10-13-2009, 11:01 PM
I directed a play a couple years ago. It was grueling, but rewarding.
There are many approaches a director can take. Clint Eastwood is legendary for doing one or two takes before moving on -- he trusts his actors and lets them do their thing. George Lucas says he was paying homage to the wooden stilted acting in the old serials. James Cameron is a legendary perfectionist. Stanley Kubrick decided the best way to catch Wendy's breakdown in "The Shining" was to force Shelly Duvall to have a real one on the set.
The text itself is always open to interpretation -- is Lee peeved? Furious? Drunk? Is Austin scared of Lee? Humoring him? Egging him on? If you leave it up to the actors to decide what their intentions are, they may veer off course from each other. The director decides where the crucial beats are, and makes sure the two characters are in clear opposition.
Film and teevee acting is different from the stage, because the actor also has to consider how the shot is framed. The director has to make all that clear before shooting begins. What's more, the constant stop & start, as well as shooting out of order, means somebody has to make sure there's a continuity of intentions that would be natural in a staged play.
But even then, the film director can do a fantastic job, and then have his work butchered in the editing bay. It's not even a question of cutting things out, but about rhythm. There's a documentary about Star Wars which touches on Lucas having to fire the editor. The doc includes clips of the cantina scene as edited by the first editor, and then how Richard Chew edited it. It made a world of difference.
There are many approaches a director can take. Clint Eastwood is legendary for doing one or two takes before moving on -- he trusts his actors and lets them do their thing. George Lucas says he was paying homage to the wooden stilted acting in the old serials. James Cameron is a legendary perfectionist. Stanley Kubrick decided the best way to catch Wendy's breakdown in "The Shining" was to force Shelly Duvall to have a real one on the set.
The text itself is always open to interpretation -- is Lee peeved? Furious? Drunk? Is Austin scared of Lee? Humoring him? Egging him on? If you leave it up to the actors to decide what their intentions are, they may veer off course from each other. The director decides where the crucial beats are, and makes sure the two characters are in clear opposition.
Film and teevee acting is different from the stage, because the actor also has to consider how the shot is framed. The director has to make all that clear before shooting begins. What's more, the constant stop & start, as well as shooting out of order, means somebody has to make sure there's a continuity of intentions that would be natural in a staged play.
But even then, the film director can do a fantastic job, and then have his work butchered in the editing bay. It's not even a question of cutting things out, but about rhythm. There's a documentary about Star Wars which touches on Lucas having to fire the editor. The doc includes clips of the cantina scene as edited by the first editor, and then how Richard Chew edited it. It made a world of difference.