How do YOU direct actors?

[John@Bophe]

This subject came up in a movie discussion thread, and there seemed to be some interest in a separate discussion on the topic -- how do you direct actors into delivering the best possible performance? If your actors are your friends (which is so often the case) how do you get them to take you seriously? What techniques do you use to make your actors more comfortable and more in touch with the character?

Please, feel free to share your thoughts and experiences!

 

[AshtonNew]

im still a newbee in directing but when ive made videos with friends. to make them shut up and do what i want them to do i change my personality from an easy going, funny guy to a serious assertive monkey.
the change in personalityy helps them not think im the same person to muck around with and to take me seriously.

 

[sonnyboo]

And Sonny! What the hell are you rehearsing so much for a 5 page shoot? You're going to burn your actors out, not to mention stifle their performances. The professional actors you elude to using can handle that easy--all they need is an hour or so to go over the scene with each other...mostly for blocking and major choice matching. Most film actors--if they are pros--show up to set ready to go without a single rehearsal run...most of the directors I work with do very little rehearsal...but now'adays I'm not sure why...rehearsing months before a film shoot has become a 'thing.' I don't think it's necessary. I can understand how a massive dialog scene could use a few hours rehearsal...or a major action sequence needs choreography practice and stunt runs...but 8 weeks for a 5 page shoot? Who are you doing that for? Your actors or your crew? Because actors don't need that.

These are some of the best actors I've seen in other things, but we needed it all. Yesterday we did the shoot and it showed we rehearsed and explored the script and got it where it needed to be. We'd spend 2 hours lighting a shot and then only have time for 2 takes. I know I got what I wanted from it and so did they because we rehearsed it well without killing it.

You don't blow out the performance with all-out rehearsals every week, you just EXPLORE the characters, the lines, the interaction, the moments, the blocking, and just try to find out what works and doesn't in a scene... in rehearsal so you don't find out it doesn't work on the set with a crew waiting. Maybe once or twice at the end of the process do you do any full out performances. It's more about finding something there for everyone, actors and director.

It was entirely worth it to do 8 weeks of rehearsals, at least for me (and these actors). With everything technical going on on set, this was how we worked out every kink, every line, and we still had some new moments on set.

Theater actors are used to this kind of thing, but acting for the camera means pulling the performance down a lot, but the "work" and the rehearsal means deeply getting embedded in a character.

 

[M1chae1]

Actors don't get burnt out from rehearsals - they get burnt out from trying to guess what a director wants. Every actor, though they may not need it, ALWAYS appreciates having the chance to rehearse as much as possible. I cannot even fathom how being prepared (via rehearsals) would stifle an actor -- that's just a crazy statement.

Well. What do I know.

I've been acting for over 15 years...and all of the FILM actors I know get annoyed, and never seem to benefit from OVER rehearsing. Film is different than stage. This is the first thing we must understand if we want to continue with this discussion.

I cannot even fathom how being prepared (via rehearsals) would stifle an actor.

With all due respect, are you an actor? I'm do not at all mean to be an ass here...but are you? Trust me...over-rehearsing an actor--especially a film actor--is stiffling. Granted some actors are different than others, but most of the actors I know want freedom...and when FILM directors ask FILM actors to rehearse like crazy, it adds something unnatural to the gumbo, and thwarts progression. It's hard to explain. Basically, over-working anything as an actor can be detrimental. Yes, certain shows (on stage) require a lot of rehearsal...but again, stage is different than film...totally different beast, and we won't go there.

You have to ask yourself as a film director...why am I asking my actors to rehearse as if it was a stage production? A film actor comes to set prepared...ready with the character...ready with multiple ideas. When you have them continually rehearse THE choice that's been made, it will create an over-played feeling for the actor, and consequently, for the audience. As an extreme example, what about an emotional crying scene...would you have the actor play that out in full everytime? Of course you wouldn't...you want to save some of that energy for the performance. Well, this is sort of the same thing for a film actor. You want to go over the scenes, so that the choices are clear, and then you want to let the actor run free. If they've been rehearsing for weeks...they feel like they can't even budge with their performance. They will begin playing the character like a carbon-copy everytime (at least a lot of actors tend to do this)...and this is not what you want. You want organic and fresh...and over-rehearsing doesn't allow for an organic feel.

