Unlocking Performance – Actor-Director Collaboration, Uncanny Choices, and On-Set Immersion

MZed Education

by Mascha DeikovaAugust 7^th, 2026

Subscribe to How To

When we talk about directing, we often get caught up in the technical aspects of it, such as camera movement, lighting setups, or the mechanics of a scene. Yet cinema is ultimately a human medium, and even the most meticulously framed shot won’t work if the performance inside it feels hollow. So, let’s put our attention into actor-director collaboration and try to find the unusual choices that result in truly great performances. Luckily, some of the latest films like “Obsession” or Christopher Nolan’s “The Odyssey” give us plenty of material to look at.

A brilliant recent example of a delicate yet dynamic collaboration and uncanny acting choices is Curry Barker’s horror, “Obsession.” An indie feature marked Barker’s directorial debut and took the cinemas by storm, making lots of buzz along the way.

There are many great things about this film. However, one element stands out above all: the acting. The cast does not consist of traditional A-list stars, but they deliver skin-crawling performances that make the hair on your arms stand up. Putting their natural talent aside, “Obsession” features several clever – and unusual – acting choices that serve as a perfect gateway into our topic.

What makes the performance in “Obsession” truly creepy

On its surface, the storyline presents an already familiar concept: wishes gone horribly wrong. What Barker does differently is his total commitment to the premise. He boldly goes all the way down this road at full speed, without trying to sugarcoat the outcome or offer the protagonist a simple, unearned happy ending. No, he lets him suffer every step of the way. This is probably a good moment to warn you that the following analysis contains spoilers.

Let’s start with the main actress Inde Navarette, who plays Nikki (the protagonist Bear’s love interest) and goes above and beyond to deliver an iconic horror performance. Throughout the film, the “Wish” version of Nikki tries a wide range of different strategies to fulfill Bear’s desire. (He wished that the real Nikki loved him more than anything in the world.) Her tactics change rapidly: from flirtatious and playful to loving and tender, then to manipulative, menacing, and completely unhinged.

On top of that come the abrupt, lightning-fast transitions between the “Wish” version of Nikki and the real, suffering Nikki trapped beneath. (Like in the example above.) With her performance, Navarette manages to make these switches happen within a matter of seconds. They are so sudden and grabbing that it almost feels like a terrifying magic trick. But what acting and directing techniques allowed her to achieve this?

Chemistry and collaboration between actors and the director

First and foremost, this dynamic worked because of the chemistry and trust between Navarette and her co-star, Michael Johnston, who portrayed the protagonist, Baron “Bear”. She knew that Johnston’s genuine reactions to her performance would be crucial to the emotional truth of each scene. Therefore, she made a conscious creative choice: she never revealed during rehearsals exactly how she intended to play a take. Taking this approach even further, director Barker noted that Navarrette preferred to hold back during table reads and disliked rehearsals altogether, allowing her to keep her true performance hidden until the camera rolled.

Sounds strange, doesn’t it? How many directors would embrace such an unconventional approach to rehearsals? Curry Barker did it, and the trust he places in his actress paid off with astonishing results. Navarette committed to using every psychological tool in her arsenal during live takes to ensure her choices felt jarring and uncomfortably real. Most importantly, they had to catch her scene partner Johnston – and by extension, the director – by surprise, so that his reactions would remain raw, unscripted, and authentic. This could mean anything, from flashing a sudden, creepy smileto moments like this restaurant date scene:

In this scene, Navarette references a scene from yet another eerie movie, “Get Out” by Jordan Peele, in which people are also trapped in different bodies. At the same time, she is experimenting with different ways of saying “no.” What starts as a seemingly straightforward answer to Bear’s question, quickly escalates into a completely different meaning, and makes the scene truly uncomfortable to watch.

Trusting character instinct: rewriting the climax

One of the greatest assets an actor brings to set is their deep understanding of character logic (the so-called “character study”). While a director must keep their eyes on the macro-level story, an actor lives entirely inside their character’s skin. This is another prime example of actor-director collaboration that took place during the filming of the final scene in “Obsession.” You can watch the full explanation in this behind-the-scenes featurette:

What stunned me most is Curry’s confession that, in the original script, the protagonist Bear accepts his tragic fate. Desperate to finally do the right thing, free the real Nikki, and find redemption for himself, he swallows a handful of lethal pills. However, actor Michael Johnston felt that this noble acceptance contradicted Bear’s nature. Bear was weak and cowardly – someone who made selfish choices throughout the entire story.

So, he pitched a different idea to the director: What if, immediately after swallowing the pills, Bear’s survival instinct takes over? What if, even after all the horror he has caused, his pathetic desire to live forces him to shove his fingers down his throat to vomit the pills back up?

Curry Barker trusted his lead actor and shot the variation. The resulting moment concludes Bear’s downward spiral in the most fitting way possible. I believe this exact detail rounds his flawed character without granting him an unearned cinematic martyrdom. In fact, I liked it so much that it’s impossible to imagine a different ending. Thus, this on-set story serves as a great reminder for directors: when an actor expresses a strong gut instinct about character plausibility, make sure to listen to them.

Physical guidance in actor-director collaboration

Beyond emotional beats, actor-director collaboration often involves fine-tuning physical micro-expressions to convey subtext without dialogue.

During prep, Curry Barker and Inde Navarrette spent days perfecting a subtle, “uncanny valley” look for Nikki’s eyes. The goal was to let the silent pain of the real Nikki shine through her eyes while her body belonged to the “Wish” version. Her smile was another important physical tool. They discovered that combining a slight eye squint with a rigid smile created a far more disturbing image than a wide-eyed expression.

