I've come to a realization that I think is going to make life so much simpler for me: I'm not a leading man. You know how the leading man is the focus of the movie (or TV show or play or whatever)? Among the various characters, it's his story that we watch with the greatest anticipation. We want to see him succeed at the end of the movie and get the guy or girl (depending upon the kind of movie you're watching). He's the focus of our attention.
Well, I'm not that guy.
I'm a character actor. I'm a supporting player. I'm a featured actor. I'm there to have a funny line or two, perhaps help the leading man in his quest, but not to take over the story. Sure, I may get a few moments to shine, and I might, briefly, steal the picture from the star, but he'll get it back in time. He always does.
I'm Claude Rains. I'll be in a lot of movies/lives, and people will always remember me in some fashion or other, but I won't be the one who has to "carry" the entire picture. Lots of people in Hollywood made a good living as character actors, actually. I'm thinking of people like Agnes Moorehead and Thelma Ritter and Ward Bond and Andy Devine. There are hundreds of others like them, and none of them were ever really, truly the star of a movie.
Billy G. tried to tell me something like this one time. We were in the cafeteria talking about his performance in The Rocky Horror Show. He kept telling me that I would be great on the stage, and he kept suggesting roles like Brother in Cat on a Hot Tin Roof. I suppose I should have realized then that I'm not really cut out for the part of Brick, but I guess it had never quite dawned on me that I would be better suited for the supporting part. I guess I should be grateful that he didn't suggest Big Daddy (although that time is coming rapidly).
Before you start in on me, consider this. In my students' lives, I'm not the lead. They are the leads. I'm just there for a few hours a week. The rest of the time is all focused on them. That's really being a character actor. It's not as if I am not memorable at times--perhaps so, perhaps not--but I'm only temporarily the focus.
And with friends, it's pretty much the same. They have lives of their own in which they are starring. I get my few minutes now and then to shine, and then I get to recede into the background while they carry out the main plot.
This realization is going to save me so much time.
If I'm not the lead, then I don't have to worry about how things are going to turn out. That's someone else's concern. I also don't have to fret about being single any longer. Since I'm not the star, it doesn't matter if I'm paired up with someone else. My job is to be there for the lead and whomever he chooses.
By the way, the lead never chooses the featured player as a partner. It's not in the script because no one would believe it. He wants another lead.
I will, at times, be part of an ensemble cast. Think, for example, of a department meeting. Well, I suppose the department coordinator running the meeting might nominally be the lead, but everyone has a role to play and all of us are involved to some degree or another. It's much more equal in terms of the players, yet it too is only temporary, once a month for a couple of hours. At other times, I will merely be background, a bit player, a face in the crowd, little more than an extra. I'm thinking of those Opening Day convocations with hundreds of employees all listening to speeches. I've spoken at four or five of those over the years, but even then I was only a featured player, not the real star. If you don't believe that to be the case, ask our current college president who she thinks is the focus of Opening Day. Some of you already know the answer to that one.
Now that I've accepted my character actor status, I'm going to have it so much easier. I won't continue to be hung up on finding another leading man. Certainly, the supporting actor sometimes finds someone to be his partner in life, and I'm not giving up on that possibility, believe me. However, knowing that I'm not the star of some romantic comedy gives me less of a burden. I'll just remember my job is to display some wit now and then and perhaps even draw attention away from others momentarily, but eventually (inevitably?), someone else will take over the greater amount of work.
2 comments:
Hey Joe, I always thought I would eventually be the lead in some great story, and now I think maybe I am just that weird old servant with a low bun pinned up on the back of her neck who serves dinner to the family, in semi-silence, while they argue and gossip and pass each other the potatoes. I have kind of a grouchy look on my face. I am rolling my eyes at their silliness and ineptitude. But they are in charge. It's their story.
So after years and years of bit parts involving eye-rolling, I decide to quit the business and move to Oregon. I start making my own tiny films...not for the multiplex crowd, but for odd little film festivals attended by odd audiences.
I never spoke at a convocation. I was never teacher of the year. My whole career was about other people and their perilous and yawning needs. Not even a character actor, just a bit player pretty much. Let's get new agents!
Now you've made me think that perhaps I'm really a former lead--I hesitate only slightly from using the term "has-been"--who now takes supporting parts in small or indie pictures. You remember this star from his (in this case, his) glory days, and it's still a pleasure to see him now and then, but he'll never be expected to take on too demanding of a role now. (And he really doesn't take roles in blockbusters, either. Unless, of course, someone is remaking one of those all-star disaster movies we had in the 1970s.)
I think I might like that characterization even better, to be honest. It somehow seems more fitting.
Post a Comment