I made someone cry during auditions

[gabrielflorit]

Today was my second day of auditions. Before going over there I did a search on directing practices on dvxuser - found really useful information on how to direct, namely don't give them emotions to play, rather give them actions to visualize (not "be sad", but "your mother just died").

The first auditionee comes in, she introduces herself, etc., etc. I let her read the first time without directions. The second time I told her "you've been in a relationship for the last 7 years with the guy of your dreams. He's all you ever wanted. Yesterday you found out he's been cheating on you. All this time you've been with him, and it's just been a lie. A lie".

To give some context: I myself have been in a very intense relationship with a girl for the last 6 months. And this past week I've realized that, once she went to the other coast for graduate school, she's started telling me "I met you too soon", "I'm not ready to commit", "maybe we're meant for each other but now's not the time".

And this girl, the auditioning girl, started telling me how she once was in a similar situation to the character, in the sense that she was almost abused. And then she paused for a second, then says "so maybe I should tap into that", gets very red, and starts reading. She was really holding back the tears. When it was done and my 1st AD says "ok", I was moved.

Is that right? Did I do something wrong? I let her read first, and there was nothing going on. So I gave her a completely different direction, and she read great. She won't get the part, because she just doesn't look the part. But she did move me. I get a feeling she's in a very similar situation as the character she's portraying.

Afterwards I felt really elated, because I'd managed to connect with another human being on a very emotional level. But was that right? Was it right for me to use a person like that? I'd like to think I gave her great direction, and got her to where I wanted her. But maybe she's just so fragile the slightest thing will break her?

What do you think?

[blownapartstudios]

If she was willing to, and suggested that she "tap into that" than it appears that her emotional response was part of her acting method. If she was able to so convince you to the point that you feel guilty she must have been pretty good. If an actor cannot get into that inner place and channel that raw emotional experience necessary to make the part believable than they are a waste of both yours and the audiences time.

I think it is easier to draw on personal experience to bring out emotion and can be therapeutic as well.

This works in all kinds of acting situations. Ive watched a man die. I pulled his lifeless body out of a canal after he wrecked his car into it.

Ive had to resuscitate my own son after he had a seizure and swallowed his tongue.

Ive watched four babies come into this world and held their mothers hand as it happened.

I once chased my long distance relationship from California to Wisconsin only to be left without family and friends 2000 miles from home.

I had to recently put down my own dog.( I cried during old yeller)

These are all very personal things but you better believe I'm gonna go there when I'm acting. Its part of the territory and its your job to make it happen.

Of course I wasn't there and you may just be an insensitive jerk. But from the spirit of your post, I doubt that.

Good luck with finding the right look to match the right emotional state:crybaby:

[armisiano]

Don't feel bad for her having cried. She did a great job.

Feel bad for not casting her.

Find something either in this project or an upcoming one where you can use her, because obviously you connected (according to your post) and you were very impressed, what's missing? That sounds like an ideal actor to me.

[Neal Buconjic]

As the others have said, don't feel bad for directing someone to "that place".

What I was surprised to read was that she didn't get the part because she didn't look the part. Why was she reading if she didn't look appropriate for the part?

I typically do my auditions in two stages. I'll ask for submissions of headshots/resumes then I'll contact the actors who look to be appropriate for the role for an audition.

When I did an open casting call, I did a similar two stage process. Each person filled out an information form (and attached a headshot/resume if they had one) then they were assigned a number. I called each person up in front of the camera and they introduced themselves. Took all of 10 seconds. I was able to process them through at an efficient rate. The video intro allowed me to evaluate their look and hear them as well. We were then able to identify who we wanted for call backs.

It is at this time (once you've qualified an actor for a certain part) that you can see how they take direction.

Good luck to you. Finding good actors is always challenging.

[Capt Quirk]

Yeah, if the role is a sad one, you did good. If it was a little girl trying to sing Animal Crackers and you made her cry, then it would be "Shame on you!". It is a job, and she has to be able to bring out the desired response. It sounds like you both did good.

[Capt Quirk]

As far as not giving her the part because of her look, I have to ask what you were looking for? If she can bring out the emotional response, that might be more important than appearance.

[gabrielflorit]

She called the day before, telling me she'd heard I was still looking for females to audition.

Coming in to the audition I wasn't even considering her for the part, just because she looks a little bit older. But I've read you should treat actors with respect - so I gave her the full 20 minutes, including giving her quite a bit of direction so I could see if she responded to direction.

She did respond to direction, and she did a great job.

My problem is still: she doesn't look the part.

[Drew Ott]

Acting ability > looks. IMO.

[gabrielflorit]

Acting ability > looks. IMO.

