Hi guys--I have a question for you--especially those of you in NY.

I recently answered a question in my column, about whether an actor can expect (or at least request!) to see a full script of a new play before he or she commits to a role in a production. I said yes. I went on to say he or she should get to see the script before callbacks or at least AT callbacks.
I got a letter responding saying no, actors should not expect to see new plays before committing to productions, and certainly not at auditions, as playwrights like to keep new work close to their chest. The letter writer also said that asking for the full script would seem like a Diva move.

In retrospect, I GET the playwrights not wanting the full script out there in the public, but still feel actors should get to look at the whole script at callbacks or AT LEAST before being expected to commit to a role. Am I naive?

I'd love to hear from people that have auditioned for or written and produced new plays. Your thoughts?

I feel this can often be a "no win" situation.

I think, at the VERY LEAST, the playwright/director should give the actor(s) a little overview... and also let them know if anything special will be required of them (nudity, etc).

I will say that on one occasion that I was offered a role in a new play, the playwright was very good about it. He wouldn't give me the script, but he told me I was chosen for a gay role and I would have to kiss another guy. He then gave me the option of turning down the role. I thought that was very courteous and professional.

On the other hand, I'm not a playwright... I don't understand what they might be afraid of. If they're worried about it being stolen, that's what copyright is for. *shrug*

But whatever, I guess I can have a possessive streak also, especially about something I created. So inevitably, it's just something I felt I've had to get used to.

Your opinion is not naive, in my OWN opinion. =)

Especially for those of us who have a decent amount of credits, the writing of the play (in addition to the depth/arc of the offered role) are vitally important to me when I accept or decline an offer. For those looking to build their resumes, perhaps it wouldn't be as important. But for me it's almost non-negotiable (I say almost, because anything is possible!)

This also relates to filmmaking- screenwriters are often hesitant to release their scripts to actors and this makes it difficult for us to make our final decision. I have even seen some student filmmakers refuse to send SIDES before an audition, preferring us to come in and read cold so that we cannot run off with their story ideas. Of course, when you are working at a higher level, the casting director will have access to at least a treatment or synopsis and will usually pass them along to the actor, which is extremely helpful.

That all being said, I think it is a valid concern for writers, because it is so easy to steal ideas and pass them off as someone else's. I believe the Writer's Guild has procedures in place to protect its members and their intellectual property. Perhaps these playwrights and screenwriters could consider registering their work to ease their mind?

As a practical matter, I've seen numerous actors find reasons to drop out of productions, whatever their actual problems with them.

Honestly, it depends somewhat on the rank of the production. When I did black box theater in NYC, I dimly remember leaving a production early on because it was so blatantly clear the writer had no clear vision. Certainly, if I'd gotten a few days into a play and realized it was awful, I probably would have left, with little concern for what those involved thought.

On the other hand, if you're involved with people you'd like to work with again, you might want to be more tactful. But then they're less likely to have dicey material. And if they do, the problems should be specific enough for the actor to tactfully address in leaving.

I auditioned for one play out here where the director smoked right through the audition. I mildly commented on this and he said, "But there's smoking in the play!" Which hadn't been mentioned until then. Had I done the play and discovered that after the fact, I would have had no qualms about citing that as a reason for leaving.

I think the problem might really be framed as one of power. Many actors might hesitate to leave once they find the script dismaying because, in a general way, they view those hiring them as having the power. But really that's only true in fairly professional circumstances and those are the very ones where you probably have the least to worry about. Otherwise, for most productions where this would be an issue, the worst they can do is dislike you (unless of course you're just fabulously unlucky and their next project turns out to be a major hit. )

Hi guys!
I don't usually post much because I still consider myself pretty new to the industry, but I have to say, it would be much easier for me, as an actress, if I were able to see the script before I committed. I have a great work ethic, so I prefer to stick with a project he whole way through once I've started. But I also don't want to put myself in a position that makes my skills/choices as an actress questionable, ya know?
I've been in two situations recently where, had I seen the script beforehand, I probably wouldn't have committed to the project. On the same note, though, unless you've seen the work of a specific director beforehand, you don't know how the show/film is going to turn out. Even a script that is great on paper can be turned into a mess in the wrong hands.
On the other hand, I do understand a writer being protective of their work, and not wanting it just floating around for anyone to see. So I guess there's the catch. : )

quote:

......but still feel actors should get to look at the whole script at callbacks or AT LEAST before being expected to commit to a role. Am I naive?

Jackie

I don't think you are being naive at all. To expect an actor to commit to unseen work, is the same as the actor expecting to be hired without auditioning.

Both seem unreasonable to me, unless we are talking about 'offer only' level talent, or proven playwrights.

Just an opinion.

Jim

I thought that's what WGA and AZZCAP..maybe others too...
was for...to protect the work the writer wrote.
The script being out there (in the actors hands specifically) should therefore be protected right?
I feel if an actor asks for the script, he/she either wants to get a better understanding of the play story etc, to get a better understanding of his/her character..
Or maybe because he/she really likes the work and is interested in wanting to know more, which I find to be a flattering compliment....

