Discussion My 3-Step Film Directing Mantra

DirectingCoach

DirectingCoach

New member
Early-Career Professional
Joined
Jul 6, 2026
Messages
9
"Making a (good) movie is the art of visually telling a compelling story with believable characters who make us feel something." Peter D. Marshall

Many scriptwriters, directors, producers and studio executives have tried many times to find a winning formula for making a successful movie by copying films that have worked in the past. Some of these films have been successful – but many have not.

Making a "successful" film depends on your definition of success. You must first decide what "a successful film" means to you: Did the audiences love it? Did the critics love it? Did it win awards? Did it make money? Did you get another directing job because of it?

During my 50-year career in this often intense and challenging business, I've had the opportunity to work on many types of productions, from industrial films to documentaries; television commercials to music videos; Emmy Award-nominated TV series to Hollywood feature films.

I've worked with dozens of directors and hundreds of actors varying from "the great, the good and the bad." I’ve read hundreds of film scripts, some of which were so dreadful I couldn’t get past the first 10 pages to scripts that hooked me from the first page. (One even won an Academy Award for best screenplay!)

As a film directing coach for the past 15 years, I’ve spent countless hours mentoring filmmakers around the world – from giving them creative and logistical notes on their scripts; showing them how to do proper script analysis and scene breakdowns; helping them effectively audition actors and how to creatively block and rehearse actors on the set.

I've also had the incredible opportunity of spending years teaching and mentoring hundreds of international film students as they write, prep, shoot and edit their short films.

I believe that all the years I’ve spent in the “professional film production trenches” plus the years I've been teaching filmmakers around the world, have given me a unique insight into finding an answer to the question:

“Is there a simple guide that any director can follow that will help them to demystify and better understand the craft of filmmaking?"

We all know there's no 100% guarantee of any film being successful in our business, but I believe there is a basic guide that any filmmaker can follow to help them create “compelling movies with believable characters.”

In my opinion, most inexperienced (or lazy) directors spend the majority of their time figuring out how to shoot their films first (cool visual effects, creative shots, camera angles etc.) before they understand (a) what their story is really about and (b) what their characters really want.

From what I have witnessed over the years, this is not the best way to make a good film! WHY? Because I strongly believe that to successfully direct any film, you need to first understand this simple 3-step Film Directing Mantra: Story - Performance - Cinematics!

1. Story: The first and most important part of a director's job is to understand every detail of the story you are telling which requires you to dig deep into the story and its structure by analyzing every scene in the script to find out what the scene is about, what works and what doesn't.

2. Performance: One of the main responsibilities of every Director on a film is to help actors achieve a realistic performance. Remember, actors want to work with directors who understand their vulnerability, so it’s incredibly important to create a good relationship with every actor in your film – which starts right from the first audition!

3. Cinematics (Mise-en-Scene): Originating from the theater, the French term mise en scène literally means "putting on the stage." In cinema, mise-en-scène refers to everything that is shown in front of the camera such as sets, props, actors, costumes, lighting etc.

I believe that without understanding these 3 steps you could set yourself up for “filmmaker mediocrity” which is writing unimaginative scripts with unbelievable characters that create boring and predictable films.

As a visual storyteller, listen to your heart first so your camera can then show us your version of life and art. Your unique perspective is what gives your story authenticity and meaning. By trusting your instincts, you create visuals that speak deeply to the audience, leaving a lasting impression.

From what I have witnessed over the last 50 years, if you follow this “3-step film directing guide” you will see how any director, even someone with very little experience, has the potential to create a visually compelling movie with believable characters.
 
Genre
  1. General / Multiple Genres
DirectingCoach said:
"Making a (good) movie is the art of visually telling a compelling story with believable characters who make us feel something." Peter D. Marshall

Many scriptwriters, directors, producers and studio executives have tried many times to find a winning formula for making a successful movie by copying films that have worked in the past. Some of these films have been successful – but many have not.

Making a "successful" film depends on your definition of success. You must first decide what "a successful film" means to you: Did the audiences love it? Did the critics love it? Did it win awards? Did it make money? Did you get another directing job because of it?

During my 50-year career in this often intense and challenging business, I've had the opportunity to work on many types of productions, from industrial films to documentaries; television commercials to music videos; Emmy Award-nominated TV series to Hollywood feature films.

I've worked with dozens of directors and hundreds of actors varying from "the great, the good and the bad." I’ve read hundreds of film scripts, some of which were so dreadful I couldn’t get past the first 10 pages to scripts that hooked me from the first page. (One even won an Academy Award for best screenplay!)

