You've seen Stephen Book's ads on Showfax, Nowcasting, on walls of casting facilities,etc

I was curious if anyone has actually studied with Stephen? And if so, how many months and how was it?

No but I've read his book and he gives free seminars once in a while....he sounds really interesting and he is one of the teachers I've asked about myself because he claims to also teach actors to cry on cue:
http://stephenbook.com/images/pdf/bsw11-14-96.pdf

Interesting stuff!

/Foreigner

A number of people at Actor's Access have and are big fans. Check those archives. I also know one young guy I think is a good actor and he speaks highly of Book.

There are also some negatives that will come up, though far less, and at one point some over-enthusiastic devotees over-hyped his free seminar, but allowances made for people's different sensitivities and some over-selling, sum total he's at least worth checking out.

quote:

Originally posted by TRUTHTELLER59:
You've seen Stephen Book's ads on Showfax, Nowcasting, on walls of casting facilities,etc

I was curious if anyone has actually studied with Stephen? And if so, how many months and how was it?

I went to his free seminar last night. It was pretty interesting so I'm considering it.
It does feel like an oversell at times and he has a good system going to cause urgency to sign up. Ex: you can only join the group when it opens up (which is now) and if not you will have to wait 2 years to join the class because that is how long his "improve conservatory" goes on for and he doesn't allow new students in between.

Its about 250/month and a 2 month start up minimum.

He has an interesting approach which I think actors can relate to. So if you have the funds, I would def try it out. If not, get the book, see what you think and wait 2 years to join his new group.
Hope that helps

I studied with Stephen Book for three years. It was far and away the best acting class I have ever been in. It’s really a class in technique. You learn how to do everything (including crying on cue). And you learn it by doing it, not by watching others. It’s totally experiential learning, not traditional scene study. His logistics for the class are very helpful too. While it is a long term class, you only stay as long as you want to and pay on a month by month basis. Never-the –less, he doesn’t add actors to the group, so if someone leaves he doesn’t replace them. This is great because there is no stalling while he catches up new people like in other classes. Also, there is no auditing which is great because there are never any strangers there. His free seminars are his substitute for auditing, which is why he only does the seminars every couple of years, just prior to forming a new group.

AaronH88 - thanks man, can you elaborate on what you do in class, what types of exercises, group work etc and to all the skeptics - how he teaches one to cry on cue and how that doesn't necessarily have to be bad acting, please???

/Foreigner

Those who think the ability to cry on cue is bad acting are wrong. Technique is technique. If the director wants you to cry at a particular moment, shouldn’t you be able to do that? And, “Do it right now because we are losing the sun!” Wouldn’t the bad actor be the one who doesn’t know how to do that?

Stephen Book taught us the importance of playing the scriptwriter’s intent for the scene, i.e., what the writer wants; and not the approach of focusing on what the character wants, which was my approach until this class showed me another way.

When I started out as an actor I did not know that with technique I could achieve desired and pre-selected emotions. The emotional aspect of Book’s technique is “physicalizing emotions.” Physicalizing emotions allows the actor to make and perform an emotion choice or to fulfill an emotion direction without a context of “playing my objective.”

How do you physicalize emotions? I’m not a teacher. I just know how to do it because Book taught us with experiential training in class.

If you want to learn how to do it by reading about it, you can read the emotion chapter in his book, “Book on Acting: Improvisation Technique for the Professional Actor in Film, Theater, and Television.”

Also, if you want a description of what kind of exercises we do in class, then again I refer you to his book, which has descriptions of the exercises.

I hope this helped you out.

Cheers,
~Aaron

THANKS AARON....and AMEN!I'm glad to hear from people who knows about this. I did actually read Book's book some years ago, maybe I should re-read it but it sure helped a lot and confirmed what I was trying to say that some teachers actually teach "crying on cue" without it being flat, unreal, bad acting and so on.

I look forward to reading what other people think of your post about playing the writer's intention - so let me ask the first questions: What's the difference between what the writer wants and what the character wants? Isn't it the same since the writer created the character?

/Foreigner

I finally went to one of the free classes and was actually impressed.

Unfortunately, I can't join the next group. I would have to wait a year and a half from now.

I have the book, so I'm probably going to set up a group of actors to work on the exercises.

Also, I'm thinking about going to The Acting Center which shares the same belief as Stephen, applying improv to scripted acting.

I've never gone to any of his classes or seminars but I've had 2 friends that went and they liked him

quote:

Originally posted by TRUTHTELLER59:
I finally went to one of the free classes and was actually impressed.

Unfortunately, I can't join the next group. I would have to wait a year and a half from now.

I have the book, so I'm probably going to set up a group of actors to work on the exercises.

Also, I'm thinking about going to The Acting Center which shares the same belief as Stephen, applying improv to scripted acting.

Could you elaborate with what he did in regards to "crying on cue"? I've always held to the belief that result oriented acting is generally a bad idea, and if you were impressed by what he did, I'm very curious as to how it all worked.

