Friday 30 October 2015

To what extent could Leonardo DiCaprio be termed a method actor?

To what extent could Leonardo DiCaprio be termed a method actor?

Speaker: The Stanislavski System is an intense character development process that strives to make a performance "real" and not artificial. In order to achieve this realism, the system is used according to Stanislavski 'to bring an actor's experiences into the role and to expand an actor's imagination' (Item 11). Therefore the two conditions which need to be applied to say that an actor is using the Stanislavski method acting technique are:
1. Whether they are bring some of their personal experiences into the role
2. Whether their imagination can be expanded whilst playing the role
I will be using this to explain why I think Leonardo DiCaprio does use the Stanislavski's method acting formula in some of his films. Here's an example of the work which he produces using his method acting technique, in 'The Wolf of Wall Street' as Jordan Belfort. 

Projector: Lemmon Drug Phase Scene in 'The Wolf Of Wall Street' (Item 2)

Speaker: I think this scene perfectly captures how into character Leonardo DiCaprio was whilst shooting this film. Firstly, that really is him falling down the stairs, he decided not to use a stunt double for this scene, despite everyone telling him to use one (Item 6). This is because he wanted to make his performance as authentic and accurate as possible, and said in an interview with ExtraTV 'when you play a character like this you have to go all out' (Item 16). In addition to this, DiCaprio completely improvised this scene on the today they shoot this scene (Item 20). According to this article, 'DiCaprio came up with the idea of opening the car with his foot but strained his back during filming, meaning he could only perform the action once'. This applies that not only is DiCaprio able to act and think like this character, but he can also have a producer's mindset and come up with ideas for his character in the film. This is probably because of the environment Martin Scorsese, the films director, created on the films set, which DiCaprio described as 'we had ideas where scenes wanted to go but it was incredibly loose , there would be scenes that were a page long and we would be improvising for hours and hours... anything can happen on that day and it did' (Source 21). 

Projector: Inspiration Speech Scene in 'The Wolf of Wall Street' (Item 2)

If we analyse DiCaprio's performance in this scene we can see how he has visually transformed himself into this character. Firstly, he has put a New York accent on instead of his LA accent and dying his hair black instead of his blonde hair to look more like the character he is playing, Jordan Belfort. In addition to this, DiCaprio is saying this speech with so much passion and commitment which shows how into his character, which would have been hard for DiCaprio as he described Jordan as the character as 'a vaccum of consumption with no moral compass', something he isn't which made the character 'fun to play'. DiCaprio didn't just read the book the film was based on (which goes by the same title, written by Jordan Belfort), he also talked 'extensively to Jordan Belfort himself' (Items 5 and 6), the character he was playing in the film. He wanted to make sure he knew everything about the character and how he acted to make sure his performance was accurate and approved by the person he was playing. Another method acting technique DiCaprio used for 'The Wolf of Wall Street' was he talked to doctors about about how the brain acts under this drug and how people act when they are under them, as he would have to act this out in the film (Item 5). Once again, DiCaprio did this incredibly detailed research to make sure his performance was accurate and he made sure he acted like you should when you take the drugs he takes in the film, as a pose to acting inaccurately when taking them drugs, which would have made his performance exaggerated and not accurate/ realistic. 

Projector: The Mad Max scene in 'The Wolf Of Wall Street' (Item 2)

This is an example of a scene which would have been improvised by DiCaprio and the other actors on set, only loosely following the film's screenplay. However, with all of this being said, can Stanislavski method acting technique be applied to Leonardo DiCaprio for his performance in 'The Wolf Of Wall Street'? The two conditions which need to be applied to say that an actor is using the Stanislavski method acting technique are:
1. Whether they are bring some of their personal experiences into the role
2. Whether their imagination can be expanded whilst playing the role 
I personally believe that the method acting process can be applied to Leonardo DiCaprio in 'The Wolf of Wall Street' because these techniques (talking extensively to Belfort, doing his own stunts etc) and the improvisation he did on set all helped him get into character and therefore expanded his imagination when he played Jordan Belfort, this being the first rule of method acting which he has clearly achieved. However, I believe that DiCaprio did bring some of his own experiences into this role, namely all the excessive drinking and partying the character does in this film. This is because DiCaprio personally has been known to throw massive parties and drink excessive amounts during said parties, particularly his 40th birthday party (Item 18), and therefore I believe that he added these personal experiences when playing Jordan Belfort, as both of these parallel each other in that they both throw massive parties and drink excessive amounts during said parties. As a result, because of all the techniques he used to broaden his imagination whilst playing Jordan Belfort and the fact that he used personal experiences when playing the character as well, I believe the term 'method actor' can be applied completely to Leonardo DiCaprio in 'The Wolf of Wall Street'. However, can this also be applied to his performance as Calvin Candie in 'Django Unchained'. 

