Faire un film (La Première collection)

by Sidney Lumet, Charles Villalon (Translator)

Comment choisit-on un scénario? Qu’est-ce qui détermine le style d’un film? Comment gérer un tournage en extérieur avec une centaine de figurants ? Que faire pour maintenir la concentration d’un acteur au bout de la dixième prise ?Étape par étape, Sidney Lumet aborde tous les aspects de la création cinématographique, de l’écriture à la post-production : le casting, les répétitions, le choix des décors et des costumes, le tournage et le montage, la conception de la bande-son..., jusqu’au moment fatidique de la première projection. Auteur de nombreux classiques (Serpico, Un après-midi de chien, 12 hommes en colère), Lumet offre avec ce livre le point de vue rare d’un cinéaste sur son propre travail et sur son art, nourri d’une longue expérience à Hollywood où il a tourné avec les plus grandes stars (de Katharine Hepburn à Al Pacino). À la fois mémoires professionnelles fourmillant d’anecdotes et guide pour apprenti réalisateur, Faire un film est une plongée saisissante dans les coulisses du cinéma.

Genres: Film, Nonfiction, Media Tie In, Art, Memoir, Writing, Biography

292 pages, Kindle Edition

First published March 14, 1995

About the author

Sidney Lumet was an Academy Award-winning American film director, with over 50 films to his name, including the critically acclaimed 12 Angry Men (1957), Serpico (1973), Dog Day Afternoon (1975), Network (1976) and The Verdict (1982), all of which earned him Academy Award nominations for Best Director. He won an Academy Award for Lifetime Achievement in 2005, for his "brilliant services to screenwriters, performers, and the art of the motion picture".

Reviews

[Orsodimondo · Rating 4 out of 5]

IL MESTIERE PIÙ BELLO DEL MONDO


Philip Seymour Hoffman, Ethan Hawke, Albert Finney, Marisa Tomei in “Before the Devil Knows You’re Dead – Onora il padre e la madre”, 2007.

Sidney Lumet ha un curriculum imponente e impressionante: quasi sessanta anni di attività, cominciò a fare il regista in teatro (esperienza che lo segnerà, quanti suoi film sono adattamenti cinematografici di pièce teatrali!), attraversando la televisione (che negli anni Cinquanta in US sperimentava e innovava il linguaggio più del cinema dell’epoca, proprio come succede adesso), per esordire nel cinema a trentatre anni (nel suo paese, non proprio ragazzino a quel punto).
42 film e altrettanti lavori televisivi tra miniserie, serie, tv movie ed episodi sparsi. Un Oscar alla carriera e quattro candidature come miglior regista.
Titoli memorabili, come La parola ai giurati, Pelle di serpente, L’uomo del banco dei pegni, La collina del disonore, Serpico, Quel pomeriggio di un giorno da cani, Assassinio sull’Orient Express, Quinto potere, Il verdetto, e l’ultimo, forse il suo capolavoro, Onora il padre e la madre - altri titoli meno riusciti, e Lumet è il primo ad ammetterlo in queste pagine.


Paul Newman in “Il verdetto”, 1982.

Faceva film in modo diretto semplice e pragmatico, con passione, e competenza, e precisione, curando il dettaglio di ogni aspetto, con umiltà e senza retorica: con le stesse qualità e nello stesso modo ha scritto questo libro, senza cedere alla tentazione di fare del facile gossip sul suo lavoro.
Lumet ci accompagna in ogni aspetto della preparazione di un film, dalla pre alla postproduzione, passando per il casting, la scenografia, i costumi e gli effetti, le riprese e il montaggio, la scelta della colonna sonora, il missaggio, le luci e la distribuzione, il lancio e la promozione, fino all’attesissima uscita in sala, raccontando così un viaggio meraviglioso: lo sviluppo e la trasformazione di un’idea in film.


William Holden, Robert Duvall, Peter Finch in “Network – Quinto potere”, 1976. Assente (giustificata) da questa immagine la magnifica protagonista Faye Dunaway.

Come i suoi colleghi, Lumet sapeva di fare il mestiere più bello del mondo. Un mestiere che porta a contatto di una grande quantità di persone, un lavoro davvero collettivo, fino al momento finale, quando l’opera è sullo schermo, e lì l’artista torna solo con la sua responsabilità complessiva. Un mestiere elettrizzante e faticoso, fisicamente e mentalmente esigente.
Nel nostro paese le cose vanno più o meno come le racconta Lumet: solo tutto più in piccolo, con meno gente coinvolta e meno soldi, meno tempo a disposizione, lo stesso talento, ma anche spesso, più improvvisazione, o più cialtroneria.


Sidney Lumet e Al Pacino sul set di “Quel pomeriggio di un giorno da cani”, 1975.

Una lettura per addetti ai lavori, per studenti e appassionati, per amatori e curiosi, una lettura per passatempo, una lettura per tutti.

Non è un libro per imparare a fare un film: è un libro che fa innamorare dei film.
Se mai ce ne fosse bisogno.
Se per caso questa arte che crea mondi nuovi non fosse già nel cuore di chi legge.


Sean Connery (secondo da dx) in “The Hill – La collina del disonore”, 1965.

[Vincent Masson · Rating 5 out of 5]

A gift of biblical proportions for anyone involved, or curious about the filmmaking process.

