(Ch. 5) Response & Dialogue Post (due March 15)

screem

DUE MARCH 15 (11:59 pm)  – After reading and engaging in the articles, videos, interviews and other materials for Chapter 5: Acting & Writing Reviews:

jovan-adepo-denzel-washington-fences-01-600x350

…answer all the following questions in the response section of this page (or email me your comments if you experience technology glitches). **Post something different than an earlier dialogue post in the chain, or expand on it. 

  1. What did you learn about acting you didn’t know before (or that was reinforced)? How do you feel that will change the way you view, and review films? Why?
  2. As a rising film critic, what do you find to be the most challenging about evaluating “good acting?” Why? Offer a real-world example.
  3. After exploring Four Easy Steps to a 600-Word Review & Creating a Title for your Review, what do you feel is the greatest benefit for your film writing and reviewing? Why?
  4. Based on an interview with one of the actors on this page (on in this chapter), what did you find most intriguing or interesting about their approach to filmmaking/acting. Why? You must identify which actor this post is addressing.

 

Oscar-winning actor Mahersha Ali (Moonlight, Green Book, House of Cards, True Detective)

Actor Michael Kelly (House of Cards, Jack Ryan)

Yvonne Strahovski (‘Chuck,’ ‘Dexter,’ ‘24’ and Hulu’s ‘The Handmaid’s Tale.’) 

Britt Robertson (Tomorrow Land, Mr. Church, The Longest Ride, The Space between Us)

Gillian Jacobs (Community, Love, Diet Coke)

Melissa Rauch (Big Bang Theory)

Patrick Fabian (over 110 acting credits on his resume)

Oscar Nominee James Cromwell (Over 200 roles on film, TV & stage including  – Babe, LA Confidential, American Horror Story, The Green Mile, The Longest Yard, Big Hero 6, Star Trek: First Contact, Marshall)

Character actor Charles Napier (hundreds of film and TV roles including Silence of the Lambs, the Blues Brothers, Star Trek)

 

 

 

 

40 Comments Add yours

  1. 1. What did you learn about acting you didn’t know before (or that was reinforced)? How do you feel that will change the way you view, and review films? Why?

    I learned that telling good acting from bad acting is not as hard as I was making it. All you have to do is look and see if the actor feels what the character does. If the character is happy and in love, the actor does not need to look sad. I will now look at the situation the character is in and see if the actor is acting like he is in the situation. I will do this now because I use to look at what the actor did rather why they did it.

    2. As a rising film critic, what do you find to be the most challenging about evaluating “good acting?” Why? Offer a real-world example.

    The hardest thing about evaluating good acting for me will be getting inside the character’s head. I will have to think like the character and evaluate the acting based on the character’s mindset.

    3. After exploring Four Easy Steps to a 600-Word Review & Creating a Title for your Review, what do you feel is the greatest benefit for your film writing and reviewing? Why?

    After viewing Four Easy Steps to a 600-Word review & Creating a title for your Review I feel that I will benefit the most from forming an introduction. I never thought of including a quote from the movie to help grab the reader’s attention. I have always had trouble forming an introduction.

    4. Based on an interview with one of the actors on this page (on in this chapter), what did you find most intriguing or interesting about their approach to filmmaking/acting. Why? You must identify which actor this post is addressing.

    I listen to Melissa Rauch. The thing that intrigued me the most about her was when she would watch some stand-up comedy shows on Tv. After she watched them she would go to school and perform them during show and. Sometimes she watches one that was not age appropriate, then she would go share that at school too. Another thing that I found interesting was that he writes to make herself feel better when she did not get the roles she wanted.

    ~Dylan Mistretta 3/11/19

    Liked by 1 person

    1. noeltmanning says:

      When evaluating acting -make sure that it “feels real” within each role. Noel Manning

      Like

  2. Caitlyn Hamrick says:

    What did you learn about acting you didn’t know before (or that was reinforced)? How do you feel that will change the way you view, and review films? Why?
    The biggest thing I learned about acting is that the best way to evaluate a actor is to look at their eyes. All great actors should show their emotions in their eyes. Knowing this about acting will better my film evaluation skills by helping me recognize if a actor is truly a good actor or is my baggage just telling me something that is not true.
    As a rising film critic, what do you find to be the most challenging about evaluating “good acting?” Why? Offer a real-world example.
    I find separating my bias to a character and good acting the most challenging when evaluating, because when I grow a love for a character, specifically when watching a television series I automatically judge the actor based on my liking for the character and when I do this I really get pulled down when evaluating films. An example of this would be when I grow a liking to a character in a tv series, after I have watched them grow for seasons, and then a character comes in and gets in that character’s way the actor playing that character I automatically grow to dislike them as a actor, even if they had really great acting skills.
    After exploring Four Easy Steps to a 600-Word Review & Creating a Title for your Review, what do you feel is the greatest benefit for your film writing and reviewing? Why?
    After reading about the steps to reviewing and creating a title I think I benefitted the most when I was told in the article to simply as myself these questions to figure out my summary. Making a title is something I always struggled in and the tips on how to do a good title shed a lot light for me on that aspect.
    Based on an interview with one of the actors on this page (on in this chapter), what did you find most intriguing or interesting about their approach to filmmaking/acting. Why? You must identify which actor this post is addressing.
    I found “Michael Caine’s” approach to acting the most intriguing. What Caine said about when you are rehearsing a scene those watching you should not be able to tell whether you are rehearsing or just having a normal conversation was really interesting and really great advice to give to young actors/actresses trying to make it in the business. When I read this things just seemed to fall into place and make sense on how to recognize good and bad acting.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. noeltmanning says:

      I’ve watched Caine’s interviews & acting lessons several times, and I still find it amazing.

      Baggage and bias truly is the most challenging thing to overcome. Noel Manning

      Like

      1. noeltmanning says:

        remember to add your name on each post

        Like

  3. What did you learn about acting you didn’t know before (or that was reinforced)? How do you feel that will change the way you view, and review films? Why?

