Fun Threesomes, Foursomes and Moresomes

Hi,

Francois Truffaut, makes a bit more sense, specially in the early days, when one gets to know "improvisation" in both theater, film and music.

Truffaut's style was/is, what is considered a "guided improvisation", in that you have a setting and the characters and you tell them to discuss their marriage on the way to the supermarket. The dialogue and the timing it takes to get there are "open" and the actor can do a lot of things within this time span. To me, this is really "visible" in "Jules et Jim" a lot ... you never get the feel that these words were actually scripted or thought about.

An improvisation that is not "guided" is the source/soul of the work that Peter Brook did at the RSC and went on to do in Paris, even with actors that could not speak to each other, and yet ... were able to put on work together. Communication is the key, not the words or the setting. It's all you "got", so to speak. And these are much wilder, in the sense that there are no limits and where it goes ... it goes ... and may become a different story.

We did this in Advanced Acting Class at UCSB ( I was there as a Director Student not an Actor), and it was on our "lab" time, with someone that was English that had been through the time of the RSC's and NT's. We turned down the lights and for 3 hours we were 6 or 7 year old kids for 3 hours ... and there are a lot of lessons in that time. Ex: What you start with is nothing compared to what you end up with. Your communication with various folks changes many times. Your "character" becomes non-existent in the sense that the amount of time, prevents a "definition" ... something that most acting schools try hard to teach all new actors about (including the concept's and ideas!!!! WOW!!!) ... and in the end ... these are huge wastes of time when you can teach the character creation from "nothing" much better than you can from the script itself. The "words" in the script are also an "idea", which you can easily transpose to someone on a wheelchair, or an athlete, or Didi/Estragon. AND, still make a character with those words.

Seeing, "improvisation" in theater is difficult, since a lot of times it is very well hidden. You will never know when Keith Michell is off in wonderland ... and it works, almost to the point of it being ridiculous. Peter Brook tells a story about him that is about that repeating line in King Lear, that they did over 300 performances of it, and he had a hard time find 2 of them that were the same. That is "improvisation" at its best ... ASSOCIATED with that moment specific time and space! You, almost, can not teach that!

Godard's style of improvisation is ... I don't care, and it shows. Mike Leigh's style is one I am not sure I like ... but it works. I call it start it ... and then let the actor suffer through it to get even more out of it! It's hard, and few actors can do this, but there are times when you can see on his screen that ... man ... you are pushing it! 

I can not, at this moment, discuss this properly in French, Italian film. In German film it's a different story ... open up the Herzog film about "his friend" and watch the beginning with Klaus. This is the same type of improvisation that gave us a lot of theater, film in Germany. Fassbinder let his actors do their own thing. And Klaus is famous for his improvisation to the max. And this was the same time that "krautrock" came alive, and is why I state that the scene is an artistic one, not one about rock music! Amon Duul started as a "drum circle" (more or less with more instruments), but in my book when it got "meaningless", AD2 came alive ... and immediately made fun of it with their first album, which was of course, a massive attack on the "drum circle" which was nothing but the start of today's orgy! ... (... and it gets weird ... once the drugs take hold!) ... CAN was all pure improvisation, and TAGO MAGO shows it in two sides, even if they were cut up pieces, as Holger suggested came from 20 hours of tapes. GURU GURU had a lot of improvisation allowing Ax Genrich a chance to do his own "space junk", which we know is something Jimi Hendrix did, but was not to incorporate into his music ... at the time it was show ... all of a sudden, it's a part of the music. FAUST was also wide open, and it didn't matter what they did.

There is a "point" in improvisation, that the whole thing ... comes alive ... but the hardest part is what most folks are afraid of ... you have to stay on it ... and in the rock tradition the whole thing ends when a riff is in place ... which is stupid ... there is a lot more life after that one riff ... more like 30 more riffs! It's really hard to discuss improvisation with musicians that only know the notes ... you have to LET GO EVERYTHING and (essentially) go back to being a kid and re-learn it all ... your "feel" and "touch" will be different, and it will add to your abilities. Most musicians are afraid of this area because it is not "documented" ...for them to copy and learn!

The thought with musicians is like this ... they will quit the improvisation right after their 5 tricks ... because now they don't know what to do ... and they are more "in tune" with the notes they are playing, than they are with the people they are with. This improv will take longer, until the musicians can find themselves, which we know they won't do, and quit as quickly as they "find" something cool, not realizing that continuing teaches you more than just finding one riff!

Tells you all about the learning, doesn't it?