Quote:
Originally Posted by polak
Except scripts have a general tone and story they want to convey. They tell the actor what to do. If an actor, say, took a monologue from a script and acted it out completely different from what was originally intended then 100%, I'd call that artistic.
|
The artist is the difference between the good actor and the bad actor.
If someone is jsut sitting there spitting out the lines, sure your point stands. That person's not an artist, they're just reading.
Someone who can pull a character out of words, give them personality and relatability. Someone who can create an entire back story in their mind based on a few lines of text and use it to flush out an interesting enough character that people will pay attention takes art and creativity.
Quality of writing varies just as much as anything else. As does the type of writing. Some writers will give a lot of scene detail and character reactions, some writers leave a lot open to interpretation. Screenplays are not like books, they take many different forms. Some characters don't even get names (even major ones; Ed Norton's character in fight club is referred to as just "Narrator" in the script).
Your logic puzzles me given your preference for EDM music (as UCB alluded too). You have a problem with actors as artists because they didn't create the whole character or the idea of them? But then you refer to directors as artists, who are just taking the writers words and making them into images. What about a musician who takes the words someone else wrote and creates a beautiful piece of music with it? The actors art is becoming someone or something they're not and making other people believe that they are what they are pretending to be. It's a computer animators art to make people believe that the Millennium Falcon exists. It's the directors art to make people believe that this entire world exists.
Filmmaking is probably the single greatest collaboration of various art forms to create another piece of art.