Actors 3 - Line ups and problem solving

Hi Guys - this is the last of the acting hints. It covers working on set, line-ups, camera rehearsals and finally a section on fixing performance problems.

On Set – Line ups and solving performance problems

If you’ve done the work during the read-through and rehearsal your actors should arrive with a good knowledge of their character, a high degree of confidence in their abilities and a belief in you as their director. This is a great way to start a movie, because on set you’re going to have to deal with a myriad of practical issues and your primary concerns are going to transfer from the cast to the crew, for much of the time.

However, the trick with this is to remember that the film happens in front of the camera and at the end of the day the actors are the most important piece of kit on the lot. If the camera breaks down half way through a shoot you can replace it. If your lead actor breaks down, the whole film is knackered.

So, on set regardless of how busy you are make time to greet the cast when they arrive in the morning, talk over with them what scenes you’re doing and deal with any questions they have. The first day on set they’ll be lots of questions, many of which are really about pre-performance nerves; so the key is to reassure them, but not get tied down into detailed conversations. The other practical thing to deal with on the first day is to introduce the actors to the 1st AD. Up to now the actors have had complete access to you when ever they wanted, now this has to change and the communications protocol becomes that if they’re not on set and have any questions, they go to the 1st AD and not directly to you. This doesn’t mean that you can’t go and chat to them, but you make the choice of when and where that happens. Most actors respond well to this because they’ve already established a relationship with you, you’re obviously very busy and important during the shoot and it feels more professional for them and strangely enough the more professionally the shoot is run, the more the actors enjoy the process. The other thing that gets covered in the morning briefing is what the set protocols are. By this I mean where the actors will wait when not working, why they have to have their mobile phones switched off, what it means when someone hollers “quiet on set”; this is particularly valuable if you’ve got cast who’ve never been on a film set before. It’s also a good idea to point out any health and safety issues, like watching underfoot for cables and not getting too close to lights. Personally, I don’t like to have performers cluttering up the set when other people are working, but you have to decide for yourself whether you want them to be able to see the film getting made or whether you want to keep people on set to a minimum. Once you’ve finished the briefing get the actors through make-up and wardrobe. You’ll probably want to step in and check people as they go through this process, wardrobe sometimes gives people clothing that is going to get in the way of a particular piece of action and as your actors now have a feel for their character, you may have to work with them to get this part right.

When the set and crew are ready it’s time to do your first line up. This should be a simple process where the actors come in, see the minor differences between the rehearsal space and actual set and make minor adjustments to how the action works. This means that you can concentrate on talking to the DOP, lighting team and sound recordist about how the scene is going to be shot.

In the line up I start by reminding the actors of how we approached the scene in rehearsal and then asking them just to walk through the action. If there are any obvious alterations to the blocking this is when they will show up, but nine times out of ten the actors will adjust it themselves. What you are looking to do is establish the timing of the scene and to establish precise marks for the actors to hit when the action takes place. The marks are important because the DOP will set their camera positions to hit those marks. Once this is established the line up is done and the camera and lighting team can rig for the first set-up. The crew may well need the cast around to make sure that the light is hitting the right points, that the camera is at the right height (this is the primary work of stand-ins for stars on big budget movies). Personally, I like to give a little space to the cast at this point and concentrate on getting the set-up right. Some actors need to go into themselves to prepare at this point, some like to chatter nervously and personally I don’t like to be around either process.

When it’s rigged, bring the cast back in and run your first camera rehearsal. The purpose of the camera rehearsal is primarily to make sure that the camera movements/set up are right. It’s the first time that you get to see the scene as it actually going to exist on tape/film.
With that sorted it’s worth running a few additional runs of the piece where you’re fixing minor performance issues.

To do this some directors like to call their direction in from their chair, which is the fastest way of doing it and the only way if it relates to position (you want to judge the changes in the monitor). However, in my opinion, the only way to give notes is to go over to the actor and talk to them quietly one-to-one. It’s works out faster in the long run than calling instructions in because you get more effective results, which means less takes to get the job done.

