|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2016 17:00:34 GMT
But who is saying anything about actors being special?? I've not seen a single word about that. It's simply actors answering questions about how they do their job honestly, and people who have never done that job and don't know anything about what it involves taking pointless offence at the idea that someone who does a particular job for a living might actually know what it involves and use techniques that they know work for them. Really, how is it remotely anyone's business how someone does their job, as long as they do it? Because they don't just do the job. They make a big deal of it. You are making a big deal of it, saying how utterly draining it is and asking people if they're actors as if mere muggles can't possibly understand the world of theatre. The fact that actors feel the need to tell people about how much they think they go through is making a big deal of it. You asked why people were "sniffy", as if they had no right to be unimpressed by actors. I explained, in general terms rather than specifically in reference to this thread, why I view actors as ordinary people and why I get annoyed when they treat me as if I have no right to have grown up in an environment that led to that view. Right there in that quote above you say "people who have never done that job and don't know anything about what it involves". That right there is exactly the "we're so special" attitude I'm talking about. |
|
433 posts
|
Post by DuchessConstance on Aug 15, 2016 17:13:37 GMT
Don't be ridiculous, giving interviews is part of an actor's job. Often it is part of their contract. Giving the odd interview is not "making a big deal about it". Why are you even reading their interviews, if you think actors should stfu?
I asked if they were an actor in direct response to people posting their (pretty derogatory and mocking) opinions on specific acting techniques, which is a perfectly reasonable response. If someone started spouting off about the best way to install a boiler and mocking anyone who uses X plumbing technique, it would be perfectly reasonable to say "but have you actually ever installed a boiler?"
Stating that someone who's never done a particular job is less well-informed about what that job involves than those who do it for a living is not remotely superior. There are countless millions of jobs I've never done, and I would never dream of insisting I know those jobs better than those who do them professionally. If I were a professional plumber and someone who'd never even changed a stopcock was mocking me and insisting they know more about plumbing that me, I'd say the exact same thing.
|
|
2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Aug 15, 2016 17:28:24 GMT
Interestingly enough, yet another article has popped up discussing things in a similar vein. "How Does A Demanding Role Take Its Toll" from Playbill. Tyler Lea (Curious Incident), Jessica Hecht (Fiddler), John Owen Jones (Les Mis) and Beth Malone (Fun Home) discuss their pre & post-show rituals and how they cope with their emotionally taxing roles. Favourite quote from Audrey Hepburn (via Jessica Hecht): "“There was this great Audrey Hepburn quote when someone said to her ‘God, you play such complex parts, how do you work through it? Do you go to therapy?’ She said, ‘No that’s why I don’t go to therapy because I play all these parts.’" www.playbill.com/article/how-does-a-demanding-role-take-its-toll |
|
19,778 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Aug 15, 2016 18:12:24 GMT
No one has said that actors don't or can't get emotionally involved in the part, although I would suggest that someone playing a small speaking role in EastEnders doesn't have to go home and get big hugs and "talk things out" with their beloved every night. "Darling it was terrible, Peggy told me to get out of her pub and it brought things Back with such.... such... I was like a child again". Do me a favour. I think that is definitely "just acting" (even though there's apparently no such thing). So maybe we can agree that the very best acting may require the actor to invest beyond remembering the lines and applying a veneer of realism to them. Maybe.
As for me "denigrating" Sheridan by suggesting her tears every single night might be as much affectation as emotion (because I assume that was a dig at me, Cardinal) sorry but I think that is part of her shtick. Everything she does is emotional, and she plays up to that. Funny Girl is a piece of fluff and to suggest that she's been emotionally affected by a repetition of it every single night is unconvincing. I might be wrong, but that's my opinion and if it's denigrating her then so be it.
I still maintain my point from another thread that as professionals I expect professionalism from actors. And hundreds, thousands of them play incredibly emotional parts on stages all over the world every night without finding it necessary to allow themselves to break down at the curtain call. Here's a tip. Even if you feel like breaking down, don't.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2016 19:10:42 GMT
I'm struggling to see why war has broken out over this. I think most people have basically acknowledged that good actors do clever things on stage to make us believe them. Whether they're truly deeply feeling the emotion in that moment or not.
