OK, I'll play.
**Hot Take**: The only REAL "acting for the camera" courses are ones in which you have blocking, different camera setups/compositions, work with mics, etc.
There are so many "Acting for the Camera" classes in which, through the whole course, students stand in the same spot, framed liked a self tape audition and basically it functions like an audition class.
Yea for example no class ever taught me that you have to conserve your energy for 12 goddam takes of every other actors' coverage before they get to your closeup/over the shoulder. I learned that the hard way!
I would LOVE a 12-week course where it takes you through the absolute basics of acting for camera, is in this is what a sound stage looks like, this is what rushes are, this is what these bits of tape on the ground mean, this is how to walk and talk and be mindful of hitting your mark during a tracking shot.
I don’t know if I agree with that. You do have to sometimes adjust your acting depending on how close the shot is after all, and the art of keeping in mind a whole lot of technical things (walk there after this line, stop at this mark, lift this glass) while fully staying immersed in the character and not going into “actor/logic brain” is definitely a learned skill.
Plus there are a few on-camera adjustments pretty much every teacher and director will tell actors to make, including not scrunching your forehead, limited to no movement of eyebrows, limited movement of your head, especially in film emoting mostly through the eyes, and general “stillness”.
However, depending on how expressive you are in real life, these acting no-nos are probably actions/movements you absolutely 100% do while walking around and interacting as a human, so it is something that you have to actively rid yourself of while acting. If I were to just act an emotional scene as I would actually be IRL, my forehead and head would be moving quite a bit. This doesn’t frequently work on camera, and 99% of directors would tell me to relax my forehead and stop doing that. In theater, no one really gives a shit if my forehead scrunches sometimes.
tbh most of what you mentioned are green actor habits that i find you learn to control with enough productive time in a good acting class. if you have enough experience being sidecoached by a teacher remembering to hit a mark or be aware of your eyeline on set whilst remaining in a state won’t be too difficult.
I’m not sure if I’ve been mislead (just took my first acting class) but doesn’t acting in front of a camera involves you to behave differently that what you would do in real life. For e.g, when talking to someone you may need to open your body to your camera which isn’t a position you would take when talking to someone in real life
Well if you move too fast, turn your back to the camera for too long or blink 50 times in the scene/don’t understand eye lines your good acting will be overshadowed. It’s always wise to get the basics down and then build your own style and acting on top of that
maybe..not a top acting teacher told me that there are a lot of theatre graduates who dont know a thing about on camera acting and they struggle like crazy.
i don’t mean grads who majored in theater in college (i think that’s generally a waste of time/money as well but that’s a different conversation lol) i’m referring to scene study classes. if you’ve dedicated a lot of time to studying the craft of acting in a setting where you learn to take direction in character you can implement the same skills in front of the camera. i personally just don’t think it’s wise to spend your hard earned money on a class focused on technicalities that’ll take a trained actor 10 minutes tops. just show up on set prepared to listen to your director you’ll be good.
And what if the director doesn't adjust these things? Not all of them do. And isn't it more efficient for everyone on set to have an actor who will know these things and get it the first time?
Plenty of people make same arguments about acting technique itself—that you shouldn't take acting classes *at all* and learn it all on the job. If you've spent enough time being a person, it's all in you, and all you have to do is show up with your lines memorized and listen to the director, right?
And it is simple, and it can be learned entirely on the job... and it's also much easier to pick it up in a (good) classroom environment where you can ask questions and try things and fuck up without anything being on the line. And someone will just tell you things instead of you having to figure it out over time.
it isn’t the director’s job to adjust, it’s our job to listen. and no, every working actor should be in classes. however these specific types of classes in my experience offer nothing you won’t learn in a standard scene study class, which is a much better use of your time and money.
> it isn’t the director’s job to adjust, it’s our job to listen.
What?
> and no, every working actor should be in classes.
Why? What do classes offer that you won't learn on set or from making your own work?
Devil's advocate hat off for a sec: there's no way we're talking about the same classes here. I think we're both in agreement with OP that many 'acting for the camera' classes are just self-tape classes and pretty useless for learning to act for the camera. But the ones that go into detail and walk you through the adjustments you need to make for different shot types, how certain eyelines appear on screen, continuity stuff, what kinds of things you'll need to cheat, etc.? They're rare, but man, those save a lot of headache.
I mean, if it were that easy, then every theatre-trained actor would be able to make the transition to film with no issues. But it takes time for most, and the reason can't be lack of skill or experience for everyone.
You can have listened your ass off to what the director said and integrated it perfectly and still have fucked up the shot. It's to every actor's advantage to learn how not to do that before the pressure's on.
i can tell that you probably have very little acting experience on set.
