Can u tell from an actor's performance that he's adopting method acting?

Question

I adore quite a number of actors. However, I can never tell which are method actors and which are not. I am just in love with their performances. After browsing some sources, I can only say most actors that are regarded as method actors do always portray intense/neurotic characters. Is there a relation? And can u ever tell? If yes, how?

Answer 1

You shouldn't be able to tell, that's the point. No matter the 'method' or technique an actor chooses, the point is to bring a character to life not to show their method. And I believe actor's choose roles according to what character's appeal to them, not according to the method they use in order to portray them. It's a personality thing, maybe an ego thing, but I highly doubt it's a method thing.

I don't think you can tell what any actor's personal method is unless they tell you what their process is as an actor then you watch them and disect their performance and you think you can then tell what they're doing because you already know.

my two cents

Answer 2

Wow, somebody's still having the acting debates from the 1950s. I fondly recall how serious people argued over whether method acting was the salvation or damnation of drama.

How can you tell if someone is a method actor? Watch a rehearsal or see the actor working on a part.

The method actor is intensely concerned with motivation, with analyzing the beats of the scene and describing the character's intention with an action verb. The technical actor is concerned with how to present the scene to the audience.

Backstage, the method actor will be using emotional memory exercises. The technical actor will be doing her/his customary preparation. When it's time to weep onstage, the method actor will work his/her emotions into a genuine sorrow, the technical actor will rely on more mechanical means like not blinking.

Theatre, like so many other things, can achieve similar results from a wide range of methods. I appreciate the distinctions between method and technical actors, or between organic and predetermined directing--it's important to be able to tell how you're doing what you do--but I've never noted clearly superior results from any theoretical approach; instead I've found that people of different bents can work together respectfully and that's what generates the best outcome for all involved.

Answer 3

If you cannot tell, the actor is doing his/her job.

Forget the Method. Look to the Performance. Does it work?

It is possible to over-analyze an actor's work. It is rude. Cut it out.