Acting exercises

thef0x said:
I go to a small college and I've created flyers asking for student actors.

Suprisingly, they responded. Now I have to actually figure out how to direct.

Are there good acting exercises to get actors and myself comfortable? I'll be behind the camera (my whole reason to do this is to learn how to direct and shoot) the whole time.

Suggestions? Books?
Click to expand...
Hey,

That is great that you got a good response. When the times comes hopefully my experience will be the same.

Chris
 
R!ff R4ff said:
I've read where acting teachers beg directors to come to classes so they can learn where actors come from. I tend to agree with that.

Judith Weston has a book called "Directing Actors: Creating Memorable Performances for Film & Television." I've read it and it really helped me a lot but last fall I took some acting classes and it helped me even more. JMHO though.
Click to expand...
IMO not a good book. I was completely 100% bored. She also gave advice that I felt was bad. Oh well... can't win them all.

Chris
 
I learned that all of the "technique" in the world will do nothing in making you a good actor or a bad actor. Most actors I know (everyone is different) have found that they profit from using a combination of different methods that may change depending on the work that they are doing.

I agree with everyone esle here. Take an acting class.
 
How to Stop Acting by Harold Guskin is one of the best books on acting I've run across in a long time. Uta Hagan has some great exercises for actors. See Respect for Acting and Challenge for the Actor.

Both of these emphasis acting from the inside out and a natural style of acting appropriate for film.

don
doncleary.com



 
I thought I would chime in on this..

in my experience (which is limited to 2 short films I'll admit) is that, I don't really care if you have a technique, or are naturally good at what you do.. whatever..

If you can act, it shows. The school I went too (if you can call it a school..) trains their 'actors' in one of the previously mentioned techniques... I can't see much of a difference in the performances really..

I am sure on an internal level it helps some actors. But if you can emote, and get to that final emotional level, doesn't matter how much training you've had.

Another thing is; working with good actors, it makes directing so much easier. Perhaps this is just my experience, but my cast and I had a great discussion about who the characterss were, their motivations for things.. where they are coming from etc... in the script read / rehearsal process. I could tell right away that the people I had cast were going to be great.

I am not an actor, but as a filmmaker, if you don't love what your doing, it shows. And it definitely shows with actors in my mind.

All the technique in the world isn't going to help you if all you want is fame. Plastic Surgery may be a better option.

Ok enough ranting.. I didn't even touch on the original post yet.

As for the original post, there are a lot of things you can do. A good one is to have two actors (or how ever many there are) do an improv scene. eg: you give each person a personality trait they have to project, setup a goal for each person, and setup the situation, and let them go at it.

Provides an interesting scene.
 
Loki said:
All the technique in the world isn't going to help you if all you want is fame. Plastic Surgery may be a better option.
Click to expand...

People that don't take the time to learn the craft of acting are usually the people looking for quick fame, most professional actors I know have labored in the theatre in NY and have studied aacting for many years. The word "technique" seems to be a pejorative here for some reason.
 
I think the best exercise is to get drunk together! Well, maybe...
Click to expand...
Hahaha...! I did this before I directed my last short; told the actors to get together and drink and find a card game that they were both into (the characters play cards and are old friends). Drawing from reality and injecting it into the performance is always a good place to start. My first few films had little dialouge, so I in the past, I've completley eschewed line reading rehersals, feeling that if we found the honest emotional core of the characters some other way, it'd be more helpful than just going over lines. You can't do this all the time, but I really love it when you can.

IMO not a good book. I was completely 100% bored. She also gave advice that I felt was bad. Oh well... can't win them all.
Click to expand...
I'm curious why you didn't like it, as it's probably the best book on directing technique that I've read so far - and it's worked well for me. I find that most of what she says is rather common sense, you know, telling a director that saying "hey actor - act sad" isn't the way to get a good performance out of someone.

The thing about technique is, it isn't something that's set in stone everytime you get in front of an actor. With each actor comes a completley different set of training and methods, so it's my belief that the very best directors use whatever techniques they have at their disposal to get the performances to the right place. Sometimes with more instinctual actors, it may be using analogies and prior emotional experience. Sometimes with more technical or intellectual actors, it's about breaking down the beats into motivations and desires at the given point. It's all about experimenting and realizing that just one thing won't work for everyone.

One thing that I like to do pull actors aside and quietly give them their direction individually; make it a little more personal. Sometimes I'll give them completley conflicting direction, sometimes the same, but it always produces interesting results. I find that in most cases, it's way better than calling out their specific direction and/or adjustments out to the whole crew, because it feels more personal... more specific. Plus, if it feels like they know something that the other actor doesn't, it'll provide for a little more spontenaity - because they don't know what direction I've just given the other guy, and vice-versa.

Another thing that I'll emphasize is the nessecity of giving really simple direction. It's not very helpful to give actors thirteen beats that they have to hit during a scene, but I see it all the time where a director will be like "...and at this moment you're feeling this way, and then you feel that way, and then, when she does this, you feel another way." It's really super-confusing for most actors, and just isn't very helpful. Learn to be sparing, yet powerful with your verbage and you'll be way ahead of the game.

I'd still reccomend picking up Weston, though. It might not be the best book for everyone, but if you haven't had any formal training or otherwise - it's a really good starting point, based on some pretty sound fundamentals (IMHO).
 
