The most underrated component of an actor’s performance: their posture. 

Generally, a thespian’s physicality is heralded for either in-your-face movement (think: decisive gestures, facial expressions, etc.), or chameleonic transformations of their entire being (think: Richard III).

But there’s a subtler art to inhabiting the regular, everyday reality of a character’s corporeality, an art that resides firmly in a meticulously embodied posture, a meticulousness that’s so deliberate it can appear to be natural to them (because, you know, it’s natural to their character!).

How a person moves through the world, comports themselves, their disposition and demeanor fundamentally inform not only how they’re perceived, but who they/we are. And there is literally no chance that an actor’s real posture perfectly matches their character’s posture. Posture is like a fingerprint, or a handprint: one might look the same as another on a peripheral glance, but if you barrel into the micro — where truth actually lives! — no two are exactly alike.

For a recent example of such barreling, please consult the forever-homie Brian d’Arcy James’ performance in the new movie The Cathedral. It’s a constant shape-shift that doesn’t scream itself as such; rather, it’s an un-flashy, fully lived-in turn. It’s still clearly ol’ Brian up on that screen, but his body shares as much with his character as it does with his own person.

And that’s freaking acting.

---

What’s the relationship between posture and an actor’s “presence”, the latter of which can be a core feature of their appeal? I’d say posture is one amongst many factors contributing to an actor’s presence, which is more of a cumulative, ineffable essence comprised of multilayered parts.