In my limited experience, I haven't been given a full script at auditions or callbacks, considering there are many of those brought in that probably won't be involved in the production. However, I have been offered the script along with the contract and if not I've always asked.

Like others have said, it's important for the actors to know what they're getting into before they sign on. I think that's true no matter what level, at least if you reach the point where you're being offered the part.

Perhaps I can shed some light on this.

I'm a writer and an actor, and I'm currently involved in a production of a new script I wrote. We're still in the developmental phase (ie the script will be going through readings, etc), but we're pretty close to the actual production.

I make sure the actors have the script at least a week before the audition. Why? They'll give me a better audition, and I'll have a better idea of who's right for the role.

I'm not really worried about keeping the work "close to my chest." If I'm embarrassed to let others read it, then I'm honestly not ready to start auditioning actors. And I'm not worried about someone stealing my work. It's fully copyrighted, and if someone was foolish enough to mount an actual production without my permission, I'd be incredibly wealthy from the resulting lawsuit.

Now that's just me. And I understand if the writer doesn't want to send out the full script at an audition. Some writers are very protective. But you should definitely get the script by the time callbacks roll around (especially if you're going for a lead role), and you should DEFINITELY get the script before you commit to the project. As an actor, there is no way I'd commit to a project without seeing the script first. It's not a diva move; it's common sense. If the script is terrible, or I don't feel I'm right for the role, then I won't commit to a project. As the old saying goes, if it ain't on the page it ain't on the stage.

So in short, there's nothing wrong with asking for the full script. I've done it for nearly all the projects I've auditioned for (no one's ever told me no), and as a writer I'm more than happy to provide it to actors. However, BE NICE. Writers are incredibly sensitive people, and if you're rude to them in any way, bad things will probably happen. Just send the writer/production company a well written letter saying that you prepare extensively for any role you audition for, and you really want to do some work on the actual script before the audition. They'll be impressed, and you'll probably get the script.

Now, if we're talking about a Spielberg movie, or something with several major stars attached to it, then it's a different story. Major studios are very protective of their scripts, and rightfully so. But most of us aren't at that level yet, and when you are, you'll probably get the script from your agent a long time before the actual audition.

quote:

BE NICE.

That should be understood.

I would not even audition for any project before reading the entire script (if possible). My friend was offered a part in a tv show, turns out she was playing the fat, ugly, sidekick who slept around bc of low self esteem and everyone made fun of her. She got out of it but everyone was pretty pissed at her and it wasted everyone's time. Other than posting nudity, they don't really have to say what sort of role you are auditioning for. Will you be proud of the end result, as far as you can tell? If not, don't even bother auditioning. I turned down an aud for "Integrity Talent" playing a lesbian sex scene with my sister. Incest has never been my thing.

Well, I'm always told by those in the industry to always be PROFESSIONAL.

And to be professional for me is to be prepared, arrive with the text in mind with some sort of character work done etc. I have in the past and still do in the present ask for longer sides, partial script chunks involving my character-and I don't view it as a DIVA move.

For me to request this you are seeing (for me again) if I the actor can do justice to the piece be it theatre or film or what ever. You save the casting person/director a lot of issues in the casting process.

I have in the past read a full script which the writer or director did not mind emailing to me. And I have contacted them back that I did not believe that I would do justice to the character they had me in mind for nor the production of the project. They did not seem to mind it all and appreciated my approach in this way.

However, there has only been one negative result with the writer blocking all my email contacts to her, and barely saying Hello when we see each other. This behavior to me is "unprofessional". Why would a writer want to force someone to just try a lame attempt in performing their piece. I would think you would want an actor who's heart and soul was totally into the role. But, that's just my opinion.

quote:

Originally posted by fyi:
I have in the past read a full script which the writer or director did not mind emailing to me. And I have contacted them back that I did not believe that I would do justice to the character they had me in mind for nor the production of the project. They did not seem to mind it all and appreciated my approach in this way.

However, there has only been one negative result with the writer blocking all my email contacts to her, and barely saying Hello when we see each other. This behavior to me is "unprofessional". Why would a writer want to force someone to just try a lame attempt in performing their piece. I would think you would want an actor who's heart and soul was totally into the role. But, that's just my opinion.

Here is the thing. When you say "I don't think I'll do the role justice" a lot of writers will take that as "I think your script sucks." I don't, but I'm a bit more self-aware than most people. The best thing to do is call them up and tell them you have a conflict and won't be able to make the audition.

I appreciate all the input on this--thanks so much. I have a follow up running in the column soon and I'll link it here. I spoke to a writer and an AD of a new works company, and they echoed the sentiment here exactly!

If the sides I receive for an audition/callback are pretty bad, I will pull out of the audition (and say a conflict has arisen.) But I fear I do this too much because in all likelihood the pieces will be revised and perhaps tightened up before the end. So sometimes I worry that I back out of things that could have been fixed.

But then again, I am not made of time and energy. I suppose I have to be a little selective about projects I pursue.

Anyone else care to offer thoughts/feelings on turning down roles/auditions when the material seems pretty awful?