Has acting gotten worse?
Has acting gotten worse?
Other urls found in this thread:
Acting is literally pretending. The whole "you can't act with a green screen" shit is complete bullshit. People have been putting on plays without props and sets since the beginning of humanity. One man shows where they pretend to talk to someone off screen have existed just as long. If you're an actor and you can't act because there's a green screen, you're a shit actor. Learn to act.
Hundreds of movies are released each year. Less than ten use the anything like the technique depicted in your image.
most modern actors are complete shit
wait...
why was is necessary to record them separately?
>Acting is literally pretending.
You have autism.
they didn't
Acting is not the only thing that creates a scene, but also directing. Directors are the ones who extract the true emotion they want for the screen. In order to do that directors utilize the stregths of the actor, and place him into positions that show off the emotionality they want. Therefore a good director should strive to create his set as realistic as possible to maximize the extraction of emotion from the actor. Hence why real sets or live location shooting is still preferred over green screen for most people who cherish quality.
t. never acted before
An actor needs something to work off of in order to produce a believable performance. Read some Miesner for more on this. It's not a huge issue if there's just a greenscreen in the background, but if you're doing something like the OP pic where the two actors might not even be in the same room as eachother, you're not gonna get a good performance. (and the performance in that particular scene is utter shit, which only proves my point).
It saddens me how so few directors seem to know even the first thing about acting or directing actors now-a-days.
FPBP
No. What those actors had to do there for that shot is very difficult, btw. They would much rather work off of an actual actor rather than a green stick.
t. pretending to know shit
>Acting is literally pretending
Acting is channeling not pretending. Actors that pretend are called bad actors.
Look ma, I'm projecting! If I accuse others of the very things I am afraid of I am immediately superior to them!
I've read all the major books and have a good few years of experience under my belt. I know how actors work.
Is this what kids on twitch and discord consider a good comeback these days?
>The whole "you can't act with a green screen" shit is complete bullshit.
Except, having tangible things to act off of and respond to kind of enhances the performance for the actor. This is why the acting feels so wooden/manufactured in the Hobbit trilogy vs LOTR trilogy.
It's a bit rich to have a single actor acting out a scene with multiple characters and no-one present to bounce back off. Green screens can go too far.
post the gandalf
Everyone look at fucking Nick Cage here and laugh
You have autism.
Everything he said makes perfect sense you moron.
>but if you're doing something like the OP pic where the two actors might not even be in the same room as eachother
So when an actor is talking to someone and it's shown from the perspective of the listener, the other actor should operate the camera?
Reading books is nothing compared to real experience.
No, it doesn't, you fucking idiot. You can still have a good performance with a good actor and a good director. Using the Hobbit as an example is laughable and just shows how much up a brainless child you are because everyone knows that it wasn't bad because of a green puppet but because they literally winged everything and used the first take. There are plenty of good performances out there that relied on actors not interacting with other actors directly.
>what is chemistry?
>a director could reach everything a pair of good actors could do together if he directs them right and is creative
how stupid you sound
>An actor needs something to work off of in order to produce a believable performance.
Tell that to Christopher Lee, he didn't mind using green screen and thought it was more fun to imagine an army of orcs here and there.
>Reading books is nothing compared to real experience.
And failing to read post so you can pretend you haven't been utterly BTFO'd is nothing compared to growing up
No one said no good acting or good directing exists anymore.
>There are plenty of good performances out there that relied on actors not interacting with other actors directly.
Name even one
Its fucking terrible. Ive really been able to see how bad it is lately when these washed up stars jump on the capeshit bandwagon. Take Michele Pfeifer she has been fucking terrible in Aquaman and that other. Greenscreen makes it worse. Older actors probably had it a bit easier because they could immerse themselves. How the fuck do you get immersed with everything green around you and a dude has ping pong balls hanging all over him.
I can't wait for the next generation of screen actors who will be raised on these methods and not have mental breakdowns about having to act. I think it's bullshit when these actors complain about having to work on green screen or without other living actors. It's like if a guitar player broke down on stage because someone asked him to play his part without the rhythm section. Get over it and do your job. and practice more
there are ways to prepare for these roles, and it's not crying Sir Ian Mckellen
they did and what you see in the video is the already composited result
to answer 's question, it's because Hackson shot the movie in 3D so perspective tricks, like the ones he used in LOTR, won't work
>dude i read books so i know better!
You're just as useless as YouTube "critics" who failed at film making but act like they know their shit.
See