HOLLYWOOD ACTOR PREP by Dana Kaminski

Marlon Brando, While Acting, And In Real Life Apparently Was:

“

Brando–Incorrigibly Candid

Even 30 years ago, long before tabloid TV and TMZ were a gleam in anyone’s eyes, Brando had a shrewd grasp of how celebrity journalism operated. As he tells Grobel: “I was very slow in realizing that money was the principle motivation in any interview. Not necessarily directly, but indirectly. We’re money-bound people and everything we do has to do with money, more or less. I am a commodity sitting here. You’re making money, your publisher’s making money, and I suppose, in some way, I’m making money. If money were not involved, you wouldn’t be sitting here asking me questions, because you wouldn’t be getting paid for it…. I’m paying a debt, so to speak. People look for the money questions, the money answers, and they wait for a little flex of gelt in the conversation.”

When Grobel argues that the public has a genuine interest in movie stars, Brando retorts: “You know perfectly well that you don’t interview out-of-work movie stars and people who can’t get a job. I just happen to be lucky and have had a couple of hits and some controversial pictures, but I was down the tubes not long ago.”

Grobel: “And no one’s wanted to interview you then?”

Brando: “You can see it on the faces of the air hostesses’ expressions, you can see it when you rent a car, you can see it when you walk into a restaurant. If you’ve made a hit movie, then you get the full thirty-two-teeth display in some places, and

…if you’ve faded, they say, ‘Are you still making movies?’

”

-From LA Times Blog: The Big Picture

Please share. Thank you.

Best,

Dana

Kurt Sutter Tells It Like It Is. Everything. Including Why Creativity Doesn’t Pass Into TV Programming.

Sutter Created Sons Of Anarchy...My favorite show of this past Fall.

This interview was on KCRW, our local Santa Monica College station.

The specific show is The Business, and it is about the entertainment industry.

How’s this apply to Actors? What’s so great?

Lots.

I can’t stress enough, about how you really need to know about how the business works…Actors…before you jump in.

Do you want to know about the business, really? Why television, especially, is so difficult?  Sutter is absolutely succinct about how it works.

He happens to be a writer, and a funny one, too. At the same time that he’s the most accurate, and most blatant.

He’s also married to Katey Sagal, and you gotta love him for that.  He’s got a blog called SutterInk. Even though he tells-it-like-it-is, in the business that demands everyone to tell-it-like-it-isn’t…Sutter has survived, and thrived, and reads some juicy selections aloud, on this radio show I embedded here.

If you are an actor, and you have this idea that what TV executives are looking for is talent, is creativity…You should listen to this.

Illusions don’t produce prosperity, at all.

Knowing the facts, and the “lay of the land”, gives you the information you need, to be able to succeed. You can’t surmount hurdles that you don’t know exist.

(I know that is one of my big ‘themes’, but I can’t stress it enough…Especially, since I have been talking to actors on Twitter, and during my weekly, Sunday Brunch With Dana! Surprising amount of misconception going on…)

Enough with the heaviness, and lessons..Listen, and I hope you enjoy. I sure did.

Kurt Sutter is @sutterink on Twitter.

I am @__dana__ on Twitter.

Those are both links.

Here is a link to Kurt Sutter’s blog.

Here is a link to my other blog, called Hollywood Oscar Prep, or simply OSCARPREP.COM.

Would you kindly share this blog, Hollywood Actor Prep, to anyone and everyone you know?  …All you need to do is go up to the address bar, and copy the webaddress, paste in into an email to friends.  Or use post it on your Facebook page by using the “F” icon at the top of the post.

Thanks very much!

Dana

“I Wanted This Role So Bad! …I Loved The Story And The Character, And I Trusted The Director.”

Actor  Michelle Monaghan’s star is rising fast, and she’s been getting some great parts. Here’s how she works, her acting process. Here’s also what she thinks about the business, and women’s parts in movies.