When everything is looking the way you want it, it’s time for the first take. By now it should just be a case of rolling the camera and letting it happen, as far as the performances are concerned, but usually there will still be minor alterations during the master take. However, once a good master take is down, the rest of the process is really about quality control. One thing that I always do is if I think a cast member is 90% there, but aren’t quite hitting it I’ll say “That take was perfect, excellent. Look we’ll just take another couple of takes for safety, but from a performance point of view we’ve got it.” What tends to happen then, is that the pressure comes off the cast and slightly more relaxed they give even better performances on the safety takes. (Of course if they don’t you just keep working them and remind them that you need about three good takes to be safe).

At the end of each scene, when it’s in the can make sure that you go up to each actor in the scene and give them some positive praise, and make it about something in particular. “I really liked the relationship between you and Trish in that scene” or “I really liked how you brought out the sulkiness of your character in that scene.” Actors need post performance reassurance and it’s an investment on what they do next.

As you can see, by running proper read throughs and rehearsals the time on set is used more efficiently (all in all this approach can make huge saving on your production, providing you aren’t paying some megastar a fortune for rehearsal time.
 
Last edited:
Fixing performance problems.

In my experience most of these issues should get resolved in rehearsal; however, with small roles some times the blocking and rehearsal gets done on set, so you need tools for sorting out bad performances quickly and effortlessly. Plus, there are also always going to be occasions when your well rehearsed actors loose the plot.

So, here are some techniques to get you out of trouble with a scene.

Problem – The relationship between two characters isn’t believable.

Sometimes this is just a matter of discussing the situation with the actors and getting them to talk about their character’s relationship to one another. This doesn’t always work though, because not all actors operate on an intellectual level. So, one thing that does work is getting the actors to work alone improvising scenes from their shared history that aren’t in the film. For example, you have a Mother and Son who are supposed to be close but obviously just don’t click together. Get them to improvise two or three key scenes from their joint history. Another approach is to ask them to stay in character all day and interact with each other as Mother and Son.

Problem – The lines should be highly emotional, but seem flat.

Sometimes actors have real problems getting any energy into their lines. The easiest way to overcome this is to get them to deliver their lines whilst holding a chair above their heads, or to get them to deliver their line whilst trying to push you down the room (you resist their pushes and make them work at it). Amazingly this almost always changes the dynamic, leading to more animated performances.

Problem – The actor can’t get the line right no matter how hard they try.

Sometimes even with the best actor this happens, for whatever reason they can’t deliver the line the way it’s supposed to work. So even though they understand the character, the character’s objective in the scene and the motivation the line just won’t come out right. The actor is just mangling it.

There are also times when you haven’t got time to piss about discussing the role, like when you’re loosing the light. So, you have to have a twenty second line fixing solution.

The first thing to understand is that a sentence is a complete unit and when speaking a sentence there should be only one word stressed. Here’s an example:

Your mother wasn’t like this; she was a kind woman.

By changing the word that’s stressed you can change the emotional content of the sentence. Try these different versions.

Your mother wasn’t like this; she was a kind woman. (So that means someone is denying that the Mother was unkind)

Whereas

Your mother wasn’t like this; she was a kind woman. (This is someone accusing someone of not being as kind as her mother)

And

Your mother wasn’t like this; she was a kind woman. (This reading means the Mother used to be kind, but isn’t at the moment)


Where possible this approach needs to be done to one side with the actor, going over the possible stress choices and jointly deciding which way to go with it. However, when the light is fading sometimes the only choice is to ask the actor to deliver the line in a particular way, with a particular stress point. When ever possible do this by asking the actor to stress a particular line, don’t deliver the line for them and expect them to mimic it (unless all else has failed and time is against you).

I hope these techniques help.
 
Last edited:
You must be a brilliant director because if you can work as well as you do in theory, you'd get breathtaking performances

Actors like working with me, and I'm kind of unusual in the indie film making world, in that I started off as someone who was interested in acting and writing for the theatre before I got interested in film making. This has meant that I arrived at film making with an understanding of how actors work and in particular how to approach text, and then had to acquire the technical knowledge about how a film is made. Usually people do it the other way round.

The other thing to consider is that I directed actors in radio for thirteen years before film making and that I spent four years teaching acting at our local college. It's one of my primary fascinations. One of my criticisms of film school education has always been that it puts too little effort into teachng directorial technique.

