how do you tell an actor to adopt a personality type

A

astigmatic

Well-known member
Hi,

I have a character that I want to be eccentric, very fervent.. at the verge of insanity. However you wouldn't really be able to tell from the characters dialogue. I want it to be in the way the actor carries himself and in the way he says the lines. What's the best way to get an actor to assume a personality type without using result driven direction? So instead of saying to the actor, "say it like you've lost focus on reality", what would be the better approach to get the desired performance.
 
so it's not bad to show examples or site existing performances? ..

oh wait.. were you making a jab at brad pits horridly forced acting?
 
I was just suggesting that you show him examples of how you like to the part played. Another might be One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest...depending on what you're going for, of course.
 
Are you completely changing the character from the backstory that the screenwriter originally provided for that character?
 
craigbowman said:
Are you completely changing the character from the backstory that the screenwriter originally provided for that character?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say so. It's a supporting role so the script doesnt really hint much towards his backstory. However, this personailty would def be a believable direction to take this character to.. although no the most expected direction.
 
astigmatic said:
What's the best way to get an actor to assume a personality type without using result driven direction? So instead of saying to the actor, "say it like you've lost focus on reality", what would be the better approach to get the desired performance.
Click to expand...

I thought this is the opposite of "result driven direction"? I thought result direction might be something like... "be a little bit more insane"... "be angry"... "be happy"...
 
Just curious why you don't tell the actor exactly what you told us? As an actor, I understood what you were looking for from what you posted at the start of this thread. A good actor follows all kinds of direction. Have you tried just telling the actor what you told us?
 
vnguyen972 said:
I thought this is the opposite of "result driven direction"? I thought result direction might be something like... "be a little bit more insane"... "be angry"... "be happy"...
Click to expand...


Hmm, maybe you're right.

Michele
Just curious why you don't tell the actor exactly what you told us? As an actor, I understood what you were looking for from what you posted at the start of this thread. A good actor follows all kinds of direction. Have you tried just telling the actor what you told us?
Click to expand...

I haven't talked to the actor about the role yet.. I've been reading the book Directing Actors and it has really confused the heck out of me in terms of how to approach actors with this type of stuff.
 
You're on the right track with your "as if". Keep working on it. The beauty of an "as if" is that you can dial in a specific level of insanity instead of telling someone to be insane. The next logical question after that would be "how insane"?
You could even structure your "as ifs" to grow in intensity as the character's insanity increases.
If all else fails, like Michelle said, just give the result oriented direction and let the actor do his/her job.
 
You're on the right track with your "as if". Keep working on it. The beauty of an "as if" is that you can dial in a specific level of insanity instead of telling someone to be insane. The next logical question after that would be "how insane"?
You could even structure your "as ifs" to grow in intensity as the character's insanity increases.
If all else fails, like Michelle said, just give the result oriented direction and let the actor do his/her job.
Click to expand...

cool, sounds like a good plan thanks
 
astigmatic said:
Hi,

I have a character that I want to be eccentric, very fervent.. at the verge of insanity. However you wouldn't really be able to tell from the characters dialogue. I want it to be in the way the actor carries himself and in the way he says the lines. What's the best way to get an actor to assume a personality type without using result driven direction? So instead of saying to the actor, "say it like you've lost focus on reality", what would be the better approach to get the desired performance.
Click to expand...

"Say it like you've lost focus on reality" isn't all that bad a direction to give, and it's not, as others have pointed out, altogether 'result oriented' like Ms. Miller recommends against. The latter would be telling the actor to be "crazier" or the like. You might also help the actor understand the character's backstory as you understand it - why/how he became insane, and what type of insanity it is.

The only red flag I see in your question is the notion that the script doesn't seem to reflect the character's craziness. If it's just a matter of subtext that needs to be explained to the actor (where the insanity actually is in the text, but it's subtle/ambiguous enough that it could be missed), then you should be ok. On the other hand, if the 'insanity' really isn't there in the writing at all, including the subtext, then you may have a problem. It reminds me of a shoot I did sometime ago (as an actor) where this exact situation came up. My dialog (and previous character background) were normal, and typical of the character - lucid, businesslike, organized - but the director insisted that I play it "insane" (and this was *not* a comedy). After struggling with it over a few takes in complete futility, I sat the director/writer down (a young guy, relatively inexperienced) and said "I'm sorry, but it's just not there in the text". Trying to read a line like "we're counting on you to assist the effort in achieving our goals at the board meeting in Tampa next month" like a raving lunatic (who was always normal before) just wasn't gonna work. If the *dialog* was that of a raving lunatic (even one who was previously sane) and however subtly so, I could have certainly played it. Playing it as comedy/satire would have worked too, but this scene was dead serious...

Make sense?

It brings me to a point I'd like to make about filmmaking in general: in more ways than any other, it's all in the writing...
 
Last edited:
How about: You - your character - thinks he will die if he doesn't figure his problem out immediately, and there is a clock ticking in his/your head. Character is basically the language where you can talk to your actor about their craft - which is taking their own personality and filling out the circumstances of the person in the script. Some acting teachers always want their actors to talk about their characters in the first person, as in 'I think I'll die if I don't solve everything right now.' Actors! So self-centered! I like giving an actor a secret direction, like that above, where no one knows that the actor and the director are in cahoots - then if you're working well together, the reactions really tell the story.
 
astigmatic said:
Hmm, maybe you're right.