    That there is something called naturalistic and non-naturalistic acting. I feel this will change the way i view and review films because it’ll change the way I see the actors, if I get upset because what the actor is feeling is something the majority of people can’t relate too, its non-naturalistic because they aren’t recognizable, the emotions and reactions aren’t reactions a normal person would act out, however a naturalistic approach at acting would be expected, you would expect them to take that kind of action and you can relate too it.

    As a rising film critic, what do you find to be the most challenging about evaluating “good acting?” Why? Offer a real-world example.

    spotting that the actor your criticizing is feeling what the character their playing is feeling, that could be hard to catch because what they do determines how they feel which in turn changes the way it plays out, you don’t know how they’re supposed to feel if you don’t have the exact script and you normally wouldn’t, so say I were about to get hit by a car, there would be a state of panic in my mind, this would be easy to catch if someone didn’t act it right because the sheer look of panic or a different look would prove them a good or bad actor, however thats a very easy example, now say the beginning of the story the character loses something but we don’t know whether he’d be optimistic or not, we can’t tell how he would at if we don’t know him so we couldn’t guess if he didn’t express it correctly.

    After exploring Four Easy Steps to a 600-Word Review & Creating a Title for your Review, what do you feel is the greatest benefit for your film writing and reviewing? Why? I feel creating a great attention-grabbing lead would provide the most benefit as the lead is the opening to the entire review, if you express a monologue tone, I don’t think people will enjoy reading it as much, but if you have some optimism and express your excitement, maybe it’ll catch their attention and they’ll stay to enjoy your review, and maybe leave some positive feedback!

    Based on an interview with one of the actors on this page (on in this chapter), what did you find most intriguing or interesting about their approach to filmmaking/acting. Why? You must identify which actor this post is addressing.

    I found that the filmmaking process that is used and interpreted through their eyes is always gonna be difficult, it is a lengthy process after all and I’m sure it’s exhausting, what I find most interesting is that Michael Kelly has been directing his acting too more of a television/series side more than film, although I find it great that he does both as he can appeal to a much wider audience, his approach to filming and acting is interesting as every actor is really unique, so Michael Kelly’s approach is about wanting to show himself, he wanted to show something he was good at and acting was that outlet earlier on when he started acting, he was finally able to show the world what he was good at! His approach is more of the faith and support, the money isn’t everything to him and that amazes me, he wouldn’t do it just for the money because he loves the support he gets from the crew and such and he believes that fuels him through the process!

    – Jackson Mealing

    Liked by 1 person

  4. 1. What did you learn about acting you didn’t know before (or that was reinforced)? How do you feel that will change the way you view, and review films? Why?

    What I learned about acting is that it is mostly listening and reacting, which did not surprise me but I have never thought of it as that simple. All an actor has to do, in a nutshell, is listen to lines and commands and react to their environment and the lines that the others say.

    2. As a rising film critic, what do you find to be the most challenging about evaluating “good acting?” Why? Offer a real-world example.

    What I find most challenging about evaluating “good acting’ is losing my bias towards the character and using it against or with the acting. Whenever I like a character I usually like what they like and that means thinking that the actor is really good even though they are not doing anything special. I know it will be hard to become unbiased to most everything but it is very important for my evaluations.

    3. After exploring Four Easy Steps to a 600-Word Review & Creating a Title for your Review, what do you feel is the greatest benefit for your film writing and reviewing? Why?

    The greatest benefit for my film reviewing I feel is practicing on “The Lead” because in my reviews so far I have not really had one and I think it would help me bring in the reader into the reading. It would also help me get started on the writing because I sometimes do not know how to start so it takes me longer to write the review.

    4. Based on an interview with one of the actors on this page (on in this chapter), what did you find most intriguing or interesting about their approach to filmmaking/acting? Why? You must identify which actor this post is addressing.

    I listened to Michael Kelly and what I found most interesting about their approach to acting is that he was the first person to graduate from Coastal Carolina with a performing arts degree and that he is not good at remembering much. I thought that such a famous actor that has trouble remembering his lines was crazy because you would think that he would be good at that. I also think that out of everyone before him and there with him that he was the only one to graduate with a performing arts degree at Coastal Carolina.

    -Dylan Swofford

    Liked by 1 person

  5. sugarymango says:

    What did you learn about acting you didn’t know before (or that was reinforced)? How do you feel that will change the way you view, and review films? Why?

    I learned that you shouldn’t compare actors from two totally different movies. People have their own acting style and when looking at actors, you should look at the movie type and how the actor portrays the type of genre is important. I think this will help me review films because I now understand that you shouldn’t compare two people from different genres because obviously you can’t compare two things that are totally different. I can’t compare an actor in a comedy film to the same actor (or different actor) in a horror film.

    As a rising film critic, what do you find to be the most challenging about evaluating “good acting?” Why? Offer a real-world example.

    You have to look at how they act, not the character, not the other works they may have been in, or if you just like them. How they act can be seen in the eyes. Most people can see true emotion when looking in someone’s eyes and if an actor can pull that off, I’d say they’d be a pretty good actor. This also happens in music. I may hate an artist with a passion, but I wouldn’t be able to tell you why. “Oh it’s because I hate *insert song title*” “Well this song is good you should listen to it.” “No it’s by so-and-so.” It’s the same in acting, you could hate an actor just because of how poorly they could’ve done in one movie but they may be a really great actor. In music, you have to analyze it without any bias or you will just hate it. If my friend loves country music, but I like K-pop and she hates it but has never heard one song, one band, anything, then she should at least give it a chance and listen without bias.

    After exploring Four Easy Steps to a 600-Word Review & Creating a Title for your Review, what do you feel is the greatest benefit for your film writing and reviewing? Why?

    I think the greatest benefit for my film would be how to introduce the review. I have the hardest trouble coming up with what I’m going to write that doesn’t sound cheesy or boring. I think the information on the “lead” would definitely help. Also, the amount of words and about how long a certain part of the review should be would help with shortening the review, while making it concise.

    Based on an interview with one of the actors on this page (on in this chapter), what did you find most intriguing or interesting about their approach to filmmaking/acting. Why? You must identify which actor this post is addressing.

