The emotional responsibility of acting
Films are heavily dependent on the performances given by the actors and actresses. Acting techniques used in animated film differ greatly from those in live action films.
<
(2 of 3)
Next argument >
The Argument
While both animated and live action film's success relies heavily on the performance of actors and actresses, the way emotion is conveyed differs greatly depending on whether a film is live action or animated. Animation requires voice actors to convey emotion by primarily using vocal cues. Physical emotional cues, such as crying or smiling, are the responsibilities of artists and animators.[1] In live action films, however, the actors and actresses are responsible for conveying vocal, facial, and physical cues. Therefore, animated and live action movies should not be directly compared in the same categories, as they have such different ways of conveying emotional effectiveness.
Counter arguments
In both live action and animated films, emotion must be conveyed to tell a compelling story and to create a good film. It doesn't matter who has the responsibility of conveying emotions as long as they are conveyed in a way that makes sense and serves to benefit the story.
Premises
[P1] Acting in an animated film is different from acting in a live action film.
[P2] It is hard to compare the emotional effectiveness of films when the responsibility of creating said emotion shifts based on the medium of the film.
Rejecting the premises
[Rejecting P2] In general, it is the responsibility of the director to capture and convey the emotions of the actors to the members of the audience, no matter the medium of the film.