(In Contention)

The film tells the gritty story of Diane, a long-haul trucker, driving 18-wheelers across the country, hellbent on getting that all-important on-time bonus. She doesn’t shy away from one-night stands, leaving many a guy wondering what him him, nor does she feel the least bit guilty about hanging out with a married man, though there is nothing betwen them. Her life is sent into a tailspin when she is suddenly faced with a son from a marriage in another life, the boy’s father having been hospitalized with cancer.

Forced to think about someone other than herself, Diane is not sure she is up to it, but in the days that she has with the boy, she discovers a humanity within herself she didn’t know existed. It is a spiky relationship, but one that will considerably impact the two of them.

In many ways the film is a return to the sort of picture made in the 1970s, such as “Five Easy Pieces” and “The King of Marvin Gardens,” though in this case, the lead is a female.  “I wanted this role so bad,”Monaghan says.  “I mean, I loved the story and the character, and I trusted the director to go in the right direction.  I like that Diane is not a victim.  She is a carefree, independent woman who lives by her own rules in her own world, and though she may be immature in many ways, there’s a lot to like about her.

“And I admired her honesty,” Monaghan adds.  “She never lies.  She always tells the truth and is not a victim at all. And I really liked that she lived in what was mainly a male-dominated world.”

When she took on the role, Monaghan says it was imperative for her to learn to drive a big rig in order do the character some authentic  justice.  “I couldn’t even drive a five speed when I started,” she exclaims.  “So for two or three hours a day for three weeks I trained to get my CDL, so yeah, I went to truck driving school. It really mattered to me that I did this, it really mattered that I got this right. These are real people with real struggles.  I knew I had to honor that with the best I could possibly give.”

“I saw Diane as mustang, a wild horse,” she continues.  “And my director told me of a film he had made about wild mustangs, and no matter how hard they tried to rope this one mare, they could not do it, she was going to stay wild. So I saw Diane like that. I don’t know if you noticed but I had a fake tatoo on my shoulder, Wild Mustang, and I think that represents Diane. I tried to achieve that in small ways in my physicality, in the way I moved, the way I moved my head, things like that, and I don’t know if it comes across, but it helped me get there.”

The explanation is perfect because the character is indeed carefree, with a wild streak in her, certainly not wanting to settle down and play family. For me, I tell her, the mustand metaphor is perfect. But as she left her child, is she a bad person?

“She is brutally honest,” she explains.  “She never lies, and personally, I have a lot of respect for someone like that. She’s not where a lot of people her age are at in their lives, but it’s not my job, the job of the actor I mean, to judge her, and certainly James [Mottern, the director] never judged her. She is who she is, no surprises.”

In the last few years there have been several films offering strong roles for women, which have given us an array of great performances such as Maggie Gyllenhall in “Sherrybaby,” Kate Winslet in “Revolutionary Road,” Ellen Page in “Juno,” Meryl Streep and Amy Adams in “Doubt” and Helen Mirren in “The Queen,” to name a few.  Monaghan says she believes there has been a small turnaround in cinema with stronger roles coming to the fair sex, which she finds quite exciting.“That is so refreshing,” she says.  “I would like to see more…The roles are there; sometimes the challenge is getting the film seen.”

“We worked so hard on it,” she says.  “I would be happy if more people saw the film, and if being nominated for an Academy Award brings 10 or 20 more people to the theater to buy a ticket, that makes me very happy. This is something we are all very proud of, something we made in less than a month if you can believe that, so I just want to get people out there to see the movie.”

When asked about working with the caliber of actors she has had the chance to work with, there is immediate admiration in her voice.”…I come away better than I was before, because each actor is different in their approach to the work, and the ones I have worked with have been so willing to share with me. I studied journalism, and I have used my five W’s (who, where, what, when and why) in creating my characters, because I write about them a lot, creating a history for each. So merging the writing knowledge and the fact I can watch and listen together, I have learned so much.”

There is a refreshing reality in everything Monaghan does that comes from some honest place deep inside of her. She wants to succeed, she wants to be good, she wants the work to be truthful, and the one thing she learned about herself on “Trucker,” she says, is that she is stubborn.

