In a class for my Bachelor of Acting and Performance degree all student actors were required to perform a short monologue from film or tv in front of a camera. Analysed in a previous blog post, I performed Ryan Reynolds’ short monologue scene from the film Hitman’s Bodyguard. Each piece was filmed in front of a black curtain and lighting stands were used to light the set. The camera was positioned to capture a medium close up shot and everyone performed once, received comments from the director and then performed again.
Personal Review
As it was my first ‘proper’ performance in front of a camera, I was not sure what to expect when I watched the performance back. My initial reaction was a feeling of disappointment and disproval. As is the case for most things, when you watch yourself back you start looking for criticism and focus on solely the negatives. The most prominent note I could think of was that it appeared to be a disengaged performance in regards to feeling present in the moment – becoming the character within the given circumstances. Particularly in the first half of the first video, I noticed a lack of connection to the character and what he was trying to achieve in the scene. This could be a result of not feeling emotionally connected or present due to my lack of experience with camera performance, creating nerves and distractions. However, it could also be a result of choosing the wrong action to play and omitting any thought or analysis on the objectives of the character. I find it interesting that, during a performance, the scene can feel so authentic and real but the opposite can be felt when watching it back.
The Director had organised for someone to always stand next to the camera lens (out of shot) so that we were able to actually communicate and engage with someone. I believe this assisted my performance as it is quite challenging to be able to maintain character and connection when you are speaking to a lens. Particularly in the second performance, speaking to another person freed my imagination and I was able to envision the circumstances and connect to the character more easily. This was particularly beneficial because the nature of the performance was very challenging on the imagination due to the fact that I had to stand up, remain still and in shot and perform with bright lights shining in my eyes. Although it would be an extremely useful skill to acquire, performing in such a challenging situation felt very limiting. Every other performance of the monologue was in a more relaxed situation – there were no artificial lights, I was able to sit down and I had a target to actually speak to without a camera in the middle of everything. Despite this fact, specifically in the second performance, I could feel during the performance and see while watching it back that I was more immersed and connected. My focus was drawn away from the set and equipment and I was able to have conversation with someone (my monologue to the other student), objectives and given circumstances in mind.
Director Feedback
The general feedback for most actors that performed before me was to not ‘act’ out the performance. This meant that they were putting on ‘acting’ voices and the director was able to tell that they were acting. This phrase was repeated over and over by the director when commenting on performances and in each class leading up to this point:
“Push it down. Push the emotion down.”
Throughout my entire degree, this simple phrase has been the most unique and remarkable so far. I whole-heatedly agree with this suggestion on actor’s performances due to the fact that people in everyday life don’t particularly like to show emotion. When an actor performs a scene and they are emotionally upset or outrageously mad, this phrase needs to be applied as the performance becomes so much more interesting. It’s the conflict that happens within the actor to hide their emotion that becomes so intriguing. For any actor, showing the emotion is an easy trap to fall into and even I was affected by it during my first performance. As with everyone else, the Director commented afterwards to “push it down” and what’s interesting is that I didn’t even know I was showing it all that much. The Director commented “you’re speaking to a bartender, aren’t you? Well, keep them interested. You don’t want to scare them away by sounding insane, do you?” So, I took on this feedback and performed a second time, keeping in mind that I am speaking to a bartender and I didn’t want to let my emotion go. As a result, I can confidently say that my second performance was much more entertaining and realistic.
It was mentioned by the Director that I have a thorough understanding of the text, what it means and that it was evident that I did analysis and research on the objective, the character, the relationships and the given circumstances. The performance did not appear to be ‘acted’ and I spoke the text naturally with changes in thought and there was evidence of conflict. There was a level of spontaneity in the performance as both takes were very different and I took the audience on a journey of changing thought and objectives, especially since my vocal tone was always changing. It was commented that I “have a natural instinct [with the text] and antithesis which made it funny.” This indicates that I spoke the text in a quality that seemed natural and as the character, not as me, the actor, as well as the fact that I was able to play against the text’s (specifically the character’s) emotion by playing a different attitude and mood due to the circumstances. I was successful in pushing it down but not letting go of that conflict. This experience for me actually felt rather difficult as I wanted to let some emotion go. I generally felt the emotional anger, regret and guilt of the character but had to play with all that hidden but this doesn’t mean that it was irrelevant. By playing against the anger and emotional conflict of the character, the performance became engaging and the audience found it funny.
Overall: My initial perspective of my own performance is very different to how other students and the Directors perceived it. I felt very displeased with my work; however, some very important feedback was given and the general consensus was that my performance was well-done and entertaining. Although, the first take didn’t quite hit the mark until half-way through. I’m a little happier with how it turned out; however, I would have loved to be able to work on it more thoroughly before the performance was due. With more performances coming up, I will gain more knowledge and experience with camera work and, one day, I may come back to this monologue and work on it further.
The Film's Effect 