|
You know, when you think about it, it's pretty crazy that this subforum dedicated to cinema doesn't have more focused discussion on one of the most important aspects of the artform: ACTING! I wish I had time to do an in-depth OP, but in some ways I think that works out because I'd like this to be kind of a catch-all place for anyone to pipe in about whatever as long as it has to do with acting in film. A couple of points of interest of mine:
So go ahead and talk about your favorite actors or performances, acting techniques (method acting, anyone?), history, personal experiences, Oscars, what have you!
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2018 18:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 09:00 |
|
|
I like it when actors walk around a set and touch stuff, trip over things or otherwise have physical interactions with the surroundings. Like, you can have some boring exposition, characters talking and such be made more interesting by adding movement to the scene. Basically anything is better than having your actors standing around reciting lines.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2018 18:55
|
|
|
I have never heard a single story about the Method technique that has made the practitioner sound like anything less than a massive pain in the rear end.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2018 18:59
|
|
|
lizardman posted:I think people often forget (even film critics) that an actor's performance in film or television is much more at the mercy of the director and editors than it is live. Case in point: in its initial release, Jack Nicholson and Shelly Duvall were lambasted by critics for their over-the-top performances in The Shining, but that wasn't even their decision - director Stanley Kubrick took many, many takes of every scene and reportedly always chose the most scenery-chewing takes for every moment. Scenes can also be re-arranged in post so that an actor's choices play completely differently to the audience than intended. kubrick did this with george c. scott in dr. strangelove also. asked specifically for over-the-top takes just to get it out of his system and ended up using every one of those.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2018 03:44
|
|
|
One particular performance that my mind keeps going back to recently is Barry Keoghan in The Killing of a Sacred Deer. He hits the sort of naturalistic note that reminded me of the kids in Larry Clark's movies. My initial impression of him in the first act was that he was fidgety and awkward, but as the film progresses and his character's motives are revealed, this demeanor starts taking on an intense creepiness. It was a perfect performance.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2018 04:27
|
|
|
Michael Caine teaches film acting https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bZPLVDwEr7Y
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2018 05:13
|
|
|
lizardman posted:[*]I think people often forget (even film critics) that an actor's performance in film or television is much more at the mercy of the director and editors than it is live. Case in point: in its initial release, Jack Nicholson and Shelly Duvall were lambasted by critics for their over-the-top performances in The Shining, but that wasn't even their decision - director Stanley Kubrick took many, many takes of every scene and reportedly always chose the most scenery-chewing takes for every moment. Scenes can also be re-arranged in post so that an actor's choices play completely differently to the audience than intended. This is very true and some actors have learned to completely embrace this. On the Lord of the Rings commentary Ian McKellen revealed that Ian Holm would perform every single take of every scene differently, so that the director and editor could sculpt the character of Bilbo out in the editing from the variety of options he'd given them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2018 10:22
|
|
|
Fart City posted:I have never heard a single story about the Method technique that has made the practitioner sound like anything less than a massive pain in the rear end. 100%* Have you watched the Netflix documentary Jim and Andy, about Jim Carrey's foray in to method acting to play Andy Kaufman? If not, you'll learn how it feels to hate someone unconditionally. *This should probably be 99% as I have a soft spot for Daniel Day Lewis. But to be fair, if you're rich and you can take a year off to learn a cool new skill (dress making, cobbling etc) to play a professional in that field with more accuracy, why not? Sounds like fun if you're not driving the cast and crew insane like Carrey.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2018 10:26
|
|
|
Egbert Souse posted:Michael Caine teaches film acting Nice but definitely not his best advice: https://youtu.be/HdBZ3Pg0-OM lol I had no idea this sketch was based on a real thing. even the outfit is the same
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2018 10:44
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nyoWmkhRyp8
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2018 12:06
|
|
|
