Why is Method Acting so Controversial?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 8 июн 2024
- From Jeremy Strong’s performance as Kendall Roy in Succession to Jared Leto as the Joker in Suicide Squad to Daniel Day-Lewis in, well, anything really, commentary attacking actors' processes seem to abound. Today there is a lot of controversy around the Method and actors who utilize this process, regardless of whether they identify as being method actors or not. In this video essay I will take a look at the history behind method acting, its evolution from Stanislavsky to Strasberg to what it is today, and how it has led to intense scrutiny around actors' processes.
//CHAPTERS:
00:00 Intro
02:12 History of The Method
07:49 Critiques of method actors
08:43 Method acting today
09:40 Misconceptions about method acting
10:24 Increasing fascination with actors’ processes
12:01 The legacy of method acting
14:06 In defense of The Method
//SOURCES:
-FILMS, SHOWS, AND SOUNDBITES: Requiem for a Dream, The Suicide Squad, House of Gucci, There Will Be Blood, Succession, On the Waterfront, Black Swan, The Dark Knight, The Revenant, Rebel Without a Cause, The Pianist, The Bangville Police, The Adventurer, The Goat, The Graduate, The Godfather, Taxi Driver, The Dallas Buyers Club, The Crucible, Raging Bull, Sophie’s Choice, Silence, Hacksaw Ridge, The Machinist, Joker, Monster, The Power of the Dog, Under the Banner of Heaven, Elvis, Boys Don’t Cry, Arrival, Jim and Andy: The Great Beyond, Apocalypse Now, Gangs of New York, Lincoln, The Last of Us, American Masters documentary on Stella Adler, The Danny Kaye Show song, American Masters documentary on The Group Theater, Stanislavsky clips
-INTERVIEWS: Jared Leto interview with GQ, THR on Jeremy Strong, Jeremy Strong interview with Rolling Stone, Brian Cox on SiriusXM, Strong on The Late Show, DP/30 interview with Toni Collette, Variety Actors on Actors with Robert Pattinson, Paul Thomas Anderson on Jimmy Kimmel, Brian Cox on Late Night, Dennis Hopper Inside the Actors Studio, LA Times Actress Roundtable, Variety Actors on Actors with Lady Gaga, Adrien Brody interview with GQ, Robert De Niro interview (1981), ET interview with Meryl Streep, Joker behind the scenes, Daniel Day Lewis interview with Charlie Rose, Austin Butler Golden Globes, Leonardo Dicaprio interview for The Revenant, Film at Lincoln Center Interview, Time piece on Kim Gillingham, Variety Directors on Directors with Jane Campion, Variety Actors on Actors with Kirsten Dunst, Variety Actors on Actors with Laura Dern, THR interview with Sandra Seacat, THR Actors Roundtable, Backstage interview with Andrew Garfield, Variety Actors on Actors with Amy Adams, Bafta Guru interview with Kate Winslet, WTF with Marc Maron episode 1150, WTF with Marc Maron episode 1359, WTF with Marc Maron episode 1377, Scriptnotes episode 568
#videoessay #methodacting #acting 
Кино
In reference to the joke in the thumbnail…I’m not an actor, but was a cameraman. The first time I heard about method acting was from an actor telling an anecdote about Dustin Hoffman and Lawrence Olivier on “Marathon Man”, during which Hoffman had to appear exhausted. He physically exhausted himself by sleep deprivation and exercising, at which Olivier commented, “why don’t you just ACT tired.” I don’t know if it is true, but I found it humorous.
That was the intention, glad you caught it.
I heard that too. A little different " why don't you try acting my boy?"
William Goldman recounted this incident in his great non-fiction work Adventures in the Screen Trade. He was the screenwriter of Marathon Man, adapting his own novel.
Have you seen it recently? Hoffman is far and away superior to Olivier in Marathon Man.
@@Garrett1240 I've seen it twice. Their parts were vastly different. Olivier was terrifying. Anyway, I did not criticize Hoffman's performance, I only related a popularly held view of method acting.
I'm all for an actor using whatever method or process they need to help them get into character. So long as it's not an excuse to act like an ass, or comes at the detriment of others then do what you gotta do.
Completely agree. There's no excuse for bad behavior on set.
So far as I know, none of the gurus of The Method advocated being unprofessionally or being an ass on the set.
@@fromtheframeNot just bad behaviour, imagine the endless toll on the working crew it takes. I read a book about Clint Eastwood which detailed that he is very harsh towards actors who request retakes or have too much inputs and qualms about a scene.
@@brianholly3555 they may not advocate it but it definitely happens. DDL sounds exhausting to work with.
who the fuck cares if they're kind of mean for a few months? Lots of people are mean. The only reason you even care is because they're getting publicity for it.
I think respect is the keyword here. Method acting is fine as long as it doesn't cross the boundaries of respect for other people involved. I.e. the R scene in Last Tango in Paris where Marlon Brando and the director did not informed the actress of what they were gonna do to her body. Consent is essential to form trust on both actors.
I think this is widely misunderstood and it was only the butter part that wasn’t scripted…
“Only the butter” is gross understatement
I couldn't watch the whole movie. I dipped during the r scene. It was too disturbing. That poor girl...
I think you’re mixed up here. The director didn’t tell Brando or the actress what was going to happen, I don’t think Brando was as aware as you’re trying to say he was.
@@Gino565 Pretty sure the director said that he and Brando were having breakfast and saw butter and knowingly looked at each other and both agreed to incorporate it into the scene. Also, Brando is a rather awful person, if you read up on his life you’d find out things you really wish wasn’t true, such as him SA many people, minors included, him having sex with a decapitated duck and many more disgusting things. The butter scene would be the least of his issues.
My guess is that the recent backlash against Method Acting (or that what is perceived as Method Acting) is not so much directed at its techniques and means themselves, but at the fetishising of it.
Nothing is more likely to get an actor awards consideration then a carefully planned media campaign about how much effort and preparation he put into the role. Also Method Acting is often identified with playing eccentric, bombastic, larger than life characters and extreme physical challenging roles, the kind of acting that is easy to point at and say: wow, that’s good.
Consequently, the fascination with how much actors suffer for their art, almost always comes at the expense of the more nuanced, low-key performances and more commonplace characters, the kind of acting that is so good and natural that you forget that you are watching a performance.
Perhaps that’s why Donald Sutherland never won an Oscar
Yes!! I've been trying to put this into words for ages! I heard somebody say that the awards often go to "Most Acting" rather than "Best Acting" and that stuck with me lol
Totally agree. Worked with a few INTENSE actors taking it too seriously. They’re always the arseholes on set.