He actually did not talk about the "crying on cue" stuff at the seminar.

His thing is creating spontaneity while doing memorized lines. The idea is you do a different but as great if not better than the first take.

quote:

His thing is creating spontaneity while doing memorized lines. The idea is you do a different but as great if not better than the first take.

I agree with that 100%. I don't think great acting can exist if you don't make it a point to be different every time. Especially if you're doing a show seven times a week for a year+. You're bound to get bored if you don't find new ways of doing things.

Guys, go to his website, there are several videos where he talks about Improvisatioin Technique as he calls it. It's interesting. And also check out the link in one of my earlier posts here...

In regards to the "crying on cue" he talks about breathing and how you naturally breathe when you're angry, sad, happy and so on. And he says your breath patterns will be the same way for the rest of your life and if you can recognize those patterns you can recreate REAL emotions that way...ON CUE.

The Acting Center sounds really good too. I went to the intro class and they are very much the same with improv and teaching their students to believe in themselves and teach their students to become independent actors with their own opinions and not based on a certain guru actor...I don't know how they do this, I've been asking this question on here myself.
Also, some claim they are related to Scientology.....however I liked them a lot because of the positive energy and their belief in their students (perhaps this is very Scientology, I don't know??)

quote:

Originally posted by foreigner:

The Acting Center sounds really good too. I went to the intro class and they are very much the same with improv and teaching their students to believe in themselves and teach their students to become independent actors with their own opinions and not based on a certain guru actor...I don't know how they do this, I've been asking this question on here myself.
Also, some claim they are related to Scientology.....however I liked them a lot because of the positive energy and their belief in their students (perhaps this is very Scientology, I don't know??)

Stephen Book talks about how improv can help you in becoming your own teacher and judge and the founders of The Acting Center also happen to be trained in improv like Stephen Book and thus emphasize improv with scripted material. And based on the orientation, it sounded almost like the stuff that Stephen talked about in his seminar namely about being spontaneous with each take.

I think Scientology has little to do with what they teach at the Acting Center. I know a lot of people there who are Scientologists and never once have they tried to push that on me. I also didn't get a Scientology vibe when going to the Orientation.

Just wanted to make clear that I didn't feel like they were trying to push Scientology on me at the Orientation either nor did I get a Scientology vibe there, so for me the place is cool and if I was in LA it would be one of the places I would seriously consider to train at.

quote:

Originally posted by foreigner:
In regards to the "crying on cue" he talks about breathing and how you naturally breathe when you're angry, sad, happy and so on. And he says your breath patterns will be the same way for the rest of your life and if you can recognize those patterns you can recreate REAL emotions that way...ON CUE.

I agree that breath is really important, but more so along the lines that breathing well help you concentrate. When human beings concentrate they tend to hold their breath, and learning not to do that will keep your concentration up for the rest of the scene. Also the breath is kind of a roadway for emotions and feelings to come out of so it's always important to breath well in a scene.

I suppose I could work myself into a certain emotion by breathing a certain way... but it's not something I'd ever want to do while I'm working... maybe as an emotional prep... but not once the camera's rolling...

Jon_K I totally understand your point in your last post and I do agree with you, however, what Book teaches could/might be really powerful and might change your mind in regards to working with breath in his way: "but it's not something I'd ever want to do while I'm working"....that's what so great about learning new things, you never know, maybe if you learned it you might find it so useful you couldn't work without it!!

What I mean is, you say: "I suppose I could work myself into a certain emotion by breathing a certain way" and that already exudes negativity from the beginning and makes it sound like you don't believe in it or that you don't think it'll work for you or like it's bad acting or something...do you know what I mean?
And I'm pretty sure it's not supposed to be bad, difficult, inorganic, unnatural, unreal or whatever word best describes "bad acting". I think Book means it to be(-come) a natural part of your life(acting) to a point where the breathing is second nature to you and you don't even have to "work for it", you know...

The problem in this discussion is that none of us knows exactly what it is Book does and thus we can explain it and so it (the breathing training) sounds weird...but I would like to learn it myself.

/Foreigner

I spent about two years of my life trying to learn how to do "emotions on cue." And I was able to do it reasonably well... but after those two years I began to realize that that's not what great acting is about.

So when I say, "it's not something I'd ever want to do while working," I mean that I've tried it before, and I don't like the results it produces. Perhaps Stephen Book knows something about the breath that I haven't been taught before, and perhaps it was just the teacher that taught it to me - but I doubt it.

And the ironic thing is... predetermining what emotions you're going to do goes 100% against what his "improvisation technique" is about. Making it a point to be different every time is about exploring and experimenting and taking in the possibility that the particular emotion you thought might be right for a particular moment could be something else. And maybe I overlooked something, but I didn't see any "emotions on cue" stuff in the videos on his website. Perhaps I overlooked the link.

I remember doing some extra work and watching one of the leads choke up exactly on cue at exactly the same moment, take after take.

Sometimes what the director wants is hamburger, no matter how fine your filet is. You should have some in the freezer in case you need it.