    I listened to Michael Kelly. I found the interview pretty intriguing. He worked for over 2 decades, the part where they were talking about how he was alright with shaving his head but not his eyebrows made me laugh. He was at a college in the coastal part of NC and was a cross country runner. It was his third year in political science when his instructor said he needed an elective. He did an acting scene and his instructor told him he was very good. His parents supported him too. I found this really interesting because it shows how even if people say they want a certain career path, it may change by the time you graduate or many years later. You need to find your passion and find a job that doesn’t seem boring when you do it.

    ~Lucy Holland

    Liked by 1 person

    1. noeltmanning says:

      Lucy -Michael Kelly was fun to interview; he’s really found his footing now.

      Working through our baggage is something we all continue to do.

      Like

  6. petertuong says:

    What did you learn about acting you didn’t know before (or that was reinforced)? How do you feel that will change the way you view, and review films? Why?

    In this chapter I learned what naturalistic acting and non-naturalistic acting was and how one isn’t necessarily bad acting. Knowing this information will help me look at films because I can tell if the actor is being realistic or non realistic and if they are being successful at standing out or being relatable.

    As a rising film critic, what do you find to be the most challenging about evaluating “good acting?” Why? Offer a real-world example.

    Good acting and reactions could be different than what I would expect since people do react differently to different situations. For instance, if told about a death to a close one there are many different reactions, instant sadness or grief, numbness/silence, etc. So I would necessarily know if an actor is doing one of those things right or in a believable way.

    After exploring Four Easy Steps to a 600-Word Review & Creating a Title for your Review, what do you feel is the greatest benefit for your film writing and reviewing? Why?

    After looking at the easy steps section I feel like the story synopsis area will benefit me and my reviews because I have been struggling on what to put and not to put in my summary in all of my reviews so far. These guidelines and tips will definitely help me in later film reviews to cover less but still be effective.

    Based on an interview with one of the actors on this page (on in this chapter), what did you find most intriguing or interesting about their approach to filmmaking/acting. Why? You must identify which actor this post is addressing.

    I listened to the Charles Napier interview, what I found most interesting was that he never planned to go into the acting career so when he was auditioning for his first few roles he even admitted he didn’t really know what he was doing since this was not the career path he was expecting. This shows that there is talent even when you don’t expect it and that you can adapt and learn to act better like he did.
    Peter Tuong

    Liked by 1 person

    1. noeltmanning says:

      Peter – I encourage you to go back to the summary section from earlier this semester as well.

      Like

  7. Faith Ramsey says:

    What did you learn about acting you didn’t know before (or that was reinforced)? How do you feel that will change the way you view, and review films? Why?

    They must not be predictable. I feel like that would because film critics know how many films are so they will be expecting many things. I will think how hard a scene was for an actor.

    As a rising film critic, what do you find to be the most challenging about evaluating “good acting?” Why? Offer a real-world example.
    After exploring Four Easy Steps to a 600-Word Review & Creating a Title for your Review, what do you feel is the greatest benefit for your film writing and reviewing? Why?

    You have to remember when judging predictability, everything that’s predictable to you could not be to others. Being a film critic you have seen many film and outcomes.

    After exploring Four Easy Steps to a 600-Word Review & Creating a Title for your Review, what do you feel is the greatest benefit for your film writing and reviewing? Why?

    It help me write a review. It also gives more information about different settings.

    Based on an interview with one of the actors on this page (on in this chapter), what did you find most intriguing or interesting about their approach to filmmaking/acting. Why? You must identify which actor this post is addressing

    I watched Britt Robertson. It was interesting how she started small in Greenville south Carolina. It also wasn’t even to get her to start acting, it was to make friends.

    -Faith Ramsey

    Liked by 1 person

  8. jmcmullens2 says:

    1)What did you learn about acting you didn’t know before (or that was reinforced)? How do you feel that will change the way you view, and review films? Why?
    I learned that you can easily tell the difference between good acting and bad acting. There is acting where the actor reacts to their environment in a way that suits what is going on. I didn’t think much of this because i thought maybe that’s what they were supposed to do. I also learned that comparing actors does not get you anywhere because there each actor had a different style. This will help me because I will pay more attention to how the actor is expressing their feeling and how they react to the environment around them. Also it could help me because instead of looking at one movie that has a similar baseline and different actors I won’t compare the two since I now know that there is not a certain way to act. One may be better than the other but in that one specific movie the actor acts how they do.
    2)As a rising film critic, what do you find to be the most challenging about evaluating “good acting?” Why? Offer a real-world example.
    As I am starting to critic movies what I find the most hard of evaluating “good acting” would be judging a character based on what other movies the actor have been in. I find this the most challenging because I tend to look back and determine if I want to watch the movie or not based on who is casting in the movie. However i am going to have to d watch movies and evaluate them and I am going to think about how I viewed the actor before and be biased towards it. An example of this would be that I love Tika Sumpter and I usually like a movie just because she is shows the emotion and make me feel like i’m right there beside her that’s what I would consider good acting. However if it was someone that I did not like as much I would most likely avoid the movie because I know how they act and I just don’t like it and think that every movie they in would be bad or not for me.
    3)After exploring Four Easy Steps to a 600-Word Review & Creating a Title for your Review, what do you feel is the greatest benefit for your film writing and reviewing? Why?
    My greatest benefit would be the synopsis or the Evaluation part itself. I think this because I hit the high points without giving it away and make it more clear. Also I mention multiple things that could help someone if they were interested in it for example they can get if it’s appropriate for kids or not from my evaluation
    4)Based on an interview with one of the actors on this page (on in this chapter), what did you find most intriguing or interesting about their approach to filmmaking/acting. Why? You must identify which actor this post is addressing.
    I listened to Mahershala Ali and what I found interesting about his approach to acting was that in Moonlight they did not have any rehearsal. When they were in the process it took him seven days to film his part and he says that they had to be just alive if they were sitting in a studio but they had to bring that through same concept but in space. It was like they still had to have relate to each other and have that dialog without talking., I found this interesting because I thought that they actually talk through the making of the movie and then they just mute the clips and add the sound too it however they don’t talk at all. That’s interesting to me because they have to go off of each other and have to be able to know communication skills so that you can still get the feeling as if it had noise.
    -Jada McMullens 03.15.19

    Liked by 1 person

    1. noeltmanning says:

      Jada – Exploring each acting talent within each role and situation/film is sometimes more challenging than we think. We have to ask ourselves … is this believable? Noel

      Like

  9. katiecstone says:

    1. What did you learn about acting you didn’t know before (or that was reinforced)? How do you feel that will change the way you view, and review films? Why?

