Is Acting a Misunderstood Art Form?

V

VoxMethod

Hi everyone,

We are trying to start a dialogue on how Acting is viewed by actors and by filmmakers.

Are we talking about acting fairly? Or are we barely scratching the surface of all the details and techniques of this art form?
In short, WHAT is real acting ability?

To know how we view Acting, watch our Oscar's commentary right here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9G3Y9Qe-lPA

Or our acting capsule video "VOX TALKS - ACTING TECHNIQUE":
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLDfyRkaeB6TxtT4gVahUsuuOiGJKpH1S8
 
Last edited:
Interesting way of advertising.

But I watched that first video and it was kind of interesting. I agree with a lot of what they said. I do believe that the criteria for good acting is pretty low. But the thing is that they basically said that Cate Blanchet and Charlotte Rampling were more advanced than Brie, JLaw, and Soarise. Well duh. The first two are seasoned veterans while the latter three are all in their twenties. What the three bring is a sense of rawness that you do not get from Cate (who I just about bow down to, I nearly cried watching her in the video) and certainly not Charlotte. That rawness makes them more accessible IMO and makes more unique. Brie will win the academy award in part of that. The only performance that I haven't seen in full was Charotte's. I enjoyed all of them. I think JLaw pretty much saved Joy.

As for what is real acting ability I think it's subjective. I'm an actor first and some people believe it's just being someone else. But I am not so sure that this is the case. Some people believe it's being yourself on screen. But I don't think that the great actors are just doing this. I believe it's a combo of being truthful to the character and using your own emotions to fuel the character. That way you show what is unique about the character and yourself. But some would disagree with that. But at the end of the day you just have to be believable.

I certainly can spot bad acting.
 
Last edited:
mlesemann said:
Every actor I know (and I've worked with a lot of them through 2 features & numerous shorts) works hard at it in order to make it look easy.
Click to expand...

Well look at it this way..

Cameron Diaz was a model that just happened to work in the right building. She had never done any acting, but it was the same building they were doing the mask auditions in and she got to meet the director and got the job.

Matthew Mcconaughey was just some dude hanging out at a bar when they thought he would be perfect for the role in dazed and confused.

Shirley Temple began her professional acting career at the age of 3, I find it hard to believe she spent a lot of time perfecting her craft before her big break.

It's this way with most things in life.. some people are gifted with a natural talent. Others have to work hard at it.

Just because you weren't born with the gift doesn't mean you can't achieve it. Although personally I think no matter how hard I try I'll never be a great singer :)
 
VoxMethod said:
Hi everyone,

We are trying to start a dialogue on how Acting is viewed by actors and by filmmakers.

Are we talking about acting fairly? Or are we barely scratching the surface of all the details and techniques of this art form?
In short, WHAT is real acting ability?

To know how we view Acting, watch our Oscar's commentary right here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9G3Y9Qe-lPA

Or our acting capsule video "VOX TALKS - ACTING TECHNIQUE":
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLDfyRkaeB6TxtT4gVahUsuuOiGJKpH1S8
Click to expand...

most of the most intelligent and famous actors dont consider it art. its a craft. They are being told what to do reading someone elses' lines.
 
I agree with everything that has been said about natural talent. Some people, yes, are naturally talented, but sometimes stories about people just being plucked up into major motion pictures are a little exagerrated.


sfoster said:
Well look at it this way..

Cameron Diaz was a model that just happened to work in the right building. She had never done any acting, but it was the same building they were doing the mask auditions in and she got to meet the director and got the job.
Click to expand...

While not an actor per se, as a model Cameron Diaz spent years in front of a camera, both for print and video. And she didn't just happen to be in the building, her agency secured her the audition. She also admitted that she began to take acting classes as soon she was cast.

Matthew Mcconaughey was just some dude hanging out at a bar when they thought he would be perfect for the role in dazed and confused.
Click to expand...

Matthew Mcconaughey graduated with a degree in Radio, Film and Television, where he took acting classes, and though his original plan was to go to law school, he ended up acting and had already been acting in commercials and student films by the time he was cast in Dazed and Confused.

