Careers: Acting, Performing, Directing/Films (Movies) v/s Plays (Dramas).
which according to you for an artist is a more challenging role to portrait i.e In Movies or Plays (Dramas) ?.
Is it not always the Plays or Dramas because In Plays (Dramas), the artist has to perform live before the audience ?
There is a Movie "Romeo and Juliet" - 2 hours duration.
There is also a Play "Romeo and Juliet" - 2 hours duration.
Now the artist who has portrait the role of Romeo in both is common. i.e Same Artist has acted in both the Movie as well as
in the Drama.
Is it possible that An Artist who is acting in both Movies as well as in Plays may or may not be successful in one of them ?
i.e. Audience have appreciated his/her acting skills in Movies but not in Plays or vice versa.
if that is the above case what could be the reasons ?. Script,
Co stars, Direction, Music, Environment etc
Awaiting your reply,
Thanks & Regards,
Prashant S Akerkar
The opinion or each artist will differ, as you imply, but for me the film role would be more challenging.
On stage, after considerable rehearsal and cast discussions, in costumes and a setting that is familiar, the performance is shown to an audience in a two-hour unit that runs continuously.
In film, after some discussion with the director, the actor starts playing sections of the performance completely out of chronological order. The party scenes will be shot together so that there is minimum use of dancing extras in the backgound, followed perhaps by the final scenes around the suicides, followed by the street fights, then the close-ups at the party, etc etc.
In film, the emotional journey is constructed by the editor out of fragments of performance, abetted by music and other post-production effects.
It is quite possible that the stage Romeo may not be as popular in the film version, not because the audience sees his skills or not, but because he could not hold his performance in his mind's eye as he jumped here are there in it. The director or editor may not have been in sympathy with his interpretation -- most film acting is not strongly opinionated in its attitude, and allows all sorts of interpretations to be applied to it -- and may have presented a reality around a gloomy hero, full of shadow and suspicion, in which the normal likeable but doomed teenager looks like a self-absorbed fool.