What is right and what is wrong
Thu, 12 Apr 2001, 11:20 amdEAN9 posts in thread
What is right and what is wrong
Thu, 12 Apr 2001, 11:20 amI am writing this, i guess, simply just to see who else has been in a situation similar to mine, who can relate and perhaps, what certain directors may have to say on the subject.
I was cast in a play not long ago. A great play. A play of which i have always been fond of, and, passionate about.
I get cast in a supporting role, and just feel privlliged enough that i have the chance of being in this play. Until i meet the person who is to play one of the leading roles.
I was shoked at his dreadful reading ability, his inability to express the true meaning of the character and his obvious lack of preparation, all of which, i am hoping will improve.
Has anyone ever been in that situation. I'm sure you have.
Directors - have you ever cast someone for a particular role, a leading role, and then wished you hadn't. Realised that this perhaps wasn't the right person for the part, and that perhaps someone else in the cast had the "right goods" for the part?
What did you do about it? Have you ever changed things around? Or are there any of you out there who would admit to not changing for whatever reason, and perhaps even regretting it?. If so - why?. Why did you do it?
Who can relate to this?. Who has ever felt that the casting in the play they were in was unjustifiable?.
Now, i know this is amateur theatre, but we all strive to be professional in our work.
I have worked with some outstanding talent, and talent fitting for the role. But sometimes, just sometimes......it all looks a bit miffed.
I was cast in a play not long ago. A great play. A play of which i have always been fond of, and, passionate about.
I get cast in a supporting role, and just feel privlliged enough that i have the chance of being in this play. Until i meet the person who is to play one of the leading roles.
I was shoked at his dreadful reading ability, his inability to express the true meaning of the character and his obvious lack of preparation, all of which, i am hoping will improve.
Has anyone ever been in that situation. I'm sure you have.
Directors - have you ever cast someone for a particular role, a leading role, and then wished you hadn't. Realised that this perhaps wasn't the right person for the part, and that perhaps someone else in the cast had the "right goods" for the part?
What did you do about it? Have you ever changed things around? Or are there any of you out there who would admit to not changing for whatever reason, and perhaps even regretting it?. If so - why?. Why did you do it?
Who can relate to this?. Who has ever felt that the casting in the play they were in was unjustifiable?.
Now, i know this is amateur theatre, but we all strive to be professional in our work.
I have worked with some outstanding talent, and talent fitting for the role. But sometimes, just sometimes......it all looks a bit miffed.
dEANThu, 12 Apr 2001, 11:20 am
I am writing this, i guess, simply just to see who else has been in a situation similar to mine, who can relate and perhaps, what certain directors may have to say on the subject.
I was cast in a play not long ago. A great play. A play of which i have always been fond of, and, passionate about.
I get cast in a supporting role, and just feel privlliged enough that i have the chance of being in this play. Until i meet the person who is to play one of the leading roles.
I was shoked at his dreadful reading ability, his inability to express the true meaning of the character and his obvious lack of preparation, all of which, i am hoping will improve.
Has anyone ever been in that situation. I'm sure you have.
Directors - have you ever cast someone for a particular role, a leading role, and then wished you hadn't. Realised that this perhaps wasn't the right person for the part, and that perhaps someone else in the cast had the "right goods" for the part?
What did you do about it? Have you ever changed things around? Or are there any of you out there who would admit to not changing for whatever reason, and perhaps even regretting it?. If so - why?. Why did you do it?
Who can relate to this?. Who has ever felt that the casting in the play they were in was unjustifiable?.
Now, i know this is amateur theatre, but we all strive to be professional in our work.
I have worked with some outstanding talent, and talent fitting for the role. But sometimes, just sometimes......it all looks a bit miffed.
I was cast in a play not long ago. A great play. A play of which i have always been fond of, and, passionate about.
I get cast in a supporting role, and just feel privlliged enough that i have the chance of being in this play. Until i meet the person who is to play one of the leading roles.
I was shoked at his dreadful reading ability, his inability to express the true meaning of the character and his obvious lack of preparation, all of which, i am hoping will improve.
Has anyone ever been in that situation. I'm sure you have.
Directors - have you ever cast someone for a particular role, a leading role, and then wished you hadn't. Realised that this perhaps wasn't the right person for the part, and that perhaps someone else in the cast had the "right goods" for the part?
