Here's a thought. Because of all the conversations I had this weekend about film and theater, I'd like to hear from you guys this time.
Please comment with your opinion on film (either mainstream or indie, or both) and theater, or compare and contrast the good and bad points of each, based on whichever of them you prefer or are already involved in. And you can also cite some of your first-hand experiences if you want.
yeah.. i know how it feels.. on my end its film camera's versus digital cameras. hahahaha
ReplyDeletegrabe, essay question ba ito? :P
ReplyDeleteWag nang magtanong, sumagot ka na lang, hahaha. =P
ReplyDeleteI was thinking in terms of the intimacy of space that an actor has to deal with (on set and on stage)...but it's hard to quantify all that :D
ReplyDeletehmmm... very active in theatre and really want to do film one day although have dabbled with a lot of videos already...
ReplyDeletehere's one: the best film actors are those who came from theatre. that's a worldwide fact.
directing for both is VERY VERY DIFFERENT, so a very good theatre director might not be as good in film, although the "shots" may come out very "theatrical".
I almost had three indies. Almost because I was cast in these films, but last minute, they opted for a mainstream actress. Ouch!
ReplyDeleteI understand why indie directors cast mainstream actors. Para mas mapansin. But come on.
Theater's more fun to do, and you learn a lot. Plus, iba talaga ang bonding. But film has more exposure.
I guess it's all a matter of choosing projects.
You know my thoughts on mainstream. :D
I'm just lucky mainstream rackets come my way when I need the money. :P
And as a director, the mainstream actors have their possibilities but for the most part it is covered up by a lot of bullshit glitz and glamour and bad acting habits, stock mannerisms, playing "pa-cute" instead of focusing on the truth of their expressions.
ReplyDeleteAs a director I prefer to work with people from theater (who I have tremendous respect for) or complete non-actors (who I also have tremendous respect for) I know personally or like the Iranian film master Abbas Kiarostami, literally picking people off the street that I come in contact with. =)
And yes for the casting of mainstream actors in so-called independent films, there may be other good reasons for that, but well, a lot of times they are for the wrong reasons. Read: box office draw.
That's a very good point about the intimacy of space that the actor has to deal with. =)
ReplyDeleteIn theater, the actor deals with a three dimensional space and an immediate and direct connection with the audience in the theater. It is more physical and present. One can literally and emotionally "reach out and touch someone". The actor's dealing with the space is usually clearly defined beforehand. There are clear limitations that are "rehearsed". Theater requires a physical space of a theater or a venue that can serve as a theater like a living room or the street.
As Tarkovsky notes in his essay, traditional theater would not exist without the perfomer/actor. Film on the other hand can still exist because it can focus on many other things other than the performer/actor (who is also an integral part of the whole work).
In film, the actor also deals with a three dimensional space, but this shall be later translated to a two dimensional image of the movie screen.
In commercial filmmaking, the actor is usually more constrained and confined by the technology than in theater (the frame, the camera, the make-up, the editing continuity, the lighting, etc.) As the great American film master John Cassavetes noted, the actor becomes a mere cog in a giant industrial machine.
Whereas in filmmaking as an art form, the actor has more freedom and in film deals with more intimate and tinier energies than in theater. These intimate and tiny energies are magnified onscreen. And with the flexibility of the film camera and editing, whether through the selection of shots, movement or the cutting, there is a much more varied and wider playing field of time and space. =)
In theater, the actor is the creator and defines his/her space. In film, film creates and defines the actor's space.
theater started it all..
ReplyDeleteOne art form is not better than the other. Like all the other arts, Film has its strengths, theater has its strengths. Film has its limitations, theater has its limitations. Each can borrow and learn from the other to help with their expression.
ReplyDeleteOf course what theater has over film is maturity since it has behind it hundreds, if not thousands of years of development and innovation from cultures all over the world, whereas Film is just over one hundred years old.
And of course most people don't take film as seriously as they take theater, but that is the fault of a lot of bad filmmaking, miseducation, and a lack of exposure of people to the works of the great film masters.
Now this is a good point. =D
ReplyDeleteYep, the nail on the head right there. I was trying to get to that thought. Thanks!
ReplyDeletehmm, aside from our lovely lovely lovely workshop during that gorgeous summer of 2006, i never studied theater theories/elements/etc. Film, we studied in school. Pero ever since, watching plays excited me a lot more than watching films. Aside from the thought of the "theater" (in a British accent) being more romantic and more grand, i think the sheer act of watching a live performance makes theater more raw, more heartfelt. Basta mas may nararamdaman ako sa teatro. yun lang.
ReplyDeleteHogi, you're trying to get people to do your homework again! Muaha. I'd rather discuss these things with you in person. You know how I think and talk, baka may masagasaan ako. Ahem. Kthnxbai.
ReplyDeleteIsa ka pa. Sagutin mo lang naman eh. =P It's not just for me, but for everyone who's interested in either or both theater and film. Di bale nang may masagasaan ka; opinion mo lang naman eh. =)
ReplyDeleteI actually don't think we need to compare. Theater is simply above film. The reason why film is so popular is because its the most accessible--mabenta. I mean the audience can watch it through hbo or any channel, even buy pirated dvds--that simple--with matching takes and cuts in between.
ReplyDeleteThere are no cuts and takes in theater. And in terms of design and acting--i think theater smashes film in a blink. Design in film, its the actual thing. It depends what period..or what have you. In theater, design is a big deal--in terms of the point of view of the audience and how it suits the actors and blockings onstage.
Acting in film, is like the yawn of theater. I don't even need to explain this. Because as what they've said, all the best actors come from theater.enough said.hahaha
Its not like the chicken and egg, which came first battle eh. am i even making sense.hahahaha.lab you hogi!!