The real secret behind Jack Nicholson’s acting technique: “I’m still fooling them”
The idea of method acting has become a somewhat controversial subject over the years, with some actors vehemently denying the use of the technique and some proudly using it to excuse some very questionable on-set behaviour. When asked about being a method actor in an interview, Tom Hardy was quick to quell the rumour, intently clarifying that he was no such actor. However, the likes of Jared Leto and Daniel Day-Lewis have extensively spoken about their commitment to performing by embodying the very character they are playing, transforming not only on screen but in their personal lives, too.
However, Jack Nicholson has always managed to evade this label, with audiences assuming that he is so effortlessly talented that he doesn’t need to try, something that Nicholson has confirmed isn’t true and takes great pride in fooling everyone.
From his unhinged portrayal of a man losing his mind in The Shining or the haunting sadness of wasted potential in Five Easy Pieces, Nicholson is known for his rich and nuanced performances that feel almost second nature to the actor, creating iconic and multi-faceted characters that live on as some of the greatest performances of all time.
Many people have debated his ability to do so, questioning whether it is an innate talent or a skill that he has carefully nurtured, working on his craft to such a high level that he can achieve these performances. However, during an interview, Nicholson revealed the truth behind his performances and the way he is able to achieve them, saying, “I was talking to Sean Penn on the phone today. I told him it was interesting that they managed to leave me off this long list of Method actors they’d published in some article. I told him, ‘I’m still fooling them!’ I consider it an accomplishment. Because there’s probably no one who understands Method acting better academically than I do, or actually uses it more in his work. But it’s funny — nobody really sees that. It’s perception versus reality, I suppose”.
This opens up an incredibly interesting conversation about our perception of performing and the work of an actor. While some people see the use of the method technique as an indicator of skill and commitment, believing that it shows how dedicated they are to their craft by taking a controversial and all-consuming approach, Nicholson implies that the job of the actor is to make this work invisible and for the approach to be unseen.
Does discussing the performance process diminish the effect of the performance? When we’re made aware of the effort and inner workings of how the performance is constructed, does it break the illusion that it is real and ruin its conviction? Should it be an unspoken transformation that the audience doesn’t know about?
Nicholson’s response perhaps hints that this is the case. As a method actor, it is his job to make sure that no one knows about this, to protect the secrets behind his characters, and to create the illusion that they are completely real.