What did you do about it? Have you ever changed things around? Or are there any of you out there who would admit to not changing for whatever reason, and perhaps even regretting it?. If so - why?. Why did you do it?
Who can relate to this?. Who has ever felt that the casting in the play they were in was unjustifiable?.
Now, i know this is amateur theatre, but we all strive to be professional in our work.
I have worked with some outstanding talent, and talent fitting for the role. But sometimes, just sometimes......it all looks a bit miffed.
bruceThu, 12 Apr 2001, 12:27 pm
RE: What is right and what is wrong
Dean, I have seen the other side of this as both a Director and an Actor.
You roll up at an Audition and there is someone who reads beautifuly, and six weeks into the rehersal process they are still reading beautifuly!
No character development or input of their own, script still in hand, sounding lovely, but getting nowhere. Also they manage to hold everyone back as they stumble around the stage with their head buried in their script.
As a Director I have seen many people at an Audition who read terribly, possibly from nerves,once I found out after I cast someone who read badly that they were Dsylexic but desperatly wanted to "have a go" that individual will never be a great actor but is now one of the more dedicated club members.
If it's a young cool surfer dude you need for the part it doesnt matter if the thirtyfive year old reads well, they just won't work in the part.
Some of the worst readers I have cast have been the first to get the script out of their hands and have generaly been some of the most daring in experimenting with their character.
I suppose what I am saying that a good reader doesn't necassarily mean they will be a good actor or will "look right"
When I was at High School ( early seventies) I was not allowed to join the drama club because I wasn't in Advanced English! Consequently it was full of good students , but lousy actors!
You roll up at an Audition and there is someone who reads beautifuly, and six weeks into the rehersal process they are still reading beautifuly!
No character development or input of their own, script still in hand, sounding lovely, but getting nowhere. Also they manage to hold everyone back as they stumble around the stage with their head buried in their script.
As a Director I have seen many people at an Audition who read terribly, possibly from nerves,once I found out after I cast someone who read badly that they were Dsylexic but desperatly wanted to "have a go" that individual will never be a great actor but is now one of the more dedicated club members.
If it's a young cool surfer dude you need for the part it doesnt matter if the thirtyfive year old reads well, they just won't work in the part.
Some of the worst readers I have cast have been the first to get the script out of their hands and have generaly been some of the most daring in experimenting with their character.
I suppose what I am saying that a good reader doesn't necassarily mean they will be a good actor or will "look right"
When I was at High School ( early seventies) I was not allowed to join the drama club because I wasn't in Advanced English! Consequently it was full of good students , but lousy actors!
Walter PlingeThu, 12 Apr 2001, 10:30 pm
RE: What is right and what is wrong
hmmmmm.....
is it "allowed" , having cast someone in an amature production as a lead, or indeed any role, to sack them simply because they are not as good as they appeared to be?
Indeed, the fault is not theirs, for they did not choose the role, they were cast by a director who decided that they were the best for the job.
perhaps directors should put up signs " please do not audition above the level of your performance", this may solve some of the truly horrifying blunders that im sure we have all witnessed on occasion.
however, i can sympathise with dean, it really does suck when you know that you could do the role better, and are not given the opportunity.....( happened to me recently, or so i am told...).
on the other side, sometimes a fine performer will have a bad audition, and perhaps the most over looked skill in being a director is being able to tell the good auditions from the good readings...........
considering the generally close nature of the perth amature theatre set, removing someone from a role due to incompetence is sure to hurt feelings and no doubt step on toes, and probably preciptate a torrent of notes such as this, so perhaps the answer is simply more direct.....well, direction?
just my incoherent ramblings, hope i didnt upset anyone.......
Kam
is it "allowed" , having cast someone in an amature production as a lead, or indeed any role, to sack them simply because they are not as good as they appeared to be?