Another reason plays have such an extensive rehearsal, is because they are insanely dialog heavy, in addition to the fact that the actors must play out the entire piece in one go. Film on the other hand is a completely different beast. Film isn't all about talking...it's a lot about visuals as well...telling a story not just by verbage, but by visuals...a moving painting. This usually means the dialog sequences are not as intense. Secondly, a film is broken up in many days of shooting (usually a feature is done in 15-30 days depending on the production company). And most professinal production companies give out a detailed shooting schedule. This means that actors don't necessarily have to memorize their entire part...they can work the script, make their choices, and get completely comfortable with the scheduled days they are needed. That is why stage-based rehearsing is not necessary for film...

I could go on and on...but it's kind of silly. If this isn't clear to a film director...than I don't think my explaining is going to help. Film has been handled this way for many many decades...why start treating it like stage now? There is no need. Don't get me wrong here...I DO agree with rehearsing here and there for key dialog scenes or big action sequences...but overall...a good film actor comes totally prepared to the set with many ideas which the director can mold on the fly if need-be.

Thanks.

 

[sonnyboo]

Film has been handled this way for many many decades...why start treating it like stage now? There is no need. Don't get me wrong here...I DO agree with rehearsing here and there for key dialog scenes or big action sequences...but overall...a good film actor comes totally prepared to the set with many ideas which the director can mold on the fly if need-be.

I think an important thing to note is that you're speaking for yourself and the actors you know, but not every film actor shares this point of view. Far more importantly, many directors do NOT share this point of view, as people like Francis Ford Coppola goes through EXTENSIVE rehearsal periods before filming with the actors.

I agree that some actors are better at just showing up and doing it without rehearsal, but the problem lies in that it may not be what I want as a director and on set I have very little time to explore and try to get the best performance for the movie and I can get stuck with something that doesn't work. The rehearsal process is a way to work around that, at least that appears to be the most obvious answer for avoiding that problem. Fixing it "on the fly" is not something most actual film directors get the luxury of because of time constraints, so again - how to overcome that problem? Rehearsal.

If I'm dealing with an actor who can't rehearse a lot or can't replicate a great performance over and over again like a xerox machine; I can't use that kind of actor, nor can any editor I know of. In my experience rehearsing a lot for any movie tends to yield better results as opposed to worse. I've been directing/editing for 10 years professionally as my sole income, but I must re-iterate that every actor is different and requires different levels of attention and process to do what they do. If you're as good as you say you are, then I probably wouldn't need to rehearse as much because you'd know exactly what I want.

To each his own!

 

[M1chae1]

I think an important thing to note is that you're speaking for yourself and the actors you know, but not every film actor shares this point of view. Far more importantly, many directors do NOT share this point of view, as people like Francis Ford Coppola goes through EXTENSIVE rehearsal periods before filming with the actors.

I agree that some actors are better at just showing up and doing it without rehearsal, but the problem lies in that it may not be what I want as a director and on set I have very little time to explore and try to get the best performance for the movie and I can get stuck with something that doesn't work. The rehearsal process is a way to work around that, at least that appears to be the most obvious answer for avoiding that problem. Fixing it "on the fly" is not something most actual film directors get the luxury of because of time constraints, so again - how to overcome that problem? Rehearsal.

If I'm dealing with an actor who can't rehearse a lot or can't replicate a great performance over and over again like a xerox machine; I can't use that kind of actor, nor can any editor I know of. In my experience rehearsing a lot for any movie tends to yield better results as opposed to worse. I've been directing/editing for 10 years professionally as my sole income, but I must re-iterate that every actor is different and requires different levels of attention and process to do what they do. If you're as good as you say you are, then I probably wouldn't need to rehearse as much because you'd know exactly what I want.

To each his own!

Each actor is different...as is each director. Of course. I was simply stating that in my experience (over 15 years), most of the actors and directors I've worked with don't hold lengthy rehearsal periods. Why? Well, I think for some of the very reasons I stated earlier. You don't need to.

As I said before, plays are rehearsed for weeks and weeks...that's because there is no 'cut, let's do it again.'...you have to get it right the first time through. That's the huge difference between film and theater.

If I'm dealing with an actor who can't rehearse a lot or can't replicate a great performance over and over again like a xerox machine; I can't use that kind of actor, nor can any editor I know of.

So, you can't use an actor unless they can ball their eyes out as intensely the 8th time as they could the first time? Well...you're going to have a hard time finding an actor to work with then. We aren't machines. Yes, for the most part, I can duplicate a performance once we've settled on how it's going to be played...and for the most part this is important for matching and continuity...but that's different than asking an actor to rage with tears the same way 15 times. And there isn't any level of rehearsing that's going to help with that. Most of us just can't do it.

Look...to each is own. I know that. But out of the dozens of directors I've worked with in film...not a single one required more than a weeks rehearsal. And out of the hundreds of film actors I've worked with, very few would have benefited from massive rehearsal.

The rehearsal process is a way to work around that, at least that appears to be the most obvious answer for avoiding that problem. Fixing it "on the fly" is not something most actual film directors get the luxury of because of time constraints, so again - how to overcome that problem? Rehearsal.

If you have time for rehearsal...you have time to mold a performance on the fly. That makes little sense.

Thanks guys. I love hearing each of your experiences and ideas. Cheers.

 

[David.rhsc]

Maybe a defining of terms here would help, 8 weeks of rehearsal is sort of vague; was it once a week, every day, every weekend, etc? Were all of the rehearsals, well, "rehearsals" as opposed to something like a short character discussion meeting over coffee or some other simple table discussion. 8 weeks sounds like a long time, but it could easily have been 8 sessions of a couple hours just spread out to accommodate schedules - that happens all the time.

Speaking as a novice who will probably not have the benefit of actors with a great deal of experience for a while, I can see the benefit of a middle ground here. I wouldn't try to burn folks out on a ludicrous schedule - but unless I spent some time working the material, exploring options and the ideas the actors are bringing to the characters *I* would feel unprepared to go into production.

 

[sonnyboo]

If you have time for rehearsal...you have time to mold a performance on the fly. That makes little sense.

Rehearsals are done BEFORE the shoot when there isn't money rolling through a camera and an entire crew is waiting and you have multiple setups to get done in a day. Molding a performance, especially anything with complexity and depth, takes more than a few seconds or minutes on a set with everyone waiting to mold, at least in my experience.

So having time BEFORE the shoot versus on the set are completely different time schedules (since one takes place during a hectic shoot and the other in a safe, easy environment of your choosing). This makes pretty simple sense to me, not sure why that would be confusing.

 

[sonnyboo]

Maybe a defining of terms here would help, 8 weeks of rehearsal is sort of vague; was it once a week, every day, every weekend, etc? Were all of the rehearsals, well, "rehearsals" as opposed to something like a short character discussion meeting over coffee or some other simple table discussion. 8 weeks sounds like a long time, but it could easily have been 8 sessions of a couple hours just spread out to accommodate schedules - that happens all the time.

Speaking as a novice who will probably not have the benefit of actors with a great deal of experience for a while, I can see the benefit of a middle ground here. I wouldn't try to burn folks out on a ludicrous schedule - but unless I spent some time working the material, exploring options and the ideas the actors are bringing to the characters *I* would feel unprepared to go into production.

Yes, one night a week for 2 hours for 8 weeks. Some rehearsals were just 2 of the 3 actors to work on their chemistry and scenes alone with me.

 

[M1chae1]

Rehearsals are done BEFORE the shoot when there isn't money rolling through a camera and an entire crew is waiting and you have multiple setups to get done in a day. Molding a performance, especially anything with complexity and depth, takes more than a few seconds or minutes on a set with everyone waiting to mold, at least in my experience.

So having time BEFORE the shoot versus on the set are completely different time schedules (since one takes place during a hectic shoot and the other in a safe, easy environment of your choosing). This makes pretty simple sense to me, not sure why that would be confusing.

This is called 'indie talk' right? How many of us here have thousands of dollars 'rolling' through the camera on set every day? I would guess not many. I would guess the majority of us here have time to play around on set with minor character development and director choices. As I said before, any actor worth his salt is going to come prepared with multiple ideas, so there really doesn't have to be a ton of time wasted. Usually, the director watches what the actor brings, and then nudges them accordingly...it's not a huge waste of time, it never is...and usually you'll always get good stuff out of what a good actor brings forthright.

Now, of course when we delve into 'big budget' films...where millions are being spent a week...well...do whatever you think is necessary. But I'm guessing less than 1% of accounts on Indietalk are shooting with millions of dollars. And actually...when you think about it...big budget films with name actors don't have rehearsal time. The actors come prepared with a character, and like I've suggested, they mold them on the fly. 'Let's see what you've got'...ACTION! CUT. 'Good good...now let's try something a little more...' That's how it gets done. I don't know any set (no, micro, low, or big budget) which holds extended rehearsals.

Not that you're a bastard for holding them...lol...not at all. Just remember...this is film...not theater.

 

[sonnyboo]

Not that you're a bastard for holding them...lol...not at all. Just remember...this is film...not theater.

I have never been involved in theater, and as I mentioned, I'm a professional with a decade of experience as a director. Shoots that have even tens of dollars in the budget still get under the crunch of time and with time being the most valuable commodity, I'd prefer to spend it on the technicals of filmmaking and spend the much cheaper free time on rehearsals working on the acting and performance, but I cannot speak for any other director than myself. I can say that I've worked with actors who audition well, but come to set unprepared, or just plain not good. With time in rehearsal, something can be culled. With no time on set, you're screwed and I'd personally not like to make a movie with subpar performances.

I can make a list of directors of the last 50 years that have had extensive rehearsal periods for big budget movies, but it seems we are at an impasse of opinion, and it's important to note that neither of us is ultimately "right" or "wrong" in a broad sense, as this is a very preferential thing.

I think you're coming at this from the persepctive of being a GOOD actor and being prepared, but quite frankly, not all (and most) actors are NOT prepared or necessarily good at what they do at the LOW BUDGET, NO BUDGET levels. Kudos to you and I think I'd love to meet more actors like you.

 

[citychik]

I've been acting for over 15 years...and all of the FILM actors I know get annoyed, and never seem to benefit from OVER rehearsing. Film is different than stage. This is the first thing we must understand if we want to continue with this discussion.

Just because I disagree doesn't mean I don't understand you. Yes, film acting is different than stage acting. Of course, it is. Very different. That fact does not necessarily preclude the need for rehearsals in preparation for a film role. Nor does it mean that all film actors feel stifled by rehearsals. In my experience, both stage and film actors appreciate and welcome the chance to rehearse as much as they can, in order to, at the very least, understand their role and the material better.

With all due respect, are you an actor? I'm do not at all mean to be an ass here...but are you?

Yes, indeed I am, since the early '80s, though my focus is now filmmaking (still fairly new at that). Not that I have to back up my opinion, anyway. My opinions are just that... my opinions.

Trust me...over-rehearsing an actor--especially a film actor--is stiffling. Granted some actors are different than others, but most of the actors I know want freedom...

Trust me... rehearsals don't take away an actor's freedom. Rehearsals are simply an effective means to get them familiar with the material and stimulate their approach to making choices. Sure, an actor can improvise and wing it and get great results, but there's nothing wrong with having some solid ground for them to stand on.

