Tuesday, July 03, 2007

Coffin Nails

Throughout the making of Dangerous Writing and in the wake of picture wrap I've been asked a lot of questions directly and indirectly about individual performances and my overall satisfaction with the film. I've overheard some handwringing and fretting that some actors didn't feel they "nailed" things.
I have a very different take on this stuff. I don't want anyone to nail anything. I don't like the association with adreline fueled, pursuit of perfection that nailing something brings to mind. To me acting is about understanding the given circumstances of the text and then trying to get under it. As an actor, I welcome many takes - not so much to try many things, but to explore my experience of the scene, discarding and adapting as I venture forth. It is the only way that I know to connect and commit to exploring the imagined world of the story. If I hold onto to some idea about how it should be, I sacrifice my freedom to find out what it could be. As I remind actors of the given circumstances they latch onto them as direction. I'll suggest what it might be and then observe my suggestion getting played when my intention was to start a dialogue rather than end one.
I too want the film to be good, but not as much as I wanted to experience its creation honestly. Honesty is the most reasonable yardstick of creativity. Was I honestly working from the best I had to offer each day of filming? Or was I operating from a place of ego with the expectation that my involvment with DW was going to lead to something else?
If we can each answer those questions, we will know how "good" we were. I think many aspiring filmmakers and actors go into a new project with the hope that they are going to overcome their mortality and that the imagined and hoped for greatness of their egocentric insecurities are going to be fulfilled at last. Rather than trying to reinvent myself, I am looking for opportunities to find out who I am as a filmmaker. What are my strengths and weaknesses? Where do I need to adjust my focus?
In making DW, I had two primary goals regarding my process. One was to let others assist me in making the film. There are many things that I know how to do faster and better than the crew can do, but is that best for the film? No, it isn't. It drains my energy and focuses my attention on light stands and microphones rather than the story's possibitlites. I did a better job of letting go as we went along. My work in this regard is far from over. One of the things I have to get over is the idea that the crew will think I'm lazy if I'm not working alongside them. Another difficulty is to look on at someone fumbling with something I can do with my eyes closed. My most successful day of letting go was at Ristretto. Since one of my oldest and closest friends owns the place and was present, I would have thought I would have been vigilant about things working efficiently. Somehow I walked past a lot of blundering and kept a smile on my face. I noticed a lot of it, and I checked my watch as things dragged on with the crew, but I didn't take it on. I transitioned from micro-managing to managing that night.
The other thing I wanted to do on DW was to stop coaching actors on set. If an actor doesn't know how to do something, I would rather not teach them how to do it. After teaching acting for five years, it's a tough habit to break. As many of the actors in DW were former students I could sense their frustration at letting them flounder. In the long run, we'll all be better off for it. As I work with more experiened actors, a poorly timed acting lesson may well alienate a trained professional. It has probably irritated my former students at times as well. And my former students won't come to rely on coaching from other directors. Especially since most directors are not former acting coaches or even familiar with acting technique.
What I want to do as a director is sit back and watch the actors work. I want to remind them of the starting and end points, and perhaps a mile marker or two. Then I want to be surprised and entertained. I want to fall in love with them. I want partners in crime. I got that at times in DW. For sure. I personally ruined a couple of takes by bursting out in laughter. I would like to see more of that ownership on the part of the actors. I would like to see and hear less concern with being good. I would like to hear more questions about the story. I don't like "Should I ..." questions, they betray the desire to get it right. I also would like to see actors learn to hit marks and hold their blocking without cutting themselves off. I noticed a lot of energy getting put into not moving and holding marks rather than behaving within the boundaries of marks. Then there are those that ignore marks and blocking for the sake of more organic perfomances. Well if it's not in focus, it's not much a performance.
All of these things I mention are skills gained with experience. I don't look back on DW with finger pointed at this actor or that for failing my genius vision. Hardly. I cast them because I like them and I knew they would do a good job and be enjoyable to work with. That's especially important on a micro-budget film. Everyone succeeded in that regard.
Every experience is different. DW is a minimalist film. Getting the sizzle isn't important. On another film, the actors might need to stir their molecules a bit more. With more closeups, they might need to focus their energies better. But that's another film's challenges, I wish them the best in meeting those future challenges as well as they met the demands of Dangerous Writing.

¡Viva!
Signroe Directtore

No comments: