Characters and performance

Jun 04, 2013 21:04

So I got to thinking a while back, That it's not a story or setting that 'sells' me on a character, but by the characters performance.



What is a measure of a good character?

A good character might be one that is believable, relatable or some might say realistic, even given the circumstances of said characters Canon.

To me a good character needs to be able to do something very difficult for any person, and that is to sell themselves to me. Any good story can fall to pieces if the characters cannot sell themselves in the setting. They appear either out of place, or the audience merely doesn't care one way or another, with this detachment on an emotional level our opinion on the work lessens due to poor delivery.

The tricky part about this is that well loved characters by fans of a series might still be a bad character when judged by another, Lets take Dr Who as an example, sure he's interesting, quirky, likeable and so on, but I don't think he's a good character. I'm not talking about David Tennant or Matt Smith or even any of the previous doctors, I'm talking about Dr Who as a character. From what I can gather he is essentially the last of his species [ lets ignore the master for now ] and he spends his days popping all over the universe in space and time, getting himself in and out of sticky situations, with a stolen craft I might add. Get off your high horse Doctor, you're a thief who runs but I, the audience, am not shown what he runs from.

This is a sour point with me. No matter how many species, worlds or even realities that the doctor might save, he still wanders or runs or moves seemingly on a whim, I'm not sold that he's a good guy, so while I don't dislike the Dr Who series, I don't actively follow or care for it. I'm not sold on the character.

The point to this argument is that even an unrealistic character can sell themselves when done right. Lets take a look at Downtown no Gaki no Tsukai ya Arahende!! aka Gaki No Tsukai, which is a variety show from japan. Specifically I am familiar with and enjoy their No-Laughing punishment game / specials. The cast of these new-years specials go through a kind of role play training scenario and endure 24hours of trials, situations and such for basically simple entertainment.

All the while they maintain personas of their characters which might be their actual selves or they could be merely playing to a type rather than being genuine. But I don't care, it's not about how they would behave or react as a person but as a character that draws me in with interest. The same argument could be made for Dr Who, but I don't see it personally, I could just be blind to it really.

The point is that within the little bubble of whats happening in the show, everything seems to fit, we ignore or even point out how unrealistic a model dinosaur storming down a high-school hall-way is in favor of wondering how one of the gang would react, would they stand there or run like a little bitch, given their character sees a dinosaur coming, not a cheap latex model of one.

This could be tied into the fourth wall, immersion and other subjects but even breaking the fourth wall doesn't mean a character is broken, when done right. For this I'll be referring to a couple of cartoons, right off the bat lets look at Futurama, We have a robot, Bender, somehow use his arms to attach his arms back into their sockets, a character, Fry, even states 'I don't know how you did that' [ refer to this clip http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFuq1Mhq-qg ] but we don't care because it's funny, it's the future, Fry is confused and we were just thinking the same thing.

Fry in the above example serves almost as a copy of ourselves in that he states the most likely question we would be thinking, yet in any other point of the series, he is within his own universe and doesn't realise that many people are wondering about the same question.

This doesn't break his character but it does break the fourth wall, or at least it leans on it. Lets look at the next example, from Disneys 'the Emperors new groove' ( See this clip http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t23YSJzMEpg ) The main villans see the 'map trails' of the main characters but can only shrug in confusion when they check their own feet and find their own trails appearing as they run. Then despite a setback in the villans trip, we again find out that cartoon physics has taken a shot and they somehow managed to get back to the lair before the heros, openly admitting they aren't sure how it was possible in the first place, only to merely shrug it off.

But I digress, respecting or disregarding the fourth wall doesn't sell a character. Yet if we look at a different series, I find myself entirely sold on the characters, almost blindly. The series in question is My Little Pony. Oh yeah. I'm going there. Buckle up.

On the outset lets summerize the series as shortly as possible for those that haven't and or don't want to watch it. It's about six colourful little horsies that reinforce their friendships together by overcoming their trials and tribulations both with each other and external influences. On the surface it's covered in enough sugar to make a child foam at the mouth but I kind of like that, it's different, less dramatic, more fun which brings a smile to my face. Most of my peers in my age group and demographic either don't care for it or flat out dislike it, Which is fine, I don't have a gun to their heads.

I have my own views on friendship and problem solving so I can't even say it's relatable as the formula is different from anything I could concoct, but I do see little specks in a few of the characters that I admire. Diving into their world I empathise with them and cheer at their success as the episode draws to a close. I am being entertained. This is the core of being sold on a character in my opinion. I don't like a horror film because I don't feel entertained by watching someone either survive or get gored by whatever the monster of the day is, I can't claim to understand the entertainment value in something like that.

It could be that I can't appreciate the universe the character finds themselves stuck in, so I can't be sold on the character even with good writing. This is my reasoning for not paying attention to two other largely popular series, Game of Thrones and The Walking Dead. I don't care about the costume design, the budget, the effects or the story because I don't feel that there is anything the characters have to offer to me.

This isn't to say they're bad series, I just don't personally like them. On the reverse side, I did rather like Dark Angel, Firefly, even Daria. The performance of the characters sold me and drew me deeper into their worlds. Standing back and looking at it, I could suppose this is why a play of Romeo and Juliet could be regarded as entertaining, when the characters are performed well we ignore the tacky backdrop setting of the stage, we ignore that the characters are standing on a stage, not in the streets of Verona, we are sold on the performance in spite of what we see, in spite of the script, we believe in the characters rather than the story. Using Romeo and Juliet as a solid example, I recount an english class from high-school.

We were asked to watch two versions of the above play, an old movie adaptation, and a second, modernised adaptation. The first, when Juliet discovers the late Romeo and impales herself on his dagger, I chuckled, by modern standards it felt over-acted with the way the actress playing Juliet writhed, yet with the modern interpretation, Swords were pistols, the scene was more dramatic and with the difference in connotation by the mere change of weapon, all the more powerful, despite the scene playing out no differently between the two versions, I was sold on the second more modern version, it had more impact, the delivery of the performance was powerful and I rate it as a very good, entertaining movie.

Suffice to say, I feel a good or bad series is not determined by its writing or setting, but whether you are sold on the performance of the actors who portray the characters. Of course everyone has their own tastes, experiences, expectations and ideals of a good performance, and I'm against judging someone’s opinion of a performance just because I didn't feel the same impact they did, Which leads me into this topics question;

Can you tell me of a performance that was strong to you, but not others? And can you tell me of a performance that was strong to others, but not you? Remember, this has nothing to do with 'a well written story' because even a poorly written story might have a great performance ( Leslie Nielson's appearances in the “Scary Movie” spoof series for example ) or even a well written story might have a poor performance ( the earlier mentioned old film adaptation of Romeo and Juliet, dagger, writhing. )

What say you?

movies, stuff, musing, thoughts

Previous post Next post
Up
[]