But what's been interesting about it is the way I've started looking at my script once actors entered into the equation. They're my friends, but they're a lot less likely to want to read my material unless I give them something juicy to do with all those acting chops. As I've been informing them of their parts, I've realized that some of my characters are weak. I feel bad asking a friend to come over and spend time reading a part that has no real emotional involvement. Of course, not every character can be great. You don't want minor characters to take over the story. But just because
they're minor doesn't mean they can't have personality. In Last Kiss there's a gay neighbor who has about three lines but those lines are brimming with character. One of them got the biggest laugh in the film. In fact, all the characters in that movie had a distinct personality no matter how much screen time they got. It's an actor-friendly film.So I'm doing an actor-friendly rewrite. I'm going to think of my script in terms of what I'd be proud to have my friends read. When they come over, I want them to be satisfied with the job they're doing, even if it's not the lead. I've never thought about it that way before.
So next time you work on your script, try it. If you were an actor, would you want to play that part?
Being a bit of a thesp has definite advantages when writing, too.
ReplyDeleteIt's still shocking to hear how many writers don't even read their dialogue out loud, let alone do the honourable thing and get to know some actors to give them a hand at a time when rewrites are less agonising than when a production deadline is looming...
Plus, us actors are (unless we've got a screw loose) always willing to invest time and energy into acting, so if we're between jobs and something like a table read with nice coffee, pleasant company and a roof is on offer, nine times out of ten we'll go for it. ;-)
Writers need to keep writing, actors need to keep acting. Just like guitar players need to keep playing if they're going to stay fluent.
It's all good.
Best of luck with the read. I hope it goes well.
Wow. I think that's an OUTSTANDING plan! I know a few screenwriters that do this -- I've managed to do it once and it really really helped me.
ReplyDeleteIt's such a learning experience and while I would sincerely recommend that everyone do it with every script -- the truth is that it might not always be possible so milk the session for everything it's worth and really absorb what's happening because you will really learn a lot about dialogue and how to write it.
Cool. Good post!
Unk
this is a fine line to me.
ReplyDeletehaving actors (or anyone, including yourself), read aloud your words to discover their viability is a great idea.
doing an "actor-friendly" pass? not so great.
especially when you're considering it because "they're a lot less likely to want to read my material unless i give them something juicy to do with all those acting chops."
that's one scary statement.
whether an actor would want to play the part or not is irrelevant if it's good for the story.
do we do grip-friendly passes? or camera-operator friendly passes? no.
because it's not about them.
it's not about the actors. it's not about the production crew or the editor, or the composer.
it's about the story.
and if the story needs a character that might only have two lines that aren't show-stoppers - then that's what it gets.
I disagree with deepstructure, I think "actor-friendly" passes are a great idea.
ReplyDeleteBecause what you're really doing is a "character-friendly" pass. You're going inside the character, and looking to see if what he or she is doing makes sense, and if it does: can it be better?
We don't do grip-passes or camera-operator passes because those people don't put themselves into a character. Actors do. And it's incredibly hard to act a character that doesn't really make sense. It's incredibly boring to act a character that's just two-dimensional. I feel like more often than not, giving actors good characters is GOOD for the story.
Of course, pandering to the actors is a very different thing. If an actor wants to play a macho, machine-gun toting badass, but you're writing a family drama spec, that's probably not a great idea. That's an extreme example, but changing something about your character just because you know an actor would love to play it is not only stupid, it's just bad writing.
Table reads are a great thing. In my writing class at Temple, we go up and read out loud EVERYONE's script, EVERY week. It definitely changes your perspective on writing it. Lines that seemed perfectly fine on the page are simply cringe-worthy out loud. And vice versa: some things that you thought would never fly while writing them, jump out and surprise you by actually working--sometimes really well.
lol - you're not very good a disagreeing. ;)
ReplyDeleteyou said the same thing - just more eloquently. characters aren't actors, they're story elements. what they do, why and how is all part of what makes the story work (or not).
if you're "going inside the character, and looking to see if what he or she is doing makes sense," you're trying to improve your story, not appease some actor that might be playing the part.
I think that's the point isn't? To explore the characters as STORY ELEMENTS within the screenplay rather than give the actors a venue to audition.
ReplyDeleteSure, there might be an actor or two that come up with something for the character that doesn't work but that's just as good as an actor coming up with some kind of additional insight to their character simply by their read.
Let us know how it goes Emily...
Unk
Wanted to see where the debate went before chiming in again. I think I'll post it on Wordplayer because it's an interesting discussion.
ReplyDeleteIt really came up when a friend who was reading my part said my second lead was overshadowing my first. She's right.
In fact, my second lead is such a great character he's overshadowing everybody, which is great for the actor I've asked to play that guy, but how do I tell my lead actor that he doesn't actually have that great a part when compared to the other guy? And that made me start thinking about the other roles and how I could improve them. How do you give each character a past that shapes his or her present?
I will watch out for overdoing it, though. DS is right about the way you need to look to the god of the story first.
Thanks for the input.
Table reads are essential, as far as I'm concerned.
ReplyDeleteIn the future (when we fly to our meetings on jetpacks and rocketships), professional actors will do the table read as part of the rehearsal process. Their input (and that of the department heads) will be invaluable for finding any problems with the script before the cameras are set up.
So if those who make a living making film and TV consider a table read a good and useful thing, I don't believe that there's any excuse for the rest of us not having one.