 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
In Reply to: actors who play themselves posted by Albert B. Broman on June 25, 2001 at 20:13:06:
You have to ask why a certain actor continues to play his characters in a similar way. Has the actor agreed to play this role in a particular way by choice? Does he feel he is choosing roles that he can develop from his own strengths as an actor with the inherent limitations of the part? Has he chosen a role expecting to be given the oportunity to stretch himself as an actor to go beyond the surface level of the character part? Has his expectation to develop as an actor been aborted by the film director, who has already made a decision regarding his expectation from that actor? Has the actor been so typecast that he is accepting these dreary roles only with the hope that an opportunity to show "his stuff" may, someday be given to him by a keen director?I think you are mistakingly suggesting that the actor has more say in how a part is played than is really the case.
I always thought it was the director's call on what of the actor's performance actually is kept in the film.Really, the only way for an actor to "grow" as a performer is to accept a wide variety of roles. Think of Robert Dinero and Mel Gibson, for example, and you already know what their character is most likely to be. Neither are likely to be portrayed as cerebral types, because the movie would have to spend a lot more time on character development to make the roles credible to the movie audience.
John_N
Follow Ups:
If you want to see an actor who is a true chameleon, watch "Kind Hearts and Coronets". Sir Alec Guiness plays five or six different characters, each unique and convincing. Peter Sellers also had this gift. Today, a good example of this is Ian McKellan.
Duvall doesn't need to have a say, because both the actor and the director know that he is "Duvall" and they both know what he will bring to the role when is is hired. Or you don't hire Duvall.
Duvall in Mockingbird, what year was that? What year did he make Godfather, 1973?
What I meant to say and did not articulate, is that today the man has become a parody of himself. I just don't see much role difference between
1) the preacher in Apostle(an intimidating preacher who slaps his wife around, kills, and does the good ol' boy shuckin' and jiven' routine?),
2)Santini (a pilot who attempts to intimidate everyone while doin' the shuckin' and jivin' routine)
3)the aircav officer in Apoc. Airborne, ha.
4) crusty ol cowboy in Lonesome Dove.
I see great similarity in those roles.
Duvall likes to travel to Argentina where he spends time dancing the "hormonal" tango. Kissinger referred to Argentina as the spirtual home of "machisimo".
Duvall is machisimo. That is why he goes to Argentina. That is why every role he plays is that of a macho man. Always.
Regards,
BrothermanVan Dyke Parks "Clang of the Yankee Reaper"
> > Think of Robert Dinero and Mel Gibson, for example, and you
> > already know what their character is most likely to beThis is a misleading statement regarding De Niro. If people pay him an obscene amount of cash to play a mobster, then it's not his fault (and I'll still see it). But this does not reflect his ability to play *any* character. Some evidence, just on top of my head:
- Meet the Parents
- Goodfellas
- Bronx Tale
- This Boy Life (De Caprio is great too)
- We're no Angels
- The Untouchables
- King of Comedyjust to name a few... DeNiro does have a kind of texture that makes him memorable.
> > This is a misleading statement regarding De Niro
Sorry, if I offended you. I had no intention of slighting Robert De Niro. I have enjoyed all his movies that I have seen.
My point is the same one you made; that actors do not have the final say in how they are presented on screen. I only used this actor's name as it was in the initial post. The director has the final say on what he wants from the actor during the filming, and still takes another run at it at the final editing stage as the movie concept is crafted into the final product.
I still say that to judge an actor's versatility and talent from a few (possibly typecast) roles can severely misrepresent said actor's skills and potential. Lack of opportunities can also be a factor as we all know that there are many actors out there but very few choice roles available.
I hope I have clarified my initial post.
John_N
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
