Getting actors to improvise
- Thread starter Semiazas
- Start date
From someone who has absolutely no idea...
First do a sit-down with your "cast" and discuss the characters; I would assume that the actor being comfortable with his/her character would be important. Set up a camera, hit record, go through the script as written a few times, then start riffin'. From there you can re-write and then shoot for real.
From having worked with quite a few editors over the years most of them hate having to piece together improv-ed material. The only exception seems to be is when there is multiple camera coverage, and even then proper continuity seems to be an issue. I hate it as well; the boom op has no idea who will be speaking next, so the sound is very inconsistent. I guess that if each actor had his/her own lav recorded onto an individual audio track I might like it a little better.
First do a sit-down with your "cast" and discuss the characters; I would assume that the actor being comfortable with his/her character would be important. Set up a camera, hit record, go through the script as written a few times, then start riffin'. From there you can re-write and then shoot for real.
From having worked with quite a few editors over the years most of them hate having to piece together improv-ed material. The only exception seems to be is when there is multiple camera coverage, and even then proper continuity seems to be an issue. I hate it as well; the boom op has no idea who will be speaking next, so the sound is very inconsistent. I guess that if each actor had his/her own lav recorded onto an individual audio track I might like it a little better.
Make sure your actors have training in improv, before setting them loose on camera for your scenes. Otherwise you'll end up with a string of profanities, 'cos those are the easiest filler words to use to fill empty spots in dialogue.
Coincidentally, I just got back today from a 4-day shoot that did this, though this time the talent was pretty good. I edited a short by the same director a few years back, and it was almost unsalvageable.
Coincidentally, I just got back today from a 4-day shoot that did this, though this time the talent was pretty good. I edited a short by the same director a few years back, and it was almost unsalvageable.
I've tried improv twice. The first time, it was an absolute train-wreck. My actors (one of whom was well-trained otherwise) were inexperienced in improv.
The second time I tried it, my actors knocked it out the park. They made it look easy. Not surprisingly, these two had a great deal of training and experience in improv.
Unless your actors have done this before, I'd shy away from trying it. Actually, I guess it doesn't hurt to try it, but I wouldn't bank on it being very effective.
The second time I tried it, my actors knocked it out the park. They made it look easy. Not surprisingly, these two had a great deal of training and experience in improv.
Unless your actors have done this before, I'd shy away from trying it. Actually, I guess it doesn't hurt to try it, but I wouldn't bank on it being very effective.
Im knee deep into a short film right now that will have some improv in it. The piece is a surreal thriller and I think that will be workable. The talent must be skilled and trained or just plain creative in order to do this. many actors will freeze and come up w/ nothing especially if you have not brainstormed with them. I feel very lucky on my current project that the talent is highly motivated to contribute. The first go-round, the actors wanted to express the script and draw everything from the script. I knew that the script had holes in it and really wanted to work with the talent to make something good come from it.
We start filming Thurs am.. so I will know by February when I hope to have this done at the vary latest. I have the help of two talented musicians who love film, so I hope we all can make something cool.
I have advise from someone who is talented in scripting not to go thru with filming at the current time, cuz the script has flaws. I fully understand his position, but Im the one filming it and have a vision in my head of what the finished piece would look like. If one were to take my "script" and shoot from it. It would be a disaster.
I hope I will bring something extra along with the talent of the actors and my musically inclined friends and make the short something worth watching. Im almost on the edge of making a feature from this..... more to come
We start filming Thurs am.. so I will know by February when I hope to have this done at the vary latest. I have the help of two talented musicians who love film, so I hope we all can make something cool.
I have advise from someone who is talented in scripting not to go thru with filming at the current time, cuz the script has flaws. I fully understand his position, but Im the one filming it and have a vision in my head of what the finished piece would look like. If one were to take my "script" and shoot from it. It would be a disaster.
I hope I will bring something extra along with the talent of the actors and my musically inclined friends and make the short something worth watching. Im almost on the edge of making a feature from this..... more to come
As Robert McKee notes, a character is defined by his/her actions. Dialogue is secondary to character. Improv can work, if there is a line of action happening in your script. If the characters are just sitting in a cafe, this will be much harder!