[brian · Rating 3 out of 5]

lumet's an interesting guy to think about if one decides to make a film -- the guy's made some of the best films of our time. but for me, lumet provides a cautionary tale of what not to become.

12 Angry Men
Dog Day Afternoon
Network
The Verdict
Serpico
Before the Devil Knows You're Dead

all good. and Network is great.

and he's made about fifty bad movies including A Stranger Among Us, Guilty as Sin, the remake of Gloria, etc...

lumet's obviously an intelligent guy with good taste (cites Carl Dreyer as his favorite director - nice) -- and he's an auteur: a thematic quality runs through his best work and he clearly chooses his material by a certain standard. but lumet is at the mercy of two things: (1) the time in which he lives and (2) his cinematographer. (it's also worth noting that he comes from television which is about as visually distinctive as high school yearbook photography) check it out:

(1) why are his 70s movies better? why do his 90s movies suck?

well, he was a younger man in the 70s than in the 90s and had more fire in his belly. of course. but he was also making films in american cinema's 2nd golden age - the spirit of the time dominated his films: gritty, tough films both thematically and visually; intense character studies about flawed people; obsessive and paranoid films as a response to nixon/watergate/vietnam.


(2) lumet's great w/actors. for sure. his pacing is great, he knows how to construct a scene... but visually, is there a 'lumet style'? well - in making movies he states, for example, that the color blue never once appears in The Verdict (paul newman's eyes!) as he wanted the film to have an autumnal feel. ok. that's kinda cool. but, ultimately, is there anything visual to distinguish a sidney lumet film? naw, not really. and this is ok. same for howard hawks - for hawks it's all a 'code of masculinity' and saucy dames. he left the visuals to the camera guy.


fuck that. i don't wanna be at the mercy of my cinematographer. greg toland (cinematographer of Citizen Kane) famously explained that orson welles was able to reinvent cinema with his first feature in that he didn't know the 'rules', he didn't understand the limitations -- he demanded shots from toland that hadn't been done before and refused to hear that they couldn't be done. but there's only one orson welles. the rest of us will believe our DP when s/he tells us that a shot cannot be done. the rest of us will allow our DP to construct a shot. fuck that.


filmmakers rule #1 -- on set, know how to do everybody's job better than them.


spielberg has kaminski, a visual fucking god, but every spielberg film looks like a spielberg film.

in the early 90s francis ford coppola said that new technology would democratize cinema. a few years back james gray said that new technology hasn't done much in the way of the democratization of cienema in that 99.9% of 'homemade' movies suck. gray's right.

you gotta know the technical stuff.

lumet is a very good filmmaker. (and i thank him kindly for Before the Devil Knows You're Dead -- the naked marisa tomei scenes have provided invaluable masturbatory assistance). and making movies is a great read. but, for me, it's a cautionary tale. i might never make a film as good as network. shit, i hope i make one half as good. but fuck if i let my cinematographer or the time in which i live be the deciding factor of what my film looks like! be like a writer banging out the beats of his novel only to have someone else handle the prose!

* this is in no way meant to disparage cinematographers. the great ones are every bit the genius as the great directors. and a great cinematographer matched with a great director (bergman/nykvist godard/coutard, coppola/willis) can create something transcendent. but i ain't a cinematographer. and in terms of my shit, i'm an insufferable egomaniac. and hopefully the tension b/t a tough-minded director and tough-minded cinematographer will make 'em both better than they could've been on their own.

[Richard · Rating 5 out of 5]

*2019 Re-read*

Sidney Lumet has always been one of my favorite directors and a big filmmaking inspiration to me. He's always enjoyable to listen to when he speaks about the craft and I've learned so much from him over the years, even from simply watching his movies, which includes numerous classics like Dog Day Afternoon, Network, The Verdict, 12 Angry Men, and Serpico.

And this book is a great summary of everything that makes Lumet awesome. You get a sense of his theories on filmmaking and working with actors, as well as great on-set anecdotes. And it's all told in his trademark pragmatic tone that's easy to read, non-technical, totally relatable, and completely unpretentious.

When people ask me about required reading for filmmakers, I always include this on my lists.

[Aditya · Rating 4 out of 5]

4/5

Sidney Lumet is my favorite director, even if he was not this book would be a wonderful read for those interested about what goes on behind the scenes while making movies. Lumet has made more classics than most – 12 Angry Men, The Pawnbroker (one of the most underrated American movies of all time), The Hill (one of the most underrated British movies of all time), Serpico, Dog Day Afternoon, Network and The Verdict. I love how Lumet turns character driven dramas into tense thrillers. No one was as good as him with actors. Stars as varied as Katherine Hepburn, Al Pacino, Paul Newman, Rod Steiger gave career best performances in his movies.

Making Movies start at the pre-production stage – scripting and goes on to chronologically explain every step involved with movie making up to the release of the film. The more technical sections like sound mixing and editing were difficult for me to grasp though the writing is lucid and unpretentious but the sections about writing and acting are filled with great nuggets of wisdom. He uses his own filmography as examples to explain how he countered various problems.

Lumet is generally a bit underrated because modern film criticism focuses on the auteur theory – where directors who maintain their individual stylistic signature across movies are overrated. Lumet was a great technician and he does not rate auteurs highly, I don’t blame him. Lumet explains his versatility was often held against him. He did not see the director as an orchestra conductor who leads the chorus but more as a puppet master who hosts the show without drawing attention to himself. He did not want his stylistic flourishes to be visible, that gave him an undeserved reputation as dour. Check out Network to see how it is a false narrative. The framing and cinematography back up the core themes as well as any other auteur driven film. Lumet is also big on finding the central theme of the movie and extrapolating from it.

