quote:

Originally posted by M1chae1:
I learned more in the first two features I worked on than in my entire time at college.

I think it depends on the person and the school as well. But take a moment to think about what else you would NOT have known if you hadn't gone to college.

Unless the theatre program you attended was 100%, absolutely, completely crap... I have a hard time believing that you didn't learn quite a bit that maybe you took for granted after working in real theaters.

Of course you learn in school. My point was I personally learn a lot more by either being on stage, or being on set.

School taught me things...but it didn't teach me things I couldn't have learned 'on the job.' I'm not saying you should show up to an audition, set or stage completely ill-prepared...you should definitely take time to research on your own--this is part of your job. Also, film actors should be getting with indie companies and shooting shorts and indie features together...learning the process together. No one is going to crucify you on an indie set for not knowing what a C-47 is...but in time you'll learn. I use that as a funny example...but this can be applied to all things learned on set. And then when you've done it enough, you can confidently step onto a big-budget production knowing you're prepared for anything.

Also, not to cause trouble with this thread, but school also teaches you to doubt...it can confuse you with myriad techniques I feel people don't necessarily need. I won't go into the details...but I will say school isn't always a good thing (nor are acting classes).

Each school is different...as is each class, and each teacher. Just make sure it's right for you...and it feels right.

quote:

I would be the happiest person in the world to do repertory theatre for the rest of my life.

I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with a lot of what has been said on this thread based on that sentence if the OP is serious and knows what he's saying. Not to denigrate pure screen actors, but that implies playing the classics well with very little direction and you're probably going to need to go through a period of immersive classical training at some point to develop the skillsets and knowledge it takes unless you're some kind of supergenius like Ben Kingsley which ain't likely. You might be able to get somewhere near the equivalent bouncing between the various studios for "acting," but you'd be hard-pressed to get all the voice, movement and text work doing so and you'd be so busy trying that you really might as well just be in school. That's not even considering the impossibility of having all the classes coordinated to replicate the synergy between them you'd get at the good classical programs. It's no accident that the vast majority of actors you'll see playing the big roles by Shakespeare, Chekhov et al. on Broadway, the major regional theatres and Shakespearean festivals have had that kind of training. It's also no accident that famous screen actors who have not had that kind of training so often fall flat on their faces when they get stunt cast in those roles. It's similar to the difference between pop and classical musicians. Techniques and knowledge necessary to one can be irrelevant or even an obstacle to the other although I personally think the "best" actors - Streep, Blanchett, Hopkins, Fiennes, etc. - are perfectly capable of doing either equally well.

I do think a legitimate criticism of many MFA and other conservatory programs is that some overtrain to the point that their graduates often need to go somewhere to knock off some of that polish - i.e. "unlearn" some things - to recover some of the raw edge that makes one unique and interesting under the microscope of the camera assuming "it" existed in the first place. There are also somewhere in the vicinity of 200 MFA and 150 BFA programs in the US and it stands to reason that the quality and depth of the training offered varies greatly. Some really just seem to serve the purpose of perpetuating academic theatre in all its polite, Muzak-like sterility. Hell, the MFA program at my home state's flagship university hasn't graduated a steadily working actor in many years, but has an awful lot of alumni training younger actors to be "professionals" at other college and university programs ...

This is about to become an extremely long post thanks to the block and move I'm about to do, but the British have an accreditation standard for their conservatory programs "to give students confidence that the courses they choose are recognised by the drama profession as being relevant to the purposes of their employment; and that the profession has confidence that the people they employ who have completed these courses have the skills and attributes for the continuing health of the industry." http://www.ncdt.co.uk/document...onGuide-08.05.07.doc

We don't have a standard like that here nor the reward of automatic union eligibility on graduation like they have, so caveat emptor when choosing a program or trying to decide if you want to attend one that has chosen you. It could, however, be useful to someone aspiring to be a "complete" actor to compare whatever you're getting to that standard to see what else you may need training-wise whether you are pursuing it scholastically or through the various studios although some aspects seem to go without saying. Also keep in mind this is something of a bare minimum ...