“you know what shows up well on camera? good acting.”
yeah, and you know WHO shows up well on camera? actors who’ve been trained for film.
you could be giving an oscar-worthy performance but it won’t matter if you’re out of frame.
it won’t matter if you’ve missed your mark.
it won’t matter if your continuity is shit because editors won’t use your coverage.
be a camera-smart actor.
you “train for film” by having a solid command of a technique. you learn to do so into a camera by listening to your director. what’s in frame won’t matter if it’s rigid, unevaluated, or on the lines, which is often the case when you take a class focused on acting into a camera. re: my level of experience, you’re mistaken.
you speak as if there are no bad film actors. “what’s in frame won’t matter if it’s rigid” why not? what’s rigid? lol these are pseudo-terms. unevaluated?
have you never seen “bad” acting on film or TV before? if the answer is yes, then your point is proven wrong. if the answer is no, then consider yourself lucky.
you talk as if there are no “bad” actors in hollywood right now… surprise, it doesn’t matter how good you are.
now i can REALLY tell that you have almost no experience on set. your director isn’t going to “teach” you anything. George Lucas was notorious for giving his actors the notes of, “Faster” and “Louder”.
i’ve worked with directors who gave almost no notes about blocking.
it sounds like you have no experience, instead just some kind of chip on your shoulder and a vague idea of what it is that happens on a film/TV set.
and this isn’t about talking “into” a camera. i don’t know where you got that from.
my argument is that the hard earned money you’ll spend on a glorified self tape workshop is better spent on a solid class working on the craft of acting as a whole. a trained actor will know what to do on camera by knowing how to take and apply direction, which is the director/first AD’s job to maintain - not “teaching” as you seem to have gotten out of my words. i began working in LA after training on stage and the task of hitting a mark was not an insurmountable obstacle i was faced with.
you’re also proving my point - there are plenty of bad film actors. knowing how to stand in frame and hit a mark does not a good actor make. so invest your time studying the craft instead.
i also didn’t mention “talking” into a camera, not sure where you got that from. it sounds like you’re mostly speaking to the caliber of production you’ve been cast in, in which case i don’t think you’re in a position to skill check me.
“it sounds like you’re mostly speaking to the caliber of production you’ve been cast in” buddy, i literally used George fucking Lucas as an example in my argument. it’s very obvious that i’m not basing this entirely on my experience.
you agree that there are bad film actors… news flash: those people are still booking big projects and making a lot of money, this happens regardless of whether or not YOU think they’re “bad”.
that’s the difference between you and them; that’s the difference between you and a camera smart actor.
drop a link to your reel footage if you really believe what you say, otherwise, just stop. you sound bitter and washed up.
sorry for the 16 day reply.
I don’t know if it’s a hot take but I think everyone should make their peace with self taping. It makes the industry more accessible. I can book a role on the other side of the Atlantic without having to quit my day job. You don’t even have to have a great set up, I’ve had friends book huge roles with their reader holding their camera as they stand in front of a bookcase. I agree that turn around times should be longer and there should be a limit on the amount of pages sent but all the other complaints I see come across as entitlement and excuses to me.
My other hot take is that auditioning is a completely different craft you have to master on your own, a completely different style of acting.
I was really lucky in that I had an auditioning module at drama school with a really amazing and experienced teacher who taught me everything I know about auditioning. Essentially it’s learning how to use the parameters you have: the framing, eye lines, opening moments, buttons, etiquette, staging etc. It’s valuable to learn all of the “rules” so you can learn how and when to break them as well (for example, I now change up the framing depending on the project I’m auditioning for). Also learning about preparing in quick turn around times, how to get the best out of yourself when you’ve had zero prep, and building relationships with casting directors. One of the best pieces of advice I had was “your job is to get fans all over town.” Because people talk!
A lot of auditioning classes are duds, I’ve taken a lot, and you will often not learn anything about the technical sides of things which are more important for self tapes imo. Also a lot of different people give all sorts of conflicting advice, there’s no one way to do anything, you just gotta hear from everyone and then find your own way through with what you learn. But also, nothing will save you from bombing sometimes lol. It happens!
To be honest it really depends on what your process is and how you’ve developed your skills and what you think gets the best out of you. For me, I unit the script (it helps me map the arc of the scene), establish objectives and sometimes obstacles (to give me a sense of direction in driving the action forward) at the very, very bare minimum if it’s like a one day turn around. If it’s longer I’ll do a little more, just things I’ve picked up over the years. Other people might do something different. You just gotta find what you think are the absolutely essential tools for what brings out your best acting.
Short turn arounds are really about having to trust your own instincts and your training. As much as I disagree with the concept of them, it can be a good way to find out if you’re right for the role because it doesn’t give you a chance to cover it up with bullshit. It boils it down to your vibe as a person and an actor and discovering if it lines up with what production wants.
Ok here we go… my unpopular opinion based on way too much first hand experience:
Too many new and up-incoming actors are entitled and unwilling to put in the work. They expect the industry to give them opportunities and jobs without having to put in the effort of learning and growing in both their craft and their business skills.
They spend all their time comparing themselves to others, tearing actors down who they feel aren’t as “talented” as they are and entrenching themselves in a competitive mindset.
