|
IS MOTION CAPTURE WORK IN YOUR FUTURE?
A young person entering the acting profession today can reasonably expect to sooner or later be asked to get into a motion-capture suit. Some movies, such as Sony Studio's Beowulf, are shot 100 percent with motion capture. Others, such as Benjamin Button, use a combination of live action and motion capture. The majority of video games are produced using mocap.
I do not know of any acting schools that at present include mocap training for actors, but there is no doubt that actors five or ten years from now will routinely be working with the technology. Therefore, it will be worth your while to take a look at the following links for first-person reports on what it is like for an actor to work in this new format.
I wonder what Lee Strasberg, Sanford Meisner or Uta Hagen would have thought of this evolution. Actors in rubber suits! Who knew?
"King of Mo-Cap Andy Serkis on Digital Action" (Wired)
"Avatar's Motion Capture Actor Talks Pretending To Be Eaten Alive" (io9.com)
"Anthony Hopkins Interview, Beowulf" (moviesonline.ca)
CHICAGO SCENE STUDY
The scene study workshop meets at The Acting Studio, 10 West Hubbard Street #2E, in the Loop. That is located half a block west of Hubbard and State streets. Hours are 7-10:30 on Thursday nights. It is free to audit once, and you can start at any time. Tuition is $135 per 4-week month.
PRIVATE COACHING
I am available for private coaching in Chicago. $75 per hour.
ACTING FOR ANIMATORS WORKSHOP SCHEDULE
Sept 12-17 - Changchun, China, 2009 Jilin International Game Forum
Oct 23-24 - Taipei, Taiwan, Digital Content Institute
Oct 28-31 - Beijing, China, Aniwow! Festival
Nov 14 - Sunnyvale, California, Cogswell Polytechnical College
CRAFT NOTES
Re-Imagining Conflict
The word "conflict" has a different meaning for actors than it does for normal people. If you Google "conflict definition", you'll get dozens of links, any of which will provide some variation on this from Answers.com:
- A state of open, often prolonged fighting; a battle or war.
- A state of disharmony between incompatible or antithetical persons, ideas, or interests; a clash.
It is perfectly understandable that non-actors would therefore think of conflict as something undesirable. That is why you will also find many links if you Google "conflict resolution". There are entire companies devoted to nothing other than resolving conflict between two parties. If a married couple has conflict, they go to a family counselor in order to eliminate it. If conflict were a dog, normal people would be wagging their fingers at him, saying sternly, "Bad conflict! Bad conflict!"
But actors are not normal. There are numerous differences, and the one I want to focus on here is the way an actor uses that word "conflict". For an actor, "conflict" is synonymous with "obstacle". It might imply a fistfight or argument, but it can also apply to something positive. You can, for instance, be in conflict about whether to vacation in Paris or Rome. You can be in conflict about whether to order from the dessert menu Mom's Apple Pie or the Sinfully Delicious Chocolate Cake.
"Conflict", or "Obstacle", is an essential element of theatrical reality. Regular reality is what you have at the mall or grocery store. In regular reality, we see 100 percent of everything. People are not often willing to pay $50 for a seat to watch others shopping for groceries. Theatrical reality, by contrast, is compressed in time and space. It has form. The writer is showing the part of reality that best helps tell his story. Shakespeare did not elect to have a scene in which Romeo and Juliet are relaxing at the beach. He chose the balcony scene because that was a transitional moment for the young couple.
For an actor, "conflict", or "obstacle", is part of the equation of acting. An actor plays an action in pursuit of an objective - while overcoming an obstacle. The obstacle is largely what makes the moment theatrical. A director could make a theatrical moment out of grocery shopping if he released a skunk into aisle three. Without the skunk, we have shoppers playing actions (shopping) in pursuit of an objective (food for dinner), but there is no obvious conflict. Add that skunk, and the scene just might be worth paying $50 to watch.
But an "obstacle" or "conflict" does not have to be the equivalent of a skunk on the loose. Maybe you are out on your fifth date with someone you feel awfully happy to be with. Should this relationship be intimate? Will intimacy ruin it? Will he still love me in the morning? That is conflict, too.
There are only three possible kinds of "conflict"/"obstacle":
- Conflict with self. ("Will he still love me in the morning?")
- Conflict with situation. (Trinculo is afraid of a looming storm in The Tempest.)
- Conflict with another person. ("Give me your money. I have a gun.")
At least one of those should be present whenever an actor is acting. You can have more than one simultaneously, but it is not an option to have none of them. If there is no "conflict"/"obstacle", it is an acting error.
Another way to look at this is to consider a scene to be a negotiation. Any negotiation implies conflict of some kind. You can negotiate with yourself ("Chocolate Cake or Apple Pie?"), with your situation ("It is snowing, and my winter coat is at the cleaners"), or with another person ("I will jump if you will, too"). Playwright David Mamet gave a talk to a group of writers in New York some years back, and he said, "A scene is a negotiation. If you write a scene and cannot name the negotiation, the scene cannot be fixed. Tear it up and write another scene." This is also true for an actor, except that she does not have the option of tearing the script up. Even if you are given a scene that clearly has no conflict in it, which is extremely common with supporting roles on television shows, you have to find a way to add some. Just keep in mind the part about conflict not having to be negative. Since you used to be a normal person, it is not all that easy to hang onto this new use of the word.
Ideally, if we could freeze-frame actors on stage and ask each of them what he is doing, the actor should be able to answer the question in terms of action, objective and obstacle. Even if a character is standing there doing nothing but listening to the other fellow's monologue, he must still have action, objective and obstacle. Acting has almost nothing to do with words. The one that is listening may be choosing places to interrupt the monologue - and then deciding not to do it. That is what we mean when we refer to "active listening". When you listen, you are actually doing something. Listening is not simply an absence of talking. Harold Pinter understood this better than most, and it is a key to appreciating the famous pauses in his plays.
Many new actors today are taught to be "real", spontaneous, emotional and "honest". All of that is good stuff, but those qualities by themselves, are not enough. Acting is doing something. Once again: Acting has form. Action in pursuit of an Objective while overcoming an Obstacle. You play an action until something happens to make you play a different action. And, yes, you should be doing all of that honestly, spontaneously and for real.
Until Next Month . . . Be Safe! |