Acting

In assessing the quality of work in Acting, NCDT will look for evidence that student actors are being offered learning experiences, appropriate to their stage of study, which will enable them to:

i. develop and play a character in rehearsals and performances and sustain it before an audience or within the framework of an audio /visual production

ii. show evidence of the skills of characterisation

iii. create believable character and emotion appropriate to the demands of the text and production

iv. define the objectives of a character and embody and express these within the context of a production

v. make full use of individuality in performance

vi. work sensitively with other actors in both rehearsal and performance

vii. show evidence within performance of creative imagination, emotion, thought, concentration and energy

viii. develop an effective working process and the ability to monitor and evaluate its application

ix. draw upon and make use of personal experience and observation to assist in the creation of a role

x. prepare and sustain the quality of concentration necessary for each performance

xi. combine acting with singing and/or dancing and other appropriate skills within a performance

xii. use make-up, costumes and props effectively to develop performance

xiii. communicate to an audience with expression, emotion and spontaneity

xiv. adjust to the demands of different venues and media

xv. adjust to the nature and reaction of different audiences

xvi. read and interpret texts with accuracy and confidence

xvii. identify style and form of writing in order to reveal and express these elements within a performance

xviii. use textual analysis, research and observation in the development of a role

xix. study text, in both prose and verse, and make full use of the structures and phrasing in order to reveal character, intention and the development of a story

xx. create and sustain an improvised rehearsal or performance if required with discipline and spontaneity

xxi. show evidence of ability to devise and where appropriate, to direct, performance material from research and observation



Voice

In assessing the quality of work in Voice, NCDT will look for evidence that student actors are being offered learning experiences, appropriate to their stage of study, which will enable them to:

realise individual vocal potential

use and protect the vocal resources to the full

create and communicate character, emotion, thought and narrative through the use of language - spoken and sung

adapt and direct the voice with confidence according to different requirements and conditions, including the use of microphone

read and interpret texts and scores with confidence

perform rehearsed texts and scores in prose, verse and song and be clearly heard by the audience

express and communicate emotions and thoughts with spontaneity

communicate the meaning of texts of various periods and style

achieve vocal characterisation through the use of speech patterns, accents and dialects, including received pronunciation

communicate with confidence and assurance

read with clarity and understanding from a prepared passage and understand the needs of sight reading

apply vocal techniques of breathing, centring and relaxation in relation to pitch, resonance, projection and articulation and sustain long passages of speech in rehearsal and performance

understand the necessity to prepare and execute suitable warm-up exercises in order to protect the voice and ensure the optimum potential in rehearsal and performance

respond and listen to other actors and be aware of the audience

use music and song with confidence and to communicate an emotion

sing harmonically


Movement

In assessing the quality of work in Movement, NCDT will look for evidence that student actors are being offered learning experiences, appropriate to their stage of study, which will enable them to:

use the body to the full in a free, safe and flexible manner while taking care of physical resources

realise character, emotion and narrative through the use of body and movement

communicate physically in performance with confidence and assurance

move with understanding and awareness of space

move economically and expressively and use relaxation and balance as a sound basis for the efficient use of body and voice

assimilate and commit to memory and recall simple dance patterns demonstrating musicality and rhythm in the execution of dance movements and/or sequences

take part effectively in combat and action sequences under specialist direction with an understanding of the requirements for their own safety and that of their fellow performers and the audience

maintain stamina in specific movement tasks and demanding work over a lengthy period

understand the necessity to prepare and execute personal warm-up exercises in order to avoid personal injury and to facilitate the fullest use of physical skills in performance


Professional Skills

In assessing the quality of work in Professional Skills such as the preparation for auditions and interviews and a basic knowledge of industry and industrial relationships, NCDT will look for evidence that student actors are being offered learning experiences, appropriate to their year of study, which will enable them to:

show a responsible and consistent attitude towards self management

prepare a selection of appropriate audition pieces and be able to read at sight
effectively

show competence in self-presentation in correspondence and at interview

choose personal photographs which accurately reveal casting potential

choose appropriate clothes for warm-ups, rehearsals, auditions and interviews

target potential employers and prepare clear and concise CVs that provide accurate
and relevant information

record and maintain potential employment contacts in a systematic way

understand a union’s role in relation to the employment process and have the
opportunity to meet representatives of Equity in order to inform themselves of the
Trades Union

