# How do they teach acting? **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Tags:** theater-stage-dance\ **Created:** [December 31, 2024, 1:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-they-teach-acting/1012390 "2024-12-31T13:44:45Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/13edae/32.png) [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stranger_On_A_Train)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2025, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-they-teach-acting/1012390/41 "2025-01-01T16:27:53Z")
> [@Q.Q.Switcheroo](#): > > And even the occasional non-actor - like Fran Lebowitz as Judge Janis Goldberg. Yeah, I thought about that but didn’t mentioned her because as you noted, Lebowitz isn’t a professional actor (at least in the sense of pursuing it as a primary profession although she has done a few other roles) but the show also featured some real world NYC minor officials that nobody outside the city would likely recognize, and one unfortunately appearance by Rudy Giuliani. Stranger ---
**Author:** ![bordelond](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bordelond/32/150_2.png) [@bordelond](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bordelond)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2025, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-they-teach-acting/1012390/42 "2025-01-01T16:39:30Z")
> [@Cervaise](#): > > Does this example help illustrate and answer your question? I can’t reply at length right now, but yes. Thank you for your in-depth reply. ---
**Author:** ![John\_DiFool](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_difool/32/19543_2.png) [@John\_DiFool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_DiFool)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2025, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-they-teach-acting/1012390/43 "2025-01-01T16:50:35Z")
> [@Mahaloth](#): > > He told Olivier this when he got on set and Olivier said, “My man, haven’t you heard of ‘acting’?” > > Again, great point. You were ninja’ed 21 hours ago by **bordelond**. 🥷 ---
**Author:** ![FairyChatMom](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fairychatmom/32/21825_2.png) [@FairyChatMom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FairyChatMom)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2025, 4:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-they-teach-acting/1012390/44 "2025-01-01T16:55:20Z")
One thing about good actors that’s always impressed me is the ability to deliver a line multiple times, each time sounding like the first time the words have been uttered. First, there are rehearsals. Then there are the performances, whether takes and retakes for movies or seven nights a week plus a matinee. I can’t imagine keeping dialog fresh after the hundredth performance. Are there tricks actors use to prevent a performance from being stale? ---
**Author:** ![Andy\_L](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c67d28/32.png) [@Andy\_L](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Andy_L)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2025, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-they-teach-acting/1012390/45 "2025-01-01T17:49:15Z")
> [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](#): > > Of course, the _Law & Order_ is also the source of the tropes of “Guy Who Is Too Busy Unloading Crates Of Liquor To Stop And Talk To Detectives”, “Suspicious Parent Who Is Just Covering For Their Child Who Is The Real Killer”, and I would argue is the real genesis of the ‘Walk & Talk’ trope that Aaron Sorkin gets all the credit for because he tries to put one in every episode of every show he’s ever written. I’m thinking of “Bookstore clerk who is glad to look up sales records, while blinking repeatedly” and “Secretary who leaves no doubt that she’s from New Yawk” (from the accent and the fact that she’s unfamiliar with any human inhabitation west of the Meadowlands) ---
**Author:** ![LurkMeister](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/3da27b/32.png) [@LurkMeister](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LurkMeister)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2025, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-they-teach-acting/1012390/46 "2025-01-01T17:56:58Z")
It’s been (Og help me) 50 years since my college days as a Theatre major and I haven’t done any acting since then, so I unfortunately never had a chance to keep up my skills, such as they were.\* One thing I remember from my acting classes was being told to observe people as much as possible in order to pick up on mannerisms and actions which you might be able to use as part of a performance. I remember I used to practice eating “European style” (keeping your fork in your left hand instead of always switching it to your right) and practicing different ways to hold a cigarette while smoking. \*On my desk I still have an award I received for “Most Improved Actor” in my senior year. ---
**Author:** ![Q.Q.Switcheroo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/q.q.switcheroo/32/5713_2.png) [@Q.Q.Switcheroo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Q.Q.Switcheroo)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2025, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-they-teach-acting/1012390/47 "2025-01-01T17:59:17Z")
> [@FairyChatMom](#): > > Are there tricks actors use to prevent a performance from being stale? In _Monty Python’s Life of Brian_, Michael Palin as Pontius Pilate supposedly made up a new name for Biggus Dickus’s wife on each take so the guards would genuinely appear to be on the verge of cracking up each time. (The actors playing the guards had been told nothing about the scene except that they had to keep a straight face or they’d be fired.) ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2025, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-they-teach-acting/1012390/48 "2025-01-01T18:16:22Z")