Michele

I haven't talked to the actor about the role yet.. I've been reading the book Directing Actors and it has really confused the heck out of me in terms of how to approach actors with this type of stuff.
Click to expand...


ahh...well I have never read a book on directing but I have taught actors for more than 20 years and I can't see how one guideline will really help.

Some actors need to be told exactly what you want while others just need general information to find the character. Still others need you to spoon feed them line for line while others would get upset if you did that.

Since I have never read a book on directing I could be all wrong on this but as an actor and someone who has trained them forever...I can only tell you that each actors takes a different approach and you often have to feel them out or directly question them.

Some of the directors here may have other ideas from the perspective that may serve you well too!
 
If you want the crazy to be in their vocal quality and physicality, that really has nothing to do with "result driven directing." That's more about intention within a scene. Physicality and vocal quality are something you have to craft separately, like an accent. Obviously if you wanted someone to use a British accent, you would just say "Do a British accent." You wouldn't try to craft some elaborate way to have them end up at using a British accent without telling them to.

I would think about exactly what you want. Is the character fast talking? Loud? Do they twitch? Just an eye twitch maybe? And so on. Those are specific things you can tell an actor to do as opposed to something vague that may or may not get your desired result.
 
Like I said earlier, the 'crazy' behavior must exist for a reason that is clearly, coherently included in the script. Write a crazy character/dialog (even if only temporarily), get a crazy performance (assuming you've got a good actor who understands the character/scene).
 
Expanding on the previous post as it pertains to exactness, I think the key with all communication, but especially communication in the arts is to be specific. Asking someone to act "insane" is going to result in an abomination. Sure the experienced actor will take that direction and by themselves create specific treatments to their performance, but if your actor really NEEDS direction (which most of them do, especially if the script isn't expertly crafted and/or in line with the director's intentions), you need to be specific about what it is about "being insane" that you feel this performance is lacking.

I don't know about any books on directing, but what works for me is expressing to the actor A) motivations, authentic to the scene or not, or B) history, again regardless of its authenticity to the scene.

Remember that in movies it's not like on the stage. It's not necessary to build a performance built on truth of moment as it pertains to the character, you can build a performance based on truth of moment as it pertains to the actor.

A quick examination of DiCaprio's performance in What's Eating Gilbert Grape is pretty telling. Instead of trying to act mentally retarded, he chose specific movements and contortions that he uses again and again throughtout the film. At no point is he "acting retarded", he's simply using mannerisms, inflections and pitch that mimics the type of behavior he was trying to get across.

So what are the mannerisms, inflections, pitch and (unlike a performance for a mentally handicapped as you're talking about a person with a mental affliction), what would be the motivation that is causing the mannerisms, inflections and pitch? A handicapped person moves and operates the way they do because they have a motivation that is being hindered by their handicap, but the mentally afflicted person has a motivation that they are trying to dissuade or avoid thus giving them the awkward mannerisms, inflections, etc that we've come to view as "acting insane".

So, "I want to strangle and eat the person in front of me at the grocerie line" turns into a clenched jaw, quick darting eyes (so as to not focus on the neck of the person in front of you in line), perspiration, shallow breathing and the presence of imagination behind the eyes of conflicting versions of symbols of Christ and symbols of intense lust (or something like that) -- all resulting in the cashier wanting to ring this guy up as soon as possible and get him out of there.

So without knowing a script, we could recreate this scene by you telling your actor specifics that would result in the same performance without any of the actual character motivation.

Director says: Okay, in this scene you notice that five or six birds are flying around in the store. They're darting around, zipping by, there's some sense that they could be dangerous if they hit you at any great speed. In front of you you notice on the woman's neck that there's a bee. You're allergic to bees and I don't want you to say anything to her or anyone else about the bee. While watching the bee and noticing the birds you remember the time you were stung by a bee and your throat closed up, makes it hard to swallow. You remember that bee sting and how you thought you were going to die but couldn't help feeling aroused when the attractive nurse started rubbing ointment around the base of your ears.

The copious amount of information is horrible if you're giving normal direction, but in this case you need the actor to be existing in several places at once. Even though it means nothing to the character or the actor, the performance will be there, and that's all that matters in film.

Now if you were going to try to formulate a kind of cross breed between a person who is handicapped and afflicted (which would be in cases of extreme skitzophrenia and some instances of autism), then you'd be adding in both of the aforementioned and then also layering on social dysfunction, or the character's inability to relay or possibly even understand its own motivation. This is where you get the violent outburts and tantrums.

So be specific, and remember that your actor on film does not need to build an entire performance the way a stage actor does. You can certainly create a thought process (that may have nothing to do with the character at all) for the actor that has nothing to do with the script at all. Most film performances nowadays are created in the edit. Just ask that your actor trust you and give them specific information.

IMO
 
Chambered made a point on asking them to act insane. Most people who are insane don't think they are. Like a drunk trying to act sober...a crazy person can seem normal on the surface depending on how it was written to be.


He also makes a great point on the edit. Ask your actor to do it more than one way and then when you go to edit...odds are you will have something that works!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top