You have to ask yourself as a film director...why am I asking my actors to rehearse as if it was a stage production? . . .You want to go over the scenes, so that the choices are clear, and then you want to let the actor run free. If they've been rehearsing for weeks...they feel like they can't even budge with their performance. They will begin playing the character like a carbon-copy everytime (at least a lot of actors tend to do this)...and this is not what you want. You want organic and fresh...and over-rehearsing doesn't allow for an organic feel.

I don't see rehearsing for eight weeks as "over-rehearsing." It seemed obvious to me that wasn't an every day thing, and it also seemed (to me, anyway) a peculiar assumption of yours that Sonnyboo's eight weeks of rehearsals were just automatically, across-the-board excessive, before knowing the parameters and how the rehearsals were done.

I say that an actor's "freedom," achieving an "organic feel" to a performance, and being well-rehearsed are not mutually exclusive. A good actor with a reliable technique that works for her or him will be able to express a spontaneity and "freedom within the harness" (as my old acting teacher used to say) no matter how many times they rehearse. Every take will be alive and new because from moment to moment the actor is alive and new. I guess you would rather have them do 22 takes and pick the best one in post, but I'm an editor, too, and it is painful, literally, to have to sift through a gazillion takes and tons of footage to put the scenes together. Having your actors well-rehearsed beforehand eliminates a lot of the undisciplined or off-base on-set experimenting that will never get used. To me, it makes much more sense (and is more economical of time, $$, and resources) to have the actors arrive on set feeling confident and solidly knowing the material inside and out, and having already developed a sense of the director, and an understanding of how the director works and what she or he wants. That way, they are able to improvise and take off from that foundation as a jumping-off point, rather than showing up on set and doing it pretty much like a cold reading. I feel that it is not necessarily accurate to conclude that having many rehearsals per se will automatically get in the way of creative freedom. I think the lynch pin is always the actor's technique.

Another reason plays have such an extensive rehearsal, is because they are insanely dialog heavy, in addition to the fact that the actors must play out the entire piece in one go. . . . That is why stage-based rehearsing is not necessary for film...

Curious that you assumed eight weeks of rehearsing must be "stage-based rehearsing." Obviously extensive rehearsals don't work for you, but making blanket statements that all film actors are stifled or will be over-worked and robotic from a few weeks of rehearsals is a bit extreme. I can't even count how many times I've read or heard Hollywood actors say in interviews how much they appreciate having rehearsals, and how much they love-love-love the directors who give them the time to rehearse and be well-prepared before filming. In fact, I'd say that most film actors consider extensive rehearsals for a film a luxury that doesn't happen often enough. Can't name 'em, 'cause I forget who, but I've read or seen it numerous times. And most directors appreciate an actor who is able to be consistent and have a grasp on who their character is, even if big things change at the last minute on set. It's not a foreign concept -- preparation is a good thing.

Shoots that have even tens of dollars in the budget still get under the crunch of time and with time being the most valuable commodity, I'd prefer to spend it on the technicals of filmmaking and spend the much cheaper free time on rehearsals working on the acting and performance, but I cannot speak for any other director than myself.

Also a great opportunity to build camaraderie among the cast, before they get to the set. What you say makes perfect sense to me. Right now I'm in pre-pro for a short, and before I even read this thread, I knew I wanted to make sure I schedule a few weeks of rehearsals. The last fictional narrative project I did (another short) was difficult to edit because the acting was inconsistent. I had thrown together the project at the last minute and we hadn't had any rehearsals. I had a very small crew, and there was no one in charge of continuity except me, and I was also shooting and directing. One of my actors had great technique and was spot-on every take. No worries with him (he has since moved to Hollywood and I just know he's gonna make it big), but my other actor was very wild and improvisational. Though she stuck to the script, her delivery was so varied from take to take, and since I was directing, I missed some continuity mistakes she made -- so, trying to edit together her scenes was a nightmare. From my experience, as a filmmaker AND as an actor, rehearsals are meant to serve a need, and having many of them allows a variety of issues/questions to get addressed. For me, they will be a "must have" from now on. Glad to know it works so well for you, Sonnyboo.

