Advice requested

Question

Ok all - so I've taken a few weeks to lick my wounds and re-assess what might have gone wrong with my applications this year. Am moving forward with my writing, taking a class at NYU right now in Techniques and Technology (film-related), and also a class at Pratt in Basic Drawing (one of the prerequisites to obtaining a certificate there in computer graphics/video game design). Really enjoying both classes - I have my midterm tomorrow in the film class, so wish me luck.

I am toying with the idea of applying first round this year to both UCLA (again) and USC (first time), as in, first round, first day they start accepting applications, etc. Since I want to pursue a career in film-making, etc, it does seem like these two schools are by far the best choices for me. I feel like I came so close with UCLA, and that perhaps my third-round entry was what hurt me. What do you guys think? I'd like your honest opinions. Should Uphill:

1) Go for it - why not?
2) Hang it up - you gave it your best shot, and the adcoms blew raspberries at you anyway.

Am toying with the idea of taking Calculus in the early fall, as soon as it's offered, and acing it, just to show that I can.
Your thoughts?

jallenmorris · Answer

Are you talking about an MBA at UCLA or USC? I'm pretty sure George Lucas didn't go to USC's business school

j allen morris

jb32 · Answer

Yeah, I'm not really sure an MBA would help you become a film-maker as much as it might help you become one of the 'suits'. If you want to be a 'suit' then UCLA and USC are two of the best schools for Media and Entertainment.

jbguy · Answer

I can't even imagine how much worse those last Star Wars movies would have been if Lucas did have an MBA. I'm sure the Jedis would be guzzling Red Bull (or whatever energy drink had the highest bid) to get fueled for battles, and JarJar Binks would be downing Reese's Pieces by the bag. It'd be the product placement scene from Wayne's World, only nonstop.

As for the original topic, go for it if you want to get involved with the business side of the movie/entertainment industry...a "suit" according to Billy Walsh. How is your quant score from the GMAT? If it is a little low, or you don't have much of a mathematics background from undergrad, you may want to take the Calculus class and reference it in your applications.

ryguy904 · Answer

Hey UH, It's great to see you back on the boards!! :-D

Let me say that I have absolutely no idea how the entertainment industry works, so that's up to you to determine whether or not an MBA will help reach your ST and LT goals. I was accepted at USC and here are my impressions on the school: They are very interested in high GMAT people. USC is trying to move up in the rankings, and taking high GMAT people is one way to do that (I think Cornell is taking a similar approach as well). If you have a decent story, and good GMAT (which you do) you should be a shoe-in from that perspective. That being said, your age is a complete wildcard. Looking at the whole picture (which adcoms say, but who knows if they really mean this), I believe that your story is compelling enough to quell the age factor, though. I believe that it will. Applying early will be helpful. I do not believe USC is one of the schools that WL w/o interviews (not pointing fingers...cough...NYU) or waits and see how the applicant pool looks (cough....NYU), so applying early will only help your case. Applying to USC's Early Decision round (which does not have a huge $$$ commitment like Columbia) will show your commitment. The fact that you are interested in entertainment also makes sense to apply to USC. As far as UCLA, perhaps Kry or others know if they are a reapplicant friendly school. I think that your undergrad GPA is leaning on problematic, regardless. I think I read in a post a while back that said that absolute lowest GPA of an accepted applicant from a previous class was 2.9 or 2.7 or something. Could be an issue, even if you reapply early. From a "fit" and story perspective, the school makes sense, it's just a matter of overcoming the other issues. Good luck and keep us posted. ryguy

togafoot · Answer

For the creative side of film-making, an MBA is absolutely useless. Networking with a personal portfolio of creative works is the usual method. The MBA may get you into the financial parts of film studios, but i would doubt you would be involved in the actual films.

There is no way an MBA would be qualified to look at the creative output of a film studio (if they did, I;m sure those films would be rubbish). This would be hired based on previous experience, if you have previous experience and an MBA, that's another story... but again, i would doubt the MBA (an analytical degree) is highly valued in a creative industry. It's the same in the music industry and games industry the MBA's would be separated from the creative aspects of the company.

More than likely, the tools an MBA provides would make you qualified in the channel distribution, negotiation of distribution and supply chain mechanics and corporate finance of the entertainments industries.

e.g. Computer graphics :- the artist would be someone who has a portfolio of creative art work and has demonstrated the capability to use modern computer tools (No MBA needed)
The physics and programming of the character movements would require computer science skills (no MBA needed, engineering degree preferred)

kryzak · Answer

like everyone said, if you want to be in the "business" of entertainment (fund-raiser, producer, deal-breaker, etc...), then an MBA is very good. If you want to actually be an actor/director/cinematographer, etc.., then MBA will be pretty useless.

As for UCLA, I think they're pretty friendly to re-applicants, as long as the applicant has improved upon some aspect of their application (similar to most schools). I do know of a couple people who reapplied and got in.

uphillclimb · Answer

Thanks so much for the responses, guys. I already have a very good creative network, due to my years spent as an actor/musician/writer. I was kind of hoping to gain some business skills so that I could elevate the level of my "day" job, as well as gain some useful knowledge for forming my production company. Even the very successful writers/artists I know still have to have a decent day job - independent productions, while personally gratifying, tend not to pay that well, and you end up sinking a lot of your own money (horrors!) into projects. I've no desire to be a part-time professor or consultant (I have a number of artist friends who do these jobs to get by).

And I have to say, in my experience, the "suits" DO make all of the important decisions, ie, they can greenlight your project - or not - and the decisions made seem to be rather arbitrary at times.

I'm going to chew over your comments for a bit. Perhaps it would be more beneficial for me to continue taking courses at Pratt and NYU, thus gaining some immediate hands-on experience and technical knowledge. But I must say, both UCLA and USC have such an amazing roster of classes in media and entertainment, that I can't help thinking that it would still be very beneficial for me to attend...

Again, thanks for your thoughts!

kidderek · Answer

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Lucas = what a sellout. Maybe if he had an MBA, he would know that a good plot sells.

togafoot · Answer

But he probably wouldn`t be able to create it or measure if it was good enough because there isn`t enough numbers in a plot to be able to analyse it :-D

Advice requested

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards