Hello Everyone,

Last May I graduated from college with a degree in Communication Arts. I was in a good situation at school, so I took advantage of the programs and enrolled in an acting course my junior year. My senior year I took full advantage of it, enrolled in a few more courses and was cast in two full productions.

Prior to my senior year I was cast as an Extra in "Public Enemies". Following my day of work, they called me back to be a "Stand In". I stood in for 3 days and was hooked with film.

Now upon graduating, I want to focus on acting/film but am unaware of where to start. I have been traveling the west since I graduated, and now need to stick in one place for awhile. My sister lives in L.A, so I decided to come stay with her for the past week, as this is where I currently am living.

I am unsure if this is the place to start, as the size is intimidating and the economy itself keeps me up at night. So on that note, is L.A. or Chicago the place to start for a twenty three year old who wants to keep exploring the art that awoke a passion.

Thanks for taking the time to read this.

-Alex

LA dude. Especially since you've got a cool situation there. Yes, Chicago does have a great theater scene, but to be a working actor, the move to LA or NYC is the best thing. Plan to give it a few years, and then you can reevaluate based on your progress and your comitment level at that time.

It takes a while to learn to navigate the system, and you really have to be in the city to do that

actually, chicago is one of the top secondary markets. so if you aren't sure yet about acting, or the business, or are worried about the horrible economy here in LA right now and the finances that come with living here, stay in Chitown for a year or two.

LA isn't going anywhere. and no one here in LA is going to care that you did BG or stand in work, except people that do BG and stand in work, and even they don't usually care (since none of them ask for your experience or a resume). they only care if you are union or not.

and being in LA for a week is nothing. you need to be here for at the very least a month, so you can get around, see traffic, explore the job market... you probably won't get any auditions unless you are on AA and very lucky. but a week is not anywhere near long enough to judge.

but they say it takes 2-4 YEARS to get established in NYC and LA. it may take less than half that in a secondary market- like Chicago.

if you were in a really small market, like a small city with one casting director, one tv show, and one feature film a year who only hires BG... i'd say yes, move.

but Chicago is a HUGE town. plenty of stuff going on there. no it's not NYC or LA, but i know many working actors there who took time to build their resumes and reels there before relocating.

i mean, you can't tell anyone, agents, CDs, teachers, even other actors, that you did BG work. no one cares. and unless you went to Boston University/Conservatory, i doubt anyone will care that you did stage shows in college either, esp here in LA, unless you are planning to pursue some amount of stagework here in LA as well. yes, they go on your resume anyway, but no one is really going to care.

which means, you are moving here with absolutely no experience. the job market sucks (expect $8-11 an hour, and only 20 hrs a week, MAYBE, and have to pay for your own parking when you work). it's expensive (esp to own a car, insurance, gas, rent, etc).

i'm not trying to turn you off of LA, but you have no experience. before you pursue anything, you'll need to be in several classes, which could run you an additional $250-500 a month, you'll need headshots eventually, and so much more.

yes, you'll need these things in Chicago, but it might be more manageable to live in Chicago. i don't know. it's probably just as expensive, but it's still a smaller market.

it's a tough call, i know.

thursday, another boardmember and i were doing stuff for Backstage, and at our last stop, we ran into an audition, which we popped into and did. she went before me, and as i was walking in, the team was badmouthing another actress (not boardmember), saying things like, "What? only stage credits? blah blah blah bad stuff about stage, no on camera experience, blah blah..."

i don't want to go into details beyond that, but just goes to show. small indie project. never heard of any of these people before. and they had problems with some actress who only had stage credits and her gall at auditioning for an on camera project (to which they invited her to audition, makes no sense, since they had her resume, but...)

just saying.

woah, that got long. sorry!

No it definitely did not. I appreciate your input and input such as yours makes things clearer. So THANK YOU!

Chicago is actually the Voice Over capital. Many of the major ad agencies are there.

It also has the Second City main stage.

I just moved to New York after being in a secondary market for a few years.

And I wish I had moved here sooner!

I've heard it takes 2 or more years to establish yourself in a big market like NYC or LA and I wish I had begun that process 2 years ago so I could be doing more work now! It takes time to establish yourself in a secondary market, too. Perhaps just as much (to keep this brief, I won't elaborate on why). So if a move to LA is inevitable, why not put in your time now? I'm not sure a great resume in Chicago is gonna make many people in LA care more about you. I kind of doubt it actually. This isn't meant to be rude. A credit at a no-name but decent Chicago theater will mean nothing to a LA casting director. A credit at a no-name but decent LA theater stands a chance of meaning something to a LA casting director - cuz they may know someone connected to it!

To sum up: it's about who you know. Get workin on that in LA if you know you wanna be there eventually. I fear LA is too important/large/snooty/what-you-will a market to care about your Chicago contacts. I could of course be wrong, but my personal experience has taught me that the credit on my resume only meant something to the New York folks if it was connected to a New York person. Know what I mean? They didn't care that if I'd worked for the most respected theater in my city. They only cared that I worked with the NY director a not-as-good theater flew in.

Goddammit! I hate it when people say that phrase.

It's NOT who YOU know!

It's WHO knows you!

many apologies. It is who knows you.

true, it may be just as difficult to get started in chicago as well, which i think i mentioned. but at least then the poster would be moving to LA with a reel and some training, both of which ha sthe potential to be easier (and maybe more affordably) attained in chicago.

Definitely LA. If film is your focus, LA, no question.

It's funny how in this week's "Parade Magazine" DeNiro says he hates California and lives in NY. He still gets into films. (btw excellent article, too short)

quote:

Originally posted by Popeye:
It's funny how in this week's "Parade Magazine" DeNiro says he hates California and lives in NY. He still gets into films. (btw excellent article, too short)

He can do that because he's De Niro. ; )

Deniro and Pacino both were born and raised in NYC. Both got started in theatre in NYC. And both live here. Pacino has a home north of the city that caught fire a few years back. Home is home. Sigourney Weaver lives in NYC as do many film actors. Home is home. And with a great career, you can live anywhere. Rovert Duvall lives in Virginia. (Where he's from) Sandra Bullock lives in Texas.(Where she's from).

Home is where your heart is.

Having grown up in Chicago and got my start there in major market radio and VO's, I can attest that Chitown is a good place to land for a while. It also helped to have a college roommate that knew me well enough to put me in national spots. Right now NYC is looking pretty good, at least for the past 28 years.
LA, NYC and Chicago are good places to get experience and network.