Rating: 
Summary: Mamet's opinion is not meant to be a bad thing....
Review: I read this book before I began taking my first acting class and I must say it was written from a realist's stand-point. There is some very worthy information in this book! However, I wouldn't reccommend this book to someone who is learning about acting for the first time (like I was.) When I had performed my first monologue in class, I had received some good comments from my teacher and peers, but I was also told that I had lacked emotion in an area of the script where it should've been injected more strongly. Then again, the monologue I performed wasn't written by the brilliant David Mamet; whereby if the script is "that good", the actor can just say his/her lines and still make an impact on the audience. Overall, the book can be very effective for actors. But, again, I certainly wouldn't "marry" everything I was reading in this book if I was just starting out.
Rating: 
Summary: I marvel at how ignorant he can be of playwrites
Review: I recently read this book for my acting class in high school. When I began it I was told that Mr. Mamet felt that acting school was a waste of time, I could accept that. But he goes much further than that; he states, basically, that actors need do nothing more than say their lines. He goes so far as to say that the only person who matters in how the "characters" (which he claims do not exist) are portrayed is the playwrite. He says that you shouldn't have to do any more than say the lines because if the play isn't written well you can't save it. I am willing to bet half the country has seen a play or movie where an actor carried a poor script or where excellent writing was destroyed by poor acting. Actors were the ones who brought Mr. Mamet notarity as a writer, I am astounded he can write them off so easily and say they are only responsable for getting a play to it's ending. I do not feel that "the method" is the correct way to do things, acting should be done actor by actor, there is not a grand method. But to degrade the actors job to nothing but a fountain for words that someone else has given them is merely a childish way to tell actors he feels that he is more important than they are.
Rating: 
Summary: The best acting book I've read
Review: I started reading this book with a highlighter in hand, just in case anything jumped out at me. At the end of my read, 80% of the book was yellow!As an actor and director, I have myself felt bound by techniques and seen fellow actors I've directed get trapped by the limitations of "being in the moment" and feeling inadequate about their work. Mamet, I believe, respects the actor enough to encourage the actor to remove these trappings and focus on their simple task. Not that acting isn't tough work, but we invariably make it much harder than it need be. Mamet pulls no punches. If you subscribe to the "method", "sense memory", or other schools of acting, this book will offend you as Marilyn Manson might offend a Christian Coalition leader. There is no middle ground here. You'll either feel liberated as an actor, or want to hurl this book into the closest bonfire. As for myself, I have a clearer vision of the actor's place in the world, and am performing and directing with more clarity and consistency than ever before. I owe this to Mr. Mamet.
Rating: 
Summary: Is it true or false?
Review: I was first disappointed when I read this book (it is so high rated in amazon.de and amazon.com). I read Shurtleff, Johnstone, Strasberg and other stuff. There are a lot of phrases to provocate the reader - maybe this was the intention of the author. The reading of this book left a few questions in me. To learn more about this kind of acting, I would recommend the book "A Practical Handbook for the Actor". If you are not a professional actor and do not have some experiences in acting, than this book won't be very useful and interesting for you.
Rating:
Summary: A gift for actors from David Mamet
Review: I'm an actor living in New York, often trying to figure out what I'm doing and why I'm doing it. We actors engage in a business that is wholly unfair, unethical, and nonsensical. What Mamet suggests is that we accept the ridiculous, find ways to get work, and engage in telling stories simply and clearly on the stage or in front of a camera. Period. Reading this book was like being invited in out of the cold and given a hot meal.
Rating:
Summary: MAMET IS NOT AN ACTOR!
Review: If you didn't know of Mamet, one would gather that this book was written by a playwright. Only a playwright would have these opinions of the actor's process. It is his own self absorption that allows himself to believe that everything is in the script. He is guilty of what he accuses actors of doing. Mamet is a great playwright, but he is not an actor. It is interesting to hear from a playwright's perspective on acting, but anyone wanting to learn to be a better actor should read the opinions of actors. When I want to learn about being a better playwright I'll listen to a playwright.
Rating:
Summary: Mixed Feelings On This One
Review: In general, I have been a huge fan of Mamet's other books on various topics related to entertainment. Nevertheless, this one left me a little hollow. There were certainly some pearls of wisdom, but people would have to dig deeply to find them in this book. On the positive side, I like that Mamet attempts to steer Actors away from their rituals and instead plant in their heads that they need to show up and do the job... it is that simple. "There is no character arc... there is no motivation." Having directed 6 films, I can relate to how damaging the "character arc" in an actors head can be. Leave the "character arc" to the director... it is his or her job to follow the melody of the film. Another positive detail was his emphasis on becoming a true artist... and how a true artist longs for the theater or any role - not just fame. I was particularly happy with his discussion on people that have backup plans... as he states they will end up doing their backup plan. I like his notion that in order to succeed you must bind your life blood to the task at hand. Here I am trying to come up with the positives, and I am having a difficult time. I think that therefore leads me into the negatives. This book is nearly impossible to decipher, even for an intelligent person. It reads like the Torah in ancient Hebrew. While I am sure there are plenty that can do that, it is pretty damn difficult, and in this case - I would argue not worth the time. The next dangerous thing that really screams out was his emphasis on not going to school to study. I certainly understand this, because an "untalented" actor that goes to school may become even worse if they are misguided. Nevertheless, there are plenty of people that I have worked with that were infinitely better after having had some formal training. Thus, I am concerned that "would be" actors reading this book will use it as an excuse or validation for their not seeking training... which could (and likely will) damage their chances for getting roles. Again, I could continue to go on, but why bother... especially since I think that is my ultimate feeling on this book---Why bother? (Check out his other books like "Writing in Restaurants" to see his true genius come out)
Rating: 
Summary: No Respect For Acting
Review: Mamet has no respect for actors. He also seems to think that the writer is the most important person in a play and a movie. In both instances, he is wrong. Watch a Mamet-directed movie if you don't believe me. His direction of actors sucks. Paul Thomas Anderson, now there's an actor's director
Rating:
Summary: A Challenge to the Actor
Review: Mamet is an infuriating author. He calls Stanislavski a "hack," and yet his system is based upon a part of Stanislavski's system: the actor's objective. Mamet derides acting schools, and yet the Atlantic Theater has an actor training program based upon the system that he devised. It's as if his system is the one "correct" one. (If Mamet were religious, he would make a great Baptist.) Mamet's method is exclusive- it only provides for actor's working on a written text. What about actor's who are creating a piece of theatre? How are they to analyze their lines and find an objective? What if there are no lines? What if it is a piece based on sound and rhythm? Mamet could pose very good answers to all of these questions. So could I. This is merely to demonstrate that Mamet seems to argue that everything he says is the truth with absoloute finality. Mamet is an infuriating author. But the infuriation is well worth it. By forcing us to question our ideas about acting, school, etc. -- Mamet is doing a lot of good. Read this book. Be outraged. Be challenged. Question, think, and either you'll have been enlightened by Mamet or you'll come out having reinforced your own ideas. It's a concise, lively read.
Cheers!
Rating:
Summary: Tell it like it is brutha
Review: Mamet just peels off the tawdry, inflated, infuriatingly banal mystique of acting technique and shows up all those stinky NYU fruities that couldn't act their way out of a wet bag. Poor acting can just mutilate a good script- and he's right- who gives a hoot about someone's inner tortured child? THANK YOU Besides, if Anthony Hopkins thinks it's a good book- shouldn't you?
| 
