Is being an actor over a singer more acceptable than being a singer over an actor?
Is being an actor over a singer more acceptable than being a singer over an actor?
AndAllThatJazz22
Broadway Legend Joined: 11/8/08
#1Is being an actor over a singer more acceptable than being a singer over an actor?
Posted: 9/30/09 at 4:49pmA lot of times, people on BWW tend to say 'He/she was not a strong singer, but he/she acted her way through the sow very well and gave a solid performance' but when it's the other way around, people don't seem to be as accepting. Is it more acceptable to be an actor over a singer than it is to be a singer over an actor?
"There's nothing good on. The media hates Christmas. The media loves vampires, though. Maybe they will show a Twilight Christmas."
-Danmeg's 10 year old son.
-Danmeg's 10 year old son.
#2re: Is being an actor over a singer more acceptable than being a singer over an actor?
Posted: 9/30/09 at 4:53pmIt much be amazing to see someone act their way through a sow. I've personally never seen it done before.
When I see the phrase "the ____ estate", I imagine a vast mansion in the country full of monocled men and high-collared women receiving letters about productions across the country and doing spit-takes at whatever they contain.
-Kad
#2re: Is being an actor over a singer more acceptable than being a singer over an actor?
Posted: 9/30/09 at 4:54pmWell personally, I'd rather see someone who's equally strong at both, but if I had to choose, I would definitely say that acting is more important than singing. You can have the prettiest voice but if you can't act your way out of a paper bag, I'm not going to care. Although that also depends a lot on the role. It's different for every role.
BrodyFosse123
Broadway Legend Joined: 2/27/06
#3re: Is being an actor over a singer more acceptable than being a singer over an actor?
Posted: 9/30/09 at 5:19pm
Put it this way... to this very day, Barbra Streisand never includes the title singer when describing any portion of her talent.
Though her roots began in theater (summer stock, etc.), she technically began her professional career singing in nite-clubs. Her first professional acting job came about AFTER her singing career brought attention to her.
In other words... La Streisand still finds acting more acceptable than singing.
#4re: Is being an actor over a singer more acceptable than being a singer over an actor?
Posted: 9/30/09 at 5:19pm
"Acceptable" is probably the wrong term; we're not talking about morals or manners here. However, I do think acting is a more flexible talent. Plus, technical prowess can only take a singer so far; you need acting ability to be able to really interpret a song. Otherwise, it's all just pretty notes that don't emotionally connect with the audience or truly convey the meaning of the song.
I think you can be a great actor but a so-so singer and still move your audience; you can't be a so-so actor with a great natural voice and do the same.
dramamama611
Broadway Legend Joined: 12/4/07
#5re: Is being an actor over a singer more acceptable than being a singer over an actor?
Posted: 9/30/09 at 5:22pm
A weak actress has little right to be acting. Record an album, get a nightclub gig. But if you cannot bring the character to life....I don't want to see you.
You can act through the song and as long as you don't make my ears bleed, I'm with you.
If we're not having fun, then why are we doing it?
These are DISCUSSION boards, not mutual admiration boards. Discussion only occurs when we are willing to hear what others are thinking, regardless of whether it is alignment to our own thoughts.
#6re: Is being an actor over a singer more acceptable than being a singer over an actor?
Posted: 9/30/09 at 5:28pm
I personally would rather see a phenomenal actor/actress who maybe doesn't have the greatest singing voice, but can still sell the song over an outstanding singer who can't act their way out of a paper bag.
If an actress or actor cannot act, then they have no business being in theater. I'll take an actor with a weak singing voice any day, as long as that actor can sell the song.
"You drank a charm to kill John Proctor's wife! You drank a charm to kill Goody Proctor!" - Betty Parris to Abigail Williams in Arthur Miller's The Crucible
#7re: Is being an actor over a singer more acceptable than being a singer over an actor?
Posted: 9/30/09 at 5:32pm
As an audience member, the acting is most important to me personally. No matter how amazing their voice is, the acting must be good to make the character believable.
Not to start a whole debate again over Alice Ripley, but I am not a big fan of her voice. However, it's her acting that wows me and is what make her performance in Next to Normal so incredible. Another example is Karen Olivo. I know not everyone thinks she's the greatest dancer, but I was blown away by her performance in West Side Story because of her acting.
#8re: Is being an actor over a singer more acceptable than being a singer over an actor?