@@gregelchert752 that’s not method acting. That’s just good work and standard for knowing what you’re doing. It’s character work. Who am I, what am I doing, what do I want etc
@@gregelchert752 My point about Donald Sutherland - my favrorite actor - is not about his methods and preparation. It's about the fact that he is a very understated actor, who plays his characters so naturaly that you forget he's acting. These are generally the perfomances that don't get awards attention.
Correct. It’s the “biography of spectacle,” that the entertainment media focuses on. The truth is the “controversy” is one or two colleagues saying they “don’t know how they manage.” It’s not controversial at all except in the eyes of the media.
Method acting seems to be one of those things that make sense for certain things like, practicing an accent so it sounds natural, but it really feels like it turned into a weird clout thing where an actor takes a role as someone evil or dickhead-esque and does obnoxious things for publicity.
all acting is method acting to a degree
@@siennamiel-wb7nl To a degree is the key word. But when most say they're a method actor these days, it usually means they're trying to get attention for acting like a dickhead character IRL. Frankly, it should be more impressive for an actor to be able to act as their character without forcing others to endure their "method" off set.
I really think accent work needs to be considered separately from so-called Method or similar immersive processes. On a real nuts and bolts level, accents need to be constantly worked on and maintained in order to be delivered accurately and naturally.
I forgot who, but a famous actor recently commented that he wasn't a fan of method acting. He said (paraphrasing here) that an actor's *job* is pretending to be someone else, so he couldn't understand why some actors insisted on wanting things to be as "real" as possible.
In recent times, the term "method acting" is severely misused. The original idea was to relate events in the narrative of the film to real experiences from your life to portray your emotions and reactions realistically. So if you were in an accident onscreen, think back to how you felt when you fell off a bike as a kid and emote that. But people like Jared Leto and Val Kilmer twist it around to "living" the experience of the character on set. It is one thing to research a character on your own, whether that be by reading up on them or whatever. It's another thing to cause issues for others when you're shooting. Jared Leto insisted on using crutches on the set of Morbius because his character is disabled. It took ages for him to get to the bathroom, and eventually he was carted around in a wheelchair. What for? He still gave an awful performance in an atrocious film. Leto also pulled similar BS on the set of Suicide Squad, sending opened condoms to cast members, an act that was confirmed by the director. Surprise, he also sucked in that movie too.
Strong's request to be actually tear gassed is not just stupid, but outright dangerous. I'm guessing he didn't realise that being gassed would probably violate insurance clauses, not to mention cause him to be out of action for the better part of a day. What about the lost day on the schedule? Did he think of that? Nah, he just needed the experience to be as "real" as possible.
There's scores of great actors who give excellent performances without needing to stay in character all the time, or inconvenience the crew. If you want to immerse yourself in a character, that's ok, as long as you keep in mind that there's plenty of other people on the set whose jobs depend on you doing your job efficiently.
I’m an aspiring actor and currently going to an academy to study the art of acting…
It feels weird and exploitative to me that these actors want to be “real” as possible when they can’t be with that method: I believe that trying to do something you don’t usually do or demanding other people to do something to you to make the performance “real” already makes it fake… Like, what kind of protester asks the police to tear gas them? What kind of person would handicap themselves willingly?
This “method” is not only useless, but extremely nonsensical.
I don’t know how we got to a point where literally going further away from Stanislavski’s well-thought method is being praised…
@Greg Elchert I guess Leto will be disappointed that Mckellen didn't even bother to learn any magic for the role 😜
About your last point, sometimes people misunderstand what is immersing in a character and what is Method Acting, you can immerse yourself in a character without being a Method Actor. Heath Ledger on the Dark Knight being perhaps the most famous example of this, he immersed himself on the character and went to great lenghts to build his version of the Joker, with his now famous notebooks, etc. But he wasn't using the method for it, he wasn't in character all the times on set, and by all accounts he was a delight to be around on the set, but yet, with time, people starting building his performance as a Method Actor immersing on a character and eventually dying because of it, and that's simply not the case. I think this image that part of the public created of Heath's performance is, in a way, what ended up making Jared Leto do the stupid shit he did on Suicide Squad, trying to surpass what Heath did to get his version of the Joker.
@@gustavoventura8536 I think you give Leto too much credit. I think he's just another of the scores of actors who misunderstand and abuse the so called method, and get away with it because they have the clout. Like you said, Ledger was a bloody great Joker without needing to be a jerk to people on set. And let's not forget even the originator of the method himself moved away from it later on.
David Harbour (Hopper from Stranger Things) was the actor that said this I believe.
I just wanted to compliment you on how often you let people speak for themselves, through clips and snippets. It’s so refreshing to watch something akin to a stream of consciousness. Just a flowing, dreamy masterpiece. Keep up the superb work.
As an actress I found this video extremely enjoyable. I'm currently writing my master dissertation in philosophy on "the paradox of the actor between being and nothing", connecting and comparing Diderot to Sartre. I also talk about the parallelism between actor/artist and philosopher/author and the concept of human comedy (the world as a theater). I love this stuff.
If you haven’t already read it, I recommend The Society of the Spectacle by G. Debors 😊 good luck writing your thesis!
In our era where you might argue our entire public discourse in the “west” had been conquered by an irony that is no longer satirical or clever, but indeed simply pernicious and destructive and quite ubiquitous … how much of your current course of study involves Sartre / de Beauvoir’s elucidation of the concept of “Bad Faith”? De Beauvoir’s “The Ethics of Ambiguity” discusses the concept extensively.
Hitler identified early in his political career the importance of performance, personal image and his ability to manage and exist within publicly enacted spectacles to his power to govern. You could argue that today all our successful western politicians have transitioned into this mode of leadership indeed we have come to expect little or no distinction between actors and politicians today (so much the worse for our democracies imho!) as we have (ridiculously) elected many actors to the most powerful political positions and most of our elected leaders are successful in direct relation to their ability to “act like” politicians.
Which is why I wondered about how interested your studies have been in the Sartrean / de Beauvoirean concept of Bad Faith. One could argue our ironic era is also dominated by bad faith from our “leaders”. They are now all “performance” or “acting like a politician” and no substance or acting out of genuine held beliefs in good faith. The fact we can’t tell the difference any more kind of proves the point about the dominance in our era of the ironic mode of discourse and bad faith in our interactions. The reason for this imho is of course the penetration of neoliberal capitalism into the the discourse of “conservatives” AND the “liberal left” both in most western nations now (other than the very rare, usually ostracized socialist or Marxists who question capitalism and what it’s doing to political debate across the spectrum).
