I believe that one of the most useful qualities I possess as an actor is a fine, articulate rage. We all know that anger is the most accessible of emotions for most men, and often anger is the first emotion that young male actors crack open--to the point that no man under the age of 25 is allowed to do Edmund's bastard monologue in auditions. But, less obvious to us is that actors often have trouble accessing the truly ugly, obscene parts of themselves, the gateway to which may be--or at least, is for me--a deep simmering vengeful slithering rage through which one can pry open the invisible disgusting self one would rather no one see. A successful portrayal of Richard III, for instance, depends on this rage, all the more so because Richard must also be as joyful as he is intermittently remorseful in his sinning. It is surprising when an actor, perhaps otherwise known for being 'tough' or 'macho' in charismatic male roles, fails to access this ugly under-the-docks, fishy-smelling grimy wet evil. I know that in one of my more 'evil' roles, as Mr. Klemper in THE BOYS NEXT DOOR, I felt myself surprised by how difficult it was for me. Nonetheless. I much look forward to whatever opportunities I get to go there again.
(I know I've written about this before, but I'm taking a moment to restate my feelings, and sometime down the road I'll compare notes with myself. I find such re-iterations useful.)