At The Actors Studio, an actress presented a scene for the sole purpose of ending it with an “Affective Memory”. She stated that it had been a very long while since she had any need of one in her work, and wanted to keep that part of her acting arsenal alive and functioning. As a quick reminder, an Affective Memory is the go to exercise that will bring a specific emotional response at a specific level. That day’s moderator was Shelley Winters, a long time member, an important film star, and a regular on Broadway and in touring companies.
Read MoreThere are so many good teachers available for actors to get good training. I am biased towards Lee Strasberg’s teachings not only because I studied with him, but also because it made the greatest sense to me and it works. It always amazes me how many people choose teachers based on their actors’ resumé rather than on their teaching background. This usually comes up during an entrance interview for my classes. When I ask who they’ve worked with in the past, prospective students often tell me the name of an actor whose career consists of some TV credits, or occasional film work, or showcase theatre productions.
Read MoreAlthough Lee did not directly address this in his classes, the names that we call our exercises are for training purposes only. As we discussed our scenes and processes with him we had to have a common vocabulary. Therefore, if an actor said s/he was working on an “overall sensation”, or a “personal object”, or a “specific place”, etc. Lee and the rest of the class knew immediately what the actor was trying to achieve. In actual performance there is no need for these labels because the work itself will not be discussed as it is in the classroom – not even with the director. Instead, the actor will have available an active imagination. and will be truthful and believable due to all of the training and homework that preceded performance. Sometimes the work that is created defies naming, but thanks to all the classroom work, takes the actor wherever it is necessary to go.
Read MoreAs long as people think about acting as a representational art, rather than as a creative, experiential art, the perception that there isn’t any place for Method Acting in comedy will persist. In other words, if the various sensory exercises are only used to generate real emotions and behaviors, and then applied to result oriented acting, the best that can be hoped for is predictable reactions expressed organically. It will help to refer back to last week’s posting to follow this reasoning.
Read More“Am I going to have to relive and re-experience the horrors of my past in order to learn this work”? This common question started off the new academic year of 2015-2016 for my college sophomores. It was met by stares and groans of affirmation and concern from a large part of the rest of the class.
Read More“I become my character”! That’s something that I have heard attributed to Method Actors for as long as I can remember. Certainly, I heard this long before I began studying with Lee Strasberg. There’s plenty of anecdotal evidence to support this kind of thinking, and the popular press loves to report it. We hear stories of actors who insist on being called their characters names, day and night, even off the set or out of the theatre. Some actors tell tales of “losing themselves in the characters”, and others report that “it becomes so real that I forget who I am”, or “even when I’m with my family and friends I can’t stop being who I am in this film (or play)”. And again, reporters love to call this “real Method Acting”.
Read MoreAn often repeated complaint about Method Acting is that actors get so involved in what they are creating for a scene that they don’t have enough room left to be “in the scene” and “in the moment”. There are even complaints that the creative work in Method Acting takes an actor “out” and is a distraction from the script. Lee Strasberg made sure that all people who worked with him (both in his classes and at The Actors Studio) understood that it was necessary to pay attention to the other actors and to react and respond to them. He emphasized that it was important to “stay in the moment” so that the responses would be spontaneous rather than be pre-planned.
Read MoreLong before I began studying with Lee Strasberg, I heard and read about how difficult it was to understand Method actors. It seems that the perception was that, even with all of the “reality” that was achieved in their acting, no one could be heard or deciphered. Of course, as the first and leading proponent of the Method to reach super-star status, Marlon Brando was accused of this more than anyone. “Marlon mumbles” was an often heard and repeated complaint.
Read MoreWhether at The Actors Studio or elsewhere, when an actor says that his/her character would do something a given way, I can still hear Lee Strasberg’s voice saying, “how do you know what your character would do? You don’t even know what you would do.” I can also remember sitting in his class and being very confused. After all, didn’t the writer tell me not only what my character would say, but also what he would do, and how he would do it? Even if the script didn’t supply this information, wouldn’t my director tell me how I should do things?
Read More“The lines are not important”. Lee Strasberg actually said this, out loud and often. What is rarely reported is how he went on to describe the way in which they should be seen in the context of our craft. This has led to many misperceptions and abuses. I have heard actors paraphrase (they also erroneously call this improvising), and even go off the lines altogether in the name of “the lines are not important”.
Read More