Has anything you’ve read indicate a path forward where we might re-establish a society where we cease to glamorize the actor and the false and the performative but begin again rather to hold in higher esteem the non-ironic, the non-perfomative, the non-celebrity, the honest person with genuine beliefs held in good faith as people worthy of leadership and modeling our behavior after?
I’ve been thinking about these issues for a few years now and it’s unusual to see anyone mention things like you did in your comment.
Good luck with your thesis!
@@JAI_8 thank you so much for the hint. I didn't touch politics in my thesis but I do talk about bad faith and the actor both as a public and and a private person. Thanks to you I'll see if it's the case to go deeper in this prospective.
This sounds like an absolutely awesome dissertation!!! So cool!! I'm an actor trained in Stella Adler's technique through conservatory, and I have a degree in Philosophy and English. I think Sartre's work is some of the most interesting stuff out there. His plays hit me so hard in college. When you finish your work, if you ever share it publicly, I'd love to read it!!!
@@lizzyboothactor thank you (: it's so rare to find people with similar studies to mine. Maybe we could chat. Unfortunately I'm italian so the thesis isn't in English!
I remember Liam Neeson being frustrated with Daniel Day-Lewis when shooting in Gangs of New York because of the latter's refusal to get out of character. Because sometimes actors want talk to each other about their roles to give better understandings of their roles, play off with each other or rehearse off-camera.And not only that, Day-Lewis caught pneumonia during the shoot and refused to seek treatment because there wasn't any treatment for it during the time period the movie took place, until it got really bad. Which meant he slowed down production and he could've infected the cast and crew too if it wasn't for his insistence to stay in character.
I heard an interview from a British actor working on a multi national set say that the American actors were all saying "what's my characters motivation?" The Indian actors were all saying "what is my character feeling?" And the British actors were saying "these are my lines, those are my marks. I'm good." 🤣 It might be an exaggeration or a joke, but it is illustrative of how different schools of thought approach acting.
Jeremy Strong is an incredible actor. Whatever he does, works. People shouldn't bag that.
I definitely think he gets unfairly criticized from people who may not understand his process, and agree that his work is incredible. Excited to see what he does next!
He has the the potential of being of the one of the greatest actors of all time
Lies again? Asses Method USD SGD
I've acted/directed in over 60 theater productions and I can say Method acting is not for anyone who doesn't have a good grip on their own personality. I find Method often flops over into a parody of melodrama. Audiences seem mainly fascinated by method actors when they are portraying evil, tortured, or violent personality types (probably because we can vicariously experience what we would run away from in real life). But my own personal opinion is that if someone has to starve themselves to fill the director's vision of a role, then the director needs to cast someone who fits the physical type for that role instead of putting someone through that kind of pain. Brando in "The Island of Doctor Moreau" is an example of Method gone beyond serious into parody. And it seems Hollywood and some actors enjoy inflicting this pain on themselves to justify the ridiculous money, egos, and hunger for celebrity involved. Method acting, in my opinion, is not a test of your talent but of your willingness to throw away your own personality for a shot at public adulation and success. I hope these actors are happy with that Faustian bargain.
Username fits.
One of the most sickening cases of actors taking "method acting" too seriously is when Jim Carrey pretended he was the literal embodiment of a dead comedian and pretended to channel that comedian's spirit to that comedian's estranged daughter.
Would you expect any different from these weirdos?
Yea I stopped watching carreys movies after finding that out
@@musstakrakish you're too pathetic
he made a mistake, he regret it and is already a better person now
@@edba1.037 he has never disavowed the events I described and looks back on it fondly
"Why don't you try acting my boy?"
Lazy acting is having to live it first.
The story was false the real story was: A story circulated for a long time that Dustin Hoffman (being a "method actor") stayed up all night to play a character who has stayed up all night. Arriving on the set, Sir Laurence Olivier asked Hoffman why he looked the way he did. Hoffman told him, to which Olivier replied in jest "Why not try acting? It's much easier." Hoffman repeatedly denied the story, and finally cleared up the matter in 2004. The torture scene was filmed early in the morning, Hoffman was going through a divorce from his first wife and was depressed, and had spent the previous two nights partying hard. Hoffman told Olivier this and his comment related to his lifestyle and not his "method" style of acting.
Which is bullshit. Everyone has a different approach to those emotions. You cant fake emotion no one will believe it. You need to be able to relate to something real as you are playing a person with emotions and flaws.
My own experience studying Method Acting in the early 1980s, I concluded it was a waste of my time. There was such an elitist attitude with the instructors. The pros I respected most had no patience for it. "Learn your lines and hit your mark" was their advice. But whatever works for you.
I think main issue with method in the terms of public perseption is that its only ever brought up in those extreme cases of an actor being in character at all times, only responding as the character, going home and living it 24/7. That I would argue is largely unhealthy for the actor, toxic for the other members of the team on set and from an audience perspective less magical to watch. The magic of an actor I think is to see them calm collected and polite then action is called and they turn in to a raging monster or an emotional wreck.
The technique of using past experiences in life to relate to the character or using research like learning a language or training in a job is not "method" in the eyes of the public and I dont think anyone would criticise it but Jared Leto refusing the walk while filming morbius because his character is paralysed so he wastes time on set causes delays and eventually the production had to go in to negotiations with him so he would use a wheel chair instead of crutches, bare in mind this is for a film where maybe 30 minutes in he turns into a fucking vampire and can walk again.
I have so much gripe for this story, because if he’d actually had a single inkling on what it’s like to depend on crutches, he’d refused to cut his palm in one of the first scenes, too. (And cut anything else instead) Because have you tried crutches with a hand wound?? So all his antics for realism where basically poppycock.
@@LOLrigole I hate when characters cut their palm in anything. There's no logical reason to cut your palm, it is a part of your body that's extremely sensitive and in constant movement, it's also the key way in which you interact with the world around you anytime you use anything you use your hands so an open wound on the hand is a massive inconvenience. Just cut at the wrist or even better if you're a scientist who knows blood will be needed for a procedure, bring a fucking syringe.
@@AGD_27 Haha very true. It also heals the slowest. People cutting their palm is one of my film pet peeves. It was extra annoying though when Leto claimed he was all about finding the truth of a character and felt he had to hold everything up for his crutch antics. Worked a treat, Leto, worked a treat. Crutch users worldwide are thanking you with tears in their eyes for this uncompromisingly realistic portrayal.
