best audition activity
Printed From: Community Theater Green Room
Category: Producing Theater
Forum Name: Directing
Forum Discription: For questions about handling shows, actors, crew, board members, children ...or do we repeat ourselves?
URL: http://www.communitytheater.org/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4906
Printed Date: 5/19/24 at 11:11am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 8.05 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: best audition activity
Posted By: VPA1
Subject: best audition activity
Date Posted: 12/24/10 at 5:58pm
|
I hate cold reads. To me, at least for community theater, they often reveal little of what I am looking for. The best actor locally that I know can't read worth a hoot. He would never get a role if all there ever was at an audition was cold reads.
What do YOU do that is notably different? What has worked well for you? Thanks, I appreciate your reply! Larry |
Replies:
Posted By: jayzehr
Date Posted: 12/24/10 at 9:03pm
|
I know what you mean about good actors who can't read very well. And then there are actors who read very well but never really give you anything more. I'd also like to hear what ideas others have. |
Posted By: edh915
Date Posted: 12/27/10 at 10:01am
|
Ideally, it would be great to have prepared audition monologues - one comic, one dramatic, and one classical. But I have rarely seen that work for amateur theater. The most recent auditions I sat in on that required prepared monologues only had one in four actors adequately prepared. Many simply read their monologues from a script they had brought. Granted, it wasn't a "cold" reading, but it didn't really give you any strong idea of what they were capable of. One exercise that works for me during "cold reading" auditions is to have the actors read through a scene together more than once - twice, maybe even three times; then have them set the scripts down and do the scene again recalling what dialogue they can and paraphrasing what they need to. Then have them do it a second time sans script; and maybe even a third. The idea is to see them connecting with their audition partner and acting the emotional curve of the scene. It can be a little awkward at first, but after a couple of times through, all of the actors really seem to get into it and enjoy the looseness of acting in the moment. It's also really amazing how much dialogue they actually remember from just reading it through twice. And, from a directorial standpoint, it's interesting to see exactly which dialogue they do remember; which words and phrases are meaningful enough to them to actually stick with them. I do this whenever I can. Easiest to do when auditioning a small cast play. |
Posted By: Spectrum
Date Posted: 12/27/10 at 7:53pm
This is only my opinion, but since acting is actually REacting to those around you, it might bring out a poor reader's ability to act by staging various activities that require a person to REACT to situations around him/her. In other words, set up various scenerios with scripted actors that the auditioner will have to respond to in a natural, believable manner. That would also give the director an indication of how he/she will handle someone going off script in a live performance. You know, how well they can ACT. You might even require they work a sentence or two (given verbally by the director) into the conversation to see if they have any memorization difficulties. Good luck! 'Er, I mean, break a leg!  ------------- Growing old is mandatory. Growing up is optional. |
Posted By: KEB54
Date Posted: 1/01/11 at 1:55am
|
I do a combination audition. Part one are theatre games that loosens the auditionees up, see how they follow directions, and interact with each others.
Part two are the typical cold readings.
A typical audition may be:
"Everyone on stage and introduce yourself to one another" After a few minutes have each person introduce someone else until all are introduced.
Separate into two groups, one on each side of the stage. One from each side walk across the stage crossing in the middle. (see what happens)Then have them skip across the stage. Then give each a character (a boss and employee; cousins, etc.) as they walk across the stage.
Then a group theatre game like slow motion, mimed dodgeball.
Next pair them up for some type of theatre game.
Hand out sides, asign roles, and give them several minutes to read it. Do "cold" readings.
That's how I do it.
Remember, you can learn a lot by observing the actors from the time they arrive including time sitting in the audience and how they behave/react to others on stage.
