If I remember correctly we used to use glycerine on stage for tears. It's slightly viscous so it holds its shape as it slowly runs down. A theatrical suppliers should have it.

Personally, I find it funny that actors have to use saline solution or other methods for fake tears. The actors are really supposed to be commited to the moment, whatever it is to make it real for them to allow the tears to flow. I feel catering to actors and making things easier for them, when creating emotional moments takes the authenticity out of the creative process of filmaking. Just a personal note I thought I should share, any other thoughts?

In defence of actors: Crying over and over and over take after take is a lot to ask anybody. A lot of actors are not method actors, in that case they don't work themselves into an emotional state to produce tears and a bit of help can be useful.

RJSchwarz
San Diego, CA

In alot of small independent shoots, you aren't going to have professionally trained actors, and if you do, they likely are theater actors not trained for film. At most universities i've been to, the theater teachers are against method acting in general.
Has anyone else noticed this? Its been kind of bugging me for a while that theater actors often have such trouble acting in film.

thanks alianco. I'll try to find some glycerine. Anyone got any other ideas?

I totally agree with posters that for a truly emotional scene, the actor (with some good direction) should be able to get to the point of real tears themselves, and that if they can't, then maybe it's forced to begin with. (I think there's a scene in Sex, Lies, & Videotape where Soderberg wanted Andie MacDowell to breakdown crying in a scene, filmed it, realized it was forced and actually changed it to bittersweat laughter)

but again, in my movie it's supposed to be emotionless crying, a tear duct malfunction, i.e. tears but without any real sadness. That's pretty rough for an actor to do on command, it'd be like telling them to sweat out of certain glands on their forehead or to make their heart beat at a certain rate. That's more zen than method...

Just remembered something. This may sound like a joke, but I heard of the director setting up the shot and then someone pulling a hair out of the actor's nose to make his eyes water. Chopping strong onions would have the same effect if not better though you'd have to lose the sound. May not be as ridiculous as it sounds.

quote:

---

Its been kind of bugging me for a while that theater actors often have such trouble acting in film.

---

To be fair, that's kind of like complaining that a jet fighter pilot can't fly a helicopter without a conversion course :).

Theater acting is very different as Mark pointed out. A theater actor has to act so the back seats also get the performance. On film that is over the top as the camera is very close. A film actor on stage is often underwhelming unless you are in the first rows or they compensate for the differences.

The other difference is immediate feedback. If a theater actor screws up and gives too much or too little it is clear at the end of the night. A film actor may not know for months or years and must learn to depend upon their instincts or the directors instincts.

But this is all off-topic. On a closeup you can use onions and other options. On more distant shots the glycerine will work as long as it can be placed prior to rolling film.

RJSchwarz
San Diego, CA

Eye drops work to get glossy eyes. There are different kinds of eye drops as well, some for ed eyes, some for dry eyes, some for itchy eyes i believe. I would get the one for dry eyes so not to get rid of the redness that usually comes from real crying. None the less, they create tears and are some what harmless to the eyes. But if you use to much it can potentially harm the eyes, says the directions on the actual eye drops. Anyway just my to coin.

<("<) <( " )> (>")>

A tiny smear of Vicks vaporub below your eyes will get your tear ducts going.

How far would you go for the truth?
http://www.OneLastBreathMovie.com