understand and appreciate the professional status which will be conferred on them
by their graduation from the course and their subsequent eligibility for membership
of Equity

understand the conditions of employment contracts and their implications

understand the function and role of agents, casting directors and potential employers

show an understanding of and a willingness to observe professional and contractual
obligation

show a knowledge and understanding of the entertainment industry and its
professional organisations, services and opportunities for further training

treat production teams with courtesy and consideration

show punctuality at auditions, rehearsals and performances

take accurate written notes given by directors and be able to absorb and implement
them

understand the importance of systems for the communication of rehearsal calls and
changes

plan work within a specified professional time scale

take care with props, costumes, wigs and equipment

understand the basics of the current taxation system and how to run their personal
tax accounts

develop an attitude to work which fosters professionalism based on a personal code
of practice

develop a commitment to and understanding of the necessity for continuing a
personal training programme beyond graduation


Recorded Media


The Camera

In assessing the quality of work in Acting for the Camera, NCDT will look for evidence that student actors are being offered learning experiences, appropriate to their stage of study, which will enable them to:

understand and respond to the technical demands of:

a. continuity
b. eye-lines
c. different sizes of shot

find their mark(s)

perform in scenes which are being shot or recorded out of sequence

pick up a scene from any line within it

understand the interview process and the respective roles of the personnel they may meet at interview i.e. casting director, director, producer, executive producer

understand how to prepare for the interview in those cases where they have been sent a script in advance

be capable of dealing with the need for fluent sight-reading

handle sight-reading in an interview situation with a video camera
focussed on them
understand the respective roles of the key members of an average
film/television crew
prepare for a screen role on their own in advance without rehearsal or other outside assistance

respond to circumstances or notes from the director which require them to deliver a performance quite different from that which they anticipated in their own private preparation

perform a role in a scene in the time that would normally be allocated to that scene on a television shoot under current industry conditions

understand the necessity to conserve their energy and concentration through a long shooting day, sustain it through numerous technical interruptions, draw on it when the moment comes for the take and sustain it for a whole series of takes of the same shot

be proficient in the processes of post-production in which their participation may be required e.g. additional dialogue replacement (ADR)

understand the requirements of commercials casting

act in front of the camera on exterior locations as well as interior or studio sets



The Microphone
In assessing the quality of work for the Microphone, NCDT will look for evidence that student actors are being offered learning experiences, appropriate to their stage of study, which will enable them to:

understand that working in radio drama is not to do with voice alone, but to do with acting

apply the same levels of preparation, concentration and stamina – both physical and mental – as are required to sustain performance in stage work

understand:

a. the microphone’s place within the scene and the character’s relationship to it
b. the listener’s imaginative contribution to the process of the drama
c. the nature of projection by means of the microphone
d. the processes of listening as opposed to simply hearing
e. disciplines for entering and leaving studios

be conversant with the geography of a standard script layout

be adept at:

handling scripts in mono and stereo for drama and in mono for readings
movement skills for both mono and stereo microphones,
avoiding inadvertent noise
textual analyses for both drama (including book readings) and commercials,
aural observation skills and listening skills;

master relative sound levels for the voice

pitch for shouting and equivalent close microphone vocal techniques

work under the real-time pressures of a commercial studio

Excellent post. Wonderful wealth of information and things an actor should learn/know.

But damn is that going to be overwhelming to a beginner. To many of us veterans, this list is second nature to us...we've been there and done that. We understand and are at least familiar with these tools, techniques, etc...for someone that is just beginning, they are going to think, 'Holy cow, I have a long way to go before I'm ready...'

Let's forget about 'naturals' for just a moment...they are the diamonds in the rough, and much does not apply to them...so...

A beginner needs to begin with taking classes (either in High School, University, private classes, etc) and start jumping in community theater and/or indie film. Once they are confident they are good (and if most of us can be honest with ourselves, we know if we are or not) I don't think general acting education needs to occur. I think by always working on stage or on set will be the best thing for you. Once you have your basic tool set, you can grow on your own--let's face it, you are either actively seeking growth, or you're not. If you have the core understanding of the craft, you will always grow--and the quickest, most effective way to grow is simply by doing it.