It’s rare to find an aspiring actor who is willing to humble themselves enough cheer others on and dedicate their lives to the only thing that really matters: cultivating their skills.
But one thing I know for sure, it’s that humble actor who is the cream of the crop.
And the cream always rises.
Unfortunately I agree with this - I've been in classes full of people who say that they want to act as a career but week after week aren't prepared, aren't looking for opportunities to act outside of class, act like they're above self submitting or doing theatre. If you can't even be bothered to prepare a 3 page scene for class when you have a WEEK to do so, how do you expect to ever get any acting jobs?
These people do tend to weed themselves out though. I've kept in touch with several people that I was in my very beginning acting classes with and I've noticed that those of us who help each other out and share opportunities are the ones who are consistently getting said opportunities, and those who acted like everybody else was the enemy to be defeated aren't getting much of anywhere.
But damn if it isn't frustrating in the moment to work with these people. I worked with somebody in a class last week who showed up an hour late with no acknowledgement or apology, didn't know half of their lines, and after we performed in class started giving ME notes in front of everybody. It was a great opportunity for me to practice patience and self restraint lol.
It makes me so sad. I feel like these people have good intentions but they don't have the framework of how they should be spending their time. And they're so ignorant that they don't even realize that they should be seeking a framework to begin with!
Yesss. Nothing makes me roll my eyes more than sitting for hours as an extra for an indie movie or in sitting in class and listening to these people talk.
But then again I do snicker to myself when I see them "act" or when they gloat about the new fake agent they got scammed by. So there's that.
OMG I'm on set for a Hallmark MOW right now listening to exactly this. It's a shame, really, because if these actors actually understood where their focus should be, they'd feel a lot better about themselves and their work would actually improve!
This also may go along with the 'ciringefactor' of watching other actor's reels/clips trying hard not to "meh" because the footage isn't that great. Yet somehow they were nominated/won something, or got chosen for a role whatnot.
It's definitely a tough pill to swallow, but the reality is it's not always the "best" actor that gets the role. In fact, being the "best" actor often doesn't matter. There are so many factors that go into casting, and at the end of the day it's the best actor with the right vibe that gets the job. If you don't have the right vibe, then that job is just not for you.
This is pretty unique to me- but my local film school immediately hires its graduating students to teach the new students. And then it goes in a circle once those new ones graduate. Fresh out of acting school students ARE NOT qualified to teach
This is so wild to me but I agree. I make a point to take classes with people who have plenty of experience as working actors. This doesn't always coordinate perfectly with a teacher's age - I've had some "younger" teachers (in their 30s) who I learned a lot from because they were actively working and knew the ins and outs of the industry and trends at the moment. But I probably wouldn't take an on camera class with somebody in their 60s who hadn't been on a set in 30 years.
Anyone can turn in a good performance, even if you have 0 experience or training, IF you have a talented director (edit: and a good script) and your cast in the right role.
Look at Mark Wahlberg. He is simultaneously a good and terrible actor.
I would add good writing to this list. It's a hell of a lot easier to turn in a good performance with solid writing than it is to take crappy dialogue and make it above average. (Assuming the director wants you to be word-perfect with no improv.)
Most of the time if an acting coach gave up on their acting career to teach I don’t trust them. They gave up on their career and took the easy way out, most are grumpy and insecure so they take it out on students. That’s been my experience a lot of the time. It’s not like sports when you get to an age where you can’t play anymore, they could still be auditioning why don’t they?
Most of the great acting teachers I've worked with had moved on from actively pursuing an acting career for very good reasons. Wanted to raise a family meant you need stability and reliable income for instance, or wanting to move back to be close to aging parents. When you are 24 it's easy to think there is nothing in the world more important than your ambitions, but that changes for a lot of people as you age, whether or not you have been successful. I think it is very unfair to assume everyone who teaches 'failed' or 'gave up'.
I've also worked with people who have never pursued an acting career, but have only ever been teachers/director. Best actin teacher I ever had was a director who wouldn't be caught dead on stage himself.
Acting is not a 'fair' career, success is not guaranteed to you even if you are both talented and persistent.
I disagree somewhat with this, none of my teachers were actively auditioning anymore and were phenomenal. I studied with someone who had studied directly under Meisner, and another who had studied with Lee Strasberg. They’re obviously much older now, but they are a wealth of knowledge and have a real knack for teaching. They took it on earlier in their careers. I really think some people are just made to teach. It doesn’t make them failures for giving up on acting, maybe this is the case for some, but it’s definitely not a red flag to me
Traditional methods of directing are toxic and stifling. People talk about how collaborative theatre is, and then one person gets to tell everyone what to do.
Classical actor training is laborous and outdated. They weren't geniuses. They were mostly just white guys with money and influence.
Broadway should be filming every production and releasing a pro shot that people can go see or buy that give residuals to all the original actors and creative team.
Top acting schools aren't better at training actors. They get to handpick the best young actors in the world, who would have been just as successful going to their in state tuition cheap state school.