lizardman posted:So go ahead and talk about your favorite actors or performances, acting techniques (method acting, anyone?), history, personal experiences, Oscars, what have you! When I think of favorite performances I always go back to Robert De Niro in Cape Fear (1991): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6vO-XDUiRqU and Juliette Binoche in Three Colors: Blue (1993): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=osu3j7N1fGU
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2018 00:10
|
|
|
Adam Driver had some things to say on this topic recently.quote:So what I’m trying to ask about are the specific mental and emotional similarities and differences that might exist between actors and soldiers. It seems to me that one profession is at least partly about individual expression and one is more about conformity. Do you know what I mean? http://www.vulture.com/2018/11/adam-driver-in-conversation.html
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2018 08:39
|
|
|
Wonderful thread idea and OP, OP. On Adam Driver, I was rewatching Last Jedi the other day and was focusing on his acting. My god he can act. There is this tiny little muscle under left eye (our right) that twitches ever so slightly when he's holding in some rage in an elevator and its just -mm! Very good. I'm been meaning to go through some DDLewis films too and focus on his acting. The Crucible has some tremendous acting in it, from memory. Rob Campbell as Rev. Hale has some fantastic dialog. Anyway. here is DDLewis killing it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gj635laKpY0 Throughout high school drama class myself and the other two dudes were strongly influenced by his acting in this film and basically aped him in all our assessments ha. Acting, for me, changed everything. I was a very nervous, shy wee lad growing up. I was privileged enough to have one-on-one speech and drama coaching and later high school theatre classes for five years as well as Trinity College examinations (which were always intense and where I stood on stage alone). In my final years in school I played lead. I don't have too much to say about it that would be interesting for this thread but, acting will always hold a special place in my heart. Lampsacus fucked around with this message at 12:17 on Nov 8, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2018 12:12
|
|
|
My girlfriend and I have been slowly working through Tom Cruise's filmography. It started a bit as a joke -- her all time favorite film is Top Gun. So by chance we wound up also watching Legend and Interview with the Vampire together and jokingly decided to just watch everything he's done in order. And I gotta say, Cruise is an amazing actor. I had never given him much thought before and although I like Eyes Wide Shut and Magnolia and Minority Report and all that, I don't think I truly paid attention to his craft. Before this I would have said he was a bit of a nondescript pretty boy and any number of actors could have taken over for him in those roles, but the more I watch him and read up on him there's really some brilliant and careful calculation going on with his every move. He brings a dark undertone to his films and I think with the exception of Legend he rarely chooses characters who are innocent. His acting in Top Gun is impressively multi-layered, not just playing a Navy bro but playing a seriously vulnerable man putting up a facade of machismo. In Interview with the Vampire he employs these subtle facial ticks -- his eyes widen, he shows just a bit of tooth in a wry smile, he flicks his wrists in incredibly controlled yet menacing manners. In fact he often plays characters putting on masks and facades -- Born on the Fourth of July, Magnolia, Minority Report. It's only in recent years with Jack Reacher and the Mission: Impossible sequels that he's begun playing Mary Sues (although Cocktail seems to be an early Being Tom Cruise is Great role). I thought doing this might be a bit boring or repetitive, that Cruise was merely a charming star. But it makes me think more about the qualities of our modern movie stars and what drives them and how subtle their craft can actually be.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2018 15:39
|
|
|
Cruise is legitimately great in Interview With A Vampire. Lestat was a perfect intersection of the height of his pretty boy popularity, and a desire to show that he could act beyond it. It’s a rare stuntcasting move that works on dual levels of being somewhat of a gimmick, but with enough muscle behind it to make it legitimate. It’s the best part of an otherwise “meh” movie that isn’t someone getting hacked apart by a scythe.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2018 16:00
|
|
|