> [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](#): > > And it has been the ‘first role’ for a not insignificant number of actors such as Claire Danes and Maura Tierney who you could kind of tell were destined for bigger things. Just in Season 1: Philip Seymour Hoffman, Cynthia Nixon, Aida Turturro, William H. Macy, Patricia Clarkson, and Samuel L. Jackson. ---
**Author:** ![Zyada](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zyada/32/3028_2.png) [@Zyada](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zyada)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2025, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-they-teach-acting/1012390/49 "2025-01-01T18:40:42Z")
I don’t have anything to add, except that taking an acting class will give you a really good appreciation of acting. And it’s cheap therapy ---
**Author:** ![Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/13edae/32.png) [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stranger_On_A_Train)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2025, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-they-teach-acting/1012390/50 "2025-01-01T19:07:40Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > Just in Season 1: Philip Seymour Hoffman, Cynthia Nixon, Aida Turturro, William H. Macy, Patricia Clarkson, and Samuel L. Jackson. Good catch on Hoffman; for the others it wasn’t technically a first role (nor was it for Maura Tierney; mea culpa) but certainly it was before they were widely recognized. Samuel L. Jackson had been working since the mid-‘Seventies, albeit mostly in roles credited as “Black Guy”, “Hold-Up Man”, and “Ulysses - Three-Card Monte Game” (I recognized him from the last one from _A Shock To The System_, which was a great dark comedy with Michael Caine) and played Stacks Edwards in _Goodfellas_ as the driver who neglected to dump his truck and gets whacked by Tommy DeVito, but was still widely unknown until the mid-‘Nineties when he was in _Jurassic Park_ and _True Romance_, and then his star role in _Pulp Fiction_. Imagine a world in which which Samual L. Jackson is a bit player doing two or three line roles for scale instead of carrying films like _A Time To Kill_, _The Long Kiss Goodnight_, and of course [his underrated turn in _Deep Blue Sea_](https://youtu.be/yMwmqp3GLMc?si=0unwOy13we_j9oZB). > [@Zyada](#): > > I don’t have anything to add, except that taking an acting class will give you a really good appreciation of acting. > And it’s cheap therapy It [doesn’t always work out, though](https://youtu.be/LT_nJaV2ZE8?si=EduqLzmq50eazmNI). Stranger ---
**Author:** ![CookingWithGas](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cookingwithgas/32/485_2.png) [@CookingWithGas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CookingWithGas)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2025, 4:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-they-teach-acting/1012390/51 "2025-01-02T04:00:09Z")
> [@aceplace57](#): > > There are different approaches to acting. My Theater teacher used the Meisner technique. This was going to be a follow-up question. I’ve heard of “method” acting but don’t know what it is or how it differs from other approaches. What is the underlying theory of Meisner? ---
**Author:** ![CookingWithGas](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cookingwithgas/32/485_2.png) [@CookingWithGas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CookingWithGas)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2025, 4:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-they-teach-acting/1012390/52 "2025-01-02T04:18:42Z")
> [@Cervaise](#): > > I have formal training and a four-year acting degree from a fine arts school. I can address this question authoritatively. Happy New Year and thanks so much for taking the time to craft that thorough response. > [@](#): > > In one’s imagination, one adjusts one’s given circumstances, and then one simply _is_ I kind of understand this, but if I get angry I look different than when Walter Sobchak gets angry. So I can’t just be me getting angry. How does an actor create a character? I would think that the script doesn’t always tell you everything you need to know. ---
**Author:** ![TreacherousCretin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/treacherouscretin/32/476_2.png) [@TreacherousCretin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TreacherousCretin)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2025, 6:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-they-teach-acting/1012390/53 "2025-01-02T06:28:45Z")
> [@Cervaise](#): > > Giamatti is great. As you say, he makes it look easy, like he’s not acting at all. He gives one of my all-time favorite film performances, in 2003’s _American Splendor._ He’s absolutely spectacular from beginning to end. A genuine crime he wasn’t Oscar-nominated for it. Agreed! Spectacular is the word. ---
**Author:** ![Atamasama](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/atamasama/32/12961_2.png) [@Atamasama](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Atamasama)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2025, 8:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-they-teach-acting/1012390/54 "2025-01-02T08:13:28Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > That’s a pretty thankless role; how could you hit it out of the park, if the character is written as a going-through-the-motions guy who says things as if he’s said them before? I imagine what’s worse is when an actor’s role is as an actor who is bad at acting in a performance. How do you know if they’re doing a good job? They’re supposed to look bad, so if they look good they’re bad… Right? ---
