Acting: Truly THAT Hard?

[Cruel_Sandwich]

Posted: 7/17/07 at 3:42am

Sorry if this statement pisses a lot of people off but I truly feel that acting is not nearly as hard as it's made out to be. I believe that you REALLY don't need schooling to teach you how to do it, you REALLY don't need a degree, and you REALLY don't need any of the other things that a lot of people tell you that you MUST have.

I'm not saying that it's just a completely mindless thing. You can't just turn your brain off while doing a scene. No, you actually have to put effort and thought into your performance. But, in essence, all you're doing is unlocking emotions that you should have experienced at one time or another.

I've noticed that the truly bad actors are those who haven't really lived life to its fullest. They have no life experience behind them and, therefore, have no emotional memory. This also means that they can definitely improve.

A lot of GREAT performances come from people who have never acted before.

Therefore, the truly best acting school is life itself. ANYONE can act. There is at least ONE good performance in EVERYONE, no matter who you think you are.

Updated On: 7/17/07 at 03:42 AM

[areyoukiddingme]

Posted: 7/17/07 at 3:59am

Are you an actor?

This is an interesting post. Is acting truly that hard? That's a strange question.

Acting is an art form, and just like a painting, the quality of an individual's performance is almost completely subjective. I have long noticed that EVERYONE, from the engineer to my father, have opinions about actors. They judge them as they might judge a waiter. Well, with a waiter, there are certain criteria by which we have all grown accustomed. Are they friendly? Do they get the order right? Are they around when you need them? I'm pretty sure that if we all eat at the same table, we'll pretty much be in agreement as to how our waiter was.

This is not true if we all go to the theater. A good friend of mine admitted to me that he likes an actor more if likes the way they look. This is probably true for many of us. That's why people on television are pretty.

The truth is, there are many different types of acting. When I look at actors, I ask myself one question: Do I believe him? I often notice details missing from person's performance that would make that performance more real to me.

If you have been around a lot of actors, you must know that most people are not good at "acting." This would lead me that it is hard to be good at it. Now, I know some people who might be very good at a certain style of acting -- I know people who are EXCELLENT at comedy, but awful with anything the least bit dramatic. My mom might be great at a scene where she is yelling, but give her a scene where she just has to ask "How are you" and she might be awful.

The reason actors need training is so that they can explore all parts of themselves. Just because you have lived a situation, does not mean you can act it. It might take you many tries to recall what that feeling was like and recreate it. A runner might be great at running the 50 yard dash, but that runner shouldn't audition for the mile run without ever having tried it first.

In answer to your questions: training can never hurt. Training should help you to become as skilled and as maleable as possible. Then your director can mold you into what he wants. And you can offer him/her many different options from your toolbox. Natural ability will only get you so far.

Unfortunately, there are a lot of scam artists and bad teachers out there.

[cvrenthead]

Posted: 7/17/07 at 3:59am

Wow. Unleash the torrents...

[Cruel_Sandwich]

Posted: 7/17/07 at 4:05am

Yes, I am an actor.

I agree with most of what you said. Training definitely cannot hurt, this is true, but going into an acting school with the mindset of "I'm not a good actor until I get this training" is the wrong way to go about it. You ALREADY have it in you, you just need to get it out.

[areyoukiddingme]

Posted: 7/17/07 at 4:09am

I don't know...
There aren't any real facts to base this on. Would Meryl Streep be as good as she is had she not gone to Yale? We have no idea.

BUT we do know that even Meryl Streep gives bad performance -- at least in someone's eyes. Some people out there probably think she's a bad actress. Who knows if they are right? If Meryl were acting in the early 1900s, she probably wouldn't have been as successful. Her style might now have fit there. You can't please everyone.

But I'm kind of getting sidetracked.

It's like anything else -- for some people it's hard, for some it comes more easily. As for you, until every performance you give is pitch-perfect in your director's eyes, better keep training.

[areyoukiddingme]

Posted: 7/17/07 at 4:11am

Most importantly, why do you want to be an actor if it's that easy? This would lead me to believe that you don't have much respect for actors if you think that anyone can do it.

I have great respect for the girl that wins the gold medal in the long jump, because I know it must have been incredible work for her to get there. I watch Streep and have respect for her because I think she busted her ass. Michael Jordan worked hard.

[buffyactsing]

Posted: 7/17/07 at 4:13am

It depends whether or not you create characters or always play yourself (as most Hollywood actors do). No, to play yourself you don't need classes, or books but they can help give you tools. Creating a character however takes a lot of work. You don't need classes but it takes a lot of observation, thought and focus.

