Rating: 
Summary: POOR TRANSLATION OF A GREAT MAN
Review: It cannot be doubted that Stanislavki's Trilogy is a must for any aspiring actor. Stanislavki was the pioneer in creating a coherent system of practices and concepts to aid in strengthening the art of acting. I would, however, advise anyone who has not yet read the book to be cautious. It is important to understand that Hapgood's translation is sketchy in places, and tends to run around in cirlcles. As a supplement to this book, I would recommend reading Sonia Moore's The Stanislavski System. She worked directly with Stanislavski and understands his system much better than E. Hapgood. Not that the books vagueness is all her fault. It seems that Stanislavki goes to great lengths to explain things that are, nowadays, common sense. He certainly wasn't the first to ever think of these concepts; he was merely the first to organize them and give them names. Much of what is contained in this book is merely a modernized translation of Hamlet's "Speak the speech I pray you". The Magic If is simply a codefied means of make believe. That is fundamentally what it all boils down to. I relished the situation of the student and teacher realationship, and did find myself growing and evolving with him. It really makes you think of acting in a whole new perspective. But, as with any method, you must be cautious to use only what works for you. There is a common desire to make An Actor Prepares the bible of all actors. I won't argue that Stanislavski's system is the basis of almost all other methods that have risen in the last century, but there are other effective texts available. Respect of Acting and To the Actor, to name a couple. Don't just read Stanislavski; read several to help put it all in perspective. Acting books are so pompous, byenlarge, and you have to wade through a lot of self-hype and nonsense. That is one thing I really appreciated about his trilogy; they are without ego. Also, for anyone interested in a truly off the wall acting text, read The Inner Game of Tennis. It's literally found in the Sports section, but it's teachings are every bit as relevant to the art of acting as they are to sport psychology. Take my word for it. And the best thing about it is that you don't have to listen to any snooty actors talking about how great they are.
Rating: 
Summary: A Must Avoid!
Review: Just Kidding.
Every actor should sit through this one and then balance it off by reading David Mamet's 'True and False' or for a better if less vehement critique Hornby's outstanding 'The End of Acting'Personally, whenever I feel it would have been a happier world if Stanislavski had never been born I realize I've been spending too much time with film actors and so I go out and see bad theater. ( Not out of masochism it's just that if you see enough theater you're bound to run into some turkeys) Usually the reason it's bad is because of some sin Constantin ranted against. Ranting is actually an appropiate word to describe the style of his writings. He's not theorizing, he's discovered The Organic Truth Of The Uiverse, etc. All this dogmatizing is forgivable when one realizes it's the oupouring of a Slavic soul, but it does tend to eclipse the fact that his system is--stripped of all the hyperbole--based upon, of all things, logic. What's the objective? Ok, play that. Or if you wish amore detailed dissertation: To [...] with what you're feeling. Play the objective. Otherwise you may weep and rave about but fail to find the brooch pinned to the curtain, like the student actress in this book. Now does it work? Well, if you have faith in it. . . The progression (some would say the degeneration) of Stanislavski in the US goes something like this: Charles Conrad (who taught for Meisner and never wrote anything, his is the Zen-style of Stanislavski) to Sandford Meisner (who taught for Strasberg and wrote an unintelligible book but who is much admired for getting method actors off their introspective derrieres and on their feet) Lee Strasberg who, unlike Stella Adler never met The Master himself, so felt free to um.. theorize even further, and Michael Checkhov, (the only great actor of the bunch who Stan considered his best student even though he rejected the system) whose mystical ideas are floating somewhere in the stratosphere. Strasberg, by far the most influential, founded Method Acting (not to be confused with the Stanislavski System or 'The Method of Physical Action ' a short treatise in Creating a Role ) which emphasized remembered mamory a.k.a. emotional memory which at times superseded the objective by demanding a pavlovian type of identification/ conection which would ensure real tears. In away he set theater back to before 'finding the brooch' Later, Stanislavski himelf rejected the emotional memory/pavlovian experiment after many of his actors started freaking out.. The main moral of an Actor Prepares is that if you're going to write a world changing treatise on acting, it helps if you've got a genius playwright like Michael's uncle whose palys you can produce. The second is to play the--oops said that already. May I also humbly recommend Mike Green's 'The Art of Coarse Acting' Shurtleff's 'Audition' Keith Johnstone's 'Impro' and Klaus Kinski's bio, for a sense of, if not sanity, at least a healthy dose of skeptical heresy?