Indeed, the fault is not theirs, for they did not choose the role, they were cast by a director who decided that they were the best for the job.
perhaps directors should put up signs " please do not audition above the level of your performance", this may solve some of the truly horrifying blunders that im sure we have all witnessed on occasion.
however, i can sympathise with dean, it really does suck when you know that you could do the role better, and are not given the opportunity.....( happened to me recently, or so i am told...).
on the other side, sometimes a fine performer will have a bad audition, and perhaps the most over looked skill in being a director is being able to tell the good auditions from the good readings...........
considering the generally close nature of the perth amature theatre set, removing someone from a role due to incompetence is sure to hurt feelings and no doubt step on toes, and probably preciptate a torrent of notes such as this, so perhaps the answer is simply more direct.....well, direction?
just my incoherent ramblings, hope i didnt upset anyone.......
Kam
Walter PlingeThu, 12 Apr 2001, 10:48 pm
RE: What is right and what is wrong
I have heard of an amateur company in Victoria that makes cast members sign an agreement that states if they do not meet a required level of performance at a required time, they will be replaced.
I am in two minds about this. In one instance it covers the directors ass and enables him/her to replace someone who is not quite right. On the other hand it creates an atmosphere of insecurity for the performer, which is perhaps not the most ideal situation to work in.
I think it really depends on the aim of the comapany. is it a group that aims to create a fun and happy environment, where every one gets together, has a good time and puts on a show, or is it a group that is willing to sacrifice some of the fun, in order to have a professionsaly run company.
Several years ago I was involved with a comapny which had to make an important decision as to how professional it should be. After hours of debate it was decided that although the comapny could achieve a high level if professionalism with a strict audition process and "contracts" for cast members, the best thing about the company was the fun members had. It was the general opinion that some (not all) professionalism would have to be sacrificed in order to make sure that involvment in the goup was an enjoyable experience.
I am in two minds about this. In one instance it covers the directors ass and enables him/her to replace someone who is not quite right. On the other hand it creates an atmosphere of insecurity for the performer, which is perhaps not the most ideal situation to work in.
I think it really depends on the aim of the comapany. is it a group that aims to create a fun and happy environment, where every one gets together, has a good time and puts on a show, or is it a group that is willing to sacrifice some of the fun, in order to have a professionsaly run company.
Several years ago I was involved with a comapny which had to make an important decision as to how professional it should be. After hours of debate it was decided that although the comapny could achieve a high level if professionalism with a strict audition process and "contracts" for cast members, the best thing about the company was the fun members had. It was the general opinion that some (not all) professionalism would have to be sacrificed in order to make sure that involvment in the goup was an enjoyable experience.
Walter PlingeFri, 13 Apr 2001, 06:01 pm
right and wrong
Emmalee wrote:
> It was the general opinion that some (not all) professionalism
> would have to be sacrificed in order to make sure that
> involvement in the group was an enjoyable experience.
It seems to me that the greatest myth perpetrated by so-called professionals, as well as many drama schools, is that for a rehearsal room to be professional, it must be serious workplace, and that any goofing off is considered detrimental and unprofessional.
What a load of crap!
One of the nicest compliments I have ever received from an actor that I have directed, was when I was told that I had proven that it was possible to be professional and yet still have fun.
The production in question was a fine one (even if I do say so myself), even though much of many of the rehearsals had been spent laughing and joking amongst ourselves. The atmosphere was so relaxed that when we did focus on the task at hand, the work was strong and the rehearsal time was incredibly productive.
Why? Because the actors were at ease, and the mood in the room was friendly and supportive.
This is the way I always have, and always will, work.
peace,
D.M.
> It was the general opinion that some (not all) professionalism
> would have to be sacrificed in order to make sure that
> involvement in the group was an enjoyable experience.
It seems to me that the greatest myth perpetrated by so-called professionals, as well as many drama schools, is that for a rehearsal room to be professional, it must be serious workplace, and that any goofing off is considered detrimental and unprofessional.
What a load of crap!
One of the nicest compliments I have ever received from an actor that I have directed, was when I was told that I had proven that it was possible to be professional and yet still have fun.
The production in question was a fine one (even if I do say so myself), even though much of many of the rehearsals had been spent laughing and joking amongst ourselves. The atmosphere was so relaxed that when we did focus on the task at hand, the work was strong and the rehearsal time was incredibly productive.
Why? Because the actors were at ease, and the mood in the room was friendly and supportive.
This is the way I always have, and always will, work.
peace,
D.M.