I started out as an actor. A very accomplished director once told me that you have to completely immerse yourself in the character, but, at the same time, NEVER FORGET THAT YOU'RE ACTING !!!
This is a great explanation of what method acting is supposed to be - as a private technique and process for character creation - in a way which doesn’t necessarily translate to what is happening when we hear about actors misbehaving on set today. I liked the inclusion of the controversy of emotional memory being used as an abusive rehearsal experience from an overbearing acting teacher. There’s plenty of that with acting teaching too.
With “method” it’s mostly an American male thing. A ego thing. You just don’t hear about actresses getting away with poor behaviour with the excuse of “method acting” - there’s no tolerance for woman being “difficult”. Jeremy Strong is a real actor, but there’s others who aren’t trained and who absolutely use “method acting” as a free pass to be a total arse. Robert Pattinson mentioned it in an interview once…
And Amy Adams uses Warner Loughlin for her technique if you were interested! X
Couldn't agree more about women being unfairly labeled as difficult, and find actors using the Method as an excuse for poor behavior on set to be unacceptable. Thanks for the note about Loughlin! I find her technique interesting, but I have yet to read her book
Men are just better actors
Some of the things you mention in the video (like learning Polish to understand how Polish sounds and shapes your mouth) is not only not exclusive of method acting, but a basic technique of every acting method. Research and documentation are basic tools for every actor, every method and every role.
Although I respect every actor's process I do think there are unethical and irresponsible approaches to the work of acting. Even if a roofer thinks they would do a better job tiling a roof without any security measure there are regulations in place to prevent that from happening. In art, all art, there is a romantization of suffering. Method acting is the result of fusing Stanislavsky's techniques from one specific point of his life and the initial results of his laboratory and a very American philosophy of work: individualistic, christian (suffering and calvary) and extremely capitalistic.
Everybody's understanding of Method Acting is different, it's true, but that's very much by design. It's a departure from Stanislavsky based on a profound misunderstanding of Stanislavsky's techniques themselves. It's a catch all term now to describe a process that starts from inside the actor themselves deeply rooted in psychoanalist notions (which themselves have grabbed hold of Americans' understanding of psychology more generally). The actor feels and goes through the emotional process of the character and the audience is a witness to that process.
On the other side of the spectrum you would have Gorotowsky's methods which to grossly simplify it would say: "The actor has two instruments: Voice and Body, which is all the audience sees. Much like a guitarist has a guitar. With those two instruments he has to play them to transmit the most amount (and right amount) of emotion they want their audience to feel" Gorotowsky is much more centered on what the audience receives than what the actor puts out.
The whole idea of Method Acting suits cinema much better than theater because as a director once told me it is a misunderstanding to think of cinema as an evolution of theater, it isn't. It evolved from photography. It is bound by the shackles of naturalism and audiences are trained not to suspend their disbelief or work their imagination as much as an empty theater with a sole chair would have them do.
If cinema starts breaking itself free from its own constraints, method acting would start losing its relevance.
I think we’re agreeing on more than we disagree on, in that, what most people consider method acting today isn’t really method acting in the classical sense. What actors like Streep, Brando, De Niro, and Day-Lewis demonstrate, is how public perception of what it means to be a method actor has changed greatly. This is why, for instance, Meryl Streep learning Polish and German shouldn’t be considered Method (because most actors would undergo the same amount of preparation and research) and yet, I see many labeling her as a method actor. It’s more of a failure to realize exactly what type of work actors undergo when preparing for a role. In this way, the term itself gets weaponized against certain actors. It feeds the media’s desire to expose the behind the scenes processes of film and television, singling out certain actors, and declaring them to be silly or pretentious, without truly understanding their processes or techniques.
In terms of the tortured artist trope, that is certainly not something I was attempting to condone with this video. Bad behavior on set or within the industry at large is indefensible. No method or process makes such behavior okay. Unfortunately, such behavior is not limited solely to actors and can be witnessed from directors, producers, managers, agents, etc., and so is a larger part of the problem with the industry as a whole, but not something I fully touched on in this video.
As for cinema as it relates to theater, I believe it was Hugo Münsterberg who argued that it was completely distinct. He argued that, unlike theater, film was not objective reality but a product of our mind; that it acted like our imagination and was therefore not bound to space, time, and causality. Film had the capacity to show people thinking different things at the same time, it gave better access to the mental world and, as you pointed out, required a different style of acting than theater. I think it is because of this that film is actually not bound to naturalism, and invites audiences to suspend belief, thus using their imaginations. However, the lines between what one considers film and what one considers theater have been greatly blurred since he made this argument. Nevertheless, I find myself generally more drawn to the formal aspects of film analysis rather than the philosophical ones.
@@fromtheframen response to your video, this comment, and your reply, I can sum up my thoughts with a single “Goddamn.”
As an audience member, a spectator, I always appreciate people so dedicated to their craft and industry, so both of you please continue your work.
It’s good to see a more nuanced view of different acting processes being discussed, and I tend to think it will become more commonly held in the public. Growing up, I associated method acting with Daniel Day-Lewis, and it was always in a positive manner. I highly respect his work in Last of the Mohicans. Whether it was necessary for him to learn wilderness survival techniques for his role or not, I don’t really care. I respect that kind of dedication to a role, and it shows a certain amount of respect for indigenous people and their practices. It is also impossible to deny that his process absolutely works, as his performances are each stunning in their own right.
As you’ve talked about, bad behavior is really where the term “method acting” has become a dirty word. I don’t care how dedicated to role you might be, if you’re acting like an asshole, you are an asshole, and using “the method” as an excuse only adds a layer of snobbery to the assholery.
Which leads to privilege. We all wish we could live with the wealth and excess of a celebrity, so it is offensive to hear stories about those who don’t seem to appreciate it. We don’t want to hear about actors who have to send used condoms to their co-stars in order to give an awful performance in an awful film. I know Leto has since recanted those statements, but he did say them, and one can hardly blame the public for being taken aback by them. Essentially, in the end, one has to ask, “Was the performance really worth the behavior?”
Ultimately, I’ve come to the same conclusion you seem to have reached, which is, “If it works, it works.” We will put up with a certain amount of snobbery if the performance is incredible. But this adds an inverse statement. “If it doesn’t work, then quit being a dick.”
It’s been fascinating to learn about the history of “The method,” and how it has perhaps been appropriated by some who don’t fully understand it, and developed further by those who do.
Anyway, thank you for your video. It made me think, and I appreciate that most of all.
Excellent comment!
