Friday, 21 January 2011

GOOD ACTING - When An Actor Is In More Than One Place

A lot of people wake up one day and say 'I'm going to be an actor.' It means nothing, thousands do it. Most have an abundance of training; but so often, it means nothing. The training helps, it gives you technique and tools; but it means very little if it doesn't go deeper.

When you cast an actor in a film; the résumé is important to some people and the look is definitely a factor; but you're looking for someone with a bit of wisdom, with a story in their eyes. Robert Downey Jr isn't just a man acting out scenes from a page; he's a carriage for something more meaningful. His comedy has a sadness to it and his darker scenes have a lightness to them. He's able to be in two places at once because that's how his life is. He doesn't just play what's on the page, he plays what's inside himself. He does this whether he's in a little indie film or in a superhero movie.


The thing about real life is that we are in ten places at one time. If I'm at a party having a good time; I'm also worried about my drunken friend in the corner, and I'm a bit sad that my friend who died 4 years ago can't be there and I'm also dreaming about a beach holiday. If it was a scene in a movie; a great actor would be in all those places but a bad actor would just be at the party.

And this is what you can't teach. Some actors just want the red carpet. Some are too aware of themselves. Some just want to escape their lives. But you want to cast the ones who don't have blank expressions and don't look at things from one perspective. You want performers who bring it all to the table.

The most successful actors often have an ease about them which we assume is because of their riches and celebrity, and I'm sure that's a part of it; but more than that I feel that they have mastered themselves. Becoming a great actor is a personal development project. The more you get to know who you are and what triggers your emotions, the better you'll be. The training helps, but a lot of it needs to be figured out by the actors themselves.

Care to share?

Wednesday, 19 January 2011

127 HOURS - A Life-Changer

At its core, 127 HOURS has some simple messages: call your parents, let them know you love them. Commit to things. And if you're inclined to disappear, let the people who love you know where you are. Why? Because when you're caught between a rock and a hard place; these are the only things that matter.

We know these things because Aron Ralston says so. He's the guy who really spent 127 hours  stuck in one place with the near certainty of his death.



Movies have a tendency to get bigger and crazier and louder. But life isn't like that. Life is really simple; it's about showing up and being a good person. That's what being wedged in by rocks reminds you. Aron wouldn't change that experience for anything. It's like the lightning flash of insight that Michael J. Fox got when he left the neurologists office in New York all those years ago after being diagnosed with Parkinson's Disease. It wasn't the premieres and free parties that mattered; it was his wife and kid. We forget that.

The story of 127 HOURS is no mystery. He cuts off his arm in order to survive. I gave away the ending. But endings are always certain. You're gonna die and I'm gonna die, I'm certain of that, but it's not the ending that matters-- it's all the pain and joy in between.

And Danny Boyle's latest movie is full of pain. When bones break and arms are sliced into; you feel it. Richard Pryke and Ian Tapp didn't win Academy Awards for sound re-recording mixing for nothing. They made SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE sound real, and they did it again in this one. When Aron slices up his arm, you feel it in your body. The people sitting near you come alive -- whether they throw their arms in front of their faces or whether they lean further towards the screen; everyone reacts. It's gruesome. But it's real. This is pain and you have to keep watching because only by being present for pain do we see the true beauty of pleasure.


There's a moment about half way through when Aron is talking into his camera that will break your heart. Because he talks about wishing he'd called his Mother back and he talks about what a selfish ass he is and you realise he's talking about you too. The difference is that you can be a better person without chopping your arm off.

I don't know how 127 HOURS will feel on a second viewing and I don't know how it will feel on a DVD, so I hope you go to the cinema to see it. THE KING'S SPEECH is a solid movie and THE SOCIAL NETWORK is super slick, but 127 HOURS reminds us of the truly unparalleled simplicity and genius of the cinema.

Care to share?

Tuesday, 18 January 2011

HENRY'S CRIME

If it was a DVD, you'd turn it off, because life is too short. But when you're in the cinema you work harder. And bad movies make you work harder, because you have to make a lot of decisions in order to stay interested.

Henry's crime begins with Keanu Reeves being an accidental accomplice at a bank robbery, he goes to jail and he meets James Caan, who talks for ten minutes about the meaning of life and prison and he throws in some movie cliches and reworks what we loved about Shawshank Redemption into something far more trivial. As a viewer, you notice the trickery, you know it's just a setup and a bunch of character information they're trying to force feed you. But you stick with it because Caan is a joy to watch, he's a real pro.


And then Keanu is out of jail and he can rebuild his life. But he decides to rob the bank he was accidentally caught up in last time. He does it for two reasons; 1) he heard a cliche in jail about how if you did the time you may as well have done the crime, and b) because while he was peeing he saw an old newspaper pinned up on the wall about how, 80 years ago, there was a tunnel between the bank and the theatre across the road.