.

 

[indietalk]

It's good to see different directing styles. I've never done a rehearsal. I do a script read through and make sure the delivery of the lines is what I want. I like the magic to happen on the set. If I saw a magic moment in a rehearsal I'd just be pissed it wasn't being filmed

 

[sonnyboo]

Also a great opportunity to build camaraderie among the cast, before they get to the set. Glad to know it works so well for you, Sonnyboo.

I like to build a relationship with the actors as a director. We find the character and the meaning of the lines together as an exploration and a team. Having a good rapport helps save time on set with a short hand and understanding of what we both mean. I would never presume to say that my every direction is clear to every actor and vice versa. I like to work out those kinks when the whole crew isn't watching which can make some (not every) actor nervous or distracted. I hate having my first direction to an actor be between a boom mic, a wireless lav, the 2 grips, a camera, a DP, the PA, and a tripod or dolly. How much trust does that build if we haven't already established a relationship somewhere, like I don't know... rehearsals? Not every actor, even good ones, can psychically know what it is I want as a director. Then again, I have worked with some actors who don't need rehearsals at all. It's very circumstantial, but the camaraderie and building of some kind of mutual respect between actors in rehearsal go a long way to helping make convincing relationships on screen.


I think if more filmmakers rehearsed, we'd see better acting in "indie" films...

 

[Spatula]

Here's my perspective... at least in regards to the feature film I'm currently embarked upon....

So I'm the "writer/director" (and supporting actor) in the movie. Now, 2 weeks back I got my core crew and available cast together for a technical test shoot to make sure the two cams we have will synch up ok, and to test a SPFX (I'll post it soon enough, I'm just tweaking the edit). Anyway, in the scene test we shot it was me and my best friend (and long time co-actor) Bill acting opposite of Bill's girlfriend Jenn (our makeup artist and a first time supporting actor).

Now, Bill and I have a developed chemistry so it's very easy for me to write scenes for the two of us... but what I always find is that no matter what I write, when we get to it and actually start acting it out, things HAVE to evolve. Whether it be an idea, a line or an action, once we get on set and go through the motions of a scene, we can start filling in the blanks of a sequence and oftentimes it ends up better than the original- as it did in this case. Two jokes in particular made it into the scene that I hadn't written but enhanced the scene greatly.

But with other actors, non-actors and new actors, we don't necessarily start off with that chemistry - and improv is easier if you know where your scene partner tends to go. Thus, I would say that rehearsal would be integral to understanding actor's tendencies to interpret the script, their role and lines. By going through the motions we can weed out and replace any dialogue that doesn't sound natural and allow the actors to find replacements that suit their taste and liking.

Part of my job as Director is to make sure that the changes don't go outside the boundary of the big picture... and on set I'm more tempted to sign off to whatever makes the current scene better- without consideration to future events that may have relied on a particular line, action or emotion. But in rehearsals I have the opportunity to get those "Gems" and still go back and make sure it works into the full picture.

Now, because I wrote the script keeping in mind an easy production plan, it's segmented so that with rehearsals I can "group" actors to make it easier. So I'm dedicating one day or two to the lead protagonists and their interactions in scenes, their character development and their deliveries of lines. I'm gonna do another for the bad guys, and then another for "physicalization" for the zombie roles. Just enough to get the idea for each scene in their heads, but not so much that they become robotic and stilted for the actual shoot.

The way I've planned shooting, we have a 7-10 page per day average, half of which will be shot indoors in the day and the other half outside at night- which is EXTREMELY tight. So the way I've figured is that while my crew will be setting up each shot, we can run through the details of each scene on set and rehearse each chunk before we shoot. This will give my camera and audio team a chance to see the action on location and then adjust. It's not film, but I'm still hoping for a 3:1 shot ratio, and the only way to do that is to have crew and cast running through each shot at least 2-3 times before we even shoot a take. That being said, I'm a big fan of shooting rehearsals. That also being said, I hate having to pick shots from 7 takes that are all different levels of good.