I’d add something to what you said at the end, to the effect of the actor’s job being making us believe on screen and it shouldn’t matter what the method to achieve that was. I agree, except that the actor has two jobs. One is to deliver a performance. The second is to be a coworker. If they can’t do the former without making the set toxic or making the crew uncomfortable, they’re not doing their job. Nobody would tolerate an abusive gaffer on set, and somehow every gaffer finds a way to express their art without affecting others. We only tolerate asshole actors and directors, and we shouldn’t.
I was fortunate enough to work with Sandra Seacat on a short film a few years ago. I was sad to hear about her passing.
I totally disagree with the last statement of "respect what they are doing cuz it's what they need to do to get where they need to go"... the whole controversy with method acting came mostly about stories of how toxic the behind the scenes would become when working with special "method acting " actors and that's the problem. If you need this "method" where you disrespect the other cast and members crew to be in character you are not a great actor, first of all, and also you don't deserve respect when you are not respecting your coworkers and their work environment! This respect what their doing statement comes from someone who thinks that the actor is the most Important part in the fucking movie and that everything else is superfluous and unimportant!
If you're asking to get tear gassed can you still call it acting? At that point it's more like re-acting. Pretty sure I could make being tear gassed look real if someone threw a can of tear gas at my feet. Now I just wait for the award nominations to roll in.
Jeremy Strong is so extra 💀
Something just came to mind. I think what worries people isn't so much the method but they see somebody really beating themselves up or denying lunch with castmates and crew and they get concerned about that. Something to be said about training being for being able to set the character down as much as picking them up. Some actors have a natural instinct for muscle memory and "method" acting but the training can help them resurface better, making it an easier and more long-lasting career.
really great piece of work, and highly recommend Broey Deschanel's video on method acting for anyone that's interested in the topic.
whatever works imo in regards to an actors process, so long as their adhering to workplace law and accomodating for the many colleagues around them, especially outside of the space between "action" and "cut". the film set--whilst an artistic venture--is still at the end of the day, just another place of work, and no one should be put at risk of injury or personal harm, whether physical or emotional
As a performing artist (not an actor) and something of a pedagogy geek, I find this to be a fascinating and surprisingly thorough breakdown of some of the prominent lineages in "Method" teaching and coaching. Got a lot packed in to a relatively short segment!
Honestly though, it would probably help demystify the whole thing if they started calling it something else. Every school of acting is literally A Method. A bit cult-like, isn't it, that name?
Excellent video! Really interesting to make this conversation go to different places other than just staying in a simply judgmental way.
Thanks! Glad that intention came through!
OK, but for real how does this video have less than 500 views? 👀This was awesome
Thanks! That means a lot!
Thank you so much for this.
I have often been in the position of feeling like Andrew Garfield in his first quote here.
Most criticism I hear of method acting seems to come from people with very limited understanding of what it actually is.
David Mamet, for example, has written very negatively about method acting in ways that made it obvious to me when I was reading that he didn't know nearly enough about it to do so credibly. Mamet has been an excellent writer for the stage and screen, but I will stick to valuing just that from him.
What is most important to know (as the video expresses) is that method acting is not just one thing or one approach and it hasn't been for a LONG time.
My acting training was in the tradition of Sanford Meisner, which gets lumped in alongside Strasberg but is different in some key ways. Based on what Amy Adams says here, she may be doing similar work.
Not every actor uses any sort of formal or organized method or technique, and no one approach is consistently useful for everyone. Of course I also would probably resist sharing anything about my approach to a role beyond surface stuff. Doing so doesn't seem valuable for my work. I will do my work. You do yours and let's both try our best to be available to one another during that work.
The “method” actor antics are almost exclusively male actors who go too far and make life miserable or eye rolling for the rest of the cast and crew.
Cox is well seasoned as an actor and will have met and worked with hundreds of other performers so for him to speak about Strong is significant. What the heck was he doing on set to upset everyone so much?!
That final point was such a beautifully succinct way of encapsulating not just the acting experience, but human one also.
Quite Insightful video on the background of acting.
Especially liked wrt highlighting the forefathers who defined the philosophy/methodology of acting from the last century. Will definitely look them up later.
It's quite an interesting topic.
Really great video! I’ve been taking acting classes recently and reading a lot about these techniques since I had to relearn what Method Acting was when registering for a class on Strasberg’s Method. Hard to believe this is coming from such a small creator. Keep it up!
Yes, often a lot of conversations about method acting don't fully understand the history behind it or why actors may use certain aspects of it. Thanks for the encouragement! Definitely plan on making more content about acting!
Oh man, that quote by Craig Mazin at the end just kind of covered everything...
As a former actor and theater kid I was a huge fan of the method and even employed it at some points but what opened my eyes was the man on the moon documentary.
I have nothing but love and respect for Jim Carrey but watching him be a complete tool to all of the crew and all these wide eyed starsuckers fawning over him completely turned me against it. Like, are you serious?
Then watching him be an actual jerk to Jerry Lawler when in real life Kaufman and Lawler were great friends who worked together just turned me completely against it.
The nail in the coffin came years later when Leto sent a used condom to his co star. That was purely self indulgent BS that would be sexual harassment anywhere else and I think a lot of people started waking up that fact then.
I totally understand diving into and covering yourself in a role but when you start impacting other peoples lives with your self important bs you need to check yourself.
What an inspiring video essay! Keep up the good work.
I'm reminded of the documentary "Jim & Andy" which depicts Jim Carrey's over-the-top method acting on the set of "Man on the Moon". Brilliant, yet ridiculous.
This is pretty much my new favorite YT channel. Keep up the awesome work. Here at 1.6k subs
I prefer actors like Leo DiCaprio. Can just switch in and out of characters when they stop filming, and is nice to everyone on set. It's more impressive IMO
The people who mock actors for their techniques are the same people who confidently declare they could do De Niro or Brando does easily.
This video had some nice introductory information about The Method and its history. Thank you. But like most things having to do with high art today, the video attempts to explain a complex system of inexhaustible interactive tools which offer the artist the opportunity for a lifetime of study, and can never be mastered, with a couple talking points. For example, Sense Memory, or Emotional Memory, is just one tool. It is not what defines the Method. As Stanislavski himself said, it's great for when you need it, but that is not always the case. One of the main reasons the Method has the reputation it does in Hollywood today, is because there are very few people left here who understand it or have actually been trained in it, and yet far too many who are quick to give you their opinion on it, (many of the "famous actors" in the video fall into this category). The second reason is that no one in the media has any formal Method training at all. So the reporting on it is always sophomoric at best. I have taught the Method for more than 25 years. it was taught to me by teachers who go directly back down the line you laid out in the intro, right to the Moscow Arts Theatre. When the Method came to America, all the great teachers you mentioned, (with the exception of Meisner who does not teach the Method at all) took Stanislavski's work and made it their own by using the tools that worked for them, building on those tools with additions and interpretations, and leaving behind the tools they didn't like. So, there is no one approach left being taught today that is pure Stanislavski. One thing that is true, is that "the Method" is now a dying art form, because if there is one constant in all the interpretations of it floating around today, (from Uta, Stella, Strasberg, Clurman...) it is REALISM. And Realism is nearly a thing of the past in Hollywood.