Where some opinions seem to diverge is on the expression of deep emotion/histrionics at curtain call. Just as we can disagree over whether we find an actor emotionally believable in a moment of high drama in a play, surely we can disagree on whether we buy floods of tears at curtain call?
Personally, I prefer a simple smile at curtain call or, if the occasion calls for it, a genuine grin. Captures the sense of achievement nicely, acknowledges the audience's reaction, doesn't scream 'Look at me, still emoting!'
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2016 19:15:23 GMT
Here's a tip. Even if you feel like breaking down, don't. Wos, I mean that's just so.....wow.... Waiter/ress, don't bother smiling because you've served people again and again and we know you don't mean it; Doctor, don't bother to look concerned when you give a patient bad news because you do it so many times. Who is anyone to tell another to stop giving their 'customers' what they seek and expect, even if they do it for everyone? On a less extreme note - of course a one line part doesn't require extended emotional investment but the performer delivering it is likely to have had the same training as the leads (and, yes, they sometimes get the big break and, when they play the lead, you find that out). 'Funny Girl' is also a story of desperation and inadequacy ameliorated by talent. That's not fluff. To play that level of self deception and outward show is likely to be draining.
I've known a number of actors and a similar number of people in other professions; there's about the same ration of idiots to really nice people and everywhere the really nice people vastly outnumber the idiots.
With Smith one of the key things about her is that she has no professional training, every night has her not having that sort of hinterland that a trained actor has. |
|
19,778 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Aug 15, 2016 19:28:35 GMT
Here's a tip. Even if you feel like breaking down, don't. No they're not. They might have, but they equally might not have. Not everyone acting today has been trained up to the hilt. That's a ridiculous notion. I personally know two actors who get regular work here in the north west (we produce quite a lot of tv here) and both are complete chancers, in the nicest possible way. As as for your unfailing defence of Miss Smith, it's a credit to you. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2016 19:52:35 GMT
On a less extreme note - of course a one line part doesn't require extended emotional investment but the performer delivering it is likely to have had the same training as the leads (and, yes, they sometimes get the big break and, when they play the lead, you find that out). No they're not. They might have, but they equally might not have. Not everyone acting today has been trained up to the hilt. That's a ridiculous notion. I personally know two actors who get regular work here in the north west (we produce quite a lot of tv here) and both are complete chancers, in the nicest possible way. As as for your unfailing defence of Miss Smith, it's a credit to you. Attempting to explain and give some background is not defending. Or are you trying to yoke in the Funny Girl thread for this purpose? Of course any performer who is being picked on and singled out for treatment, such as she has come in for from some quarters on the FG thread, should have people defending her, as I, and I think others, will do for other performers/writers/ushers etc.. It's just a human being not liking the way another human being is being treated. So why have you picked out this particular actor for persistent negative comments? What is your purpose in doing so? (also stage versus TV is an interesting discussion to be had as regards training and suitability but deserving of its own thread) |
|
19,778 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Aug 15, 2016 20:09:11 GMT
No they're not. They might have, but they equally might not have. Not everyone acting today has been trained up to the hilt. That's a ridiculous notion. I personally know two actors who get regular work here in the north west (we produce quite a lot of tv here) and both are complete chancers, in the nicest possible way. As as for your unfailing defence of Miss Smith, it's a credit to you. So why have you picked out this particular actor for persistent negative comments? What is your purpose in doing so? Why have you picked this particular actor out to defend? I don't see you standing up for Alexandra Burke and the critisism of her in Sister Act, just as an example. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2016 20:13:34 GMT
I only read threads of shows that I've seen or likely to see.
Simple.
(Was she in Sister Act? I saw it at the Palladium but that was ages ago.)
|
|
19,778 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Aug 15, 2016 20:23:55 GMT
I only read threads of shows that I've seen or likely to see. Simple. (Was she in Sister Act? I saw it at the Palladium but that was ages ago.) Then I suggest you dont throw around accusations of singling out because you don't, clearly by your own admission, have a global view of the board. If if you want to defend every actor who is ever criticised on here you're going to have to get around a bit more. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2016 20:28:32 GMT
So you treat others in the same way? Is that a justification?