“It helped me in the role,” she says.  “It helped me find Diane and define Diane. We share that I suppose. And you know she’s still with me, I’m still digesting the whole experience, and I found her hard to let go.”

The film tells the gritty story of Diane, a long-haul trucker, driving 18-wheelers across the country, hellbent on getting that all-important on-time bonus. She doesn’t shy away from one-night stands, leaving many a guy wondering what him him, nor does she feel the least bit guilty about hanging out with a married man, though there is nothing betwen them. Her life is sent into a tailspin when she is suddenly faced with a son from a marriage in another life, the boy’s father having been hospitalized with cancer.

Forced to think about someone other than herself, Diane is not sure she is up to it, but in the days that she has with the boy, she discovers a humanity within herself she didn’t know existed. It is a spiky relationship, but one that will considerably impact the two of them.

In many ways the film is a return to the sort of picture made in the 1970s, such as “Five Easy Pieces” and “The King of Marvin Gardens,” though in this case, the lead is a female.  “I wanted this role so bad,”Monaghan says.  “I mean, I loved the story and the character, and I trusted the director to go in the right direction.  I like that Diane is not a victim.  She is a carefree, independent woman who lives by her own rules in her own world, and though she may be immature in many ways, there’s a lot to like about her.

“And I admired her honesty,” Monaghan adds.  “She never lies.  She always tells the truth and is not a victim at all. And I really liked that she lived in what was mainly a male-dominated world.”

When she took on the role, Monaghan says it was imperative for her to learn to drive a big rig in order do the character some authentic  justice.  “I couldn’t even drive a five speed when I started,” she exclaims.  “So for two or three hours a day for three weeks I trained to get my CDL, so yeah, I went to truck driving school. It really mattered to me that I did this, it really mattered that I got this right. These are real people with real struggles.  I knew I had to honor that with the best I could possibly give.”

“I saw Diane as mustang, a wild horse,” she continues.  “And my director told me of a film he had made about wild mustangs, and no matter how hard they tried to rope this one mare, they could not do it, she was going to stay wild. So I saw Diane like that. I don’t know if you noticed but I had a fake tattoo on my shoulder, Wild Mustang, and I think that represents Diane. I tried to achieve that in small ways in my physicality, in the way I moved, the way I moved my head, things like that, and I don’t know if it comes across, but it helped me get there.”

But as she left her child, is she a bad person?

“She is brutally honest,” she explains.  “She never lies, and personally, I have a lot of respect for someone like that. She’s not where a lot of people her age are at in their lives, but it’s not my job, the job of the actor I mean, to judge her, and certainly James [Mottern, the director] never judged her. She is who she is, no surprises.”

In the last few years there have been several films offering strong roles for women, which have given us an array of great performances such as Maggie Gyllenhall in “Sherrybaby”, Kate Winslet in “Revolutionary Road,” Ellen Page in “Juno,” Meryl Streep and Amy Adams in “Doubt” , and Helen Mirren in “The Queen”, to name a few.  Monaghan says she believes there has been a small turnaround in cinema with stronger roles coming to the fair sex, which she finds quite exciting.“That is so refreshing,” she says.  “I would like to see more…The roles are there; sometimes the challenge is getting the film seen.”

“We worked so hard on it,” she says.  “I would be happy if more people saw the film, and if being nominated for an Academy Award brings 10 or 20 more people to the theater to buy a ticket, that makes me very happy. This is something we are all very proud of, something we made in less than a month if you can believe that, so I just want to get people out there to see the movie.”

When asked about working with the caliber of actors she has had the chance to work with, there is immediate admiration in her voice.”…I come away better than I was before, because each actor is different in their approach to the work, and the ones I have worked with have been so willing to share with me. I studied journalism, and I have used my five W’s (who, where, what, when and why) in creating my characters, because I write about them a lot, creating a history for each. So merging the writing knowledge and the fact I can watch and listen together, I have learned so much.”

