Religious Actors- Page 3

[Danielm]

Posted: 3/6/07 at 6:53pm

Wow, apparently the theatre is just a sewer of filth and sin. I think all you Christian actors should quit right now and go do something else.

[LimelightMike]

Posted: 3/6/07 at 7:05pm

I consider myself to be a fairly religious person, as a Christian actor, and I have a firm belief in God, and I am very much intrigued by anything and everyting supernatural, as well. Now, as far as how that pertains to my profession. I feel that 'acting' is just that ... 'acting' -- It's been covered in previous posts, so I don't feel the need to repeat it. I feel that whenever a role comes along where I feel even the least bit uncomfortable (i.e.: physical confrontation(s), constant swearing, etc.) I'll let it be known that I feel a tad bit uncomfortable with it (from the get-go), study the scene, and try to make it as COMFORTABLE as possible. I stray away from swearing (unless it's a song lyric, of course). If there's a way around it, I usually ad-lib or implement something in its place. I feel that God is proud of us all...

Best,
- Mike

[freeadmission]

Posted: 3/6/07 at 7:11pm

Theatre IS a sewer of filth and sin, but so is life. Thankfully, because God is redeeming all of life, He is redeeming theatre, too. It is the duty of talented Christians to participate in excellent theatre because such theatre that follows the pattern of God's story.
Credenda/Agenda on Storytelling

[BroadwayGirl107]

Posted: 3/6/07 at 7:59pm

freeadmission, I still don't understand what isn't hypocritcal about excusing foul language but not excusing playing a promiscuous character. After all, playing a promiscuous character means you don't even have to go BE promiscuous, while foul language in the text is foul language in the text.

"Personally, I think the world would be a better place if EVERYONE was an atheist. "
Fosse, you do realize that comment is as obnoxious, intolerant, and pretentious as an evangelical Christian shoving his/her views in the world's face saying the world would be better if we were all Christian. Overzealous atheism is no less annoying than overzealous Christianity or Judaism or whatever religion gets you worked up to a rage.

That being said, I hear you on most of your points (though I'd echo with considerably less bitterness).

"And if you really think actors can seperate themselves so easily, I'd talk to the countless actors who've fallen in love with co-stars."
I'm sorry, but that's downright unprofessional. If your a professional actor, you need to learn to separate life from art, or you're truly just in a profession that is quite honestly awful for your mental and emotional health. It may happen to beginners and amatuers, but a professional needs to be able to separate the two.

"Now before another rediculous sarcastic comment is hurled, I don't think that actors think they ARE their characters. But there are plenty of people who take some of their work home with them."
Julianne Moore came to speak to us at my school today, and as she said..."that's bull****." Taking your work home with you in the sense of working on your character and trying to deepen your understanding of her is one thing, but to take the actual feelings or situations a character that a person (like this example you mentioned of falling in love with a co-star) is working on home with them is, again, unprofessional. If this profession is going to **** with someone that much, he/she probably shouldn't be an actor.

[freeadmission]

Posted: 3/6/07 at 8:30pm

freeadmission, I still don't understand what isn't hypocritcal about excusing foul language but not excusing playing a promiscuous character. After all, playing a promiscuous character means you don't even have to go BE promiscuous, while foul language in the text is foul language in the text.

Because Scripture sets forth the example in Psalm 14 ("The fool says in his heart, 'There is no God.'") that quoting a blasphemer is not a sin. Acting is simply quoting in word and deed. God commanded that his name not be taken in vain because his name is to be hallowed, and He is to be feared and reverenced. Blasphemy in the appropriate context has the effect of making the character more real and making us like him less. No sin is inherently involved for the actor (as noted above) and no it does not lead anyone in the audience to sin directly.

As I said before, immodesty is a different matter because of the nature of the sin. God commands modesty in Christian women, partially, because (generally speaking) men desire and women want to be desired. Men respond visually. This is why porn is more prevalent among men than women. Dressing immodestly attracts the wrong kind of attention and has a tendency to lead men directly into sin (Scripture equates lust with the act in Matt. 5:2. Whether the immodesty is on stage or the street, the reaction is the same. Were a woman dressed immodestly in front of an audience of only straight women, there would be no problem.

Updated On: 3/6/07 at 08:30 PM

[BroadwayGirl107]

Posted: 3/6/07 at 9:57pm

"God commands modesty in Christian women, partially, because (generally speaking) men desire and women want to be desired."
I'm not sure I see the really what's sinful about a harmless natural attraction.