    One acting tip that I learned from Sir Michael Caine was this – “For men in particular – men will do anything BUT cry. When you cry, you must fight the tears. And when you fight the tears, the audience will cry for you.” I think this applies to women too, but the impact that more naturalistic acting can have on an audience, as opposed to over-the-top acting, is incredible. I feel that now I will examine more of how an actor exhibits an emotion, not just how they make me feel through their portrayal.

    2. As a rising film critic, what do you find to be the most challenging about evaluating “good acting?” Why? Offer a real-world example.

    For me, evaluating good (or bad) acting without having a preconceived notion of a certain actor is the biggest challenge. For example, I despise Jennifer Lawrence’s work in The Hunger Games (2012), but I recently viewed Silver Linings Playbook (2012) and adored her acting skill! My baggage could have kept me from enjoying her performance in Silver Linings Playbook, but I chose to keep an open mind and watch it anyways, to my surprise, it was really incredible! I hope to continue to push past my baggage in order to become a great film critic.

    3. After exploring Four Easy Steps to a 600-Word Review & Creating a Title for your Review, what do you feel is the greatest benefit for your film writing and reviewing? Why?

    Learning the importance of creating an intriguing Title and/or Lead was especially beneficial to me. Both of these contribute greatly to the first impression your audience has of you as a film critic. Opening with a good pun is always my go-to!

    4. Based on an interview with one of the actors on this page (on in this chapter), what did you find most intriguing or interesting about their approach to filmmaking/acting. Why? You must identify which actor this post is addressing.

    I LOVE the show “Chuck”, so when I saw that there was an interview with Yvonne Strahovski, I had to listen to it! Yvonne’s acting in Chuck (2007-2012) was incredible, but possibly even more remarkable is her acting in The Handmaid’s Tale (2017-). When talking about how important it is to be vulnerable in order to portray a character in the truest manner, I found it intriguing that Yvonne says she gets excited whenever her character has an intense (usually, emotionally intense) or complicated scene. This makes me think of something Olivia Colman said in a video from this chapter – “When you get the chance to feel an emotion in acting, it’s cathartic! It is all of those emotions you aren’t usually allowed to show, so it is beautiful to finally let them rip!” As a person who loves acting, I find this to be a very true statement. Being vulnerable allows you to have the most natural character possible.

    – Katherine Stone 3/15/19

    Liked by 1 person

    1. noeltmanning says:

      Absolutely wonderful and engaging feedback. Noel

      Like

  10. zachbaynard says:

    What did you learn about acting you didn’t know before (or that was reinforced)? How do you feel that will change the way you view, and review films? Why?

    One major thing I learned was one of Michael Caine’s 10 tips for any actor. The tip I want to share is tip 9, which is “A majority of movie acting is about relaxation. If you’re knocking yourself out, you’re doing it wrong”. I think that this tip is meant for actors who are afraid of forgetting their lines. I think that with this line, it really encourages people who think they will forget their lines in the middle of a scene when in reality, they won’t forget since the audience doesn’t read the screenplay. I think this will change as if I was watching a film, if they don’t look confident and it seems they’re forgetting all of their lines, then that might be bad acting.

    As a rising film critic, what do you find to be the most challenging about evaluating “good acting?” Why? Offer a real-world example.

    So for this question I’m going to go based off of my answer for question 1. The most challenging part of acting has to be trying to identify their characteristics of acting. If the actor is just shaking the whole time and not confident at all in a movie that’s not supposed to have them do this, then that is pretty bad acting. As for good acting if they look confident and are in dialogue as if it was real life, then that I would consider good acting.

    After exploring Four Easy Steps to a 600-Word Review & Creating a Title for your Review, what do you feel is the greatest benefit for your film writing and reviewing? Why?

    I think the greatest benefit I got from this was how a film review should work. Like in my review of Annie Hall, I just went straight to the plot when I shouldn’t do that. I should be giving the reader a “hook” or in film how we call it the “lead” as I want to lead them into the review. I also got to review that the evaluation should be last as I should first do the lead, then the plot, and then my evaluation so that film review is more structured and not scattered.

    Based on an interview with one of the actors on this page (on in this chapter), what did you find most intriguing or interesting about their approach to filmmaking/acting. Why? You must identify which actor this post is addressing.

    So for the interview I watched, I watched Michael Kelly. I think what struck out to me is that he ain’t good at remembering things. My thoughts on that was “How the heck did he even be allowed to be an actor if he can’t even remember that well?”. However, I think that it’s just that the tips he knew of such as not panicking as I’ve mentioned made him a better actor since once again, the audience doesn’t read his script, so it’s okay if he messes up.

    Liked by 1 person

  11. What did you learn about acting you didn’t know before (or that was reinforced)? How do you feel that will change the way you view and review films? Why?
    I learned that actors have to sacrifice their vulnerability and their dignity in order to make a living. This will make me respect actors more than I already did because I did not know that and I don’t think I could do that. I can use this to judge if someone is a good actor and if they aren’t its because they aren’t exposing their vulnerability.

    As a rising film critic, what do you find to be the most challenging about evaluating “good acting?” Why? Offer a real-world example.
    I find that it’s hard to judge if someone is a good actor because of my personal film baggage. I may have prejudices and I may like/dislike someone because of another movie, because of their background, or because of their opinions. My mom loves Tom Cruise because she thinks he’s handsome so she thinks his acting is superb. I, on the other hand, am not a fan because of his work in The Mummy (2017). Film baggage affects us both in very different ways and practically sculpts our opinions and makes us biased, which is not what you want in a film review.