Shirley Temple began her professional acting career at the age of 3, I find it hard to believe she spent a lot of time perfecting her craft before her big break.
Click to expand...

Shirley Temple got her big break at, yes, the age of three, but because she was spotted at a performing/dance school for very young and gifted children.

There are some stories that are pretty much "plucked from obscurity though."

Chris Pratt was a layabout working as a waiter in Maui when he happened to wait on Rae Don Chong. She was so taken with his personality and charisma that she offered him a part in a horror film she was making in Los Angeles. It was still a while though until he broke through. He had some small roles on TV series.

Jennifer Lawrence did not have any hardcore training. She tells a story that when her family moved to New York for her to pursue acting, they knew she needed training. At her first session with a respected acting coach, the coach reportedly told her that she had an amazing talent and he cautioned the family against her taking any acting training, including his own, because he thought it might ruin what she already had.
 
Last edited:
sfoster said:
Well look at it this way..

Cameron Diaz was a model that just happened to work in the right building. She had never done any acting, but it was the same building they were doing the mask auditions in and she got to meet the director and got the job.

Matthew Mcconaughey was just some dude hanging out at a bar when they thought he would be perfect for the role in dazed and confused.

Shirley Temple began her professional acting career at the age of 3, I find it hard to believe she spent a lot of time perfecting her craft before her big break.

It's this way with most things in life.. some people are gifted with a natural talent. Others have to work hard at it.

Just because you weren't born with the gift doesn't mean you can't achieve it. Although personally I think no matter how hard I try I'll never be a great singer :)
Click to expand...

Have you ever directed an actor before?

I do believe that a lot actors have natural talent. But do you think that Daniel Day Lewis and Meryl Streep were just born that way? Nope. They have studied for years. Same with Cate Blanchett, Bryan Cranston, Bradley Cooper, and several others.

I remember when I first started acting. I was told that I had raw ability. I thought pretty highly of myself. But I still knew that I needed technique.

Cameron Diaz has actually trained a good bit. I believe that she still has an acting coach to this day. Even then she isn't the best actress out there. She is just attractive, has a nice personality, and some natural ability. I don't think anyone should follow her example (and I do like her).

Matthew McConaughey has a film degree and trained in acting as well.

I am not sure about Shirley Temple, but when you start at such a young age that is your training.

And I saw what a poster wrote about JLaw. Keep in mind that she was in a theatre group for years when she was younger. And Chris Pratt has said in interviews that he worked with an acting coach right after he went to L.A.
 
"While not an actor per se, as a model Cameron Diaz spent years in front of a camera, both for print and video. And she didn't just happen to be in the building, her agency secured her the audition. She also admitted that she began to take acting classes as soon she was cast. "

Yes - her agency that was in the same building.
 
I've never taken an acting class but i would like to eventually. Ive been told people like that I dont have any training. They say Im not forced or have bad habits. Just got done shooting a film with Barry Bostwick (Sin City) and Casper Van Dien ( Starship Troopers) I didnt get to know Barry (scenes at different times) at all but Casper was cool but his daughter was way cool.

My style of acting is done differently than most I found out. When I audition, the first time I hear the words out loud is when I say them in the audition. Plus, I'm in no hurry to say my lines in a film. I like to take my time and pause. I also add uh's in my dialogue. https://youtu.be/DQO_ozdKSRM
 
VoxMethod said:
Is Acting a Misunderstood Art Form? - We are trying to start a dialogue on how Acting is viewed by actors and by filmmakers. Are we talking about acting fairly? Or are we barely scratching the surface of all the details and techniques of this art form?
Click to expand...

Compared to what? Compared to my area for example, Sound Design, I think most filmmakers have a comparatively excellent understanding of acting!

G
 
AudioPostExpert said:
Compared to what? Compared to my area for example, Sound Design, I think most filmmakers have a comparatively excellent understanding of acting!

G
Click to expand...