Not to mention, not all nudity is necessarily sexual, and not all characters who are promiscuous are going to attract that sort of response from men. And it depends on how it's dealt with in the play or film. You can't just write it all off.

[Jazzysuite82]

Posted: 3/6/07 at 10:12pm

well you can say what you want about professionalism. Tell that to Jason Danieley and Marin Mazzie who met and fell in love while playing opposite each other. You can't dictate human emotion. That's the point of most theatre. Things happen. There are people who do take they're work home with them and need to get that emotional weight off of them. WHo is Julianne Moore to judge how someone gets to where they need to be emotionally onstage. I've heard and seen seasoned actors fall into that trap. Have you never heard of a showmance?! It's hardly an amateur, youngish problem. It happens on tour, in regional houses and Broadway. I turn you to the book Making it on Broadway where Broadway actors talk about that very problem.

Acting is not an exact science so it's very difficult to judge what is right and wrong regarding the emotions. I personally don't think that it SHOULD happen. But it does all over the place. Regardless it does happen. It's very easy to sit and say what's professional and not until it happens. I haven't been there but I know plenty of people who have. They're consumate professionals.
Updated On: 3/6/07 at 10:12 PM

[BroadwayGirl107]

Posted: 3/6/07 at 10:26pm

Woah, woah, nobody was putting down how somebody got to where they need to be emotionally on stage (Just so Ms. Moore isn't misrepresented she SAID you get to where you need to be in whatever way works for you), and I never said that two people playing love interests NEVER could fall in love with their opposite. It's when people are falling in love with the other person because they can't separate their own lives and the other people's lives that it becomes a serious problem. It's when people don't know how to leave their work at the theatre the way they need to leave their life at the door when they walk into work. Not being able to separate your work from your life (which was the statement of yours I was commenting on) is unprofessional and just unhealthy.

[freeadmission]

Posted: 3/7/07 at 1:58am

I'm not sure I see the really what's sinful about a harmless natural attraction.

Not to mention, not all nudity is necessarily sexual, and not all characters who are promiscuous are going to attract that sort of response from men. And it depends on how it's dealt with in the play or film. You can't just write it all off.

If you read my post a few back (where I posted my term paper), you'll see that I DON'T just write it ALL off. When it comes to portraying any sort of sin (or iffy things like nudity) I think we need to take certain thing into account: intent, depiction, consequences and context, all in the light of Scripture. Of course, the "in the light of Scripture" part is hard to explain to non-Christians, which is why I think you're having a problem with my stated difference between portraying blasphemy vs. portraying immodesty. Scripturally speaking, there is nothing harmless about lust. The world will say that lust is okay, as long as you don't do anything as a result of it, but Matthew tells us that if a man lusts after a woman, he has already committed adultery in his heart. Parading oneself on stage as a prostitute (or whatever) even if the intent, depiction, consequences, and context are all lined up nearly, is just not something Christian women should do. It is looking out for her brothers.

[avab802]

Posted: 3/7/07 at 11:00am

The world will say that lust is okay, as long as you don't do anything as a result of it, but Matthew tells us that if a man lusts after a woman, he has already committed adultery in his heart. Parading oneself on stage as a prostitute (or whatever) even if the intent, depiction, consequences, and context are all lined up nearly, is just not something Christian women should do. It is looking out for her brothers.

I understand what you are saying here. I don't agree, but I understand your view. Do you also think Christian men should be modest to protect their sisters from lustful thoughts? I think women have just as many lustful thoughts as men. I also think if a man (or woman) cannot control his or her thoughts or actions it's his/her problem, not mine.

[Colle]

Posted: 3/7/07 at 6:12pm

I find this topic thoughtful. I know as a fan, and a Christain, I try to be choosey about what I watch, I admit I am not always perfect on it. I do agree that it is important to know your limits, what you would or would not do. For example, I know if I was an actress I would at least be uncomfrontable about doing the "Lovely Ladies" scene in "Les Miserables"

[Danielm]

Posted: 3/7/07 at 7:36pm

Well, Freeadmission, maybe your life and the theatre you are involved with is a sewer of filth, but mine is certainly not.

