Changes in the American Landscape

Since   the   demise   of   the   traditional   studio   system,   the   Hollywood   film   industry   has  moved  from  providing  an  abundance  of  stable,  single  employer  careers  for   creators,   craftspeople   and   technicians   to   a   more   freelance   and   project-­‐by-­‐ project  orientated  employment  landscape.  The  opportunities  to  work  within  one   studio  for  the  majority  of  a  career  are  almost  non-­‐existent.  A  situation  reflected   in  the  British  film  industry.  Therefore  there  is  a  need  to  be  versed  in  both  the   cultures   of   freelance   and   flexible   contracting,   as   well   as   balancing   vulnerable   employment   with   creative   development.     Acquiring   such   skills   ought   to   be   a   valuable  part  of  modern  film  education.  Kaufmann  (1996)  says,  ‘if  a  school  is  to   be  effective  at  preparing  students  for  work  after  graduation,  they  should  provide   a  well-­‐rounded  approach  –  and  not  just  to  cinema.  But  many  don’t’.  Providing   graduates  with  the  tools  to  navigate  increasingly  flexible  employment  structures   of  the  industry  they  are  entering  should  be  part  of  the  responsibility  undertaken   by  education  providers.  With  the  number  of  graduates  seeking  work  outstripping   the  number  of  jobs  available,  some  attention  could  be  given  towards  developing   graduates’   abilities   to   lead   a   creatively   sustainable   life,   developing   projects,  

portfolios,   credits   and   cultivating   audiences   alongside   seeking   the   gainful   employment  that  is  essential  to  cover  their  cost  of  living.    

Suggesting   a   flaw   in   the   current   model,   the   number   of   graduates   entering   the   industry  from  US  film  schools  is  low.  In  1991  only  between  five  to  ten  per  cent  of   graduates  found  employment  (Jones  and  DeFillippi,  1996).  As  a  result,  the  right   school  is  paramount  and  this  is  what  makes  USC  in  particular  such  a  competitive   school,   not   only   to   gain   access   to,   but   also   to   flourish   within.   Competitiveness   coupled   with   industrial   changes,   high   fees   and   an   increased   value   placed   on   employability   may   be   the   factors   that   have   seen   even   those   schools   in   the   US   renowned   for   their   anti-­‐Hollywood   stance   undergo   cultural   changes.   Alex   Ross   Perry,   in   the   interview   at   the   outset   of   this   section,   hinted   at   a   lack   of   engagement  with  the  wider  theoretical  contexts  of  film  amongst  his  cohort  and   Charles  Burnett  (2002)  says  of  returning  to  give  lectures  at  UCLA  as  alum:    

It’s   not   like   [it   was   when   I   was   there]   now.   I   lectured   there,   and   the   students   have   professional   people   working   on   their   films   […]   their   only   concern  is  ‘How  do  I  get  in?’  It’s  not  about  art,  or  ‘I  have  this  to  say’  […]   Looking   back   […]   I   think   if   we’d   taken   it   more   as   a   business   we’d   have   been  wiser.  But  then  we  probably  wouldn’t  have  done  it  (Burnett,  2002).    

The  demise  of  the  in-­‐house  training  provided  at  Hollywood  studios,  or  indeed  the   UK  television  industry  that  has  seen  so  many  filmmakers  emerge  through  it,  may   have  resulted  in  more  people  taking  up  film  education  as  a  means  of  accessing   careers  in  the  industry.  This  is  discussed  in  the  following  chapter  in  more  detail.   What   the   input   here   of   Burnett   and   Perry   indicates   is   that   the   type   of   person   engaging   with   film   education   may   have   changed.   USC   aside,   there   have   been   demands  on  other  US  institutions  to  focus  more  on  progression  from  education   to  work  in  the  industry  because  this  is  what  students  want,  the  opportunities  for   building   skills   and   experience   within   studio   or   production   providers   having  

diminished.   The   impact   of   this   on   film   culture   is   an   area   that   requires   more   investigation  than  can  be  afforded  here  but  it  is  worth  hypothesising  as  a  way  of   clarifying  that  there  have  been  profound  changes  in  U.S.  film  school  culture.    

3.3.2.3  The  Importance  of  Alumni    

These   changes   from   creativity   and   theory   led   film   courses   to   ones   that   focus   more  heavily  on  skills  and  professional  career  development  are  clear  everywhere   except   USC,   which   has   maintained   a   steady   course   and   is   essentially   still   a   Hollywood   academy.   Its   pride   as   an   industry   conduit   is   clear   today   from   the   prominence   of   the   alumni   section   of   its   website   where   there   is   the   annual   newsletter  ‘the  hot  sheet’,  which  regularly  announces  the  achievements  of  USC   alumni.    

There   is   also   a   page   of   notable   alumni.   On   this   page   the   producers   who   have   graduated  and  gone  on  to  achieve  industry  prominence  are  the  ones  to  be  listed   first.   As   with   the   Oscars,   awarded   by   the   Academy   of   Motion   Picture   Arts   and   Sciences,  the  founding  partner  of  USC,  where  the  Best  Film  award  is  collected  by   the  producers  of  the  film,  the  business  aspect  of  film  production  is  foregrounded   and  placed  at  the  top  of  the  hierarchy.  On  this  page  there  are  fifty-­‐two  producers   listed;  sixty-­‐nine  directors,  writer-­‐directors  and  director-­‐producers;  seventy-­‐one   writers   and   writer-­‐producers;   twenty   cinematographers;   twenty-­‐two   editors;   two  production  designers;  twelve  sound  editors  and  re-­‐recording  mixers;  seven   visual   effects;   nine   documentary   filmmakers;   twenty-­‐four   executives;   thirteen   agents   and   managers;   twenty   animators;   twenty-­‐three   scholars   and   authors;   three  festival  founders;  two  critics  and  three  actors  or  performers.  

It  is  an  extensive  list  covering  a  myriad  of  roles  within  industry.  When  compared   to  USC  the  focus  offered  on  the  UCLA  alumni  is  rather  different.  There  is  a  news   section  for  alumni  achievements  but  a  striking  roll  call  of  achievements  is  absent.