Lumet’s contemporaries like Robert Altman and William Friedkin are better remembered these days but they put together have not made as many good movies as Lumet. Lumet loved working so he did a lot of crappy movies as a favor or simply for the money. He did not mind being a director for hire. It did not mean turning in bad work, it meant working on movies that he knew were not that good. He is the best director to never win a competetive Oscar. Some might say Kubrick or Hitchcock was the best director to not win an Oscar but neither made Oscar friendly movies. Plus Lumet was a New York man, so he was not always seen as a Hollywood insider. But with or without Oscars, Lumet’s movies stand up to the test of time.

Lumet had a reputation of being one of the nicest directors in the industry and the book reinforces those feelings. His humility and deep respect for the medium and peers is ever present. He equates belief to self-deception but warns against belief turning into pretentiousness. He came from a theater background so he understood the value of a good script. Maybe that’s why he adapted some of the best plays of all time into excellent movies like Long Day’s Journey Into Night and Equus. He made actors feel comfortable; his man-management skill is evident. He says the best acting is about self-revelation his job was to give the actor enough space and support where the actors could be vulnerable. Contrast it to William Wyler, who was also great with actors but had a reputation of driving the stars insane to get what he wanted. Lumet shares nice anecdotes about Brando, Hepburn, Newman but never reduces himself to gossip. He talks about their work ethics and their different approaches to challenges.

So what’s the secret sauce? According to Lumet it is in depth planning. It is about rehearsing and anticipating problems, the preparation stage is as important as the actual shooting. Lumet is honest about his flaws. He said his writing lacks the polish of the best scriptwriters. I agree, I recently saw Q&A, a rare movie that has Lumet as the sole writer and the writing felt on the nose. Lumet explains his reasoning for wanting an unknown actor for Prince of the City, an actor without the baggage of audience expectations. Treat Williams got the lead role but I thought he was not up to the mark. Even when I disagree with Lumet, his eloquent explanation of the rationale behind his decision making turns out to be insightful. If you ever want to make a movie, this is a must read. Even if you don’t want to make one and are just interested in the magical world of films; the first half of the book, the non-technical stuff is worth a read. Wish more people who are titans in their fields wrote such accessible books about their chosen professions.

Quotes:
We’re out for communication. And sometimes we even get consensus. And that’s thrilling.

I’m dependent on weather, budget, what the leading lady had for breakfast, who the leading man is in love with. I’m dependent on the talents and idiosyncrasies, the moods and egos, the politics and personalities, of more than a hundred different people.

Everything becomes creative if the person doing the job is. It’s true as well for something that seems as mechanical as sound effects.

[William2 · Rating 4 out of 5]

Sidney Lumet has been making movies for so long and so well, that his description of the movie-making process is very stripped down — almost aphoristic. It’s something of a master class.

In his explanation of lenses, he starts:

“Lenses have different feelings about them. Different lenses will tell a story differently.” (p.78)

That’s what I mean by aphoristic.

There are also excellent stories here about how he gets his actors to act. Among them Ingrid Bergman (Murder on the Orient Express), Marlon Brando (The Fugitive Kind), Katherine Hepburn and Jason Robards (Long Day’s Journey Into Night), William Holden and Faye Dunaway (Network) and Paul Newman (The Verdict).

The chapter “Shooting the Movie” gave me the best look at day to day movie-making. Especially interesting was the author’s review of the call sheet for two separate days of shooting. Everything is listed here: what sets/locations will be used; what scenes shot — everything is numbered — which actors present; how many pages of script shot (in eighths of a page); time when Teamsters have to pick everyone up, etc.

Published in 1995, this is analog filmmaking. Today some operations, like editing, have been utterly streamlined. The viewing of rushes, too, have changed with the advent of digital technology. Takes are now seen immediately on set. But the logistics of scheduling, rehearsal, blocking, set lighting, location scouting, camera movements, etc. – less of that has changed.

[Dmitry Berkut · Rating 5 out of 5]

I picked up this book at a retrospective of Sidney Lumet’s films and wasn’t disappointed for a moment.
Making Movies by Sidney Lumet, the legendary director of 12 Angry Men and Dog Day Afternoon, is a fascinating exploration of the craft of filmmaking. Lumet, who helped launch the careers of Al Pacino, Faye Dunaway, and Christopher Walken, shares his expertise with clarity and wit, covering everything from working with actors to managing tight budgets.
One of the book’s most valuable aspects is Lumet’s honesty. He doesn’t romanticize the industry but openly discusses the compromises, budget constraints, and challenges every filmmaker faces.
I loved how he seamlessly balances technical insights with personal anecdotes, making the book as entertaining as it is informative. It’s not just a guide to filmmaking but a heartfelt tribute to the art itself.

[Daniel Gonçalves · Rating 5 out of 5]

I grew up with the conception that movies were art. The media would commonly refer to it as the 7th form of artistic expression. I had my doubts. In my young mind, it was easy to assemble a film together. All people had to do was bring actors to their sets. Then the camera would roll, and another motion picture was made. It was now waiting in the cinema, and you could by a ticket for a reasonable price.

I was wrong. There is much more to it.

