1. Do you agree with Mark Westbrook? What are the areas you agree with and what you do not agree with him.Most importantly, Why do you agree or disagree with him.
If you are not sure what method acting is then read this brief description.
Method acting is any of a family of techniques used by actors to create in themselves the thoughts and feelings of their characters, so as to develop lifelike performances. Though not all method actors use the same approach, the "method" in method acting usually refers to the practice, influenced by Constantin Stanislavski and created by Lee Strasberg, in which actors draw upon their own emotions and memories in their portrayals, aided by a set of exercises and practices including sense memory and affective memory. Method acting shares similarities with Stanislavski's system.
Method actors are often characterised as immersing themselves in their characters to the extent that they
Method acting has been described as having "revolutionized American theater." While Classical acting instruction "had focused on developing external talents," the Method was "the first systematized training that also developed internal abilities (sensory, psychological, emotional)."[1]
Method acting continues to evolve, with many contemporary acting teachers, schools, and
Before watching this video, I'd never really given much thought to method acting. I knew vaguely what it was, but I, myself, hadn't tried, nor wanted to. I agree with quite a few things Westbrook said, such as number six: the psychosis point. Trying to change what you feel to what someone says you should feel is insane. It manipulates your thoughts and causes you to question normal things around yourself, which sends you spiraling downward even further. Attaching that to point three (the emotion point), you cannot try to control your emotions. As Westbrook said, "Great acting moves the audience, not the actor". Taking the time to focus on emotions that can only be felt, makes the scene forced and uncomfortable for everyone involved. The only point I (just barely) disagree with is point seven: self-indulgence. The only real reason I have to disagree, is when else are you going to have an excuse to do stupid things? It's not like normal people just decide to learn Swahili one day. You can, but being given an opportunity to use it, makes it that much more significant. Simply saying to people "Hey, I can speak Swahili" is nowhere near as fancy as saying "Hey, I learned Swahili so I could be so and so from excellent play name here". Sometimes, you need an excuse so you don't sound nearly as stupid and wasteful as you are. Westbrook made some terrific points that I agree wholeheartedly with. I enjoyed hearing his stance on this. I think it will affect how I look at how Jesse and I are developing our scene; hopefully, it will spawn some positive results.
ReplyDeleteI agree with his first statement in the sense that acting is not about the actor, it’s about the story. An internal, inward directed focus should not be used, since you are not physically the person you are portraying
ReplyDeleteI disagree with the statement that “acting is not emotion, acting is action”. I firmly believe that acting is an emotion-based profession. I do believe we have some control over some emotion. Obviously not as much as we’d like to, but we do. For example, you can resurface past sadness to bring about current sadness in preparation for a scene. You can’t “act sad” if you don’t know how sadness feels - just like you can’t “act lustful” if you’ve never lusted, or “act heartbroken” if you’ve never had your heart broken. However, I also believe that there is a line that should not be crossed between taking emotion from past experience and applying it, and inflicting an emotion to in turn create it.
I agree with the psychosis aspect as well. There’s nothing healthy about that. You need to wipe your feet at the door when dealing with mental health. But, at the same time, there is a healthy way to use the art to work through your problems. That’s a large part of what art is, self-expression.
I disagree with his point about “self-indulgence in research”. He talks about method actors learning to shoot a gun to understand how a soldier feels or talking to a prostitute prior to playing one. He looks down on this and says it will do nothing but create false confidence. I don’t agree because you cannot have knowledge without experiencing something. I couldn’t play an angler because I’ve never caught a fish in my life. I would have to go out and do that to understand what it’s like.
He seems to feel very strongly about this and I think he’s thrown the baby out with the bath water. I’m not completely swayed either way. Method acting has its good aspects and its bad, like all things in life.
Mr. Westbrook is all over the place.
ReplyDeleteI do agree with his first statement, it's not about you, it's about performing it for the audience and telling a story for them, but the question is how do you tell an accurate story with out knowing background? Mr. Westbrook talks as if it is you on stage, but to give a convincing performance, it's not about you, it's about the character that you playing. sometimes you can't connect to that character so you have to dig deeper, which is fine, but not to deep like he said. The physiological health of actors is pretty messed up already. They have to be different people other than themselves all the time. I like to use Heath Leadger as an example. He was always full of ideas and his mind was always racing. When he got to play the Joker from The Dark Knight, that was hard for him. I'm assuming that he never killed anyone, so what he did was that he got into the mindset of a psychopathic murderer by living alone in a hotel writing in a diary as a murder would, and that took a toll on him. So I agree with Mr. Westbrook, it messes with your head.
