just what exactly is it? thank you in advance.
Basically, it is a technique in which an actor imagines himself/herself thoroughly as the character that they are playing. From this perspective, they try to take on the personality of the character so that when they are portraying that character, they rely on their own (perceived) emotions to express their lines “in character.”
This differs from the the “pre-Method” technique in which the actor simply tries to imagine how the character “should” respond to the dramatic events.
Whenever you see a movie/play/whatever in which an actor asks “But what is my motivation?” they are mocking (either good-naturedly or meanly) method acting. Some method actors get so involved with their parts that they stay “in character” throughout the entire day of shooting a script or rehearsals. (This can be a bit wearing on the rest of the crew when an actor is playing a psychotic and won’t come “out of character” even for lunch.)
While it is easy to make fun of method actors*, some very outstanding actors have used method acting successfully.
- for example:
I just started a thread about a different theater term, and I was going to offer to answer your question, if you’d answer mine. Unfortunately, I get back here to see that Tom has beaten me to it, and (typically) done a much better job than I could have.
I will only add that one often sees actors referred to as “classically trained.” I’ve always assumed that this is a term for non-method actors. The actors who are so called tend to be Shakesperian sorts who often excell at playing “types” and larger-than-life characters (though this could simply be because classically trained means Shakesperian, since Shakespear was obviously written for pre-method actors.) Marlon Brando comes to mind as an example of what I’m talking about, although I have no idea what his actual training or technique is.
Method acting seems designed to produce very intimate and realistic characterizations, whereas “classical” acting is focused on dramatic staging. I think of the TV steriotype of the stiff and arrogant “AC-tor” as being the classical couterpart to the whiny, “what’s my motivation” method actor steriotype Tom described. William Shatner is a classically trained actor who comes pretty close to the steriotype, partly because he was never quite able to adjust to the intimacy of the camera, which picks up every move, as opposed to the stage, which forces one to magnify everything.
Is method acting mutually exclusive with character acting?
I’m probably getting some of this wrong, but the story I heard related to method acting concerned a conversation between Dustin Hoffman and Laurence Olivier. During the filming of Marathon Man, Olivier noticed that Hoffman looked terrible, as if he had been running in a marathon, and Hoffman told him that to prepare for a scene he had in fact just finished running. Olivier’s reply: “You should try acting, dear boy.”
Marlon Brando (especially during his first few movies) is very much the Method actor. Incidentally, the Method is short for the Stanislavski Method.
Shoulda figured.
Interesting of John Scribe to mention the situation in Marathon Man with Dustin Hoffman, because that examplifies one of the methods that is sometimes utilized in method acting.
Genereally, Method acting resembles what Tomndebb described. It is an art of taking from within, and utilizing that to create an external effect. The poster boy for that sort of method, of course, is Robert Deniro. He stays in character 100% of the time while on the set, even while not shooting. He avoids talking with, and expresses comtempt for, people whom his character is supposed to dislike, and shows affection for those people his character would feel warmly towards. A lot of that comes from massive research, soul searching, and contemplation to create an understanding within the actor as to who this character is that he or she is BECOMING, and that’s the key. A character actor is not playing a part…they are BECOMING someone else. At times this will be aided by some physical changes…the gaining or losing of weight or physical build for a part, for example. But most of it, in THIS type of method acting, is internalization to create a physical change.
The other side of the method coin is using the external to create an INTERNAL change, which then radiates outward as the aforementioned method does. Some method actors, in the attempt to BECOME their character, will put themselves through physical experiences to make the character more real to them, so they can feel more easily not like themselves. I knew someone whose character was supposed to be off balance, uneasy, and uncomforable. To help him achieve this, he tied one of his shoes very tight, and left the other extremely loose, almost falling off, to make him physically uncomfortable, therefore, to him, bringing him closer to his character, and this was how he dressed while playing the role.
The story of Dustin Hoffman in Marathon Man was that his character was supposed to have been up for days, without much food. Hoffman didn’t sleep for days, didn’t eat, and used to run around the set 3 times before shooting, just to aid in his transformation, instead of intellectualizing what the character should become, and using one’s imagination and past experiences to get them there, as someone like Deniro would do.