Posted: 9/30/09 at 6:27pm
I think on Broadway, having a 'pretty' voice is not important, as long as you can give a very strong performance. However, in high school and community shows, they pretty much without exception give roles to the best singers without worrying about acting.
For example, my high school only has singing auditions, not acting auditions, for the musicals. The non-singing speaking roles in musicals go to great singers who usually can't act very well because their auditions got the highest scores on the rubric.
In my pants, she has burst like the music of angels, the light of the sun! --Marius Pantsmercy
SporkGoddess
Broadway Legend Joined: 7/27/05
#9re: Is being an actor over a singer more acceptable than being a singer over an actor?
Posted: 9/30/09 at 6:33pmIt depends on the role, IMO. But I tend to value singing over acting.
Jimmy, what are you doing here in the middle of the night? It's almost 9 PM!
#10re: Is being an actor over a singer more acceptable than being a singer over an actor?
Posted: 9/30/09 at 7:08pmSome shows have that be more flexible than others... for instance, Josh Groban is tolerated in the mostly sung-through Chess since the part of Anatoly requires more beautiful singing than heavy-duty acting, whereas Freddie is the opposite- lots of Freddies struggle with the singing, but sell the character and the songs nonetheless.
philly03
Broadway Legend Joined: 9/20/07
#11re: Is being an actor over a singer more acceptable than being a singer ove
Posted: 9/30/09 at 8:08pm
"It depends on the role, IMO. But I tend to value singing over acting."
Agreed. For example: Linda Eder in Jekyll & HYDE. Greatest actress? No. But for that role particularly, it's the songs that move her character's story, not necessarily book-parts.
#12re: Is being an actor over a singer more acceptable than being a singer ove
Posted: 9/30/09 at 8:31pmI agree with Philly. I think there are roles in musicals that are written with an emphasis on the singer needing to DELIVER the song with flawless technique, power, and control and sometimes there are parts in musicals with songs where the emphasis being on the actor where he or she can fudge the singing and use charisma and acting prowess to compensate. I think of Pal Joey where Stockard broke my heart but sang poorly. I didn't care about her being off key, I just was mesmerized by her transcendent performance.
"The sexual energy between the mother and son really concerns me!"-random woman behind me at Next to Normal
"I want to meet him after and bang him!"-random woman who exposed her breasts at Rock of Ages, referring to James Carpinello
ghostlight2
Broadway Legend Joined: 12/5/04
#13re: Is being an actor over a singer more acceptable than being a singer ove
Posted: 9/30/09 at 8:37pmTruly depends on the performer. As long as an actor(ress) can really act, I can easily get past a so-so singing voice. An extraordinary singer who can't act? Only in an opera, please.
#14re: Is being an actor over a singer more acceptable than being a singer ove
Posted: 9/30/09 at 8:43pmI just remember seeing Sweet Charity on tour and seeing Molly Ringwald ( who I think of as a very capable actress) just desecrate the character of Charity. She took a big steaming dump on the singing, choreography, and character.
"The sexual energy between the mother and son really concerns me!"-random woman behind me at Next to Normal
"I want to meet him after and bang him!"-random woman who exposed her breasts at Rock of Ages, referring to James Carpinello
Soliantu
Leading Actor Joined: 11/10/06
#15re: Is being an actor over a singer more acceptable than being a singer ove
Posted: 10/1/09 at 10:19amPersonally, I feel that acting is very important BUT, if you're going to be a musical you should be a great singer in ADDITION to your acting skills.. someone who is a great actor or actress but cannot sing, should not be in a musical.. for that you should have both.
#16re: Is being an actor over a singer more acceptable than being a singer ove
Posted: 10/1/09 at 10:33amI guess for me, I prefer a better actor over singer. That was my issue with Marin Mazzie in Spamalot. She is a good singer, but just went through the motions and put no effort into being the Lady of the Lake. Not only do you need to have a pleasant voice for that role, but you have to put some sass and comedy into it, which Marin had neither, in my opinion.
"I don't want the pretty lights to come and get me."-Homecoming 2005
"You can't pray away the gay."-Callie Torres on Grey's Anatomy.