Creating film is a complex process. The struggles are immense. There are benefits in all of it, and the fact that it is a complex system gives extreme importance to the figure of the director - a person I thought had it easy, after all, his role was to hire people to do it for him. But this is not how it works. Sidney Lumet, one of the industry's most revered directors, proves it.

Lumet not only writes a comprehensive success-guide to his aspiring colleagues, he also informs the layman about every concealed aspect of his process. To do this, he writes in a fluent, candid prose, that any person can understand., debunking and destroying various myths and misconceptions about his craft. His wisdom, derived from yeas of experience, shines a new light on the herculean process of movie-making. It will transform your views, and make you appreciate the art even more.

[Diana · Rating 4 out of 5]

Making Movies [1995] - ★★★★

This book on movie-making is by American director Sidney Lumet (1924 – 2011) who was probably best known for directing a number of “legal” films including 12 Angry Men [1957], Murder on the Orient Express [1974] and The Verdict [1982]. It provides a deep insight into the “magical” process of making movies, from deciding whether to do a movie (Lumet almost always decided “instinctively”) to the final editing process and running previews. Lumet was a “trier” and “doer”. He tells us in his book that he did not believe in waiting around for opportunities and liked to create his own luck. His eagerness to create opportunities reflected the sheer variety of films he directed. Cinematic success is hard to pin down, he states. That’s also his first lesson to us: “nobody knows what that magic combination is that produces a first-rate piece of work” [Vintage, 1995: 9]. Even a great script or a great star-actor does not guarantee success.

Referencing many of his films and his work with such actors as Marlon Brando, Paul Newman and Al Pacino, Lumet divulges to us many “truths” about the film-making process. For example, he states that “the script must…keep you off balance, keep you surprised, entertained, involved, and, yet, when the denouement is reached, still give you the sense that the story had to turn out that way” [1995: 31], that “all good work requires self-revelation” [1995: 59], and that “there are no small decisions in moviemaking” [1995: 165]. Perhaps some of the nitty-gritty of the movie- making is not as interesting to read (there are pages on the impact of certain camera angles and the importance of tempo in editing), but other insight offered certainly makes up for any dullish bits. For example, it was particularly interesting for me to learn that the Murder on the Orient Express production hired the best ever sound technician to create real steam locomotive sounds for the scene of the departing train. That technician’s work was brilliant and he worked four weeks on some incredible train sounds. Unfortunately, that work also proved fruitless: after Lumet had heard the final version of Richard Rodney Bennett’s score, he chose the music over the sound and what we now hear when the train in the film departs Istanbul is the wonderful music instead (both do not combine).

The result? After finishing this book I now would love to watch Lumet’s film Death Trap [1982], based on a play by Ira Levin (who also incidentally borrowed the first part from a book by Boileau-Narcejac) with always brilliant Michael Cane and Christopher Reeve (see memoir Still Me), and his movie Before The Devil Knows You’re Dead [2007] with Albert Finney and Philip Seymour Hoffman. Making Movies is a relaxed, almost conversational book packed with lots of little “truths” about the film-making process: some fun, some painful and some more interesting than others, but all delivered with such passion that only a director who truly loved his work and was dedicated to it as an art form could have done.

[Lee · Rating 5 out of 5]

Indispensable, candid insight from a great filmmaker, including numerous wonderful anecdotes (like this one).

'Sometimes, on particularly good takes, I’m so moved that I stop “doing” the scene and just watch in awe at the miracle of good acting. As I said earlier, that’s life up there. When it flows like that, that’s when I say “Print.” Is it exhausting? You bet it is.

One of the most difficult acting scenes I’ve ever encountered was on Dog Day Afternoon. About two-thirds of the way through the movie, Pacino makes two phone calls: one to his male “wife” and lover, who’s at a barbershop across the street, and the second to his “real” wife, in her home.

I knew Al would build up the fullest head of steam if we could do it in one take. The scene took place at night. The character had been in the bank for twelve hours. He had to seem spent, exhausted. When we’re that tired, emotions flow more easily. And that’s what I wanted.

There was an immediate problem. The camera holds only a thousand feet of film. That’s a bit over eleven minutes. The two phone calls ran almost fifteen minutes. I solved it by putting two cameras next to each other, the lenses as close together as was physically possible. Naturally, both lenses were the same—55 mm, as I remember. When camera 1 had used about 850 feet, we would roll camera 2 while camera 1 was still running. I knew that there would be an intercut of the wife somewhere in the final film, which would allow me to cut to the film in camera 2. But Al would have acted out the two phone calls continuously, just as it happened in real life.

I wanted Al’s concentration at its peak. I cleared the set and then, about five feet behind the camera, put up black flats so that even the rest of the physical set was blocked out. The propman had rigged the phones so the off-camera actors could speak into phones across the street and Al would really hear them on his phone.

One more thing occurred to me. One of the best ways of accumulating emotion is to go as rapidly as possible from one take to the next. The actor begins the second take on the emotional level he reached at the end of the first take. Sometimes I don’t even cut the camera. I’ll say quietly, “Don’t cut the camera—everybody back to their opening positions and we’re going again. OK from the top: Action!” By the way, I always call “Action” in the mood of the scene. If it’s a gentle moment, I’ll say “Action” just loud enough for the actors to hear me. If it’s a scene that requires a lot of energy, I’ll bark out “Action” like a drill seargent. It’s like a conductor giving the upbeat.

