Do you like your work?

This is a question I ask a lot of filmmakers, and I find myself not being able to judge my own movies. A few weeks ago was screening day for my film class, and i walked in there thinking my movie was a pill of garbage. At the end of the day everyone really liked my film and it was the best in the class.
And yet I still don't think it's very good.

Anyways I want to know how you guys feel, do you like your work?
 
I think there is a difference between liking your work and being satisfied with it. I always liked my work and wasn't really slapped into reality, until some of it went into actual release and pissed some viewers off. :lol:

My current state is some discontent and the need to improve to the point where viewers won't be thinking of "the budget." Some elements work well - I'm pretty good with writing a "plot," but have been weak on character arc. I'm good with action, but weak with being subtle. I think I have the ability to do exceptional work, but have over-reached with most of my projects. When you try to do too much, that only exposes the flaws.

I guess what I'm saying is, I like my work, but I am not satisfied with my work.
 
We're now speaking of taste, it's not unknown that somebody creates something that they dislike.

However, i don't believe this was the questions intent.

I believe it healthy to be a "Perfectionist", to a degree. The need to improve lingers long after every project. Yet, this in itself shows the growth in your field, over what could be a small period of time, that you're now torn within instances of pardon, or a technique you happened not to know. The real importance, and true value, is that you recognize this as growth, and remembering to incorporate those that escaped you in the last.
 
Last edited:
I'm my own worst critic. But generally speaking, I like my work. Especially immediately after I finish it. The immediate satisfaction of finishing the project gets me high, and I'm not as critical of my own work, after that high has worn off. As time goes by, I notice more and more faults, but by then, I'm usually cool with accepting those faults as part of the learning process.
 
I think you have to be honest with yourself...that is most important. And as said above, you have to strive for your next project to be superior in all realms.

I think some filmmakers (actuall a lot) are blind to how low quality their work is...they will say incredible things like, "I want to submit this to Cannes", and "We're going to make money on this"...and the truth is, the production looks and sounds like shit.

Another problem is, not enough people are honest with the fimmaker...most people just blow smoke up their ass, or will just be polite. I think people should tell it like it is. And it's the job of the filmmaker to really listen and not get defensive.

Cheers.
 
Another problem is, not enough people are honest with the fimmaker...most people just blow smoke up their ass, or will just be polite. I think people should tell it like it is. And it's the job of the filmmaker to really listen and not get defensive.

I actually prefer that people just be polite -- unless I ask them to be honest. There are people whom I actively seek advice from, and those are the people I want to be brutally honest, and I do my best to listen. As far as getting opinions from "regular" non-filmmaking people is concerned, I think I've become pretty good at figuring out the difference between polite not-entirely-sincere compliments, and enthusiastic sincere compliments. I've gotten enough of both to be able to tell them apart, and I appreciate both.

One way I can recall that some (non-filmmaking) friends basically offered criticism, without actually criticising, was to ask questions, basically along the lines of, "that was an interesting decision -- what was your reasoning for that?" If you're to offer unsolicited critiques, I think it best to be careful with how you phrase your criticisms, and I think a carefully-worded question is a good way of doing that.

If a filmmaker is too stupid to seek advice and honest critiques, then that's their loss, but I think unless you're really close to them (or the production), I think it best to let them choose whom they seek advice from.
 
That's definitely one way to look at it CF, and I can see how that method may benefit (as we don't want to listen to half-baked bovine's explaining what they didn't like about your movie).

I guess people just work that way...being polite, even if they didn't like it. That's how humans are...but when it comes to filmmaking, if you don't want to hear what someone thinks, don't ask after the premiere, 'Whad'ya think?' Becuase your half-polite question is as insincere as the answer...why even start the insincerity with the question...
 
Last edited:
I guess people just work that way...being polite, even if they didn't like it. That's how humans are...but when it comes to filmmaking, if you don't want to hear what someone thinks, don't ask after the premiere, 'Whad'ya think?' Becuase your half-polite question is as insincere as the answer...why even start the insincerity with the question...

Very true. Come to think of it, I don't ask unless I truly wanna hear. It's really flattering when someone tells me how much they like it, and I can see in their eyes that they really mean it. At the same time, it's flattering for someone to be polite, and tell me that they like it, even if I know that they're just being polite. But it's only flattering if they chose to offer this nicety, unsolicited. If I forced them into it, what's the point?
 
Everyone is a critic and opinionated. I am my own worst critic. I think everything I turn out lately is substandard primarily because I can't give it 100% focus. Too many distractions with the day job and with life in general. But then I let a trusted friend read some material, and I am pleasantly surprised by their reaction.

One thing is for certain. I have yet to produce my best work. And I know it is in me. Practice, practice, practice.