I think the thing to realize about Cruise is that other than Cocktail he never really relied on or even sought out Pretty Boy roles. In a really unusual move he actually drastically rewrote Top Gun himself to give his character more depth and although the studio demanded fan service scenes like the volleyball sequence he had it contractually stipulated that no promotional materials show him shirtless. Like almost all his early roles are surprisingly complex: Taps he plays a trigger happy sociopath, The Outsiders he's a dirty greaser, Risky Business he's creating this complex and cocksure character who gets in way over his head. He played hustlers and jerks (Color of Money, Rain Man) way more, so Interview with the Vampire actually isn't much of a departure for him it's just allows him to fully embrace camp and theatricality. In some ways he feels like the popular answer to Nicolas Cage -- his ability to rage and freakout on screen feels similarly unhinged, but grounded in a popular naturalism versus Cage's jarring expressionism that makes people think he's a bad actor. But take the scene in Born on the Fourth of July where Cruise comes home drunk and has a fight with his mom that ends with him ripping out his catheter and yelling "PENIS" so loud it wakes the neighborhood. It's pure pathos and it's stunning to see Cruise so naked. Or watch his boxing scenes in Far and Away. He carries this rage in him, it made me wish for a version of Gangs of New York where he got Leo's part. With Lestat, you get this heightened version of his character in Taps in a way, but more nuanced as well. There's a little moment at the piano right before Kirsten Dunst tries to kill him where he makes a backhanded comment about how she'll never grow old. When he says it his eyes light up, he looks off into the distance for a second like he's just gotten this ecstatic pleasure from his little bit of cruelty he gets to inflict. He curls his fingers and it's the brilliant moment that says everything you need to know about Lestat. I think it's as he got older, richer, and became more powerful in Scientology that his performative risk taking turned into doing daredevil stunt work. He became completely subsumed by the church and around when those videos broke in 2005 or so is when he really started tripping over his ego. But even then he still gives his performances his all.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2018 16:12
|
|
|
TrixRabbi posted:But even then he still gives his performances his all. That's really what's kept him at the top even as his roles became more similar and predictable. Like the Mission Impossible series or the Jack Reacher films, there's an intensity there that just isn't really mandatory for a mega A-lister like Cruise but he always brings it regardless. With Mission Impossible he's on his 5th sequel and there's just no let-up whatsoever in his Ethan Hunt performances, he's just as intense and convincing in the role as ever, and I'm not sure it has as much to do with his excellent physical condition as most people tend to assume. It's more about giving your all, which he never ever fails to do.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2018 16:29
|
|
|
Yeah I mean, honestly, compare Ethan Hunt to John McClane at this point. I am convinced that Bruce Willis has become a master of some kind of anti-Method acting philosophy, where he embodies no character, and instead remains developmentally arrested in the form of a plain white bagel.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2018 16:32
|
|
|
Tom Cruise represents my largest divide between "person I hate" and "actor I love".
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2018 16:43
|
|
|
Has Cruise done anything particularly bad aside from being a Scientologist?
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2018 16:45
|
|
|
TheUnifiedHeart posted:100%* I couldn’t finish that doc because of second hand embarrassment.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2018 16:47
|
|
|
Pirate Jet posted:Has Cruise done anything particularly bad aside from being a Scientologist? I wasn't particularly fond of him portraying a Jewish stereotype character in Tropic Thunder. It was a funny role but it rubs me the wrong way when I think about the hypocrisy of Scientology and how viciously they react to any sort of criticism or negative press.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2018 16:50
|
|
|
Lampsacus posted:Acting, for me, changed everything. I was a very nervous, shy wee lad growing up. I was privileged enough to have one-on-one speech and drama coaching and later high school theatre classes for five years as well as Trinity College examinations (which were always intense and where I stood on stage alone). In my final years in school I played lead. I don't have too much to say about it that would be interesting for this thread but, acting will always hold a special place in my heart. Awesome, I was kind of hoping the thread could attract some folks with experience (even if just amateur stuff like school plays, etc.). My own experience with acting consists almost entirely of taking Acting 101 (or some other 100-level class) as one of my random electives in college. One of the more memorable exercises involved pairing students up to play out a scene in which one is trying to stop the other from leaving the room. The key is that the one who was trying to exit should only stop if they are genuinely convinced by the other student (or, I guess I should say, if their character is convinced). It was a really great way to practice acting as simply 'doing' rather than self-consciously presenting, while still staying true to your character. I'm always reminded of that class whenever I watch this scene from ALIEN. About a minute into this there is a brief but heated