A little bit of theory: Is a director an artist or a craftsman?

I was thinking about this for a while last night. A movie is art, and a director makes movies. However, there is much more involved in directing, much more technical aspects that must be mastered, a more well-rounded approach that must be taken. In the same way a master carpenter has a vision for a new chair or table, and uses his technical skills in order to creat it, a director uses his technical skills in order to create his vision. However, artists do the same. A painter captures his vision for a painting using his technique and knowledge of paint and color. I can't even really decide what my opinion on this is at the moment...

What do you guys think?
 
I think most importantly a director is a good communicator. Yes, they come up with a vision for the film based on the script, but it is ultimately the job of the cast and crew to bring that vision to life as is communicated to them from the director. Without good communication skills that's difficult if at all possible.

However, having an adequate amount of knowledge on each team members 'craft' is essential to be able to properly communicate that vision to them. So, a director is an artist, and a craftsman, but most importantly a communicator. Which is also good anyway, as the most important skill a filmmaker can have is the skill to network with people. ;)
 
Great topic,

Im a artist..and have been since I was a small child. I got into film at the age of 20. Became a director in my 1st shorts at 20/21 as well....Im still in my 20's and feel that art plays a important role in my vision at shoots....I story board some things, but overall I have so many ideas flowing in my mind that it is so easy to paint pictures with my cast/crew. It is truly both...most directors I feel...WELL THE BEST DIRECTORS APPRECIATE ART!
 
I agree with bird. And to be honest I try not to divide stuff up between craft and art anyway. It's an artificial Aretolian division that doesn't serve to make things clearer in this particular case.

Directing is just a job that requires a wide variety of skills, some of which are associated with artists and some of which are associated with technicians.

I think the danger with seeing the job solely as an art is that it allows the director to get self indulgent, because after all you can justify almost anything in the name of art.
 
This is a great topic, I think a director is an artist, technician, and communicator it is all of these things that make a director a director. I think of a director as a visual artist..Remember art is communication :cool:
 
Director as artist

I think there should be two directors-co directors. One working on the technical end, and the other on the vision , maily working with the actors who take up a lot of the director's energy. Often the actor is insecure and needs reassurance from the director, and in some instances catering to. Elly
 
I think there should be two directors-co directors. One working on the technical end, and the other on the vision , maily working with the actors who take up a lot of the director's energy

I've done that on most of my films and at the time it worked well, probably because I came from a theatrical background and was really comfortable with the actors and also with framing, but less comfortable with the technical knowledge. However, as I've progressed as a director I feel less and less need for another person as co-director to cover technical aspects. In fact, I've got to the point where I'm not sure I could co-direct anymore.

The truth is that a good DOP and 1st AD are more than able to support most directors and all film making is a collaborative process, you draw n the strenghts of your team. There is, however, a real benefit in having one voice at the top who takes ultimate responsibilty.
 
I agree with Clive tha the DP is the technical aspect of directing the film. Fortunatley for me I have found a really good guy who as the DP can not only do that but he respects my position as director for the overall theme and scope.

I am an Architect, which, in my not-so humble opinion is closer to the job of director. It is the job of the Architect to design the project from scratch, hire the engineers and oversee development of the drawings and engineers and the hiring of the general contractor. During construction I interpret the plans and make sure the project is going smoothly, or offer change orders in order to get the client what he needs or really wants during construction. Lots of similarities. Craftsman? yes. Artist? yes. Project manager? yes.

All of the above.
 
I break it down like this. If you are making movies as art then you are an artist. If you are making movies as a commodity then you are a craftsman. If you can do both at the same time then you are the winner of an academy award.
 
Back
Top