There is a refreshing reality in everything Monaghan does that comes from some honest place deep inside of her. She wants to succeed, she wants to be good, she wants the work to be truthful, and the one thing she learned about herself on “Trucker,” she says, is that she is stubborn.

“It helped me in the role,” she says.  “It helped me find Diane and define Diane. We share that I suppose. And you know she’s still with me, I’m still digesting the whole experience, and I found her hard to let go.”

For a list of Michelle Monaghan’s credits, click on this link to IMDB.

Please share this, and retweet it. Thanks for paying it forward to actors, or anyone who may enjoy it.

But. I do specifically remember telling you all a few important things; at least I felt they were important enough to share:

It’s the first time in history that actors can make their own product, and post it up for all the world to see.

What makes that doubly great, for actors, is that: no longer is whether you work or not dependent upon you sitting for years by the phone until you get an invitation/approval from the outside, to do your thing (that you love to do).  Or even get a break.

BUT, too, it’s that you don’t have to spend years and years wishing and hoping that you will stumble into just the right cookie-cutter audition which is for a part that is absolutely ideal in showing off your talent and special-ness of abilities, and, relying on prayer alone, to help you actually book the job, and then if ya do, that people will come to see it (or somehow watch it)…Especially those in the business…specifically: those who can either represent you  and are willing to…or are producers/casting directors/directors, etc. that can see you have something that they would want to hire for their next project.

It’s not only odds, that I am talking about, it’s sense + wisdom, it’s taking action + responsibility for your own career.

It’s the ability, and the getting-off-your-butt too…to start your own momentum of your career.

Did I tell you that when I was breaking my own humps to get, even, a foot-in-the-door-in-this-business, that we:

Didn’t have anything like this?  (That’s right, this is the “walked 5 miles to school everyday, even in the snow” talk, and the “very little good  cable TV shows to keep us busy” speech…)

Ha-a-ad to try and stay by the phone and would not allow ourselves to leave , which meant inside a teeny apartment, because there weren’t cell phones to take with us, outside, OKAY??

(I feel just like an I-told-you-so-type-of-mother, right now…because the veins are sticking out on my neck, which for our purposes, buddy, is a very emphatic way of typing…)

No.

We would never have imagined that there would be a way for us, actors, to someday overcome one of the hardest hurdles of all, that most actors never break through…that is,  to be able to show what you do and market  it out there.

Not only to be able to act in something, to make it, and to create it however you want, to show your acting abilities in the best light possible (as well as your other attributes…damn, c’mon!)

Simply,  to have something to show.

We had nothing to show. Nothing. And no ability to make something. Not really. Nothing like now.

And, may I say, if you don’t have something that showcases you, in some easily view-able way, that  you get right down to doing that.  (And a good one, at that.) Because if  you are waiting for the perfect part to smack into you, as you sit on  your couch…

I know. There is a lot to do.  I do know that.

There’s a lot of stuff to do to prepare for a professional career in acting, and to get yourself ready.

Look, I don’t even say: “Do everything all at once.” No, I don’t.  

It’s a building  up, of one step at a time.

But… if you are going around doing measly auditions that aren’t really going to highlight you and that no one is going to come to, or uccch, not even hire you for;  or you’re spending all your time doing extra work, or worse: paying dues at the  unions and barely making rent and not getting any decent auditions…Don’t.

Prioritize, to maximize, the priorities, first.

(Sort-by-leverage.)

And, today…

Get started on getting some projects made.  Take “initiative” and begin the process. Gather a team, if you need to…a writer friend, a camera-holding friend etc.

Look, I’m not your mother, and aren’t we both glad??  

So, let’s get a moment of grounding here, shall we?

And…(*legal* caveat) this is all just an opinion and should never be assumed as any guarantee or even a promise of success…I mean, what do I know? 

OK, I’ll tell ya what I know…I know that every actor I started out with, probably,  would have killed to be born 10, 15, 20 years later, if they knew that actors would be able to make their own stuff, and broadcast it to the  world.

