Showing posts with label film. Show all posts
Showing posts with label film. Show all posts

Monday, February 8, 2010

"Acting Out" in Desperation



I got into a conversation today about actors. My daughter and I are producing a short film together. This is Grace's first time as a producer. At eighteen years of age, she still looks young. Most girls her age trying to get in movies are pursuing the dream of being ON camera, not behind the camera--especially when they are as good looking as she is (and I'm not being biased, it's a fact.) Anyway, as she manned the door of our call back room: checking in actors, handing out sides, getting them to fill out paperwork, and dealing with those who grew impatient waiting, she was occasionally mistaken for an actress cutting in line. A few waiting actors, in their weariness from waiting, were rude to Grace. She's good-natured and didn't let it get to her, but what she really noticed was the sudden shift in how she was treated when some of these actors learned her title, "producer." This lesson is not unique. I learned it a few years ago when I first took on the "powerful" role, and I've heard countless other producers share their memories of the first time they noticed actors "kissing up to" them in hopes of getting cast.

Well, when I shared this tidbit with an actress friend who I know strives to be real and kind and respectful of everyone, she expressed embarrassment over the behavior I described, saying: "A sad testimony to our 'race' -actors!!" I love her humble attitude, and I've seen that same beautiful humility in many other actors. In fact, during the previous days' auditions, I had interviewed almost every actor who came in, asking questions about WHY they wanted to act and what it was that kept them in it. Not one person said a word about fame or getting attention. Instead they would come alive talking about how wonderful it is to get to understand what it would be like to be someone else. What they spoke of, even if they didn't have the word for it, was empathy. I know that from my acting days, and it's something that keeps us writers going too. Empathy is that something that fosters connections that are deeper than surface, and I believe its something that many creative-types thirst for more than the average person--a driving force.

That's why I went on to tell my friend that I think actors are wonderful people... They may be annoying at times, but *anyone* in a state of desperation can fall prey to self-defense mechanisms that are blind to the needs of others. We all have to guard against that. Most actors have a hunger for that "getting inside the skin of another person" which can lead to a very positive sense of empathy. Ah, but that desperation is always lurking... It's complicated, like everything else. I think actors amplify life, both on screen/stage and off. They amplify the good and they amplify the not-so-good. They amplify that which is noble in human beings and that which is base and even downright destructive. It's important for an actor to be able to get into all sorts of characters, and in the process of fighting for those roles that can be so few and far between, they sometimes forget about feeding the "character" that represents them as real-life persons. That is one of my passions when it comes to working with actors--to help them discover the connection between creating characters through tapping into empathy and creating *character* that is truly empathetic--to help them discover how their career can be a ministry to the hearts of their audience and to the people they deal with day-to-day as they learn to be truth-seers, truth-tellers, and truth-be-ers.

Yes, I've been annoyed by the pandering of some actors. But, yes, I can empathize with actors--I've been there and I know what that desperation is like. Those outside of the profession who look at actors as vain and shallow would do well to consider what it would be like to be in a career that requires a person to re-apply for the job over and over and over again, being rejected the majority of the time, sometimes for reasons as silly as wearing the wrong shoe size. It's quite a sacrifice to go through the rollercoaster of emotional highs and lows, of rejection and adoration followed by more rejection, and for what? Is it a selfish endeavor? No, most storytellers, whether it be the writer or the actor or the director or any of the many team-members it takes to make a film, most of these people do what they do because they really want to make a difference in the lives of others. This is the way that they can most effectively communicate, and their desire to communicate is a compulsion that often even overrides their own well-being. For that reason, I would encourage anyone who is judgmental of actors to try on a little empathy. It's something we all could use a bit more of.

Wednesday, December 16, 2009

Women in Hollywood: Speak Up!

Disclaimer: This is not a final treatise on the subject. Really, it’s more of a musing out loud, a conversation starter--meaning: I’d love for you to join in a process that I hope will bring greater clarity of purpose and direction for those of us who are “women in film.” I’d also love to hear from those who make up our audience and the men we have the pleasure to share our work with. This is in no way intended to bash male filmmakers or those who worked on either of the Twilight films.






Ever since the last Twilight installment came out and "shocked" the Hollywood prognosticators, I have been reading blogs and articles by sister filmmakers giddy about the glimmer of hope for women in film because the female audience is finally getting noticed and we think--this time--it might stick!

I, however, have been fairly guarded in my response, partially because I'm not convinced that the fare which females are flocking to the theaters for is truly, well, worthwhile--I mean, is it really to be considered "progress" for our gender when a bunch of drooling school girls pay to see a hunky guy take his shirt off? After all, most of the females I know in this industry are actually concerned with art and content (gasp) and I'm still not convinced that the studios are going to rush to fund *that* kind of thing when they can just put a pretty boy up on the screen, manipulate every girl who longs to find her meaning as a man's "personal brand of heroin," and rake in a fortune.

Another reason I'm not getting caught up in the girl-power rally yet is the fact that I'm not even convinced that there is such a thing as a homogeneous "female audience." If the studios take notice of the Twilight phenomenon, and try to use it as a template for the wooing of the elusive "female audience," we will not have progress. It will just be more of the same pandering and dumbing down, and large segments of the art-house hungry female population will continue to be unrepresented in the calibrating of the filmmaking machinery. (Note that while the first Twilight film was directed by a female, the second was not... I didn't follow the politics of the hiring, but I couldn't help but wonder: did they think they had figured out the formula & just revert back to the status quo?)

I'm just saying that I'm not in a hurry to trust the powers-that-be in Hollywood to make intelligent conclusions from the complicated connections between what female audiences choose to spend their money on (given what is offered to them at the box office), and what females who work in the industry know and have to offer. I think that in playing it safe with the status quo (which includes hiring male directors 90% of the time regardless of whether honest accounting supports the choice), studios--and even a lot of smaller production companies--are seriously limiting their own potential to reach broader audiences.

Yes, there is a vast audience of females out there, hungry for film with which we can identify. But, no, we are not to be grouped in a simple clump and satisfied by formulaic entertainment "product" designed by those who only *think* they understand the complexity of their newly targeted viewers. I wonder sometimes at the logic of some who are considered experts at "business." I think of myself as more of an artist than a business mind, and yet even I understand that hiring those who ARE members of a target audience just might help in the production of stuff that appeals to the target audience.

That is definitely not to say that just because one is a member of a particular group, that they are not able to appeal to those outside that group. Sometimes the infusion of an "outside" influence in the creation process can invigorate the entire team and bring about something that is fresh and interesting to everyone. I've worked with male co-creators who actually jump at the opportunity to work on female-led projects because they find the energy and atmosphere "different and refreshing" after years of working on male-dominated sets.

Last week, Manohla Dargis wrote an insightful analysis of the situation of women in film for the New York Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/13/movies/13dargis.html

I'd love to hear your thoughts, too.