» Home » Arts
Should An Actor Try To 'become' The Character?
Actors talk about becoming the character and thanks to Stanislavski, this has become an accepted idea, but is it a good idea?
 Spartan76  11 Dec 2007 17:08
                           (What's this?)  Add to Firefox  RSS
Yes, because it's not very good acting if you're being yourself. You have to think about how and why a character would do something as opposed to how and why you would do something.
 
 Celtica1  16 Aug 2012 12:38
 Add a Comment
 
 
To act is to create this character and, finally, become that character. When watching a movie/play/ television show you can tell when actors are acting and when they are being. The goal of acting is to become, not to act.
 
 Fredrick3  13 Nov 2010 20:08
 Add a Comment
 
 
I agree, considering I've done some acting. But wearing your costume everyday, and dying your hair, and making everyone call you by your character's name is a little over the top, although I'm pretty sure that's not what you meant ;)

when actors talk about 'Becoming' the character, they really mean putting themselves in a fictional or non-fictional person or creatures circumstance for however long they need to. Walk like them, talk like them, respond when called by their name, eating like their character would, everything their character would do.
 
 DdAWg  13 Oct 2010 18:19
 Add a Comment
 
 
Not only does it make the performance better, but it's really fun to just change your personality for a while. :)
 
 RoboHippo  19 Dec 2009 20:16
 1 Comment
 
 I completely agree :)
by  DdAWg
 13 Oct 2010 18:26
Comment
  
Comment
  
 
That is the best way to "portray" or express the written screenplay character.
 
 debategal  12 Dec 2009 01:28
 Add a Comment
 
 
Whtever the art, singing, acting, the performer shud become wht they perform..4gt urslf whn perfrming and be ur character, feel their emotions as urx, make their expressionx as urx, their tlking, walkin, thinking style, make it al urx..like singing..the only way the audience feel the song ix by how u sing it. The singer becomex their character and sing from their heart..not from the performerx mind..
..the mre u r ur character the mre likly ur acting wil b felt by the audience..

Itx almost like switching 2 anthr persn..=]
 
 ziku94  06 Nov 2009 19:42
 1 Comment
 
 Is it honestly that hard to spell words right?
by  DdAWg
 13 Oct 2010 18:25
Comment
  
Comment
  
 
To everyone that said 'no', acting began as exactly what you said: Acting. Since theatre began, actors would act as a character in order to tell a story. However, in the 1900s, Konstantin Stanislavski developed Method Acting, in which the actor makes the audience believe they are actually the character. This goes as far as actually tricking yourself into believing that you are the character. I, myself, have tried to do this, but it is extremely difficult and requires an amount of talent that I probably do not possess.
Also, let me ask you something. In any of Heath Ledger's movies, did you look at him and say "Oh! That's Heath Ledger!" or did you look at the screen and say "Oh! That's Ennis del Mar!" or "Oh! That's The Joker!". Yes, Heath Ledger went from a homosexual cowboy to a crazed homicidal psychopath. Why? Because he became the character. He tricked himself and was able to make audiences believe that what he was doing was real. He made people believe that he was devastated when Jack Twist died and later made people believe that he really wanted to blow up a hospital.
So I say absolutely should an actor try to become his or her character. It's the evolution of theatre that has caused actors to start using Method acting and developing methods of their own and who are we to go against evolution, after all?
 
 sudadera02  19 Oct 2009 03:48
 Add a Comment
 
 
Actors act better when they "become" the character. Depending on the role, they may have already been through that character's feelings and actions before. Otherwise, unless you're talented, it can look fake.
 
 bookworm3  05 Dec 2008 00:45
 Add a Comment
 
 
Of course! Otherwise it wouldn't be realistic!
 
 Monique  28 Sep 2008 16:10
 Add a Comment
 
 
If they act better that way, then yes. It will benefit their career.
 
 ur_wrong  25 Aug 2008 04:14
 Add a Comment
 
 
There are different kinds of actors. Method acting is in my opinion, the better as the actor studies and develops the character they are trying to portray.
It is uncanny the number of times an actor acts out the role they played, in their real life. Singers too.
 
 keepmindok  06 Aug 2008 17:33
 Add a Comment
 
 
Well now, i have never been interested nor attracted to the acting career myself, so anything I say on this debate is without actual knowledge or information, basically I am ignorant on this topic, OK?

So, that said, its just a guess on my part.

(Hard to debate without any exposure to information).

I am guessing, that within the job or career of acting, it would probably, require personal feeling added to the mix of clinical technical acting training skills to create a fully-developed flushed-out character.