But I think the best way to work with non-actors and friends is certainly this- give them control over their lines, have them play it the way "they would play it" (natural delivery as opposed to characters, accents), steer them with very specific directions, and always make sure they know when they did something right.

Pants are optional.

 

[M1chae1]

Oh well...*shrugs* I guess we all have our own stories. I do see all of your points...but I think I was misunderstood a tad. I wasn't 'assuming' an eight week cycle was every day...of course not--once or twice a week for a few hours each...I know that. But this is for a five-page script...is it not? I think that's where the word 'extensive' came from. Anyway...

I just wanted to throw my two cents in...it isn't just purely opinion...I'm basing much of this on personal experience. If people can find a way to disagree with nearly everything I've said...then obviously this is a great example of just how different people can be, and just how unique each person handles their craft.

Hey...I like a little rehearsing. I think I stated that several times. I just think rehearsing 8 weeks (no matter how often) for a five-page script is a little 'extensive.' So shoot me! lol.

Thanks guys for sharing and listening.

 

[the film guy]

In smaller films, I try to have a round table at the beginning of production where I sit down with ALL of the main actors at once. I discuss the film and what I am trying to do and make certain character suggestions for certain scenes and hopefully that will guide an actor with all of the other scenes. If you have a scene that a single line delivery is in itself the nuts and bolts of the entire scene, I have no problem showing an actor exactly how I want that line delivered. On the other hand, I try to leave the majority of the actor/character to the actor to see what they come up with. There is another reason for the meeting. If those who don't know you and haven't worked with you before are taking you seriously and see how no nonsense you are with them, then your Uncle Phil and next door's Billy Beckley are going to learn from the start that your relationship with them outside the film is one thing but your relationship ON the film is another. If you get that straight from the start, you'll find that your friends and relatives WANT to be as professional as the other actors on the set. Or else they don't and you can get them out of your movie at the start BEFORE you have to reshoot everything they messed up or deal with cast problems they shouldn't be causing.

 

[John@Bophe]

This must be a good topic. This thread is almost four years old and still going strong. Thanks, everyone!

 

[Cracker Funk]

I appreciate a director that has a sense of urgency on the set. Just because you aren't spending tons of dollars on expensive cast, crew, equipment, etc., that doesn't mean an independent production has the luxury of time. People have jobs. People have personal lives. Spending time on rehearsal can actually save time in the end.

For my feature that I plan to shoot this summer, I simply need my actors to be off-book, prior to any shooting. I'll be paying my actors, but not much. We'll have a very short amount of time to shoot a movie, so I won't have the luxury of experimenting with different feels for each scene. By the time we're shooting, I want my actors to know exactly what we're going for.

That being said, I do appreciate very much the input that some actors have put forth in this thread -- that over-rehearsing will wear them out and their performances will be wooden. I was thinking that maybe to avoid this from happenning, I could use two tactics. First, most of our "rehearsals" will just be table-reads, to get the cast closer to being off-book, and familiar with how I'm looking for each scene to be paced, dialogue-wise. I think we'll only have one rehearsal with full blocking. Second, we'll mostly skip over the big emotion scenes. No, I don't need you to scream "I hate you" at the top of your lungs, then burst into full-on cathartic crying every time we rehearse. Save that for the actual performance.

 

[Graeme]

I pretty much let them do what they want, let the ad-libs slide and try to shoot at break neck speeds. However I have try to act-out what an actor is suppose to do when they really don't understand their character/situation at all. I also have a habit of refering to actors as "you" and that can be odd when instructions like "you do his and you do that, no, no, not you... You!". That needs improvement.

 

[Gonzo_Entertainment]

"How many of us here have thousands of dollars 'rolling' through the camera on set every day? "

I average $1000 to $1500 per shooting day. That's why I rehearse the actors (MUCH more on the current film and going forward than on the last one).