Tuesday, August 19, 2003
If you have not seen Steven Shainberg's "Secretary" you should. We watched it last night, and all I can say is "oh my god".
What was it that you saw in this story ten years ago that so compelled you that you had to make this film?
Shainberg: It deals in the way in which sex, love and power are all inter-related and I was very interested in doing a love story that was different and that would deal with these kinds of issues but not in a creepy way or a dark way but in a way that had a sort of lightness and beauty to it. I don't think that there's anything odd, at all, about what they're doing. I think what while what they're doing is perhaps metaphorically bigger than the way many love relationships work in reality, that all relationships have these aspects. They have tops and bottoms that shift and change and it's always a question of, in some sense, manipulation that segues into honesty and connection and then segues back into something else. The problem with most love stories in my opinion is that they're too simplistic.
How have people reacted so far?
Shainberg: With surprise. And some people are shocked, and they tend to be from the older generation. I had anticipated, because of the point of view of the movie and because of Maggie's performance, that young women would respond really strongly to the film. At Sundance, that was overwhelmingly true and to the point where it was kind of shocking. That particular demographic was so wildly enthusiastic. I think it's because it's a movie about a young woman who has very particular needs and doesn't shy from them and learns to not just accept herself but flower in them and to feel that what she is is good. That's true about the character and it's also true about any particular kind of sexuality. I think a lot of young women are probably fearful or embarrassed or cautious or hiding whatever their particular sexuality might be. From the most odd to the just slightly abberrant. And so when you see somebody who expresses themselves with such honesty and strength, I think that's extremely compelling. There's a kind of beauty about the way in which Maggie discovers love. On the one hand, the movie is very erotic while on the other hand, it's quite romantic so - what's not to like?
What was it that you saw in this story ten years ago that so compelled you that you had to make this film?
Shainberg: It deals in the way in which sex, love and power are all inter-related and I was very interested in doing a love story that was different and that would deal with these kinds of issues but not in a creepy way or a dark way but in a way that had a sort of lightness and beauty to it. I don't think that there's anything odd, at all, about what they're doing. I think what while what they're doing is perhaps metaphorically bigger than the way many love relationships work in reality, that all relationships have these aspects. They have tops and bottoms that shift and change and it's always a question of, in some sense, manipulation that segues into honesty and connection and then segues back into something else. The problem with most love stories in my opinion is that they're too simplistic.
How have people reacted so far?
Shainberg: With surprise. And some people are shocked, and they tend to be from the older generation. I had anticipated, because of the point of view of the movie and because of Maggie's performance, that young women would respond really strongly to the film. At Sundance, that was overwhelmingly true and to the point where it was kind of shocking. That particular demographic was so wildly enthusiastic. I think it's because it's a movie about a young woman who has very particular needs and doesn't shy from them and learns to not just accept herself but flower in them and to feel that what she is is good. That's true about the character and it's also true about any particular kind of sexuality. I think a lot of young women are probably fearful or embarrassed or cautious or hiding whatever their particular sexuality might be. From the most odd to the just slightly abberrant. And so when you see somebody who expresses themselves with such honesty and strength, I think that's extremely compelling. There's a kind of beauty about the way in which Maggie discovers love. On the one hand, the movie is very erotic while on the other hand, it's quite romantic so - what's not to like?
Monday, August 11, 2003
CRAFT NOTES
"ACTING IS JOYFUL!"
When you first acted in school plays, it was fun wasn't it? It had
elements of playing dress-up, putting on mom's high heels or carrying
dad's brief case, and pretending. The mimetic experience was joyful
and almost primal, the applause in the school auditorium was heart
felt and family-oriented and the good feelings you got from it may
have inspired you early on to pursue acting as a career.
So what happened? When did the joy go out of it? When was it that
you became obsessed with the challenge of "being honest" instead of
having fun? When did acting become work? Was it when you decided
to be a professional actor? Is a profession in America, by
implication, "work" instead of "play"? Do you feel guilty if you
have fun when you think you ought to be working?
Acting is not watch repair. It is not a tiny and fussy little thing
in which you look through a magnifying glass, adjust the cogs exactly
so in order to get the watch to stay accurate. Acting is lusty,
physical, sensual and tribal -- and sometimes you just need to knock
the thing on the edge of the table to get it running. We in United
States are embued from childhood with the work ethic. "Work hard and
you'll succeed," goes the advice. The organization and pursuit of
the marketing side of your career may fit that mold, but acting
itself does not. When you are chasing around after the gigs, it can
indeed be a labor, and I don't think I have met the person yet who
likes to seek representation from agents. You must compartmentalize
yourself. Work hard when you are marketing, and play hard when you
are acting. Acting is not a process of "causing"; it is a process of
loosening and freeing and allowing. You won't become a good actor by
beating on the craft with a hammer. If you want to relax on stage,
you don't do it by ordering yourself to, "By God, relax!!"
