6 Obvious signs that can help distinguish the good from the bad actors

Many viewers intuitively understand when an actor is misinterpreting, but not everyone can explain how they define this criterion. Professional critics, directors and film buffs can do this analysis very easily, so we can learn from them.

We, from awesome.club, we did a little research and found out how people working in this industry distinguish the good actors from the bad ones. In the bonus feature, you’ll find out why director Marcus Geduld thinks Keanu Reeves, loved by so many, is not a good actor.

The actor or actress is doing his job well when he convinces the spectator to believe in the emotions his character conveys. And it doesn’t matter what he does: if he is hurt, if he breaks up with his beloved or is scared to death. “If an actor appears to be pretending, he is not doing his job,” wrote Marcus Geduld.

Good actors spend a lot of time preparing for their roles. They think about their character’s motivation, reflect on their actions, and choose different ways to memorize and read their lines. Some even try to live out the character’s destiny, like Natalie Portman, who did ballet for the filming of black swan🇧🇷

A Reddit user provided a great example of how an actor can think deeply about each step. “On the set of Red Dragon, Edward Norton wanted to show that his character looked very nervous during the interrogation. Someone on the crew suggested that the actor do something trivial (like, say, bang on the table) in front of the camera. Norton was not happy with the suggestion and talked to the director. Together they tried other ways and ended with Norton’s character walking out of the interrogation room. It is at this moment that the viewer realizes that there is sweat under the actor’s armpits.”

If the spectator can easily predict the actor’s reaction, then your performance is bad. The actor’s task is to surprise the viewer, otherwise his role will be boring. “Think about how a woman would react if her boyfriend broke up with her. She can break down and cry, laugh hysterically, throw water in his face, go completely numb…” said Geduld.

The director cites Johnny Depp, Jack Nicholson, Gary Oldman, Glenn Close, and Al Pacino as examples. Their talent lies in the fact that they are chameleon actors: you never know what their next reaction will be.

Watch an actor when someone else is talking in the scene and he is silent. This is the moment when you see the actor not only living his character, but also thinking about technical issues, instead of just remembering his next lines, for example.

A good actor is fully focused on those he is interacting with. “You can see how the words spoken to the actor have a physical effect on him, as if they were hitting him in the face. Take actress Claire Danes. She’s an incredible listener,” commented Marcus.

If an actor or actress moves and speaks expressively, it means that he is doing his job well. His acting “tools” don’t interfere with the performance, as you can’t see tension in them. That’s exactly what Philip Seymour Hoffman did, a talented actor in his physical and vocal expressions. Although he couldn’t boast of perfect abs, he used what he had expressively.

Geduld cites actress Kristen Stewart as an anti-example: “It’s almost painful to see her. It seems like she’d rather be anywhere else but in front of a camera. She is (or seems) very insecure.”

Great actors aren’t afraid to show on screen what most people prefer to hide in the depths of their souls. Bad actors will never display mean and ugly personality traits. Geduld believes that “actually, this kind of emotional nakedness is very difficult to fake. If you get the feeling that an actor is showing a secret part of themselves, they probably are.” Julianne Moore and Bryan Cranston have that talent, in Marcus’ opinion.

In his explanation of a good and a bad actor, Marcus explained why Keanu Reeves cannot be called an exceptional actor. The fact is that many people who judge his acting start from their impression of the film in its entirety, but that is not right. In his opinion, if the character Neo were given to another actor, then everyone would admire him as they now admire Keanu.

This is what Geduld thinks about Reeves’ acting skills: “Keanu Reeves is a horrible actor. Mainly because he shows little expression and is fake. He often seems to be reading his lines instead of speaking his own words”.

And the reason, according to the director, is not the fact that Reeves plays a serious character in matrix🇧🇷 We have examples of laconic characters, like Anthony Hopkins in the film Traces of the Day, or Tommy Lee Jones in Where the weak have no placewhich performed wonderfully well.

To convince his readers, Geduld suggested comparing Reeves and Jones’ acting, drawing attention to their voices and movements. Check out these two videos: a compilation with Keanu on Bram Stoker’s Dracula and Where the weak have no place, with Tommy Lee Jones. See if you can spot the difference.

Do you agree with these criteria? Which actors or actresses do a great job, in your opinion?