Efficient Callbacks

citychik

citychik

Efficient Callbacks?

The auditions I held this past Saturday and Monday have left me with a fairly nice embarrassment of riches. I saw so many good actors, I'm having a tough time whittling down my choices.

I have three lead roles: a man & woman will play a couple who live together, and another man plays someone who throws a wrench into the works. The couple are at odds with each other, at a crucial point in their relationship and have different goals. It's important that the actors playing the couple have good chemistry, so no one looks at them and says, "why is she even with him in the first place?" I'm going to hold Callbacks, but I want to do it as efficiently as possible, so my actors don't have to wait around for really long periods.

The problem is that there are three guys I'm considering for the boyfriend, and five women for the girlfriend, and two guys for the other male lead. ALL of these actors gave solid auditions and gave their own unique flavors to the materials, so this will be a challenge!

I'm looking for tips on how to schedule this logistically, if I want to see each Boyfriend paired with each Girlfriend, and then see the Other Guy interact with the girlfriend. I think I'll hold initial callbacks to cast the couple -- then, after I make my decision, I'll bring in the actors who play the other guy to interact with them. But for that "Couples Callback" I can't figure out how to schedule each woman with each guy. Someone told me to just pair them up Best with Best, 2nd Best with 2nd Best, and so on - but I like a few of these folks equally and that doesn't allow me to see different combinations!

Let's say I setup a time for Boyfriend A to come in and do scenes with four Girlfriends, then I schedule Boyfriend B, and Boyfriend C to come in - it seems unfair to ask the actors being considered for Girlfriend to wait around to audition with each Boyfriend (A, B, C)? If each couple has 15 minutes to do a scene together, that's one hour per couple or more.

Suggestions? How would you do it?
 
Last edited:
Sort by date Sort by votes
Sorry, I'm an audio guy.

Dealing with talent and producing a film is not my forte.

What I know about producing is what Les Grossman from Tropic Thunder taught me.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
To be honest, your first post is a little confusing which is probably why no-one has answered as of yet.

I suggest going with your gut instinct on who was the best for the part based off the first audition -

Why do a callback? Who says you always have to do a callback? And who cares if they have to sit and talk to the other actors for another 30 minutes. Buy some starbucks and have it out for them and make them watch Napoleon Dynamite if you have to,

I've been called back 4 times and felt like it was the exact same audition and that we were going nowhere.

You need to fully name what you want as your ideal actor to fit the part and choose the one that closely approximates that - otherwise you'll always be in a quandary = bad filmmaking.

Go with your gut.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
If they all gave solid performances, why hold callbacks? Throw their names in a hat.

I'm guessing that's not the case, though.

You're from the theatre, right? It's no different than theatrical auditions. Cattle call them back, have them wait in an anteroom and call them in how many ever times and in whatever different combinations you want to read sides together. These are good riches to have, because you can comfortably cast based on looks. You can't cast based on looks when their acting abilities aren't great, and that's a drag because its a visual medium.

I don't think you need a plan ahead of time...call them all in at the same time if you want to see them all again, then pick and choose who goes with who at this time. Having a PA or two would be ideal to help you keep track. Take copious notes. Good luck!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
ROC said:
Ahhh thank you.

I was trying to make sense out of that sentence with a PA speaker system.

- Ryan
Click to expand...

They're the people you have working for you who basically have no idea what they're doing. They make coffee, run errands, pick up your cleaning, basically any other menial job that needs to get done. The best of them (the ones who aren't retarded) get promoted to line producer or AD.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
2001 Productions said:
hmm...that's borderline insulting. I've PA'ed on shoots where I knew more than the director. Do you mind if I reword it just slightly to say:

They're the people you have working for you who basically have no idea what they're going to be doing.
Click to expand...

Ok, I can only speak from my world... If you knew much, you wouldn't be a PA, you'd be an AD or a line producer, or the script supervisor, etc... The shoots I have been on, PAs are the people who have pretty much never been on a movie set before. They are also the only crew working for free.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Gonzo_Entertainment said:
If you knew much, you wouldn't be a PA, you'd be an AD or a line producer, or the script supervisor, etc...
Click to expand...

I've PA'ed on mainstream features, network TV series, national commercials, etc. The work may be menial, but the checks don't bounce. :)

Gonzo_Entertainment said:
They are also the only crew working for free.
Click to expand...

Last gig was a Toyota commercial. Got paid $200 to stand in a driveway for 3 hours with a walkie-talkie. I'll swallow some pride for that.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
Getting back to the OP topic.

I like the idea suggested of having them back, hold them in an anteroom and bring in the different pairs-get nitty gritty, look for personality tics that work/don't work. Watch for the chemistry as well-does one pair seem that they "mesh" better than another pair? Do they look like they could work together without throwing bricks at one another? ;)

That would be the most efficient way. Also, by holding call backs, they may not all come back-maybe one of them changed their mind, or didn't show, whatever. It would be a way of seeing how dediciated they are(and how flexible during performances if they had to suddenly be called in for some reason).
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
"It would be a way of seeing how dediciated they are"

I think it was said somewhat tongue in cheek, but Lloyd Kaufman has always suggested you should hold auditions in the middle of a mosquito infested swamp and tell people to be there 6 hours before you're actually going to read them. As I said, it's exaggerated, but the point being, to not coddle auditionees (sic) because presenting them with adversity is a good way to find out if they are gonna be whiny tittie babies on set.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
@ the post above:

Then I take back my statement about buying them Starbucks and having them watch Napoleon Dynamite.

... Make them watch Suberbabies: Baby Geniuses 2 instead.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Just my opinion.

Even though you had numerous good actors, some had to have a better handle on the audition. Whether it was their answers to questions, the way they were dressed, or just their overall behaved at their audition. Look at these people first. Or take headshots and pair them up accordingly.

While everyone is hungry and looking for roles, you should have no problem with people waiting around. If either of Actor A and Actress A do not gel, and one is stronger then the other, ask the weaker to leave (or wait out in the hall) and bring in the next candidate. Keep eliminating till you have your perfect choice. The reason you might want the weaker ones to wait around is, they might be better with another actor at their side.

Whatever you do, don't settle.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top