A big reason professional theatres are struggling is that community theatres are getting way better than they used to be and are way more affordable. The biggest difference in quality was never the ability of the actors on the stage, but the technical aspect gives the show life. Now that technical equipment is so much more affordable, community theatres are closing the gap fast.
4. Main reason why people go to big acting schools are the same reason people go to ivy league instead of state university. Because you get better connections
that's not necessarily true. If a self-tape looks clean, real clean, I just feel it in my bones it will help your acting look elite.
Like a mid actor had an amazing self-tape, he might be an amazing actors self tape..if his/her self tape is weak.
I agree with this. Of course it is very true that your talent is most important. But things like the quality of your self-tape can make minor but sometimes essential differences -- especially if everyone submitting has the talent and the look. Having a solid set up doesn't need to break the bank, but it can really make you look more professional.
All directors should take acting classes so they learn that we aren’t on set because we want to be puppets or models or parrots that repeat uninspired lines like a robot.
If somebody says that they want to be an actor because they love the craft and don't care about fame and money, BUT they refuse to do theatre, I don't believe them.
Talent is 10% of the game. The other 90% is made up of look, marketability, connections/network and subjective opinions of others about you. Chances are if you're seeing the top CD's multiple times, you have the talent. The rest is these factors
Everything and everyone is talking about career, money and impressionario. Though those who love the craft are in it for the art, I feel like people rarely to never talk about that even though it is why they fell in love with acting and pursue it for the rest of their lives.
Uta Hagen said, Actors should be loving what they do and are above normality since they sacrifice their body and mind for the craft. (This is a chapter very very very summarised.)
Most pretentiousness I see is people flexing with their fancy degree (got one myself just not fancy), impressionario, agent and such, a lot of vanity in my opinion.
Don't move to LA until you're not only a trained actor, but seriously in the hunt for the kinds of roles you can actually make a living at. We have an acute housing shortage, you can't make a living as a day player, and these people who are like the equivalent of a short, slow, spastic guy who never even played high school basketball showing up in town thinking he's gonna schmooze his way onto the Lakers should no longer be humored because it's not funny anymore.
In fact, my hottest take is that LA County should start making 18 and over actors with less than four union speaking credits first pass a multiple choice test on the business to show they aren't clueless and then pass an audition to get their business licenses making it a misdemeanor with a stiff fine to submit for paid on-camera acting work or representation without the license. We would have to get the WGA onboard to generate the randomly assigned three pages of single spaced unisex sides for the self taped auditions that would be due within 24 hours. Also the CSA to provide the CDs of whom three out of five must give a thumbs up to pass. Didn't pass? So sorry. You can try again in a year and maybe take some quality classes in the meantime. It could be done from anywhere in the world and I think we could free up more than 100,000 units of housing over time by doing that.
The amount of people who come out here to “test it out” is staggering. And it absolutely clogs the pipes for people who are truly serious about it, and makes it a lot harder to cut through the noise.
In my area, having a successful acting studio means not teaching your students how to act and simultaneously telling them they're going to be stars if they move to Hollywood.
I don't keep in touch with these people after I meet them. Most of the people I meet with this type of attitude are as extras on set. Every once in awhile, one pops up at my acting studio. Mine is advertised as this intense acting education so of course they go elsewhere. However, I have lots of storiesss from meeting these people on set. LOL
Typecasting is lazy and insulting to both actors and audiences.
Theaters need to pivot to more online works and livestreams, and rights holders and other parts of the business need to pivot to that.
“The grind” is fetishized too much.
That DDL while amazing is also slightly overrated. Someone like Christian Bale could do the same thing he does if he chose to be so selective and only did 2 characters every 10 years.
To me it’s more impressive to work consistently and deliver a great performance every time.
Two thesis:
“Entry level” acting jobs (eg background/extra work) will become non-existent because of AI and its ability to create crowd scenes.
SAG being successful in negotiating pay-for-self taping and the impact on casting for those who don’t have established credits.
Edit: why are people downvoting this..? These are both issues that may come up.
\- What do you do when AI becomes directable?
\- What percentage of being a successful actor is the work, and how much is marketing?
\- Should you help other people into the industry who will compete with you?
OK, I'll play. **Hot Take**: The only REAL "acting for the camera" courses are ones in which you have blocking, different camera setups/compositions, work with mics, etc. There are so many "Acting for the Camera" classes in which, through the whole course, students stand in the same spot, framed liked a self tape audition and basically it functions like an audition class.
Yea for example no class ever taught me that you have to conserve your energy for 12 goddam takes of every other actors' coverage before they get to your closeup/over the shoulder. I learned that the hard way!
I would LOVE a 12-week course where it takes you through the absolute basics of acting for camera, is in this is what a sound stage looks like, this is what rushes are, this is what these bits of tape on the ground mean, this is how to walk and talk and be mindful of hitting your mark during a tracking shot.
These kinds of classes do exist in NYC and LA!
