Yeah it's a real thing. There's a guy I've been in shows with before where we have great on stage chemistry but a conversation between us is like pulling teeth.

Chemistry is one of those things that can make or break a show.  It's hard to put your finger own but you notice when it's there and you really notice when it's not there.

What I find fascinating in film and TV is that on screen chemistry does not necessarily mean two actors get along off camera.  And vice versa.  I have seen real life couples work together and they have zero on screen spark.  I have also seen two actors set the screen on fire, only to find out later that they hate each other in real life.

tonnaree wrote:

What I find fascinating in film and TV is that on screen chemistry does not necessarily mean two actors get along off camera.  And vice versa.  I have seen real life couples work together and they have zero on screen spark.  I have also seen two actors set the screen on fire, only to find out later that they hate each other in real life.

Yes, it's a bit like that with Ben and Martin. They have on-screen chemistry, but they don't hang out as friends outside of filming.

I am still not sure what it is, though, or how to see if it's there or not. I just read that some actors have that chemistry and some have not, and I am not quite sure how they see it or what to look for.

No, Ben and Martin don't hang out a lot, but they do honestly like and respect each other.  They do seem to enjoy each other's company.

Some on screen couples out right loathe each other of screen. 

Well, I don't know what it is exactly that makes chemistry, but I know it when I see it - and I see it when it's not there.
However, I do think that chemistry can happen after a while, even if it wasn't there from the very first moment.
Good example (in my eyes) is "The X-Files". I thought Gillian Anderson and David Duchovny always had great chemistry on screen, and when David left (more or less) and Robert Patrick joined Gillian Anderson it just felt wrong to me. Not because I missed David (which I did) but because I felt that there just wasn't any chemistry between Gillian and Patrick. Maybe it had to do with the fact that I subconsciously compared Gillian and Robert with Gillian and David, I'm not sure. I just know that the first couple of episodes with Robert were... wrong. But it got better and eventually they had chemistry, although it was a different kind of chemistry than Gillian's and David's. I re-watched the show recently and it felt exactly the same all over again.

 

Last edited by SolarSystem (January 20, 2016 1:53 pm)

I see chemistry or the lack of it.

First let me say that I think how people perceive chemistry is highly subjective, even though there is a definition out there that tells us what chemistry means. Nevertheless I think that's theory, what comes across to each audience member however is the real thing.
My example: Guy Ritchie's "Sherlock Holmes". In my opinion RDJ and Jude Law are having a hell of a chemistry, it totally translates to the audience (or better: to me) how much fun they obviously had while doing the movies. I felt that way even before I saw any interviews they did together. What I see when I look at their Holmes and Watson feels real and right - and that's probably why I'm saying that they're having great chemistry.
I can't explain it any better. Just call it a gut feeling.

I can only describe it as a kind of spark that happens when the two actors work off each other.  There's an energy, a rhythm and a sense they are in sync with what they are doing with their characters. And because of that they are able to draw the audience in to them with that energy. In some mysterious way they compliment each other perfectly. It's like charisma - another hard to define characteristic people have.

I think the chemistry I felt between Ben and Martin when I first saw them on screen together as John and Sherlock started because of how opposite they were in looks and how they played their characters - one so tall, dark, exotic, frenetic; the other small, blond, boyish, stolid - but both with a sort of underlying vulnerability. I loved them both equally but when they were together on screen it was like something ignited and together they were greater than the sum of their parts. I remember someone asked me once if I loved the show because of the way Ben played Sherlock and my answer was, "No, I love the show because of John and Sherlock together.  I have to have them together!"  Such was the force of that "chemistry".

KeepersPrice wrote:

"No, I love the show because of John and Sherlock together. I have to have them together!" Such was the force of that "chemistry".

That's what it comes down to, I would say. It doesn't really matter that the story is written that way, you know, with two main characters. What matters is that you wouldn't want to have it any other way, that it wouldn't work if one of them suddenly were alone or with someone else. It has to be the two of them, together.
That's basically why "The X-Files" didn't really work for me anymore after Mulder/Duchovny was gone. With Mulder and Scully it was brilliant, it was perfect. With Scully and somebody else it was just another tv show.