**Author:** ![Cervaise](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cervaise/32/16693_2.png) [@Cervaise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cervaise)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2025, 8:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-they-teach-acting/1012390/55 "2025-01-02T08:54:02Z")
Okay, so… the topic of “how do actors do what they do?” has been a common one on the boards forever. I’ve previously written lengthy responses **[here](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-tell-me-about-acting/246384)** and **[here](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-acting-difficult/104668)** among other threads. Those go back twenty and twenty-two years respectively, and I stand by everything I wrote previously. _This_ thread originally started with a new and different question, one I don’t remember being asked before — how is an actor _trained._ Since I’ve never written anything here on that previously, I was happy to respond. Now, though, it’s leaving that question behind, and evolving into the more fundamental, and well-plumbed, topic of how the craft of acting simply works. On that, I’ll just point back to those earlier comments, as they explore the topic thoroughly and there’s nothing significant I would retract or rephrase. > [@CookingWithGas](#): > > What is the underlying theory of Meisner? Similarly, this is a question that has previously been explored. I would commend your attention to **[this earlier thread](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-method-acting-still-taught/319342).** It’s short, but the replies are lengthy and detailed, and provide an excellent overview comparing the various theories and schools of acting. I will also address this question directly: > [@CookingWithGas](#): > > How does an actor create a character? I would think that the script doesn’t always tell you everything you need to know. I talked about this in my original response above. I will repeat those points for clarity. In the modern theories of acting, character is revealed by _action._ An actor may have chameleonic talents for accent, or changing posture or attitude, but it is the _actions_ chosen that illuminate who someone really is. By action, I mean “the things one does to pursue the things one wants.” If the character is romantically interested in someone and wants to convince that person to return the romantic interest, how does the character go about it? Blunt pursuit? Indirect pursuit (e.g. talking to the person’s friends)? Manipulation (e.g. setting up putatively platonic interactions with the conscious intent of building a relationship)? Outright deception? What the character _does_ illustrates who the character _is._ The character is not a funny hat, or a funny walk. Those are just decoration. The character is _what he or she wants and how he or she pursues it._ You get some of that from the script. A well-written piece of material will give the actor most of the raw material they need to start building the character. Some basic script analysis will reveal the character’s narrative spine, and deeper analysis, moment to moment, will provide a map of how the character proceeds along that path. However, there is creative latitude for the actor to make different choices, scene to scene and beat to beat. An experienced, well-prepared actor will come to a scene with a _range of options_ that are supported by the text. It will never be the case that there is a single correct answer, a single correct choice, for a given moment. The actor will instinctively understand that the choices fall into a specific area, and will eliminate other possibilities, but will be free to explore those choices during rehearsal. Or, in short — the script (hopefully) gives you everything you need to get started, but it (probably) doesn’t answer every single one of your questions. Say the script presents your character threatening another character. The scene is about your character trying to convince someone to quit their job and leave the company. The script has your character revealing possession of compromising information to the other person, basically engaging in extortion. That’s a broad-strokes tactic, and defines the boundaries of what the character is doing in the scene. Your character is not “negotiating,” your character is not “charming,” etc., and actions in those areas are not available. Your character is “threatening,” so your choices must fall into that tactical range. But _there is still a range,_ and the specific choices will be informed by given circumstances, and reveal the character. Do you threaten _desperately,_ because there’s a ticking clock and if you don’t succeed your own career is screwed? Or do you threaten _coldly,_ because you secretly like this person and hate ruining their life so you have to clamp down on your own emotions? Or do you threaten _jovially,_ because you’re a psychopath and you enjoy watching them squirm? And on and on and on. These are the things that expose and explain the character to the audience — but in all cases, the actor must bear in mind that they are fundamentally _actions that affect the other character._ This is not about “emoting,” taking a paintbrush and dipping it into an emotional bucket and slathering the performance with feelings. This is about internalizing the given circumstances, and then looking at the other character and _trying to make something happen to, with, or by them._ (This basic approach originally comes from Stanislavski, but has been much elaborated in the years since.) You asked, if I get mad “like this,” how do I make a character that gets mad “like that”? Well, an actor (at least, a modern actor experienced and/or trained in modern acting traditions) doesn’t really think in that way. The actor starts by thinking about who the character is in the context of what the character wants, and then starts charting out the actions the character performs in pursuit