    After exploring Four Easy Steps to a 600-Word Review & Creating a Title for your Review, what do you feel is the greatest benefit for your film writing and reviewing? Why?
    I think that the most beneficial tip from those posts was the part about writing your review and the part talking about how if you say the film is bad and you grade it a B, then it doesn’t make sense unless you expand on your thoughts. I almost made this mistake of not explaining myself enough until I reread the entire post to see if I left anything out. Another part that helped me a lot was with the title. It said something about using clickbait to your advantage and using slight clickbait to draw your readers in.

    Based on an interview with one of the actors on this page (on in this chapter), what did you find most intriguing or interesting about their approach to filmmaking/acting. Why? You must identify which actor this post is addressing.
    I listened to the Melissa Rauch interview. I found it interesting that she figures out the voice and body movements first whenever she’s trying to become a character and make them real. She approaches the way the character will be seen by reading the screenplay and figuring out what type of person they are and puts herself into her role a little bit. I don’t think I could ever do that which is why it’s so interesting to me.

    Liked by 1 person

      1. noeltmanning says:

        Good feedback. Remember “vulnerability” “baggage” and a “clickbait” title. – Noel

        Like

  12. evelky4 says:

    What did you learn about acting you didn’t know before (or that was reinforced)? How do you feel that will change the way you view and review films? Why?
    I learned that there is more to acting than just looking at a camera or another person and talking. I feel like this will change the way I view films by me realizing the work that the actors and actresses actually do and start looking deeper into each motion made by the actors.
    As a rising film critic, what do you find to be the most challenging about evaluating “good acting?” Why? Offer a real-world example.
    I find the most challenging about evaluating good acting is considering what they are working with(the script and setting) because we normally think of good acting as one singular standard, but we need to consider the situation as well. For example, an actor can get a very bad script for a particular scene. If they make it special and their own, they are in my eyes a good actor. Normally, I would not think of it and would say that they are a bad actor simply because they were given a bad script.
    After exploring Four Easy Steps to a 600-Word Review & Creating a Title for your Review, what do you feel is the greatest benefit for your film writing and reviewing? Why?
    I feel that the greatest benefit for my film writing and reviewing is the lead line because I have been finding it difficult to find a good way to start off my film reviews.
    Based on an interview with one of the actors on this page (or in this chapter), what did you find most intriguing or interesting about their approach to filmmaking/acting? Why? You must identify which actor this post is addressing.
    I listened to the interview with Melissa Rauch. I found it intriguing that whenever she was 6 years old, she was memorizing stand-up shows and would perform them in front of her class for show and tell.
    -Edward Velky

    Liked by 1 person

  13. Josh Rubino says:

    1. What did you learn about acting you didn’t know before (or that was reinforced)? How do you feel that will change the way you view, and review films? Why?

    I learned that performances can be call naturalistic or non-naturalistic. Performances that are naturalistic are the ways that people view life and how they would really act in a certain situation. Also naturalistic is actions done by an actor that are actually realistic and that people would do with that certain situation. Non-naturalistic is the opposite of that, it is different from what we would see in our world, actions done by actors are unique and that people usually would not do in that certain situation. Also non-naturalistic is not bad acting but it is unique and creative acting. I think this will change the way I view films because I have to evaluate if the actor fits the world or the story that is being portrayed in a film. Also if the actor is acting in a natural way I would be thinking to myself will I do that if I was really in that certain situation.

    2. As a rising film critic, what do you find to be the most challenging about evaluating “good acting?” Why? Offer a real-world example.

    I think the most challenging is knowing if they are really going through whatever the character is going through because they themselves are playing the character so if they are not portraying what the character is supposed to feel then how could you tell that they have bad acting. If I watch a movie I am watching the actor and the way they act, if they act a certain way then I think that was how the character has acted. This is why I would have a hard time evaluating that in a film.

    3. After exploring Four Easy Steps to a 600-Word Review & Creating a Title for your Review, what do you feel is the greatest benefit for your film writing and reviewing? Why?

    The greatest benefit to me was the conclusion because I always have a hard time on thinking up what the conclusion should be. Also I am not that good at summarizing all my ideas up and making a whole conclusion because if I try to do that, I always put all my ideas instead of summarizing my ideas.

    4. Based on an interview with one of the actors on this page (on in this chapter), what did you find most intriguing or interesting about their approach to filmmaking/acting. Why? You must identify which actor this post is addressing.

    The actor I chose was Britt Robertson. Britt started acting at a very young age but did not know that she was going to do this for a living. Britt was homeschooled her whole life so her mom thought acting might help her make some friends. While I was listening to her, I could see that she valued the storyline of the film, she said gave thought to the lesson that is shown by the film and gave deep description on why she liked her character. Also she wants people to gain from the films that she is in, in a positive way.

    -Josh Rubino

    Liked by 1 person

    1. noeltmanning says:

      Thanks for the feedback Josh – Noel

      Like

  14. What did you learn about acting you didn’t know before (or that was reinforced)? How do you feel that will change the way you view, and review films? Why?

    I learned how to notice and know whether the actor feels what the character is feeling or doesn’t feel what the character is feeling. While watching films I have seen an actor that doesn’t seem like they’re into their character but I thought nothing of it, but now that I know whether the actor like their role or not. This can help me evaluate film because I now can look at the actor and tell whether they are a good actor or not because a good actor fits their character no matter what role they have.

    As a rising film critic, what do you find to be the most challenging about evaluating “good acting?” Why? Offer a real-world example.

    I feel like the most challenging thing for me would be focusing on the actor so that I can tell how they feel about the situation while acting. When I watch a film, I honestly don’t focus on the acting that much because I’m more into the plot and the story, but if I was to focus on the actor I would be able to know how they feel and if they fit their role, which could help me evaluate a film better by being able to give a better description of the actors and their roles.

    After exploring Four Easy Steps to a 600-Word Review & Creating a Title for your Review, what do you feel is the greatest benefit for your film writing and reviewing? Why?