Are there good acting exercises to get actors and myself comfortable? I'll be behind the camera (my whole reason to do this is to learn how to direct and shoot) the whole time.

Suggestions? Books?
Click to expand...

Just looked at the original post again...

Are you working from a script? If not, I'd reccomend going to a library and photocopying some short, one-acts, or get a scene books (book that has scenes from plays for various sizes of ensembles) and find something to work on. I'd reccomend something short... even if it doesn't seem like there's a lot of drama in it, there's always something to work with.

Once you've settled on a script, do some character work. Who are they? What are their motivations? What's the conflict in the scene? It doesn't matter what you make up, as long as it's something concrete that you and the actors can always fall back on.

Send them the script ahead of time, along with the character breakdowns - they need to know what they'll be doing, and who they'll be playing.

When you get there, I'd suggest talking about the characters a bit, then having them run the scene cold, without any direction. It's always good to get a sense of where the performance is at, without being meddled. After that, you can get into giving them little bits of direction (use lots of action verbs, "as-if" analogies and things like that) and see where it goes.

After awhile of this, switch the roles and see what happens (but don't tell them ahead of time) You'll be able to tell pretty quickly if they're good actors or not, because if they're bad, the performance will be exactly the same as it was when they were playing the other character. You want to watch out for canned performances, inflections, or anything like that - as it means that they're pulling from a bag of tricks rather than honestly and genuinley listening and reacting to the other actor.

Frankly, there's lots you can do with that time, but doing a little test like that will give you a pretty good sense about some of the basics. There's definatley lots of interesting things you can do though.

Improvs are always fun, as is the "A / B" excercise. It's where you take the scene, strip all the words out of it and only let one actor say "A" and the other actor can only say "B". It's a little silly at first, but it's an important tool. Lots of actors get caught up in wordy dialouge, using it as a crutch - rather than finding the emotional core of the moment. When they're forced to give up the dialouge, they're forced to express the emotional truth in other ways. I've seen some VERY interesting results with this exercise.

Something else that might work is to give your actors business. It's easy to have two guys sitting down at a table reading lines, but imagine instead that they're two chefs at a buisy restraunt delivering those same lines. When the actor has physical action to focus on, other than the dialouge, it helps out considerably. Imagination's the limit on this one, as you can be as creative (brutal) as you want.

If the actors are theatre students, you can always ask them if there are any exercises or techniques that help them - they do PLENTY of them. Also, don't be afraid to ask for feedback, especially if they're somewhat experienced. Let them know that you're learning, and they should be receptive. This helps if the session isn't about getting cast, or something like that, because the actor will probably lie and say you're great - regardless of actual performance.

Sorry for the novels, but I hope they help - even if it's just a starting point.
 
DonCleary said:
I know I'm stating the obvious, but a film is never any better than its actor(s).
Click to expand...

disagree, I think different parts of a film can make up for other. Just like one actor can make another actor better and visa versa.

Sometimes there are very good movies with ok acting and horrible movies with great acting.

I would agree all parts would have to be great to be a great movie.
team sport:)
 
I 100% agree with deedive.
Sometimes bad acting may even benefit the final version of the film when editor puts everything together.
 
I think the single most important thing that can benefit an actors ability is being comfortable with the camera, for some odd reason people change the second the camera starts to record, I think it has something to do with our constant desire to be portrayed as perfect. This obviously doesn't change an actors ability to understand the emotions conveyed etc. any better, but once an actor gets used to the camera its almost like telling a stupid joke to your close friends, it doesn't matter anymore because you won't be judged, and therefore more natural because of it.
 
Holosynthetic said:
I think the single most important thing that can benefit an actors ability is being comfortable with the camera, for some odd reason people change the second the camera starts to record, I think it has something to do with our constant desire to be portrayed as perfect. This obviously doesn't change an actors ability to understand the emotions conveyed etc. any better, but once an actor gets used to the camera its almost like telling a stupid joke to your close friends, it doesn't matter anymore because you won't be judged, and therefore more natural because of it.
Click to expand...

I too have seen this countless times. A director tells an inexperienced actor to "just be yourself" and the performance reads as anything but on camera. Expressions that are so subtle as to be almost unnoticed can read really big in an ECU.

One of the best directors that I can remember said something to the effect that they could careless what the actors "feel" while working. They didn't care if you were really thinking about what you were going to pickup on the way home from set or what you should wear to the wrap party. All that mattered was what the viewer of the film would "feel" when they watched the performance. How they accomplished the task wasn't what was important, doing good work that read correctly from the camera's prospective was all that mattered.

Great actors are a joy to watch work. I am still amazed when I watch a great performance and equally horrified when I see bad ones.
 
One thing I've noticed is that you sometimes have to explain a feeling to an inexperienced actor. Like... set up a seperate scenario for them, to understand how they need to express a feeling.
 
After reading some of this thread I didn't realize actors needed so much coaxing and help to get into character. As an actor, I've always preferred voice over training because of how it forces you to be in character within seconds instead of having warmups, etc. This I think separates those who can and those who can't, someone who understands a character within seconds will only benefit if given a little more time, but those who need to be told how to grasp concepts, even simple ones that can be achieved if they read the script sometimes worry me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top