You'll learn a lot about them and what they are capable of. Who listens. Who is respectful. Who takes direction well. Etc. ------------- KEB |
Posted By: edh915
Date Posted: 1/02/11 at 1:59pm
| KEB54 - Your "games" are exactly the kind of thing I detest in some theatre groups. They obviously work for you, but they don't always go down well with everyone. I'm afraid I would walk far far away from your auditions and never look back, nor come back. I'm a pretty decent actor - nominations, awards, etc. - and it's my belief that acting is work, and good acting is hard work, and games of your sort trivialize the process. I may be misunderstanding the exercises as described, and if so I apologize, but I don't see that there is any inherently constructive objective to be gained by them. |
Posted By: JoeMc
Date Posted: 1/02/11 at 8:57pm
|
This AACT article may be worth wheeling out again, at least it is something to think about when auditioning;- http://www.aact.org/documents/AUD1.pdf - http://www.TOI TOI CHOOKAS
|
Posted By: ChanaGoanna
Date Posted: 1/06/11 at 3:01pm
|
The article that Joe linked to above is how I found this forum: for my first audition as a director, I was searching for different ways to run an audition and came upon that article and this forum. I used a modified version of the techniques suggested and thought it worked beautifully. I could immediately tell who was comfortable onstage and who wasn't; who were the natural physical actors and who was going to need more work to loosen up and move; who was inhibited and who was ready to put him/herself out there. I didn't have them read lines from the show at all, yet I ended up with a wonderful cast; they were all perfect for the roles they got and did them very well. Next week I'm running auditions for our spring musical and am planning to use the same techniques again. It might not work for every director or show or cast, but it worked out great for me last time.
|
Posted By: TonyDi
Date Posted: 1/07/11 at 7:27am
ED I sooooo agree with you on this remark. While I know some people find that useful and for some it works, I let anyone know that I've ever worked for that doesn't know me - that I DO NOT do those game playing, time wasting things. Frankly it's the product of academia - NOT the real world of theater. That occurs more in college than it ever does in the real world and I find it a waste of my time, offensive, degrading and totally and completely unnecessary. I never did that as a director, I will NOT do it as an actor AND I CAN and DO reassure that whomever I work with and/or for that I will DO MY JOB and can almost guarantee the results WILL BE what the director wants. I have no problem with getting to know people and being friendly with people. I can build a relationship(s) with fellow actors once we're into the rehearsals. WE ARE after all, there to do a job and we can all do that without the need for trivial game playing that accomplishes absolutely nothing in my opinion. I've seen it done, I've been in casts where they did that (whether I participated or not) and I have as yet to see where it makes one iota of difference in any end product.
I keep reiterating that people need to read David Mamet's book TRUE AND FALSE. While he is a case and a story unto himself - he does make some incredibly valid points in the book. And while he's speaking from the standpoint of a playright, thinking that even ACTORS have no business "creating" a character - that they should just go out on stage, deliver the lines and get the hell off the stage leaving the interpretation to the audience - at least he DOES make some valid points regarding academia and the true waste of time spent in school doing things that have no relevence nor application in the real world of theater. He, I am certain, pissed off a lot of people with that book. But let me say this - I have heard from numerous colleagues who were 50 and 60 year veterans of the stage who highly endorsed that book and Mamet's viewpoints as THE MOST VALID thing they'd heard in their entire careers as actors and theater technicians. Agree or not, college is a waste of time for many (not all but many) because of the waste of time things that get done.....or not get done.....that it makes it less than worth the effort and expense in the real world application. That's my biggest peeve about theater departments who neither offer extensive courses in theater makeup too - being a makeup artist myself and seeing so much BAAAAD makeup work being done by actors who "know how to do their own makeup"!!!! I think there are SOME colleges that MIGHT come close to having solid curriculums that don't do a lot of those ridiculously waste of time theater games - but I'd venture they're few and far between.
Now I know that I'll likely piss someone off with my opinions and I really and truly don't mean to. But like many, I too have been at this for 50 years and I see absolutely no benefit to me or any cast or show I've ever been part of that makes playing those silly theater games worth the time that gets wasted doing them. I AM THE ONE responsible for bringing to the show/production what I was hired and/or cast to do and I follow through on my committment to that. I warm up, I prepare, I learn my lines, I follow the director's direction (even often in the face of completely off-the-mark, BAD direction - and I've had a few of those) and bring a finished AND POLISHED product while maintaining friendly, supportive, encouraging and contributing relationships with my fellow actors ALL WITHOUT the need for theater games during rehearsals or auditions. As a director, if I cannot get what I need from auditioners - or if I don't already have the experience first to BE directing and casting a show, then I really don't have any business doing it in the first place. As a degreed singer/voice teacher, when it comes to musicals, I can listen to anyone sing any little ditty and figure out if they can handle what a musical can expect from them. As a long time actor/director, I can spot any auditioner in a general, simple few minutes if they can bring to a role what I am looking for. I've been delighted more than once that an auditioner who might have never ever set foot on the stage, becomes a star of the show in their own right. It's happened more than once. And if I can't get from them what I need by the time the show goes up, as either a director or vocal director/music director since it IS my job to get them to performance ready, then I don't need to be doing it at all. That's one of my major pet peeves - is directors, music directors/vocal directors who simply are NOT QUALIFIED to do those jobs getting hired to do them and then trying to tell ME HOW to do those jobs when I know more about what it takes than they do. THAT TOO has happened to me far too many times to recount.
