Do you need to act to direct?

Do you need to act to direct?

Click to expand...

No.

However, it's always nice to learn something new, and to gain an understanding of a different craft.

I took a few acting seminars when I started doing audio post. It probably made me a better Foley walker (I'm still only fair), and I have more empathy for those doing ADR.

Absolutely not.

Acting can help understand some mechanisms but is absolutely not a necessity to direct actors.

As a director, you have a vision in your mind. You can picture in your mind what you want. The same way you direct your DP to achieve the looks, you direct your actors to achieve the emotional position. And the same way you don't need to know how top operate a camera to direct a DP, you don't need to know acting to direct actors.

But, in both cases, having some knowledge through theory or experience is always helpful.

Would I benefit from taking a summer/night acting course between uni breaks?

Click to expand...

Yes.

Over here, there are "Acting for Directors" classes. Essentially, crash-courses in the actors' process for upcoming directors who want to be able to communicate & relate with their actors. Even if there's nothing so specific in your town, definitely take a few acting for beginners classes. Not necessarily to make you a decent actor - but to understand the actual mechanics of drawing a performance out, if you need to.

.

I went to LA and took Judith Weston's Acting for Director's workshop. It was absolutely worth it. The takeaway from her workshop was how to communicate with actors using direction that appeals to their training.

Ok, that has eased my worry a little. I think I will still look at taking a course at some point, but it won't be top priority for a while.

Although, I'd still like to improve my knowledge on acting and how I communicate with actors. Are there any resources I should look at to do this? I know Weston's book "Directing Actors" is meant to be good. Anything else?

Don't knock yourself out. If you study & master the material in Judith's books, you'll be well on your way to being an "actor's Director".

it's not a necessity, but it surely helps. As Rok said, it's helps you understand the mindset of an actor and makes it easier to communicate your message.

From experience, my cousin had always made films before he got into choosing theatre as a major. A lot of the theatre students that we have worked with much prefer working with my cousin than they did working with the student filmmakers on campus. Since he directs and acts in most of our stuff, it was easier for him to understand how to create characters, utilize the strengths of the actors, and overall direct.

A lot of student directors only know how to direct in such a way that they would normally go, "Okay I want you to do this, and this, and hit this mark, etc. etc." but they usually never tend to explain WHY the character/actor is doing such and how it fits into the overall scene.

I agree, it's definitely not a necessity. But an understanding or basic grasp of how actors/actresses work and the foundations of performance is always a plus. For me, the first step was understanding that different people work in different ways, and it's adapting your directing style to accommodate that - this requires at least a small amount of knowledge of acting as a craft.

You don't need to, but you will probably benefit from it greatly. It's good to know how actors feel, and what you are asking of them. You will be able to instruct them better, and you will most likely know how to make them feel comfortable. Most actors turned directors get great performances out of the cast. A few are: Clint Eastwood, George Clooney, Ben Affleck, Sofia Coppola, Rob Reiner, Woody Allen and Charles Chaplin. They have made bad/not so good movies, but they always get great performances out of their actors.

Not saying you have to make acting your career for a while, but it's good to get at least a little bit of experience.

My two cents... I am not rich, famous or have a foot in any door...

I have directed a few small projects -- one really bad, one mediocre and one that turned out very well. Call it not afraid to stumble in the process of learning. Life is learning. If your not -- your dead.

I am not an actor. Have little interest in acting. But I did want to learn, understand and know what an actor goes through before, during and after the camera starts. You can listen and learn from others -- but nothing will ever give you the insight or the respect for your actors -- that being in front of a camera and trying to go through the motions of acting -- can do...

I have a lot of respect and admiration (and loyalty) for those that were and will be (in the future) in front of my cameras, professional and non-professional. I look at what I do as being the voice to the story/idea behind the camera -- setting the stage (lights, audio, props, etc.) for the actors to act out the story/idea. It is extremely important to convey that story, all aspects of the character(s), all those images in my mind/vision/goal successfully to the cast and then let them do what they do. Let them act. I have learned that I should always be on the same page as my cast. If they are not doing something as I see it in my head, then I have failed to explain 'something'.

Yes. Not all actors are good actors. This is another reason why it is a good idea to 'try' acting yourself. There are thousands of reasons why. By the time the camera is starting to roll, you should have the best of the best going through the motions. Do several read through. Rehearsals. ETC. -- they pay off.

Let the actors act! Learn to explain the vision of the story. Trying to act yourself will go a long way to helping grasp how hard it is to act in front of a camera or audience successfully.

My going further would be redundant... over and out!