Art for 3rd Graders!

[applecameron]

Y'know, the cool thing (amongst many cool things) about doing audiobook recording is the wide range of stuff I might be reading on during any given shift. Today was a third-grade art book with a photo on almost every page, and captions longer than the text on a page. It was fun. We were supposed to read in a warm style if possible, which was an interesting exercise in projecting character aloud. That is, maintaining 'voice' where voice is cheery, hopefully not condescending, upbeat, babysitter-reading-aloud more *involved* in the text kind of tone than what readers might otherwise use.

Then, I came home, browsed at Blockbuster (I have a $10 gift cert there, was thinking of buying a cheap DVD) but didn't purchase (I lost the mood, I guess), came home and watched M. Night Shyamalan's Signs which I think might have the only deep performance we've seen from Mel Gibson in, perhaps, ever.

Shyamalan loves long slow shots that delve into emotion, and it takes a lot of work for an actor to successfully sustain that emotion. (The first time I watched this film my parasomnia kicked in with a vengeance and instead of random people or strange things in my room in the middle of the night [the classic experience], it was the aliens from Signs. The only good thing is that so far, this [mild, really] sleep disorder I seem to have never repeats itself. One night, a floating baby in blue pajamas, the next, Doctor Who. *shrug*. The mind is a strange country filled with unknowable customs.) I enjoy his work a great deal.

Comments

[umbo.livejournal.com]

I have some problems with Signs, but the acting, as I remember, was uniformly good. I think you'd be missing out if you said it was Gibson's only deep performance, though--I think he was doing a lot better in his younger days, and both Gallipoli and Year of Living Dangerously are among his best performances ever.

you right

[applecameron.livejournal.com]

You're absolutely right, I'm brainfarting, I can't believe I actually forgot about those two. Ach, well, it's been a long time. So I'll revise my statement: *deep* performance we've seen from Gibson in a long time. :-)

So much of his recent work has been shortcuts -- Gibson mentioned it himself in an interview about Signs,actually, that Night didn't let him get away with any of his lazy habits. (Might be on the DVD, I don't remember.)

I'm still gonna watch, yeah, but it hasn't felt like he's been going to new places as an actor for a long time. Part of that is probably the curse of celebrity. Movie-makers want more-of-the-same when they've got an 'established star', not edgy dangerous work that might flop. Too bad.

I think Shyamalan's long, slow, invested technique works really well for pulling something unexpectedly deep from actors. Makes me curious what he's going to do next.