I don't need others (including leaders of any faith) to tell me what is good and what is not--I can figure that out for myself. I suspect Christians have the same capacity. If I ever have to do a role that makes me uncomfortable I figure out why it makes me uncomfortable and then whether I want to do it. I was once offered a stereotypical gay role that I found very offensive. I suggested ways to play it that would turn that around and make the character stronger and not just a joke--the director didn't like them and I refused the role. I don't regret it. Had the situation been different and the stereotypical charater was given some dignity I may have reconsidered. We all have to make decisions--and I find the whole idea of Jesus or God telling us what to do a little fishy because in all my years of praying no voice ever told me what to do.

[Jazzysuite82]

Posted: 3/7/07 at 9:19pm

Either you're not thinking spiritually or you're not listening hard enough. I think it's important to remember that God is spirit so her's not going to sound like your best friend calling you on the phone. If you truly seek and listen, that voice inside you, that inner pull in a certain direction will tell you which way to go. That's God...and sometimes God is silent.

[Alphadog2]

Posted: 3/7/07 at 10:34pm

"Now before another rediculous sarcastic comment is hurled, I don't think that actors think they ARE their characters. But there are plenty of people who take some of their work home with them."

Julianne Moore came to speak to us at my school today, and as she said..."that's bull****." Taking your work home with you in the sense of working on your character and trying to deepen your understanding of her is one thing, but to take the actual feelings or situations a character that a person (like this example you mentioned of falling in love with a co-star) is working on home with them is, again, unprofessional. If this profession is going to **** with someone that much, he/she probably shouldn't be an actor.

JULIANNE MOORE SAID THIS? The one who did The Myth of Fingerprints? The one who's married to Bart Freundlich? The one who fell for Bart Freundlich when HE WAS THE WRITER AND HER DIRECTOR on The Myth of Fingerprints? Is she kidding?

[BroadwayGirl107]

Posted: 3/7/07 at 10:51pm

Are YOU kidding? Clearly you missed the entire point here. If Bart Freundlich was her writer and director, CLEARLY he was not the actor playing her love interest and therefore I do not see how anything you said is relevant to her comment.

My God, people are either incredibly dense or far too willing to tear apart any bold statement an artist throws out there. Even if she DID fall in love with a marry someone playing her love interest that's NOT THE POINT. The "bull****" she was referring to was not being able to separate your life from your art. Which is what started this conversation.

My God, I feel bad I even attached her name to it.

[mediakilled]

Posted: 3/8/07 at 1:25am

an actor ACTS. that is his/her job. it has nothing to do with religion or anything else . you are depicting ways of life. not living one. I once knew someone who didn't take a role because it went against her religious beliefs. that was ridiculous. A TRUE actor TRANSFORMS and becomes other roles and should be open to anything and everything. That is how you learn and grow as a performer..and you should leave religion and personal beliefs aside.

[Jazzysuite82]

Posted: 3/8/07 at 10:06am

well that doesn't make sense. An actor should be open to everything? Every single actor in the world has their limits. Bernedette Peters doesn't do nude. She told SOndheim that in Sunday in the Park. Now is she not a true actor because she wouldn't do a nude scene? I don't know 1 actor that would be open to any and everything. I know some who put limits on what they do. An actor acts in his/her specific role. It's not their job until they take the part. So how is turning down a job that you don't want ridiculous? I mean for whatever the reason people turn down jobs all the time. Suddenly because it's religion it's rediculous. Why should the reason matter much? You don't have to give up on your morals in order to learn and grow.

I'm not one of those actors who thinks that my job is ALL. I think there are more important things. This is whether you're Christian, Jewish, Muslim or even an Atheist with moral convictions. Compromising one's beliefs for an acting gig is what would be rediculous to me. I mean it's spiritual prostitution. Even if you believe in no God, you have some sort of moral compass (unless you're a sociopath). I think that's what makes us human. That's something to hold on to. They'll be other gigs to be had.

[evadiva]

Posted: 3/8/07 at 10:58am

evadiva is too lazy to read all of these long posts at this time (I will be back), but I will add this before I do:

Stories, fiction or non, enlighten. We can learn so much from an accurate and authentic portrayal of the most heinous character. Theatre enables us to understand the human spirit on a deeper level. And to spread messages.

Actors give information to the audience by bring it to life. And I believe God wants us to be informed.

Everyone's place in the world is important. God gave you the desire and the gift to perform.

Go with it.