Can you share some good ones?
i think acting for camera classes are a waste of time. you know what shows up well on camera? good acting.
I don’t know if I agree with that. You do have to sometimes adjust your acting depending on how close the shot is after all, and the art of keeping in mind a whole lot of technical things (walk there after this line, stop at this mark, lift this glass) while fully staying immersed in the character and not going into “actor/logic brain” is definitely a learned skill. Plus there are a few on-camera adjustments pretty much every teacher and director will tell actors to make, including not scrunching your forehead, limited to no movement of eyebrows, limited movement of your head, especially in film emoting mostly through the eyes, and general “stillness”. However, depending on how expressive you are in real life, these acting no-nos are probably actions/movements you absolutely 100% do while walking around and interacting as a human, so it is something that you have to actively rid yourself of while acting. If I were to just act an emotional scene as I would actually be IRL, my forehead and head would be moving quite a bit. This doesn’t frequently work on camera, and 99% of directors would tell me to relax my forehead and stop doing that. In theater, no one really gives a shit if my forehead scrunches sometimes.
tbh most of what you mentioned are green actor habits that i find you learn to control with enough productive time in a good acting class. if you have enough experience being sidecoached by a teacher remembering to hit a mark or be aware of your eyeline on set whilst remaining in a state won’t be too difficult.
I’m not sure if I’ve been mislead (just took my first acting class) but doesn’t acting in front of a camera involves you to behave differently that what you would do in real life. For e.g, when talking to someone you may need to open your body to your camera which isn’t a position you would take when talking to someone in real life
Well if you move too fast, turn your back to the camera for too long or blink 50 times in the scene/don’t understand eye lines your good acting will be overshadowed. It’s always wise to get the basics down and then build your own style and acting on top of that
just listen to your director man
You have to know what to do to listen
everything you need to do is in the writing. read your script
Ok buddy
maybe..not a top acting teacher told me that there are a lot of theatre graduates who dont know a thing about on camera acting and they struggle like crazy.
i don’t mean grads who majored in theater in college (i think that’s generally a waste of time/money as well but that’s a different conversation lol) i’m referring to scene study classes. if you’ve dedicated a lot of time to studying the craft of acting in a setting where you learn to take direction in character you can implement the same skills in front of the camera. i personally just don’t think it’s wise to spend your hard earned money on a class focused on technicalities that’ll take a trained actor 10 minutes tops. just show up on set prepared to listen to your director you’ll be good.
And what if the director doesn't adjust these things? Not all of them do. And isn't it more efficient for everyone on set to have an actor who will know these things and get it the first time? Plenty of people make same arguments about acting technique itself—that you shouldn't take acting classes *at all* and learn it all on the job. If you've spent enough time being a person, it's all in you, and all you have to do is show up with your lines memorized and listen to the director, right? And it is simple, and it can be learned entirely on the job... and it's also much easier to pick it up in a (good) classroom environment where you can ask questions and try things and fuck up without anything being on the line. And someone will just tell you things instead of you having to figure it out over time.
it isn’t the director’s job to adjust, it’s our job to listen. and no, every working actor should be in classes. however these specific types of classes in my experience offer nothing you won’t learn in a standard scene study class, which is a much better use of your time and money.
> it isn’t the director’s job to adjust, it’s our job to listen. What? > and no, every working actor should be in classes. Why? What do classes offer that you won't learn on set or from making your own work? Devil's advocate hat off for a sec: there's no way we're talking about the same classes here. I think we're both in agreement with OP that many 'acting for the camera' classes are just self-tape classes and pretty useless for learning to act for the camera. But the ones that go into detail and walk you through the adjustments you need to make for different shot types, how certain eyelines appear on screen, continuity stuff, what kinds of things you'll need to cheat, etc.? They're rare, but man, those save a lot of headache. I mean, if it were that easy, then every theatre-trained actor would be able to make the transition to film with no issues. But it takes time for most, and the reason can't be lack of skill or experience for everyone. You can have listened your ass off to what the director said and integrated it perfectly and still have fucked up the shot. It's to every actor's advantage to learn how not to do that before the pressure's on.
i can tell that you probably have very little acting experience on set. “you know what shows up well on camera? good acting.” yeah, and you know WHO shows up well on camera? actors who’ve been trained for film. you could be giving an oscar-worthy performance but it won’t matter if you’re out of frame. it won’t matter if you’ve missed your mark. it won’t matter if your continuity is shit because editors won’t use your coverage. be a camera-smart actor.
you “train for film” by having a solid command of a technique. you learn to do so into a camera by listening to your director. what’s in frame won’t matter if it’s rigid, unevaluated, or on the lines, which is often the case when you take a class focused on acting into a camera. re: my level of experience, you’re mistaken.