As a film directing coach for the past 15 years, I’ve spent countless hours mentoring filmmakers around the world – from giving them creative and logistical notes on their scripts; showing them how to do proper script analysis and scene breakdowns; helping them effectively audition actors and how to creatively block and rehearse actors on the set.

I've also had the incredible opportunity of spending years teaching and mentoring hundreds of international film students as they write, prep, shoot and edit their short films.

I believe that all the years I’ve spent in the “professional film production trenches” plus the years I've been teaching filmmakers around the world, have given me a unique insight into finding an answer to the question:

“Is there a simple guide that any director can follow that will help them to demystify and better understand the craft of filmmaking?"

We all know there's no 100% guarantee of any film being successful in our business, but I believe there is a basic guide that any filmmaker can follow to help them create “compelling movies with believable characters.”

In my opinion, most inexperienced (or lazy) directors spend the majority of their time figuring out how to shoot their films first (cool visual effects, creative shots, camera angles etc.) before they understand (a) what their story is really about and (b) what their characters really want.

From what I have witnessed over the years, this is not the best way to make a good film! WHY? Because I strongly believe that to successfully direct any film, you need to first understand this simple 3-step Film Directing Mantra: Story - Performance - Cinematics!

1. Story: The first and most important part of a director's job is to understand every detail of the story you are telling which requires you to dig deep into the story and its structure by analyzing every scene in the script to find out what the scene is about, what works and what doesn't.

2. Performance: One of the main responsibilities of every Director on a film is to help actors achieve a realistic performance. Remember, actors want to work with directors who understand their vulnerability, so it’s incredibly important to create a good relationship with every actor in your film – which starts right from the first audition!

3. Cinematics (Mise-en-Scene): Originating from the theater, the French term mise en scène literally means "putting on the stage." In cinema, mise-en-scène refers to everything that is shown in front of the camera such as sets, props, actors, costumes, lighting etc.

I believe that without understanding these 3 steps you could set yourself up for “filmmaker mediocrity” which is writing unimaginative scripts with unbelievable characters that create boring and predictable films.

As a visual storyteller, listen to your heart first so your camera can then show us your version of life and art. Your unique perspective is what gives your story authenticity and meaning. By trusting your instincts, you create visuals that speak deeply to the audience, leaving a lasting impression.

From what I have witnessed over the last 50 years, if you follow this “3-step film directing guide” you will see how any director, even someone with very little experience, has the potential to create a visually compelling movie with believable characters.
Click to expand...

Peter, I really enjoyed reading your post. One question came to mind.

Over your 50 years in the industry, you've probably worked with and mentored countless first-time directors. In your experience, what's the single biggest mistake that most of them keep making, regardless of which country or film school they come from? And what practical advice would you give them to avoid it?
 
Michael said:
Peter, I really enjoyed reading your post. One question came to mind.

Over your 50 years in the industry, you've probably worked with and mentored countless first-time directors. In your experience, what's the single biggest mistake that most of them keep making, regardless of which country or film school they come from? And what practical advice would you give them to avoid it?
Click to expand...
Hi Michael. Excellent question! Well... since you have asked, "what's the single biggest mistake that most of them keep making.." I would have to say that first-time (and even some "long-time directors") don't fully understand or appreciate the actors' process. They usually just revert to telling the actors what to feel or think. They tend to treat them as puppets to move around the set without any internal motivation. For example

1. Casting for looks, not chemistry: They pick pretty faces or famous names without testing if the two actors actually have real chemistry together.

2. Telling actors what to feel instead of what to do: Saying "be angrier" makes actors fake it. Saying "try to humiliate him" gives an actor a “playable” action.

3. Over-explaining everything: I’ve seen some Directors give a 10-minute backstory that overwhelms the actors. It’s more effective to just give one clear, physical note, such as "don’t let him/her win the conversation!”

4. Directing for the screen, not the actor: Many directors just sit and stare at the monitor all day. They obsess over framing and lighting, forgetting to make eye contact with the performer or even to talk with them after a take.

5. Exposing actors when they're most vulnerable: Giving actor notes in front of the crew or making jokes after an intense scene is not good “set etiquette.”Actors need a safe, protected space, and good directors always guard that.
 
DirectingCoach said:
Hi Michael. Excellent question! Well... since you have asked, "what's the single biggest mistake that most of them keep making.." I would have to say that first-time (and even some "long-time directors") don't fully understand or appreciate the actors' process. They usually just revert to telling the actors what to feel or think. They tend to treat them as puppets to move around the set without any internal motivation. For example

1. Casting for looks, not chemistry: They pick pretty faces or famous names without testing if the two actors actually have real chemistry together.