Most experienced actors have studied improv. I still recommend a base outline of where the conversation should go.
Most experienced actors have studied improv. I still recommend a base outline of where the conversation should go.
"How do you think they would say it...?"
Not in a sharp tone, as an actual question delivered warmly and welcomingly to encourage them to actually answer the question... keep the camera rolling when they answer and stand where the other actor should be when they answer... That way their first time through it is on camera and usable... you won't get inexperienced actors to do improv in a master shot... make sure you have the camera going when they answer (perhaps don't let them know you're rolling).
Not in a sharp tone, as an actual question delivered warmly and welcomingly to encourage them to actually answer the question... keep the camera rolling when they answer and stand where the other actor should be when they answer... That way their first time through it is on camera and usable... you won't get inexperienced actors to do improv in a master shot... make sure you have the camera going when they answer (perhaps don't let them know you're rolling).
I'm actually really big into improv (I study at the groundlings and have studied second city). I think throwing actors who have no training in improv isn't necessarily a bust. Some people are more comfortable improvising than others....the training helps you get it to be usable and worthwhile instead of going for the "joke" or going "blue".
Personally, if they are inexperienced I would set two actors down and put them in a scenario like ....
Dave, you just walked in and caught your best friend Mike trying on women's shoes. You're both guy's guys...into sports and this and that. That said..i want you two to keep the dialogue real....stay true to the characters....but say anything you would say as this person.
From there you can explore...tell them to play in the scene after you get your first unimprovised take. That way you still have something clean to work with. The problem with using non actors or not experienced actors is you tend to get either stale reads or over the top reads....that middle "real" ground is what you're looking for.
Personally, if they are inexperienced I would set two actors down and put them in a scenario like ....
Dave, you just walked in and caught your best friend Mike trying on women's shoes. You're both guy's guys...into sports and this and that. That said..i want you two to keep the dialogue real....stay true to the characters....but say anything you would say as this person.
From there you can explore...tell them to play in the scene after you get your first unimprovised take. That way you still have something clean to work with. The problem with using non actors or not experienced actors is you tend to get either stale reads or over the top reads....that middle "real" ground is what you're looking for.
One thing we have decided to do on my current short film is to have the talent all stay in character throughout the production. There will be some improv for sure, this will help them. Im lucky all the talent is into the story and really wants to do something powerful. My job is to slow tthem down, they are going a little fast, faster than I can keep up with and faster than it needs to be. I can control the speed. Im pumped !
The is a dark and creepy one where the lead will play an evil little bitch who gets victimized. Her family and everyone around her is angry w/ her so the mood shall be dysfunctional. We will all be in a dark mood, no levity on the set behind the camera till the very last scene to be shot, that one is uplifting and upbeat.
.
The is a dark and creepy one where the lead will play an evil little bitch who gets victimized. Her family and everyone around her is angry w/ her so the mood shall be dysfunctional. We will all be in a dark mood, no levity on the set behind the camera till the very last scene to be shot, that one is uplifting and upbeat.
.
Last edited:
As someone who has worked with actors on stage and in film for more than twenty years and has acted himself I can tell you that improv is much more difficult to do well than working from a script. With inexperienced performers, you're likely just going to burn tape on a lot of unfocused rambling and nervous chatter. Or, like Steve said, a bunch of aimless profanity, depending on the age of the performer.
Even many experienced actors are intimidated by improv. There are a few big name directors who specialize in improvised films, but they usually rehearse for many weeks beforehand. That sounds contradictory, I know -- rehearsing improv? But what they do is distill a "script" from the rehearsal, rather than just rolling film and letting the actors ramble.
As Bez suggested, I'd start slowly with improv "exercises" to get them used to focusing on one simple idea, then gradually expand until they reach a point where they are comfortable and are able to stay on topic.
P.S. -- The other side of this is to use non-actors and just have them play themselves doing what they would normally be doing in real life. In other words, if the scene calls for a teacher, cast a real teacher; if you need a shopkeeper, cast a real one; etc.
Even many experienced actors are intimidated by improv. There are a few big name directors who specialize in improvised films, but they usually rehearse for many weeks beforehand. That sounds contradictory, I know -- rehearsing improv? But what they do is distill a "script" from the rehearsal, rather than just rolling film and letting the actors ramble.