Yes - you're right, and this is really a non-issue.

[J.R. Hudson]

I think wasting her and your time is not cool considering you knew you would not be casting her. Perhaps another project will come up that will be a fit for her ?

[Jay Rodriguez]

I think it was a bad idea asking her to come in if u knew she wasn't the one for the role. Part of the "you should treat actors with respect" statement comes into play here. If u knew she wasn't the one, the respectful thing to do is to thank her for the interest in being a part of your project but blank blankety blannk...

You learned alot from this specific audition, you learned alot from her.... Maybe she's really the one for the role? I really try hard not to keep an image in my head of what the actor should look like because it tends to cloud my judgement on their acting skills/talents.

[Capt Quirk]

It is amazing what a talented make up artist can do. They make Gwenyth Paltrow and Maggie Gyllenhal look good on screen.

[J.R. Hudson]

Well those chicks aren't what I'd call fugly to begin with :P

[Capt Quirk]

They ain't that pretty off screen either, so the make up people are earning their money.

[Tim Joy]

Maybe you can change the part a little, to fit the better actress?

Or cut out all her lines :)

Personally, I'm pretty tired of this "beauty contest" thing that movies and TV really love. I can't imagine casting up there in AK is too easy, so you might have to make changes to fit the talent you have available.

I'm facing the same situation here in VT, that's why I wrote one role for a college-age guy (there's a college next to my house) and one for a middle-aged grungy guy. (farms all around the area)

[Kyle Stebbins]

It is amazing what a talented make up artist can do. They make Gwenyth Paltrow and Maggie Gyllenhal look good on screen.

Did I miss something here?

These ladies are gorgeous no matter what.

[gabrielflorit]

Did I miss something here?

These ladies are gorgeous no matter what.

Yeah... I'd have to agree there Kyle.

[gabrielflorit]

I think it was a bad idea asking her to come in if u knew she wasn't the one for the role. Part of the "you should treat actors with respect" statement comes into play here. If u knew she wasn't the one, the respectful thing to do is to thank her for the interest in being a part of your project but blank blankety blannk...

You learned alot from this specific audition, you learned alot from her.... Maybe she's really the one for the role? I really try hard not to keep an image in my head of what the actor should look like because it tends to cloud my judgement on their acting skills/talents.

But see... now I'm glad she came in to the audition, because I witnessed something special. You're right, if I had no desire at all to cast her, then making her audition is a waste of her time. But maybe I should not worry about someone's image and go for what they can do.

[J.R. Hudson]

Believability in a performance is much more effective than a look.

I'd rethink your choice on this one i she is indeed badass.

[Kyle Stebbins]

Believability in a performance is much more effective than a look.

I'd rethink your choice on this one i she is indeed badass.

Any headshots you can show us?

[gabrielflorit]

I do have headshots... but I'm somewhat hesitant to post them online if I haven't cast them... you know what I mean? I can PM people, I don't know about publicly posting them.

[Zak Forsman]

never, never, never, cast based on the image of the character you have in your head. never! haha.

i'm overstating it, but my philosophy is to find great actors and tailor (aka "rewrite") the role to suit them. for example, a little known fact about HEART OF NOW is that the character was originally written as a young filipino girl. not joking. i mean, how many more stories about white people do we need? :)

but then i met Marion Kerr (http://www.marionkerr.com/), auditioned her and I rewrote the part so I could capture that magical thing she had, that none of the other actors brought.

[Mattykins]

Two words:

Cast her

I rest. :)

[jasonthewho]

I think to cast someone just because they can cry is almost as bad of a reason as casting them just because they are attractive.

Honestly none of us can really tell you what to do. We weren't there, we didn't see the auditions, we don't know your script or the role. Is acting ability more important than looks? Usually. But if you're casting a cheerleader with just a few lines, then looks would probably supersede ability. It sounds like in your case acting ability is pretty important. Use your best judgement. Would she work well with your other actors?

Lots of things to consider. People have made good suggestions, but remember, this is your choice. Do what will make for the best film.

[egyptianboxer104]

I suggest re-writting teh script unless the part NEEDS to be younger.

[jcemerson]

As the mom of a fairly new child actor (Zack in "The Five Worst Days in the Life of Bartholomew Saxton"), I have to say that your method you used during the audition is completely normal for actors to experience. My son has gone on a number of auditions here in LA recently and is always expected to show the emotion (if need be). His acting coach, manager, and agent call it "Method Acting" and he has been trained accordingly....to tap into a memory or make up a story that he can relate to that will take him to "that place". So don't feel bad.....if anything, she feels great about the audition because she was able to go to that place! It's not always easy! And it's not uncommon for an actor to hear that they delivered the lines perfect, but just didn't have that "look" that the director is looking for for THAT particular film, commercial, etc. Doesn't mean they won't be remembered, though, for future projects! So, don't feel bad!