    After reading about the four steps to a 600-word review & creating a title, I think the thing I will most benefit from is knowing how to make a title and knowing how to make a great lead will help me catch the reader’s attention so that they might feel less bored by reading over my review.

    Based on an interview with one of the actors on this page (on in this chapter), what did you find most intriguing or interesting about their approach to filmmaking/acting. Why? You must identify which actor this post is addressing.

    The actor that I chose to listen to was Britt Robertson. A thing that I found interesting was that she started theater as a way to make friends, but then she turned out enjoying it so much and that led her to being noticed by some agents that helped her build her acting career.

    – Rileah Graham

    Liked by 1 person

  15. Cinema Scope says:

    What did you learn about acting you didn’t know before (or that was reinforced)? How do you feel that will change the way you view, and review films? Why?
    One thing I learned about acting is that you need to show the characters emotions in your eyes, it’s more believable than any words you say or body motions you do. This will help me in reviewing films by helping me evaluate the characters emotions, and to see if the actor is really a good actor.

    As a rising film critic, what do you find to be the most challenging about evaluating “good acting?” Why? Offer a real-world example. The most challenging about evaluating “good acting” is separating your bias from a character or the actor in general. Say that you don’t like Greg German because he played Hades in Once Upon a Time, you can’t judge if he is a good actor if you don’t separate your bias of him. You could just say he is not a good actor because of a character he played and it’s not fair for the people reading your review or the actor them self.

    After exploring Four Easy Steps to a 600-Word Review & Creating a Title for your Review, what do you feel is the greatest benefit for your film writing and reviewing? Why? One thing in those articles that helped me was making the introduction, I always struggle when making the introduction. I don’t know what to start off with or how to summarize everything up. But these articles helped me a ton with writing my introduction, I never thought about using a quote from the film as the start of your introduction but once I’ve read it it makes sense to me.

    Based on an interview with one of the actors on this page (on in this chapter), what did you find most intriguing or interesting about their approach to film making/acting. Why? You must identify which actor this post is addressing.
    The interview I listened to was on Melissa Rauch, who played on The Big Bang Theory. I love that show in general and I saw that she was one of the interviews I immediately listened to the interview. One thing that interested me is that her voice for her character in The Big Bang Theory, Bernadette, is completely made up. It really surprised me when I heard that, how can someone do that and make it sound real. It really interested me how deep she was willing to get for her character and one of them was changing her voice so that it fit her character more. Now that I hear her real voice I think that if she didn’t use the fake voice the show would be completely different. Another thing that interested me was that when she was younger she would memorize stand up comedy shows and she would redo them in her class or in front of her parents. That shows that she was made to be an actor and that she is very brave and not shy, which is perfect for an actor.

    -Jessica Randolph

    Liked by 1 person

    1. noeltmanning says:

      Jessica, Great feedback. Baggage keeps coming back to visit doesn’t it? Noel

      Like

  16. What did you learn about acting you didn’t know before (or that was reinforced)? How do you feel that will change the way you view, and review films? Why?
    I learned about naturalistic acting and how one is not bad acting.Having this information will be beneficial to me so that I can evaluate films better and I will be better able to tell if the author is being realistic or unrealistic.
    As a rising film critic, what do you find to be the most challenging about evaluating “good acting?” Why? Offer a real-world example.
    Good acting can sometimes be tied to specific reactions to a certain situation. An example of this is if I give bad news to my family that one of our relatives has died. There will be different reactions from everyone some might just break down and cry others might sit still and process it.
    After exploring Four Easy Steps to a 600-Word Review & Creating a Title for your Review, what do you feel is the greatest benefit for your film writing and reviewing? Why?
    I feel as if the synopsis part will help me in my reviews. The guidelines will help me write better reviews.
    Based on an interview with one of the actors on this page (on in this chapter), what did you find most intriguing or interesting about their approach to filmmaking/acting. Why? You must identify which actor this post is addressing.
    I watched Britt Robertson. What I found interesting about it was that she had started small in Greenville South Carolina. She didn’t go there to start acting she had originally went to make friends but later got into acting.

    Jahseim Merritt

    Liked by 1 person

  17. Gluna0303 says:

    What did you learn about acting you didn’t know before (or that was reinforced)? How do you feel that will change the way you view, and review films? Why?
    What I learned about acting that was interesting to learn was the difference between realistic and unrealistic acting.I learned that it doesn’t necessarily mean that one is good acting and one is bad. The way you can tell the difference is based on the context of the story. Some require unrealistic type emotions but the acting is amazing but others portray a more realistic image of emotions. I feel that knowing this will help me to be able to understand without having a quick judgement that an actor is bad when they don’t show a certain type of emotion because I should view it based on context.

    As a rising film critic, what do you find to be the most challenging about evaluating “good acting?” Why? Offer a real-world example.

    I feel that the most challenging part is if the person is acting so unnaturally because of the context of the situation or because this actor is not capable of showing full emotion realistically.

    After exploring Four Easy Steps to a 600-Word Review & Creating a Title f\

    Liked by 1 person

    1. noeltmanning says:

      Gabby – You didn’t add the fill post. – Noel

      Like

  18. blakepow says:

