Rating: 
Summary: An interesting take from an interesting storyteller
Review: I read the other reviews here and I laugh.
The critics of Mamet claim they hate Hollywood movies, then tell us Mamet has no business writing this book because his movies aren't like all the other movies in Hollywood.
Mamet is one of the very very few true auteurs of American cinema. He has his own style and controls it from front to back. And now we have not only House of Games, but The Spanish Prisoner, Heist, and the best Mamet on film to date in Spartan.
In these films we find the theories he teaches here put to awesome use. Watch the films, read the book.
Rating: 
Summary: playwriter yes, filmmaker no!
Review: If you want to learn how to direct film from an inexperinced director, than "On Directing Film" maybe of some interest to you. Mamet wrote this book when he was young and green to moviemaking. His ego was obviously bigger than his vision. He is more intersted in dialogue than he is in visual storytelling, although he will never admit it. Movies are a visual medium, there's no denying it. If Mamet wants to make the cinema a dialougue medium than go head, break the rule. Just make sure you know the rule inside and out before you break it. Mamet does not know the cinema well enough to go beyond convention. I will say Mamet's techniques are intriguing. But what are film techniques worth when they don't show on screen. The most important thing in filmmaking is the end result. When I wacth Mamet's films all I see is a photographed play. Which is not surprising since he is a playwriter. His eye for storytelling lacks visual grace and imagination. A great example of visual storytelling combined with wonderful dialouge would be "Pulp Fiction." Mamet's idea for directing is intresting in theory but shallow in result.
Rating:
Summary: Do yourself a favor -- read it.
Review: Mamet cuts through the crap. Essential reading for anyone who deals with story. Throw away Robert McFee's enormous, incomprehensible tome -- the slim paperback Directing Film contains the truth.
Rating:
Summary: An arrow in the quiver of any fine writer.
Review: Mamet's plays have been known for exposing gender miscommunication(Oleanna, Sexual Perversity in Chicago), investigating what drives the common man (Glengarry Glen Ross, American Buffalo) and bringing to light our fears and desires (The Duck Variations, Edmond). He has a style of theatre attributed to him, identified by blue collar, swearing, seedy characters. When NYPD Blue premiered it was referred to, by some, as Mamet TV. It is easy to watch a Mamet play and forget that the playwright is a poet and he, at times, writes in iambic pentameter.However, he isn't just a playwright. Mamet has directed movies (Things Change, We're No Angels, Oleanna, House of Games), written movies (The Postman Always Rings Twice, 1981), adapted plays (An Enemy of the People, The Cherry Orchard) and has written criticism on the art of the theatre and writing for it. The title of On Directing Film is misleading. A better title would be, For the Director Who Writes. Mamet spends a great deal of time in the book, it is structured around lectures he gave at Columbia University in 1987, explaining how to trim a script to its core so the best, and most coherent story can be told through film. Often his students will mention camera angles or camera movements to complete an emerging story they are developing, but Mamet is quick to reduce the lecture to the field which he knows well. Writing. He always returns to the script and how that should be structured so an excellent story can be told. Filming the script, the easy part, is for later. Mamet draws from Hitchcock to Hemingway to Aristotle to explain what makes a good story work and how that can be applied to writing the script. On Directing Film should be mandatory reading for all students, formal or informal, of creative writing.
Rating: 
Summary: A Short and Pleasing Account by Famed Screenwriter
Review: Of course the question begs, why is David Mamet teaching us how to direct? In one instance, aside from the films he has directed, his expertise and notariety is in writing the script or even the play for the theater. On the other hand, when a good writer has control of his craft, it will be written well enough for any director who takes the script and turn out similar products (either to each other, or even to the script writers vision). Yet, Mamet discloses himself as a competent teacher and director. Its a short book, but there is some good practical information that is discussed, and with student dialogue Q&A to give a sort of "interactive understanding" of how to write and direct a film. On the other hand, Mamet is dogmatic about his approach to the craft and the student answers are all wrong unless answered, not only correct, but the way he wants you to answer them, that is, what he knows to be correct. The dilemma I personally have with all books about writing or directing is they are from a single perspective and allow very little intuition or personal style to interfere. This book is, for the most part, no exception when one has to meet Mamet's standards for what is right or wrong. Given the fact that it works for David, it does not mean it will work for everyone. The trick is to take it all with a grain of salt and skim it off the top. Take what appeals to you and what feels good and what can be applicable to your writing. Its a short book that is clear and concise which is based on lectures given at Columbia University. One of the better books on the subject, so if you feel you need a little more study before you write, I would reccomend this one (although not before Lajos Egris book Art of Dramatic Writing).
Rating:
Summary: PROBABLY A GOOD SCREEN WRITER BUT DEFINETLY BAD DIRECTER...
Review: People like Mamet should not even attempt to teach Film Making. Of course the book has a little credibility for film making, that's obvios. But the guy lacks Directors Imagination. Yeah I'm sure he can write a really good Screenplay, hell, he even contributed to "Hannibal" but this guy is no director. He describes people at Film School as "Ignorant" and states that what they learn is rubbish yet he has never even been to Film School. I bet you havn't even heard of one movie Mamet has directed! Because their rubbish. If you want to learn how to direct film read "Directing: Film Techniques and Aesthetics" that will show you how to direct. If you are a screenwriter and are interested in Directing a movie yourself - Mamet's you're man! A modern day Woody Allen minus the acting. If you want to become a good directer you can sure as hell read this book, but enrole in Film School. If you are good at writing & Acting an would also like to direct like Woody Allen give this book a Read.
Rating:
Summary: robert mckee recommends it and i do too
Review: recommended in robert mckee's story, and it really is fantastic. I'm not sure that all directors would agree with his comments, but it's essential to understand his view. it's a fascinating read.
Rating:
Summary: A New Approach
Review: The truth is that David Mamet directs film as no one else does. His book should not be compared with standard, film-school texts. He has a different approach, and one that I find to be more rudimentary than most. After reading, I felt that Mamet genuinely took me into the "basics" of filmmaking. He certainly marches to his own beat.
Rating:
Summary: I really enjoyed this book
Review: This book, like all the books of Mamet I have read, is very short. It taught me a lot about film making without the need to turn a whole lot of pages. I think there comes a time when even the most faithful Mamet reader says, "I've read enough of this guy's short little books, I'm moving on." I've reached that point myself. Nonetheless I'm glad I read this book and think anyone who is interested in theatre or film will consider its purchase a good investment of money and time. Per page it is expensive, but it is provocative and thoughtful, and never boring or trite.
Rating:
Summary: I really enjoyed this book
Review: This book, like all the books of Mamet I have read, is very short. It taught me a lot about film making without the need to turn a whole lot of pages. I think there comes a time when even the most faithful Mamet reader says, "I've read enough of this guy's short little books, I'm moving on." I've reached that point myself. Nonetheless I'm glad I read this book and think anyone who is interested in theatre or film will consider its purchase a good investment of money and time. Per page it is expensive, but it is provocative and thoughtful, and never boring or trite.
|
