Five Year Plan

I just got off working on a Judd Apatow production that is filming in Sonoma and San Francisco. It was my first time working on a big budget Hollywood film and it was pretty exciting to experience the massive scale of production and see star and writer/producer Jason Segel hanging around the office. I was working as a Production Assistant during prep days, and believe me when I say getting this five day shoot going took a lot of prep. Yesterday I showed up on set at 7:00 am and didn't leave the production office in Santa Rosa until 10:30 at night.
Working as a PA, there is often down time between takes with not much to do but hit up craft service and converse with the other PA's and production coordinators. There is a long line of hierarchy on a film set-at the top is the director and executive producer and at the very bottom is the PA, so it's not surprising that a frequent topic of conversation is what else we would like to be doing in the industry. Assistant Director, or AD is common because on set the PA's work for the AD's(plural on big shoots, as in First AD, second AD, second second) and if they work in the office, Production Supervisor or Story Producer.
One other thing I heard from PA's on this shoot looking to fast-track their way into a high paying job is to focus on one thing, and one thing only. In other words, don't bother learning how to operate a camera if you want to be an AD, because the AD will never touch a camera on a film set. If your resume reflects a diverse range of production experience it is perceived as diminishing your chances of getting hired. Apparently, working in several different departments is seen as indecisive. As professionals who work on a lot of these types of high budget film shoots, I have to take their word for it.
To me though, the whole idea is silly: if you love film, and you want to make movies, why would you possibly not want to learn and experience everything there is to know about it? Working on many different aspects of production is not indecisive, it shows a curious mind. A film is like a house-the script is the foundation, principal photography is the framing and editing and post production is the finish carpentry. A home that is based on an uneven foundation will never be stable, like a movie based on a bad script will never become a great film.
My dad is a general contractor, which is sort of like the director of the home building world. The architect is the screenwriter, and it is my dads job to turn the architects blue and white sketches into physically present and aesthetically beautiful home. So it is the directors job to turn a screenplay into a living, breathing work of art, in which case shouldn't the director know all there is to know about building his movie? The Coen Brothers, who have made a couple of my favorite films, often write, direct and edit their own movies. Can anyone say their films suffer because they do more then just direct? It's the control over the full range of the creative process that makes their films unique. Like them, my dad isn't the type of contractor that drives around in a truck and makes sure that everyone is working-he is the type with a hammer in hand, pounding nails or underneath the house soldering together copper pipe. If you were to tell him that general contractors don't touch skill saws he would laugh. It's from him that I have taken my inspiration to be a writer/producer/director/whatever as long as its making movies.
If that means I'm foregoing my chance at a higher paid but ultimately less satisfying job, so be it. Mass track homes will never have the unique feeling of a custom built home, and movies that are produced out of the desire to make the most profit and not to tell the best story will never be the type that remind us of what it is to be human. Shelter building and story telling; Two of our most ancient needs and arts-and I want to know as much as I can about both when the shit goes down.