Totally disagree. I've worked with directors and even acting professors that had no idea how to direct me or really anyone. In the directors case they were more concern about visual and neglected the human aspect of film. As for acing professors that basically boils down to a class becoming a rigid "please the professor" class.

A lot of DPs don't understand acting. That's why they get into that field rather than directing, they don't have to worry about that.
 
Theauteur14 said:
Totally disagree. I've worked with directors and even acting professors that had no idea how to direct me or really anyone.
Click to expand...

Having an incomplete knowledge and/or a very poor ability to assess or implement that knowledge is still a significant improvement! Both the directors you're talking about and the acting professors knew basically what acting is, even if they were ignorant of some/many of the details and nuances of acting and/or "had no idea how to direct" or teach an actor. Compare that to sound design, where many don't even know at the most basic level what sound design is, what it's basic function is, why it exists and in some cases, not even realise that it does exist! Ask these people what sound design is and most commonly they will explain the role of a sound editor, a sound effects designer and/or a re-recording mixer, NOT what sound design is or the role of a sound designer! Most members of the general public have a far better basic understanding of what acting is than many actual filmmakers have of what sound design is!

It's not even a vaguely close contest, so I'm baffled how you can "totally disagree"?

Theauteur14 said:
A lot of DPs don't understand acting. That's why they get into that field rather than directing, they don't have to worry about that.
Click to expand...

They don't have to worry about what? You have to have some basic understanding of something to be worried about it and make the decision to avoid it!

G
 
AudioPostExpert said:
Having an incomplete knowledge and/or a very poor ability to assess or implement that knowledge is still a significant improvement! Both the directors you're talking about and the acting professors knew basically what acting is, even if they were ignorant of some/many of the details and nuances of acting and/or "had no idea how to direct" or teach an actor. Compare that to sound design, where many don't even know at the most basic level what sound design is, what it's basic function is, why it exists and in some cases, not even realise that it does exist! Ask these people what sound design is and most commonly they will explain the role of a sound editor, a sound effects designer and/or a re-recording mixer, NOT what sound design is or the role of a sound designer! Most members of the general public have a far better basic understanding of what acting is than many actual filmmakers have of what sound design is!

It's not even a vaguely close contest, so I'm baffled how you can "totally disagree"?
Click to expand...
You do make good points. But I am talking about people who actually understand how to speak to actors, how to inspire and really direct. That is few, far, and between.

A lot of young directors are only concerned about visual telling a story. So when they get on set they have no idea how they should talk to an actor. They start doing things as line readings, saying things like "you can say that, but I will cut it out of the film, stuff like that. Even a basic understanding of acting is not enough to get great performances out of actors. That's why you see an actor do great in one film and be okay in the other. What's the difference? The writing and the directing.

At the end of the day, the deciding factor on if a film is good or not is the acting. And quite frankly there are not a lot of good actor directors.


AudioPostExpert said:
They don't have to worry about what? You have to have some basic understanding of something to be worried about it and make the decision to avoid it!

G
Click to expand...
A DP doesn't have to worry about the actor's performance as that is the director's job. Though a good DP will be concerned about a performance.
 
Theauteur14 said:
At the end of the day, the deciding factor on if a film is good or not is the acting.
Click to expand...

That's patently not true! I'm obviously not saying that you can have a good film with bad acting, you can't. The quality of acting is not the deciding factor though, because you can have good acting and still have a bad film! This is because there are a number of crafts which on their own can kill a film, regardless of the quality of the acting. The aforementioned craft/s of sound definitely can kill a film but so can picture editing and cinematography, production and costume design as well a the music can at least massively degrade a film. Furthermore, you can still have a good film with fairly mediocre acting. In other words, with the exception of obviously bad acting, acting is not the deciding factor, it's just one of the deciding factors.

Theauteur14 said:
A lot of young directors are only concerned about visual telling a story.
Click to expand...

Agreed, that is a failing of a lot of immature, inexperienced or just plain bad directors. I agree that a lot of directors, even a step or two above this level, neglect acting to at least some degree but it is only to a degree, sound design is often neglected completely! At the end of the day, being a good director is a tough job and many never really get past what can in some respects be considered the first step; realising that modern film is an extremely carefully considered balance of a number of diverse crafts and is NOT essentially just cinematography with a bunch of supporting crafts/skills.