I knew a second take would mean a serious interruption for Al. We’d have to reload one of the cameras. Reloading a magazine of film can be quite disruptive. The magazines are usually kept in the darkroom, which is always far away. In addition, the camera cover (the Barney) we use to reduce camera noise has to be taken off; the camera has to be opened; and then the film has to be threaded through all those little gears. The whole process, done at top speed, takes two or three minutes, enough time for Al to cool off. So I put up a black tent to block off both cameras and the men operating them. We cut two holes for the lenses. And I had the second assistant cameraman (there are three men on a camera crew: operator, focus puller, and second assistant) hold an extra film magazine in his lap, in case we needed it.

We rolled. As camera 1 reached 850 feet, we rolled camera 2. The take ended. It was wonderful. But something told me to go again. Camera 2 had used only about 200 feet. I called out gently, “Al, back to the top. I want to go again.” He looked at me as if I’d gone mad. He’d gone full out and was exhausted. He said, “What?! You’re kidding.” I said, “Al, we have to. Roll camera.”

We rolled camera 2. It had about 800 feet left. Meanwhile, behind the camera tent, out of Al’s sight, we reloaded camera 1. By the time camera 2 had used 700 feet (close to eight minutes into the take), we started the reloaded camera 1. By the end of the second take, Al didn’t know where he was anymore. He finished his lines and, in sheer exhaustion, looked about helplessly. Then, by accident, he looked directly at me. Tears were rolling down my face because he’d moved me so. His eyes locked into mine and he burst into tears, then slumped over the desk he’d been sitting at. I called, “Cut! Print!” and leapt into the air. That take is some of the best film acting I’ve ever seen.'

[John Mullarkey · Rating 4 out of 5]

Sidney Lumet has directed several outstanding films over a long career including - my favorites: "Murder On the Orient Express" (1974), "The Verdict", "Dog Day Afternoon", and "Network". So I selected this book to read this summer in order to get some insight into his process and methodology in filmmaking. I was glad that I did - although in some ways the technology described is fairly outdated being the book was written in 1996. Nevertheless, my impression as I read this book is that it is an excellent "introduction" to filmmaking for someone who wants to know the basics. It would fit well in a college syllabus for a 101-type course. The work is divided by chapters into the elements of making a movie. My favorite chapters included those that dealt with use of the camera and art direction - Sydney explains in simple and clear terminology how he uses the camera to increase tension - during 12 Angry Men, the camera slowly used close-up shots of the jury members as the decision process became more tense, so that the backgrounds became smaller. In addition, when planning the locations and scenery for 'The Verdict', it was decided that "autumnal colors" would be utilized in each scene to show that Paul Newman's character was making a comeback from a shaded and difficult past. Very cool. I also found the chapter on "rushes" very unique - Sydney and crew - along with some of the actors - would all behave/react differently during watching the daily filming and in some cases, would change how the editing process would take begin take shape. Finally, another takeaway from this unique work is how Sydney, as director, would spend days/weeks developing a "thesis" as what his film was "trying to say" well before he got together with his staff and actors to have initial meetings and read-throughs. It is a long and detailed process that the reader gets a chance to look into, think about, and understand.

[Ryad · Rating 5 out of 5]

One of the few books that i read a couple of times, and believe me I'm so picky.
Sydney Lumet a master of the craft, directed three of my all time favorites (Dog day afternoon, Network and 12 angry men) and many other masterpieces.

I remember the first time I brought the book, it was recommended by some friends because I wanted to be a filmmaker (dropped the idea later) and i found it so easy and entertaining, years later I started seeing the brilliance of the New York based director and the way he read the script and translated it into images, the way he dealt with writers, producers and most importantly actors (he had a great reputation among them)he also had the ability to finish full production before the deadline which is if you ask many directors "pretty hard".

He discussed in his oeuvre every movie he did going through every detail, the lenses he used, why he casted certain actors and the post production with editors.

Wether you are a filmmaker, a cinéphile or just an ordinary reader, Sydney with his narration style will take you through an amusing journey revealing the secrets behind producing a Movie and how Masters does it.

[Justin · Rating 4 out of 5]

Really enjoyed the behind-the-scenes look at how movies are made, including many of the small details I’ve never really considered before. It would have really helped if I had seen more of Lumet’s films before diving into this, but I will absolutely be correcting that posthaste.

[grace · Rating 4 out of 5]

i love movies

[Kasa Cotugno · Rating 5 out of 5]

Beautifully executed examination of filmmaking. Lumet's generous sharing of his attention to detail from conception to final product explains the richness and care that went into his films even those that didn't work out. Not gossipy, but does provide insights into the entire process.

[Vishy · Rating 4 out of 5]

I recently opened an old box which had been packed years back with books. It is wonderful when we pack a box and leave it to gather dust and then open it after many years. We are surprised by some of the treasures that we find inside. Sometimes we don’t know how a particular treasure got into the box and why it has been lurking there for many years. That is exactly what happened when I opened this box. I was surprised by some of the treasures I found and I was very excited. One of these was Sidney Lumet’s ‘Making Movies’. I vaguely remember the time around which I had bought this book – I remember buying a few books on movies. But I also clearly remember that I hadn’t seen a single Sidney Lumet movie at that time. So either I had heard his name and picked the book, or I picked the book after reading the blurb and browsing inside. I am glad I picked it up. It has taken me years to read it, but I am glad that I did – I am glad I packed it in a box all those years ago, I am glad the book was in good condition and I am glad I opened the box at the right time when my movie taste was reasonably sophisticated and picked it up and read it.