exchange of overlapping dialogue between Ripley and Parker which ends with an alleged ad-lib by Sigourney Weaver, "Shut up!" (I can confirm, at least, that none of the scripts I've seen have ever had that line in it). This scene is often cited as on-screen evidence of real-life behind-the-scenes tension between Sigourney Weaver and Yaphet Kotto (Kotto claims Ridley Scott actually told him to act antagonistically to Weaver) and while I don't know the exact details, I bet you anything what happened here was that they had flubbed take after take because Kotto would not actually stop talking as written in the script, and his reasoning being that Weaver's performance was not convincingly authoritative enough for his character to submit to. So finally a genuinely pissed-off Weaver decides to go off-script too, and the result made it on screen. It's just too easy to imagine! lizardman fucked around with this message at 17:32 on Nov 8, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2018 17:28
|
|
|
One of my favorite little bits of acting in film is when William H. Macy flips out while scrapping his windshield in Fargo. In a lesser movie, the director would have cut at the tantrum. But the entire outburst serves an important insight into the character’s barely held-together rage that is boiling just under he suburban surface. The actual acting isn’t about him wacking the window, but rather the sheepish, defeated manner in which he tries to reestablish his outward normalcy afterwards. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3McfrgMN8EM
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2018 17:33
|
|
|
Pirate Jet posted:Has Cruise done anything particularly bad aside from being a Scientologist? There's some rather egregious accusations: https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2012/10/katie-holmes-divorce-scientology quote:If Cruise found fault with anything [Nazanin Boniadi] said or did, according to the knowledgeable source, he immediately reported it to Tommy Davis or a member of the staff, and she would then be audited about it. This process started with the first words she ever spoke to him, “Very well done,” about his receiving Scientology’s Freedom Medal of Valor. Evidently that was not sufficiently doting; according to the source, her “Very well done” implied that Cruise was her junior. She spent two to three hours of her day, every day, purging herself of “negative thoughts about Tom.” Though the first month on the project was bliss, by the second month Boniadi was more and more often found wanting. Cruise’s hairstylist, Chris McMillan, was brought in to work on her hair; in addition, says the source, Cruise wanted Boniadi’s incisor teeth filed down. Finally, she was allowed to tell her mother that she was involved with Tom Cruise. Her mother, a hairdresser, did not like the fact she was now out of the picture, not even allowed to do her daughter’s hair, and she frowned upon the age difference between her daughter and the then 42-year-old actor. She reportedly also had to sign a confidentiality agreement, but she never reached the point where she qualified to meet Cruise. He's been described these days as the de facto second-in-command of Scientology and if he wasn't Tom Cruise The Actor he's so close with David Miscavige he'd probably have the position officially. Of course, he would never have climbed to that stature within the church -- certainly protected from its worst abuses -- because he is Tom Cruise The Actor. So he's servicing a[n allegedly] dangerous, retaliatory, and abusive cult. But goddamn is he a good actor.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2018 17:33
|
|
|
Yea I mean Scientology wrecks lives so the fact that he's been out there supporting it and so heavily involved in it all these years means he bears responsibility for that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2018 17:40
|
|
|
lizardman posted:Awesome, I was kind of hoping the thread could attract some folks with experience (even if just amateur stuff like school plays, etc.). My own experience with acting consists almost entirely of taking Acting 101 (or some other 100-level class) as one of my random electives in college. One of the more memorable exercises involved pairing students up to play out a scene in which one is trying to stop the other from leaving the room. The key is that the one who was trying to exit should only stop if they are genuinely convinced by the other student (or, I guess I should say, if their character is convinced). It was a really great way to practice acting as simply 'doing' rather than self-consciously presenting, while still staying true to your character. You're absolutely right here. One of the biggest reasons that performances and scenes can come off stiff and bad is a result of actors simply saying the lines instead of listening to the other actor's lines and then responding and reacting as if their character was just hearing those words for the first time It sounds like 101 stuff but my wife is a professional actor (stage primarily) and director and her biggest frustration is colleagues and actors who simply do not listen to their scene partners and instead just say the lines