    What did you learn about acting you didn’t know before (or that was reinforced)? How do you feel that will change the way you view, and review films? Why? While watching the video of “Michael Caine Teaches Acting In Film” I started to realise how complicated movie acting is and just how much every small detail matters in creating the mood of a movie. I did not know this before. I also did not know the difference between good acting and bad acting, but now I do. It is interesting to me how natural a good actor has to be to not be a bad actor. A good actor has to find the sweet spot between too much acting and not enough acting. Trying too hard in acting will make the feeling that the character tries to convey meaningless and fake. While little acting will have no impact on the audience at all and it will also seem fake. The sweet spot that a good actor has to find is natural. A good actor will react to a situation the same as a normal person would react to it, or react to it based on the character’s persona.
    As a rising film critic, what do you find to be the most challenging about evaluating “good acting?” Why? Offer a real-world example. For me it is hard to tell the difference between bad acting and good acting when it comes to crying and breakdowns. This is hard for me because for good acting and bad acting the character’s face will scrunch up and they will scream and it is hard for me to find a natural feeling in that. Some of the examples provided in the Tim Burton link in the natural acting vs non natural acting link are confusing. Some of the examples of good actors breaking down I would have to disagree with because of their facial expressions, but the article says that it is right and not wrong so now I have conflicting emotions about it.
    After exploring Four Easy Steps to a 600-Word Review & Creating a Title for your Review, what do you feel is the greatest benefit for your film writing and reviewing? Why? I feel like learning about how to structure the evaluation and analysis in my six hundred word review will benefit me most in film writing. I feel like this because the evaluation and analysis is the main reason people read reviews anyway. Learning to structure this part of the review will be very useful in making a smooth review. It also helps with reviewing films because if you know how it is supposed to be set up then you know what to look for and how to review it.
    Based on an interview with one of the actors on this page (on in this chapter), what did you find most intriguing or interesting about their approach to filmmaking/acting. Why? You must identify which actor this post is addressing. I listened to the interview with Patrick Fabian. What I found most interesting and intriguing about the way Patrick Fabian approaches acting is how he learns from the other actors around him. He saw that Ted Levine had this great technique and patience with the way he acted and this brought more weight to the lines of dialogue that he was saying. Once Patrick saw this wonderful technique he wanted to learn more about it. I thought it was interesting how Patrick picked up on small details to enhance his acting.
    – Ethan Blake Powell

    Liked by 1 person

    1. noeltmanning says:

      Ethan Blake Powell – Excellent feedback and understanding. Noel

      Like

  19. travismc88 says:

    What did you learn about acting you didn’t know before (or that was reinforced)? How do you feel that will change the way you view, and review films?

    I like when Cristoph Waltz said when you think you did well the audience was probably bored and vice versa. I believe it is that fear of not succeeding that drives some of the best actors. Taking it seriously and not approaching it so casually. Matt Damon followed it up by using the word discipline. So when I watch future Films I’m going to partially judge the actors on how much effort they are putting into their role. Are they really pushing their range or is the director barely getting performance out of them.

    As a rising film critic, what do you find to be the most challenging about evaluating “good acting?” Why?

    Judging “good acting” is difficult for it’s subjective. Certain actors are good at different types of acting that’s why they get type-cast. Such as Seth Rogan or T.J. Miller always being the “stoner friend.” Sometimes they get criticism for making choices when it was the director who told them to do it. Like every Johnny Depp role in a Tim Burton. Moving forward I have to keep things like this in mind.

    After exploring Four Easy Steps to a 600-Word Review & Creating a Title for your Review, what do you feel is the greatest benefit for your film writing and reviewing and why?

    From this article? I’d say grabbing the reader/listener with a good lede is a new thing for me to consider. As with a great film or story in general: the first few minutes your watching or reading if the work doesn’t grab you, your going to lose interest. Same thoughts on the last part of One’s review: make it your own to make them come back to YOU for their movie reviews. Be a trusted opinion.

    Based on an interview with one of the actors on this page (on in this chapter), what did you find most intriguing or interesting about their approach to filmmaking/acting. Why? You must identify which actor this post is addressing.

    I chose to focus on Michael Kelly because he was amazing in House of Cards- my favorite role I’ve seen him play. From his seriousness when displaying the deep flaws within the character, to the more sensitive times when dealing with the girl…well I don’t want to spoil it. It was nice to hear how he tried multiple studies and career paths to no avail before discovering theatre. He loved it so much he worked harder at it than anything he had tried before. I admire that part of his approach, the hard work and hearing how he grinded and payed his dues for years before hitting mainstream success. I like that he spoke on how emotional and vulnerable he tends to be in life and that he tries to let that show in even his quieter roles such as his very guarded role in HOC. And to listen to the other actor even if you know the lines, react to the subtle things they do. Or at least that’s what I took that part to mean.

    Travis A McIlwain
    3/15/19

    Liked by 1 person

    1. noeltmanning says:

      Strong feedback Travis. Noel

      Like

  20. 1.What did you learn about acting you didn’t know before (or that was reinforced)? How do you feel that will change the way you view, and review films? Why?
    It was reinforced that acting is mainly about listening and reacting to what is being said by the other actors and the directors. This will not change the way that I view an review films because I already look at films and wonder why the director tells them to say what the do, how to act the way that they do and why they have the actor in a particular setting at a specific time. Another thing that was reinforced to me was that there is a difference in between good and bad acting as well. The difference in between the two is when it is a good actor you can feel what the actor feels and feel and understand what they are saying. In comparison to good actors are bad actors. The bad actors are bad because the do not connect to the film and you are unable to feel anything when they say something.
    2. As a rising film critic, what do you find to be the most challenging about evaluating “good acting?” Why? Offer a real-world example.
    I find not being biased on a character and good acting the most challenging about evaluating because when you watch something such as a film and you fall for a character it is difficult to be unbiased towards them after you develop these feelings. This is because when I am watching a movie and I fall for a character that is in it I find it difficult to judge them due to my feelings for that particular character. For example when I had to evaluate Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone for an assignment I had struggled to do it because I had to find simple errors that had been made in that particular film. This was difficult to watch this film after because I had to look for errors and what the character I loved the most did wrong while in the film.
    3. After exploring Four Easy Steps to a 600-Word Review & Creating a Title for your Review, what do you feel is the greatest benefit for your film writing and reviewing? Why?
    After exploring Four Easy Steps to a 600-Word Review & Creating a Title for my review I feel that the greatest benefit for the film writing and reviewing was creating and forming an introduction. I feel this way because I have always had difficulties to grab my reader’s attention. When it comes to my introductions I do not think about tryongb to put in a quote from a character from the film to help me to be able to grab the audience’s attention to read whatever I am writing.
    4. Based on an interview with one of the actors on this page (on in this chapter), what did you find most intriguing or interesting about their approach to filmmaking/acting. Why? You must identify which actor this post is addressing.