…And, that there would’ve been some kind of anyone-can-put-it-up-thing, called YouTube…

And, I’ll tell ya one more thing, bud, and this is the last thing I am going to say–

Let this be the last time that you let the kids from up the block, who don’t even have a smidgeon of the talent or passion that you were born with, show us up, again.  Understand??

Have a glimpse of this to see what I’m talking about:

Better news for all actors: Now a win-win-win situation?

New SAG Plan: instead of putting out a “strike authorization”, for the professional actors, of SAG to vote on…they are sending out something different…an AMPTP contract authorization. Directly, to the SAG members, to see it for themselves, and to vote on whether to accept it or not.

What IS the AMPTP CONTRACT, actually?? Well, it states the “bottom line” level, (the lowest pay scale) that they are proposing: to pay for acting…now and in the future.

(….What they are ‘offering’ is “bupkus”…)

It’s not much different, now, it’s just a direct choice for actors, instead of the representative leadership.

(This is according to Nikki Finke’s column: ‘Deadline Hollywood’ and if you really want the skinny on the underhanded moves of the AMPTP during this, and during the prior Writer’s Strike (WGA), she’s the one with the real goods, and the guts…)

Alan Rosenberg

The SAG Strike would’ve been about whether or not to accept the same contract.

If the SAG strike is what is causing such terror and public uproar, then…

My own vote, on this changed-SAG-vote, is that it’s brilliant!

So much wasted energy, and actor leverage/actor-power has been spent on internal arguing and blaming. Blaming the people that are available and safe to be blamed. (Can’t bite the hand that feeds, right?)

Ridiculous, I have always thought…for actors to blame the Alan/Allen leaders of SAG.

(BTW…SAG Leadership didn’t compose the AMPTP CONTRACT ! That was created by the hands that won’t feed you, Actors. Those that think you will do anything for a job, and actually…besides not paying you for your work, the AMPTP contract —the new “final” contract, according to the Producers/Movie Studios side—literally takes away meal breaks. While working. So, under the new terms, not only will you not be able to afford food, to eat at home…you won’t even get a food break on a 10 hour day, on the job. Is it okay, with you, not to eat? Dieting, aside, I do mean.

It’s called “French Hours” by the way, having no set meal-breaks. You just nibble when you can, if there’s time. Apparently, they film that way in France…Fine, I’d agree to it, here, if they’d start serving fine French food on movie sets.

You know what would really win me over?? If the AMPTP started to give actors a teeny tiny bit of the honor that France gives to their actors, and artists of all kinds. Or how about just a bit of respect. (Even a false showing, that would be better than anything I’ve seen yet. )

Oh, and if they create a national, official government office called “Ministry Of The Arts”–Just as they have in France…

Ahhh, oui, I digress. I rannnntttt.)

I do think that SAG’s new tact is a great turn of events. Let all the actors read over exactly what they won’t have. Let them see who the real boogeyman is. Let all see the real numbers..I mean, the real money offered. And who is not willing to spread it around, to those who they even call: “the Talent”.

Doug Allen

…Some actors may not ‘get’ how this all applies to them, at all…

And I urge you, all, to-think-as-successful-working-actors. And if you are not one, now, then think “as-if”.

(Because I know that part of this conflict has to do with all different economic levels of actors, all trying to agree on the same contractual items, and they all mean different things to different actors

Example: For an actor who has never worked, the $28 dollars that the AMPTP is offering for per-show (with no residuals for any re-play)…well, that may seem great to a young actor who has never had a paying job. Or who has spent a year, breaking their back, suffering indignities, and maybe doing “background”/extra work, so as to get their “3 jobs” so they could qualify for eligibility for a SAG card…)

To them, a real job, any job, feels like reward enough.**

It’s not.

I’ve been on both ends of the acting career spectrum.

And all in-between….Trust my words: time keeps moving. And so does your acting career, with the right amount of determination. You can get acting work, with the right amount of skill, determination, and intelligent focus. Yes, you can, and you will, then.

And…if and when you make that happen… you will want to earn a living, and even live well…you will want payment, adequate, just payment…for your work. For your talent. As an actor.

