Chapman University (Screen Acting) VS NYU Tisch

<p>I was just wondering which school would be better for film acting? I also like modern Theater more than classical. NYU has a Stella Adler summer workshop in LA and NYU has Stonestreet while Chapman has the actual degree. I am planning on going to an early college, but if I don't get the scholarship this would be my second option. If I go to this early college (Bard College at Simon's Rock), I would just transfer to USC or NU for print journalism. I would also like to double major in print journalism if I did this. Which one has a stronger program and what are the pro and con's of each one? Here is my thoughts of each program:</p>

<p>Chapman: Orange, California. A drive from LA but it's only an hour. Has an actual degree in screen acting. LA is more known for films and television shows. It is mediocre with academics and lots of people I know never heard of the school. I would also have to try out after two years for this track and it would stink if I went there and didn't get into it. I would likely transfer because that would be my whole point of going there. The journalism school isn't as strong as NYU and I've heard people go here because they couldn't get into UCLA or USC. And heard the people are a little snobby. It is also expensive and almost the cost of USC. When USC only has one course for film acting. I also have no family (all on east coast) but I think I would like LA. I have heard Chapman gives good scholarships though. Question, How hard is Chapman to get into?</p>

<p>NYU: NYC and I'm use to the east coast. The program isn't just film acting but that can be a pro. I have lots of family in NY. NYU's name is a lot better in terms of prestige. It has great academics plus has Tisch. The journalism school is just as good. The school may look good on my resume for all fields. It doesn't have much of a campus and I'm use to the suburbs. It cost a lot of money and that could be a factor. I may be happier since I think I could adjust better. It may be too liberal for me. I have the views of a Roman Catholic but Democratic view points/beliefs too. </p>

<p>Here are other schools I like: USC, Northwestern, Flagler College, UGA, Sarah Lawrence College, UNC- Chapel Hill, Boston College, Yale, IU- Bloomington, Pepperdine, Mizzu, Ithaca College, Georgetown, NYCDA, Suny Purchase and Syracuse University.</p>

<p>What do you think and which school is best for me? Do you suggest other schools? I still have plenty of time but this is more my back up plan. I don't want to count on Simon's Rock and if I did go it wouldn't be worth it to go and transfer and graduate later. The point of the college is so I can get a head start for my acting career. Any feedback? Ty!</p>

<p>I'm a little loathe to give advice since you're a h/s freshman and you WILL CHANGE A LOT between now and when it comes time to actually apply to college, but I would suggest that you stick to BA options and get the lion's share of your actor training outside of school with your current mindset. While my opinion is that getting the most intensive stage training you can find makes for the best screen actors, you can't really go through all that successfully unless you have a love for the stage first and foremost. In an intensive BFA, you will literally eat, drink and sleep THEATRE 24/7 for four years. There will be some camera acting classes, but the vast majority of the training will be for the stage and you probably won't last if you're doing it simply as a means to the end of being a screen actor. Seriously ... You've gotta not only love it, but be obsessed. Of course, Chapman might be an exception. I know nothing about their BFA in film acting, but that's because it is a brand new one-of-a-kind program. Maybe good. Maybe nay. </p>

<p>Since you're interested in the Bard early college deal, why not look into them for a BA? I know some of the creative writing types from my old arts h/s were very into Bard and a couple went there. They supposedly have a pretty good theatre department, too, and I think I heard something about them recently spending a lot of money on some fabulous new facilities. I'm not sure if they have a film/media arts department, so check on that. Some other BA type schools you might look into are Swarthmore, Vassar, Tufts, Emory, Muhlenberg and Skidmore. That's just off the top of my head and there are many, many more that would be more than sufficient. </p>

<p>All-in-all, I'd say to just look into places in or near major media centers where you can nurture your writing abilities, get a well rounded education with lots of options, and take acting classes outside of school - maybe summer intensives in the city? A school that also has a decent film major would be a plus as well so you could build a starter reel through student film assuming you're not already in SAG. I know some people with screen acting ambitions who actually decided to major in film, so that's another option. Get your grades up first, though. As they stand, you couldn't even be accepted to most of the schools you're talking about ... much less get a scholarship.</p>

<p>Hope this helps although it'll more than likely confuse ... :)</p>

<p>fishbowlfreshman is very wise. She gave you excellent advice....listen to her. :)</p>

<p>Thanks so much! Oh, in my state is it actually worth not to be Non Union and most of the projects are Non Union. It's not the same as California and NY and a different market. I use to love Theater when I was younger and it truly was my passion. I have been in over 20 plays, but these were at different play house's. It was not classical Theater at all. About 4 years ago I went into film acting and loved it. It took me a LONG time to switch over to film. I was very theatrical. I now have two agents but haven't got much. I like film acting but where I am there isn't much and with the economy things have gotten worse. I haven't been doing much training lately but I've had plenty. My agent did not like the fact about me taking Theater in high school. Because it could get me confused on how to switch over to film and plays. It's very hard to go from one another because I finally toned myself down. I've lost some of my interest in Theater and focused it on film acting. I am also now going to do swim team full on so I don't have time for community theater. I also don't like Classical Theater like Shakespeare. I really can't deal with that type of Theater. I do like some Modern Theater like Barefoot in the Park. </p>