This is on my mind today because I have lately seen a few actors that
have obviously been spooked somewhere along the way. I put them up
in a scene or monologue, and they won't do anything. I press and
discover they are afraid of being dishonest. Maybe they got this way
from other acting classes or maybe they got that way because they are
just too hard on themselves. I don't know and it doesn't matter.
The important thing is to break free of this inertia because it only
leads to artistic dead ends. Acting is not watch repair.
Based on my observations in class, the single most troublesome
mind-set for an actor is too much obsession with honesty in the
acting moment. To be sure, honesty is a desirable thing, but it is
not the only thing. And anyway, theatrical reality isn't the same
thing as regular reality. Theatrical reality is compressed in time
and space. It is significant, meaningful and oxygenated. An actor
that is overly concerned about being honest tends toward a shut down
mode. She doesn't want to do anything at all for fear it might not
be honest and "organic". But acting is doing, right? Did you know
that the root of the word "emotion" is "to move"? True. Honesty is
as honesty does. The avoidance of failure is not the same thing as
the pursuit of success. In the acting moment, you do something;
story telling is not a factor of your being.
I suppose what I want to say to you today is that acting is a joyful
enterprise. It was that way when you were a teenager, and it ought
to be that way when you are on Broadway or acting in a movie with
Robert DeNiro. Even if you are dealing with great tragedy, the
process and art is joyful because it speaks to what makes a life
meaningful. When you act, you draw a circle in the dirt and talk to
the tribe. It is not any good if you draw a circle in the dirt and,
when the tribe assembles, you start teaching them how to fix watches.
They want to know about how to get through the hard winter.
Have fun! Rejoice in your art! Kick some butt!
Amen.
Ed Hooks
"ACTING IS JOYFUL!"
When you first acted in school plays, it was fun wasn't it? It had
elements of playing dress-up, putting on mom's high heels or carrying
dad's brief case, and pretending. The mimetic experience was joyful
and almost primal, the applause in the school auditorium was heart
felt and family-oriented and the good feelings you got from it may
have inspired you early on to pursue acting as a career.
So what happened? When did the joy go out of it? When was it that
you became obsessed with the challenge of "being honest" instead of
having fun? When did acting become work? Was it when you decided
to be a professional actor? Is a profession in America, by
implication, "work" instead of "play"? Do you feel guilty if you
have fun when you think you ought to be working?
Acting is not watch repair. It is not a tiny and fussy little thing
in which you look through a magnifying glass, adjust the cogs exactly
so in order to get the watch to stay accurate. Acting is lusty,
physical, sensual and tribal -- and sometimes you just need to knock
the thing on the edge of the table to get it running. We in United
States are embued from childhood with the work ethic. "Work hard and
you'll succeed," goes the advice. The organization and pursuit of
the marketing side of your career may fit that mold, but acting
itself does not. When you are chasing around after the gigs, it can
indeed be a labor, and I don't think I have met the person yet who
likes to seek representation from agents. You must compartmentalize
yourself. Work hard when you are marketing, and play hard when you
are acting. Acting is not a process of "causing"; it is a process of
loosening and freeing and allowing. You won't become a good actor by
beating on the craft with a hammer. If you want to relax on stage,
you don't do it by ordering yourself to, "By God, relax!!"
This is on my mind today because I have lately seen a few actors that
have obviously been spooked somewhere along the way. I put them up
in a scene or monologue, and they won't do anything. I press and
discover they are afraid of being dishonest. Maybe they got this way
from other acting classes or maybe they got that way because they are
just too hard on themselves. I don't know and it doesn't matter.
The important thing is to break free of this inertia because it only
leads to artistic dead ends. Acting is not watch repair.
Based on my observations in class, the single most troublesome
mind-set for an actor is too much obsession with honesty in the
acting moment. To be sure, honesty is a desirable thing, but it is
not the only thing. And anyway, theatrical reality isn't the same
thing as regular reality. Theatrical reality is compressed in time
and space. It is significant, meaningful and oxygenated. An actor
that is overly concerned about being honest tends toward a shut down
mode. She doesn't want to do anything at all for fear it might not
be honest and "organic". But acting is doing, right? Did you know
that the root of the word "emotion" is "to move"? True. Honesty is
as honesty does. The avoidance of failure is not the same thing as
the pursuit of success. In the acting moment, you do something;
story telling is not a factor of your being.
I suppose what I want to say to you today is that acting is a joyful
enterprise. It was that way when you were a teenager, and it ought
to be that way when you are on Broadway or acting in a movie with
Robert DeNiro. Even if you are dealing with great tragedy, the
process and art is joyful because it speaks to what makes a life
meaningful. When you act, you draw a circle in the dirt and talk to
the tribe. It is not any good if you draw a circle in the dirt and,
when the tribe assembles, you start teaching them how to fix watches.
They want to know about how to get through the hard winter.
Have fun! Rejoice in your art! Kick some butt!
Amen.
Ed Hooks
