Witholding vital plot information from actors.

J

jghenderson

Well-known member
I've read in many places that it can be a good idea to not reveal everything about a plot to the actors, because if you do it can lead them to "acting the result" and not being true to the moment. The first place I heard this was from Tarkovsky, but i've seen it many places since then.

So I have a short film I will hopefully be shooting prior to summer. The story involves one character torturing/threatening to kill another character. I am considering whether or not to reveal to the actors the ending prior to that day of shooting. What do you guys think? Part of me feels like it might be silly in this instance especially since I imagine we will only be shooting for ~3 days...but a lot of directors I highly respect seem to think this is the way to go about it....
 
I'm an actor. I think that withholding information from an actor is not a great idea. Good actors have wonderful imaginations. Start them off in the right direction then get out of their way.

As Alexander Mackendrick said when asked "How does the director get an actor to do what he wants?" said, "You don't. What you do is try to get the actor to want what you need."

Oh and praising is good... ;)
 
jghenderson said:
I've read in many places that it can be a good idea to not reveal everything about a plot to the actors, because if you do it can lead them to "acting the result" and not being true to the moment. The first place I heard this was from Tarkovsky, but i've seen it many places since then.

So I have a short film I will hopefully be shooting prior to summer. The story involves one character torturing/threatening to kill another character. I am considering whether or not to reveal to the actors the ending prior to that day of shooting. What do you guys think? Part of me feels like it might be silly in this instance especially since I imagine we will only be shooting for ~3 days...but a lot of directors I highly respect seem to think this is the way to go about it....
Click to expand...

The buttered Butt action in "Last Tango In Paris"(1973), was ostensibly 'withheld' from Maria Schneider, the receiver of the buttered Butt action... for which she never forgave Brando nor Berolucci for conCOCTing their 'plot device'...

I think the 'Look Ma, no Undies' scene in "Basic Instinct"(1992), while apparently with the consent of Stone... she was not exactly aware of the specific camera angle, and what it may 'show'... in frame by frame single step mode... who would have been able to do that in the theaters anyway...

However, an actor usually given the script to work from, so I don't know how one could withhold plot elements, other than 'small' setups like the above mentioned ones... and from my view, don't seem to do well for the actor's, or in these cases, the actresses appreciation of the 'greatness' of direction...

How many male actors would sign up for a 'bathroom shot', only to have their less than generous masculinity displayed from a camera over the urinal???
 
Im assuming this only works in funded projects with contracts and possible lawsuits and such. Otherwise the actor would likely just say "suck a donkey's what??? **** this, im leaving."
 
Josh Bass said:
Im assuming this only works in funded projects with contracts and possible lawsuits and such. Otherwise the actor would likely just say "suck a donkey's what??? **** this, im leaving."
Click to expand...

Well, I don't know about THAT, exactly.

My questions are, do you really believe that the surprise response from Joe Actor would be the appropriate response for Jack Character? If you are wrong, and the response is not appropriate, your creditability and trust with that actor is going to be shot for take number two and it may be very hard to work with them to finesse the scene to what you want and need for the film. I think it is probably better to work with the actor, with full disclosure, and let them do their actor sh*t to give you what you want.

What you have to remember is, that in many of the instances that you have read where directors that you admire have pulled stunts like this, they are probably working with very experience actors who have the skills and experience to make amazing decisions on the fly, in a scene, when confronted with surprise information. If you are not in a situation where you are working with very experienced, highly skilled actors, I would not suggest try to manipulate them by surprises but instead work with the actors to give you the response that you need.
 
Hey guys thanks for the responses.

Perhaps I should be more specific as to what I mean in reference to my short. I in no way am planning on doing anything that embarrases an actor or makes them look stupid or anything. I think in the cases that were mentioned above it was definitely WRONG for the director to withhold their true intentions from the actor. I think one of the primary roles of a director is protecting the actors and making sure they know you aren't going to abuse their trust.


For my short film specifically, it involves a character kidnapping and torturing someone in revenge for something they did. The main push of the story is the main character battling what to do to this character (how far should he take the torture, should he murder the guy, let him go, etc.)