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2018 17:44
|
|
|
It is part of what makes him a more fascinating actor though. Left off after Far and Away on this project and I've never seen A Few Good Men before (which is up next) but it fascinating tracking his development and seeing where his career was at as he gets deeper into Scientology. Mimi Rogers introduced him so around 1986 at the time of Top Gun was when he got involved. That got deeper and more pervasive through the 90's, although Going Clear suggests that when he was in London for over a year shooting Eyes Wide Shut (around 1997) was the closest he came to ever breaking away. After he came home, he and Kidman divorced and they just went all in on making sure he was entrenched. By the time they gave him that medal and the video leaked his performances became less vulnerable and he started embodying more of these Mary Sue-ish characters. To keep the thread on track and not just Tom Cruise Discussion I think it is interesting to factor in how actors personal lives affect their craft. With Cruise, it's worth remembering he had a very troubled, nomadic childhood and his father abandoned his family. He's a real rags to riches guy, which I think is part of why he's able to express such vulnerability but also could show why he's so obsessed with perfection and adoration. He's also the rare actor who can and will take over creative control of a project and it's telling he hasn't really done an auterist art film since 1999, so his projects are more reflective of who he is I think than a lot of other actors who give themselves over to directors.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2018 17:47
|
|
|
Waffles Inc. posted:You're absolutely right here. One of the biggest reasons that performances and scenes can come off stiff and bad is a result of actors simply saying the lines instead of listening to the other actor's lines and then responding and reacting as if their character was just hearing those words for the first time I think this probably also factors into why people soured on the standard "shot/reverse shot" way of handling dialogue. Because it became too common for actors to film the scenes with stand-ins and even if not, you just don't get the same intensity that's possible when two people in the same frame are interacting. I've mentioned this in other threads before, but I saw a Scorsese interview where he talks about how John Ford shot actors that was very interesting. Scorsese loved Vistavision, because it allowed directors like Ford to use ensemble casts and excellent character actors to the fullest extent. He called Vistavision an actors format, because it allowed Ford to stay constantly in the middle distance(while still being able to see actors faces extremely clearly), very rarely using close-ups and hardly ever for dialogue. So you get scenes where there are 4 or 5 or 6 characters all interacting with each other in the same shot and it results in much more genuine dialogue and more opportunity to develop more characters. Basebf555 fucked around with this message at 17:55 on Nov 8, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2018 17:50
|
|
|
All about shot/reverse shot methodology, mainly as it regards Coen movies. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5UE3jz_O_EM
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2018 18:15
|
|
|
I've seen a lot of Ryan Gosling films. For me, his acting has been a showcase of 21st century masculinity. Like many others, I started following him after Drive (2011). But IMO his best work was The Believer (2001), a film released to great controversy at Sundance and beset by delays due to 9/11. He was perfect as a young neo-Nazi Jew. Already you could see hints of an intensity that would later make him so beloved, but there was a rawness to his anguish. I don't feel like you get that sort of performance from many young actors; often it's a little too poised. In the 10 years between The Believer and Drive, he really tried to stretch himself. There was The Notebook in 2004, which everybody remembers. But Half Nelson (2006), Lars and the Real Girl (2007) and Blue Valentine (2010) are three incredibly varied takes on how a man can be broken. Blue Valentine haunts me because Gosling makes the switch from charming, sweet boyfriend to jealous, loathsome husband so believable. I haven't been a big fan of his post-Drive acting. I wish I could definitively say why, but it just hasn't landed right. With The Place Beyond the Pines, Only God Forgives, Blade Runner 2049 and First Man, maybe it feels like he's rehashing what we've seen before. We've seen him nail the brooding man role before. He hasn't innovated. Hell, maybe he's regressed. He's easily one of the least interesting parts of Blade Runner 2049. And La La Land. It's not clear to me why, as Gosling gets more experienced, we don't see him becoming one of those great actors. We don't see new dimensions of him. There's the odd foray into comedy, but I don't think he's particularly cut out for it. I'd really love to be proven wrong, to really see him take it to the next level in some new film, though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2018 18:21
|
|
|
