Ed's Newsletter - September 2008

CHICAGO ACTING FOR ANIMATORS WORKSHOP
SATURDAY, OCTOBER 4TH, 10AM-5PM
I’m going to run another one-day Acting for Animators workshop in the city where I live. Yes, I will cover the basics of acting theory, so if you took the workshop previously, you’ll have to listen to them again. But I’m going to include some new stuff. Also, and probably most important, if you took the workshop before, the price this time is $75. If you are taking it for the first time, the price is $100. Drop me an e-mail at edhooks@edhooks.com to express your interest. This is Chicago, folks, and I almost never teach in Chicago. This is a rare event. Tell your friends and co-workers. Put a note on the bulletin board.

ACTING FOR ANIMATORS WORKSHOP SCHEDULE
Sept. 12-13, SPARK Festival Vancouver, Canada (sponsored by Vancouver ACM Siggraph). This will be a ninety-minute talk, not an Acting for Animators class. My topic is “Seeing the future of animation by looking into the past.”
Oct. 4, Chicago, IL (Open class – contact Ed Hooks)
Nov. 12-18 United Kingdom, various classes, some open. (Contact kumar@twelvej.com).
Nov. 21, Stockholm, Sweden (Electronic Arts)
Nov. 24-27, Swansea Animation Days, Swansea South Wales
Nov. 29, Ludwigsberg, Germany, Academy of Performing Arts Opening Celebration, a speech of welcome.
Dec. 1-5, Ludwigsberg, Germany Filmakademie Baden-Wurtemberg (closed workshop)
Dec.12th Barcelona, Spain – Grin Games (closed)
Dec 15-16 Oporto, Portugal --Escola das Artes Universidade Católica Portuguesa (closed) 

Recently, a friend suggested that I read Keith Lango’s blog, in particular the article he wrote entitled “Animated Acting”. I consider Keith a friend and one of the finest animators in the biz, so I eagerly read the piece. It’s very good and raises some provocative questions. The problem is that, in my opinion, Keith didn’t go quite far enough in his explanation about what is and is not acting. His main point is that acting is “pretending”, and he’s correct about that. The viewer knows in his heart that the entire enterprise is not real. But acting is, more importantly, “doing”.

There are some very significant differences between stage actors and animators. Animators are not really “actors with pencils”. Stage actors work “in the present moment”. In other words, if you were in my regular stage acting class, and I reached out to stroke your cheek, you would have an emotional reaction, and we would deal with that. Animators don’t really have “a present moment”; they have 24-frames-make-a-second, i.e. the ILLUSION of a present moment.

In my view, as helpful as Keith’s blog article is, he left out something pretty essential: a definition of acting. Your character should be playing an action in pursuit of an objective while overcoming an obstacle. Acting is, in fact, “doing” something.. Keith writes a wonderful description of a driver trying to get somewhere who keeps running into red lights. He’s frustrated, and he grips the steering wheel so strongly that his knuckles are white. I can imagine the scene he has in mind, but the really important thing is where the driver is going and why it is urgent. Emotion is a reaction, and his reaction to the red lights is the frustration he feels with the red lights.

An objective is provable. If you head for the bathroom, you will know whether you got there or not. If you get into your car and drive from LA to Las Vegas, you will know whether you got there or not. If you have a flat tire or run into a dust storm along the way, that is an obstacle you have to overcome if you want to reach your objective.

It is not enough to “know” the character and his behavior traits. 100% of the time, you should be able to answer the question, “What action is my character pursuing, in pursuit of what objective, and what is the obstacle?” If you can’t answer that question, you’re in trouble.

Which brings me to the subject of working in front of a mirror. Most animators do it, and that’s okay with me. The only problem is that acting-wise, it is impossible to be on the stage and in the audience at the same time. When you act out a sequence in front of a mirror, you are trying to be both actor and audience simultaneously. Mirrors, therefore, are good for working on pose-to-pose and facial emotion, and not much more. It would be far better if you videotaped yourself performing the sequence and then played back the tape to see what you did.

Keith views acting as “imagining” and “pretending”, and that is fine. But the most important factor, in my opinion, is how the audience reacts. They’re watching the screen and, although they know it is a cartoon, they must “willingly suspend their disbelief” in order to buy into the whole enterprise. They know that is just animation on the screen but, if they are to be emotionally affected by it, they must suspend their disbelief and pretend that it is true. We all know that Wile E. Coyote could not really hang in the air for so long before plunging to the bottom of the canyon, but we pretend we don’t know that in order to empathize with Wile E.’s emotions. This is why so much animation is aimed at kids. Kids like to pretend. They are an easier market than adults.

“Acting is doing something”. You should be able to freeze-frame your character at any moment and ask him what he is doing? What is his objective? What is his obstacle? (Obstacle with self, obstacle with the situation or obstacle with another character.) If the character can’t answer those questions, you have a problem. Scenes begin in the middle, not at the beginning. When a character enters a room, where is he going? Where did he come from? What is the obstacle? It is not enough to know that, when frustrated, this character stomps his left foot and pulls hair out of his head. The more important question is what is his objective.

Note to Keith: I hope you don’t mind me talking about your blog article. It really is quite good, and the more we hear from pros like you, the better off we will be.

Until next month...be safe!