The last thing I want to touch on is that he said acting is fun and enjoyable and could be a great time, but you can't have any self indulgence?? Having the chance to learn a new language, shoot of weapons and so on is exciting and fun! So I say take every chance you can to have fun... after all if we didn't have fun we would be robots.
Mr. Westbrook has his points and he also contradicts himself a lot. I would love to have a class discussion about method acting and his points in class because there is so much I want to say, but my mom needs to use the computer right now...
I disagree with Westbrook.
ReplyDeleteI admit that he does bring up some interesting points that I agree with; like how it is not about the actor personally. But if the actor is really good at transferring his emotions and experience into the part, why try and stop that and say it is unnecessary? In acting, you are always trying to get better and method acting can improve the performance. That to me is completely necessary.
But a part of what he said I specifically disagree with, his third point. In his third point he talks about how acting is not about emotion. That I strongly disagree with. Acting is all about emotions and portraying that to the audience to the best of your abilities. If you have experienced the death of a loved one and are playing a character that is going through the same thing, why not bring that emotion in with you to your performance? That way, the audience can tell that the emotions are more real, because they are real; straight from the actors real experience.
To conclude, if method acting helps the actor grow and improve their performance, it is absolutely pointless to try and stop this from happening. It may not work for everybody, but if it does work for you then you might as well use it, not ignore it. In my opinion, something that helps the actor, like method acting, is a good thing for the actor and not unnecessary.
I agree with Jesse wholeheartedly, I mean, it's not about you, it's about the production and the person who you are portraying. It doesn't look like fun? Who cares? If it helps you understand your character and say your lines as that person, then it doesn't matter if it's "fun" or not, it's for the sake of the production. And you can't properly portray a character without knowing how it feels to be in their shoes to know how it feels to shoot a gun, to know the crafts of your trade, how else are you going to give a believable performance if you don't believe it yourself? And for the fact that acting is not emotion, you have to make the audience believe that you are feeling that emotion, you have to know what emotions to make them believe. I've never killed someone, but if I had to play someone who did, it would be extremely beneficial to talk to someone who has, to know what is going on in their heads, before, during and after the act, to know how you have to portray to character. To make the character come to life, you have to make sure that you, yourself knows what it's like to be that character in real life, otherwise, your audience will never believe you, no matter how much iambic pentameter or technical work you do.
ReplyDeleteIt seems like Mr. Westbrook has a very solid opinion on method acting, and that appears to get in the way of his illustrating of his ideas on method acting since he frequently contradicts and repeats himself.
ReplyDeleteIn the first half of the video, he states that “acting is not emotion, acting is action” which is a statement that I disagree with strongly. Method acting is a way to enhance the emotion of a scene, which is why in most cases I believe it to be a wise thing to do (to an extent, as I will explain later). This sense of emotion and connection to a performance provides the audience with entertainment, which is one of many roots of acting. Without this emotion sustained by method acting and other approaches to connecting to a character or situation, the audience loses interest. The moment they realize they’re watching a group of people recite memorized phrases, the actors/actresses have failed. Action is better portrayed through emotion. You can have a phenomenal blocking set up, and you can spend hours, even days rehearsing your actions for a scene, but if the audience does not feel an emotional connection or feels that the essence of performance is off, they will be focused more on what’s missing then they will focus on being entertained. Therefore, acting is much, much more emotionally based than action based.
He also states that acting should not be self indulgent, and that performers should not substitute work with gaining experience. But gaining experience is fun, and he also states later on in the video that acting should be fun. This is simply an example of one of the many contradictions Mr. Westbrook makes in the video.
As for the psychosis mentioned in the video, I find that form of method acting ridiculous, just as Mr. Westbrook does. This is the one thing I agree on with him because I firmly believe that everyone who method acts should not have to force it that hard, and should not risk their mental or physical health to enhance a performance. You should be able to bring up past experiences and feel what you were feeling then to accentuate your emotion in your scene, but it should not be that difficult and emotionally exhausting to do, and if it is, then I don’t think it’s very wise to do it. This also goes for the emotional involvement in a scene that method acting brings to the table. If it is too much to handle, lessen the emotional involvement. There is a line that can be crossed, but its not knowledgeable to do so since it would almost surely emotionally harm you. That way you will not allow yourself to be removed from the scene, but you will also deliver an emotionally convincing scene.
