Film Schools and the Shifting Industry Sands

When I scan the entertainment business press, I see the phrase “the great contraction” everywhere. I see the economic pressures mounting: the aftermath of COVID shutdowns, the drain of labor strikes, the wind-down of zero-interest-rate policies, the end of "Peak TV," the rapidly changing competitive streaming landscape, and the unpredictable rise of TikTok. All these factors have conspired to make the ever-perilous path toward a career in feature film and television even more uncertain. Based on the cold economic laws of supply and demand as they pertain to the labor market, you might expect film schools to be facing an enrollment pinch. Yet, in talking to various graduate and undergraduate chairs and professors across the country, I've found that is simply not the case. The top schools remain fiercely competitive, and the incoming students—well, they still overwhelmingly tell me they want to direct.

My perspective is shaped by what I hear directly from the educators and the students themselves. The new generation of students walking through the doors are not naive; they're passionate and profoundly educated by the very mediums that are currently in flux. They are not deterred by the obstacles.

Shaun Clarke, associate professor and chair of the Visual and Media Arts program at Emerson College, put it plainly: “You poll the students, and they’re coming in because they’re watching movies and TV shows, and they want to be writers, directors and showrunners making these movies and telling these stories.”

I believe this passion has been amplified by the streaming era. Prashanth Kamalakanthan, a director, Filmmaker 25 New Face, and assistant professor at Virginia Commonwealth University School of the Arts (which is reporting record enrollment), concurred. He observed, “The COVID years kept people locked up and streaming stuff, so there’s now a new generation. They have seen more films, they write on Letterboxd and their knowledge of global cinema is increasing. They apply into a cinema program at the age of 17 or 18, and they want to make, mostly, TV shows and movies. Especially as freshmen, they are like, ‘This is what I love.’”

While the students' excitement is infectious, I know that faculty members are indeed fretting over the laundry list of industry obstacles. It's our responsibility not to sell a false dream. Amid all this change, we are rapidly adjusting curricula to prepare students for the harsh realities they'll encounter post-graduation, focusing on creating a sustainable career path.

For example, I've seen the need to transition education from pure artistry to a holistic mastery of craft, business, and emergent technology. Sig Libowitz, Program Director at the Johns Hopkins University Graduate Film & Media Program, explained the necessity of providing "strong tools and craftsmanship that the modern film and media industry is looking for," such as advanced courses in editing, VR, sound, budget and scheduling, and understanding IP and key entertainment law. I agree that providing an "honest understanding and acknowledgment" of the changing landscape—how streaming platforms impact financing, the challenges of AI and virtual production, and how to gain continuing jobs—is now essential.

The most obvious curricular shifts involve technology, particularly virtual production (VP). I see schools everywhere installing those massive LED volumes—the giant screens that allow filmmakers to place actors in immersive, 3D environments. This is a clear attempt to keep pace with industry demand, and it shows me that VP is no longer a niche skill. Schools like NYU are opening dedicated virtual production stages, and I've noted that courses in immersive storytelling, game design, and coding are becoming widespread.

This technological evolution is fundamentally altering the filmmaking process, collapsing the traditional lines between pre-production and post-production. As Jenn Ruff, head of post-production at NYU Tisch School of the Arts, wrote, “Technology is advancing at light speed, and the difference between pre-production and post-production is collapsing." I fully agree that students must understand all their technical choices before they shoot, recognizing that the technology itself is not the film, but a tool for artistry.

Beyond the camera, I see film schools grappling with two other major shifts: Artificial Intelligence and the need for hybrid skills.

I know AI remains a contentious topic across the entertainment business, with widespread fears of job elimination. Yet, educators feel a duty to teach students how to work with these tools to compete. At Johns Hopkins, I know new advanced classes are being added on collaborating with AI, and at Columbia University School of the Arts, they mounted a "major masterclass on AI" where students and faculty had to develop movies using AI tools. My takeaway is that while AI may eliminate some roles, it will certainly create others, and our students must be ready to fill them.

Furthermore, I see a strong move toward teaching hybrid skills. Richard Gladstein, executive director at Brooklyn College’s Feirstein Graduate School of Cinema, summarized the reality perfectly: “Our industry has hyphenates, you know? People who do multiple things.” Feirstein is moving away from specific tracks (writer, producer, director). Instead, students will spend the first 18 months in a "common curriculum" devoted to “the art and craft of cinema.” They'll all take screenwriting, history, and directing classes while constantly making movies.

I think this hybrid approach is vital. As Mike S. Ryan, associate professor at Emerson College, stated, students are no longer declaring concentrations; they are free to explore a range of disciplines from traditional filmmaking to photography, game design, and virtual production. This acknowledges that very few directors, aside from the Spielbergs and Scorseses of the world, survive purely from feature filmmaking. Filmmakers must be prepared to have lucrative day jobs in branded content or commercials—the very path the great Ridley Scott used to fund his film passion.

Ultimately, I feel our focus must be on the sustainable launch of a career, not just the single graduation film. This means providing students with tangible, marketable work samples. At NYU, for instance, they are tightening the writing curriculum to ensure students leave not only with strong shorts but also with a strong long-format script (feature film or TV pilot).

I find the change at VCU particularly inspiring. Kamalakanthan redesigned the final core class into a senior special projects course focused on “life skills.” Students are asked to imagine and create three documents or projects that will benefit them one to two years after graduation, when they no longer have the institutional safety net.

We must also be willing to learn from the next generation. At schools like Feirstein and NYU, chairs are actively reaching out to younger, more contemporary filmmakers requested by the students. Bringing in recent grads to share "from the trenches" info and discussing how they went from school short films to acclaimed features (like Aftersun) makes the filmmaking dream seem slightly more achievable.

My conclusion is that we cannot afford to compound existing inequality or sell a false dream, especially as our student bodies become increasingly diverse. We must focus on transitioning them out of film education into the film industry in a sustainable, accessible way. The fundamental dream of directing remains potent, but its fulfillment now requires a much broader, more hybrid, and technologically fluent skill set than ever before.