It’s hard work.

Almost certainly, you will still love it.

And…because you will be eating, too; you will be glad you did.

Best,

:Dana

Here’s recent excepts from SAG’s website:

Subject: Message from Doug Allen, SAG National Executive Director

January 14, 2009

Dear SAG National Board Members and Alternates,

Because the executive session of our recent extraordinary National Board meeting occurred without my presence in the room, I want to directly communicate several points to all board members and alternates.

I began and ended my report to the National Board on January 12 by stating that I have followed and always will follow the directives of the National Board expressed by a unanimous or majority vote. Under my leadership all SAG staff has complied and will comply with those directives as well. I also said that I am by SAG constitution and by employment contract accountable to the board for my performance.

I welcome your review of that performance and respectfully request only that, in the interest of fairness, such review include the opportunity for me to discuss with the board any comments, questions or issues you wish to raise, not in lieu of executive session discussion, but prior to such discussion.

It is unfortunate that the important matters contained in the National Board meeting ag enda were not accomplished at the meeting January 12 and 13. I know that opinions vary sharply on why that happened. From my perspective, to the extent AMPTP positions or actions are the problem, the solution cannot be determined by how intensely you fight among yourselves.

Regarding the TV/Theatrical negotiations, and the sharply divided opinions on the board about how to proceed, I offered the following suggestion to a cross section of Guild leaders during the period of the executive session. I asked that they discuss the suggestion with other board members in attendance. I proposed that the strike authorization referendum be suspended and that management’s offer be put to the membership in a ratification vote. I also proposed that, before that membership ratification vote, we meet immediately with the AMPTP to determine to what extent, if any, they are willing to improve their last offer, to maximize its chances for ratification. I further proposed that the offer then be sent to the members with Pro and Con statements from National Board members and that otherwise the Guild would remain neutral during any member debate regarding ratification. This process will give Screen Actors Guild members the opportunity to formally express themselves on the bargaining issues.

This suggestion was communicated to some, but not all board members in attendance, and apparently was rejected by some who heard it, at least in part, because they believe I could not be “trusted” to implement it. Since I am the one proposing it and since I have never acted contrary to the directives of the National Board, that is not a reasonable objection. In any case, if it is the decision of the National Board to proceed as I have proposed, I assure you that the staff and I will carry out your decision faithfully and diligently.

I will convene an Officers’ call this week to discuss this suggestion and how it might be considered and implemented. I encourage all board members to discuss these issues with the Guild officers or with me in advance of the call.

There are no more important issues before us than the conclusion of the TV/Theatrical Contract negotiations and the initiation of the Commercial Contract negotiations. Super-heated rhetoric through the press will not contribute to our success on behalf of the members. Working together to resolve your differences will.

Doug Allen

Two days before, Alan Rosenberg sent out this to the SAG board members:

Los Angeles, (January 13, 2009) — SAG National President Alan Rosenberg sent the following message to Screen Actors Guild national board members and alternates today:

“At the end of the National Board plenary meeting this afternoon, a group of board members submitted a document to the Guild that purports to deal with the employment of the National Executive Director and the continuing approach to negotiations. After analyzing the document, Screen Actors Guild’s in-house and outside counsel have concluded that the document does not constitute a valid written assent, for several reasons, including a lack of sufficient signatures and the absence of any language on the document demonstrating the intent of the signers to grant their assent to the proposal. Guild National Executive Director and Chief Negotiator Doug Allen and the National Television and Theatrical Contract Negotiating Committee remain committed to advancing the cause of actors and our crucial contract negotiations.”

No substantive actions were taken by the Guild’s national board, which met at SAG’s national headquarters January 12 and 13 for almost 30 hours straight.

No mailing date has been set for the previously approved TV/Theatrical strike authorization referendum.

We have no further comment.