of that goal. Then the actor (if they’re any good) chooses the most _interesting_ possible actions, eliminating the obvious and uninteresting ones, and brings those potential actions to rehearsal. The other actors will do the same. In rehearsal, you put those choices in the back of your mind, and you _listen and pay attention_ to what the other actors are doing. Based on _their_ choices, you reach into your grab bag and start _trying out your own choices._ Or, perhaps, the other actor is doing something really interesting, and gives you a new choice. _These choices are always actions._ These choices are not “funny walk” or “foreign accent.” Those are technical layers on top of what the actor considers to be the _real_ performance, which is the sequence of active and responsive tactics in pursuit of the objective. I’ll give you two performances by one actor that crystallize and illustrate what I’m trying to explain. Watch _Dr. Strangelove_ and pay attention to George C. Scott’s performance. Then watch _Patton_ and, again, pay attention to George C. Scott. In both movies, he’s playing military men — both generals, in fact. He isn’t really changing his voice. He isn’t doing anything obvious with his physicality, like a limp or whatever. And yet, both characters are completely distinct. Turgidson does things Patton would never do, and vice versa. Only _some of this_ is in the script, in terms of how the dialog is technically written. _Most_ of it comes from performance, the moment-to-moment choices Scott is making about who each man is, what each man wants, how each man attempts to affect those around him. And if you put those two performances side by side, you will see a veritable acting class in the importance of distinct and interesting choices. If you’ve already seen those movies, don’t just rely on your memory. I implore you, if you’re genuinely interested in the subject, to watch the movies again, and ignore everything about the movie except the performance of Scott in each one. Devote close attention to Scott’s work as an actor, which is both technical _and_ instinctive, and watch how focused he is on the other actors. It’s a brilliant demonstration of how to reveal character through active moment-to-moment choice. * * * I’ll also add a postscript here, on a topic that hasn’t really been raised yet in this thread but that, in looking over previous threads, seems to come up a lot: how does an actor keep things fresh, when performing and re-performing the same scene over and over, with the same dialog, the same blocking, the same necessary actions, and so on? If you’re on stage, you may rehearse a scene a hundred times or more, and then perform it several dozen times (or hundreds of times, if you’re lucky enough to land a Broadway hit). If you’re working in film, you may repeat the scene for five, ten, thirty, fifty takes, and then repeat _that_ again for two, three, or five camera angles. How do you keep it alive, every time? This is hard to explain to anyone who isn’t an actor, but there’s an analogy, I think that everyone can identify with. Think of your favorite personal story. Your go-to entertaining anecdote that you love trotting out in social settings, or when meeting new people, or whatever. You’ve told the story many times, you’ve got it down pat, you know where to draw things out for effect and where to skip over unnecessary details. From experience, you can predict where your listener may react in certain ways, and you’ve prepared for those potential reactions with pauses, tangents, and other adaptations. We all have at least one of these stories. Most of us have more than one. When the conversation takes an appropriate turn — that time I got one over on a terrible boss, or that time I realized I was having a health crisis, or whatever — we can reach into our back pocket and deploy the story. You may have told the story ten times, or a hundred. But you know, as you look at the person listening to you, they’ve never heard the story before. They don’t know the details. They need to have certain things explained for the story to make sense, and they need to have certain things emphasized for the story to be entertaining. You know this, so _you tell them the story knowing it’s the first time they’ve heard it._ No matter how familiar and rote it is to you, if you want the other person to enjoy the story, you have to tell it a certain way. If you have any instinct for storytelling at all, you naturally understand this, and click into the appropriate rhythms. Acting is like that. Fundamentally, above everything else, it’s storytelling. As an actor, you are telling a story. You’re telling the story of your own character, and you are collaborating with the other actors to tell the collective story of the play, or movie, or TV show, or whatever. The only distinction is that you’re telling the story _from inside, as a participant,_ rather than from outside as a narrator. You are _re-enacting_ the story, rather than telling it in past tense after the fact, but at the same deep, underlying level, you still snap into the same storytelling instinct. Just imagine how you feel when you get the opportunity to tell your very best personal story to someone who’s never heard it, and that’s approximately how a good actor feels when acting. ---
**Author:** ![aceplace57](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aceplace57/32/3500_2.png) [@aceplace57](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aceplace57)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2025, 3:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-they-teach-acting/1012390/56 "2025-01-02T15:13:28Z")
Thank you @Cervaise I wish my Theater teacher had explained these points as clearly. This thread reminded me of an exercise we did in class after being given scenes we would perform. Each of us was interviewed (in character) by the teacher. She asked probing questions that determined how well we understood the character and how they might respond in certain situations. The interview approach initiated responses far removed from just the lines in the script. I would have done better if I had considered the points you explained. ---