When you start having more time on your hands (which you shouldn't as an active aspiring actor), you can begin to delicately seek out private instruction...but this is not a necessary step to 'making it.'

I learned more in the first two features I worked on (as a lead) than my entire time at college. Yes, each school is different, and mine was simply decent...but I think my point is clear.

Sometimes actors can't see the forest through the trees. They need to stop over-thinking every single thing they do...they just need to get out to the non-union auditions and start working...THAT is the best education one can receive. You may suck your first few performances...but hey, most of us do...but you will get better, and if you're a quick learner, it won't take long before you're turning in passable performances. And after a few years of racking up the work, you'll start turning in good performances...and after a dozen or more years of active work, you'll start turning in great performances. You simply have to KEEP AT IT, and always be seeking growth.

My two cents.

I don't completely disagree with everything you've said since you're talking from the perspective of being a pure screen actor and maybe doing contemporary drama onstage. I do think, however, that I made it pretty clear that I was talking to someone who "would be the happiest person in the world to do repertory theatre for the rest of my life" thereby implying playing the classics. Yes, it's daunting to the beginner, but there's just no escaping the need for a lot of training in that case plus a good bit of ojt. This is especially true if you want to do that AND film. I'm kind of short on time this morning with a long rehearsal looming, so I'll let some others do some talking for me on that. Start reading about halfway down this discussion with jimtheump's first post and follow the dialog with JBActors to get an idea of what I'm talking about ... http://bbs.backstage.com/eve/f...=420104471#420104471

JBActors is right that one should first have the fundamentals down before beginning work on the classics and I think that's where you're coming from in a sense. Some of the better MFA programs would actually agree to an extent since they mostly take actors who have been out of college working for awhile into their entering classes. However, Jim is also right in what he says about the knowledge required to effectively play such roles and I'll add that there's no way on God's green earth you're going to get all that by "just doing it" ... unless you're Ben Kingsley. He's mainly just talking text there and barely goes into all the vocal and physical training needed that you will also never in a million years get by "just doing it." No offense, but you're probably something of a museum of bad habits in that context since you apparently have neither training nor experience in the arena. He's also specifically speaking to the considerations of playing Shakespeare and not even beginning to approach what goes into playing the other various verbally and stylistically complex theatre genres and styles none of which you'll have a prayer of getting by "just doing it." It's a whole different animal than just playing to type in low budget indie flicks ...

Fishgurl, this is the second time you've openly and directly insulted me. It does not look good for your character and opinions...

I DO have 'professional' training--from school, from group classes, and from private instruction.

I've also been in over a dozen theatrical performances and over a dozen films. Please don't assume you know who someone is when you bash them and their opinions--it only makes you look the fool.

Clearly if you are running deep into the territory of stage and Shakespeare, your trainings needs to take a different route. I never said you could learn ALL the things on that list by just 'doing it'...me thinks you don't really *read* and *interpret* what I write in my posts...you write as if you skim through what I'm saying (with a blinding bias).

Thank you. Could we please refrain from the insults and allow opinions to flourish without fear of flaming?

Thank you.

quote:

Originally posted by amo37:
Good training is good training, and some of the best training can be found in studios, not universities.

+1

Ian McKellen, another wonderful Shakespearean actor NEVER studied acting formally, by his old admission.

And, historically, during Shakespeare's time adn even before, you learned the play by being part of a company. There were no 'classes.' There were no acting schools or acting degrees or acting teachers. Your fellow actors were your teachers as well as you yourself. You learned by doing. You start by playing younger roles in the company, less important roles such as second spear handler from the left, and then worked your way up to the principal roles as you proceeded.

This idea of taking 'classes' is new in the history of acting. Acting IS doing. How you learn to act is different to each actor. For many, not one method or school or teacher 'teaches' you how to act.

Sanford Mesiner stated it takes 20 years to learn how to become a master actor. Did he mean take classes for 20 years to learn how to act? Hardly.

We all do what works for us. Not what someone tells us works for us.

Ian McKellen said he never criticizes those who study. The only thing he asks when watching actors is "are they truthful in their acting?"

Whatever works for you, works for you and sometimes ONLY you.