<p>My grades were like a 3.1-3.2 UW GPA, but that was just one bad semester. I am also in all honor classes and one AP class. Math got my grade down a lot and had all A's and B's other wise. My teacher was the problem, lol. I could have a much higher GPA if I took CP classes. I'm doing a lot better this semester too well I expect all A's exept for math. I need a different math teacher but it won't happen. I just need to get a B and midterms are coming up. I'm way more of a Social Studies and English person. I also love print journalism and it's also my other passion. I love to write for Newsweek or The NY Times. I would also like to do screenwriting and/or write. Oh, you only stay at Bard College at Simon's Rock for two years. You then transfer to another school which are very prestigious such as Yale, NYU, USC, Brown, etc. You could go to the upper school but most don't. You would be a junior transfer. I was just thinking maybe I could transfer to USC or NU and just do journalism. I could still do acting. Your thoughts, ty?</p>

<p>Also, it really isn't that far to apply to Bard at Simon's Rock. Oh, Bard is not the same school as Bard at Simon's Rock. They are just affiliated by each other. I also start the application in August and turn it in January 2010.</p>

<p>So...which one is better again?</p>

<p>I would think NYU is better in terms of academics and Chapman is better for film acting.</p>

<p>^ What is "better" is always going to depend on the needs of the individual student, but NYU is certainly more established both in terms of academics and all forms of acting at this point in time. Which NYU studio is "best" is also going to depend on one's individual needs. Actually, in terms of name, current trends would dictate the Meisner studio or the Practical Aesthetics technique taught in the Atlantic studio as being most desirable for screen acting although there are certainly a lot of very successful screen actors who trained primarily in Adler or Strasberg method. Personally, I find all those techniques to be outdated, incomplete, and somewhat limiting when taken by themselves and would recommend more of a toolbox approach to training that encourages you to develop your own way of working, but that's just me ... :)</p>

<p>early_college,
From what you have told us, you went into film acting when you were eleven years old and have implied that you had a lot of training by then and that it took you a long time to make the switch to screen. I'm going to try to not sound condescending and I hope you don't take this as an attack, but I'm going to have to tell you that that's impossible. Even at fifteen it's highly unlikely that you've had much of the kind of quality training that will translate into adulthood. I noticed on another thread that you didn't understand the value of voice training and had it mixed up with voiceover work. That kinda ... speaks volumes in and of itself.</p>

<p>There's nothing to be ashamed about with that, though, because what you've probably had is very typical of what is taught to child actors and early adolescents. It's mugging; not acting, and it would explain your difficulty in the switch to screen. If you train in and develop a truly solid, legitimate acting technique, toning it down to make the switch from stage to camera isn't that difficult at all unless you're one of those poor souls with a psychological tic that somehow causes them to totally freeze up when a camera is present. Once you have that basic acting technique and you've mastered the technical aspects of camera acting, the biggest challenge is getting used to playing things out of sequence. I actually find it much easier than stage. Unless you're having to cop a highly stylized ensemble form like you'll see on "Ugly Betty" or any number of sitcoms, what you're dealing with 90% of the time is just contemporary realism. It's not rocket science.</p>

<p>Keep an open mind about classical theatre, too. I remember when I was your age and Shakespeare was this pretentious, boring, impenetrable, and largely irrelevant thing I had to study in English class. I even considered it a chore to bother with learning a monologue for my arts h/s audition. The light came on when I was in eleventh grade and finally got to see it done justice in live performance. Now I would be perfectly content to spend the rest of my days playing nothing BUT Shakespeare at an out-of-the-way regional theatre. But again ... That's just me. However, what is NOT just me is the fact that if you can master the language and play it in such a way that the village idiot in the back row of the theatre perfectly understands every bit of what is going on, there's not much you can't play. There's definitely no script coming out of Hollywood that wouldn't be a breeze.</p>

<p>Now to the actual question you posed ... LOL If your primary ambition is screen acting, majoring in journalism in college is perfectly fine. Just make sure you get some training while you're doing it and continue training after you get the degree. NOBODY is ever through training even if it's self-directed. I guarantee you that Meryl Streep and Anthony Hopkins still learn something new every time they work on a project. Also, stay on the swim team and do a lot of other things. Those special skills you develop can be the difference in being considered for a lot of gigs or not. </p>

<p>
[quote]
fishbowlfreshman is very wise. She gave you excellent advice....listen to her.

