If they're not talking, they're not acting?
Why Do Actors Believe . . .
- Thread starter Modern Day Myth Prod. LLC
- Start date
Read this:
" Why do actors not talk in silent movies but still act? "
Acting isn't all about talking. They can use their body language and can still act, but have to be in role. Actors may believe that if they're not talking, they're not acting because they are not true actors. They just want to talk because they don't know what acting actually means.
" Why do actors not talk in silent movies but still act? "
Acting isn't all about talking. They can use their body language and can still act, but have to be in role. Actors may believe that if they're not talking, they're not acting because they are not true actors. They just want to talk because they don't know what acting actually means.
Last edited:
I've never worked with an actor who thought that.
I'm not the first filmmaker to run across actors who think that way. One such actor even sent me an email saying they need roles with lines for their demo reels.
I had an actress email me a month ago saying she was dropping out of the production because she does not have enough dialogue.
Her role got recast last week by another actress only to happy to be in an action film.
I get tons os submissions with people with no stunt or action experience, only talking roles and I'm tossing their applications away for their own safety. These actors believe a stunt coordinator is a miracle worker who can turn them into action stars. They will get hurt with stage combat, martial arts, ans stunt training. And, stunt coordinators don't want to work with people without experience in stage combat. Some list they came dance, but they really have no experience with choreography.
I had 2 actors duck out on me 3 years ago for the role of an android soldier with one page of all action with no dialogue. I had to use my DP to play that role. With my new production where we are casting the silver demon hunters, which are all action no dialogue roles, one of the same actors who dropped out for the role of the android soldier sends me his one role reel just showing him walking down a flight of stairs talking and talking until he joins a group of people just talking.
So, these are actors who think that way.
I had an actress email me a month ago saying she was dropping out of the production because she does not have enough dialogue.
Her role got recast last week by another actress only to happy to be in an action film.
I get tons os submissions with people with no stunt or action experience, only talking roles and I'm tossing their applications away for their own safety. These actors believe a stunt coordinator is a miracle worker who can turn them into action stars. They will get hurt with stage combat, martial arts, ans stunt training. And, stunt coordinators don't want to work with people without experience in stage combat. Some list they came dance, but they really have no experience with choreography.
I had 2 actors duck out on me 3 years ago for the role of an android soldier with one page of all action with no dialogue. I had to use my DP to play that role. With my new production where we are casting the silver demon hunters, which are all action no dialogue roles, one of the same actors who dropped out for the role of the android soldier sends me his one role reel just showing him walking down a flight of stairs talking and talking until he joins a group of people just talking.
So, these are actors who think that way.
Last edited:
Two things to consider:
Cracker Funk’s comment is correct. Only bad actors think that.
If you were paying $500/$600 per day they wouldn’t drop out. I
suspect if you were paying even $15/hr. they wouldn’t duck out
simply because they weren’t didn’t have enough dialogue.
I believe you when you say you aren’t the first filmmaker to run
across actors who think that way. But I’m like Uranium City - I
have never worked with an actor who thought that.
I’m sorry you’re having so much trouble with actors not living up
to your expectations. I’m sure it frustrating.
Cracker Funk’s comment is correct. Only bad actors think that.
If you were paying $500/$600 per day they wouldn’t drop out. I
suspect if you were paying even $15/hr. they wouldn’t duck out
simply because they weren’t didn’t have enough dialogue.
I believe you when you say you aren’t the first filmmaker to run
across actors who think that way. But I’m like Uranium City - I
have never worked with an actor who thought that.
I’m sorry you’re having so much trouble with actors not living up
to your expectations. I’m sure it frustrating.
Well directorik,
We are living in hard times. Going 2 weeks without pay is hard and I just lost a good actress today because of the economy. But, next month my salary is being cut $200 a month and I should be stopping the production and looking for part time work to fill the gap to pay my monthly bills.
However, I'm an artist and my art comes before my personal finances. I told the actress I hear where she is coming from and wished her all the best.
And now I'm sending out casting notices. BackStage.com just gave me a $65 discount as a returning customer. So, I posted a notice for the new role for $15.That will be both in their hardcopy magazine and the Internet.
We are living in hard times. Going 2 weeks without pay is hard and I just lost a good actress today because of the economy. But, next month my salary is being cut $200 a month and I should be stopping the production and looking for part time work to fill the gap to pay my monthly bills.