I had one girl who auditioned for me for Steel Magnolias for the role of Annelle. She had never set foot on stage. I conveyed to her what I was looking for in the part - in auditions mind you, she read, I cast her and by the time the show went up - she took the stage and was PERFECTION in my book - NOT because I did my job, only in part - but because SHE DID HER JOB and didn't need games - just guidance - to accomplish what she did. SO while I know it works for some people to play these foolish theater games, again, I see it often as a product of what they were (or were NOT) taught in college. Or perhaps they had been connected to a group wherein directors did that all the time and they don't know that it isn't necessary. I will never ever do it (though it doesn't matter much since I don't do much theater anymore) and never did. SO I sincerely agree with your take on it - it diminishes MY capabilities to give a director/show what is needed and it's something I'll never be a party to ever.
I apologize if this steps on anyone's sensibilities - but remember it's only an opinion but my time devoted to this craft and the years of experience has shown me that for ME - it is a total waste of time. If it works for YOU and your actors, then I have no room to say anything. BUT I'd lay a bet that I could get from ANY CAST/AUDITIONER more than those who feel the need to play games to accomplish what understanding the characters and the play should be bringing without the need to play those games in the first place. I know that sounds egotistical - but honest to God - I am NOT an egotist - I just have seen it borne out in practical real-world application more than not.
Sorry for my rant - off the box Tony. Back in your cave!!
TonyDi ------------- "Almost famous" |
Posted By: drose
Date Posted: 1/08/11 at 2:35pm
|
I find in my situation that it's best to be flexible. Particulary in a small community theater setting, I am not always blessed with a cast of actors who all have strong work ethics, innate talent, experience, and a strong rein on their egos and opinions. More often I have a cast of passionate, inexperienced, sometimes inhibited community members with a desire to act. If cold readings don't show me what I need, I improvise. Not usually so far as "games", but I have resorted to "excercises". Like actors, directors all have their process and I am not so egotistical to say my way is the only right way.As an actor, I will do at auditions what needs to be done...in the way the director asks me to do it. And to be brutally honest, if someone at auditions can't "play respectfully with others", I'd rather they go elsewhere anyway.
On a personal note, I hate participating in theater games - at auditions or otherwise - but I can love theater overall and still dislike some aspects. That's just life.
|
Posted By: jayzehr
Date Posted: 1/09/11 at 11:49am
I've pretty much come to this conclusion as well. However, and I don't know if this discussion extends to warm ups as well, I still try to have perhaps five minutes of group warm ups primarily for the purpose of group focus so to speak. Sometimes I reduce that to just getting together hand in hand in a circle, taking one breath together and then making some positive comments about the coming performance. I realize even that isn't necessary for experienced actors but as has been pointed out you don't always have all experienced actors. It can be chaos with a big cast backstage and I feel that just a moment of silence and focus like that can be helpful. Of course maybe it's just in my head. |
Posted By: JoeMc
Date Posted: 1/09/11 at 9:35pm
|
When I first read the AACT article it was almost a 180 on how most ameatres conduct auditions, with their attempts to mirror those held by proeatre. I agree with Tony about the pathetic playing of games, frankly I have never participated in the game of 'red/green light', would that be another form of 'Port & Starboard' I remember playing as a young Sea Scout? Depending on the type of production being a play or a musical, I hold the initial auditions generally on mass, rather than the individual slot type method. Also I never bother to ask for CV's, monologues or party pieces at this stage, other than the only prerequisite being is to front up with a committed attitude rather than any professed aptitude. After they do the required registration & endure any theatre propaganda or drivel. Each are asked inturn, usually on a first come basis, to just walk to centre stage state their name, address & any other info that may be required & exit. Similarly with singing & dance, depending how many turn up, it is done on mass again. They are all asked to sing a song from the show or a well known one suitable is chosen by the MD & dance a simple routine devised by the choreographer. Who single out those they require for a further audition individually. I like to complete the whole thing within a few hours then meet with the production team to assign call backs, hopefully prior to any of those who have auditioned leave. I have found this method uncovers hidden talents, while retaining & increasing the theatre groups community participation. ------------- [western] Gondawandaland "Hear the light & see the sound! TOI TOI CHOOKAS {may you always play to a full house!} |
Posted By: NDTENOR
Date Posted: 1/28/11 at 6:50pm
|
In this discussion of "theater games"during auditions , may I suggest that sometimes these are done as a type of "mental game" for the benefit of those who are auditioning in order to give the impression that audition is being conducted at " very high and professional" level artistically. And to also give the impression that the audition is being conducted fairly and in an unbiased fashion. But ( at least in my personal experience ) usually the opposite is the case .
