Acting: there may be more to it than you think
Acting seems easy, right? You pretend you are continuing a natural conversation with someone, except it’s “easier” because your conversation is written down and directed by the script.
Well, if it were that easy, there would be no need to merit talent with Academy Awards; everybody would and could do it.
For those of you who wish to learn more about the craft, you must first learn of the four types of acting that producers and directors may require of an actor. Acting provides such an essential component to a film, so much so that horrible acting would detract from the quality of a film. We’re going to explore the various acting techniques that are called upon for films.
First of all, depending on whether the project is film or theatrical, a type of acting can be conjured to suit the appropriate tone. Take for instance, theatre acting. With theatre acting, also known as stage acting, there is an emphasis on more movement, voice volume, and dramatic acting. Since the actor is trying to connect with audience members in the front row to the very last row, she has to enunciate and project her voice. When this occurs, the more subtle facial reactions that are caught on film would not be able to translate well live on a stage that is far from close observation.
Actor Robert Shaw, from the movie Jaws, has said about theatre acting, “Here’s the difference: On stage you have to dominate the audience. You don’t have to think the way you do when you’re in the movies. Stage acting is the art of domination. Movie acting is the art of seduction” (Boggs 209).
In theatre acting, the actors have the advantage of drawing on the audience’s reaction for inspiration; whereas in film, the actor must be successful in fostering that connection with audience based on compelling acting. Since the camera can zoom into close-ups on actors’ faces, it allows for a more intimate feel that places the actor in a vulnerable position. The twitches of facial muscles, the rise of an eyebrow, the curve of a mouth are all caught on camera to indicate a subtle reaction to a stimulus within the film. Here, the subtlest of emotional responses can expose the feelings of the actor and be more effective than dialogue in conveying meaning.
Joseph M. Boggs, author of The Art of Watching Films, says “Although the face and facial expressions play a part in other story forms, such as fiction and drama, in film the face becomes a medium of communication in its own right. Magnified on the screen, the human face with its infinite variety of expression can convey both a depth and subtlety of emotion that cannot be approached through purely rational or verbal means” (210).
The different types of acting that are employed in film are impersonators, interpreters and commentors, personality actors, and the star system. For films that cast impersonating characters, movies like Julie and Julia and Ghandi come to mind, where the actors had to don wigs and historically accurate costumes and conform to the personality trait of their actor.
This type of acting requires the actor shed all personal quirks and traits to appear like their character. Interpreters and commentors are actors that are hired for their personality traits or creativity that they bring to the role. The goal is that they will bring their interpretation of the character to the project and contribute or comment on any changes necessary. They can bring refreshing points of view while adding their most appealing qualities.
Well, if it were that easy, there would be no need to merit talent with Academy Awards; everybody would and could do it.
For those of you who wish to learn more about the craft, you must first learn of the four types of acting that producers and directors may require of an actor. Acting provides such an essential component to a film, so much so that horrible acting would detract from the quality of a film. We’re going to explore the various acting techniques that are called upon for films.
First of all, depending on whether the project is film or theatrical, a type of acting can be conjured to suit the appropriate tone. Take for instance, theatre acting. With theatre acting, also known as stage acting, there is an emphasis on more movement, voice volume, and dramatic acting. Since the actor is trying to connect with audience members in the front row to the very last row, she has to enunciate and project her voice. When this occurs, the more subtle facial reactions that are caught on film would not be able to translate well live on a stage that is far from close observation.
Actor Robert Shaw, from the movie Jaws, has said about theatre acting, “Here’s the difference: On stage you have to dominate the audience. You don’t have to think the way you do when you’re in the movies. Stage acting is the art of domination. Movie acting is the art of seduction” (Boggs 209).
In theatre acting, the actors have the advantage of drawing on the audience’s reaction for inspiration; whereas in film, the actor must be successful in fostering that connection with audience based on compelling acting. Since the camera can zoom into close-ups on actors’ faces, it allows for a more intimate feel that places the actor in a vulnerable position. The twitches of facial muscles, the rise of an eyebrow, the curve of a mouth are all caught on camera to indicate a subtle reaction to a stimulus within the film. Here, the subtlest of emotional responses can expose the feelings of the actor and be more effective than dialogue in conveying meaning.
Joseph M. Boggs, author of The Art of Watching Films, says “Although the face and facial expressions play a part in other story forms, such as fiction and drama, in film the face becomes a medium of communication in its own right. Magnified on the screen, the human face with its infinite variety of expression can convey both a depth and subtlety of emotion that cannot be approached through purely rational or verbal means” (210).