However, I'm an artist and my art comes before my personal finances. I told the actress I hear where she is coming from and wished her all the best.
And now I'm sending out casting notices. BackStage.com just gave me a $65 discount as a returning customer. So, I posted a notice for the new role for $15.That will be both in their hardcopy magazine and the Internet.
I don't believe many actors do, or atleast i haven't ran across any that have. It's a possibility that the actors within the specifics that you set, regarding the small fee, action requirements etc. are simply not at the level. No serious actor would mention any such statement, it sounds as though they've been given some bad advice.
Having read alot of the threads you've posted on this project, and more often than not, it's implications towards the budget stretching to its breaking point. May i ask whether you factored any "extras" within your budget at the beginning of the project?
I fully understand the extent of your position, it's testing, extremely. I just can't help but feel, having followed the threads and the twists and turns, and listened to your "Ideal" for your project, that it's going to take alot more funding wise for you to honour your material.
Having read alot of the threads you've posted on this project, and more often than not, it's implications towards the budget stretching to its breaking point. May i ask whether you factored any "extras" within your budget at the beginning of the project?
I fully understand the extent of your position, it's testing, extremely. I just can't help but feel, having followed the threads and the twists and turns, and listened to your "Ideal" for your project, that it's going to take alot more funding wise for you to honour your material.
Extras, such as actors or perks for being in the production? We have background extras for cheap this time with the posable stunt dummies. All we have to do is cloth them.
The fact the the script and characters are so interesting is bringing in good people for cheap even in this bad economy. I have a retired fight choreographer and martial arts instructor on board who gave a great audition and willing to work with us because he likes what we are trying to do. And, since he is retired, he has the free time to help.
The fact the the script and characters are so interesting is bringing in good people for cheap even in this bad economy. I have a retired fight choreographer and martial arts instructor on board who gave a great audition and willing to work with us because he likes what we are trying to do. And, since he is retired, he has the free time to help.
"Extras" as in a section factored into your budget to cover the "what ifs", and the common hiccups of the production.
It seems an intricate project you're running, and massively extensive given the action requirements, it would benefit hugely from a well-prepared funding scheme. I can't help but feel it's a missed opportunity not to approach crowdfunding as i would imagine this genre, and the overall style, has a huge following.
I do have backup plans to live up to promises, such as completing post next year and bring the final cut to NATPE a year later, using tax refunds to cover expenses.
We will shoot greenscreen and record VOs during rehearsal week to help post ahead of time.
We will shoot greenscreen and record VOs during rehearsal week to help post ahead of time.
We will be trying crowd funding soon just for that purpose and our stunt budget. But, we have to be prepared for the fact we may not reach our target.
Most definitely, there's alot of potential in the following behind the genre for you to really push for a strong budget.
Mountains of research, and perhaps a long, long wait to gather the necessary solid reel/pitch, but there's most certainly an opportunity.
I agree with everyone who's said that good actors would never think like this...
...however... If you're a jobbing actor taking on unpaid gigs in order to built up a showreel and get better parts, I can see why non-speaking parts wouldn't appeal so much. There's only a certain amount that they can do for free and it simply looks a lot better to have had speaking roles (not to mention e fact that it's a lot more fun on set!).
...however... If you're a jobbing actor taking on unpaid gigs in order to built up a showreel and get better parts, I can see why non-speaking parts wouldn't appeal so much. There's only a certain amount that they can do for free and it simply looks a lot better to have had speaking roles (not to mention e fact that it's a lot more fun on set!).
MDM, have you tried to raise a 'budget' in order to shoot, rather than skinting yourself?
Family, friends, friends of friends, associates etc?
Action, stunts, reheasalss, two weeks shoot etc. Sounds a lot of financial, physical commitment from all involved, a little more budget will go a long way I'm sure.
All the very best, respectfully jim.
Family, friends, friends of friends, associates etc?
Action, stunts, reheasalss, two weeks shoot etc. Sounds a lot of financial, physical commitment from all involved, a little more budget will go a long way I'm sure.
All the very best, respectfully jim.
Michael Caine once said, "Think of all the wonderful things to say when you're not talking, and decide not to say them."
I wouldn't say, 'Why do actors believe this...', I would say, amateur actors believe this. Most good/experienced actors have a lot going on all the time.
