crying techniques?

Post by **MovieStuff** » Tue Dec 05, 2006 1:32 pm

mattias wrote: some i'm sure like to masturbate or have a quickie since orgasms make you very emotional.

That's why my next film will be an all woman cast with nothing buy crying and misery for the entire 90 minute run time. Very, very sad. I figure it will require at least a 5:1 shooting ratio. :twisted:

Post by **Evan Kubota** » Tue Dec 05, 2006 3:46 pm

I'm reading a book called Cronenberg on Cronenberg

Great, I had no idea this was available. I really like that series and I have the Kieslowski volume... the Cronenberg one seems to be out of print, though.

Post by **johnnhud** » Tue Dec 05, 2006 6:57 pm

I forgot to reccomend Tear Gas.

Post by **Dr_Strangelove** » Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:33 pm

One actor I did a short with pinched herself in the nose...and it worked

/Jan

Post by **Actor** » Wed Dec 06, 2006 12:30 am

keagan wrote:I'm reading a book called Cronenberg on Cronenberg, and in there he admits to slapping his leading lady repeatedly in the face before each take (She begged him to do it) to make her cry! they eventually had to stop because the makup artist couldn't cover up the bruises that were forming.

He should have smacked her on the ( | )

Post by **Actor** » Wed Dec 06, 2006 12:36 am

While filming Roman Holiday director William Wyler got Audrey Hepburn to cry by yelling at her, telling her she was a no-talent little wannabee and bewailing the fact that the studio would not let him hire a "real actress." After they got the shot he fessed up that it was all an act. Audrey got an Oscar nom.

This would not work on an indy set because the actress would just come back that the director was also a "no-talent little wannabee."

Post by **moviemat** » Wed Dec 06, 2006 3:19 am

I once worked on a film where the actor rubbed soap in his eyes. Looked painful mind.

Mat

Post by **MovieStuff** » Wed Dec 06, 2006 7:29 pm

Actor wrote:While filming Roman Holiday director William Wyler got Audrey Hepburn to cry by yelling at her, telling her she was a no-talent little wannabee and bewailing the fact that the studio would not let him hire a "real actress." After they got the shot he fessed up that it was all an act. Audrey got an Oscar nom.

Mind you that I really like Hepburn and I also like Wyler. But if Wyler had to stoop to that level to get her to cry, then the talent of one of them is seriously in question, IHMO.

Actor wrote: This would not work on an indy set because the actress would just come back that the director was also a "no-talent little wannabee."

Most likely true, since most actors have more experience acting than low budget directors do directing.

Roger

Post by **Evan Kubota** » Wed Dec 06, 2006 8:13 pm

But if Wyler had to stoop to that level to get her to cry, then the talent of one of them is seriously in question, IHMO.

Not necessarily... 'crying' as an objective does not always have equal valence. Perhaps she could have simply cried but he needed the other components of a good performance. Tarkovsky continuously implied to Kolya Burlyaev that he was on the verge of being fired as the lead in "Ivan's Childhood" in order to elicit an appropriate performance. You can't argue with the results...

Post by **MovieStuff** » Wed Dec 06, 2006 9:15 pm

Evan Kubota wrote:
But if Wyler had to stoop to that level to get her to cry, then the talent of one of them is seriously in question, IHMO.
Not necessarily... 'crying' as an objective does not always have equal valence. Perhaps she could have simply cried but he needed the other components of a good performance.

Academic. You don't hire someone because of what they can't do.

Evan Kubota wrote:Tarkovsky continuously implied to Kolya Burlyaev that he was on the verge of being fired as the lead in "Ivan's Childhood" in order to elicit an appropriate performance. You can't argue with the results...

Of course you can. A good director can get whats needed out of a good actor without having to stoop to insults or abuse. If not, then something is lacking in one of them.

Roger

Post by **mattias** » Wed Dec 06, 2006 11:14 pm

roger, you're way off. if you think you can go the extra mile through abusive techniques you owe it to yourself and your film to go for it. otherwise you're a bad director. actors think so too. they don't like directors who don't have the guts to cross boundries. it's part of the job for both.

/matt

Post by **MovieStuff** » Wed Dec 06, 2006 11:44 pm

mattias wrote:roger, you're way off.

Nope. Sorry you disagree but there is no argument you can make here that will justify abuse by any director.

mattias wrote: if you think you can go the extra mile through abusive techniques you owe it to yourself and your film to go for it. otherwise you're a bad director.

Absurd.

mattias wrote:actors think so too.

Nah. No qualified actor or actress will respect a director that is abusive nor will they need that level of abuse to get the performance required if they're qaulified. Losing your cool and being abusive on the stage or set is the mark of a neophyte or simple immaturity. And while some abusive directors of the past have shown elements of brilliance, it is stupid to presume that being abusive is required to be brilliant.

Roger

Post by **Actor** » Thu Dec 07, 2006 3:39 am

keagan wrote:I'm reading a book called Cronenberg on Cronenberg, and in there he admits to slapping his leading lady repeatedly in the face before each take (She begged him to do it) to make her cry! they eventually had to stop because the makup artist couldn't cover up the bruises that were forming.

We was not doing it correctly. I once had a part on stage that required me to slap an actress. Fortunately she was trained in stage combat (and had in fact been my stage combat advisor in a play that I directed) and knew how it was done. The trick is to hit the fleshy part of the cheek and avoid hitting the cheek bone or the jawbone. Bruises won't form if you do it right.

Post by **keagan** » Thu Dec 07, 2006 5:24 am

Evan Kubota wrote: Great, I had no idea this was available. I really like that series and I have the Kieslowski volume... the Cronenberg one seems to be out of print, though.

yeah, it's a great series. This is the only one I've actually read through, but I love the idea of it.

Has anybody ever used tear gas???

mattias wrote:roger, you're way off. if you think you can go the extra mile through abusive techniques you owe it to yourself and your film to go for it. otherwise you're a bad director. actors think so too. they don't like directors who don't have the guts to cross boundries. it's part of the job for both.

I agree. As an independant director you have to do what it takes to get your film made. If you are passionate about your project, you'll attract people who are also passionate, and passion can be translated into a willingness to sacrifice.

Now, if you've got millions of dollars to hire actors worth millions of dollars, it's a different story...IMHO

Keagan

Post by **etimh** » Thu Dec 07, 2006 5:53 am

Best natural crier working in mainstream films today: Naomi Watts. Go back and check out her performance in 21 Grams. I read an interview with Inarritu where he talked about Watts' crying in the film. She could get into it quite easily and then maintain a serious state of emotional distress. Not just some rolling tears but the whole red stuffy nose and bloodshot eyes kind of emotional crying. He didn't know how she did it but he did note that when the scene was done she popped right out of it. That's acting.

Tim