Projector: The dinner scene in 'Django Unchained' (Item 1)
I think this scene shows just how much Leonardo DiCaprio was in character whilst playing Calvin Candie in 'Django Unchained'. In this scene, DiCaprio accidentally cut his hand on a broken wine glass which was on the table when he slammed his hand down. However, DiCaprio was so in character that he kept going, never breaking character and he even improvised with the blood, rubbing it on Kerry Washington's face to make him even more terrifying in the scene.This take is the one which made it into the final cut of the film, meaning all of his co-stars reactions are genuine rather than acting and after the take he immediately required snitches  as the cut was that deep (all from Item 4). Its clear just from this take that DiCaprio has 'broadened his imagination as the character', a quote from Stanislavski describing one of the elements needed to fit his definition of method acting (Item 11). 

Projector: The first time Django and Calvin Candie meet in 'Django Unchained' (Item 1)

To prepare for this character, DiCaprio isolated and shut himself away from his loved ones whilst shooting this film, opted instead to perfect his acting for the character because he had never played this type of character before, a character he describes as 'the most narcissistic, self-indulged racist characters I have ever read in my entire life' (Item 23 NBC). This is something he also used for 'Shutter Island' and repeated it for this film (Item 14). So, techniques like this one and managing to stay fully in character whilst injuring yourself during a take prove that DiCaprio broaden his imagination whilst in character and he was always in character on set, however he never managed to bring any of his personal experiences to the character because he despised the character. In an interview for Django Unchained he also said that Calvin Candie 'represents the moral decay of the South during that time period' and 'was like a Louis 14th type character, the worse of the worse' (Item 7). As a result, DiCaprio couldn't put anything personal experiences into the character of Calvin Candie because he personally despised and hated the character and he had to go all out with the character despite hating him or else he would be 'sugarcoating plantation owners during that time period' according to him in an interview with SAGFoundation (Item 6). Therefore, the term method actor can't be applied completely to DiCaprio in 'Django Unchained' like it can be in 'The Wolf of Wall Street' for him because he didn't put anything personal/ any personal experiences into his character in 'Django Unchained' like he did in 'The Wolf of Wall Street' meaning the term 'method actor' can't be applied completely to him for this film, but can it be applied to him for his role in the Martin Scorsese directed 'The Aviator'? 

Projector: The hand washing scene from 'The Aviator' (Item 3)
This scene shows just one of the many things DiCaprio had to master in this film- Howard Hughes' OCD. DiCaprio mastered Hughes OCD so well that he actually gained OCD himself whilst on set, which shows that he was always in character when playing Howard Hughes, an important aspect of method acting (Item 15). One method acting technique DiCaprio used to make his performance as Howard Hughes as accurate as possible was he listened to lots of audio recordings from the real Howard Hughes with his acting coach Larry Moss so he could perfectly master 'Hughes' curious voice patterns'  to quote Larry Moss(Item 5). In addition to this, DiCaprio said he watched 'classic' films to help him prepare for 'The Aviator' and to play Howard Hughes (Item 8). DiCaprio stated that he was 'blown away by the vulnerability of James Dean, also a method actor, in “East of Eden” and “stunned” by the power of Montgomery Clift' and that performance helped him when preparing for 'The Aviator'. 