[/quote]
Now Soozie ... You know after all these years that nobody actually listens to a word I say! LOL :D</p>

<p>I've had over a year of training starting at 11 at an acting studio and then went to AMTC which is an talent convention. I also went to that studio for about another year or two. I went once a week after AMTC. I have though have had tons of workshops with other agents, casting director's from ABC, managers, etc. I have had lots of that stuff and most of it is like a two hour thing. I've had one voice over class from a guy who was with ABC Casting, but wasn't fond of him. I haven't had much training at all since starting high school, because I don't have time. I'm on the swim team (going full time now) and I'm in all honors and AP classes. Also, there is another acting studio I may be going to. It just costs a lot of money though. There isn't much to choose from in my area and I liked the same studio. My old studio changed and most of the teachers moved. I've really never had much Theater training. I did a lot of Theater in Florida at a Play House and they thought you the basics. I kind of lost my interest in it. I do know I need more training like anyone does but not much too chose from like LA or NY. I meant that I have a lot of training for people who are in my area. I like film better because it's more realistic to me. I could see myself doing things in real life like in 7th Heaven. </p>

<p>Classical Theater really doesn't make sense because I don't understand anything. I don't like how they speak and it's hard for me to understand it without Spark Notes. I'm in Theater now and it's pretty easy. I just wished my agents get me some more auditions. That's a reason why I don't like where I live. The early college is in Great Barrington, Mass so maybe I could get an agent if I go there. I could transfer to Sarah Lawrence College which sounds more for me. They have a good writing program. I think I've lost some interest in acting because I haven't got to work and experience film on hand. My thoughts, ty. What do you suggest? Would moving to LA at 18 be fine? Thanks!</p>

<p>How about Bennington College or maybe Loyola Marymount University?</p>

<p>bump..............</p>

<p>My d was accepted to theater program at chapman. I would like to know about the bfa in screen acting. I would appreciate any thoughts.</p>

<p>The audition for the screen acting bfa happens at the end of the freshman year and the audition for the theatre bfa is at the end of the sophomore year.</p>

<p>Some thoughts off the top of my head..........</p>

<p>......Chapman is located in a suburban town, NYU is in NYC
......I disagree with some of the previous postings, Chapman has excellent academics (NYU's academics are also excellent as was stated above)
......Chapman is extremely well known in the LA area and highly regarded by the industry
.....BIG differences in Chapman and NYU are weather and the school size
......I know many people that choose Chapman over USC and UCLA. I also knew many people that choose USC and UCLA over Chapman. Chapman is not a 'school for left-overs'</p>

<p>Is it as competitive once you are in chapman. How many students get rejected.</p>

<p>Thanks everyone my thread is going again! Yes, I thought it dropped dead a long time ago. Any transfer to Chapman for the BFA screen acting? Wouldn't you have to start all over like other programs. Any body in this or may be going to Chapman?</p>

<p>The Tisch School of the Arts of New York University (Tisch-NYU) is a better school and program by a longggg shot. Is this even a question? NYU may not have a "BFA Screen Acting Program" but Tisch is one of the top ACTING programs. At Chapman you are paying for a degree title that says: "BFA Screen Acting BFA," but not good, solid, consistent acting training. With NYU you are paying for: the connections you make there and in the city, the respect of going to NYU, and most importantly SOLID ACTING TRAINING. There's a reason why only 17% out of the 3,000 kids that audition for Tisch each year get accepted, it's hard, rigourous and intense. Chapman will pretty much let anyone into the BA Theatre degree then it's very easy to get into Screen Acting. So if you want to get good and work after graduation go to a school like NYU, USC, UCLA...etc.</p>

<p>Chapman's Screen Acting program is still VERY. Maybe in 10-15 years it will be a 'good' acting program but right now, you'll be busier with GE's and Film classes (Screen writing, editing, visual story telling, film aesthetics, etc.) than acting classes. To be blunt...there are about 7 or 8 acting classes you will take as a Screen Acting Major at Chapman. If you were to take four of these classes in the fall semester of freshman year and the other four in the spring...your acting training would be complete...maybe add an acting class or two in the sophomore but thats it! </p>

<p>At NYU the acting classes are never ending.</p>

<p>ALSO NYU doesn't have a "screen acting degree" but it has an advanted screen acting studio within the undergraduate drama department.</p>

<p>At NYU you could study at the Stella Adler Studio for three years then the Screen Acting Studio. Or do two years in the Meisner, a year in ETW or any other studio then a year in screen acting. You can do so much more at Tisch and get further.</p>

<p>@coasterfly,</p>

<p>First, Welcome to CC. :)</p>

<p>I just want to point out that you are reviving old threads with an obvious agenda. You've posted basically the same thing in all of them...you don't like Chapman. OK, we get it. It's almost like you failed out or something.</p>

<p>Please stop using the forums this way. It isn't helpful. You obviously have issues with Chapman and maybe you need to work through them. A more private setting would be appropriate. Perhaps try journaling.</p>