If an actor has no knowledge of the subject, at best all he can do is portray what he believes the character is like based on his own stereotypes. At best, that's a caricature. If that's good enough for you, fine. Shallow, but fine.
If you want an accurate portrayal of a character, you need to understand the character. The best actors will spend time getting to know how the person they're portraying thinks, what he believes, what motivates him, and how he moves. For example, the actors in "Band of Brothers" and "Saving Private Ryan" went through weeks of intensive training to learn about being a soldier. They didn't just put on a uniform. They learned how soldiers walk, how they hold and use their weapons, how they talk, and how they behave. The results show in the quality of the films. It isn't hard to think of counter examples where the actor simply portrayed a caricature of what they though a soldier is like. The result is a collection of cliches like Over There and Jarhead.
But if that's good enough for you, fine.
Off Topic » in reply to I agree
Caricature vs accurate portrayal
The whole thread (61 posts)
- Anyone watch the West Wing 'debate'?
- Okay, this guy gave Alda's character a pretty good review.
- I caught part of it.
- Alan Alda will get an Emmy nom for the "live debate"
- Alan Alda playing a Republican...
- I thought he pulled it off.
- ... is like Carroll O'Connor playing Archie Bunker
- Exactly - political blackface
- If that is all you got from his performance, then that is very sad...
- Sad
- The Archie Bunker character was a simple minded bigot...
- If that is all you got from his performance, then that is very sad...
- Yeah, THAT was a realistic portrayal of a conservative. (n/t)
- Exactly - political blackface
- No...*sigh*
- Clear
- You first. (n/t)