    In Michael Caine’s way of approach to acting is really interesting. Caine said that whenever are practicing or having a normal conversation was quite unique and amazing advice to give to young people that are actors/actresses that are trying to make it in the acting business. After I was done reading things were put into order and bad acting and good acting made sense on what the difference was and how to see it in future films that I will watch.

    -Yunique Wilson

    Liked by 1 person

  21. 1. What did you learn about acting you didn’t know before (or that was reinforced)? How do you feel that will change the way you view and review films? Why?

    Before reading the material in Chapter Five, I had not entirely realized that acting partakes greatly in the movement of the eyes of the actor, even if nonverbal communication such as this would deeply impact the quality of the acting. Also, this material has defined what good acting is, which I believe is necessary knowledge so as to depict whether or not present acting exhibits good or bad quality. I believe that this knowledge will deepen my ability to view and review films in such a way as to elicit good credentials where they are due, not where the film makes an actor have good or bad quality acting. Through this more “pure” way of understanding of acting, I am able to depict in my review and criticism of a film if that film was inherently good or bad for the acting, not the other way around. Another point of interest in the knowledge of acting is how acting is either naturalistic or non-naturalistic, in which non-naturalistic is less believable, realistic, and relatable. Naturalistic acting is not so as this type of acting depicts if a character, and thus the actor, is relatable, believable, and/or realistic. This knowledge will be important because it better enables the type of acting to be known and allow the critic to understand the contrasts and comparisons between these two types of acting and two different actors that use these types of acting.

    2. As a rising film critic, what do you find to be the most challenging about evaluating “good acting?” Why? Offer a real-world example.

    Personally, I believe that the most challenging aspect of analyzing “good acting” could be how to decide if one type of acting would be better than the other based on the actor using these different styles, which could directly correlate to the quality of the acting. Also, comparing an actor and their acting to another actor and their acting could be difficult because this may possibly be influenced by film baggage. For example, a critic may hold film baggage towards naturalistic acting and dislikes non-naturalistic acting, which may be furthered to imply that if an actor is better at non-naturalistic acting than naturalistic acting, the critic may hold film baggage against this actor and negatively view their acting. As a real-world example, I believe that Sandra Bullock showed great acting in “Gravity” because she acted using naturalistic acting and also acted with the illusion of not trying to much to act.

    3. After exploring Four Easy Steps to a 600-Word Review & Creating a Title for your Review, what do you feel is the greatest benefit for your film writing and reviewing? Why?

    After exploring Four Easy Steps to a 600-Word Review and Creating a Title for your Review, I believe that the greatest benefit for my film writing and reviewing could be the possibilities to write a concise criticism of a film while still having the ability to only cover about 1/4 to 1/3 of the story, which would tell them the basis of the film while not overly detailing the entire plot of the story. For a reader to be provided with this information in film criticism, that reader would be influenced in a way that would elicit a personal opinion of the film and a decision if they would like to view the film for themselves or not. In essence, for a film critic to be able to summarize the basis of the story without spoiling the ending, readers would be greatly benefitted and thus, the film critic that has written the review properly.

    4. Based on an interview with one of the actors on this page (on in this chapter), what did you find most intriguing or interesting about their approach to filmmaking/acting? Why? You must identify which actor this post is addressing.

    (This post is addressing the actor James Cromwell) For this actor, I find most intriguing his approach to acting because is the fact that as he grows older in his acting career, he shows more and more emotion and does not hide behind his acting as much as he did in the past. I find this the most intriguing because as a more youthly individual if I was to act, I would like for my acting to display my personal beliefs and emotions about topics presented in the film I may have been acting for, especially if I was playing a large role. Also, I find this interesting because I would like to question him: What was going through your mind as a younger actor? Were you possibly afraid to show your beliefs and emotions and instead hid behind your acting in films?

    -Nathanael Leclercq

    Liked by 1 person

  22. noeltmanning says:

    What did you learn about acting you didn’t know before (or that was reinforced)? How do you feel that will change the way you view, and review films? Why?

    I learned that acting was a large part of the film. I use to believe that what made the film good was the directing, the story plot, and the sound I later learned that there are more things that make up a good film and one was the acting of actors. In the blog post it mentioned that we may think acting isn’t something that impacts the film but it does because it makes the people et into the movie if the actors are doing a decent work at their job.

    As a rising film critic, what do you find to be the most challenging about evaluating “good acting?” Why? Offer a real-world example.
    I believe that the most challenging thing that there is to evaluate about good acting is to sort of pay attention to an actor and see if they have a well honed instrument. The reason is because you are trying to pay attention to everything else the actor is doing for example if they are believable or if they are a good listener like mentioned in the blog post that I believe that this aspect is the hardest to focus on. For example when I watched the film Jurassic Park I was looking at many things in the film and one I was watching the actors I was mainly focused in their acting skills and how believable they were which then I wasn’t really looking at if they were well-honed instruments.

    After exploring Four Easy Steps to a 600-Word Review & Creating a Title for your Review, what do you feel is the greatest benefit for your film writing and reviewing? Why?
    I believe that the greatest benefit for my film review and writing is part c of the story synopsis the first act plot points. The reason it is a great benefit for my review is because this part will allow me to explain the story’s question, the inciting incident, the story crisis, the challenge for the characters, and the ultimate goal which is sometimes hard for me to put in my review.

    Based on an interview with one of the actors on this page (on in this chapter), what did you find most intriguing or interesting about their approach to filmmaking/acting. Why? You must identify which actor this post is addressing.

    The actor’s interview that I listened to was Mahershala Ali and something that I found intriguing about their approach to filmmaking/acting was that he mentioned a experience in his life and something that someone had told him that stuck with him. The reason it was intriguing was because he mentioned that the person mentioned that acting is about the work not to get rich or famous it is about being excellent at the work and the love for the work and if you do that then you would be excellent at acting and seeing some actors they just do it for the fame and money but seeing that he tries to do it when he is working shows that he is a good actor.

    Marleny Martinez

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply to jmcmullens2 Cancel reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s