[Cruel_Sandwich]

Posted: 7/17/07 at 4:21am

I have tremendous respect for actors. I'm not saying that acting isn't a mindless activity. Quite the contrary. You have to bust your ass.

I'm saying that everyone ALREADY has it within them. They HAVE the ability. They just need to nurture that ability. Some people will need training. Some people do not.

[Cruel_Sandwich]

Posted: 7/17/07 at 4:24am

The great chef Gusteau (May he rest in peace) had a philosophy about cooking that I think could also apply to acting:

"Anyone can cook. But only the fearless can be great."

[areyoukiddingme]

Posted: 7/17/07 at 4:28am

I like that quote.

I'm not sure I agree that EVERYONE has it in them. Not everyone can be a great basketball player -- they just aren't wired that way. I used to think that you can teach anyone to act, but I no longer do. I believe I can teach most normal people to basically act "normal" on stage. I don't think I can teach those normal people to be great actors. I suck at basketball. I believe someone could teach me some skills and I could become okay, but I'll never make the NBA no matter how hard I try.

[Cruel_Sandwich]

Posted: 7/17/07 at 4:30am

You keep using sports analogies but this is completely different. Athleticism is something that not everyone has. Some (like me, obviously) are completely non-athletic. Our bodies just aren't wired that way.

Yet all humans feel. All humans have emotions. And emotion is the cornerstone of acting.

[areyoukiddingme]

Posted: 7/17/07 at 4:41am

It is exactly the same as sports or any other skill for that matter. Have you ever met people in real life that are "over the top?" Have you ever seen them try to act? They are usually OVER THE TOP. And when you tell them to just act like they normally would, they say, "This is how I would act normally." Well, this is not how everyone acts normally. I believe that people believe actors when they can see themselves in that actor. They connect with that actor. It's the same reason we like anything: we see ourselves in it. The general audience will NEVER connect with the OVER THE TOP person I am speaking with. UNLESS that person is also a great actor and can behave as most normal people do. That actor might be great at "Over the top" roles, but unless she is good, she won't be able to behave normally. This is all about hardwiring. Some people have severe anxiety. That person probably won't make a great actor, because they will freeze up on stage. Some people are literally incapable of memorizing lines. You can't teach some people how to drive, what makes you think you can teach everyone to express their emotions on cue. I'm sure there have been days where Al Pacino just can't cry. If HE can't hit his mark all of the time, then that means there are MANY people who can't hit their makes MOST of the time.

The fact is -- training can't hurt,. It's also possible that some people can't be trained. I really didn't use to believe this, and maybe it just takes the right teacher, but I have seen HUNDREDS of actors over the course of the past 8 years who NEVER seem to get any better and they go to class after class after class. Remember that most people are not that smart. Most people are incapably of intelligent communication. It is like trying to teach anything.

If I spent fifty days teaching you to shoot a basket, you would get better at it. If I spent 50 days teaching you how to do a monologue from Merchant of Venice, you would get better. The quesiton whether or not you would ever be great. And I again I say that "great" is completely subjective.

[SeanMartin]

Posted: 7/17/07 at 6:21am

IMHO, you have actors and you have performers, and these are pretty much mutually exclusive groups. An actor is someone who goes so deeply into a character that you do forget who's onstage, while a performer is someone who just... well, performs for your enjoyment. A performer may have incredible stage presence and amazing pipes and the sheer ability to WOW an audience... but if s/he hasnt really delved into her/his character's motivations, then s/he's just a performer, no matter how great s/he might be at it.

And that's really the line that defines how tough a job this can be. We've all seen performances, and we usually sit there and say, "OH. MY. GOD. THAT WAS *AMAZING!!!!!!!*", even though it was little more than just a concert with some dialogue separating the songs.

Bottom line: anyone, with the right training, can perform. But d*mn few can really act.

[rabymon10]

Posted: 7/17/07 at 6:28am

Wow. This thread really is a can of worms. To the original poster: it appears as if you have some severe misconceptions about what it is to 'act'. I'm not really going to delve deep into it here - quite frankly, I don't have the time - but here are some basic points for you to consider:

You say the cornerstone of acting is emotion. I'd like to rebuke that claim (as would hundreds of great and respected acting teachers) and say that physicality is the cornerstone of acting, followed thereon by emotion. You see, anybody can emote very well, but whether they can play the role convincingly with emotion is something entirely else.
Tell me, how do you play a 4 year old child convincingly, especially if you're a grown man or woman? The only way to pull that off sucessfully is if your actions can match theirs. It's the specific way that they walk, or the way that they suck their thumb that makes them identifiable as an infant. And it's the same with every other role as well. The physicality defines the emotion. But the emotion does assist in making the physicality more interesting.

