David Mamet's rules of drama

<i>"The Unit"</i> was aweful on multiple levels. But Mamet's point is basic and correct: <i>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.</i><p>True for all literature really.

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.<p>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.""<p>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.

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.<p>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.<p>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.

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.

I wish he'd come up with some rules for fighting his own suck. I mean, he hasn't witten anything <i>really</i> good since Glengarry Glen Ross.