And is there such a thing as polite, honest critique? I suppose there's a difference between "it sucked" and "I didn't care for it". But then there are those who would go the extra step of offering why it didn't work for them, and to me that kind of feedback is invaluable. Don't just tell me you hated it (or loved it). Tell me why you felt that way.

Although I do bite my tongue often. Sometimes you just have to let it stand as "art" and not get overly critical. I don't want to be an obscure artist, so I tend to focus on mass appeal. Others don't think that way. They'd rather make the Indie equivalent of "Piss Christ". Well, more power to them. I may watch it, but don't be shocked if I wince and roll my eyes. ;)
 
Last edited:
I'm my own worst critic. But generally speaking, I like my work. Especially immediately after I finish it. The immediate satisfaction of finishing the project gets me high, and I'm not as critical of my own work, after that high has worn off. As time goes by, I notice more and more faults, but by then, I'm usually cool with accepting those faults as part of the learning process.

I'm the exact opposite. I despise it right after it's finished. I generally think it's the biggest hunk of shit ever made. All I can see are the things I wish I could "fix", and can't. In time I can go back, watch it, and think "ok, this is actually pretty good. It has a lot of good qualities about it".
 
I think if you can throw on one of your pictures a year or two later, and enjoy it as a movie without thinking about the production, you've succeeded on one or more levels.
 
Satisfied with my work I am actually most of the time, it's also the process and the fun of doing it.

But I have the selfreflection to see it can be way better. I would be an idiot to think otherwhise.

I think I can get on a level one day to say that I'm proud on my film stuff, but that will take quite a while and I hope to enjoy that process as much as possible.

Again I really think the fun of just doing it is equal to the end result.

mike d.
 
I think it's important as artists to never be completely satisfied with our work. That way we'll always continue to grow.
 
I think it's important as artists to never be completely satisfied with our work. That way we'll always continue to grow.

The greatest talent any artist can have is never being satisfied, BUT knowing when to put down the brush and say "this one is finished, time to move on". I know a LOT of people still editing the movie they shot two years ago, tweaking, and fixing, and re-doing. They could have learned from it, and taken it forward to the next project, but instead they spin their wheels on the same work they will still be working on two more years from now.
 
BUT knowing when to put down the brush and say "this one is finished, time to move on".

Absolutely important...know where your mistakes lie in previous works, but do them correctly on new projects rather than endlessly tweaking old ones.
 
I find myself not being able to judge my own movies...

Being objective about your own work is a really tough gig, but something that can be learned. A lot of it comes with experience and having some years under your belt.

And yet I still don't think it's very good.

"Ay, there’s the rub!" Once you have been as objective as your age and experience allows you have to figure out why you dislike it, break it down and figure out why you are not satisfied. Did you have enough time to do your project? Since it was for school you have a definite deadline. Obviously you work on a very limited budget; within the time and budgetary constraints did you do the best that you could? How much was completely beyond your control? Did you get your first choice in equipment? Cast? Locations? When working on a limited schedule/budget you quite often have to settle or compromise. Did you compromise in the wrong places/issues?


In my case lack of budget is the reason I am often frustrated with the quality of my work. But it's a bit different for me, however; I'm working under the dictate of someone else's schedule, budget and creative direction (interference? :lol:). For example, even working as hard and as fast as I can, I know I need 200 hours, and I'm given 50; so I prioritize and do what I can; the result is not what I know it could be. Even with enough time I don't ever have the budget I might wish to have; I might wish to custom record sounds rather than use libraries, for example. In those situations I have to judge by how well I did under the imposed time/budgetary constraints. To top it all off, my client has the final word, even if I vehemently disagree with the creative choices.

As many have already said, each project is a learning experience. The important thing is to apply the lessons learned to the next project.
 
It's easy to pit your work against pros also...and that just isn't fair. Budget does not produce a better movie, but it certainly does facilitate many aspects, and allows for much more freedom in all departments.

The trick is to shoot what you can, and shoot it well. If you go military or sci fi, don't even compare your work to Hamburger Hill or Avatar...it just won't be there. The trick is to shoot what you can in your budget level, and make it look and sound great...have a great story...and real actors.

The problem arises when filmmakers can't see what's wrong...or won't see what's wrong. They either know they won't ever be able to do it right, so they work only with short films or pilots, or investor trailers...living the 'life' of a filmmaker, but conveniently never really having to commit...or they are so ignorant because they and have no one telling them their productions suck, that they continue on as usual...never really growing.

I think most of us know what can be improved--as long as we understand what is out of our hand in terms of budget, and what can be handled creatively.

My entire point being...know where you are. Know that you can not (and really should not) try and recreate Avatar. Don't be too hard on yourself, and don't set yourself up for failure.

Cheers.
 
Back
Top