I am not disagreeing with your basic argument and the apparent tenet of the OP. That many aspiring directors need to find a better "balance", focus more on crafts which ultimately make more of a difference. I'm just pointing out that acting is not the only victim of this lack of "balance" and usually, it's quite far from being the worst victim!

Theauteur14 said:
But I am talking about people who actually understand how to speak to actors, how to inspire and really direct. That is few, far, and between.
Click to expand...

Agreed, top class directors are a rare species but as I explained above, a top class director is one who can speak, "inspire and really direct" ALL the key film crafts, not just the actors.

G
 
AudioPostExpert said:
That's patently not true! I'm obviously not saying that you can have a good film with bad acting, you can't. The quality of acting is not the deciding factor though, because you can have good acting and still have a bad film! This is because there are a number of crafts which on their own can kill a film, regardless of the quality of the acting. The aforementioned craft/s of sound definitely can kill a film but so can picture editing and cinematography, production and costume design as well a the music can at least massively degrade a film. Furthermore, you can still have a good film with fairly mediocre acting. In other words, with the exception of obviously bad acting, acting is not the deciding factor, it's just one of the deciding factors.
Click to expand...
True, there have been good movies with so so acting (Speed is a great film, but not because of Keanu Reeves, that's a film where the director nailed everything else right). But I would say that at the end of the day it's all about the drama. Remember The Cider House rules? The story wasn't all that exciting, maybe even a little
predictable. But along with the visuals and feel the acting was so good. It wasn't a great movie. But a good movie that stuck with me years after I first watched it and I had to rewatch it last night. Makes sense that it got nominated for seven academy awards and won two. Chocolat is another good example, good movie, not great. But fine acting has allowed that film to really stand the test of time and got nominated for five academy awards. That's the same director too (Lasse Hallstrom) so obviously he knows how to get good performances out of actors.

A lot of directors do tend to neglect sound. I know on my last short I worked on my sound design a lot. That was only because we found out that the mic had some issues on the first day so I had to get creative.



AudioPostExpert said:
Agreed, that is a failing of a lot of immature, inexperienced or just plain bad directors. I agree that a lot of directors, even a step or two above this level, neglect acting to at least some degree but it is only to a degree, sound design is often neglected completely! At the end of the day, being a good director is a tough job and many never really get past what can in some respects be considered the first step; realising that modern film is an extremely carefully considered balance of a number of diverse crafts and is NOT essentially just cinematography with a bunch of supporting crafts/skills.

I am not disagreeing with your basic argument and the apparent tenet of the OP. That many aspiring directors need to find a better "balance", focus more on crafts which ultimately make more of a difference. I'm just pointing out that acting is not the only victim of this lack of "balance" and usually, it's quite far from being the worst victim!
Click to expand...

This is so true. You have to be able to get emotions out of actors, have a good visual style, understand how to use music, how to use sound, understand the importance of editing (where the real filmmaking begins), lighting (though a good DP will cover this), and the other cracks. That's why it's so important to at least know what you want in the technical areas so that you can just hire the right people to do it and cast properly.

AudioPostExpert said:
Agreed, top class directors are a rare species but as I explained above, a top class director is one who can speak, "inspire and really direct" ALL the key film crafts, not just the actors.

G
Click to expand...
Truth. There aren't enough Spielbergs out there.
 
VoxMethod said:
Hi everyone,

We are trying to start a dialogue on how Acting is viewed by actors and by filmmakers.

Are we talking about acting fairly? Or are we barely scratching the surface of all the details and techniques of this art form?
In short, WHAT is real acting ability?

To know how we view Acting, watch our Oscar's commentary right here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9G3Y9Qe-lPA

Or our acting capsule video "VOX TALKS - ACTING TECHNIQUE":
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLDfyRkaeB6TxtT4gVahUsuuOiGJKpH1S8
Click to expand...

misunderstood definitely as in its a craft.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top