In ‘Making Movies’, Sidney Lumet shares his thoughts on movie making and the movie business based on his own experiences. Lumet started making movies in the ‘50s, when Sidney was a boy’s name and continued making movies well into the 2000s, when Sidney had firmly became a girl’s name. His first movie featured Henry Fonda and his last one had Philip Seymour Hoffmann and Ethan Hawke and Marisa Tomei. In between there were a galaxy of stars who worked with him (Sean Connery seems to have worked with him in a lot of movies) and Lumet writes about them all in his book. My favourite parts of the book were those in which he describes his interactions with Katharine Hepburn, Marlon Brando, Faye Dunaway and some of his wonderfully talented cinematographers and an absolutely fascinating lady called Margaret Booth who worked as the Chief Editor for MGM. While sharing his thoughts on movie making and on the fascinating personalities he worked with, Lumet also takes us on a guided tour on movie making. Each chapter discusses a different aspect of movie making and Lumet takes us from the time the movie is a concept till the time it is released. There are some parts of movie making that he loves and there are other parts which he is frustrated with. Lumet talks about them all – both the good parts and the not-so-good ones. This book was published in the middle of the ‘90s and so some of the things that Lumet says might probably feel a little dated now – for example, how the limitations of photographic film influenced many decisions in film making. Since the book was published the world has gone digital and many of the limitations of photographic film no longer apply to today’s world. (Scott Adams said in his introduction to ‘The Dilbert Principle’, all those years back, that today any idiot with a laptop can write a book. We can modify that slightly now and say that today any idiot with a smartphone can make a movie J) But even with that caveat, Lumet’s book is a wonderful education in filmmaking. Reading it was like sitting in the class of our favourite teacher and listening to him sharing his wisdom on the practice of his art.

Reading the book inspired me to watch more of Lumet’s movies. Lumet started with a bang with ’12 Angry Men’ (a movie which has been imitated an infinite number of times but has never been equalled), and after an indifferent decade during the ‘90s, ended with a bang with ‘Before the Devil Knows You’re Dead’. I have watched ’12 Angry Men’ and five of his other movies – ‘Network’, ‘Murder on the Orient Express’ – and three of his ‘90s movies – ‘A Stranger Among Us’, ‘Guilty as Sin’ and ‘Gloria’. These last three were all panned by the critics, but I still liked them (who cares about the critics anyway?), especially ‘A Stranger Among Us’, which I really loved. (I adored Melanie Griffith those days and she was wonderful in this movie.) I also think I have seen half of ‘Serpico’. There are countless other great Lumet movies out there which I have not seen. I want to watch them all. And then read this book again while watching them.

There is one more thing I want to mention before ending this review. It is a shameful thing that the Academy never gave Sidney Lumet an Academy award for Best Director. He is one of the greatest directors of the 20th century and though his movies were nominated a countless number of times for the Best Director award, it is sad that the Academy ignored him, though they grudgingly gave him a Honorary award in the end. (Another great Martin Scorsese was ignored by the academy for many years before they grudgingly gave him the award for ‘The Departed’). It sticks out like a sore thing in an otherwise brilliant film making career in which Lumet brought delightful pleasure to generations of moviegoers.

Here are some of my favourite passages from the book.



“…the truth is that nobody knows what this magic combination is that produces a first-rate of work. I’m not being modest. There’s a reason some directors can make first-rate movies and others never will. But all we can do is prepare the groundwork that allows for the “lucky accidents” that make a first-rate movie happen. Whether or not it will happen is something we never know. There are too many intangibles…”

Commercial success has no relationship to a good or bad picture. Good pictures become hits. Good pictures become flops. Bad pictures make money, bad pictures lose money. The fact is that no one really knows. If anyone did know, he’d be able to write his own ticket. And there have been two who have. Through some incredible talent, Walt Disney knew. Today Steven Spielberg seems to.

I’ve also been accused of being all over the place, of lacking an overwhelming theme that applies to all my work. I don’t know if that’s true or not. The reason I don’t know is that when I open to the first page of a script, I’m a willing captive. I have no preconceived notion that I want the body of my work to be about one particular idea. No script has to fit into an overall theme of my life. I don’t have one. Sometimes I’ll look back on the work over some years and say to myself, “Oh, that’s what I was interested in then.”

I don’t know how to choose work that illuminates what my life is about. I don’t know what my life is about and don’t examine it. My life will define itself as I live it. The movies will define themselves as I make them. As long as the them is something I care about at that moment, it’s enough for me to start work. Maybe work itself is what my life is about.

When I first meet with the scriptwriter, I never tell him anything, even if I feel there’s a lot to be done. Instead I ask him the same questions I’ve asked myself. What is the story about? What did you see? What was your intention? Ideally, if we do this well, what do you hope the audience will feel, think, sense? In what mood do you want them to leave the theater?

We are two different people trying to combine our talents, so it’s critical that we agree on the intention of the screenplay. Under the best of circumstances, what will emerge is a third intention, which neither of us saw at the beginning.