Of course, this is not something rare in filmmaking. Yet trying to find new ways to tell the character’s story through non-verbal physical details can be a great creative playground. Think of Tim Burton’s direction of Wednesday Addams: he instructed the actress Jenna Ortega to never blink on camera. That tiny constraint immediately signals something unnatural and otherworldy to the viewer’s subconscious – as if she is “dead inside.”

Improvisation and on-set spontaneity

One of the great things about indie features like “Obsession” is that they leave enough room for happy accidents, improvisation, and actors’ spontaneity on set (like we already discussed above.) It’s not as if every minute of filming costs millions of dollars, as it does with most blockbusters. Inevitably, we’re approaching another huge recent premiere: Christopher Nolan’s “The Odyssey.” Yet before that, I’d like to state the fact that even big films with famous directors can embrace spontaneity.

Do you remember the legendary story of “The Godfather’s” opening sequence?

During filming, the director Francis Ford Coppola spotted a stray cat on the Paramount lot and placed it directly into Marlon Brando’s lap right before calling action. What followed was a masterclass in acting and artistic flexibility. Instead of breaking character, Brando effortlessly integrated the cat into Don Corleone’s performance. His gentle stroking created a chilling contrast between tenderness and his menacing criminal authority. Even though the cat’s loud purring ruined the production audio – requiring ADR in post-production – the visuals turned out so powerful that they became a timeless example of giving actors room to react to real-time challenges. (If you want to explore the topic of improvisation further, check out my deep dive into Method Directing and how to use it on set).

Actor-director collaboration beyond words

Let’s talk a bit about Christopher Nolan’s way of working, as in my opinion, it’s both unusual and powerful. First off, in his direction, he clearly follows the rule “Less is more.” As Gary Oldman describes him in one of the interviews,  Nolan is “not a big note-giver.” (You might have heard the recent jokes that only Zendaya heard a “perfect” from him, and Matt Damon and Tom Holland envied her for the entirety of the “The Odyssey” shoot.) So yes, Christopher Nolan might be scarce in words, but the ones he chooses – always go right into the heart of the performance:

Here, Gary Oldman recalls a masterclass in concise direction on the set of “The Dark Knight.” During one particular take, Nolan walked up to Oldman and offered a single line of guidance: “Let’s do that one more time, but there is more at stake.” That note didn’t burden the actor with unnecessary exposition. It simply gave him a direction to raise the internal volume, energy, and dynamic urgency of the scene. And the rest was the actor’s work, as it should be.

Immersion as a tool for actor-director collaboration

As Christopher Nolan’s latest epic “The Odyssey” hit theaters recently, the internet has been full of interviews, behind-the-scenes footage and – unavoidably – memes. Actors have been sharing their experiences on set, and the audience tends to make the most curious details go viral. For example, people laugh about the UGG boots ban on the “The Odyssey” set. Anne Hathaway, who played Penelope, admits in one interview that it was she who returned to the set in comfortable, almost house-like looking shoes. Then she saw Christopher’s glance, heard his brief “No,” and instantly regretted the mistake. After that, nobody from the cast or crew tried to repeat the trick. However, out of this absolutely meaningless behind-the-scenes story, I mostly like the insight on why, that Nolan explains here (from 05:55):

It is plausible, isn’t it? Especially when you film something from a different era and culture, and you have all these beautifully built sets, detailed costumes, and actors who have to go through real mental and physical challenges, a small modern detail like UGG or a crew member eating chips can indeed bring you out of the immersion and pull you right back into reality. Love it or hate it, but the approach of preserving the atmosphere on set for better actor-director collaboration does make sense. And Nolan is famous for it.

Playing it for real

Room for improvisation is difficult to achieve if you are filming on IMAX and can only run a take for three minutes. (Why? My colleague Nino explains it in his wonderful technical breakdown of “The Odyssey” here.) However, Nolan finds other ways to ensure he gets the most real and authentic performances from his actors. One of them is maintaining an unbroken atmosphere on set, as we discussed above. Another one is making sure to give the performers something tangible to react to.

Yes, I’m talking about this widespread myth that “Christopher Nolan doesn’t use CGI.” While he does use computer graphics and visual effects (and a lot of them, actually), he still ensures that his filming approach provides actors with practical means to deliver stronger performances.

One of the best scenes in “The Odyssey” (IMHO, naturally) is when Circe turns Odysseus’s men into pigs. I’ve never seen anything so disturbing and fascinating at the same time. If you’ve seen it, you’ll probably agree that it feels very physical, right? Well, that is because the incredible Samantha Morton, who portrayed Circe, apparently had animatronic hands that allowed her to sculpt and interact with the creatures live on camera:

Mind-blowing, isn’t it?

Conclusion

These are all examples of actor-director collaboration that I personally find incredibly powerful and fascinating. To sum it up, it means having the full vision, making notes and giving directions while also trusting your actors and providing them with the freedom and tools they need to get in their character’s skin and craft the best performance possible.

What are your favourite examples and tools of actor-director collaborations? Let’s continue this curious and useful discussion in the comments below!

Feature image source: film stills from “The Odyssey” by Christopher Nolan, 2026, and “Obsession” by Curry Barker, 2025.

Full disclosure: MZed is owned by CineD.
Join MZed Pro now and start watching today!