[gabrielflorit]

Thanks! In the end I cast her. If I was moved during auditions - hopefully she moves the audience too.

[Zak Forsman]

very excited to see it.

[Capt Quirk]

That's a good move. I'm glad to see people will sometimes take good advice.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

Acting ability > looks. IMO.
Not in film.

Theater, yes, to a degree, because the suspension of disbelief is so high.

In theater it goes like this: (and by "looks" I mean looks right not looks hot necessarily)


TRAINING/EXPERIENCE, TALENT and LOOKS
TRAINING/EXPERIENCE and TALENT
TALENT ONLY
TRAINING/EXPERIENCE ONLY (this cane be neck and neck with #3 depending on the severity of the deficit in either and the demands of the role)
LOOKS ONLY

In film it goes like this:


TRAINING/EXPERIENCE, TALENT, LOOKS and "It Factor"
TALENT, LOOKS and "It Factor"
Talent and Looks
Talent with out Looks, or Looks without talent = keep looking.

There is no option to cast someone who's not right for the role and who doesn't have talent - you have to have both in film.

No before someone says yeah but Robert Downey Jr. played a black guy, Ledger looked nothing like the joker, etc. Those rare rarified talents that are playing at a super human level, and in special circumstances.

Most of the time, for most of the movies we talk about and aspire to make, it just has to be real. So for the grocery store clerk you're casting, or even the lead, until you have access to Gary Oldman, cast against type at your own peril. This is one of the biggest tells in our DVXuser fests of amateurism.

In theater cast for looks onlt at your own peril.
In film cast against look at your own peril.

They've got to be right for it.

[Capt Quirk]

Not in film.

Theater, yes, to a degree, because the suspension of disbelief is so high.

In theater it goes like this: (and by "looks" I mean looks right not looks hot necessarily)


TRAINING/EXPERIENCE, TALENT and LOOKS
TRAINING/EXPERIENCE and TALENT
TALENT ONLY
TRAINING/EXPERIENCE ONLY (this cane be neck and neck with #3 depending on the severity of the deficit in either and the demands of the role)
LOOKS ONLY

In film it goes like this:


TRAINING/EXPERIENCE, TALENT, LOOKS and "It Factor"
TALENT, LOOKS and "It Factor"
Talent and Looks
Talent with out Looks, or Looks without talent = keep looking.

There is no option to cast someone who's not right for the role and who doesn't have talent - you have to have both in film.

No before someone says yeah but Robert Downey Jr. played a black guy, Ledger looked nothing like the joker, etc. Those rare rarified talents that are playing at a super human level, and in special circumstances.

Most of the time, for most of the movies we talk about and aspire to make, it just has to be real. So for the grocery store clerk you're casting, or even the lead, until you have access to Gary Oldman, cast against type at your own peril. This is one of the biggest tells in our DVXuser fests of amateurism.

In theater cast for looks onlt at your own peril.
In film cast against look at your own peril.

They've got to be right for it.
How exactly did Bogart, Steve Buscemi, and countless others ever make it then?

[Tom Marshall]

Looks in terms of looking right for the role, not necessarily looks in terms of being attractive (unless you're talking about leading men or leading women roles). Buscemi has a great look...

[gabrielflorit]

Steve Buscemi has a great look but I can't remember the last time he played the lead in a romantic comedy. This is what JDS is saying, I think.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

... (and by "looks" I mean looks right not looks hot necessarily)
...

You can't cast the 19 year old down the hall in your dorm as the 65 year old head of the undergound super secret Soviet spy agency.

You don't cast Steve Buscemi as the lead in Gladiator.

You do cast Steve Buscemi in countless great character roles.

I said in my post that I was not talking about attractiveness but type.

You virtually always cast for type in film. You'd never pluck some random person off the street for a theater piece because they look right for something, but it happens in film all the time, especially with "local color" parts, because artifice i.e. pretending to be something your not, is less accepted and more readily exposed in film and buying into the lie, the makebelieve is part of theater. Film - get as close to the real thing as you can. Theater, is more about suspending your disbelief as an audience member. Film is more about making it so that the audience member doesn't have to suspend his disbelief.

[Capt Quirk]

You can't cast the 19 year old down the hall in your dorm as the 65 year old head of the undergound super secret Soviet spy agency.


Before Tim Burton's Batman, I would have never, ever thought of Michael Keaton as Batman, because he certainly didn't look the part. He certainly pulled it off though, because he is a talented actor.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

Yes he was an interesting choice.