Rating: 
Summary: A Must-Have For Any Actor
Review: Simply put this is a MUST-HAVE! All actors, whether they follow Stanislavski and method acting or not could and will benefit from this book and his companion books.
Rating:
Summary: the fog lifted from my eyes
Review: The first in a series of three, an Actor Prepares deals with the inner process/preparation an actor must explore in order to prepare for a role, how to control and stimulate your mind in order to convey the truth of your character. The story is told through the eyes of Kostya, the ex-stenographer who know shorthand, thus enabling him to take notes of the class. The instructor, Tortsov, is Stanislavski in disguise.
The book takes you on a journey of the art - acting. From learning about the magic "IF" to learning how to find your super-objective there is something for all in this book. Everything interrelates forming a web of knowledge and tools that you can take with you forever.
When you read it, however, keep in mind what the author said about his books:
"It is not a hand-me-down suit that you can put on and walk off in; or a cook book where all you need to find is the page and there is your recipe. No, it is a whole way of life."
Rating: 
Summary: Not for Film actors. Barely even for Stage Actors
Review: The good old Stanislavski. This is one of the more traditional books, read by just about every professional actor. However it is damaging to todays actor. If you are in film, this book is not for you. Most of the exercises can not adequately be applied to Film acting. One reason is because a film actors life is very busy. He/she does not have the time to spend on any one of these exercises described in this book. If, however, you are a Stage actor, this book could prove beneficial. The exercises are intended for the stage and work well in rehearsal environments. However, I would speculate, like most acting schools, this book gives one too many exercises and not enough emphasis on how to study a scene. This is a common mistake found in most theatrical studies. If you would be interested to hear more explanations as to my opinion, I recommend "True and False," by David Mamet. He will explain better than I can the negative results of this book. This book was intended for its time (I believe late 18th century) and unlike Shakespeare, cannot be applied to much of the acting styles used today.
Rating:
Summary: Not for Film actors. Barely even for Stage Actors
Review: The good old Stanislavski. This is one of the more traditional books, read by just about every professional actor. However it is damaging to todays actor. If you are in film, this book is not for you. Most of the exercises can not adequately be applied to Film acting. One reason is because a film actors life is very busy. He/she does not have the time to spend on any one of these exercises described in this book. If, however, you are a Stage actor, this book could prove beneficial. The exercises are intended for the stage and work well in rehearsal environments. However, I would speculate, like most acting schools, this book gives one too many exercises and not enough emphasis on how to study a scene. This is a common mistake found in most theatrical studies. If you would be interested to hear more explanations as to my opinion, I recommend "True and False," by David Mamet. He will explain better than I can the negative results of this book. This book was intended for its time (I believe late 18th century) and unlike Shakespeare, cannot be applied to much of the acting styles used today.
Rating:
Summary: An absolute must for actors!
Review: This book covers everything you could ever want to know about acting. If you want to be an actor or actress then all you have to do is read this book, and you're there. This book covers every possible technique you will ever need on the stage! Stanislavski takes on the role as a teacher for his students in this book, but the fact is that he is both the actors and the teacher. He uses the students to ask the questions you are wondering about, and answers them as the teacher. His discriptions are so good that you sometimes wonder if you are really there. The only thing that makes you sure is that he can't give you feedback on your efforts at home. But apart from that it is just like having a very knowledgable teacher of your own, that can answer all the questions you have about acting, and then some. It is an awesome book. A must have for everyone!
Rating:
Summary: An absolute must for actors!
Review: This book covers everything you could ever want to know about acting. If you want to be an actor or actress then all you have to do is read this book, and you're there. This book covers every possible technique you will ever need on the stage! Stanislavski takes on the role as a teacher for his students in this book, but the fact is that he is both the actors and the teacher. He uses the students to ask the questions you are wondering about, and answers them as the teacher. His discriptions are so good that you sometimes wonder if you are really there. The only thing that makes you sure is that he can't give you feedback on your efforts at home. But apart from that it is just like having a very knowledgable teacher of your own, that can answer all the questions you have about acting, and then some. It is an awesome book. A must have for everyone!
Rating:
Summary: Very informmational, But be careful!
Review: This book is considered to be "The Actors Bible." There are ways in this book to help portray some characters better. But following some of the steps for certian carachters can be deadly! Please use discretion when "Method Acting"
Rating:
Summary: Opens up an actors eyes to wonderful unlimited things tocome
Review: This book is definitely a must have for actors,and will help you in every aspect of acting.I have grown so much and become so much better by reading and studying from this book.
| 