And let's not forget two of the most important concepts: Acting is re-acting, and acting is about listening.
Now, if we're discussing why actors won't take a job because they don't have dialog...well, that's different. Most good actors want jobs that showcase themselves. Not just so they can do what they love, but also so they can showcase themselves for future jobs. Landing a non-speaking job isn't going to do this...actors shouldn't put extra/BG work on their reel. I don't take BG work anymore...I want to be showcased. Again, not just because I love acting, but because I want all of my future jobs to be another rung on the ladder. I would rather take a non-paying job that gives me a great reel piece than take a BG job that pays me 100 a day. Only if I'm absolutely in need of money will I take non-speaking roles...and 99% of the time, I'll look for stand-in work instead of BG work...better pay, and better networking.
I wouldn't say, 'Why do actors believe this...', I would say, amateur actors believe this. Most good/experienced actors have a lot going on all the time.
And let's not forget two of the most important concepts: Acting is re-acting, and acting is about listening.
Now, if we're discussing why actors won't take a job because they don't have dialog...well, that's different. Most good actors want jobs that showcase themselves. Not just so they can do what they love, but also so they can showcase themselves for future jobs. Landing a non-speaking job isn't going to do this...actors shouldn't put extra/BG work on their reel. I don't take BG work anymore...I want to be showcased. Again, not just because I love acting, but because I want all of my future jobs to be another rung on the ladder. I would rather take a non-paying job that gives me a great reel piece than take a BG job that pays me 100 a day. Only if I'm absolutely in need of money will I take non-speaking roles...and 99% of the time, I'll look for stand-in work instead of BG work...better pay, and better networking.
Last edited:
You know, you've hit on something that I am passionate about personally. I was an "extra" for a couple years, and I learned so much in acting because of it. No, obviously, I had no lines, but I learned that subtle nuances in body language, a emotional change at the right time, the slightest physical action could tell an entire story.
Now granted, there are many actors out there that shun non-verbal roles, but that's to their loss, in my opinion.
On the other hand, if the role is a non-verbal one, I do look for those roles that are extremely physical and strongly featured, because, hey, I do have to look after my career.
Now granted, there are many actors out there that shun non-verbal roles, but that's to their loss, in my opinion.
On the other hand, if the role is a non-verbal one, I do look for those roles that are extremely physical and strongly featured, because, hey, I do have to look after my career.
The more words the person says the more money they are paid.
I have a good friend who was in There Will Be Blood.
His character is named "Man with Wife" and the rest of the characters were just named "Man #1" etc.
He got paid more money than the others because he had a bigger and more important character name than the other men.
I have a good friend who was in There Will Be Blood.
His character is named "Man with Wife" and the rest of the characters were just named "Man #1" etc.
He got paid more money than the others because he had a bigger and more important character name than the other men.
Thinking laterally, it seems that you could turn it around.
All the actors you meet want lines? Then you can attract actors by giving them a few lines.
Here's the key - if they need it for their reel, does it need to be in the main production? Could you shoot alternate takes that you know you're not going to use, but give them the footage? Or if they need something that's actually out there in distribution, could you do a promotional webisode or similar?
Twenty minutes of shooting some additional footage could give you a much wider range of possibilities for actors.
All the actors you meet want lines? Then you can attract actors by giving them a few lines.
Here's the key - if they need it for their reel, does it need to be in the main production? Could you shoot alternate takes that you know you're not going to use, but give them the footage? Or if they need something that's actually out there in distribution, could you do a promotional webisode or similar?
Twenty minutes of shooting some additional footage could give you a much wider range of possibilities for actors.
I like your ideas immensely.
Set or negotiate an allocation of "pay" as an understudy or verbal role experience to non-speaking roles desiring reel material knowing in all likelihood it won't be included in this release, but will certainly be useful in consideration of casting future speaking roles.
Some "personalities" don't fit current required roles while being perfect for a character in the future.
Win-win now.
Increased potential in the future.
As a director/producer look at this approach as yet one more tool in your managerial skill-set tool box.
Usually the job can be done with a just a monkey wrench. Sometimes you gotta use both a monkey wrench and a ratchet.
Additionally, bit parts in features are frequently expanded because the director/producer enjoyed their on screen performance.
Last edited: