On page 25 in section VIII, Walter Benjamin states:
"the artistic performance of a stage actor is definitely present to the public by the actor in person; that of the screen actor, however, is presented by a camera, with a twofold consequence."
As I read this I began to think about the differences between stage actors in plays and screen actors we see in multi million dollar major motion pictures. If a screen actor can mess up a scene 20 times but still be able to make a masterpiece and a stage actor has to get it right the first time, does this make stage actors better actors than screen actors. I don’t know much about acting but I wouldn’t be surprised if some people who are into drama and theatre would agree with me. A screen actor can perform one scene 20 different ways and the directors and editors can just pick the scene they like best. A stage actor has one opportunity to get a scene right; they also have to do this for hours at a time without mistakes. That is amazing to me. Now that I think about it, screen acting probably isn’t that hard. Professional athletes (Shaq), musicians (take your pick) and even stupid multimillionaires who inherit their daddy’s money become famous actors all the time (Paris Hilton, Does “One night in
With all that being said, I realize directors and casters for major motion pictures are looking for much more than acting talent. They have to ask the question, “Will somebody pay to see this person act?” That is why people paid to see Shaq play an oversized genie in Kazaam.
1 comment:
I just heard some interesting comments on Nicole Kidman from someone on the set with her that mirror your ideas.
Post a Comment