2. Telling actors what to feel instead of what to do: Saying "be angrier" makes actors fake it. Saying "try to humiliate him" gives an actor a “playable” action.

3. Over-explaining everything: I’ve seen some Directors give a 10-minute backstory that overwhelms the actors. It’s more effective to just give one clear, physical note, such as "don’t let him/her win the conversation!”

4. Directing for the screen, not the actor: Many directors just sit and stare at the monitor all day. They obsess over framing and lighting, forgetting to make eye contact with the performer or even to talk with them after a take.

5. Exposing actors when they're most vulnerable: Giving actor notes in front of the crew or making jokes after an intense scene is not good “set etiquette.”Actors need a safe, protected space, and good directors always guard that.
Click to expand...

Thank you, Peter. That's an excellent answer.

I especially liked your point about creating a safe environment for actors. It's something I think many new directors underestimate.
I'm curious when you watch a film, can you usually tell within the first few scenes whether the director truly understands actors? If so, what are the first signs that reveal it?
 
Michael said:
Thank you, Peter. That's an excellent answer.

I especially liked your point about creating a safe environment for actors. It's something I think many new directors underestimate.
I'm curious when you watch a film, can you usually tell within the first few scenes whether the director truly understands actors? If so, what are the first signs that reveal it?
Click to expand...
That is a hard question to answer, and you have to be careful here. If you were not on set during that scene to watch the director and actor work together, you would actually never know if it was "bad directing" or "bad acting."
 
DirectingCoach said:
That is a hard question to answer, and you have to be careful here. If you were not on set during that scene to watch the director and actor work together, you would actually never know if it was "bad directing" or "bad acting."
Click to expand...

Peter, that's a fascinating point.

You mentioned earlier that many directors spend too much time focusing on the technical side of filmmaking.
Nowadays, it seems that many directors spend more time watching the monitor than watching their actors.

Do you think modern filmmaking has become too technical?

Has the widespread use of on-set monitors changed the way directors communicate with actors? If so, do you think it has generally improved performances, or has it sometimes created more distance between directors and actors?
I'd be very interested to hear your perspective, especially after working with actors and directors for so many years.
 
DirectingCoach said:
That is a hard question to answer, and you have to be careful here. If you were not on set during that scene to watch the director and actor work together, you would actually never know if it was "bad directing" or "bad acting."
Click to expand...

I completely agree. From what I've seen and experienced, directing is one of the most challenging aspects of filmmaking.

The audience only sees the finished film, never everything that happened behind the camera. A weak scene can be the result of the script, the casting, the directing, the editing, or simply an actor having an off day.

That's why I believe working with actors is just as important as understanding cameras and lighting. Great visuals can impress an audience, but authentic performances are what people usually remember.
 
Lucas said:
I completely agree. From what I've seen and experienced, directing is one of the most challenging aspects of filmmaking.

The audience only sees the finished film, never everything that happened behind the camera. A weak scene can be the result of the script, the casting, the directing, the editing, or simply an actor having an off day.

That's why I believe working with actors is just as important as understanding cameras and lighting. Great visuals can impress an audience, but authentic performances are what people usually remember.
Click to expand...
Lucas, I agree with you totally! :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Max
Lucas said:
I completely agree. From what I've seen and experienced, directing is one of the most challenging aspects of filmmaking.

The audience only sees the finished film, never everything that happened behind the camera. A weak scene can be the result of the script, the casting, the directing, the editing, or simply an actor having an off day.

That's why I believe working with actors is just as important as understanding cameras and lighting. Great visuals can impress an audience, but authentic performances are what people usually remember.
Click to expand...
Lucas said:I completely agree. From what I've seen and experienced, directing is one of the most challenging aspects of filmmaking. The audience only sees the finished film, never everything that happened behind the camera...
Click to expand...

I agree, Lucas.

But that actually brings me back to John's earlier question about the technical side of filmmaking, because I think it's worth exploring a little further. Peter, in your fourth point you mentioned that many directors spend too much time watching the monitor instead of watching their actors.

Do you think the rise of "Video Village" has fundamentally changed the relationship between directors and actors? Has it improved collaboration, or has it sometimes created an unnecessary distance between them?

Throughout your career, how did you personally balance the advantages of modern technology with the need to stay emotionally connected to your actors? I'd love to hear how you managed to preserve that trust as filmmaking evolved.
 
I agree that modern filmmaking has become heavily technical, and on-set monitors have fundamentally changed director-actor communication.

