Actors, from a screenwriter: if you were to choose, what's the one thing that we do that makes you roll your eyes, and what makes instead our writing both helpful and respectful of your role?
Let's talk about all the times you wanted to tell us: "If you need to dictate me any blink, just play it yourself!"
3 people like this
I really am interested in hearing the feedback on this. Directors please weigh in as well.
1 person likes this
a great question Adriana Cannata - one way to approach the answer is to look at what an actor will do with the script and, more to your question, with a scene in the script. A LOT could be said on the subject you're bringing up, but the VERY short version:
- along with the director, the actor needs to determine the 'what,' meaning the objective in that scene. sometimes the dialogue will plainly say "I will get to the bomb before they do;" more often (hopefully) it will be more like "I will never allow anything to happen to you" for example. Takeaway: for actors, subtext is oxygen.
- maybe with the director, but also on their own, the actors will craft the 'why.' Meaning the stakes of that scene. And one way to figure it out is to ask what happens if I DO NOT reach my objective in the scene? The cool thing about that, whether anyone wants to admit it or not, is that the screenwriter could have one 'why' in mind for that character, the director decide on another one, and the actor use yet another 'why' that connect with them... and the scene will still be amazing! :) Takeaway: 'why' is only a concern between the script and the actor if the justification for the objective or the action isn't tight. Then the actor and/or director has to make it up.
So actors love subtext and a tight (meaning 'justified') narrative and emotional structure.
I think screenwriters get into most trouble with the 'how.' For actors, if the 'what' is the oxygen and the 'why' is the beating heart, the 'how' is life itself - telling an actor HOW to do something is a killer. Most often we may do it with adverbs i.e., 'she GENTLY wiped his tear from his cheek' - first, the good actor will simply ignore we ever wrote that because she'll be too busy living in the moment and reacting off her scene partner. If she is told to do it in a certain way as in the script, then we're dealing with a not so good director. IF the director wants to have it be gentle, she has to find a way to manipulate the actor to do it that way as if coming from the actor's own sense of the moment.
IF, however, it's important to the structure of the plot that the character 'blinks' (to use your example) than that's perfectly OK and it is the actor's job to make look natural for that moment.
And for the short answer haha : screenwriters, in my opinion, will serve their scripts better if they refrain from anything that comes close to telling actors 'how' to act in a specific moment, unless it is key for the plot. And I would stretch this even further and say that directors should try to do the same whenever possible.
1 person likes this
What Sebastian Tudores said. As a theater actress, I will tell you that when doing and origianl play, all the actions you read in a play occurred from the first performance. Other than the stage directions- all the actions (she blinks tiwice, she picks up the plate of sardines) those were the choices made by the actors and the director. So as far as screenwriting goes, the only actions that should be in the script are those necessary to drive the plot forward. (she picks ups the knife and stabs him) .
The next performance of the play, the actors and director will make different choices based on their interpretation. i.e. instead of picking up the plate of sardines I may put on my hat. So again, unless you don't want to leave anything open to interpreation, then put that action in. I think Shakespeare is a good example of what actions are necessary as his plays haven't been infused with the Broadway production actions.