The Great Acting Blog: “Vital Actors And Directorial Limitations”

The Great Acting Blog: “Vital Actors And Directorial Limitations”

When the accomplishment of an important objective is in sight, we become energised, positive, we gladly exercise self-control, and the thought of a successful completion of the objective creates a sense of happiness and ambition, we feel capable.In this situation it’s likely that we chose to strive to accomplish something which excites us, as oppose to attempting something which we view as drudgery, which grinds us down and causes us to function less effectively.

Similarly, the actor should make choices in the scene which are compelling to him, which make him want to act, which energises him, he should choose an objective that he wants to accomplish – this is the secret to an actor giving a full and vital performance in the scene. This is why I say that the director should only impact the actor minimally, because the work, the choices, must be the actor’s own, and must be what is personally thrilling to him, not what is personally thrilling to the director, because what is personally thrilling to the director may not be so to the actor. And this is why working to please the director is such a catastrophic disaster for acting: it leads to passionless performances – it’s like leading the life someone else wants for you, and not the life you want for yourself. The actor must unlock his creativity in the role himself, and the director can only gently assist in this endeavour.

The director should only really step in if the actor is drifting away from the intentions of the script – but this should be a reminder and refresher of what is actually happening in the scene, and an articulation of what the director thinks the actor might need to do to get himself back on track. Crucially however, it is upto the actor to convert the scene (and the words of the director) into something meaningful to himself. Furthermore however, the director should refrain from uttering anything which does not assist the actor in playing the scene practically – we all know the director is rather clever, he doesn’t need to prove it to us by telling us about his great “ideas” about the scene, the director shouldn’t abuse his privileged position by self-promoting – again, he should gently articulate what he thinks is happening in the scene, and if he can’t do that, then what is he doing there?

It’s all about the actor, for it is the actor which the audience sees, not the director’s direction of him. Is it not better for the audience to watch an actor flushed with excitement at the propect of performing the scene, energised, engaged, making ambitious choices, employing the full flourish of their art, as oppose to some half-hearted jobscworth merely carrying out the director’s instructions? I know which actor I’d rather watch, and I know which actor would best serve the piece.

So it is then, as we come to expand the cast for Noirish Project beyond it’s two main protagonists. I will certainly be using the directorial tools at my disposal to find that fine line between assisting the actors in their work and cowing their creativity. It helps enormously that I am an actor and am acting in the film (infact, I don’t really know how anyone can direct actors without substantial experience of performing themselves) because I will be in the trenches with them so to speak, I will be putting my words into practice, not lounging around the place with a coffee in my hand and my feet up on the furniture.

Download short film, Prelude (To Noirish Project), here