
David Mamet's rules of drama - jonp
http://www.movieline.com/2010/03/david-mamets-memo-to-the-writers-of-the-unit.php
======
joe_the_user
_"The Unit"_ was aweful on multiple levels. But Mamet's point is basic and
correct: _Any scene, thus, which does not both advance the plot, and
standalone (that is, dramatically, by itself, on its own merits) is either
superfluous, or incorrectly written._

True for all literature really.

~~~
arohner
That line stuck out for me as well. I just finished the new Wheel of Time book
the other day; It's much better than the last 5 or so for precisely this
reason. An object lesson.

------
dirtyaura
Mamet's "True and False: Heresy and Common Sense for the Actor (Paperback)" is
recommended reading. It's a quick read and gives a refreshing and blunt
opinions about method acting.

From the editorial review on Amazon.com: "To hell with Stanislavsky. To hell
with the Method. "The actor is onstage to communicate the play to the
audience," says David Mamet. "That is the beginning and the end of his and her
job. To do so the actor needs a strong voice, superb diction, a supple, well-
proportioned body and a rudimentary understanding of the play." Anything
else--"becoming" one's part, "feeling" the character's emotions--devalues the
practice of a noble craft and is useless to the play. "The 'work' you do 'on
the script' will make no difference," he cautions. "That work has already been
done by a person with a different job title than yours. That person is the
author.""

However, what I personally think is even more interesting is that before and
after reading Mamet's book I've always found Mamet's movies somehow lacking on
the emotional level. Either Mamet's opinions about acting (and directing) are
a crock of shit, or I don't understand anything about the subject.

~~~
gcv
_Mamet's opinions about acting (and directing) are a crock of shit_

They are. Proof by counterexample: go watch Ian McKellen perform Richard III
(1995 film). Here's a YouTube clip of a few opening scenes:
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ke5-SUDrHMU>. This is simply brilliant stuff.
Now imagine actors, no matter how good, merely reading the lines — _without_
an overriding concept for the show, just reading the text and moving just
enough to make the action make sense. Laurence Olivier's 1955 Richard III is
rather like that; good mostly because the play is awesome, not because it's a
good movie or a good production.

~~~
celoyd
Just read Mamet’s unqualified (in the sense of phrased-as-universally-
applicable) statements as being about his particular corner of the acting
world. He likes to overstate his case, but there’s room in the world for more
than one kind of good production.

McKellen and Mamet are like, say, Picasso and Monet. We can all agree that
_Three Musicians_ is brilliant without seeing it as a proof by example that
Monet’s ideas about painting were wrong.

Edit: while I’m here, I second the recommendation of McKellen’s Richard III.

------
sandofsky
I did a minor in theatre (well, the closest my college had). I focused a lot
on Mamet. It's easy to take his approach overboard.

Mamet is a playwright, and plays are a different medium than film. In fact,
his book "On Directing Film," covers it: theatre is about the present moment
between characters, film is about the juxtaposition of images.

Mamet has spent most of his life writing rather than directing, and look at
his credits to see some of the great storytelling he is capable of.
Unfortunately, putting a writer behind a lens is like expecting a great
developer to be a great product manager. Very different skills.

------
nazgulnarsil
quick hack: when in doubt, withhold information from the audience. this is an
easy way to add drama to a scene. experiment with rewriting the dialogue and
leaving out a different important piece of information. often one of these
rewrites will lead to a much better scene. yes, this is a cheap tactic, and
the master writer weaves a web of missing details that funnels the audience
towards an earth shattering climax. us mortals can make do with a quick hack.

------
Willie_Dynamite
I wish he'd come up with some rules for fighting his own suck. I mean, he
hasn't witten anything _really_ good since Glengarry Glen Ross.

~~~
waterlesscloud
Well, there's Ronin.

He also does a great deal of uncredited rewriting.