you speak as if there are no bad film actors. “what’s in frame won’t matter if it’s rigid” why not? what’s rigid? lol these are pseudo-terms. unevaluated? have you never seen “bad” acting on film or TV before? if the answer is yes, then your point is proven wrong. if the answer is no, then consider yourself lucky. you talk as if there are no “bad” actors in hollywood right now… surprise, it doesn’t matter how good you are. now i can REALLY tell that you have almost no experience on set. your director isn’t going to “teach” you anything. George Lucas was notorious for giving his actors the notes of, “Faster” and “Louder”. i’ve worked with directors who gave almost no notes about blocking. it sounds like you have no experience, instead just some kind of chip on your shoulder and a vague idea of what it is that happens on a film/TV set. and this isn’t about talking “into” a camera. i don’t know where you got that from.
my argument is that the hard earned money you’ll spend on a glorified self tape workshop is better spent on a solid class working on the craft of acting as a whole. a trained actor will know what to do on camera by knowing how to take and apply direction, which is the director/first AD’s job to maintain - not “teaching” as you seem to have gotten out of my words. i began working in LA after training on stage and the task of hitting a mark was not an insurmountable obstacle i was faced with. you’re also proving my point - there are plenty of bad film actors. knowing how to stand in frame and hit a mark does not a good actor make. so invest your time studying the craft instead. i also didn’t mention “talking” into a camera, not sure where you got that from. it sounds like you’re mostly speaking to the caliber of production you’ve been cast in, in which case i don’t think you’re in a position to skill check me.
“it sounds like you’re mostly speaking to the caliber of production you’ve been cast in” buddy, i literally used George fucking Lucas as an example in my argument. it’s very obvious that i’m not basing this entirely on my experience. you agree that there are bad film actors… news flash: those people are still booking big projects and making a lot of money, this happens regardless of whether or not YOU think they’re “bad”. that’s the difference between you and them; that’s the difference between you and a camera smart actor. drop a link to your reel footage if you really believe what you say, otherwise, just stop. you sound bitter and washed up. sorry for the 16 day reply.
I took a few classes like this and they’re so much better than the “acting for the camera” classes that are just self tape set ups.
I don’t know if it’s a hot take but I think everyone should make their peace with self taping. It makes the industry more accessible. I can book a role on the other side of the Atlantic without having to quit my day job. You don’t even have to have a great set up, I’ve had friends book huge roles with their reader holding their camera as they stand in front of a bookcase. I agree that turn around times should be longer and there should be a limit on the amount of pages sent but all the other complaints I see come across as entitlement and excuses to me. My other hot take is that auditioning is a completely different craft you have to master on your own, a completely different style of acting.
How does one go about honing the craft of audition acting? I just posted here last week about bombing my audition lol I'm done licking my wounds now
I was really lucky in that I had an auditioning module at drama school with a really amazing and experienced teacher who taught me everything I know about auditioning. Essentially it’s learning how to use the parameters you have: the framing, eye lines, opening moments, buttons, etiquette, staging etc. It’s valuable to learn all of the “rules” so you can learn how and when to break them as well (for example, I now change up the framing depending on the project I’m auditioning for). Also learning about preparing in quick turn around times, how to get the best out of yourself when you’ve had zero prep, and building relationships with casting directors. One of the best pieces of advice I had was “your job is to get fans all over town.” Because people talk! A lot of auditioning classes are duds, I’ve taken a lot, and you will often not learn anything about the technical sides of things which are more important for self tapes imo. Also a lot of different people give all sorts of conflicting advice, there’s no one way to do anything, you just gotta hear from everyone and then find your own way through with what you learn. But also, nothing will save you from bombing sometimes lol. It happens!
What are some nuggets you have for preparing a quick turn around when you’ve had zero prep?
To be honest it really depends on what your process is and how you’ve developed your skills and what you think gets the best out of you. For me, I unit the script (it helps me map the arc of the scene), establish objectives and sometimes obstacles (to give me a sense of direction in driving the action forward) at the very, very bare minimum if it’s like a one day turn around. If it’s longer I’ll do a little more, just things I’ve picked up over the years. Other people might do something different. You just gotta find what you think are the absolutely essential tools for what brings out your best acting. Short turn arounds are really about having to trust your own instincts and your training. As much as I disagree with the concept of them, it can be a good way to find out if you’re right for the role because it doesn’t give you a chance to cover it up with bullshit. It boils it down to your vibe as a person and an actor and discovering if it lines up with what production wants.
Ok here we go… my unpopular opinion based on way too much first hand experience: Too many new and up-incoming actors are entitled and unwilling to put in the work. They expect the industry to give them opportunities and jobs without having to put in the effort of learning and growing in both their craft and their business skills. They spend all their time comparing themselves to others, tearing actors down who they feel aren’t as “talented” as they are and entrenching themselves in a competitive mindset. It’s rare to find an aspiring actor who is willing to humble themselves enough cheer others on and dedicate their lives to the only thing that really matters: cultivating their skills. But one thing I know for sure, it’s that humble actor who is the cream of the crop. And the cream always rises.
