I would say that almost by definition, Naivete is a direct result of inexperience and that many of those who profess not to be naive only realise how naive they were after many years experience. 15 years ago I was earning a very good living from TV and film and did not consider myself at all naive but now I look back and cringe, I should imagine in 15 years time I'll look back to this point in time and feel the same again.
Your understanding of the definition of "naive" is a little off. By your definition, we're naive until the day we die, because of the fact that we're truly learning more and more about the world every day. "Not as experienced as" does not mean the same as "naive". I'm not as experienced as a director as I'd like to be; I'm not naive.
Working professionally there are so many more people involved, so many more things to go wrong, so much more expectation, so much more pressure and so little time. It takes a very unusual type of person to cope with the pressure and still produce high quality work, an even rarer type of person to come back for more punishment and rarer still is the type of person who actually enjoys it and can live their life that way! I see huge numbers of amateurs (particularly in music) fall by the wayside, not because of any lack of desire or talent but because the profession turns out to be quite different from their expectations, even with many years of experience as an amateur.
I don't think we are going to get any closer to agreeing on this point. All I can say is that I hope you get the opportunity to gain years of experience as a professional director.
The "Last Crusade" had a guaranteed market, a huge budget and a cast and crew about as talented and experienced as exists. If you're basing your expectations of the world of professional film making on films like "The Last Crusade", I believe you're in for a nasty shock.
I appreciate your kind sentiment, and I take it at face value. And you're right, we might not get any closer to agreeing on this point, because to be honest, your not really taking part in the conversation. I've tried to explain it to you, and you literally ignored the most important parts of my last post.
Back to the question of naivete. I lack experience as a professional director. And that is why you're dismissing my opinions. But I'm not completely lacking in knowledge. I do my best to emulate the best. And the only way for me to do that is to find out how they do what they do. I search for information in as many ways as possible. I read. I watch behind-the-scenes videos. I listen to DVD commentary tracks. I talk to people who've worked with them. Many of the people who worked on my debut feature also worked on Spielberg's "Lincoln". I probed every single one of them about what he was like, how he behaved. One of the leads in my feature actually has a fairly significant role in "Lincoln"; he had his own trailer!
And then what do I do with all this knowledge? I apply what I've learned on my own sets. I make mistakes, and learn from them. I have moments of brilliance, and I remember to do that again. This is what's called gaining experience.
How much experience do you have as a professional director? None. So, in that one respect, we're equal. You do have a great deal of experience working with professional directors, and that's definitely valuable knowledge. But how much experience do you have as a director, at all? Have you ever directed anything? I don't see anything on IMDB. I don't see a vimeo or youtube page. I have to assume you have zero experience as a director. So, which one of us is naive to the ways of directors?
The main thing is that your comments aren't even on-topic. And I think the reason for that is because your comments are coming from a completely different perspective, so you literally don't know what we're talking about. Read the next line carefully:
What we're talking about is the philosophy of how to pull the best performances out of people, on the set, during production. We're not talking about life-goals, in general. We're not talking about what we'd like our careers to be, in general. We're talking about one specific aspect of directing -- production (again, that's not specifically stated in the thread title, but it's definitely what the conversation has gravitated towards). We're talking about managing a creative team of artists, and for a director, a great deal of that interaction is with actors and actresses.
Do I expect my professional life to ever be like Spielberg's? Of course not (though I'd obviously like it to be). But when it comes to learning how to manage a creative team of artists, you'd better damn well believe that he is whom I most try to emulate (he happens to be my favorite, hence the constant references to him).
Take this into consideration -- do actors and actresses
work a part, or do they
play a part? If they don't work in movies, they work in
plays. Do you think these words mean nothing? How many professional actors or actresses do you know? I know quite a few, and many have worked on my productions. And when they are doing their best work, they are truly at play.
I seriously think you have misconstrued what all this means to me. Since generalities don't seem to be working, I'll get specific. How does all of this affect my behavior, as director,
during production?
- I RELISH surprises!
- I try my best to just be kind and courteous, to
everyone.
- I thank people, often, for their hard work.
- I dole out sincere compliments, often, to as many people as possible.
- I always try my best to make my criticisms constructive.
- If someone cracks a funny joke, I laugh. I might joke back.
- If I think of a funny joke, I crack it.
- If someone wants to share an idea with me, I listen. In fact, I actively encourage people to share them.
- If I don't like the idea, I'm as diligent as I can possibly be (dismissive comments are a no-no).
- I RELISH surprises!
Generally speaking, I try to keep a fairly playful attitude. And you know what? None of this comes at the cost of production, because a playful attitude does not have anything to do with whether or not you stay on task. Compared to other people in my shoes, I actually keep a rather tightly-paced schedule. And more importantly, in my opinion, this playful nature creates an environment in which my players feel free to play, and for me, that produces the best results. These are my experiences, not my lack-of-experiences.
Again, I'm not at all commenting on what happens after I say those beautiful words, "that's a wrap". That's when you come in, and that's when you see directors in an entirely different light. How could you possibly think that you see a director the same way that their actors do? I'm also not saying that I expect everything to be happy-cheery all the time (or even most of the time). But during production? It's a very high priority, and for damned good reason.
