# UCLA vs. USC



## Sputnik (May 15, 2007)

Although my first choice was NYU (where I was rejected), I got accepted to UCLA and USC(!) but now I don't know which one to choose 
I'm transferring as a junior to an undergrad program and want to focus on directing.

Neither one fo the schools is giving me any money, and UCLA tuition will have to be out of state (27K), whereas USC is 36K.


Any ideas? suggestions? Anybody? please help. very lost.


----------



## b4bad (May 16, 2007)

well! both the schools are very good. USC facilities are a lot better than UCLA.


----------



## Cinematical (May 16, 2007)

How big of a factor is money? Because if it's not, there should be no question: go to USC. But if it is...


----------



## techie1902 (May 17, 2007)

From what I've gathered on this site it seems that USC has a far better undergrad program than UCLA...

UCLA and USC both have great graduate programs, but I would suggest USC over UCLA anyday.

You'll get a good education no matter where you end up going though...


----------



## Jayimess (May 17, 2007)

As a junior transfer, you'll be fine as an undergrad at UCLA.  Most complaints come from freshmen and sophomores who have to do their genEds first before diving into the film track.

I personally just dealt with this *problem* myself over on the MFA boards...I got into both as well.

I chose USC.


----------



## Sputnik (May 17, 2007)

money of course is a factor, but either way I'm going to have to take out loans - might as well get the most for the money... I just want to get the best possible education...
the downside of transferring to USC - their students start taking film classes last semester of the sophmore year, whereas in UCLA I'd be starting films classes with the rest of the students...
who has better facilities?
better faculty?
better program?
i know usc has a fame for being "the best" but could that fame be outdated?


----------



## Jayimess (May 17, 2007)

The rep and the networking are unbeatable at USC.  

Your education is what you make of it...I got into both programs with a bachelor's from a third tier open enrollment public university in Cleveland, and one other girl got into USC years ago, another guy got into Chapman this year...but I know dozens that have been rejected from not only those programs, but far less competitive ones as well.

I think you'll be happy wherever you go, but for me, I couldn't let go of USC.

It's a hard decision to make, and I wish you the best of luck with it.


----------



## Cinematical (May 17, 2007)

The classes taken Sophmore year are cursory, introductory film classes. In general, they aren't absolutely necessary. You'd be able to catch up pretty easily, I'd assume, as long as you were willing to work a bit harder.

USC has better facilities than UCLA BY FAR. I visited both and just got an incredibly underwhelming feeling from UCLA. I got the opposite from USC.

And as Jayimess has said, you really can't beat USC's networking opportunities. The USC Mafia is real, and is something to consider.

Ultimately, though, you really can't make a mistake. You'll be going to one of two of the top film schools in the world. The above is just my input.


----------



## Sputnik (Jun 2, 2007)

I guess I'll start flipping a coin. Both schools offered me financial aid, so that my contribution is pretty much the same amount for each school...


----------

