Applying to Film School: University of Southern California (USC)

(NOTE: These requirements are based on my application for Fall 2006. They may have changed.)

Program: Film and Television Production (Graduate: MFA)

Website: http://www-cntv.usc.edu/
Application Deadline: November 15th

Components (for Fall 2006):

• USC Application
• Supplemental Application to the School of Cinematic Arts
• Transcripts (All colleges)
• GRE
• Recommendations (3 Minimum)
• Personal Statement (1000 words)
• Character Description (1 page)
• An Emotional Experience (2 pages)
• Portfolio List
• Phone Interview

My Application:

One of the big differences about USC’s application process is that they do not want to see a video sample. I think that this helps put people who do not have an extensive reel on equal footing. Either this is just a way for the admissions committee to avoid having to watch a lot of bad student footage, or they really want to give students with less experience an equal chance. You be the judge.

The application is made up of two main components: the USC general graduate application and the film school application. The graduate school application handles the more administrative details such as GRE scores and transcripts. The film school application handles the more creative aspects. Remember that the two applications actually get mailed to different locations. USC does require the GRE. They also require transcripts for every college I attended. I took a few summer classes at Houston Community College, so to abide by the letter of the rule, I got a transcript from HCC and sent it along with my University of Texas transcript.

USC requires a minimum of three recommendations. All in all, I had four people writing recommendations for me, so I went ahead and sent them all. My recommenders included: an independent theatre and film artist that had taught me and had directed me in a play, an academic professor who had seen one of my plays, a theatre professor, and a professional playwright and screenwriter. Luckily, I had maintained relationships with all of these people since college, so I could count on them to write strong recommendations. I felt that I would probably have less film experience in comparison to the other applicants so I was counting on these recommendations to make up for the difference.

The creative portions of the application includes a personal statement, a character description (1 page), a personal emotional experience that shaped you (2 pages), and a portfolio list. Every film school requires a personal statement, so I just used the same base statement and tweaked it to specifically answer the questions or meet the length requirements for each school. I think that it’s very important to answer the questions that the prompt asks, so if you’re going to use the same statement as I did, be sure to take the time to redirect it to fit. Since they’re not looking at a reel, the portfolio list is the only place that you really get to show off what you have done. So I made my list very thorough and stretched back to the beginning of college. I included both theatre and film projects. It’s really just a resume that fits their specific format. The nice thing about being able to list everything out like this is that you don’t have to try and sneak your accomplishments into your personal statement. So I concentrated my essay more on how certain projects shaped my development as an artist and a person.

I received a phone call in the March from one of the faculty to interview me. It was an extremely informal phone interview that lasted about half an hour. I was attending SXSW at the time for work, so that played in my favor. The questions that she asked me where questions that anyone is passionate about film should be able to answer — influential films, influential filmmakers, and so on.

My Take:

USC is THE Hollywood film school. I don’t know the real stat, but the perception is that some outrageously high percentage of Hollywood went there. USC has an incredible alumni list and better equipment than any other film school. And all three of those things (Hollywood, alumni, equipment) pretty much dominate the school in a cycle. USC has lots of alumni in Hollywood. The alumni and other Hollywood players donate money and equipment to the school (George Lucas, Robert Zemeckis, Steven Spielberg). The students learn the Hollywood way on Hollywood sized equipment, so they get jobs in Hollywood. USC has lots of alumni in Hollywood.

So I think that’s absolutely great if you want to do anything technical in the film world. If your goal is to be an editor, a DP, a gaffer, a camera operator, a special effects guru, you name it, USC seems like a great school. However, if you want to direct, I’m not so sure.

First of all, USC lets in a lot of people — 50+ grad students every Fall. For the second year projects, only a handful of those students will get chosen to direct (anyone who can afford it can direct a thesis). So right from the start, you’re competing with your classmates to direct. Almost everyone comes in wanting to direct, but obviously, not everyone gets to. So you start building other skills. In a way, I guess USC is the perfect analog to Hollywood. Everyone comes in wanting to be a star and soon you learn to be a part of the chain to pay your bills. And you’re going to have some massive bills. Not only is the school expensive, is LA expensive, but the culture makes you want to spend a lot on your student films. I think that the average USC student comes out with $120K in debt after film school. So you come out, you’re in massive debt, and you have a marketable skill for Hollywood. So you go and work and hope to someday save up enough to make your own film. But you came out with a marketable skill. So who’s to say there’s anything wrong with that?

I went to go and visit USC and spent a lot of time on campus talking to faculty and students. I also PA’d on a grad student thesis film for one day. Here’s what I learned: It’s expensive. Students feel the pinch and many are disgruntled about what happens afterwards. You can get work after film school, but USC is not going to open any magic doors for you. USC students are not rich or stuck up. They’re just in debt. So whatever stereotypes I had about the “University of Spoiled Children” were thrown out. The USC students on the set were extremely professional and friendly and they knew their stuff. That’s why they get work. The USC faculty was helpful and approachable. USC is a decently pretty campus in a not so pretty part of LA. Lock your doors. Many students are disgruntled because they did not get to direct their second year. The happiest guy on the set was the DP because he has a great reel from DP’ing several thesis films and didn’t have to pay for anything (the director pays for the films).

In the end, although, I was a bit allured by the professionalism and chance to get a Hollywood job, I decided USC was not for me. I had a job. I had a software career with better hours, better pay, and a nicer life than any film job. I was only going to film school to direct. Sure I want to learn a marketable skill, but if there’s a chance I won’t get to maximize my time developing as a director, than it’s not for me. If I’m going to jump, I might as well jump in all the way. So I choose UT over USC because the whole program is designed to develop students as an independent writer/directors without forcing them to compete with each other. Also, the expense creates a tangible problem. If I go somewhere a little cheaper, I can buy myself some time after school to develop my own projects rather than having to feel the pressure of having to pay back a lot of money right away. Because I feel that once you jump headlong into working life, it’s going to be very difficult to find the time to pursue your own projects.

So USC was out for me.

~ by soham on October 13, 2006.