Ignored Users: suestorm, N2N Nate., Owen22, master bates
#17re: Is being an actor over a singer more acceptable than being a singer ove
Posted: 10/1/09 at 10:39am
I think the reason people seem to be more accepting towards subpar singing rather than acting is because singing requires more physical training and conditioning. You can still learn to act if you're tone deaf, or if smoking has ruined your voice, etc. Singing well requires correct use of the diaphragm, throat, tongue, lips, lungs, etc. You've gotta train your muscles to be good at it. Some people are naturally talented actors, but no one ever has the inborn ability to belt or hit high Es or perform coloratura.
I'm not sure if my point's coming across right, but what I'm trying to say is that you can still be an actor if you're missing a lung or if you can't read music, or if you have a breathy voice. You have to have the right physical requirements and training to be a good singer.
I'm not saying singing is harder, I'm just saying it's a different kind of thing. Acting is emoting and singing is muscle manipulation. Emoting can come naturally, but you have to condition your muscles to move a certain way to produce the right sound in singing.
It's far easier to pick out an untrained singer than an untrained actor in a professional production.
Updated On: 10/1/09 at 10:39 AM
#18re: Is being an actor over a singer more acceptable than being a singer ove
Posted: 10/1/09 at 10:46am
This conversation is reminding me of something Shirley Jones said in the linear notes of the Carousel soundtrack about Gordon Macrae. She said he was always a far better singer than an actor, and I tend to agree with her. Not that I find his acting cringe-worthy by any stretch, but it is inferior to his magnificent voice.
In a role like Billy I would much rather have a better singer than actor (if I couldn't have both), so I guess it really depends on the part.
Marie: Don't be in such a hurry about that pretty little chippy in Frisco.
Tony: Eh, she's a no chip!
#19re: Is being an actor over a singer more acceptable than being a singer ove
Posted: 10/1/09 at 10:55am
Here's my personal criteria:
If I'd never want to see the performer in a part unless he or she is singing, then that person is a singer and not an actor (LuPone, Peters).
If I'd never consider buying a CD by a performer, then that person is an actor (Lansbury, Stritch).
For me, there are few performers I enjoy acting in straight plays/movies/etc, musical performances, and CD (Streisand).
"It does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are 20 gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket, nor breaks my leg."
-- Thomas Jefferson
#20re: Is being an actor over a singer more acceptable than being a singer ove
Posted: 10/1/09 at 10:59am
hmmm...I thought this was an easy one for me, as I generally think that a good actor can often fake their way through a song if they have a medicore voive (hey, that's how I got through the part of the Emcee in Cabaret...), while a good singer can't make up for being a piece of wood during the book.
But some of the comments here made me realize that this isn't always the case. Certain roles do require a higher emphasis on singing than acting. When I thought of it this way, several examples came to mind, such as Christine in Phantom. (Which was proven by Sarah Brightman, who IMO, can't act her way out of a paper bag...)
"Are you calling me a procrastibator?" Hunter, [title of show]
"Guess who's gonna get blamed for the war in Europe?" Eugene, Brighton Beach Memoirs
#21re: Is being an actor over a singer more acceptable than being a singer ove
Posted: 10/1/09 at 11:03am
^ Christine is exactly who I thought of as well. If you're not a trained singer, FORGET IT.
Though I adore London's current Phantom, who is both an untrained singer and actor. I'm such a hypocrite.
Updated On: 10/1/09 at 11:03 AM
#22re: Is being an actor over a singer more acceptable than being a singer ove
Posted: 10/1/09 at 3:34pm
I value singing over acting. I can't get past bad singing. You'd have to be a really bad actor for me to notice.
I do agree that some roles are for "actors" and some are for "singers."
Your latest 7in sounds obscene unless you spin it at a 45.
#23re: Is being an actor over a singer more acceptable than being a singer ove
Posted: 10/1/09 at 3:52pm
I definitely value acting over singing if I had to choose. So do, apparently, the Tony Awards since their awards are for acting and not singing (or so the individual awards are titled).
And I disagree with WhizzerMarvinetc... I'd rather have a well acted Billy than a well sung Billy (although having someone who can both sing and act the heck out of it is ideal of course). "Soliloquy" especially is all about the acting and journey of the character, even if there is that high G at the end. Billy is very complex and a hard role to grasp, and if the person playing him doesn't fully understand the character, he will lose me.
~Steven
#24re: Is being an actor over a singer more acceptable than being a singer ove
Posted: 10/1/09 at 3:57pm
That theory worked wonders for the Roundabout FOLLIES...
... not.
P
Videos