By Daniel Faris.

There is no one way to approach acting. Even among popular schools of acting – be it the classical approach or method acting – actors will differ in their preparation, approach, method, and performance.

As such, when it comes to acting in different mediums, like films and television, the differences in approach are often determined more by the constraints and realities of the medium, rather than an actor’s personal preference.

Time Commitment

For example, the scheduling demands of the genre can greatly affect an actor’s enthusiasm and approach. Television and movies are both demanding in terms of time commitment, albeit in different ways.

Films are frequently shot on location, with actors signing on for a commitment of a few weeks to a couple of months, with epics like The Lord of the Rings trilogy being the exception. With such a short time-frame, shooting a film can be a demanding and exhausting process filled with long days and limited contact with friends and family.

TV shows, on the other hand, can be cancelled before the pilot airs, or last 10 or more seasons. As such, actors have little way of knowing how long they will be committed to a particular show or character. Furthermore, the schedule can be just as (or more) demanding, as episodes need to be completed on a tight schedule to ensure time for editing before the air-date deadline.

On the plus side, unless they’re filming a show with as many locations as Game of Thrones, actors are more likely to have a chance to establish a home base and to eke out a little more time for their personal lives.

Character Arc and Development

When it comes to character arc and development, appearing in a movie can provide actors with a few clear advantages over television.

First, actors are slightly less likely to burn out on a difficult character, as they have clearer start and end dates for a role. If a role is particularly tasking – or if the actor feels no connection to, and no affection for, their character, they at least know that they will soon be leaving that character behind.

Second, films are contained stories. Just as the filming has a known start and end point, so does the story. Actors are able to delve into the entire story upfront, rather than have the story handed to them piece by piece over months or years. They are (usually) able to know who their character is and where they are going; the story is contained, therefore there is little chance – barring sequels – for messes to arise that negate a portion of their performance or require a ret-con.

Television actors, on the other hand, are frequently at the mercy of a story that is evolving, not due to a plan, but due to written improvisation. There are many examples of popular, successful shows that pulled their plots out of a hat. And when the writers don’t know what is happening or why, how are actors supposed to lay the groundwork for twists that have yet to be written? It can be difficult, if not impossible, for actors to achieve any insight into their character’s motivation or development when key plot elements are unavailable to them until the last minute.

Criticism and Feedback

Films are over and done – and actors have moved on to other projects – long before critics and audiences have a chance to view the finished product. Television shows, on the other hand, experience feedback in a far shorter time frame. Although shows typically work several episodes ahead of what’s airing, audiences and critics are able to react to and provide feedback for a show while the season and/or series is still in progress.

This immediacy of feedback is both a blessing and a curse. On a positive note, actors are able to benefit from and enjoy passionate fan support or positive feedback during production, rather than months or years after the fact. On the other hand, such immediate feedback can also provide a negative effect.

Television actors have to be extremely careful about becoming too caught up in fan reactions, for fear of how it will affect their work. Professional criticism and fan reactions can, at times, help shows course correct, especially when it comes to making amends for insensitive or problematic story elements or plot points.

However, more often than not, shows and actors that give too much power to fan reactions end up muddying the waters. Actors can become too self-conscious of their performance, or they may feel pressured to bend to the preferences and demands of an outspoken fan base.

Much of this pressure can be secondhand, as writers and show runners desiring to test the waters by seeking fan feedback can find themselves caught up in an attempt to please all fans – and ultimately pleasing no one.

Film actors, by the nature of their work, experience this blessing and curse in reverse. They are able to keep a better distance from the pressures of audience reaction, but they are also denied that immediacy of fan support.

The different levels of audience participation in film and television are fascinating in their variation. The differences become even more pronounced, problematic, and nuanced when compared both to more established genres, like theatre, and emerging genres, such as web-exclusive transmedia projects.

 

---

We hope you're enjoying BRWC. You should check us out on our social channels, subscribe to our newsletter, and tell your friends. BRWC is short for battleroyalewithcheese.

---

Trending on BRWC:

---

Cool Posts From Around the Web:

---

---