The thing to remember, though, is that this is only one style of directing. Kubrick was notorius for not talking to his actors and not giving dirction. George Lucas is another director with minimal skills when it comes to working with actors. These guys have made great films.

Personally, I like this way of working and I've only scratched the surface of directorial technique with these postings; the real skill comes in being able to analyse and interpret language, whilst at the same time having a deep undestanding of people and why they do things. The actual art in directing actors is in helping them find their way into some kind of emotional resonance with the piece, so that much of the perormance is internalised. Often with film acting it's about little things and actually the real art is making the actor feel safe enough to be able to show some genuine vunerabilty to the camera. That kind of trust takes time to establish and I understand why many directors come back to the same cast time and time again.
 
Another winner. You could publish this, filmy his 4-act, I could do one on building DIY doohickies, couple of other folks do other topics...we could have the IT Indy film companion book series. We could sell them door to door like encyclopoedias ;)
 
You could publish this

Actually, I am writing a book at the moment about lo/no budget film making. :blush: I just can't talk about it at the moment because I'm discussing it with an agent.

Following the suggestion posted on the other thread I'm also looking into producing an "Directing Actors for Film" DVD. I thought I could try out some of the tutorials here and then distribute it via Customflix, with a promise that all funds rasied would go into my next film.

I'm also looking into the wiki thing. Should have news about that soon, just dealing with some technical problems.

building DIY doohickies

I'm very interested in DIY doohickies.
 
Last edited:
I think an "How-to-act" DVD could have enormous possiblity- especially if you infuse your humor into it Clive. It would be just interesting to see a process play out on screen- we always see the end results in the final movies, and behind-the-scenes always covers the technical- would be refreshing to see acting tricks and tips in a fun, movie format.
 
All the other books on low/no budget filmmaking note that you can buy lights at a hardware store, they don't ever say what to do with them once you've purchased them! And camera placement/framing/blocking...that's the other thing never covered...I've read lots of these books in the last couple of years. I request that you endeavor to cover those topics in your book :)
 
All the other books on low/no budget filmmaking note that you can buy lights at a hardware store, they don't ever say what to do with them once you've purchased them! And camera placement/framing/blocking...that's the other thing never covered...I've read lots of these books in the last couple of years. I request that you endeavor to cover those topics in your book

Oh, that's going to be covered, for sure. I've got a very specific goal in mind with this book and I know it's never been done before. I just wish I could be more open about it, because it's all very, very exciting.

What I can say though is that I'm doing massive amounts of research for the book at the moment, hence the diverse postings.

The reason that the acting guide got written so quickly is that I'm in this massive writing groove at the moment where the words are just flowing.
 
clive said:
The reason that the acting guide got written so quickly is that I'm in this massive writing groove at the moment where the words are just flowing.

MMM... I love getting into one of those modes. For me, it usually happens when I'm at my least social..
What I'd LOVE to see are ways at getting into these "Grooves" and maintaining them- obviously it's up to the individual, but if there was ever a trick to lock your brain into "writing mode", I'd love to know it.

A couple things I've been trying:

1) Just jamming on the guitar- works the fingers up to speed, and opens up the creative brain.
2) If I can't write anything in the main script, write out character's backstory from thier perspective.

But I know there's a similarity between acting and writing- for me, when I write, I have to constantly switch perspectives like an actor playing all the characters, and somehow in the back of my mind keep the plot moving. Knowing the acting part really helps the the writing. So how does a director get the actor into the same kind of "groove" a writer can get into?

How do you inspire the story so much in an actor's mind that they feel the same things you did when writing? Technically directing actors is great- but I want to know how to bring out the emotions without damaging the actors, or making them feel silly. Especially because at my budget levels I'm working with a lot of non-actors or inexperienced ones. If you do plan on getting into it Clive, I'd be very interested to see your perspective on directing actors through emotions. I've heard the parent/child relationship stuff, but realistically, I think the actor and director should have more of a sibling-like kind of understanding of the characters- as if they share everything. So how do you connect on the same levels as the actor without making yourself seem less of a "parent figure" (for the sake of perserving chain of command).
 