But why would a theater group want to put on a "sham audition" such as this? Probably because most shows have a few "lead roles" and "featured roles" but have a lot of small " 2nd Spear-holder on the left roles" to fill. And I'm sure there are many theater groups that feel if they put on a big show of doing an elaborate and "fair" audition it is more likely that more of the people that attend the audition will be willing to be cast in these smaller roles. And excuse me, (and again just my opinion ), but in more than a few cases the whole purpose of the auditions are really only to fill some slots in the cast and small roles that haven't already been pretty much determined , for the most part, by the director and/or the " board" of the community theater group. My impression is that most professional theaters, unlike some community theaters, do not have the time or inclination for such sham "theater games". I can't say I've been to a lot of professional auditions ( 6 or 7 ) but they are usually quite fast and efficient. And no games. For a musical you sing first. In 60 seconds they pretty much know if you A) Sing very well, B) have an average voice , C) can't carry a tune. Then generally you do a 1 to 2 minute monologue. From this they get a reasonable idea if you an act a little or can't and your speaking voice. Based upon the above which has taken 3 or 4 minutes and how you look ( theather is very much a visual art form after all) they pretty much decide if they should call you back for some role and give you something to read or sing or you should just go home. If the show requires a lot of dancing they then teach you a combination they teach it to you for 15 or 20 minutes and you show them what you can do. Done. Auditions are not rocket science. They can be relatively quick and easy and yet be "fair". My impression is that when a community theater audition seems to be wasting your time with a lot of "games" ...... it probably is. Think about the musical "Chicago" and the song "Razzle-Dazzle"... pretty much the same. |
Posted By: SamD
Date Posted: 2/04/11 at 8:43pm
| Not much for games myself. You can still have plenty of fun doing cold readings — and learn a lot about how your actors will act. I guess it depends on your attitude. Have the guys read the girls parts for a bit of a mix up and some laughs. I like to keep my auditions about the play (and what do games have to do with a play?) I directed a show that had a lot of slapstick, people falling out of windows, etc. So for auditions, I opened up the double doors and told them to "sneak" past. The results were a riot, everything from tip-toeing to a commando ground crawl! Think about what YOU would want to do if YOU were auditioning. What would bring out the best in you? Then apply, rinse and repeat! |
Posted By: Rorgg
Date Posted: 2/07/11 at 5:40pm
Well, depends on the play, dunnit? I actually did a bit of this once. I was directing for a park district that had a very "this-is-how-we-do-it" culture, and they didn't do callbacks for the type of show I was doing. So basically, we had to screen down to the callback list, then give the callbacks almost immediately. Then repeat it the 2nd night, and cast. I had the acting bit do two exercises: the first was the "numbers" game -- basically, improvving a skit about (insert topic here) but instead of making up dialogue, just say numbers. I found that one to be really VERY indicative of quality, to the point that the cold read that followed as a "callback" was almost unnecessary. It was an excellent gauge of acting ability. People were able to emote and make choices without having to look at a paper, remember words, and they had to pay attention to what the scene partners were doing. The other one was very simple: I asked them to line up against a wall, and skip across the room. There was a fair amount of slapstick for a few key characters, and anyone who'd get embarrassed or wouldn't go all in on a simple task like that wouldn't work in those roles. Not needed, maybe, but it was fast, and fulfilled its purpose. |