Filmmaking / Directing : Learn Your Lines by Christopher Thomas

I know of many theater directors who hated it. You had to get approval before you even try it. One director when off on a tantrum because many of us forgot our lines on a live performance. He was right, it threw all of us off, since in this play there's 12 actors talking all the time for 90 minutes with no intermissions.

As an actor and a producer, I've been on both ends of this. Honestly, in many cases, it depends on trust. There is absolutely no reason an actor shouldn't be able to deliver exactly what's on the page, especially if that's what the director expects. But sometimes there is room to roam. To know if that's the case, there needs to be communication between the actor and the director. It's been the rare time that I've been shot down when asking a director if I could try it a different way. Now...If you are only acting as a writer in this case, you have to surrender control to the vision of the director entirely (unless he or she makes you part of their process). Don't be too precious.

There are definitely time where I write with a certain rhythm or select certain words for a very specific reason and then it is frustrating when and actor or director decides to go in a different direction. I think if you explain the point behind your word choice they should get why some lines can be adapted and others not. If they don't get what you are going for then you might have to ask yourself if they are the right people to be presenting your work.

Ultimately it does come down to the director's decision. Most directors I've worked on comedies with simply try to get their coverage and may allow for a couple of improv takes, but if the director of this allowed them to run off, there's not a lot to be done about it. The director's word is law. If the actors simply didn't learn their lines and weren't prepared, however, that's unacceptable and unprofessional.

This^^^^

Just supplementing Andrea's point - if the Studio/Financier approved the script, that's how they expect it to be shot, within a reasonable range to allow for improv, alts, changes "on the day," physical production limitations, etc. Things happen "on the day," and that's typically OK, but overall, the Studio/Financier wants to get what they paid for, within a reasonable range. Not every Director is a "Final Cut" director who can overrule the Studio, and very few Producers have "Final Cut" (e.g. Scott Rudin). The Producers should be on set to manage the situation. It's not black and white. "Management" is required when you have actors who want to do their thing, a director who wants to do his/her thing, and the Financier who approved a script and may or may not want the people on set to take a bunch of liberties.

Thanks for the addition, Regina. Absolutely true -- you may get away with a couple of changes here and there, but you've still got to be able to cut it to the Studio/Financier's liking. Ultimately it's the director that will answer for that, not the actors, but the expectation that actors can deliver lines exactly as written with room to occasionally do an improvised take still stands.

As with most things in life, it depends. If you hire Will Ferrell, you want to give him a long leash to do his thing and improv. That's Will's own expectation, that's his agents'/managers' expectation, and that's the Studio's expectation because Will Ferrell IS Will Ferrell, and you get what you pay for. Maybe the lesson here is to slot in adequate rehearsal time, actor/director meetings, and production meetings so everyone is on the same page (as much as practical) with regard to expectations BEFORE you start shooting.

Just for example, if you hire "a Will Ferrell type" for a comedy, and you arrive on set and are surprised that he improvs on the day, it's your own fault for being naive and not understanding how he works. There's no a blanket answer for what happens on a production. Situations can be different. In the "Will Ferrell" case, you probably want to shoot a couple takes "as written" (so the Financier has a usable take that mirrors the Approved Script) and the majority of the takes might give Will the freedom to be Will. Just an example. I am nervous about blanket statements which can be misinterpreted by young filmmakers. No disrespect intended. It depends on the situation.

Or if you hire a millionaire YouTube star who is used to doing his own thing, you have to keep him happy and properly manage the specific situation. It really depends.

I was at a seminar with the Russo Bros (capt America) and they said would make changes every day, tweak dialogue on set. they were constantly rewriting. they made a point to stress, Collaboration. Robert Downey would do a take matching the script and then he would do a few takes, ad-lib. The Russo bros said they brought in "action directors" to help them direct.

I agree again, Regina, in that certain 'types' of actors are expected to do their own takes, but short of a Robin Williams type talent a script very rarely simply allows for an actor to adlib as they see fit without first securing a couple of "as written" takes. This is not to say that there isn't any improv on set -- that was never my point at all, and apologize if I did not communicate that correctly. With a real comic talent those improv takes may well be better than what was scripted, which is generally why they're allowed at all. But I do think it is also risky for a young filmmaker to allow their cast to run over them strictly because they aren't sure whether a working actor should have their lines memorized. The short answer is, yeah, they should, even if it's just to get the coverage their backers agreed to and then play afterwards. Does it always happen? Unfortunately, no, and for the bulk of actors that's really not acceptable. Those that do it and aren't of that kind of caliber where they're a real name that's bringing in significant money do it at a certain degree of risk. I'm not trying to argue that improv doesn't or can't happen on set -- it does all the time. But for an actor to provide no "as written" takes (which is what I got from Christopher's original post)? That's not okay.

I love Project Greenlight Seasons 1-2. Season 2 shows a great example of young directors who don't understand that they can't rewrite the Production script that Miramax approved. However, if the studio says, "We trust you, Spike Jonze," or "We trust you, Robert Downey, Jr." then it's a different situation. "We are paying you to do your thing." There are different situations. Sometimes the order is, "We love the script, don't change it." Other times the order is, "Please improv because we feel the comedy will come from the actors." Oftentimes, it's in between the two extremes. This is somewhat of a reductive post, given the range of situations that might occur.

Hey Andrea, I really feel you offered great and valuable advice. It's this line, if taken out of context, that scares me as too much of a blanket statement: "but the expectation that actors can deliver lines exactly as written with room to occasionally do an improvised take still stands." I felt I should present another case. But yeah, I think you said what needed to be said!!!

No, that's fair. It's better to ensure that people don't expect it to apply to every single situation. I'd say we're actually arguing the same point, which is that most actors will need to know their lines and may or may not have opportunity to improv after those initial takes are secured. But again, clarification is always better, and thank you for going further in depth as to what should be expected :)

Andrea, I have become paranoid because we read so many posts on S32 like, "The rule is XYZ." Some people seem to write down a general statement and take it as gospel. We spend time "disproving" general statements all the time here, which baffles me. I need to be less worried about that, and I need to give people credit for having more common sense!! :-) Nice to meet you, Andrea.

A healthy dose of skepticism of any gospel is always healthy, I think. Nice to meet you as well, Regina :)

LOL!!

It does annoy me. If they can't say the line, or it feels bad to them a quick rewrite (rephrasing, different word) is easy enough. But do the script and then other takes with some improv. Have you ever tried editing improv performances. Very hard.