Anything Goes : Thoughts on Casting (Dos and Don'ts?) by Ron Grimshaw

I hate auditions. I love working with actors I know and trust. So if I can I do not hold auditions at all and only cast actors I like and trust. sometimes I don't know the right actor so I set up auditions.

As a director, I only audition actors when I absolutely have to, either because I need to find the right person or I am forced to by union rules. I prefer to cast directly from my own files. I hate using casting directors (I feel it puts an layer between me and talent) but they are a necessary evil in this day and age because there are so many actors.

As an actor, I know how stressful an audition can be, however since I've gotten into directing, I absolutely love the audition process as it allows me an opportunity to run a mini-acting class with my auditors. Like you Alexander, I don't like working with casting directors and I won't at this stage of my career--that may change. In any event, I value auditioning for every project I do because it allows me to meet new talent and prevents the trusted actors I've used in the past from getting complacent, which in turn has the talent feel like they really earned the part.

Couldn't agree more with Edward. A really great friend of mine is a director and he likes using auditions to find actors that will respond positively to his direction. Instead of completely leaving the choices to the actor, he will jump in and ask them to try different things through the process. This shows him not only their talent, but also whether or not they can respond to his communication and direction style. Auditions definitely give you a chance to expand your talent pool, as well. Pre-casting is certainly understandable, especially if you have a exceptional actor in mind who is well-suited for the role.

Casting is one of the most important parts of a film. Get the right talent on board in front of or behind the camera. Your production is a success or a failure before you ever open filming. And the audition process can be a great experience to learn from the talent of those auditioning and to expand your abilities as a director by taking the opportunity to work with the varying levels of talent. I would not want a casting director making choices on key roles, I really want to know I have the talent that I can work with in that role.

My opinion on the Audition vs Pre-Casting debate changes with each event. Location? Cast requirements? Actor pool in the area? Pay or no-pay? Time-tested Show, or staged reading of a new script? As an actor, my blanket statement would be to audition for bigger productions that people will recognize - actors know it will get them exposure. Then Hand pick for smaller productions, actors who will be able to originate the roles of tomorrow.

As a director, I ALWAYS try to work with people I've already worked with --- and that usually means pre-casting them. I am open to new people but they have to be referred, and then auditioned. This is because I primarily direct Shakespeare, which requires both a specific kind of chops and you have to be a person I want to spend the next four weeks working REALLY hard with. If I've worked with you before I know what you're capable of and if I want to be with you.

I usually pre-cast, so much easier to work with actors whose work you know. In fact, I actually write specifically for my actors. As I write, I even hear their voices in my head! On the other hand, its also refreshing to work with new talent. So at the end of the day..... what does it matter, its the director's choice.

I have my best actors on speed dial. Auditions are stress but a lot of work, but I find it brings new textures to the blend.

Unless I have something very specific in mind, I prefer to audition. If I'm working with someone again, I have to be very careful, or I end up with something that feels self-indulgent.

Paul, interesting comment. Why do you say indulgent? Very interesting perspective. Please expand.

If I'm working with an actor again, a number of things come up. Firstly, we'll already have a rapport, and although that's useful for speeding up the directing process, it can lead to schisms within the cast. Secondly, I'll most likely have cast them based on a specific role, and the baggage of that role will inevitably inform development of the new character. Thirdly, it's easy for me to get too comfortable too early with familiar faces, making it easier to make the obvious choices rather than the right ones. Any or all of these influences can be of detriment to the piece. As long as I'm aware of their potential, however, it's not a problem.

I love your expansion Paul. Myself, I prefer to work with people I've worked with before. I like the "short hand" that develops and I like the trust that develops. Maybe it's because indirect mostly classical material. What sort of material do you work with primarily?

Paul brings up an interesting dilemma for directors. I'm not sure what he means by schisms, to be honest, but I can speak to losing control of your cast. While that's never happened to me, I can see the potential of danger there. I prefer to create accountability with the cast, meaning that they have the responsibility of insuring continuity of the project upon opening night--it's their play from then on. However, in getting there, I have the final say. If they deviate in a way that doesn't serve the play, then there's he'll to pay. I have to say I don't worry about actors in my productions feeling a sense of entitlement--they're grateful to be working with me in the first place.

I'm sure I sound like an arrogant asshole right now, but that's really not the case.

I'm not saying I don't like working with actors I'm familiar with, far from it, I'm just saying that it poses different challenges. As I mentioned, using the same actors again and again means you can miss the opportunity for something new and "out there" in the performance. What I meant by schisms, Edward, is that using "directing shorthand" has the potential to alienate actors new to you and cause divisions between them and the "old hands." I hope that makes sense - I'm up to my eyes at the moment!

pre-casting is fine in my book if they're a great fit for the role and you like working with them and especially if they can ALSO help your theatre's cred in any way.

I prefer organizing a workshop in which different actors experiment and improvise playing various roles...eventually the actors and roles tend to gravitate towards each other and your casting choices become more apparent. It's a way of being sure...confirming your instincts etc.

I am leading a webinar for Stage32.com on Friday February 20th at 1pm PST, 4 pm NYC time. I'll be focusing on MASTERING THE THEATER AUDITION. I hope you'll attend. https://www.stage32.com/webinars/Mastering-the-Theater-Audition?affid=ac1

I hope the webinar went well!

Thanks. It did. What are you currently working on?

I cast from the office.my concern is proper portfolios

I'm the publicist for a theater so I have access to a number of veteran actors, plus theater majors from the college. I always do table reads and their services have proven invaluable. It's recorded, naturally, and I sit off to one side, out of their line of vision, shut my eyes, and listen. All it costs me is the pizza and beer.