Me as a drama theatre student, the most obvious difference for me is the audience between theatre and film. In a theatre, actors and audience are separated by a distance ranging on a small sized stage from a few feet to hundreds of feet in a large auditorium. Actors were told to exaggerate their movements and expressions also to project a loud and clear voice during each of their performance because when everyone in the audience is here, they need to be able to listen and see them clearly, especially from the last row. Audience needs to see their faces but not their back, actors have to be very aware of where they are standing and which side are they facing. As for screen actors, their audience can watch them in every angle depending on how the director wants to film it. The audience can be looking into the actor's eyes watching tears flow down or looking at the big city from above the sky. Screen actors are only allowed to do smaller movements and simpler facial expression because they need to look natural with every single cell in their body, sometimes they do not know how big or small to show their expression, it may cause them looking stiff for overdoing it to act natural. They need to know where the cameras are all the time to prevent walking out of the frame, some directors only allow their actors to move in limited spaces in order to get the perfect background.
The next difference between stage actors and screen actors is time and set. For theatre actor, they got plenty of time to do rehearsals, to get to know their role as well as their partners in different scenes also a few full runs before the real show, by the time they perform it to the audience, they have practiced dozens of times. The sets in theatre are always sorted out and organized beside or at the back of the stage as they need to bring all that out to change the whole scene when necessary. In the opposite, film sets are chaotic places packed with cameras, lighting lamps, audio equipment and wires everywhere as all the equipment are not built in like in theatre. While the actors are being filmed, it is possible that hundreds of crew members might be walking beside them. Film actors do not get too much time to learn their lines as those scripts are still possible to be changed until director shouts "Action!". In the same scene, film actors may get a chance to take numerous takes with different dialogue which the production group will then cut and change in the edit.
The atmosphere while watching a show in a theatre or on a TV is vastly different too. A theatre performance will never be duplicated in the cinema, it feels more current and real when the audience is a matter of feet away from the show rather than on the other side of the globe. A show like this cannot be redone in the same way ever again that everyone in the audience will share that specific experience. Theatre performance is a matter of exclusivity because once the show is over, it's gone for good, only the people who bought a ticket could enjoy it. Most of the theatre in London only focus on doing one play in the entire theatre, for example, Palace Theatre only perform Harry Potter, Fortune Theatre only perform The Woman in Black, Queen's Theatre only perform Les Miserables, and a few more that only perform the same play over and over again every day. These theatres' targeted audience will be those that love the play and the style the actors perform it in live, most of the audience most likely watched everything on film before they watch the live performance.
By comparison, films can be enjoyed over and over again, in the same way you watched it the first time. The best of it is that people could enjoy it anywhere they like, at the place they feel comfortable with. Films are attractive to most audience because of the unrealistic story that will never really happen in real life but film productions are able to make it happen with effects and dramatic movements from the actors also with the help of amazing work from screenwriter and producer. Some films do reproduce the atmosphere you can find in the theatre, that having two levels of performance in one single production to reduce the space between actor and audience. "High School Musical" and "Friends" are two of the examples that incorporate the same elements of showing the audience the 'reality' behind the camera.
The examples from above are some obvious differences from both industries. Let's begin with the ocean deep of skills that the actors need to develop and how these skills will be used in their own field. Scripts for the stage actors are often not allowed to have any large changes due to the popularity of that play, it will embarrass the actors when famous dialogue is said wrongly, the show wouldn't make sense for the audience at the same time. Stage actors need to be a fast thinker that can improvise anything in their brain as well as acting out, also need to have enough creativity to fix their mistake when they're halfway through their performance. I don't believe in the say of "the audience won't know if we did wrong", well they actually will know because as I said from above, most theatre audiences knew what they are getting in to and the 'professional' ones might've watched the show many times before, they just indulging in theatre performance because they love it so it doesn't mean they don't know if we did wrong, actors obviously don't want the audience saying "I watched a better one last time". Back to the point, improvising skill is really important for a stage actor as they have so much time to understand the whole play and their own character, they are more likely to able to think of another way interpreting that moment.
On the other hand, improvising isn't so important for screen actor, because the director will be trying every way to make the scene trustable, actors try as many of dialogues as they could ever imagine just to make that moment right, then, it will be film editor's job to cut and put all short scenes together. Actors have to be aware of continuity each time they perform a scene on camera because they will never know which take will ultimately be used, so they need to be consistent. Other than being consistent for each scene, they also need to worry about the continuity between different scenes. For any of their own reason, film and TV always shoot their scenes out of order, they might shoot scenes from the end of the movie first and there's also a very high probability that the actors only get to shoot their first scene on the last day in set. If your character is violent at the beginning but somehow become nice at the end, you might not sure of what really happened earlier and how aggressive you were before becoming the good one, you always need to hold your emotions and acting energy on track in case you fail to act accordingly. It wouldn't make sense for the audience also for the editor to edit if your characteristics keep changing throughout the whole movie.
If I'm still thinking one of the industries still require more skills than the other, it's just because both were facing the completely different struggles. A movie might take half a year of the screen actors' time to stay on set, and at the same period, actors were not allowed to work in another movie set as one of their contract procedures with the company, the money they earn all depends on the popularity of their movie which will release another half a year after they done shooting. In a year of time, stage actors might already perform two big shows, their working time is more flexible and productive. That's the reason why screen actors earn more than stage actors, they took the one year risk to shoot for a movie they don't even know if the audience will like it. Each has their own difficulties, there is no point for comparison as the main objective for an actor is to bring joy and experiences for the audience, no matter they're in a theatre or in the cinema.
No comments:
Post a Comment