Amo, I absolutely agree.

FYI, I have a degree in theatre AND I studied in studios in LA and NY.

I have learned in my middle age that only I know what works for me. And, like many actors, I use bits and pieces of every technique, lesson, and class in my work. But I also use my own life experiences as well.

Whatever works for you. That is for you to discover, not a teacher. Break legs!

If you read my responses, you'll see that I completely agree. Well said.

It's just too bad that Ian McKellen is such a schlub of an actor. Psshhh.

Hey Michael. I saw you agree. I was just adding an addendum.

Everyone thinks their formula is correct.

When there is no formula.

Have a great one!

M1chea1,
I really hate being the mean girl, but c'mon, dude. You haven't been onstage in years and that was before you even came to New York unless you just haven't updated the resume you have linked. I do apologize for the tone of the last sentence of my last post on this thread. That was a little over the top, but understand that I was still in eye-rolling mode from you having jumped all over me on another thread for the simple, common sense aside that an actor who isn't working should be in class. I'm definitely not suggesting that everyone should do like me and get way out on the lunatic fringe of classical training at a total immersion conservatory if their primary goal is screen acting. That would be overkill, but don't you realize how bad the training is at most colleges and how completely unprepared it leaves people on even the very basics? Then, God forbid all the horrid mugginess that is so often encouraged in young actors at most high schools and community theatres. I think both our concerns are sincere for beginners, but don't you realize how many kids who were the star of their high school musical or whatever are walking around New York and LA trying to crash auditions completely kidding themselves about their abilities? A lot of them might have had sufficient talent to at least have a chance had they gotten some proper training. As it stands, most will never even get a shot at any on the job training since they'll never get a job in the first place. Do you really think that should be encouraged? Sorry, but I don't except for the 'naturals' we'll agree may be exempt. To me, what you're encouraging really applies more to the them than the rank and file of those trying to break in. I do think we can agree that no amount of training is going to help someone who doesn't have the gift in the first place and there are a lot of those walking around out there as well. There are also a lot of exceptionally good actors who don't have a camera friendly look, but that's a different discussion ...

Amo37,
Yes, McKellan - like Kingsley - was enough of a natural genius to have forgone formal training, but is discussing total exceptions like that really even relevant here? Are you one of them? I'm not although some in my home town would disagree ...Fortunately, I know better. What you say about the historical company system is also true, but it doesn't work like that at all anymore and you know that. These days, the person playing the second spear handler usually has a BA or a lightweight BFA degree and then goes on to graduate school for more training before moving on to the bigger roles. There are always exceptions, but that's the way it is in the big regionals and Shakespearean festivals where the principals can actually scratch out a living at it. I have a lot of friends who are doing that scene right now. In this age, they are no longer the only show in town and their income has to come from quality. They can't afford to just bring people along. You've gotta be ready from the start to play and understudy multiple roles you might not generally be considered 'right' for and still pull it off brilliantly. Even contemporary juvenile roles like Anne Frank are being played by petite conservatory graduates. I do completely agree that what works for one might not for another. I'm probably around half your age, but I, too, use bits and pieces of many different influences to which I've been exposed and some would generally be considered to contradict each other at first glance. None of that would have ever been apparent to me had I just moved to New York and winged it with the Meisner based training I started with. There's a whole world of possibilities out there with each having its strengths and weaknesses. Drink up ...

Fishgurl,

For the record, you're right, I haven't been on stage in about...12 months. How the heck do you know the last time I was on stage? My resume doesn't list years. Last year I played Agamemnon in The Wrath, for your information. And secondly, my 'BigTalent' website is out of date. Don't assume. Regardless, come on, I'm working several features at a time here, including webisodes and shorts. I simply don't have the time. I WISH I could squeeze in a stage performance on top of my film work, but I can't. And since film is my preference, I choose those jobs for my time. Not to mention, we all know stage takes up an extraordinary amount of time once you're committed to a project.

I don't think my not being on stage in the last year or so has anything to do with my knowledge of the theater, or the training that is required/suggested. I'm not a seasoned veteran, but I'm definitely not a noob you can patronize. How many years of experience and how many plays must one be in before they are taken seriously in the theater?

