ShadowDance

Litz wrote: ↑

Sat Jul 20, 2019 4:47 pm

Тва приравняване на хора с дървета и животно е доста tone deaf.

Are there actors whom you look to as particular models for how you consider the job, consider the profession, or possibly approach your work? Any actors you’ve worked with, or from any other time? We have the whole history of filmed performances available to us now.

There were actors during the later Golden Age of Hollywood era that had a certain confidence, which I think was due to the force of this new, naturalistic style of performance. I’m thinking of actors like James Dean, Natalie Wood, and Marlon Brando. These actors were starting a revolution in Hollywood with screen acting. They had a very messy, unpredictable, and thrilling aspect to their performances, and watching them is thrilling because of it.

Yes, naturalism is the word that comes to mind. The emotions audiences were seeing on the screen were meant to feel authentic, which was very different from the earlier, diction-based style of acting. Previously, actors concentrated on being able to say a lot of dialogue with a beautiful accent, a beautiful voice, with a beautiful rhythm.

Yes, it was a different style of acting that I think expressed what was going on in the Zeitgeist. With actors like James Dean, Natalie Wood and Marlon Brando they exhibited a kind of liberation, a kind of unapologetic showcase of emotions. You even see it in the writing of the time with playwrights like Tennessee Williams and Arthur Miller. They would write these wonderfully dirty, complicated and ugly scenes for actors and audiences to experience. It was a time of real guts.

Do you think that mode or that generation is still important today?

You know, acting goes through trends.

Are we seeing an acting trend today?

Hmm… We live in such a weird time that is sort of identity-less in a lot of ways. I don’t know if there’s a trend in performance, but there’s certainly trends in casting right now. Today there’s a lot of emphasis and conversation about what acting is and who we want to see represent ourselves on screen. The question now is, what is acting anyway?

Right. Who gets to play what roles…

You know, as an actor I should be allowed to play any person, or any tree, or any animal because that is my job and the requirements of my job.

Yes. Must you only represent yourself, your gender, your ethnicity, or can you, in fact, play beyond these categories?

There are a lot of social lines being drawn now, and a lot of political correctness is being reflected in art.

Does that bore you? Annoy you? Buck you up? Cheer you on? I know it’s complicated, there’s probably not one answer.

You know, I feel like it’s a trend in my business and it needs to happen for various social reasons, yet there are times it does get uncomfortable when it affects the art because I feel art should be free of restrictions. What do you think about it David? You’re literally creating art all the time.

We’re seeing a pendulum swing. The pendulum had gone way too far in one direction, and now it’s swinging the other way. We all agree it had to swing; the question now is how far it has to go in the other direction, and how long it will it take to reach a point of equilibrium. I have no idea. Personally, I feel that reactions to certain things in the arts have almost reached a level of mass hysteria, and the criteria by which certain works are being judged are pretty whacky, and yet those reactions seem justified to people of a certain generation. In the visual arts there’s an almost oedipal drive to get rid of the people above you, to elbow them out of your way. And that’s ongoing. I’m not a sociologist, but I think one aspect of the present mood is just the desire to get rid of people who are perceived as having been around too long.

Hmm, that’s interesting.

Do you know what I mean? It’s partly just biological.

I think that’s true. It’s important to keep focused on the work that is meaningful to you and to keep going.

Personally, I don’t feel that artists, writers, actors have to be superior, or even especially good citizens, but some people feel very differently about it. I mean, we would all like to be good people, good citizens. But the conflict between the two is the stuff of drama. Besides, mores change. There was an article recently in the New York Review of Books about Oscar Wilde that illustrated this dilemma. Viewed through the lens of our current morality, Wilde was a pedophile, which was the way many people of his class behaved in that time. That is no longer acceptable today for obvious reasons, but does that mean we must strip him of his status as a great writer and gay icon? Do we need to reject him altogether? I don’t know the answer to that, but it’s possible for me to separate personal behavior from the art. It’s not so easy for others.

I think that’s fair. I understand how it’s harder for some, and we all have our own experiences. I think society would be more connected if we just allowed others to have their own feelings and not expect everyone to feel the way we do.

penzata wrote: ↑

Sat Jul 20, 2019 5:12 pm

Да, уе, ако не можеш да говориш с акценти е баси болката. Баси абните актьори.