Tanyfaye wrote:Oh and I don't plan to move to Hollywood, I'm not naive, I just wanted to study there for a year and maybe even get some essential networking done. Wouldn't move to America if I didn't have some good credits here, and an agent, I'm well aware of how hard the American market is to break into, but thanks.
I apologise if my post/advice seemed patronising. I'm glad you know how it works - a heck of a lot of people don't and the lure of "Hollywood" is often used in some rather dubious marketing.
Tanyfaye wrote:Most Oscar winners are method actors... Now that is saying something...
I know that this is something that Brian Timoney emphasises in his marketing.
I think there needs to be some caution about what exactly you are extrapolating here. There are many Oscar winners who have studied method acting. It should also be noted that there are hundreds of thousands of actors who have studied method acting who are not Oscar winners. It's the actors who have won the Oscars - not the method and not the teachers.
There are not so many places to
only study method acting in the UK because British Drama Schools (not Universities) have largely taken the view that for actors to be well prepared for the industry and the jobs that are likely to be available to them in the UK, they need to study
more than this. The course I was on and the one my ds did covered many of the things taught by Brian Timoney.
I agree that the subjects/techniques covered on Brian Timoney's course may be very, very useful to an actor - especially for screen work. I believe that these very, very useful things are also taught elsewhere - possibly for less money?
I'd like to quote Samster's response from the stagetalk thread:
It looks like the 'secret' is the Lee Strasberg Method. The thing about drama schools is that most of them specialise in training for the stage and not film, so the statistic about however many Oscar winners are Method actors is a bit misplaced, what with Oscars being awarded to films. There are places that do short courses in different schools of method, and I think that Drama Centre primarily train actors in Stanislavskian approaches (though you may want to find out how much of their course is dedicated to this). From my own experiences we have touched on many different ways of working, in order to discover what works (and what doesn't work) for each individual actor.
The other thing to take on board is that on film the camera is closer on the actor than anyone in the front row of a theatre; one merely has to think through things and it reads in the cinema. On stage the people in the back row need to have the character's thoughts communicated to them too, which is where physical and vocal techniques learned at drama school come in. The danger with a pure method approach on stage is that the actor can become so involved in the emotions of the character that it is felt but not communicated to the audience.
On film you don't usually have the privilege of shooting scenes in chronological order, so one has to 'come up with the goods' on the day. In this case using sense memory to 'trigger' a very deep emotion, as a one off is understandable; on stage you have the events of the play leading up to this moment as your catalyst for emotion - one is experiencing it in real-time so the events of the play are a trigger.
The site attacks drama schools for being 'Victorian', but I think it's more a question of tradition: in the UK we have a strong theatre culture, and the US make really great films - they require different skills. I would also be wary of any training that guaranteed success in the industry: 'and you want to shortcut years of slow grind and frustration… then YOU are exactly the kind of future superstar I want'. So much of the selection process is down to looks and not necessarily ability - it's important to have a perspective on what the industry side is really like!
Most schools touch on Method at some point - it's just not usually seen as the one technique that will necessarily make you a better actor, especially on stage - it's more about finding what works for you from show to show and not limiting yourself.
All of the techniques advertised on Mr Timoney's website, such as animal studies, developing a character, etc were taught at my drama school - and most of the others. What concerns me about the site is the hard sell, and the promise of a 'golden ticket' to success. I think you really need to do some research before committing yourself to something as expensive at this. I personally view acting techniques as a mixing desk - sometimes you need to turn up playing the subtext and turn down the mask and so on.
Finally, Hamlet's advice to the players has many similarities to Stanislavsky and Co's theories! Drama schools aren't anti-Method - they just don't place it at the centre of their universe.
I know that many of the more extreme claims have now been taken off Brian Timoney's website but I still think Samster's summary is a useful one to anyone weighing up the pros and cons of various courses.