Frankly I think a stills photographer is starting off from a better place than someone who's a "film person" and has eyes full of major blockbusters! I always tell beginners to read still photography magazines as the advice is much more relevant - they tend to talk about lighting technique, framing, and composition, as opposed to which camera has the biggest number in some sort of specification. Partly this is because stills cameras have long since reached maturity.
That said, Brian is of course exactly right and there will be a need to understand the process of covering a scene, creating matching shots, and generally producing a suite of material that is actually editable. This is something which doesn't really exist in stills work.
The best advice I ever had, the advice I pass onto kids when I occasionally do workshops, is that you must edit what you shoot. Much of this stuff can be learned from books and of course that's worthwhile, but at some point, learning how to shoot things that don't look odd when cut together (where "odd" is extremely subjective and relative to the variability of fashion and personal preference) is going to require some practical experience. It's terribly easy not to get around to editing things, in which case you can easily find you've created a card full of beautiful bits of photography that don't work as a sequence.