Making a movie has always been about telling a story. Some movies tell a story and leave you with a feeling. Some tell a story and leave you with a feeling and give you an idea. Some tell a story, leave you with a feeling, give you and idea, and reveal something about yourself and others. And surely the way you tell that story should relate somehow to what that story is.

Someone once asked me what making a movie was like. I said it was like a making a mosaic. Each setup is like a tiny tile. You color it, shape it, polish it as best you can. You’ll do six or seven hundred of these, maybe a thousand. Then you literally paste them together and hope it’s what you set out to do. But if you expect the final mosaic to look like anything, you’d better know what you’re going for as you work on each tiny tile.

If the cliché about pictures being made in the cutting room is false, that other cliché, ‘It’ll play better when we add the music,” is true. Almost every picture is improved by a good musical score.

Life has a cruel way of balancing pleasure and pain. To make for the joy of seeing Sophia Loren every morning, God punishes the director with the mix.

I know that all over the world there are young people borrowing from relatives and saving their allowances to buy their first cameras and put together their first student movies, some of them dreaming of becoming famous and making a fortune. But a few are dreaming of finding out what matters to them, of saying to themselves and to anyone who will listen, “I care.” A few of them want to make good movies.



Have you read Sidney Lumet’s ‘Making Movies’? Have you seen movies directed by Sidney Lumet? Which one is your favourite?

[Barry Hammond · Rating 4 out of 5]

Veteran film director Sidney Lumet (Prince Of The City, Network, Dog Day Afternoon, 12 Angry Men, Night Falls On Manhattan, Q & A, etc.) goes through a detailed outline of how movies are made from ideas, to scripts, from rehearsal, to shooting, editing to sound, music, publicity and release. It's as good a primer on how movies are made as anything this reader has ever read. True, it doesn't reach into the digital age but most of the concepts are the same. - BH.

[Aidan]

I love when a book is so fun to read I try to get an extra early bedtime so I just have more time to read before I sleep. Syndey’s treatise at the end on film being art despite the money machine of business got me so fired up to make movies that I couldn’t fall asleep anyways

[Erin · Rating 4 out of 5]

3.5 stars. sidney lumet is so interesting and his films have taught me a lot. some of the more confusing/tedious aspects of this book are obsolete, due to technological advances and streaming.

[Selva · Rating 3 out of 5]

Sidney Lumet has more than 50 films to his credit. But I had seen only two of his films: Dog day afternoon and Serpico prior to chancing upon this title on Amazon. And I came to know that he had an honorary Oscar too for lifetime achievement in Cinema. So bought this book based on reviews that it touches upon all aspects of Cinema. And sure it does.
This book came out in 1995, so certain aspects like cinematography belong to the period prior to that i.e. before they started making digitally. But if you have a liking to know about how things worked even if it doesn't serve a great purpose except as a point of discussion, you would definitely like this book. Of course, certain aspects like 'lighting' a set must remain the same now, which he says is the huge part of the filming process. For instance, he does 8-9 hr days and shoots on an average 3 minutes worth of footage in a day and half the day goes into lighting a set. It made me see things very differently. For instance, it made me see differently a Tamil film song that I had watched numerous times shot by an ace cinematographer. I always thought they just shot that song "naturally" meaning what is so great about the cinematography. I was able to see that it must have been a lot of work making it look what it is.

Also, I watched a couple of his other films: Murder on the Orient express and 12 Angry men just to enjoy the reading process a bit more. so it doesn't hurt if you can torrent a couple of movies and watch it just in case you are reading this.
It explains all the stages: script, casting, pre-production, cinematography, art direction, directing, editing, sound effects, musical score, sound editing and mixing other minor processes engagingly, in a not-boring- but-detailed- enough-for-a-cinephile kind of manner. There is no gossip about stars except if they deserve some praise for their work in some manner.

Takeaway: Making good movies is no easy job :)

[Pavel · Rating 5 out of 5]

Of oh so many books, occupying numerous " one and the most essential LIST of cinema book for whoever interested in cinema books" this one (and it is included in, like, all of them) is indeed useful and fun. With all my heart I hate "filmmaking for dummies" type of filmmaking book which is as decieving as "Oh it is so mystirious no one can explain it" type. Both are lie, because filmmaking indeed is A CRAFT, that can be learned and it does require talent, which cannot be obtained anywhere. So one needs both to succced.
And, to my delight, this book holds to this conception. It does cover a lot of moviemaking craft. Technical stuff is mostly outdated, because we switched to digital filmmaking now and the book is written in the old (not so old though early 90s) film tape times. But it does so much more then teaches this or that technique. Lumet guides you through the whole process from concieving an idea to a first screening with his own directos's experience, with all the examples and anecdotes which helps you understand how the thing works. He never was one of big autheur directors critics love, but his movies are always being taught at film schools, because they are masterfully done in terms of director's profession. So he went beyond that and wrote a book and I am, making my third feature right now (well, kinda battling self-isolation rather then making it, but either way), found things useful and brilliant there and enjoyed it as a text by an honest and funny man.

[Ella Beitler · Rating 3 out of 5]

okayyy i think this sidney guy knows a thing or two

[Stewart Mitchell · Rating 4 out of 5]

Before reading this, I made sure to watch about 15 Sidney Lumet films so that I could get a good feel for his work in order to appreciate the way he writes about it here. What I found is that he is extremely well-qualified to discuss the art of filmmaking, not only because he made so many great movies in his lifetime like Network, Equus, The Verdict, and 12 Angry Men, but also because he worked in a variety of genres and didn’t seem to have any major threads between his projects. He appreciated stories regardless of their content, and adapted his own style and techniques to meet the challenges brought by a particular script. It doesn’t surprise me that someone so adept at his craft is able to write about it so well.