[caitlinette]

Posted: 3/8/07 at 2:50pm

That's God...and sometimes God is silent.

Interesting: that's what I call instinct or trusting your gut.

[Jazzysuite82]

Posted: 3/8/07 at 3:18pm

Agreed, but where does that come from? You know that sense that "something is wrong" just before something bad happens. Where does that come from? What is that? I think it's God speaking.

[Danielm]

Posted: 3/8/07 at 3:41pm

"Either you're not thinking spiritually or you're not listening hard enough. I think it's important to remember that God is spirit so her's not going to sound like your best friend calling you on the phone. If you truly seek and listen, that voice inside you, that inner pull in a certain direction will tell you which way to go. That's God...and sometimes God is silent."

Thank you for that smug answer--obviously I was just praying wrong.

When people talk about what "God wants" or "Jesus wants" I always find it a bit silly because it comes down to "what I believe God wants" or "what I believe Jesus wants".

If acting causes a great spiritual crisis for someone they should probably not do it. You can parse what God will accept all you like--if you're going to take the Bible as a literal instruction book you will also not be able to do a play in which people wear blended fibers or eat lobster.

I think we all should hopefully have enough of a life to know what we should and shouldn't do--whether these issues are based on religion, ethics, or just personal comfort is up to the individual actor. If you are opposed to swearing--don't do a Mamet play. If you're opposed to nudity--don't do Oh! Calcutta. Also know that directors and writers are not going to try to force you--they'll just get another actor--and there are always other actors.

[Jazzysuite82]

Posted: 3/8/07 at 3:57pm

Danielm,

You seem offended by my post. For that I apologize. I actually wasn't intending to sound smug at all. If I were speaking directly to you, you wouldn't have gotten that at all. I was being facetious. Don't take it literally.

[BroadwayGirl107]

Posted: 3/8/07 at 6:41pm

"An actor should be open to everything? Every single actor in the world has their limits. Bernedette Peters doesn't do nude. She told SOndheim that in Sunday in the Park. Now is she not a true actor because she wouldn't do a nude scene?"

I know what you're trying to say here, but this isn't a parallel to something like not playing a promiscuous person or a rapist or a child molester. Not doing nudity is a personal choice not to show your own body in a venue you would not feel comfortable in doing so. If you're doing a nude scene, you are nude; it's a very private thing, even if you're willing to do it. If you're playing a prostitute, a sex offender, a drug dealer, a racist--anything of that nature, you are not really dealing drugs, sleeping around, raping people. That's why it makes very little sense, at least in my mind, to become an actor if you're not in some sense open to playing any type of person so long as the play's MESSAGE is something your beliefs line up. For example, I don't see why an actor would object to playing a racist so long as the play is condemning, not condoning, racism.

[vmlinnie]

Posted: 3/8/07 at 6:55pm

I'm Catholic. I dont go to church every Sunday, but I do believe in God and pray. Doesn't mean I believe in religion.

Now, I'm 15, so I haven't exactly had to do any sex scenes or anything with a lot of smoking and cursing! However, I don't think there's any problem with acting, even if it involves vices. You're entertaining people, you're making them happy. Isn't that a great thing? It's a great thing to be able to do for your life or living. Just because you play the part of a paedo or a drunk doesn't mean you are one. If anything, you're exploring the mindset of such a person, which can actually help you learn more about yourself and make you a better person. just my opinion.

I know that seemed complete BS, but I mean it.

[now_later_soon]

Posted: 3/8/07 at 7:06pm

I honestly think that faith and our interpretation of how God is in our lives is intensely personal. I feel the same way about Scripture; that there are a thousand variations on how it should be read and none can be objectively questioned. For me, Christianity and my love for Jesus inspire me to think differently about the world and the people in it. It is okay to disapprove of the bad choices that characters make, and to separate yourself from those actions. It is equally okay for you to immerse yourself into a controversial or dark character and gain an understanding of their perspective. In my opinion the latter choice is the more positive experience because you will come out of it a better person for exploring the world of someone else and empathizing with their experience.

I don't think religion should be about confrontation or judgement. If your view of the world includes a prohibition of performing any sort of sin onstage that's fine. But, if you refuse to play a character because you deem yourself above them morally, you may need to reexamine your reasoning. If Jesus taught us anything it is that no sin is unforgiveable and no man is above another.

This is just what I think. This is a very interesting thread.