Non traditional casting is done often. Michael Keaton was a more fleshed out, not overwhelmingly goodlooking Bruce Wayne that could easily be a millionaire. And he was also a leading man at that point in his career.

Do you think we should cast Steve Buscemi as the lead in gladiator?

You can cast who you want, but the point is to have a very good reason to go outside of type for film. And "so and so" is all we could get may be the harsh reality but it's not a good reason and won't make for a good film.

And lest you think I'm belittling actors abilities - I'm not. I'm a classically trained actor and theater director and I've directed over 35 fully staged productions, and I would never cast for type over talent or training any day, and I fully believe in the transformational power of the actor in that medium. You can't cast soley for type in film, but it should not be your default to say type doesn't matter so much if they can act. Not so in film.

Film is a different animal. We do the makebelieve for the audience. So if you can cast a 19 year old that can pull off a 65 year old russian spy then, hat's off to you. But if we see the seams, or the cracks, or behind the illusion for an instant, you're ruined. Not so in theater, the whole point is seeing the wires.

[Tom Marshall]

Before Tim Burton's Batman, I would have never, ever thought of Michael Keaton as Batman, because he certainly didn't look the part. He certainly pulled it off though, because he is a talented actor.

Or how about Robert Downey Jr. as Ironman? People thought that was a mistake but he definitely pulled it off... did a great job even. AND he spent a lot of time in the gym to get prepared for the role. Downey is a great actor.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

I always thought Downey was spot on for an eccentric hedonistic brilliant playboy.

But he's someone that I would cast in any roll he wanted in any project. Actors like that are few and far between and it might be a while before we have access to them.

So especially when you are working with friends, or semi-pro actors, it might be a good idea to cast them close to themselves ... but one day though ... hopefully, we can all work with the Downey's and Gary Oldmans out there.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

Capt Quirk, if I seem extra grumpy - been up since Tuesday morning getting stuff ready for festival submission last minute. Probably taking some Without a Box angst out on you / venting through the argument. Sorry about that.

[Tom Marshall]

One day I'd like to BE one of the Downey's or the Gary Oldmans. :beer:

[Capt Quirk]

Yeah, except for the mechanical heart and powered armor, he is Tony Stark. Well, sort of... Stark was a drunk, and I believe Downey was a druggie.

[Capt Quirk]

Capt Quirk, if I seem extra grumpy - been up since Tuesday morning getting stuff ready for festival submission last minute. Probably taking some Without a Box angst out on you / venting through the argument. Sorry about that.I have that effect on people, so I'll tell you the same thing I tell the wife- Take a pamprin and get off the rag already! :)

Just kidding, and you are fine, so no worries ;)

[gabrielflorit]

... but one day though ... hopefully, we can all work with the Downey's and Gary Oldmans out there.

I swear one of my actors is a star waiting to happen. The camera loves him. It makes me so excited to work with such mature talent. It also makes me very aware that WTF is a 28-year old doing trying to direct people like him?

[judy castro]

Today was my second day of auditions. Before going over there I did a search on directing practices on dvxuser - found really useful information on how to direct, namely don't give them emotions to play, rather give them actions to visualize (not "be sad", but "your mother just died").

The first auditionee comes in, she introduces herself, etc., etc. I let her read the first time without directions. The second time I told her "you've been in a relationship for the last 7 years with the guy of your dreams. He's all you ever wanted. Yesterday you found out he's been cheating on you. All this time you've been with him, and it's just been a lie. A lie".

To give some context: I myself have been in a very intense relationship with a girl for the last 6 months. And this past week I've realized that, once she went to the other coast for graduate school, she's started telling me "I met you too soon", "I'm not ready to commit", "maybe we're meant for each other but now's not the time".

And this girl, the auditioning girl, started telling me how she once was in a similar situation to the character, in the sense that she was almost abused. And then she paused for a second, then says "so maybe I should tap into that", gets very red, and starts reading. She was really holding back the tears. When it was done and my 1st AD says "ok", I was moved.

Is that right? Did I do something wrong? I let her read first, and there was nothing going on. So I gave her a completely different direction, and she read great. She won't get the part, because she just doesn't look the part. But she did move me. I get a feeling she's in a very similar situation as the character she's portraying.

Afterwards I felt really elated, because I'd managed to connect with another human being on a very emotional level. But was that right? Was it right for me to use a person like that? I'd like to think I gave her great direction, and got her to where I wanted her. But maybe she's just so fragile the slightest thing will break her?

What do you think?
I must say you hit the nail on the head! Some people (actors) need some type of direction. The direction you gave her was the right approach. It was clear that she needed some direction in order for her to play the part.
so 2 thumbs up to you!!!