Watching 2 monitors (one for A-Camera and one for B-Camera) allows the director to catch technical flaws in real-time, such as a focus buzz or a dolly shot bump. The director can also watch the actors (with the close-up camera) for dialogue and subtle performances.

However, many directors sit isolated in "video village," relaying notes to their actors through walkie-talkies rather than walking to the set and whispering privately to each actor. (sigh...)

This can make actors feel self-conscious (Ex: exposing their mistakes publicly). This replaces an emotional connection with the director with a technical Q&A with the First AD holding the radio close to the actors on set and the director sitting elsewhere with the monitors.

Ultimately, monitors are fantastic tools, and they can really help enhance performances when directors use them as a quick reference while staying physically present with actors.
 
DirectingCoach said:
I agree that modern filmmaking has become heavily technical, and on-set monitors have fundamentally changed director-actor communication.

Watching 2 monitors (one for A-Camera and one for B-Camera) allows the director to catch technical flaws in real-time, such as a focus buzz or a dolly shot bump. The director can also watch the actors (with the close-up camera) for dialogue and subtle performances.

However, many directors sit isolated in "video village," relaying notes to their actors through walkie-talkies rather than walking to the set and whispering privately to each actor. (sigh...)

This can make actors feel self-conscious (Ex: exposing their mistakes publicly). This replaces an emotional connection with the director with a technical Q&A with the First AD holding the radio close to the actors on set and the director sitting elsewhere with the monitors.

Ultimately, monitors are fantastic tools, and they can really help enhance performances when directors use them as a quick reference while staying physically present with actors.
Click to expand...

Peter, I think casting is one of the most important decisions a director makes during the filmmaking process. I've heard many directors and producers say that the wrong casting choice can make months of work much more difficult, while the right actor can bring a character to life from the very first rehearsal.

In your opinion, how much can great directing compensate for poor casting?

Have you ever been on a film where, within the first few days of shooting, you realized that an actor simply wasn't right for the role? If so, how did you handle that situation?
 
Lucas said:
I completely agree. From what I've seen and experienced, directing is one of the most challenging aspects of filmmaking.

The audience only sees the finished film, never everything that happened behind the camera. A weak scene can be the result of the script, the casting, the directing, the editing, or simply an actor having an off day.

That's why I believe working with actors is just as important as understanding cameras and lighting. Great visuals can impress an audience, but authentic performances are what people usually remember.
Click to expand...

Lucas, I completely agree. Beautiful cinematography can capture the audience's attention, but authentic performances are what earn their emotional investment. That's usually what stays with people long after they've forgotten the visuals.
 
Adam Films said:
Peter, I think casting is one of the most important decisions a director makes during the filmmaking process. I've heard many directors and producers say that the wrong casting choice can make months of work much more difficult, while the right actor can bring a character to life from the very first rehearsal.

In your opinion, how much can great directing compensate for poor casting?

Have you ever been on a film where, within the first few days of shooting, you realized that an actor simply wasn't right for the role? If so, how did you handle that situation?
Click to expand...
 
(In your opinion, how much can great directing compensate for poor casting?)
First of all, what is your definition of "great directing" if the film has poor casting? The only job on a film set that no one else can do is directing the actors - and that is only the director's responsibility. No one else (not even a producer) can interfere by giving a note directly to an actor. However, if the producer has a suggestion or wants to give the actor a different note, they go through the director. (NOTE: This is more common on TV series than movies since the "showrunner" knows what is best for the actors based on previous episodes.)
 
Question: "Have you ever been on a film where, within the first few days of shooting, you realized that an actor simply wasn't right for the role? If so, how did you handle that situation?" YES! If it's a big movie, they may recast that part and then reshoot those scenes again. If it is a low-budget movie or the actor is only in one episode of a TV series, they may cut their dialogue down or give the lines to another character. Each situation is different, so those are just 2 examples.
 
DirectingCoach said:
Question: "Have you ever been on a film where, within the first few days of shooting, you realized that an actor simply wasn't right for the role? If so, how did you handle that situation?" YES! If it's a big movie, they may recast that part and then reshoot those scenes again. If it is a low-budget movie or the actor is only in one episode of a TV series, they may cut their dialogue down or give the lines to another character. Each situation is different, so those are just 2 examples.
Click to expand...

That's a great insight, Peter. I think many people outside the industry underestimate how often directors have to make the best possible decision rather than the perfect one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Online statistics

Members online
1
Guests online
282
Total visitors
283
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Newest members

Stay Connected

Back
Top