How do you inspire the story so much in an actor's mind that they feel the same things you did when writing? Technically directing actors is great- but I want to know how to bring out the emotions without damaging the actors, or making them feel silly. Especially because at my budget levels I'm working with a lot of non-actors or inexperienced ones. If you do plan on getting into it Clive, I'd be very interested to see your perspective on directing actors through emotions

This isn't a question that has easy answers, because on one level I'm not even sure that it matters what your actors feel, it's more about whether the audience get it.

But, putting that to one side, there are a few things you can do.

The first thing that the director needs to stop doing is asking the actor to portray a particular emotion. The worse direction a director can ever give is, "look angry" or "show me that you are sad." This because although you want the appearance of the emotion for the camera, in fact by drawing the actor's atention to their face you are achievieve the opposite and will end up with something that looks amatuerish. The way to find any kind of emotional reality for an actor is always about getting them engaged in the reality of what they are doing.

One thing to understand is that acting isn't about pretending to be other people. This is a mistake that many inexperienced actors make, they think that they find the character by putting a layer of pretend over themselves. It's as if the character is a mask that the actor can hide behind. However, the truth is that acting is opposite of that and that when developing a character the actor needs to find ways in which they are like the character they are playing. As many characters are exhibiting flaws in their personalities, this can be a daunting prospect for an actor. So, if your central character is obsessed with his Mother, then the actor needs to find that part of him or herself that is just like that. They need to find a degree of identification with the character. So, it's not that they become the character, in real terms they were the character all along.

As the director you can help that process happen in number of ways. By far the easist way to start is by type casting, if you need someone to play a neurotic, then hire an actor who already exhibits those traits. (It won't be hard to find one).

The next step you start in the read through, when the actors are starting to work on their characters get them to draw on their own expriences. You start the process by getting them to identify people that they've known who were like this person and then as the reheasal time progresses and they get more comfortable you suggest (one-to-one) that they draw on their personal experiences to help them find their way into a scene.

Another approach is to forget the intellectual way of working and instead concentrate on the body. If a person is unhappy or depressed they hold their body in a different way from someone who is confident. The interesting thing is that just by altering the way we stand we alter our body chemistry. So, if you get an actor to fold in on themselves in rehearsal, by rounding the shoulders in and droping their head, then as they do that let the weight of their bodies drag them down into the fetal position on the floor, if they let go and just observe their feelings, by the time they're on the floor many of them will be in tears. (This has to be done very, very slowly)

If the issue is about dominance relationship between too characters, you can do an improv game in rehearsal where without speaking to each other the submissive character has to avoid eye contact and the dominant character has to establish contact. (For baby actors you need to establish a no touching rule).

The otehr key factor in generating feelings in your actors is contected to personal space. If you watch two actors working, early in rehearsal, you can guarantee that they stand between four to six feet apart. This is because in the West this is a comfortable social distance. However, because film is about conflict and intense emotions the one thing you don't want is for the actors to be feeling comfortable. Where ever possible in the blocking and rehearsal process break up that social space by either moving them closer together or moving them further apart. Each has it's own dynamic, you need to play around with it and see what gets the best result.

The other thing that helps is breaking down the barriers in the cast about physical contact. They need to be tactile with each other, right from the begining of the process. It's worth starting your rehearsals with some acting games, which you use as ice-breakers. By a book on acting games for actors and pick out ones that need people to touch each other; pick out other ones that require them to make lots of eye contact and other games that require them to listen to each other.

I know this is a lot to take in and to be honest the way you apply it is a thing that comes with exprience, the key to this is getting away from the social niceites as soon as possible and making them feel safe enough to feel uncomfortable. The rest is about knowing when to push and when to let things slide (never if you've the confidence)

One final trick, if you need a reaction from someone (they are witnessing it) and it's the key point in the film, don't let them into rehearsal for that scene and don't let them see the action until it's time to roll the camera. we did this for the girl's death scene in No Place and our lead actor wept, he couldn't stop himself. A variation of this is to give an instruction to one particular actor to do soemthing that hasn't been rehearsed. This throws the actor off balance and sometimes give excellent results.
 
Last edited:
I'd definately buy any book you wrote, as you have some absolutely amazing tips. It would be great to be kept updated on the progress of any such book as I know it would help a lot of people here.

I'm in the same kind of boat as you, despite not having any acting or theathre background, I am much more comfortable working with people and would thrive on working with actors and bringing them to the peak of their characters emotions.