LouiseCCSun, 15 Apr 2001, 03:59 pm
RE: What is right and what is wrong
Dean wrote:
-------------------------------
I was cast in a play not long ago. A great play. A play of which i have always been fond of, and, passionate about. I get cast in a supporting role, and just feel privlliged enough that i have the chance of being in this play. Until i meet the person who is to play one of the leading roles. I was shoked at his dreadful reading ability, his inability to express the true meaning of the character and his obvious lack of preparation, all of which, i am hoping will improve.
There is always the case where the director knows the actor cast as the lead a lot better than might you do; is fully aware that the said actor is not terribly good at reading; but also knows full well that the end result will be everything that could be desired.
Dreadful reading ability does not reflect dreadful acting ability, or any other ability for that matter - it simply means that reading aloud to a group of mostly unknown people may not be the strongest characteristic you possess.
Would you feel the same sense if dissatisfaction if it became known that a lead actor was unable to pass a driving test? I hope not.
Have a good Easter!
LouiseCC
AmandaMon, 16 Apr 2001, 09:33 am
RE: What is right and what is wrong
dreadful reading ability should'nt make any difference to the actors abil;ity to act, as Louise said. Anyway, the lines will be memorised and then the actor has the opertunity to bring out his/her true colours and acting ability in performances.
as for the actors inability to express the true meaning of the character and their lack of preparation, it all was probably nerves and a feeling of awkwardness. last wednesday was the first read through for Amadeus, i showed up, and found myself reading the role of Constanze. i read terribly,but most of that was because i wasn't expecting it. i was also feeling nervous, and awkward being surronded with people that i don't know that i have to work with. but i know that as i get to know evreyone better, i will work better. and i think that will be that case with that actor that Dean mentioned, as well.
hope you've all had an enjoyable easter,
Amanda T
as for the actors inability to express the true meaning of the character and their lack of preparation, it all was probably nerves and a feeling of awkwardness. last wednesday was the first read through for Amadeus, i showed up, and found myself reading the role of Constanze. i read terribly,but most of that was because i wasn't expecting it. i was also feeling nervous, and awkward being surronded with people that i don't know that i have to work with. but i know that as i get to know evreyone better, i will work better. and i think that will be that case with that actor that Dean mentioned, as well.
hope you've all had an enjoyable easter,
Amanda T
Walter PlingeTue, 17 Apr 2001, 11:47 am
RE: What is right and what is wrong
All your points are valid and good. I was interested to read of Emalee's exprereince with a Victorian company who made actors sign an "acting standard" agreement. I agree with David on that point, of that being ridiculous and creating a bad atmosphere.
And Amanda, you are right. During the last few rehearsals i have had, improvements were made, and this actor has obviously now begun to take interest.
Good luck with Amadeus - i didn't know someone was doing that again! Great play though.
Didn't i see you David, in that some time ago........?
And Amanda, you are right. During the last few rehearsals i have had, improvements were made, and this actor has obviously now begun to take interest.
Good luck with Amadeus - i didn't know someone was doing that again! Great play though.
Didn't i see you David, in that some time ago........?
Walter PlingeTue, 17 Apr 2001, 06:29 pm
RE: What is right and what is wrong
> Good luck with Amadeus
> Didn't i see you David, in that some time ago........?
1994, at the Dolphin, directed by Grant Webmeister himself.
Moving into "it's a small world"-mode, when I did Othello in Melbourne, the only person in the show who wasn't a total stranger at the start of rehearsals was a guy called Anthony Wright, who played Montano.
When he walked through the door of producer's house at the first cast get-together, I nearly died. He had played Emperor Joseph II in that Grads production of "Amadeus".
Four years later and several thousand miles away... who woulda thunk of it?!
I love how paths can re-connect like that.
peace,
D.M.
> Didn't i see you David, in that some time ago........?
1994, at the Dolphin, directed by Grant Webmeister himself.
Moving into "it's a small world"-mode, when I did Othello in Melbourne, the only person in the show who wasn't a total stranger at the start of rehearsals was a guy called Anthony Wright, who played Montano.
When he walked through the door of producer's house at the first cast get-together, I nearly died. He had played Emperor Joseph II in that Grads production of "Amadeus".
Four years later and several thousand miles away... who woulda thunk of it?!
I love how paths can re-connect like that.
peace,
D.M.