Perhaps, this is what you call "becoming the character'??
Or, I misunderstood the question.

Anyway, in my observation in movies/entertainment that I enjoy?

Leonardo DiCaprio, is at the very top of the acting profession, for the reason that while looking at his work, one forgets for the time being that it is not real, but all professionally acted parts.
I would tend to think, that that would indicate he has "become 'the character',..........perhaps.
 
 Scorpion  26 Jul 2008 18:45
 Add a Comment
 
 
Yes, but only for the purposes for the show or programme or whatever they're doing, because it makes it believable. If it wasn't believable, then it wouldn't be entertaining and people wouldn't want to watch it would they?
 
 Aims  04 Jul 2008 00:11
 Add a Comment
 
 
Otherwise known as method acting, it is the best way to achieve a good performance. Look at Robert De Nero and Al Pacino. Two cinema greats who tried to become the character they played. It can have some effect on the set, the actor strutting around in character, but it is a sure fire way to get good reviews.
 
 Jakers  05 May 2008 23:37
 Add a Comment
 
 
To be a nice actor, an actor MUST become the character! Take viggo mortensen... All long the Lord of the ring, he was weiring his sword all the time, even in restaurants!
 
 pocloutier  02 Apr 2008 19:32
 Add a Comment
 
 
Yes its what there for.
 
 hiddensc  04 Feb 2008 22:51
 Add a Comment
 
 
Yes? I'm not going to be convinced of an actor's genuineness in a role if he or she is just reciting lines. I need to believe that they are who they say they are. They need to convince me and get into character
 
 rmc031  02 Feb 2008 03:47
 Add a Comment
 
 
That is what they teach you in theatre; I think it is safe to assume that that is also where the phrase "get into character" comes from.
 
 The_Alex  02 Feb 2008 03:39
 Add a Comment
 
 
Actors put soul into a role when they ‘become’ the character. So much so that becoming a character is an art that all actors need to excel. Only by becoming a character actors can engage their audience and bring a character to life. Characters are created on paper and imagined by actors and writers together to become what we as audience see on the screen. If actors would not become their character the fun of drama, theatre or movies will be not even a small percentage of what it is right now. In fact the number of characters will then only be limited to the number of actors.
 
 Twilight  29 Jan 2008 18:09
 Add a Comment
 
 
Of course they should. If an actor didn't become a character then every single film would be boring and there wouldn't be a job for them to do!

Just because a character is fictional doesn't mean an actor shouldn't try to fit into that part. We're all perfectly aware that characters are fictional, but what would life be without them? Actors help to bring our favourite characters to life. We get joy from watching them do so.

Actors have to understand the character they are playing in order to portray them. They have no choice but to place themselves inside that character's mind. They have to become the character in order to act it out!

Acting is an art form. There is no nonsense surrounding it at all. Imagine watching a film where the actors express nothing at all. Very dull and pointless. There wouldn't be any story to tell or anything remotely interesting if an actor didn't become the character.
 
 louise23  29 Jan 2008 14:09
 Add a Comment
 
 
It is a must for an actor to understand the character from his inner self and put himself in the character’s shoes. Unless any actor becomes the character himself the entire work loses the pace and essence and as a result co-actors tends to fall short of their artistic level. If an actor remains in his own self and never tries to become the character then from the viewers’ perspective it creates a false interpretation in their eyes about the character. They get the wrong notion about the character that the actor is portraying and as a whole the entire story lacks the spirit. Thus it is very much required of an actor to get to the grass root of a character, understand it and then become the character himself.
 
 sudipa  25 Jan 2008 20:36
 Add a Comment
 
 
Yes. Becoming you character is fundamentally what you must do to act convincingly. Look at Captain Jack Sparrow.
 
 robotech  22 Jan 2008 00:55
 Add a Comment
 
 
Acting is about being someone your not if jonny deep acted modern jonny deep rather then a pirate this not a good movie so lie wont do it.
 
 hippiewill  11 Dec 2007 23:24
 3 Comments
 
 I am an actor my dad was an actor acting is about feeling your part you can have all the facts but acting is in FACT an art.
by  hippiewill
 11 Dec 2007 23:53
Comment
  
Comment
  
Comment
  
Comment
  
 
To act is "to do," not "to be."
 