Jeremy Strong is an extraordinary actor. He can play so many different types of characters, and it's so deeply embedded that you never *see* the acting, only the character existing. Whatever method an actor uses to find their performance is completely valid, provided that they're not hurting themselves or anyone else.
What has been disheartening is the way that a couple of his "Succession" co-stars have been dismissive of it. Granted, I'm not onset with these people and it may very well be difficult to be around Kendall when the camera's aren't rolling. But, the work speaks for itself. And I love that Jeremy has acknowledged the backlash and has said it won't deter him one bit. That is a true artist.
Superb compression of history and acting concepts. Thanks 👍
Excellent channel. Looking forward to your next content
I think what matters most is whether or not you can step out of another character’s shoes at the end of the day. Of course you want to make a role believable, but the fact an actor has to do that in the first place just goes to show that said character isn’t a real person.
I feel many acting methods don’t take that into account; If the characters you see on screen aren’t realistic it’s because they weren’t in the first place and therefore have experiences that the average human being never will experience or are able to come out the other end unscathed.
The point is to make any character seem plausible. That includes playing realistic people. And bad actors can make a bad job of even the most pedestrian, average character that is exactly like a real person.
Excellent video. Method has become such a dirty word used by people who don't actually understand what method acting is.
Exactly! Actors' processes can be so misunderstood and maligned by the media without fully understanding why they may use certain techniques. Thanks for your comment!
I think plenty understand it….you evoke demons into your body. Sounds like fun.
Well its also a word that actors use to make the art more grandiose then it is and makes then seem better then you. Even Stanoslovski would roll his eyes if he new how extream the art took it. Emotion has nothing to do with method. The script produces the emotions not the actor
its a bit narcissistic. once jared leto got involved, method acting is now annoying and kind of sad now.
Ah... the "don't understand" argument....
Yours is the most informational one that i've found!
Oh wow this is a new channel! I stumbled upon this video, loved it and went to watch more... There's only one more (which I also enjoyed btw)!
A very thoughtful and informative video. Thank you for making this!
Great video, loved your conclusion. Keep it up
Thank you!
Subscribed! Excited to see this channel grow
Thank you! I appreciate the support!
Thank you for sharing great thoughts from both perspectives.
If you can't simply act, if you need to "become" to act, I honestly would be questioning your acting skills.
agree
Over-simplified take on a complex problem. Careful woth one liners 'cause they often scream their own flaws. But I do see where you're coming from.... I'll thonk about it !
Having to jump out of character and then going through that ritual to get yourself back in that mindset sounds like it can be exhausting when you're having to stop and start a frequently as film sets have to.
Wonderful video essay.
11:50 thats not Jeremy Strong thats Marc Maron
If every actor went method, would any show or film actually get made? It seems very indulgent.
Well made video, looking forward for more videos. Subscribed.
Great video, one can see you put a lot of effort in it. On the method acting subject, this was the one that spent the more time revisiting History - and btw amazing for you to show us all those old pictures and searching for the former student and actors interviews, great touch - but still providing meaningful and we'll thought of commentary on the subject contemporarily. BUT I have to say this some unrelated opinion: there's a character in Gilmore Girls called Paris and you, the narrator, sound SO much like her! Seriously I was thinking the whole time "Imma Google that actress and see what's she's up to today" because it could totally be that she has a RUclips channel on acting nowaday why not??? You seriously sound like a adult version of her (she's a teen in the show) and if you seen the show and dislikes her please don't think this to be an insult of any kind. Paris has her own, well, particular way of saying stuff, and in the show her altoritarian, nerdy, extra detailed yet unenthusiastic, witty but anxious, fast pacing but weirdly polite way of speaking, it was all very clear that the shows demanded Paris to talk like that and the actress certainly didn't cared these traits in her natural speech, that's not what I'm talking about. There's just something about you tone, and particular enunciation that reminded me so, so much of that young actress voice, just you know, more mature, like 20 years later.
I think its interesting that so many actors share their process when Meisner said to keep it private...
The whole point of Method criticism is that it’s specifically NOT “what they need to do to get where they need to go”. That is, they could act just as well without being a pretentious pain in the ass, and the Method has a placebo effect at best. It’s about their ego more than their actual acting performance. These are coddled narcissists who become insecure about having a cushy profession that they might not feel fully engaged with, so they gravitate toward an extreme approach and then advertise how hardcore and serious they are to anyone who will listen. This is totally transparent in almost all cases.
no mention of Bobby Lewis who imo was best teacher of Method Acting. . he wrote book “Method or Madness”.. Bobby Lewis was in the Group Theater .. founded The Actors Studio w Elia Kazan ( both working directors) and gave it over to unemployed Lee Strasberg .. taught Meryl Steep at Yale where he created their Drama Department …he never sought spotlight .. he really knew The Method & taught but best ..♥️🎭⭐️no blah blah blaaa ,)
Ugh, yeah he was definitely someone that I tried to feature in the video, which went through MANY iterations. Unfortunately to keep it under 20 minutes I cut a lot of his parts (and many other people/talking points) out of the video. A little side note, I did manage to keep a piece of his voice over in (that’s actually him talking at about 2:24 😉). But you're absolutely right, Bobby Lewis was such an important figure and I appreciate your comment bringing attention to that! Ultimately this is just such a complex topic, the breadth of which could never be fully covered in one video.
Oh intersting, i heard about the dream work thing from Melanie lynskey as well, i hadnt realised it was so popular...ultimately its such an individual process and there are people able to snap in and out and people who cant which i find fascinating
Ooh, I didn't know that! I also find it incredibly fascinating
1:27 He can be too much & maybe overkill to some peers but as an actor, I 100% agree with that quote. Getting cast professionally, budget & time on the table, big project with the pressures that come with that, PLUS getting PAID big money (compared to 94% of working actors) makes you work obsessively. I've been there, for way, WAY, less money.