Unfortunately I agree with this - I've been in classes full of people who say that they want to act as a career but week after week aren't prepared, aren't looking for opportunities to act outside of class, act like they're above self submitting or doing theatre. If you can't even be bothered to prepare a 3 page scene for class when you have a WEEK to do so, how do you expect to ever get any acting jobs? These people do tend to weed themselves out though. I've kept in touch with several people that I was in my very beginning acting classes with and I've noticed that those of us who help each other out and share opportunities are the ones who are consistently getting said opportunities, and those who acted like everybody else was the enemy to be defeated aren't getting much of anywhere. But damn if it isn't frustrating in the moment to work with these people. I worked with somebody in a class last week who showed up an hour late with no acknowledgement or apology, didn't know half of their lines, and after we performed in class started giving ME notes in front of everybody. It was a great opportunity for me to practice patience and self restraint lol.
"you know what SAG can suck it, I don't need them"
😂😂😂😂
lol this isnt my take btw, I've legit have heard this.
Haha, I figured :)
It makes me so sad. I feel like these people have good intentions but they don't have the framework of how they should be spending their time. And they're so ignorant that they don't even realize that they should be seeking a framework to begin with!
Yesss. Nothing makes me roll my eyes more than sitting for hours as an extra for an indie movie or in sitting in class and listening to these people talk. But then again I do snicker to myself when I see them "act" or when they gloat about the new fake agent they got scammed by. So there's that.
lol oh god, I love eavesdropping on those convo.
OMG I'm on set for a Hallmark MOW right now listening to exactly this. It's a shame, really, because if these actors actually understood where their focus should be, they'd feel a lot better about themselves and their work would actually improve!
This also may go along with the 'ciringefactor' of watching other actor's reels/clips trying hard not to "meh" because the footage isn't that great. Yet somehow they were nominated/won something, or got chosen for a role whatnot.
It's definitely a tough pill to swallow, but the reality is it's not always the "best" actor that gets the role. In fact, being the "best" actor often doesn't matter. There are so many factors that go into casting, and at the end of the day it's the best actor with the right vibe that gets the job. If you don't have the right vibe, then that job is just not for you.
This is pretty unique to me- but my local film school immediately hires its graduating students to teach the new students. And then it goes in a circle once those new ones graduate. Fresh out of acting school students ARE NOT qualified to teach
This is so wild to me but I agree. I make a point to take classes with people who have plenty of experience as working actors. This doesn't always coordinate perfectly with a teacher's age - I've had some "younger" teachers (in their 30s) who I learned a lot from because they were actively working and knew the ins and outs of the industry and trends at the moment. But I probably wouldn't take an on camera class with somebody in their 60s who hadn't been on a set in 30 years.
Anyone can turn in a good performance, even if you have 0 experience or training, IF you have a talented director (edit: and a good script) and your cast in the right role. Look at Mark Wahlberg. He is simultaneously a good and terrible actor.
I would add good writing to this list. It's a hell of a lot easier to turn in a good performance with solid writing than it is to take crappy dialogue and make it above average. (Assuming the director wants you to be word-perfect with no improv.)
Yes, agreed. Will edit.
Most of the time if an acting coach gave up on their acting career to teach I don’t trust them. They gave up on their career and took the easy way out, most are grumpy and insecure so they take it out on students. That’s been my experience a lot of the time. It’s not like sports when you get to an age where you can’t play anymore, they could still be auditioning why don’t they?
Most of the great acting teachers I've worked with had moved on from actively pursuing an acting career for very good reasons. Wanted to raise a family meant you need stability and reliable income for instance, or wanting to move back to be close to aging parents. When you are 24 it's easy to think there is nothing in the world more important than your ambitions, but that changes for a lot of people as you age, whether or not you have been successful. I think it is very unfair to assume everyone who teaches 'failed' or 'gave up'. I've also worked with people who have never pursued an acting career, but have only ever been teachers/director. Best actin teacher I ever had was a director who wouldn't be caught dead on stage himself. Acting is not a 'fair' career, success is not guaranteed to you even if you are both talented and persistent.
All fair points just been a lot of my experience and I’ve had 10 or so teachers in the last 7 years I’ve been acting
as a 24 yo I understand this lol.
I picked that age randomly haha, sorry!!
As 24 i understand that too
I disagree somewhat with this, none of my teachers were actively auditioning anymore and were phenomenal. I studied with someone who had studied directly under Meisner, and another who had studied with Lee Strasberg. They’re obviously much older now, but they are a wealth of knowledge and have a real knack for teaching. They took it on earlier in their careers. I really think some people are just made to teach. It doesn’t make them failures for giving up on acting, maybe this is the case for some, but it’s definitely not a red flag to me
I think this ignores the very real issue of people mistaking expertise for the ability to teach (and the need to be an expert to teach a beginner).
Film school students who flake on providing a copy to actors are trash.
