Actors are often blamed for a bad movie (and equally credited for a good one), not realising that most times actors can only be credited for their ability and craftsmanship in interpreting a role. However, it is also typical that actors are often blamed for being in a bad movie. The question is, how do we get to this bowl of confusion?
The first point of clarification is to establish that there are other major elements that make a good film, including screenplay, cinematography, editing, and directing. All these components need to interweave successfully to enhance the performance of the actor. Simply put, without a good script and competent direction, even the most talented actor cannot deliver a stellar performance.
Consider it this way: actors are like catfish in pepper soup; their contribution to the dish’s overall flavour depends significantly on the skill of the cook. A great cook can bring out the best in the fish, while a poor cook can ruin it despite the fish's inherent qualities. Similarly, a well-written script, skillful direction, and proficient editing can elevate an actor's performance, while shortcomings in these areas can undermine it.
In conclusion, while actors play a crucial role in the success of a film, it is essential to recognise the collaborative nature of filmmaking. The screenplay, direction, cinematography, and editing are all integral to the final product. Hence, the success or failure of a movie should be attributed to the collective effort of the entire production team, rather than placing undue blame or credit on the actors alone.
Furthermore, actors are often cast not solely for their skillful craftsmanship but more for their stardom, which is how they earn a living. It's worth noting that the choice of actors can sometimes reflect typecasting, similar to how catfish might be better suited to pepper soup than okro soup, depending on the recipe.
You feel me?
Jimi D Baldheaded Guy