CalArts vs. Columbia College Chicago

[imcholly]

I have been accepted to both CalArts and Columbia College Chicago film schools. I am having a very difficult time deciding on which to attend. I do have a number of personal factors weighing in this situation which I will not mention here, except that I do live next to Chicago. But can anyone make a good comparison of the two schools?

Of course I have heard that CalArts is prestigious, and that Columbia is not so prestigious, partially because of their acceptance rates. I have heard that CalArts is huge for animation, but I'm not so sure about their film & video school. They do not have any concentrations (except directing for MFA) while Columbia has a number of different concentrations. I don't need to know anything about costs.

I know that it is impossible to realistically claim that you can succeed better at one art school than another because it really depends on you - your motivations and talents. But if anyone has some advice and knows about the differences in the two schools, please reply.

 

[Dan Selakovich]

I went to Calarts, but graduated in '86, so things may have changed. Most notably, after Sandy Mackendrick's death, I've heard that the school's classes focus more on documentary than narrative, but you can make any type of films you want. Personally, I loved my experience at Calarts. It's the type of place you have to be self motivated though. You have access to a ton of great equipment, and you are free to go make movies after only a few required classes. The music school is full of composers that want to work in film, the acting school is one of the best in the nation, as is the technical theatre school. So the support to do what you want is all there. If you're the type of person that needs a rigid structure of classes, assigned projects, etc. to learn, calarts is probably not the best place to go. Another advantage is that calarts is 30 minutes from Hollywood and the contacts you'll make with other students moving into the professional world is invaluable. I was working here and there professionally WHILE attending (not an unusual thing for quite a few film students). You'll probably not get that in a school outside of Los Angeles.

Good luck,

Dan

 

[Dylan Walker]

I don't have any merit as far as giving you my opinion on the classes at CalArts, but I did apply there as well in my search for a film school.

Something important, in my opinion, is the student films the school showcases. They were all extremely experimental, and apart from one, they looked like something my grandmother would shoot (cinematography-wise).

That's not to say they're a bad school, but it was enough to scare me away. They have a reputation as being a pretty experimental school, which is all good and well, but it's not going to get you anywhere but in debt.

I'm attending Brooks Institute of Photography, and for the most part I'm happy with my choice. Fairly rigorous courses, but lots of hands-on work. You're producing atleast one short film every two months, year round for three years. Anyway, it's worth a mention considering you haven't decided on a school yet. If you apply, you'll get in. Just a matter of money.

I have no knowledge of USC, but from everything I've seen, they are doing something right. Worth considering as well (which I'm sure you have, atleast I'd hope so).

As for the Chicago College, that sounds to be the better school. I know nothing about it though so take my input as far as that goes with a grain of salt.

Dan has a very good point about LA. If you can attend a film school within a few hours drive of LA, you're instantly at a huge advantage (Brooks is about 45 minutes away). Being that close makes it much easier to go through Telecine, buy and process your film, and find places to intern at while you go to school.

Don't know if this helped at all, but good luck in your choice. Hope to be seeing your work in the future.