Vegetable posted:It's not clear to me why, as Gosling gets more experienced, we don't see him becoming one of those great actors. We don't see new dimensions of him. There's the odd foray into comedy, but I don't think he's particularly cut out for it. I'd really love to be proven wrong, to really see him take it to the next level in some new film, though. For me, the Gos has always been a very likeable actor, and his charisma and presence carry him a long long way. Not that he's a bad actor per se, but he tends to just hit his marks and get the job done while being handsome Watching some clips from Lars and the Real Girl again here and thinking about other stuff I've seen him in, and I think his biggest acting "issue" is that he tends to do what's called "playing the problem". As Gosling the actor he's in head thinking about the character in a way that's bleeding through and into the performance of that character. It's a problem that a lot of people acting in adaptations or Shakespeare (or any things that are done a lot) have, because they as the actor know what the character is going to do or think in advance, and they let that inform the performance Waffles Inc. fucked around with this message at 18:36 on Nov 8, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2018 18:34
|
|
|
Vegetable posted:I've seen a lot of Ryan Gosling films. You should check out The Nice Guys. He does an amazing job at playing a hilariously sad neo-noir fuckup.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2018 18:53
|
|
|
I really liked The Place Beyond the Pines inasmuch as it was him playing off expectations of The Driver. He affects the quiet badass loner image, but then has it fall apart as he proves inadequate. That, Only God Forgives, and Nice Guys all make nice use of the fact that he has a chicken voice when he shouts.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2018 21:02
|
|
|
Hand Knit posted:I really liked The Place Beyond the Pines inasmuch as it was him playing off expectations of The Driver. He affects the quiet badass loner image, but then has it fall apart as he proves inadequate. That, Only God Forgives, and Nice Guys all make nice use of the fact that he has a chicken voice when he shouts. He’s really funny in Nice Guys
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2018 22:38
|
|
|
Waffles Inc. posted:You're absolutely right here. One of the biggest reasons that performances and scenes can come off stiff and bad is a result of actors simply saying the lines instead of listening to the other actor's lines and then responding and reacting as if their character was just hearing those words for the first time the number one most important thing an actor can do is focus. focus on your scene partner both during and outside your lines, direct audience's attention, don't pull focus when it isn't appropriate. that's like 80 percent of it, and it's why priority one in theater is getting off-book. obviously professional level you're coming to the first rehearsal off-book, but in community productions there are weeks wasted because actors are still looking at books or getting cues when they should be doing the real important stuff, scene and character work.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 09:42
|
|
|
which, for that reason and many others, i think jake gyllenhaal is probably the best actor working today under the age of 50. mark rylance is the best of them all.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 09:54
|
|
|
Is anyone familiar with the old canard that comedic acting is harder than dramatic acting, which is why comedic actors fit so well in dramatic roles but dramatic actors can't do comedy? Nobody thinks DeNiro is bad, but the comedy in Meet the Parents is 100% from DeNiro's reputation and career, not from him actually being funny.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 16:26
|
|
|
R. Guyovich posted:which, for that reason and many others, i think jake gyllenhaal is probably the best actor working today under the age of 50. mark rylance is the best of them all. Nightcrawler is incredible, and it completely rests on Gyllenhaal’s shoulders. I think that’s a movie that’s going to only grow more appreciated in time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 16:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 09:00 |
|
|
Easy Diff posted:Is anyone familiar with the old canard that comedic acting is harder than dramatic acting, which is why comedic actors fit so well in dramatic roles but dramatic actors can't do comedy? Meet the Parents is funny but most of it is because of Stiller. DeNiro got a lot of attention for it but Stiller's the one in every scene reacting to things and actually producing the comedic moments. My personal feeling on why comedic actors tend to work well in dramatic roles is that so often comedy(especially effective comedy that would make you successful and famous) comes from a very dark place. Comedians tend to be pessimists and usually have either tons of baggage or just a twisted way of viewing the world so using that in a more earnest direct way rather than spinning it into comedy is probably easier than trying to be funny when you have no talent for it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 16:44
|
|