Lastly, Mr. Westbrook makes a very similar statement to the first on I touched on later on in the video, saying that “action creates emotion”. I completely disagree with this, and actually think it is the other way around. Emotion creates action. For example, if you are upset with someone, and it is completely overwhelming you while you stand in front of them, you may get the urge to burst into tears, which is an action created by emotion. Most actions are created by emotion that can be enhanced by method acting. I am convinced that his statement of “action creates emotion” is a statement that is only true for “acting”, not acting, like when performers make themselves cry on stage, etc.
In conclusion, I almost completely disagree with everything that Mark Westbrook says in this video clip, and believe that method acting can be very constructive when performing a scene to an extent.
I have always been told to use method acting, the thing is, I have not experienced enough to use it to its full potential. Therefore, I never have used it, and most likely never will.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the majority of the things that Mark Westbrook brought up. Especially points one, four, and eight
“It’s not about you, it’s about the character,” is the whole reason why Method Acting is not practical. You want to step into the character’s shoes and be in there exact frame of mind; not attempting to relate your life to theirs and coming close. Coming close does not make the cut, most of the time, because our lives are usually not strong enough, when we act them out on a stage, to move an audience.
“There’s nothing truthful about pretending,” sums up acting. Why make your REAL life fit the character’s FAKE one? No matter how hard you try; it will never match up.
“The teacher is the guide, not the topic,” is one I 100% agree with. Your teacher is there to help you, guide you, and give you advice on things you can improve on. The thing is, it’s only one person’s opinion. And even though that one person may have a lot of background, you may have a whole different take on the story. It’s hard to portray your life to the scene; it’s even harder to portray your teacher’s. In some cases you teacher may now more about the subject than you, but it’s your scene. You will not improve if you don’t understand what your teacher’s ‘requests’ are and doing them anyways because you want a good grade. You will only improve, if, YOU figure out how to play the character yourself and make your own decisions.
I do strongly disagree with one thing he said, “Acting is not emotion, acting is action.” If you think this is true, please explain how you think one person could stand on stage, reading the script, doing ‘actions’ and can move an audience. It’s simply not possible. You need emotion if you want to move yourself, let alone an audience.
In conclusion, I think Mark Westbrook has a very strong bias opinion about this topic, but it depends who you are. There are many amazing actors who use this method, and many who don’t. I believe it is personal opinion. And mine? I think I’m too young to tell if this will work for me later in life. Though, as of right now, it doesn’t due to my lack of experience.
Most things Mr. Westbrook said i do think are valid points, especially at point number three in my point of view. Its true that you cannot fake emotions, for those come naturally and we don't really have to worry so much about them as our actions. As he said, truly good acting doesn't move the actor, but the audience itself. If you cant move the audience, your not doing a very good job. I also agree with how Mr. Westbrook said that you should not confuse research with self pleasure which does make sense in a way....but is also confuses me. If, for example, someone doesn't know how to ride a horse and they get on the horse when they start filming....wont that end in an embarrassing or tragic way? I do understand what he's saying but at the same time, i really don't. He also said before that acting is and should not be substitute work with experience....but then he says later that acting is supposed to be fun? It makes no sense from my stand point. I do agree with the point he made about the teachers aditude and view point towards things could effect the students who are learning and the actors on stage. The teacher is simply a guide and a helper, not the building block of the pupils acting abilities. He said when doing an emotion, you must make it strong or its going to be hard to regain your focus at the task at hand. If you start out weak, you will become unfocused and lose interest in what you are trying to do. Do it strong or don't do it at all. Don't go half ass and i strongly agree with this point. His last point i enjoy the most. If you take all the fun out of acting, its hard to keep going with it and actually enjoy the thrill of being an actor or actress. As he said "Its called talent...its knowing how to apply it properly." I do believe that action is the root of acting and emotions may just be the branch's or weeds growing from that may root....although every part of the tree is important and helps to keep it alive and well. In conclusion, i mostly agree with what Mr. Westbrook was saying throughout the video. Iv'e learned that to play a character well, you must let go of who you are for that moment and be that person as best as you can or else it will never be good enough. In acting, you CANNOT hold back no matter what anyone says.
ReplyDelete