 SpinerFan  13 Feb 2009 03:54
 1 Comment
 
 If you don't ''be'' the character, you're not acting.
by  DdAWg
 13 Oct 2010 18:20
Comment
  
Comment
  
 
I think it is a bad idea, remember heath ledger. Because he tried to become his character he went crazy and was put under medication then died because of it!
 
 mollyjmojo  31 Aug 2008 10:44
 1 Comment
 
 I'm sure that was either myth, or a very small portion of the cause. make up a character and try being them for 10 minutes. It's quite fun, living another being's life for a matter of time :)
by  DdAWg
 13 Oct 2010 18:21
Comment
  
Comment
  
 
I think it really depends on the role and stability of the actor....... Ask Keith Ledger.
 
 stever  18 May 2008 02:53
 3 Comments
 
 heith ledger lol......
by  mollyjmojo
 31 Aug 2008 10:45
Comment
  
Comment
  
Comment
  
Comment
  
 
There is a difference between getting into character, focusing your energy on how the character would deliver a line, move or speak, and "being" a character. I think that some people take it to far. Being your character 24/7 while you are working on a production is just plain weird. Acting is not being. Famous actors are not their characters, they are creating a character and leaving them on the set. I think great actors spend a lot of time outside of the set, working on their character. But the character and yourself should always be separated, or else we would fall into the bottomless pit of acting a character in the same way as the person before you did. And if that is theatre then i wouldn't take part in it anymore. Acting is about developing and discovering, not being.
 
 dem_dame  15 May 2008 21:06
 1 Comment
 
 That's not what they meant at all. It's not being your character 24/7, it's being the character until the show's over.
by  DdAWg
 13 Oct 2010 18:24
Comment
  
Comment
  
 
No because an actor should ACT not BECOME the character. They should entertain me but not be like that always. That is why it's called ACTING not BEING.
 
 green15  21 Feb 2008 19:38
 1 Comment
 
 if you don't mind my repeating this for what feels like the billionth time.....when you ACT you become the character, although it isn't for the rest of your life, it's still important and if you don't BECOME the character, it's just boring old you saying sentences someone wrote down for you. If you don't BECOME the character and you call yourself an actor, I have another word for you: Failure.
by  DdAWg
 13 Oct 2010 18:23
Comment
  
Comment
  
 
The word act means to take action, it doesn't mean to become someone else. The modern usage referring to acting seems to have been influenced by Stanislavski and other theorists. An actor cannot 'become' the character, there is no character, they are not a real person, they are not even a person, they are a collection of lines and stage directions in a play or script that when read give the impression of a fictional or fictionalised person. They are no more real than the characters in a novel, who exist inside ones head alone.

Character is the sum of characteristics, in other words, what we do and say is who we are. The 'say' of a character is created by the playwright, the actor provides the doing. This together creates the illusion of character, a very pleasing illusion for the audience, but unlike the audience, the actors have no need to believe in the illusion, as they are the ones whose technical skills must create the illusion itself.

There is really too much nonsense surrounding acting, even actors have bought into the nonsense, feeling the part, that's like suggesting that a plumber has to 'feel' his wrench to use it.

Actors who obsess with becoming the character use it as a means of deflect the real task of the player, which is to perform the play as written to the best of their abilities. All the rest is work avoidance. Not to mention the fact that it is physically and psychologically impossible to become someone other than you are.
 
 Spartan76  11 Dec 2007 23:44
 1 Comment
 
 What kind of argument is that? Acting is both an art form and a craft. Isn't your current line of argument 'it's an art because I say so?'
by  Spartan76
 14 Dec 2007 01:09
Comment
  
Comment
  
Sign In / Sign Up
 For and Against Recent Activity
Related Debates
Students With A Name Thats Starts With A Should Get All Art In Mueseam!
The Lion, The Witch And The Wardrobe Is The Best Children's Book Ever Written
Stephen King Is Extremely Underrated.
Painting Has Not Been Outmoded Just Because Photography Is More Popular Nowadays:
Homeschooling Should Be Banned
Marilyn Manson Cover Songs Are Always Better Than The Originals.
That Dubstep Is Not Real Music.
The Arts Should Not Be A Valid Job Field
Oil Is The Best Paint
Most "modern Art" Isn't Art At All.
New Debates
The USA Needs A 3rd Party Canadite To Be President
Superman Returns Was Not A Bad Superman Movie
Does The Implemention Principle Of The Secularism Mean To Remove Religion From Public Life?
Xbox One (green) Or PlayStation 4 (red)?
The Government Should Ban Fast Food.
President Barack Obama Should Be Impeached.
Racism Should Be Taken More Seriously.
There Is A Difference Between Child Abuse And Teaching Your Disobedient And Disrespectul Kids A Lesson...
Is Lamb Of God Metal?(read Description Because This Is Not About Lamb Of God!)
Hippopotamus Is Stronger Than Lion