Vera Farmiga runs over Keanu with her car. Luckily she's the lead actress in the theatre play, and luckily when he casually says during a date "I'm robbing the bank," she's pretty chilled about it and decides to sleep with him.

So you're sitting there in the cinema and you know the script is a hack job and you know that the film isn't carrying you along so you need to do your own work to keep you from walking out. After so many bad films, you know what to do-- you latch onto things you like and you excuse all of the major holes in the plot. It helps when you get a little scene where characters share their feelings that 'life is tough when you go legit' because it gives you that little bit of empathy for the characters. But really you're relating to the part of yourself that says 'life sucks' because you can't relate to Keanu in that way because he was written badly. He has no motivation for robbing the bank other than what he told us, that he realised he could change life by making a decision. But the viewer doesn't buy it because we can't see why he didn't just get a new haircut or go and study Greek history.

So Keanu is fucking Vera Farmiga on a regular basis, and know he's starring in the play at the theatre (so that they can access the secret tunnel). Vera knows they're robbing the bank by digging through the theatre, and she knows the play will be ruined: but she's not asking for a slice of the deal, and she's not planning to run away with Keanu or marry him. So she's just casually sleeping with him whilst he plots to rob a bank and disappear forever. It makes no sense, in fact nothing about her story makes sense apart from the fact she's a disgruntled actor, which was probably not a stretch given the film she was making. But Vera is also a way in and a way of staying interested because not only is she extremely beautiful but she makes everything believable. Even during the insane ending that was seemingly written by a pre-school drama club, we believed her, we felt something for her. How many actors can make you momentarily forget how bad a movie is? Not many, but Vera can. Keanu isn't so bad either. He gets a lot of criticism but he's alright, he puts in a shift and does what's required.


Bad movies are strange. Most people love them which leaves you scratching your head, feeling lonely and confused. Other people hate on them and bitch about them for eternity. But after a while you need a different angle otherwise you'll never love movies again and you'll bore everyone you meet because you'll sound like a bitter film student. Instead you need to find your way in to the movie. Find that one thing that makes it real for you and hold onto it until you're safely outside of the movie theater, wondering why there's a heap of popcorn stuck to your shirt.

Care to share?

Monday, 17 January 2011

BLOGGING

I don't think I've ever blogged about blogging. I don't think I've ever been consciously aware of the fact that I write a blog. That sounds a bit dumb, I know. I've been here for two years and of course I'm aware of my blogging. I just mean; it's been separate. I always judge my creativity based on the screenplays I'm writing and the films I'm directing and the work I am doing. And then, outside of that, I write blogs. 

But who am I kidding? I write twenty five articles a month here. I could have published three books by now (I'm not saying anyone would read them-- but quantity-wise, I've written the words.) Where does it all come from? Is the creativity of my screenwriting linked to the productivity of my blogging? If I blog more, do I write less? How would I know? I often think of my film career as a chance to leave a legacy --- but is a blog the same thing? Of course, my inner-critic says "it's just a blog, nobody cares about blogs." But you guys are here, and you keep showing up. That means something. The fact we write our blogs and we read other people's blogs, that stands for something. But what is it? What is Kid In The Front Row? What are we doing here? 

I'm not meaning to overanalyse, and I don't mean to ramble narcissistically -- but I was just hit by the insight that, wow, this blog exists, it's here. I've been here for nearly two years and I keep writing articles and keep interviewing people and keep talking about 'The West Wing' and 'Adventureland.' 

I think blogs are great because they fill a gap. I can moan to myself that the world doesn't like the films I like or doesn't view them in the same way, and that's probably what I used to do. But now, I can just write about things here as if it's what everyone cares about. And then, crazily, people often do. Sometimes people write the exact same things as me. 

'Kid In The Front Row' - what is that? What does it stand for? Why do I write? The people who read this and the people who write similarly personal blogs (I'm talking film blogs but it could be other topics..) - I think we write because we don't see a place for us in the newspapers, or in the latest fashions, or a Michael Bay movie. "Pearl Harbor" and "Transformers: Revenge Of The Fallen" don't speak to me, they don't resonate with me and my life. I guess that's what it's about---- having a place to share what resonates, and finding people who feel the same. And when they don't agree, it's because different things resonate for them. But we're still here, together, because this world dulls things that resonate. We're meant to be turned on by the same commercials, and coke cans, and skin products; and we're meant to spend 3.95 on a coffee in Starbucks because that's what the whole world does.


A good blog is a cup of coffee that costs 0.75, because that's all it should cost--- and instead of being Starbuckized like everyone else, we're finding the little, personal cafes that feel like home. That's the movies we're after, that's the artists we want to be, and that's why we blog.

Care to share?

Saturday, 15 January 2011

Ross & Rachel


Were they on a break, or not? Whose side are you on?

Take the POLL on the top-left of the blog. 
(and share any thoughts you have in the comments)

Care to share?