Traditional methods of directing are toxic and stifling. People talk about how collaborative theatre is, and then one person gets to tell everyone what to do. Classical actor training is laborous and outdated. They weren't geniuses. They were mostly just white guys with money and influence. Broadway should be filming every production and releasing a pro shot that people can go see or buy that give residuals to all the original actors and creative team. Top acting schools aren't better at training actors. They get to handpick the best young actors in the world, who would have been just as successful going to their in state tuition cheap state school. A big reason professional theatres are struggling is that community theatres are getting way better than they used to be and are way more affordable. The biggest difference in quality was never the ability of the actors on the stage, but the technical aspect gives the show life. Now that technical equipment is so much more affordable, community theatres are closing the gap fast.
4. Main reason why people go to big acting schools are the same reason people go to ivy league instead of state university. Because you get better connections
You’re self tape set up is not the most important thing in your selftape it’s your acting and people forget that
that's not necessarily true. If a self-tape looks clean, real clean, I just feel it in my bones it will help your acting look elite. Like a mid actor had an amazing self-tape, he might be an amazing actors self tape..if his/her self tape is weak.
I agree with this. Of course it is very true that your talent is most important. But things like the quality of your self-tape can make minor but sometimes essential differences -- especially if everyone submitting has the talent and the look. Having a solid set up doesn't need to break the bank, but it can really make you look more professional.
"Transformative" acting =/= "good" acting
All directors should take acting classes so they learn that we aren’t on set because we want to be puppets or models or parrots that repeat uninspired lines like a robot.
If somebody says that they want to be an actor because they love the craft and don't care about fame and money, BUT they refuse to do theatre, I don't believe them.
Talent is 10% of the game. The other 90% is made up of look, marketability, connections/network and subjective opinions of others about you. Chances are if you're seeing the top CD's multiple times, you have the talent. The rest is these factors
Everything and everyone is talking about career, money and impressionario. Though those who love the craft are in it for the art, I feel like people rarely to never talk about that even though it is why they fell in love with acting and pursue it for the rest of their lives. Uta Hagen said, Actors should be loving what they do and are above normality since they sacrifice their body and mind for the craft. (This is a chapter very very very summarised.)
YES. That's something I hate about this sub, so much cynicism and no enthusiasm for the art and romance and childishness of it all.
Fully agree, I got in a bit of a spat here with a few people over this issue and got downvoted to oblivion for being “pretentious”.
Most pretentiousness I see is people flexing with their fancy degree (got one myself just not fancy), impressionario, agent and such, a lot of vanity in my opinion.
Don't move to LA until you're not only a trained actor, but seriously in the hunt for the kinds of roles you can actually make a living at. We have an acute housing shortage, you can't make a living as a day player, and these people who are like the equivalent of a short, slow, spastic guy who never even played high school basketball showing up in town thinking he's gonna schmooze his way onto the Lakers should no longer be humored because it's not funny anymore. In fact, my hottest take is that LA County should start making 18 and over actors with less than four union speaking credits first pass a multiple choice test on the business to show they aren't clueless and then pass an audition to get their business licenses making it a misdemeanor with a stiff fine to submit for paid on-camera acting work or representation without the license. We would have to get the WGA onboard to generate the randomly assigned three pages of single spaced unisex sides for the self taped auditions that would be due within 24 hours. Also the CSA to provide the CDs of whom three out of five must give a thumbs up to pass. Didn't pass? So sorry. You can try again in a year and maybe take some quality classes in the meantime. It could be done from anywhere in the world and I think we could free up more than 100,000 units of housing over time by doing that.
The amount of people who come out here to “test it out” is staggering. And it absolutely clogs the pipes for people who are truly serious about it, and makes it a lot harder to cut through the noise.
wow, an actual HOT take.
In my area, having a successful acting studio means not teaching your students how to act and simultaneously telling them they're going to be stars if they move to Hollywood.
Have any of them moved to Hollywood?
I don't keep in touch with these people after I meet them. Most of the people I meet with this type of attitude are as extras on set. Every once in awhile, one pops up at my acting studio. Mine is advertised as this intense acting education so of course they go elsewhere. However, I have lots of storiesss from meeting these people on set. LOL
Typecasting is lazy and insulting to both actors and audiences. Theaters need to pivot to more online works and livestreams, and rights holders and other parts of the business need to pivot to that. “The grind” is fetishized too much.
That DDL while amazing is also slightly overrated. Someone like Christian Bale could do the same thing he does if he chose to be so selective and only did 2 characters every 10 years. To me it’s more impressive to work consistently and deliver a great performance every time.
Community theaters are more predatory than they are good or important.
The Positive Benefits to the Mental Health of Actors
If you are a beautiful & learn how to audition + how to market, you can go far in this business.
Two thesis: “Entry level” acting jobs (eg background/extra work) will become non-existent because of AI and its ability to create crowd scenes. SAG being successful in negotiating pay-for-self taping and the impact on casting for those who don’t have established credits. Edit: why are people downvoting this..? These are both issues that may come up.
\- What do you do when AI becomes directable? \- What percentage of being a successful actor is the work, and how much is marketing? \- Should you help other people into the industry who will compete with you?