When growing up, no one thinks about jobs or careers.  Men don't think about marriage or children... other than an occasional "you're joking, right?"  Car insurance?  Being able to legally rent a car?  Running for state senate?  Nope.

Children think about celebrities they'd want to be, power they'd like to abuse, and people they'd like to hang out with.  The whom is more important than the what.  Geography is also an important influence.  For instance, if you grew up in Chicago, your top three list would be:

1. Michael Jordan
2. Duly-Elected President of the United States of America
3. Big-time, Hollywood Movie Director

If you are from another city, you might have a different basketball player (or maybe a rock star?) in the #1 position, but otherwise your list should be the same.**

Now what do those three jobs all have in common?  POWER?  SEX?  MONEY?  DRUGS?  FAME?  Nope, it's that a key responsibility is rebounding.  That's right, most children want to break the boards and get the rock for their team.  There's no 'I' in 'team.'  Give me ten laps before you hit the showers.

Okay, the previous paragraph was kinda weird.  Sorry.  My main point was that Hollywood has taken over the nation's subconscious.  Everyone might say that they want to be an actor, work on special effects, create fantastical costumes, be in charge of cinematography, rig lights, be the Best Boy, or write a million-dollar screenplay.  But if you ask any of those people, they'd reply, "and what I really want to do is direct."  The director is the most important person on a film set.  Ever wonder why a film opens with 'A Film By <DIRECTOR'S NAME>'?  It's because the director is considered the auteur of the film.  It's their vision on screen -- if the film is good, then the director is a genius and will rightfully receive all of the adoration.  If the film is horrible, then it's probably the fault of the producers or the studio -- they changed the film so that it is different than the director intended.

There's a new reality show called "On the Lot" that just started airing on Fox.  The show has some big credentials (produced by Steven Spielberg and Mark Burnett), two permanent judges whose names are recognizable (Carrie Fisher and Gary Marshall), and a rotating guest judge (normally A/B-list, but, regardless of resume, their ability to judge cinematography seems competent).  There is a website (thelot.com) that has video clips, message boards, weekly contents, and a decent community.

The goal of the show is to go from fifty contestants (most were cut in the first and second show) to The One.  A prize of 'one million-dollar development deal with Dreamworks' awaits the winner.  The challenges keep changing, but the majority of them have been 'make a movie in X genre, of Y length, given Z time to create the film (concept to cut)'.

The problem?  Irony.  "On the Lot" is about finding a film director, but the show is lacking a director.  Every week the format is different.  It started off as a glimpse 'behind the curtain.'  We'd see people feuding, dreaming, creating, and responding to criticism.  Then -- suddenly -- there was a completely different show in the "On the Lot" timeslot.  The new show had the same name, the same people, and the same goal, but it was different in every way.  It was American Idol, but with short films.  They even tried to stretch it to two shows -- heighten the tension of not knowing the 'public vote results.'  Ratings dropped and the show barely survived.

The recent alterations are paring it back down to something interesting, but it's not the same show.  It's still focused on spectacle.  The judges are powerless under the 'American Idol' format -- their feedback is meaningless if the 'voting public' chooses to ignore it.  To be fair, the judge's criticism doesn't come across as useful, so maybe they needed to change the format as a result.  The criticism is rarely constructive, the three judges all say the same thing when asked their opinion, and their most common complaint is that they fail to understand something that is obvious to the audience.

The judges should each choose a different aspect of directing and limit their critique to constructive comments related to their assigned aspect:

1. the direction of the actors
2. the cinematography employed (and the editing thereof)
3. the use of plot/theme/motifs/effects to convey their assignment

Similarly, the current show format (presentation of films in a theatre with short 'making of' featurettes proceeding the films) makes for better spectacle, but it doesn't help the audience grow as filmmakers.  As a filmmaker, I (and most of the community on their website) found the initial episodes more compelling -- they were a window into the creative process.  However, that window is currently closed and has the blinds drawn. 

At the least, it'd be nice if the films weren't proceeded by spoilers.  The little 'making of' featurettes they show before each film should be placed after the film.  Does anyone watch the deleted scenes or listen to the commentary on a DVD before they've seen the film?

I apologize if my criticism of the show is boring.  No one wants to read a blog filled with a person's personal ranting.  Unless that person is Kiera Knightley.  And she's only given a free pass because she is so amazingly hot.

To summarize: lets make a movie together.  Send in your resumes and headshots.  Especially if you're Kiera Knightley or Scarlett Johanson.  We'll show them the power of the Internet!

* If you were thinking that this was about the invention of pick-up baseball games, then you were mistaken.  Go to your educators and demand a refund.

** There are a few other acceptable entries: 'sex-ed teacher for deaf+mutes', 'viking prince', and 'an astronaut'.  If you entered 'a roadie for a boy band' OR 'Paris Hilton' don't be alarmed!!  Take a deep breath and relax.  We're going to get you help.****

*** Until a male reaches adulthood (generally, in their late 30's), they aren't able to comprehend that other people have feelings.  Women, in particular, are expected to be simple receptacles for a man's feelings, and are held in contempt if they ask for anything in return.

**** NOTE: help not included.