The different types of acting that are employed in film are impersonators, interpreters and commentors, personality actors, and the star system. For films that cast impersonating characters, movies like Julie and Julia and Ghandi come to mind, where the actors had to don wigs and historically accurate costumes and conform to the personality trait of their actor.
This type of acting requires the actor shed all personal quirks and traits to appear like their character. Interpreters and commentors are actors that are hired for their personality traits or creativity that they bring to the role. The goal is that they will bring their interpretation of the character to the project and contribute or comment on any changes necessary. They can bring refreshing points of view while adding their most appealing qualities.
“Here’s the difference: On stage you have to dominate the audience. You don’t have to think the way you do when you’re in the movies. Stage acting is the art ofdomination. Movie acting is the art of seduction”
-Actor Robert Shaw, Jaws
Personality actors are cast in films for their characteristic acting and/or personality that aligns with the character’s personality. Usually this type of acting is found in movies like the Austin Powers series and do not require as much creativity on the part of the actor as much as the previous types of acting. The star system of acting is more dependent upon the star quality of the actor and will cast the popular names in favor real talent and capability for the role. The producers figure that the bigger, more recognized names will bring in the big bucks.
However, producers are moving away from this tactic because the bigger Hollywood names typically demand higher wages and treatment. Many producers now hire less popular actors who are in possession of the range and talent needed for the roles. Now the difficulties that attend acting involve casting off fears of vulnerability because an actor is eliciting to open herself up to exhibition on all levels.
Judith Weston, author of The Film Director’s Intuition, says that “Once an actor opens herself to accepting feelings, once she is free of obligation, the she is emotionally available. And her choices for the character can affect her... Acting is a kind of confession. The worst thing an actor can do is hide her feelings, hide her secrets...Letting every feeling show the way Garbo did is easier said than done. We don’t always know what we really feel. I find I need to spend time figuring out my feelings. The real feelings are usually layers down” (17).
Similarly, while some movie industry people frown upon “method” approaches to preparation for a role, some find that doing research and immersing oneself in the period, language or psyche of the character lends a more organic feel to the acting.
Actor Daniel Day Lewis has said, “Whatever it takes to loosen up that place inside you that either gives you something or doesn’t”. He was referring to his method attempts when taking on a role, and all it takes is a quick recollection of the capacity of his acting in films to see how his dedication has paid off.
There are many approaches to acting, some are solicited for their talent, personality, or status; and some may work hard at creating a more credible character. The process is nonetheless a fascinating one because of its inherent power to captivate an audience for an extended period of time. Lovers of performances watch the same film repeatedly and demonstrate the effects of film on an individual. Films, and theatre, speak to us about society and more personal issues as well. Anybody who can seamlessly portray a character demonstrates the ability to navigate through the demanding world of acting and simultaneously influence an audience.
However, producers are moving away from this tactic because the bigger Hollywood names typically demand higher wages and treatment. Many producers now hire less popular actors who are in possession of the range and talent needed for the roles. Now the difficulties that attend acting involve casting off fears of vulnerability because an actor is eliciting to open herself up to exhibition on all levels.
Judith Weston, author of The Film Director’s Intuition, says that “Once an actor opens herself to accepting feelings, once she is free of obligation, the she is emotionally available. And her choices for the character can affect her... Acting is a kind of confession. The worst thing an actor can do is hide her feelings, hide her secrets...Letting every feeling show the way Garbo did is easier said than done. We don’t always know what we really feel. I find I need to spend time figuring out my feelings. The real feelings are usually layers down” (17).
Similarly, while some movie industry people frown upon “method” approaches to preparation for a role, some find that doing research and immersing oneself in the period, language or psyche of the character lends a more organic feel to the acting.
Actor Daniel Day Lewis has said, “Whatever it takes to loosen up that place inside you that either gives you something or doesn’t”. He was referring to his method attempts when taking on a role, and all it takes is a quick recollection of the capacity of his acting in films to see how his dedication has paid off.
There are many approaches to acting, some are solicited for their talent, personality, or status; and some may work hard at creating a more credible character. The process is nonetheless a fascinating one because of its inherent power to captivate an audience for an extended period of time. Lovers of performances watch the same film repeatedly and demonstrate the effects of film on an individual. Films, and theatre, speak to us about society and more personal issues as well. Anybody who can seamlessly portray a character demonstrates the ability to navigate through the demanding world of acting and simultaneously influence an audience.