Making Movies is structured simply and brilliantly. Lumet devotes a chapter to each aspect of filmmaking, from music to acting to art direction to editing to camerawork; there’s even a chapter here on sound mixing, which is doubly interesting because it was written at a time when digital recordings were becoming more prominent, and Lumet’s way of doing things was becoming outdated (something he recognizes and laments in the chapter). He doesn’t get bogged down in technical details, but he does offer a really comprehensive view of the entirety of the directorial process, and in doing so he makes reference to many of his own films and the decisions that went into crafting them.

What makes this such a valuable book is that Lumet is very self-aware and acknowledges his own failings and regrets as well as his successes. His insights didn’t just make me appreciate his great films more than I already did, they also made me look for cracks in their foundation. I wish that more directors would write books like this - I’m sure there are plenty of auteurs that would even disagree with many of Lumet’s attitudes here. He writes in the introduction that he won’t attempt to speak for other filmmakers, and that this book is simply his perspective on a job that he adores; anyone who loves movies as much as I do should be thankful that such a creative genius decided to share his perspective with the rest of us.

[Julia Chupryna · Rating 4 out of 5]

Сідні Люмет, він же автор першого юридичного трилеру «12 розгніваних чоловіків» достеменно, з усіма дрібними і не дуже подробицями описує чому, як і для чого робиться кіно. Він констатує, що кіновиробництво майже повністю залежить від ринку і смаків аудиторії (і це при тому, що його найактивніші режисерські роки припали на 50-90-ті), але відмовляється сприймати кіно як розважальний жанр, сповнений примх і тотальної комерціоналізації. Тим, ця виробничо-автобіографічна розповідь (перед прочитанням краще передивитись фільмографію режисера, бо посилається він винятково на свої фільми) і становить особливий інтерес. Тут всього потроху: і безкінечних розділів про технічні нюанси, і роль зірок-акторів, і хто-що п‘є/їсть, закусує, на чому їздить, де сідає, щоб прем‘єра була вдалою і для чого взагалі знімать таку кількість фільмів і виділяти такі бюджети, якщо багато з них провалюються в прокаті і не несуть ніякої цінності. Люмет - десь ліберал, десь авторитарист, висловлює свій погляд на хід речей кіношних і робить це без голівудського шику, але з нью-йоркським практицизмом і легкістю людини, яка на вікенд може злітати на прояв плівки до Парижу.

[Gordon Mihan · Rating 5 out of 5]

What a beautiful book! Almost hilarious in its practicality—when to wake up, what to eat, etc. But Lumet also lays out his process in such simple and eloquent terms, it’s impossible not to learn from this. His disdain for teamsters notwithstanding, the respect he has for all crew members on a film set is incredibly high. The technical talk in the later chapters is quite dated, and not in the same way as when he talks about making movies in the 40’s, 50’s, 60’s etc. The book was released in 1995 so it's more along the lines of “can you believe how hard it is to sound mix now with Dolby? I hear digital editing is on the horizon, I bet that’ll be complicated too!” Still, the lessons he bestows about the art of making movies is timeless.

[Gintautas Ivanickas · Rating 3 out of 5]

Sidney Lumet – žmogus, pastatęs nuostabų filmą „12 Angry Men“. Ne tik jį, žinoma, dar aibę kitų. Ir nieko keista, kad savo knygoje ir pasakoja apie kiną. Apie tai, kas tai per žvėris ir kaip jisai gimsta.
Lumet prasibėga per visą procesą – scenarijų, aktorių parinkimą, lokacijų pasirinkimą, kostiumus, šviesas, operatoriaus darbą, montažą, garsą, muziką. Na, ir žinoma, pabaigoje nubraukia ašarą už meną, kurį žudo komercija.
Kaip žmogui, šiek tiek prisilietusiam prie visų tų procesų, buvo visai įdomu paskaityti. Bet norėjosi vos vos daugiau gyvumo. Trys iš penkių.

[Pablo Sexyo]

Amé descubrir lo que Lumet buscaba en cada una de las facetas de sus producciones, a qué prestaba más atención, lo que desayunaba antes de ir a rodar, que hacía crucigramas al empezar cada jornada por que le aclaraba la mente.

Me parece vergonzoso que en los cinco años en los que estudié cine ni una vez se mencionó este libro en clase.

[Sean Lockwood · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was so informative on a lot aspects of filmmaking that I do not consider often when watching. Movies have become a huge passion of mine so this was a valuable insight into the process. It would have been even better if I had seen all of Lumet’s movies but he’s made way too many.

[ahmed · Rating 4 out of 5]

finally finished !!

love movies. a lot of the stuff he spoke about is still true today, some stuff not so much. but loved portions and even though i took a year to slowly read it, sections have already began to stick in my mind! specifically the brando acting bit, screenwriting, and camera techniques.

sad to read where he thought film industry was going and how (seemingly) bleak it actually is now

[Kailee · Rating 5 out of 5]

When I was a kid I used to imagine all the elaborate ways “movie magic” happened and this book totally outlines it all but didn’t feel like a magician giving away his secrets…it was so much more exciting than that