**Author:** ![John\_DiFool](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_difool/32/19543_2.png) [@John\_DiFool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_DiFool)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2025, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-they-teach-acting/1012390/57 "2025-01-02T20:31:05Z")
> [@Cervaise](#): > > Watch _Dr. Strangelove_ and pay attention to George C. Scott’s performance. Then watch _Patton_ and, again, pay attention to George C. Scott. In both movies, he’s playing military men — both generals, in fact. He isn’t really changing his voice. He isn’t doing anything obvious with his physicality, like a limp or whatever. And yet, both characters are completely distinct. Turgidson does things Patton would never do, and vice versa. Only _some of this_ is in the script, in terms of how the dialog is technically written. _Most_ of it comes from performance, the moment-to-moment choices Scott is making about who each man is, what each man wants, how each man attempts to affect those around him. And if you put those two performances side by side, you will see a veritable acting class in the importance of distinct and interesting choices. An interesting choice, esp. since Scott’s performance in _Strangelove_ was mostly Kubrick’s doing, telling him to do some hammy takes first before the “real” ones-then he just used the former for the film, to Scott’s ire. ---
**Author:** ![msmith537](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d9b06d/32.png) [@msmith537](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/msmith537)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2025, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-they-teach-acting/1012390/58 "2025-01-02T20:58:27Z")
I thought it was mostly knowing your lines and not bumping into the furniture! 😃 > [@Atamasama](#): > > > [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > > > That’s a pretty thankless role; how could you hit it out of the park, if the character is written as a going-through-the-motions guy who says things as if he’s said them before? > > I imagine what’s worse is when an actor’s role is as an actor who is bad at acting in a performance. How do you know if they’re doing a good job? They’re supposed to look bad, so if they look good they’re bad… Right? I’m not an expert or anything, but for an example of playing a “bad actor” watch Natalie Portman in **May December** where she plays a somewhat pretentious (and ultimately mediocre) actor preparing for a role. The “real” acting throughout the movie is very good, but the scenes where she is portraying the “made for TV” film are just a bit “off”. Not like over the top bad (like Matt Damon doing Loki’s play in the Thor movies). But just bad enough that you realize the movie she’s making is probably not as good as all the bullshit she was going on about in the making of it. ---
**Author:** ![Q.Q.Switcheroo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/q.q.switcheroo/32/5713_2.png) [@Q.Q.Switcheroo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Q.Q.Switcheroo)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2025, 10:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-they-teach-acting/1012390/59 "2025-01-02T22:18:57Z")
> [@msmith537](#): > > I’m not an expert or anything, but for an example of playing a “bad actor” watch Natalie Portman in **May December** where she plays a somewhat pretentious (and ultimately mediocre) actor preparing for a role. You could also check out Sabrina Grdevich as Claire in **Slings and Arrows** , who turns in some very convincing performances as a talent-deprived actress at a Shakespeare festival. ---
**Author:** ![msmith537](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d9b06d/32.png) [@msmith537](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/msmith537)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2025, 11:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-they-teach-acting/1012390/60 "2025-01-02T23:33:35Z")
> [@John\_DiFool](#): > > > [@Cervaise](#): > > > > Watch _Dr. Strangelove_ and pay attention to George C. Scott’s performance. Then watch _Patton_ and, again, pay attention to George C. Scott. In both movies, he’s playing military men — both generals, in fact. He isn’t really changing his voice. He isn’t doing anything obvious with his physicality, like a limp or whatever. And yet, both characters are completely distinct. Turgidson does things Patton would never do, and vice versa. Only _some of this_ is in the script, in terms of how the dialog is technically written. _Most_ of it comes from performance, the moment-to-moment choices Scott is making about who each man is, what each man wants, how each man attempts to affect those around him. And if you put those two performances side by side, you will see a veritable acting class in the importance of distinct and interesting choices. > > An interesting choice, esp. since Scott’s performance in _Strangelove_ was mostly Kubrick’s doing, telling him to do some hammy takes first before the “real” ones-then he just used the former for the film, to Scott’s ire. I heard a similar story about Bruce Willis in Die Hard 2. Apparently he wanted to play John McClaine all serious as opposed to the jokey-wisecracking hero from the first movie. The director did something similar with serious takes and jokey takes and then picking the best ones.. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-they-teach-acting/1012390.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-they-teach-acting/1012390.md?page=4)