"For me it's mask-on / mask-off, I don't get mixed up with me and the character, I think that's sort of silly."
- Matthew MacFadyen
I had a good friend who landed a 30 second dog food commercial and pretended to be happy and excited about finally discovering food her dog really enjoyed. 2 weeks of preparation hell for Alpo.
I think journalists and studio PR's make more of it than what the actors do.
100% agree
If you need to be tear gassed to act tear gassed, you are not an actor, even if you call it "method acting".
Fantastic video!
Excellent video
I don't agree that all we should judge is the result of the work process. The process itself should be ethical.
Obviously we don't do whatever to make acting feel real. We don't murder people to have realistic crime shows. That is unquestionably above the line - so there IS a line. Question is were exactly is it. Murder is self evident but what about endangering others? Above the line?
Harming oneself physically? Above the line?
Harming oneself psychologically? Above the line?
Making others on set feel worried and unkomfortable, because they have reason to believe, that you might be harming yourself? Above the line?
Behaving plain unprofessionally, without actually hurting someone, but making everybodys day harder? Above the line?
Having a process that is silly from the outside - no harm done, do whatever silly thing you consider helpful. But method has gain notoriety because people that proclaim the loudest to follow it, go way beyond behaving a bit silly and arguably cross that line.
Look, I get that certain actors achieve better results down the method route. And more power to them. But if you can walk in off the street, flip seamlessly into character and then out at the end of the day - that's talent.
Great video. ❤
great video!
I have studied The Method (yes the original method acting technique taught by Lee Strasberg) at the Lee Strasberg Institute itself by the son of Lee Strasberg.
And I will tell you Now, that all our teachers said what the people do „being in character and living in character“ IS NOT METHOD!
Method is creating sensorial stimuli for you to respond to…
But what all
Actors do with „I lived on the street“ etc is not Method.
That’s a huge misunderstanding with people. It’s when actors do their own thing and call it method.
I remember all our teachers and especially David Lee Strasberg saying that Jared Leto is doing his own thing and that it should not be called Method Acting.
Thanks for my TED talk
Also, when it comes to things like people then doing the job of the character and living it out… that’s what we call Research. But that’s not method. Staying in an accent for ages is Preparation.
Is as what the guy described in the video… it’s creating sensory and reacting to it.
Andrew Garfield spoke out what a lot of people who study method think.
That unfortunately method is very misunderstood.
And Jared Leto lots of times is just being a d*ck… I was told this by multiple
People who were on a set with him.
TED talks are welcome here, and you bring up some really great points! This is why I felt it was important to briefly touch on the Method’s lineage from Stanislavsky, through the Group Theatre, to its legacy today. There’s actually an excellent book by Isacc Butler that does a much better job at this than me.
One of the bigger points I was trying to get across in the video is that, what most people call ‘method acting’ today is not necessarily the Method taught by Strasberg. That staying in character, maintaining an accent, living the life of a character, etc. can all be part of an actor’s process, and that doesn’t mean they’re a Method actor. Ultimately, whatever methods or processes they use shouldn’t really matter if it’s not damaging to themselves or the cast and crew.
Thank you for taking the time to watch and comment on the video. It means a lot!
NEEDED THIS VIDEO! SHOUT OUT TO YOU.
Glad you found it helpful!
I'm very interested in this topic - and this is the best video I've ever seen explaining it - the specific pedigree re Strasberg and Emotional Memory - a separate question is why the subject is derided this way - see American Splendor re how our tabloid culture turns everything into a freak show, for click-bait - esp processes involving privacy and vulnerability, like blood for the sharks
- nobody asks why Tom Cruise risks his life doing stunts, and nobody asked why Olivier threw himself down the stairs every night for Coriolanus, but if it's personal feelings, REAL "deep" feelings, then our voyeurism kicks in, and the industry feeds off this - like the paparazzi
- also, the Stanislavski ethos of Truth is something that suggests some sense of higher purpose (like a love of poetry, etc), something else for the vultures to pick at
- yes, there's a genuine public fascination w the magic of acting, as one might expect, but media folks covering this could easily inform themselves about this, but they don't, shockingly, not even on a basic level,
so IMO that shows it's more about media stoking a circus show, intentionally keeping the talk crude and sensationalistic (their bread and butter) and playing to underlying strains of sadism and voyeurism in their audiences - but there's also something about how the mainstream now attacks the humanities, etc
- something smells like a kind of pervasive bullying - like the popular clique asking the bookworm about her favorite books, and she thinks it's a real conversation, but in fact it's so they can jeer at her more, like she's a zoo specimen - are they threatened by her unapologetic sensitivity?
We don't pontificate about other professions this way, because we don't claim to know how they work, but we're quick to assume knee-jerk reactions to acting (to the process of acting, as opposed to reacting to this or that performance)
Are we maybe building up our idols so we can tear them down? So many of these famous Method performances are precisely the ones most beloved by the public, the same public that is tempted to mock these people for giving them exactly what they want so much
- is it jealousy, a flip side to the glamor of acting? Or is it something unresolved in the public's own deep responses to the work onscreen? IMO this ties to some important questions about how aware we are of ourselves as spectators, and how our media industry taps into this
Re Stanislavski and Truth - yes, there's also something almost religious here, that Strasberg cultivated and played up for PR as a kind of guru figure
- and internally, among practitioners in the field, I can see the reaction to this,
among Stanislavski vets like Adler and Kazan (I'm so sorry to hear that rift made the Group Theatre collapse - IMO we really need a high profile institution like that, like an American RSC, a kind of national symbol - the Actor's Studio stepped into that gap, and Strasberg deserves credit for that, but IMO a repertory company like the Group would have been better), the debates within the Stanislavski-sphere - there is some bad blood there
and also on another level between American Stanislavski and the Shakespearean British tradition, that old rivalry (like jazz vs classical, Dionysus vs Apollo) - the Method and its legend as part of a uniquely American-grown aesthetic, that the US promoted during the Cold War as part of its distinct national identity, like NASA or Abstract Expressionism
- yes, there are legitimate debates to be had here, and concerns to be raised, re our relationship to representation and artifice - how actors use Method immersion to set up a kind of autopilot framework to support their performance,
so consciously they can focus on other things - like Miles Davis preparing himself mentally so he can stay in the groove - again, in jazz this is something respected and admired
Anyway, great video - IMO, for anyone interested in this topic, this is the video they should see FIRST, to get a basic sense of clarity about this conversation
how about a piece entirely on requiem for a dream ? that would be great.