And yes, there is bad training in the Universities...I completely agree. But I'm also stressing how bad the training can be in acting classes as well. Trust me, I've not only heard horror stories, but I've lived them. Both sides of the coin can be ugly if you don't find the right instructor/s.

And again, I never said an actor doesn't need training. That idea keeps radiating from you, and I never even once eluded to it. I simply don't think an actor needs to contantly be in 'acting class.' I've made that pretty clear.

And you talk all this talk Fish...and you openly insult me and assume about me...I'd love to see your resume, training and your recent level of activity.

Do you have a link to your online resume and headshot?

Thank you.

There are no rules. No set limits, no set guidelines. Only opionions.

We all have those. We all have our own path.

Find what works for you, and use it. No matter what any other actor, teacher, mentor or person says.

The best acting teacher in the world is life.

M1chea1,
That's great! No, I'm not going to post my headshot and resume on here. I'm not using this message board for networking and personally think doing so is a bad idea, but to each his own. If I did, I would most certainly keep it updated and not get all huffy about it if I didn't and people made assumptions based on what it showed. It would show me being long on theatre, long on training, somewhat long on sketch comedy and improv, but short on TV and film. The other main criticism would be that I joined SAG sooner than conventional wisdom would dictate, but the advice I got from people in the business who know me was that it was a good move. Some opportunities, you just can't turn down ... Peace.

Michael,

Although it's extremely tempting because you come across as very arrogant, I'm not going to insult you.

However, I will say that I've talked with some very successful film actors who have told me that you need to study with great teachers - IN AN ACTING CLASS. Most movie stars are members of the Actor's Studio which is a free acting class located in New York or LA. Most working movie stars today were trained by either Strasburg, Meisner, or Adler.

And it's true. A few people are born with an innate gift, and they don't need training to make a living off acting. Most people, on the other hand, need a lot of training.

^^^^This. All of this.

I want to make more than cheesy horror films, personally. So, I will continue to train.

quote:

Originally posted by Fishgurl:
M1chea1,
That's great! No, I'm not going to post my headshot and resume on here. I'm not using this message board for networking and personally think doing so is a bad idea, but to each his own. If I did, I would most certainly keep it updated and not get all huffy about it if I didn't and people made assumptions based on what it showed. It would show me being long on theatre, long on training, somewhat long on sketch comedy and improv, but short on TV and film. The other main criticism would be that I joined SAG sooner than conventional wisdom would dictate, but the advice I got from people in the business who know me was that it was a good move. Some opportunities, you just can't turn down ... Peace.

Huffy? I owned one of those once...brings back memories.

Fish, come on...I forgot to put one piece of theater on my online resume...big deal. I'm not going after theater, I hardly think it would make a difference.

But you still absolutely assumed about what years I've been working on stage. And you still patronize me about not being, how should I put it, 'long' enough on theater to give accurate or worthy bits of advice.

I hardly believe any actor not willing to pony-up their resume upon request, especially after they act like they are all that.

I'm not here to make enemies...and I always rub some people the wrong way...usually the people that don't/won't post resumes online.

Guys seriously. I really am cool with everyone, as long as they don't insult me.

I don't think I deserved to be insulted, simply because I disagree with the notion that actors need always be in class. That certainly doesn't call for name calling or insults.

quote:

Originally posted by miss stone:
^^^^This. All of this.

I want to make more than cheesy horror films, personally. So, I will continue to train.

Wow. Can you be any more ignorant? Did you not look at my resume? Did you take a quick gander at my Myspace and judge me?

I'm doing a heck of a lot more than horror films.

I've worked on 8 films that could be considered horror, and 8 films that aren't horror at all.

In addition to over a dozen plays...

My favorite thing is when people make themselves look like a fool by calling me a cheezy horror actor...lol.

Oh man. Listen, I'd rather work, and meet talented filmmakers, then not work at all. And if that means act in a horror film, I'll do it.

You'd be surprised just how many people see my horror films...and trust me, I'm not going to be a non-union actor all my life...I've got a plan--just like all of you have. Don't judge me because I've done a handful of horror films.

Most importantly, before you openly insult someone and assume what they've done or are doing, try doing a little more research first, it will keep the feet out of the mouths.