Recently, People's Daily published a commentary titled "No culture dares to be photogenic? On the Self-Cultivation of an Actor".
The point of the article is clear: an actor fights to the end to fight culture, and how far he can go depends on culture.
At the same time, the article also believes that culture is not equal to diplomas, and the acting school recognized by the audience is not necessarily a "cultural person" understood by the public.
The original article wrote: "Wang Baoqiang counterattacked the actor from the grassroots, Yongmei was not from a science class but won the queen, Zhao Lirong did not go to school and could not read, but the "real thing" written in the sketch made the audience admire." ”
Is the point of view of the article correct?
Yes, but not entirely, at least not comprehensively.
Let's start with the right aspects.
Some actors act routinely, unable to interpret the role, acting everything is their own, and do not know to experience life. When asked about role-related questions, these people don't know what deep connotation the role they play is.
Outside the play, some actors like to express some inexplicable opinions and influence ordinary people with their popularity. These people are obviously from a scumbag, and they can go to college with two or three hundred points of culture, and they are not good at reading, but they have to pretend to be cultural people and life mentors.
Such an uncultured actor really shouldn't be photogenic.
So, does it mean that if you don't have culture, you can't be an actor? No, of course you can do it!
Wang Baoqiang, Yongmei, Zhao Lirong and other outstanding actors can succeed, we can use acquired diligence to make up for cultural shortcomings to summarize.
What about child stars?
Shi Xiaolong, Hao Shaowen, Zhang Yishan, Yang Zi, Song Zuer, Zhang Zifeng, Wang Shasha and other child star-turned-actors, when they just debuted, can they be considered cultured? Can you say that they had a lot of experience at that time? I'm afraid not.
There are also a lot of special actors, dragon sets, etc., they are all actors, but they are not standing in the center of the stage. When these people go to film, do they need to examine their cultural skills? Don't!
These actors can be on camera for one reason: they fit the character.
Overall, you can still be an actor without culture, but you should be selectively photogenic, don't want them all!
How to understand it?
There are three situations in which an actor is photogenic:
The first is to play the person who can play yourself in the work.
The second is to play a role in the work that you can't play well.
The third is to set up a character that does not match your own cultural level in the lens outside the work!
The first situation is very simple, if the actor has good acting skills and can act in any profession, like not like three-pointed, then no problem!
Li Youbin can play the old and rough Li Yunlong, and can also play the nuclear scientist who has learned from the rich five cars. The audience will not say, because Li Youbin is not from a rural area, let alone an old revolutionary, he cannot play Li Yunlong; Nor will it be said that he does not understand nuclear science at all and cannot play nuclear energy experts.
Another example is the true color performance, the actor and the role fit, Xiao Xianrou plays the crazy and cool, two-fated little fresh meat, and the pretentious Hua Dan plays Xiao Zuojing, which does not affect the audience to watch the drama, as long as it is dedicated.
The second situation is that it is not photogenic. This is very understandable, acting is not like, the acting skills are not enough, the image difference is huge, no matter how hard you try, you can't act well!
For example, those workplace dramas, glamorous stars to play all kinds of white-collar workers, elite lawyers, doctors, etc., did not do their homework before acting, not to mention the props, their reaction and attitude are bad, they are not doing that at all, which makes people play!
The third situation is actually the most criticized, and it is also the key to arousing public disgust.
What is literate? To put it simply, there are two points:
One is professional enough to know what your professional requirements are. What do actors need to know? It's how to understand your character and then interpret it in your own way so that the audience feels presentable.
Don't be like Wang Yibo, people ask questions about the work and the role, he doesn't know anything, doesn't understand, and then quibbles.
The second is to have self-knowledge, do not point fingers at things you do not understand, and influence public opinion. What should an actor do? It's simple, don't engage in all the bells and whistles, don't promote ideas that you don't understand.
People like Zhang Jingchu and Guan Xiaotong, who do not know anything about nutrition, have to pretend to be experts and call on everyone to eat vegetarian food, which is a manifestation of lack of culture.
There is also Huang Lei, who specializes in art, and can teach things in art performance well, but he has to be a father, full of greasy literary and artistic atmosphere, preaching everywhere, which provokes everyone's disgust. Not to mention that knowing that her daughter's ability is limited, she has to let people engage in reading programs, and the result is a series of typos that make people laugh.
Sun Haiying, Lv Liping and his wife's approach is also not advisable. These two people are ignorant of philosophy and religion, but they have to toss hard to spread specious things to the public, and laugh generously!
Anyway! If you're not that piece of material, don't set up the corresponding persona!
At present, it seems that most actors who behave uncultured are concentrated in the lack of self-awareness: the roles they should not play have to be played; Those who should not set up themselves must be established! As long as you don't touch these two nos, even illiterate people can be actors, as long as they meet the requirements of the work.
What do you think?