Don't tempt me! 😆
The Leto hate in these comments scares me though...
nah. in the words of laurence olivier "have you tried acting?" method is just hokum, so it sparks puff pieces on why they deserve some award later in the season.
At the end of the day, the only acting that really counts is the acting you perform while the camera is on.
Doing research is always cool. But I feel sometimes ppl do stuff like drive taxis for fun.
15:44 This has made me think because I film with my friends. I tend to make a lot of creative decisions and I typically advocate for subtlety. We aren’t super serious about it, the first few videos we made all included NERF guns, but I feel like we could be making something more y’know? Anyway, we’ve just recently started adding scripts to our videos (everything else before was basically improv) but before that, my friend who created the group almost always suggests that the actor says something that explains what’s going on to the audience. I try to counter this with the rule of show-don’t-tell for things that don’t really need explaining. However, maybe I should let up. Maybe I should take a second glance at what they’re doing and consider their feelings. Because if I don’t, our group could fall apart over creative differences. It’s happened time and time again in the past and that’s the one thing I don’t want. Thanks for enlightening me!
I did some acting as a student. One time I tried to “get into character “ and got so emotional that I forgot my lines. Fortunately it was only rehearsal.
I heard that when Meryl Streep played the role of Margaret Thatcher she would continue to use the Margaret Thatcher voice even during breaks. That makes perfect sense, because even a great actress like Meryl Streep would’ve had to work long and hard to get not only the accent, but the actual speech patterns of a real person who only died a few years before the making of the movie. However, if Daniel Day-Lewis actually thought he was Abraham Lincoln during the filming of that movie,… At the very least, he needs a long holiday.
These actors are truly great. Thanks to them I actually almost believe that acting is a really complex thing to do.
Fascinating explanation of the origins of Method Acting, and what a wonderful way to end the video, exhorting the viewer to accept whatever preparation is required for the actors art. Because acting is an artform. It's making something out of nothing. And at times that something is soul piercing. I still haven't gotten over Brendan Fraser's performance in The Whale. I don't struggle with eating at all, but something in his gentle self destruction opened an old wound in me that's healing still. Acting isn't just entertainment. It's so much more than that.
One tecnique is not going to be the best for everyone and relying on one technique is not going to produce a master actor. I think studying "The Method" is something that would benefit every actor, but you should pull what's useful to you and not become a slave to it. The problem with that technique is being able to shake off the character and it's effects on the actor. I also found use from all the teachers mentioned as well as others but Meisner's technique was the most beneficial for me because one of the major points is being able to turn on and off at will, and that became my rule to govern every other technique I employed. It's obviously more healthy to be in control of yourself as the actor and as a person, rather than allowing a character to take over to the point of control, which ceases to be acting and resembles something more akin to scizophrenia or posession.
I see it as a power trip. “I’m the most important artist on set because my torturous process is titanically heavy and deep”
Give me attention and let me do whatever weird thing
It helps if you look at it as different tools to achieve a goal. One tool doesn't have to be the answer to all things, some tools work better for some people while other people may prefer different tools.
That's why neither Strasberg, Adler, or Meisner were wrong. They were all right in their different ways, because they are using different aspects of the same tool. It doesn't matter if Stanslawski changed his mind, he invented that tool and Strasberg fine tuned it. It doesn't matter that Stanislawski went other ways, because other people picked up that tool and achieved great success with it.
In the end, it doesn't matter if "The Method" worked or not, are true or not, is the best method or not. It worked perfectly for those actors who picked up that particular tool. While other actors achieved similar success with other tools.
The method of acting doesn't really matter, what matters is if it works to get you places better than other methods. It's just one way of many to define and describe a way of working with acting.
Great point! I feel like Strasberg, Adler, and Meisner's techniques had more in common than any of them would care to admit, and most actors probably use a combination of techniques, rather than strictly adhering to one.
Say what you want about it in theory, but I don't think I've seen a performance in a TV show as organic and nuanced and real feeling as Kendall Roy
I find it weird that you didn't mention Brando. Method in America is so tied to him and his perceived star person. He brought together an ideal of masculinity and Method that deeply affected the work of future actors. This partially explains certain "eccentricities" that are so fashionable in his disciples.
excellent video otherwise.
Student of Stella Adler, though. Not Lee Strasberg
Brando admittedly never enjoyed or found useful any of the things Strasberg taught him. He rather praised his time training with Stella Adler. He actually was a method actor, but not that Method we've all heard of.
I think the video did show a clip of him - I don't recall the video really discussing any of the actors themselves, beyond the testimony of the ones interviewed
I was in a film where I was to be murdered (dowsed in gasoline and set on fire.) The actress threw real gas on me and then lit a match and tosses it towards me. Thank goodness it was windy and the match went out before it hit me. I screamed CUT! The actress who was also the director got very angry. I said, "You tried to kill me!" and she said, "Of course. I'm a method actress!" And I then said "I'm out of here" and I left.
That's insane, I'm happy you made it out okay. I don't know how someone could even consider doing that to another person, for something as meaningless as a film.
@@leonardo.diCATio The woman was a psychopath. in retrospect I have a feeling it was a snuff film.
How did things get that anywhere near that far? This sounds like something one would report to the police
@zmani4379 do you actually believe that story 😅😅😅
I don’t know, guess I don’t care how an actor gets to the place they need to go for a performance but I do care if they create a hostile work environment. I work in the film and TV industry and I’ll just say when one actor goes “method” but the others don’t have to it can sometimes cause a little bit of resentment because the method actor does cause additional stress, and when you are working 12hr days six days a week extra stress can be… well bad.
Ultimately actors are at the top of the food chain so their needs will take precedent over the rest of the crew but I’d just ask that actors be mindful of how their behaviour affects others over a long shoot.
I think there’s this implication that the backlash against method acting is part of gossip culture, but I honestly do think part of it is from that there have been several instances where there is tension on sets. Perhaps these stories can help keep actors more mindful of their behaviour. I don’t think that’s a bad thing.
I watched the whole video ans still don't get what is method acting. Can someone point me to the exact timing where they list the techniques?
8:53
If you've seen Tropic Thunder, it's what Robert Downey Jr.'s character was doing to an extreme degree.
It's a hard way too go. It works but emotionally it's devastating.
Awesome video
personally I don't consider talking full time with an accent to be method acting It does make it a lot easier
As an actor myself. I try to employ both technique acting with method. Technique can carry you through when you're having an off night, but I've never felt I've done my best unless I've employed some method.
Gian Maria Volonté spent months in factories, working along with factory workers in order to act in Elio Petri's "The working class goes to Heaven".