Some other acting points that I have observed over the years as a performance artist:

1. Action and reaction
2. Making the invisible visible - the character's internal monologue to be manifested outwardly
3. What if you've never been in a specific instance, say where you just realise that you've left your child behind at the bus stop? How do you manifest that particular emotion if you've never felt it before?

Well, that's my two cents. Bottom line - emotion is not simply the answer. I cried today. That doesn't mean I'll be good at playing a child who has just lost his mother. It really is hard.

[camp_actor]

Posted: 7/17/07 at 7:03am

I'm training at the moment and I don't think training is necessary. I think it has been for me, though.

A classical training not only teaches you tools for helping you to find your way through if you get lost in a production - yes, we all maybe have ONE good performance in us, but is that enough to have a lasting and fulfilling career? - but it also teaches you technical elements to stop you from killing your voice from screaming in a 6-month run of Antigone.

I think a training backs up the talent and instinct an actor already has... training doesn't MAKE you a good actor, but it gives you ways of being more consistently good and gives you tools to help you to sustain that performance standard throughout a run.

[jordangirl]

Posted: 7/17/07 at 7:13am

"Yet all humans feel. All humans have emotions. And emotion is the cornerstone of acting."

Cruel... No, not all humans. Or at least they don't always feel as society would expect. People on the autistic spectrum often do not understand emotions and are very neutral or reacting completely opposite ~ laughing at someone who's crying for example, but not out of cruelty like someone who feels as society deems normal.

Sorry...I work with autistic children every day. They do NOT feel as a rule.

[camp_actor]

Posted: 7/17/07 at 7:31am

And it's not just people who are autistic. Many people don't really feel things - preferring to view the world on almost completely a logical level. There's many degrees of this, but I know many people who just don't understand emotion. They could never be actors.

[bwaylvsong]

Posted: 7/17/07 at 11:26am

I think that different aspects of acting are difficult for different people. For example, for me, finding the emotion and physicality and getting into character is easy, but staying in character for an extended period of time and memorizing lines is difficult.

[Gothampc]

Posted: 7/17/07 at 11:35am

Acting is difficult because you have to produce the same "truth" again and again without getting bored or being boring.

[mygfdontliveincanada]

Posted: 7/17/07 at 11:39am

I highly disagree. The reason why acting sometimes looks so effortless is because the actor, director, and writer have created such a fine-tuned character. It does take lots of time and effort.

Does that mean you have to be formally educated or trained to be a good actor? Not necessarily. Does it help? I think so.

[Lavieboheme3090]

Posted: 7/17/07 at 12:22pm

Acting training is a way to learn at technique. You could have never taken a voice lesson and sound great, but it you aren’t singing correctly it can be bad for your voice. Training as an actor can do the same thing; it gives you the tools to make sure you are not wearing yourself out. Training also provides a safe stable environment to make choices and experiment.

Posted: 7/17/07 at 12:23pm

you must be kidding... this is a joke, right?
right?

Posted: 7/17/07 at 12:29pm

Eve! get back in that cage!

[G_Schlozinski2]

Posted: 7/17/07 at 12:33pm

pardon the intrusion while i get the alter-egos back in their straight jackets.

acting is HARD. emoting is easy.
try hitting the same mark, with the same gesture, with the same degree of intensity, each and every time, 8 times a week... so that the other performers can also do the same, exactly as directed, exactly as written with the same physicality.

those of you who think 'acting' is something you can do on the spur of the moment ... well, you're thinking of television. and we all know what Addison DeWitt said to Miss Caswell when she failed her audition as Margo's understudy: "My dear, I think your next move should be in the direction of television."

[G_Schlozinski2]

Posted: 7/17/07 at 12:40pm

ha! i posted my comments before i read your message rabymon10. seems we are on the same page here. funny that we both expressed the contrast between concepts, and even the very same words, 'emoting' and 'physicality' as the key to understanding the craft of acting.


and different skills apply to different media -- think of movies from the 1930s - the majority of those actors are applying stage technique to their screen performances... and today we would say they look, 'staged.'
then think of a performance by, oh, i don't know... how about Julia Roberts. does the skill that shapes her screen persona carry beyond the footlights? does whatever they call what those people are doing in front of the camera on soaps translate to either the stage, or the big screen (or even, i imagine, into their personal lives)?
Updated On: 7/17/07 at 12:40 PM