As Bez suggested, I'd start slowly with improv "exercises" to get them used to focusing on one simple idea, then gradually expand until they reach a point where they are comfortable and are able to stay on topic.
P.S. -- The other side of this is to use non-actors and just have them play themselves doing what they would normally be doing in real life. In other words, if the scene calls for a teacher, cast a real teacher; if you need a shopkeeper, cast a real one; etc.
Last edited:
The concept of casting a teacher in a teacher's role sounds good, in theory, but rarely works out. Non-actors are generally so aware there is a camera on them that they can't just relax and be themselves.
Part of acting is looking natural while a camera is two inches from your face and someone has you cheating your arm into an unnatural position, because it looks good in frame, while you're telling a stranger you just met two hours ago that you will die if you can't have their love forever.
gelder
Part of acting is looking natural while a camera is two inches from your face and someone has you cheating your arm into an unnatural position, because it looks good in frame, while you're telling a stranger you just met two hours ago that you will die if you can't have their love forever.
gelder
Improvisation can produce amazing results or it can go off the rails. I read a great essay on theater improv in The New Yorker and I'll be damned if I can find the link. It really put the scene and process into perspective. What works one night may very well fall flat the next.
In terms of filmmaking, I feel it's best to have some framework in place, otherwise it's a free for all. As long as there are a few things defined (character, setting and action) the results can often be quite surprising. And if there isn't a lot of production money at stake (tapes are cheap) then keep the camera rolling and see what happens.
For what it's worth, these shorts were improvised and when it didn't feel right we went back and took more takes. As we went along ideas came to us and we developed as we shot. Silly fun.
* hey Steve!
In terms of filmmaking, I feel it's best to have some framework in place, otherwise it's a free for all. As long as there are a few things defined (character, setting and action) the results can often be quite surprising. And if there isn't a lot of production money at stake (tapes are cheap) then keep the camera rolling and see what happens.
For what it's worth, these shorts were improvised and when it didn't feel right we went back and took more takes. As we went along ideas came to us and we developed as we shot. Silly fun.
* hey Steve!
Depends on the individual and how you work it out. Check out the BtS for the movie Monsters. Except for the two leads, every character in the film was just a person "off the street", as it were.
Reminds me of a funny story. Years ago a commercial for Miller Genuine Draft was shot in my town. Because it's largely a fishing community (or was), they wanted to capture that "working man" feel, so they hired a pair of local commercial fishermen to "act" in the commercial. Couple of hard knocks dudes.
A pair of cameras were set up with the two guys on the dock and the mooring basin in the b.g. Props handed them a couple of beers and told them they could take a sip occasionally, but not to do it too much because they're not allowed to show them actually drinking in the commercial. That's like handing a teenager a credit card and saying not to spend too much.
They rolled film and within a minute or two the beers were gone and the fisherman were given two more (MGD bottles are clear so they couldn't fake it). Couple more minutes, same thing. The Hollywood crew was shocked; they'd never seen anyone put away beer like that. Before they wrapped the shot, those guys had nearly emptied a case between them, and weren't even tipsy. I have no idea how much useful footage they got, since the "actors" were drinking pretty much constantly.
Funny story, 2001, but your last sentence kinda sums it up:
"I have no idea how much useful footage they got"
Even telling the guys not to drink too often, they went through close to a case of beer. That's not always helpful on the set.
gelder
*hey, Jeff - you look...different, somehow....
"I have no idea how much useful footage they got"
Even telling the guys not to drink too often, they went through close to a case of beer. That's not always helpful on the set.
gelder
*hey, Jeff - you look...different, somehow....
funny you mention that. I've been feeling different these days... bit of a dull headache that won't go away.
Hmmm...did you watch that DVD I gave you... ? Might explain it...
gelder
gelder
I'm not saying you're wrong, just that it can be done using the right approach and making careful choices (again, Monsters is a good example). In my anecdote, the decision to hire real fisherman would probably not have been the wisest choice for a movie, but they only needed a few seconds for the ad.
D'oh! There we go again being cordial and civil. And we have the nerve to call ourselves artists?!