Quote - "Of course any performer who is being picked on and singled out for treatment, such as she has come in for from some quarters on the FG thread, should have people defending her".
I'm also no 'white knight', I'll just respond to what's in front of me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2016 20:29:20 GMT
The thing is, in regards to the curtain call stuff, it seems to be unique (for West End/Broadway or theatre of that calibre) to Funny Girl.
I see a lot of theatre. I've seen actors get emotional on first previews, opening nights, their last night, closing nights, understudies going on for a lead etc. I completely understand why all those scenarios may be overwhelming and emotional. However, I've never seen an actor break down in tears on an average night. Whereas, from what I'm aware, both Sheridan and Natasha do it every time they perform. It just seems like a strange coincidence and leads me to believe that they've been told to play it up. They're not tearing up, they're legitimately crying. If it was just one of them I could believe we were just dealing with an overemotional actor. Was Sheridan like this in Legally Blonde or any of her other theatre work?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2016 20:34:35 GMT
The thing is, in regards to the curtain call stuff, it seems to be unique (for West End/Broadway or theatre of that calibre) to Funny Girl. I see a lot of theatre. I've seen actors get emotional on first previews, opening nights, their last night, closing nights, understudies going on for a lead etc. I completely understand why all those scenarios may be overwhelming and emotional. However, I've never seen an actor break down in tears on an average night. Whereas, from what I'm aware, both Sheridan and Natasha do it every time they perform. It just seems like a strange coincidence and leads me to believe that they've been told to play it up. They're not tearing up, they're legitimately crying. If it was just one of them I could believe we were just dealing with an overemotional actor. Was Sheridan like this in Legally Blonde or any of her other theatre work? It seems like it's been directed like that. There are all sorts of tricks to curtain calls (there are ways of making it more likely for an audience to stand when you enter, for example). Maybe the ire should be directed at Michael Mayer. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2016 20:43:44 GMT
Michael Simkins covered curtain calls in his book What's My Motivation, iirc. How you have to skip on at the end of a comedy, how you have to look like Lear REALLY took it out of you, how if you all hold hands and run downstage raising your arms as you go then the audience is pretty much guaranteed to stand, that sort of thing. The curtain call is usually just as choreographed as the rest of the show, especially for a musical, and will always take what the director considers the most appropriate form.
|
|
19,778 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Aug 15, 2016 20:46:27 GMT
So you treat others in the same way? Is that a justification? I'm also no 'white knight', I'll just respond to what's in front of me. Nope. I comment on actors positively and negatively based on my experience of them. If you'd bothered to read all of my comments about SS you would have seen that I said I think she's brilliant in FG and that she sparkles on stage in a way that is not apparent before you see her live. I just think the way she has proported herself in the media begs question, and I think she is a bit fake. Sorry! For some reason you choose to pick out my very vanilla criticisms of her, and turn me into a Sheridan hater. You've also managed to turn this thread into a SS discussion. Let's close it down by me saying that I love and respect your opinions Cardinal, this forum is richer for your input, but if you want to make this another thread about Sheridan Smith we should move it to the Perforners section. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2016 20:47:25 GMT
I think you are both right. If that is the case, then I am definitely not a fan of it. It does come across over the top on an average performance. Maybe that is just because I go to the theatre often though, perhaps people who only go once every few years like to think that they've seen a particularly special performance.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2016 20:53:57 GMT
Burly, as you had referred to Smith but not Barnes doing the same thing, i had taken that as singling out.
If you have been even handed, then I apologise.
|
|
19,778 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Aug 15, 2016 20:56:54 GMT
Burly, as you had referred to Smith but not Barnes doing the same thing, i had taken that as singling out. If you have been even handed, then I apologise. I have referred to Natasha doing exactly the same thing. No need to apologise. |
|
433 posts
|
Post by DuchessConstance on Aug 15, 2016 21:30:05 GMT
Oh for crying out loud, is this thread supposed to be all about Funny Girl again? Maybe next time you could make that clear to those of us who have never seen Funny Girl and whoever these actors are who are causing all this fuss? Or better yet, keep Funny Girl discussion to the Funny Girl thread? (Incidentally I've seen many actors take tearful curtain calls - most recent being Billie Piper in Yerma.)
I have zero opinion on either Smith or her replacement, both of whom I'm unfamiliar with. I simply object to the idea that stage acting is just saying words and any actor who talks about the real work and emotional investment involved (even in response to a direct question) is a pretentious special snowflake who thinks they're better than everyone else.
And as a general rule, it's annoying when someone who's never done your job thinks they know more about it than you. Surely everyone, regardless of what job they do, would agree with that?
|
|
19,778 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Aug 15, 2016 21:42:35 GMT
And as a general rule, it's annoying when someone who's never done your job thinks they know more about it than you. Surely everyone, regardless of what job they do, would agree with that? People are passing opinions Duchess. It's a discussion forum. We're here to talk about shows and actors and you enlighten us with your own perspective on that. But If you only want to converse with people who share that opinion then you're going to be disappointed. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2016 22:03:30 GMT
I do hope we're all on our way to being friends again. Or the Guardian will be using us as fodder for their next article: "When you get overinvested in an argument, you really get overinvested." ;-)
|
|
433 posts
|
Post by DuchessConstance on Aug 15, 2016 22:06:36 GMT
There's a big difference between sharing opinions, and making mocking pronouncements that you know what someone's job involves better than they do (but if they dare to give an opinion as to what their own job is like, they're being stuck up and banging on about how special they are).
I don't think it's too much to expect that people who choose to devote their time to running theatre websites might have a modicum of appreciation or at least not open disdain for theatre actors.
|
|
19,778 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Aug 15, 2016 22:28:38 GMT
There's a big difference between sharing opinions, and making mocking pronouncements that you know what someone's job involves better than they do (but if they dare to give an opinion as to what their own job is like, they're being stuck up and banging on about how special they are). I don't think it's too much to expect that people who choose to devote their time to running theatre websites might have a modicum of appreciation or at least not open disdain for theatre actors.I noticed you calling someone "ridiculous" earlier. Has anyone insulted you directly in this thread? There are seven people running this forum, you've encountered two who happen not to agree with you. Perspective please. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 16, 2016 4:45:12 GMT
There's a big difference between sharing opinions, and making mocking pronouncements that you know what someone's job involves better than they do (but if they dare to give an opinion as to what their own job is like, they're being stuck up and banging on about how special they are). I don't think it's too much to expect that people who choose to devote their time to running theatre websites might have a modicum of appreciation or at least not open disdain for theatre actors. You're inventing things that you claim people have said and then arguing against those instead of actually addressing what people are saying. I do have disdain for some actors. Specifically, those actors who look down on people who aren't actors themselves. When I used the term "muggles" earlier I chose that word because I know of an actress who uses the term herself when referring to the times she has to be with the ordinary people. Are you saying I'm not allowed to be offended by that attitude? On the other hand I've met many performers who are completely down to earth once they're off the job, and I've as much respect for them as for anyone else. My disdain is solely for people who think they're allowed to tell me what my opinion of them must be. I come from a theatrical family. My mother was an actress. Her family owned a chain of theatres and a film studio. My only personal experience of acting taught me that it's not for me, but what I've heard from actors as ordinary people is that the job is just a job. Then I hear an actor in an interview going on about how incredibly demanding and emotionally draining it is. Who am I supposed to believe? People I know who have nothing to gain by exaggeration, or complete strangers who are trying to talk themselves up in a publicity event? That's the point I'm trying to get across here, and it's the point you keep trying to shuffle around. I'm not saying that I rank my opinion above that of an actor in an interview. I'm saying I rank the opinions of people I know and trust above that of a stranger in an interview. Am I not allowed to do that? |
|