Projector: The theatre scene in 'The Aviator' (Item 3)

I think this scene shows the depth to which DiCaprio will go for any film, as here he has grown his hair and fingernails out and he is still mastering Hughes accent, never breaking out of character. DiCaprio didn't just use techniques to broaden his imagination while playing Hughes,  the term 'method actor' can be completely applied to DiCaprio in this film is because he put a lot of his own personal experience/ parts of himself into the character, as Hughes and DiCaprio have similarities. These similarities include that they are both box office/ movie stars and that they are both worth a lot of money. DiCaprio is and Hughes was box office/ movie stars, with 10 of DiCaprio's 22 films earning over $100 million at the box office (Item 9)and Hughes directed big budget films, with his most famous, 'Hell's Angels' earning $8 million at the box office in 1930, which is around $114 million when adjusted with inflation (Item 10). Furthermore, they are both worth a lot, with Hughes worth $1.6 billion back then, which is roughly over $6 billion today (Item 19) and DiCaprio has an estimated worth of $245 million (Item 13). As a result, because DiCaprio and Hughes share these 2 characteristics (box office stars and worth a lot of money), I believe would have used his own personal experiences with these characteristics when playing Hughes for 'The Aviator', meaning DiCaprio put some of his own personal experiences in playing Howard Hughes. This means then the term 'method actor' can be applied completely to DiCaprio in 'The Aviator' as he used method acting techniques to get into character and he put some of his own personal experiences into playing this character. 

In conclusion, I think it's fair to say that the term 'method actor' can be applied to Leonardo DiCaprio, especially for the roles I have discussed in this presentation. It's a technique he uses for most of his films so he can perfect his character and to make his performance as accurate and realistic as possible when playing a real life person. It seems DiCaprio however has gone even further for his method acting in his latest film 'The Revenant' as he has slept in dead animals, eat raw livers and went in and out of freezing cold rivers, opting against body doubles once again (Item 17). With this final bit of evidence, I think it's clearly evident that Leonardo DiCaprio can be termed as a method actor and he uses Stanislavski method acting process to help him make his performance genuine and real, not artificial and fake opting to use some of his own personal experiences into his performances to make that happen.   

Tuesday 6 October 2015

How does mise-en-scene and sound in City Of God generate meaning and response?

The opening of 'City Of God' generates meaning and response straight away in it's opening shot. The opening shot is a close up of a knife being sharpen, which immediately implies that living in Brazil is dangerous and you are living on a knife's edge. The editing also reflects what it is like to live in Brazil in this time period, because there are quick cuts, this means that Brazil is fast, lively and eventful, there's always something going on. Later on in the scene, with a series of quick cuts, we see a chicken try to escape from the 'hoodlums', which is a metaphor for every character in the film because they are all trying to escape from the favela, however like the chicken, they can't escape from the favela and the crimes which happen there. In addition to this, because the chicken is a metaphor, it shows the characters have an animistic side to them, largely because they are all trapped in the favelas and can't escape it. It's also interesting that in the film's opening scene, we are identifying  with the chicken then the film's main characters. There is then a 360 degree shot which shows Rocket in between the hoodlums and the police. This shot shows the clear conflict of not just the film, but also what real people have to live with in the favellas and that's the conflict between the police and the hoodlums. It's also like the film is visually showing us that Rocket has a choice to make, he can either choose the police and fight against crime or choose the hoodlum and commit crimes. There's then a straight cut during the 360 degree shot to Rocket when he was younger in the sixties and this single cut tells us a lot about the sixties compared the seventies. In the mise-en-scene, we can see that the sixties is a lot brighter which implies that it was better to live during that time period than the seventies, this is probably due to the lack of hoodlums and drugs at this moment in time. There is also a voice over narration from Rocket, which is done so we get more information about the favella and it's current state from someone who currently lives there and has experience of it during the last 2 decades. Furthermore, in the mise-en-scene, there is a lot more space behind Rocket, especially compared to earlier on in the scene when there was houses stacked upon each other and hardly any room to move in. Contextually, this is because the population of people living in the favellas from the sixties to the seventies increased massively, and as a result they had to build lots more houses to accommodate for these people, when in reality they haven't got much space to really build them houses. The editing in the sixties also tells us that living during the sixties was a lot calmer and more peaceful for the favella citizens, this is because the editing during this scene in the sixties is a lot slower with longer takes, which is a complete juxtaposition compared to the seventies which had quicker cuts and therefore slower takes. Lastly, in the sixties, Rocket doesn't have his camera on him but in the seventies he does. This generates meaning because Rocket's choice of weapon is his camera, as a pose to most others in the favellas which is a gun. The similarities between the 2 are that both of these tools shot, the camera shots pictures whereas the gun shots bullets. Therefore, by Rocket not having the camera in the sixties, this would imply that there isn't much violence in the favellas at this current moment in time, due to Rocket not having his weapon on him in this shot.