Here is my fear: If for instance in the end I want the main character to "forgive" the guy or let him go, I'm afraid that if the actor knows this from the very beginning, his struggle to make this decision won't come across on screen. I guess i'm afraid of him seeming too soft because he knows in the end he won't kill the guy? Perhaps i'm worrying about nothing?
 
good actors are trained to be in the moment and not be worrying about the next moment before they finish the one they're in. I'm an actor and director. I would tell the actor - my 2 cents. Stop reading Tarkovsky btw :) that boy will get you into a lot of trouble. I'm kidding - kinda - poor andrei watching the sad rain splash in the gutter from under some awning somewhere....
 
You know, in the scenario that you described, it might be better to not exactly withhold the ending that the character does not kill the guy, but to play it out both ways, and actually shoot it both ways... that is, he kills him and he lets him go. I am just suggesting that, as a deference to the actor, and, just maybe, as an interesting exercise for you as a director, that you let it play out both ways. I think that the actor might like to experience his character with the freedom that doing it both ways would give him. This would also give you alternatives to dwell over in post, just in case your dramatic choices in writing the film don't work out in the execution of production. Working it both ways, and letting the talent know that you are undecided about the ending (Which may be deceptive) just might endear the actor to you for a long time.

Just my two cents.
 
Haha yeah Tarkovsky can definitely be a dangerous teacher, especially if you ever hope to make money in this business. But he's one of my favorite directors so I can't help but respect what he says and I admire the stance he takes on the artform.


David, that's a really interesting idea! I think it could actually be good for both the actors and myself to try it both ways. Perhaps knowing we'll do it both ways will help us to all stay loose.
 
Actors are trained to work in beats... and, as said, in the moment. Beats change when some new information comes into the scene, or they get what they want. In which case, the scene is over. This may seem a little gooey and not logical but when the scene starts, the actor has something he wants from that other character, whatever that is. That is the crux of it for the actor. The thing is to make whatever is going to happen, happen right there and then. My favorite director, when working with actors often says stuff like this:

Director - What do you want from this guy?
Actor - I want him to confess
Director - how's that going?
Actor - not great.. he's slipping around
Director - exactly, he's kicking your ass (or he's ignoring you) so go in there and get what you want, let's go again!

This works because, if the acting is any good at all, it's actually happening right there and then. This is what actors talk about when they say they want to tell the truth. The truth of the moment is always new, fresh and different from the last time. The actor hasn't gotten to the end of the scene so he's not concerned with it, and when he or she starts, she may never get there or rather get what he wants. It depends on the reaction of the other actor, and what they want.. there's the conflict and there's your scene.

Also, as Mamet always points out, the bulk of the "meaning" in any scene is assigned by the viewer. The audience needs precious little but honesty and to understand what's said, and they generously color all that in. AS director, I try to have a good shot list, a good idea where I want to put the camera and why, and a framework for blocking. The actors are a gift.

It's like skiing, you can't turn unless you let the skis run. Cast well, and let the actors go. Your confidence will inspire them to try things you might not have imagined.
 
jghenderson said:
For my short film specifically, it involves a character kidnapping and torturing someone in revenge for something they did. The main push of the story is the main character battling what to do to this character (how far should he take the torture, should he murder the guy, let him go, etc.)
Click to expand...

You'd have to get actors who some how agree to 'act' through your story. If the ending of 'forgive' has some logic, then the actor should portray that.

If it has no logic... well... that probably would be seen as 'weak' by the audience, in addition to any actor.

I'm pretty 'up front' about nudity, intimacy, or situations that I think the actors and actresses may have some issue. Even in porn there are something on the order of 'basic rates' for different levels of sex... BD/SM is a lot more expensive than simple blow jobs...

As it is most of the scripts I have written, I don't have such scenes for the most part. Even for a short script that involved stripping that I wrote, there wasn't 'sex', other than stripping... so, yeah, the actress would have to agree to the nudity, but I would not set up some guy 'grabbing' her by surprise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top