Re: Acting: Movies vs Theatre
Of course, Gary, the converse of the "one shot" argument for film is that if you screw up royally on film - go up on a line, sneeze, have your fly open, or whatever - you can do another take. You've got to suck it up (or zip it up, as the case may be) and deal with it on stage.
I think film acting can be tremendously difficult in its own way, too - you get minimal rehearsal time, everything's being shot out of sequence and on a hurry-up schedule. If you have a big, important scene, you somehow have to summon all the events in the film's prior timeline, place them in the appropriate context, and still react in the moment, all the while surrounded by cables and lights and large sweaty grips. Coming from the process-oriented world of theatre, I don't always have the easiest time downshifting into that mode.
I do, however, believe that theatre is more than just "broad strokes" - there's quite a lot of subtlety and nuance that can be built into a theatre performance, too. It's just delivered differently through your body and voice. A hand in theatre tells the story that an eyebrow might on film.
Brian G. Hartz
Actor, Director, Sound Designer, etc.
"Standing ovations have become far too commonplace. What we need are ovations where the audience members all punch and kick one another." - George Carlin