Bad Advice, Big Surprise

At the end of film school when everyone is looking for jobs, the only widely accepted conventional wisdom everyone seemed to buy into was "Don't work for a big agency." I took this advice. An entertainment temp agency wanted to send me on an interview to CAA, I said, "No, thanks." I don't want to work at a big agency. "Why not?" The guy asked me. I said, "I'm a writer and I need time to write." He pointed around to everyone in the office and said, "We're all freaking writers!" My second response, "Well, I had friends who worked at them and they didn't have good employment experiences." "Wimps." he said. "Asshole," I'm thinking.

In hindsight, however, I think the film school "accepted wisdom" was wrong. Why?

Because people do not MAKE A LIVING making movies because they have promising talent and are good, solid, ethical people. People who earn a living making movies have either "access to power" or "leverage." Access to power means either a star or studio is willing to take a bet on your proven ability. "Leverage" means you possess something more than one person wants, ie the rights to a script, multiple acting job offers, a saleable finished movie. Of course there are tons of minor steps that operate underneath these assumptions - basically an interwoven web of relationships that facilitate access and/or leverage. A team of people need to get behind a script to give it "value," and likewise a team of people need to get behind someone to give them "access."

If you have any of these things or the beginnings of any of these things, great! Go for it. But if you don't - and most people right out of film school don't, why not try to find them? Why not build relationships with people who do have access to power or people with leverage. And there is no quicker or more central place to find these things in Hollywood than for a big agency.

That is not to say I regret my choices or my current situation. Nor is it to say, everyone ought to do this (obviously, the culture at these places is not for everyone), nor is it to say it is a guaranteed path to any type of success, nor is it to say it will make you a better writer or producer or filmmaker or whatever you wanted to coming to film school in the first place. I do not wish I spent the last 2 years at CAA. However, I wish some of my peers/friends did go off and work at these places because it would increase their "access." And on the path to making a living making movies - access is a tool you're gonna need, just like you need to know how to create tension in a script and compose a shot and cut a scene.

My basic point is this - there are multiple reasons people go to USC - learn to make movies, find good collaborators, and make connections. Working at a big agency can lead to finding good collaborators (hint - everyone there wants to make movies) and make connections. And it doesn't cost $30 grand in tuition. They'll actually pay YOU! So why is it the conventional wisdom points so directly in the opposite direction? It makes zero sense. I think the major reason is that everyone looks at the filmmakers they adore and aspire to be and do not see CAA Assistant on their resume. Of course, if they checked, very few would say USC film school, either. So what's with the selective logic? Help me, folks, I'm trying to figure out why we're working against our own interests.