The Instigator
Con (against)
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
0 Points

Is theatre acting a step down from film acting?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/13/2016 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 572 times Debate No: 93689
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)




Anyone of any age is free to join. This is not meant to be a statistical debate. Just an informal discussion of whether you believe theatre acting is a step down from film acting which I believe is not ture. Hope somebody accepts soon!

ps. Word limit is 1000 characters so don't think of writing too much!


Who actually wants to see a Midsummers Nights Dream when they could see any popular current movie with actors in it? Theatre acting is quite frankly boring compared to film acting. They are stuck on a set stage and that is what they have to work with. There's no animations or anything, they have to create their own set. Also who wants to listen to a play where everyone speaks using "thy", "thou", "thee", etc. As much as that's fun to listen to, it's gets really quite annoying when you don't even understand what the actor is saying. Shakespeare is probably the most famous play writer ever. As much as we all like to study Shakespeare in school, its not really that interesting compared to the Avengers is it? Theatre acting is not as popular as film acting. Was the fight between Romeo and whatever-his-face-is-Montague really as interesting as watching Gladiator? Because I doubt it, nor was it probably as real. The music is boring also, its always orchestra. Sorry but theatre acting is a step down from film acting. It's not as popular and its boring to most people.
Debate Round No. 1


Thank you for accepting my debate and thank you for your argument. The rubuttals begin.

Who actually wants to see a Midsummers Nights Dream when they could see any popular current movie with actors in it?

Lots of people prefer theatre performances to films. It might be because they feel the film is too unfaithful to the play or they simply just don't like it. And I don't think theatre acting is boring compared to film acting. Both look really fun. However, in film you cannot really connect with the audience like you can in theatre and I sometimes find when you watch a show ive, it makes it more entertaining. And in a way I think stage acting is more difficult than film acting. In a film, if you make a mistake the director can just yell "CUT" and reshoot the scene. On stage, there is no room for mistakes, you make one it ruins the whole performance so in a way theatre actors might sometimes take their jobs more seriously.
I'm running out of characters so I will continue in the next round.


Sure the audience may like being talked to by a theatre actor but that doesn't really benefit the theatre actor. Film actors are definitely more famous. This is exactly like saying classical musicians are a step down from 21 musicians like Taylor Swift etc. we both know who is more popular, who probably gets paid more and who is more well known. It's the same with film and theatre actors. Theatre actors are old fashioned. People may like that but they will never get the recognition or popularity that film actors get.
Debate Round No. 2


Yes film actors are more famous. But the reason for that is that theatre nowadays is underappreciated and like you said seen as old fashioned. To be honest, it is old fashioned but not everything old fashioned HAS to go out of style. And being a classical musician requires MUCH more skill than being a pop musician. Basically you an be a pop musician overnight but a classical musician takes years and years to perfect so you can give yourself a big tap on the back. Just because a jb makes you more famous does not make you better. Theatre acting is not a step down from film acting- it is just different. It's more like a step down in fame and that's not a bad thing. Some people don't want to be that famous. Sure, film actors may get paid more but like I said, theatre actors are underappreciated. They deserve mre credit for what they do. You have no repsect for theatre actors. you don't have to be interested in them but I'd just wish that people would show them more respect.


My opponent practically admits that theatre actors are underappreciated. How is that not a step down from film actors who are appreciated? This isn't a "are film actors better than theatre actors" debate. So theatre actors like classical musicians being better than their modern parts have nothing to do with this debate. And honestly, having an easier time and getting more recognized for your work is better than having a harder time and never getting recognized for your work. Then my opponent again admits that theatre actors do not get paid as much, or recognized as much, or as famous as film actors. How is that not a step down from film acting? My opponent basically states that theatre actor do not even get any credit. That is proof that theatre acting is a step down from film acting. Then my opponent goes on to claim tht I have no respect for theatre actors which is an empty claim that has no proof to back it up. It is clear that theatre acting is a step down from film acting.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by LordDeathera 2 years ago
"They are stuck on a set stage and that is what they have to work with." That is exactly why theatre actors are (sometimes) better than film actors. They have only props to work with, and have to use those in combination with drama mediums to create an effective piece of theatre. There is a lot more to it than a bunch of people playing on a stage.

There isn't any clear "better" as Theatre is done live. so if they mess up, you can't simply re-do the scene and no one will know, you have to try and deal with that on stage. Really, it just comes down to personal preference. I personally prefer film acting because of the amazing things that can be done with special effects, but I also enjoy a bit of theatre every now and then because it's quite cool to see actors performing live, and it's very different to films.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by zmikecuber 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: Leaving this a tie, since it's quite open to interpretation what "a step down" means and both Pro and Con argue past each other. Pro argues they're less famous, and thus it's a step down. Con argues it takes more talent, so it's not a step down. Well, it depends on how you define "a step down" and ultimately this isn't really resolved.