Technical stuff is all great, but nobody except film buffs care whether it was a wide shot or a tracking shot, all they care is that the camera finds the best place to observe the film as if living the lifes of the characters, which in no mean feat in itself.

Most of the books I have read on directing have been on acting and they have been very useful. I do find the technical ones, although useful, assume you know how to use the mind numbing amount of gadgets on the film set, which sadly I don't. So a good book on how to use stuff would be good as well
 
Excellent clive- I have the feeling if you explained the dynamics of Potato farming I'd still be all-ears and probably walk away with a new outlook on life.

Great tips there- thinking more on emotions, it would also hurt subtext of the character by asking for just one emotion. Awesome dude- thank you.
 
but nobody except film buffs care whether it was a wide shot or a tracking shot, all they care is that the camera finds the best place to observe the film as if living the lifes of the characters, which in no mean feat in itself.

Ah, but what might help you there is to remember that the camera is a character in the film. I know that might sound odd, but the camera stands at various distances from the action, either above the eyeline (dominant) or below the eyeline (submissive). The closer you take the camera the more intimate the relationship of the audience, the further away the more voyueristic it becomes. So, instead of thinking of your camera placements as technical issues, it may help to think of them as one more relationship within the story, you need to block the audience into the scene.

This doesn't mean that the actors respond to the camera as another character, the audience is the ghost in the machine. What it does mean, though, is that exactly the same issues as to relative body position apply to the camera as to everything else. A concrete example of this is the classic, victim in the boot of the car sequence. If you decide to put the camera in the boot of the car it means you want the audience to identify with the victim; however, if instead you shoot down onto the victim over the shoulder of the anatagonist you want them to identify with the antagonist. It's not just a style choice, it's also a psychological one.

As the director I'm going to try and control where the audience looks and when, not just by what angles I use, but also but using tricks of composition; and, I'll also use theatrical tricks as well. The main one is about stillness and movement. The eye is attracted to movement and looses interest in anything that isn't moving. So if I place an actor very still in the frame and somebody walks into the frame teh audience will be drawn to the character that's moving. If I also place the still actor out of the dominant third positions and match the tones of their clothing to the tones of the set, they sort of become invisible (not literally). So, when a few seconds later that character moves, both the moving actor and the audience jump; I've controlled the way they see the scene.

Still buzzing, by the way.
 
Thats what I was meaning by its no mean feat in itself :D

Poorly phrased I think, but cheers for the extra info anyway, its still useful.

Something I forgot to point out earlier which is rather interesting, I saw a documentary about the Ian McKellan recently and it was showing him on the Lord of the Rings set. Now Peter Jackson is obviously a good director, but he when preparing Ian for a shot, he just told him to look angry. I was a bit suprised by that. It would be excellent to have an excellent technical knowledge and an excellent knowledge of dealing with actors, as it would put you in a brilliant position
 
Now Peter Jackson is obviously a good director, but he when preparing Ian for a shot, he just told him to look angry. I was a bit suprised by that.

If you're working with Ian McKellan you can afford to give dreadful direction, because Ian is just too good an actor to be bothered by that. This is why Alec Guiness performs so well in Star Wars, he just didn't need the direction. For us indies it's harder to get away with sloppy direction, because we can't buy in the cream of acting talent.

However, to be fair, it's more than possible to be a sucessful director without having any skill at all with actors.
 
Of course, by that time, they may have had a verbal/physical short hand. They worked together for a really long time. Mr. McKellan could probably tell by the body language and the intonation what kind of anger Mr. Jackson was asking for...he also knows the books as well as if not better than Mr. Jackson, so probably had a really good grasp on the character's emotions at that moment. Elsewhere in the BTS, He said he had a copy of the book they were working on in his robes always for reference. And he re-reads the series once a year for the past 20 years or something.
 
They worked together for a really long time. Mr. McKellan could probably tell by the body language and the intonation what kind of anger Mr. Jackson was asking for...he also knows the books as well as if not better than Mr

I think it's more likely that Sir Ian listened to what he had to say, nodded politely and then worked it out for himself. In her book acting for Film, Mel Churcher says that because of the poor directorial skills inthe industry as they relate to actors, an actor needs to learn to translate what they are told and work it out for themselves.
 
Back
Top