How Should I Credit Myself?

[BrendanLeahy]

I created a short documentary where I basically filmed, edited, and produced it all, but I wouldn't say I "directed" the doc because I really just tagged along the whole time and filmed this guy.

Everyone else's titles are "Music" "Animation" and "Sponsor", so it seems a bit strange to make everything past tense as "Filmed + Edited" or "Shot + Edited", and likewise "Film + Edit" can sound a bit... redundant or confusing?

I'm sure this is an easy answer and I'm just not seeing it right now!

 

[Aaron Lochert]

Think about what a director would be doing on a documentary. They would be conversing with the DP to get the shots to tell the right story. They would be conversing with the editor on how set the pacing and feel for the final project. They would be discussing with the producer how to get the financials in line for getting the story told. Those three positions were filled by you. You may not have directed the talent, per-se, but you directed the vision of the project.

So guess what. You're the director.

You could just say "a film by Brendan Leahy" if you don't want the credits to get too wordy.

 

[Marc Wielage]

I always admired Alfred Hitchcock, because even though he produced his own films, supervised the writing, and also dictated a lot of the shots, lenses and camera placement with the DP, he generally only got two credits: the possessory "Alfred Hitchcock's" above the title (as in "Alfred Hitchcock's Psycho), and then "Directed by Alfred Hitchcock." You knew when you saw his films that one man imposed his vision on every single word and every single frame.

I think less is more. "A Film By" is fine. Bear in mind what happened to Eddie Murphy when he managed to get 7 or 8 on-screen credits for Harlem Nights back in the day...

 

[BrendanLeahy]

I always admired Alfred Hitchcock, because even though he produced his own films, supervised the writing, and also dictated a lot of the shots, lenses and camera placement with the DP, he generally only got two credits: the possessory "Alfred Hitchcock's" above the title (as in "Alfred Hitchcock's Psycho), and then "Directed by Alfred Hitchcock." You knew when you saw his films that one man imposed his vision on every single word and every single frame.

I think less is more. "A Film By" is fine. Bear in mind what happened to Eddie Murphy when he managed to get 7 or 8 on-screen credits for Harlem Nights back in the day...

Ha! Good call with Eddie Murphy. And yes, Hitchcock was an incredibly talented man that I hope will continue to be remembered for his numerous contributions to film (and television!)

 

[BrendanLeahy]

Think about what a director would be doing on a documentary. They would be conversing with the DP to get the shots to tell the right story. They would be conversing with the editor on how set the pacing and feel for the final project. They would be discussing with the producer how to get the financials in line for getting the story told. Those three positions were filled by you. You may not have directed the talent, per-se, but you directed the vision of the project.

So guess what. You're the director.

You could just say "a film by Brendan Leahy" if you don't want the credits to get too wordy.

That's a nice way of thinking about it! I just have felt like "directed by" has always implied some sort of talent control, even though I absolutely prefer taking a "cinema verite" approach whenever possible with filming (I sometimes make ask for a line to be said in a different way for interviews, but otherwise... let the subject do their thing!)

 

[Michael Tiemann]

At the other end of the spectrum, see Bambi Meets Godzilla. This 90 second short spends 12 seconds on content and 78 seconds on credits, mostly to or about Marv Newland.