ABOUT SAG, FROM THEIR WEBSITE;
Screen Actors Guild is the nation’s largest labor union representing working actors. Established in 1933, SAG has a rich history in the American labor movement, from standing up to studios to break long-term engagement contracts in the 1940s to fighting for artists’ rights amid the digital revolution sweeping the entertainment industry in the 21st century. With 20 branches nationwide, SAG represents over 120,000 actors who work in film and digital television, industrials, commercials, video games, music videos and all other new media formats. The Guild exists to enhance actors’ working conditions, compensation and benefits and to be a powerful, unified voice on behalf of artists’ rights. SAG is a proud affiliate of the AFL-CIO. Headquartered in Los Angeles, you can visit SAG online at www.sag.org.

Please continue to share on Facebook, and MySpace, and with all your friends. Especially, to actors. It’s important to get the messages out, it really is! Thanks very much!

And, follow me on Twitter for updates, and info- (link below)

http://twitter.com/__dana__

Have you seen Mickey Rourke acting in ‘The Wrestler’ yet?

Are you familiar with the rest of his film acting resume??

If you don’t know his name, it may be because he was ‘outa the game’ for awhile. But…when he was ‘in it‘, he floored everybody. Came out of nowhere, into the spotlight with two little movie scenes; and then consistently gave the rawest, yet right on, performances.

This year, for “The Wrestler“, his acting performance may get the “Best Actor” Academy Award.

I hope so. (If you’ve been following this Hollywood Actor Prep Blog, then you know I respect Mickey Rourke, as an actor. I think he is an fine film actor, with consistent depth.)

His acting ability, talent, and skills, are rare…  Authentic, to the highest degree.

Here is an older interview with Rourke, where he discusses some film-acting experiences; in each, of the earlier films he was in.

Other things Mickey Rourke candidly discusses are:

•  
  • How he got his first movie role
    
  • Auditioning and getting into the Actors Studio
  • Performing at the Actors Studio in front of Al Pacino and Harvey Keitel (with little prior experience!)
    
  • Working with Francis Ford Coppola, on a movie with no script (!) called “Rumblefish” where he created the mythical character “Motorcycle Boy”
    
  • Creating a film script, by improvisation (!) while being assisted, musically, by Stuart Copeland of ‘The Police’.
    
  • The directors on his acting resume who “pushed him to the limit” and who he wound up respecting…
    
  • Which directors were perfectionists, and why he liked that; which directors were unlikable, and what it was that made them that way
    
  • And which ones had unusual ways of motivating the actors…

All of the actors, the directors, that you hear about here… are probably familiar names to you.
You probably, also,  heard of most of the movies that he talks about; because many well-known films reside on Mickey Rourke’s acting resume.

Enjoy!

If you would like to view film scenes from some of these movies that Mickey Rourke mentions here, you can find them at this post on the Hollywood Actor Prep Blog.  (‘Time For The Acting Of Mickey Rourke’)

Please share this blog with your friends, either by email or by clicking an icon below that will put it on MySpace, or Facebook.  

You can also “tip” the people who run this blog, by clicking below, securely!

                                                               

©™

Current Residual Situation, AMPTP’s Offer Explained

Found this animation movie, about residuals, on YouTube. Cute…Short… Simple….Clear?

Does Acting Have Value?

What it basically comes down to is this:  The conglomerate corporations think that “talent” shouldn’t be paid everytime that they provide the audience with entertainment.  With talent.  With their visibility. Every time their likeness and abilities, and even gifts; are what is being watched, on a screen. 

They basically are saying that talent isn’t valuable. 

I value acting and actors.  

I think the general public values actors.  I think they cherish actors, I think that’s pretty obvious.

When anyone has a great theatrical experience; they count it as a wonderful life experience.  Be it live theatre, movie, or television.  Drama or comedy.  How much is that worth?

When they leave a theatre, of any kind, they often discuss the acting. The actors.

Acting has been around since the beginning of civilization, and has been cherished by the public, just as long.

How long have actors not had decent payment? For how many centuries, has this gone on?

It’s far too long.

Do you think acting has value?

Best,

Dana
Please share with your friends…
And treat me to a latte, if you’d like…