Casting Cheat Sheet

Hollywood Camera Work Directing Actors

www.hollywoodcamerawork.com

(This casting cheat sheet is a summary of Volume 9 Chapter 5 and Volume 10 Chapter 7, and are
qualities to consider in Actors you’re auditioning. This is not a checklist! There’s no Actor in the world
who could satisfy all criteria. The goal is not to use this as a harsh standard to judge people against, but
to clarify and confirm your existing intuition about whether someone might be right for a part).

Are they right for the part?

Does everything magically come together? Two big warnings: It's important to not try to convince
yourself that someone is right. When you truly get the feeling that "yes, there it is", you will know it. But
that feeling is rare, and if you rationalize it, you lose that intuition.

Secondly, never fall into the trap of which Actor someone else might think is right. The only true test is
your own gut feeling.

Do they look the part?

Two big pitfalls: First, realize that your idea of what the character looks like is probably superficial. If
your character is strong, you most likely imagine someone who looks strong. But this is a character
without layers. Instead, casting against type, for example a tough guy for a nervous part, is automatically
more interesting, because it has built‐in juxtaposition.

Secondly, when someone looks right, assume that you're fooling yourself. Take a cold, hard reality
check, and judge the acting on its own merits. Especially when someone is beautiful, you're likely to
perceive them as a better Actor than they really are.

Do you believe it?

When you watch them, does it feel like a real person having a real experience? Again, don't look with
other people's eyes. And don't be an expert on acting or wonder what experts would think. Just ask,
does this feel real to me?

Do they capture your attention?

Do you notice that 30 seconds just went by where you forgot to think about other things and you were
just sucked in?
Do they have easy access to emotions?
Are their emotions right under their skin, and come out effortlessly in the right amounts? Or does the
Actor have to work for feelings?

Do they trigger mirror neurons?

Mirror neurons are areas of the brain that look the same on a brain scan whether you're experiencing
something or watching someone else experience it. You simply don't know if it's happen to you or to the
other person. If you notice yourself making facial expressions as you watch the acting, or getting tears in
your eyes when they do, it's working.

Do they have vulnerability?

And by that, I don't mean, are they a frail bundle of nerves? Instead, is there some openness or soft
spot, something reachable, something where they could be affected?

Invulnerable self‐confidence is very douchy, because we can't reach them and make a difference in their
life. If you tell an invulnerable person that they look good, they’ll say "yeah, I know".

Vulnerability is that there's a need for us, that we could have value to them. Even bad guys should have
vulnerability, some place in their feelings where they aren't cocksure. It's what we connect to.

Are they a force of nature?

Meaning, has life molded them into some unique person that they can't escape being? And that they
maybe don't even know that they are? Is there something in them that can't be tamed?

Harrison Ford couldn't just stop being Harrison Ford. Lisa Kudrow is unshakably that person, and who
knows what adaptation to life her personality is? But it's interesting, and you'd notice her in a crowd.

Are they surprising?

Are they surprising or “good crazy”? Is their response often different from what you would have
expected? A little bit of crazy or oddball is a good quality in Actors... because it becomes a buzzing
mental activity, and you wonder what they'll do next.

We don't want actual crazy, that could be trouble. Just good crazy. And it can't be a shtick routine. That
gets tedious after a while because it's always the same.

Do they teach you the character?

Meaning, are they adding a layer to the character, some different take that gives you a new insight?

Actors taking leadership and authority with the character is good thing. A lot of Directors fear that they
will lose control of the character. But you never get good acting when the Actors are just following
orders. An Actor who owns the character will always look better on camera than someone who does
what you tell them. That's some of the best advice in this whole course.

Is it a strong, clear choice?

Most Actors are pretty good at being relaxed and natural. But allowing is just a starting point. The real
question is, is the character somebody specific, with a specific, active agenda? Most Actors show up with
surprisingly general characters, and it's very forgettable. It's better to pick an angle and fall on your face
than it is to make no choice. We always respect Actors who just go for it.

Do they engage in the relationship?

Acting works when it's fundamentally other‐oriented, that your head is in the other person's business.
Acting doesn't work when you're doing the character in your own bubble, focused on your own
performance.

To what extent does the Actor engage in the relationship? Watch their listening. What's happening in
the gaps between their lines? Are they monitoring the other person and adapting? Or does the
performance stop, like there's a period after each line?

That's also why it's better if Actors are mostly off book. Actors really hurt their chances by being buried
in the script. Because the eye contact and engagement are gone.

Are they willing to have impact on the other Actor?

Many Actors are afraid of having real impact... and instead gently poke around like it's a pretend fight.
Acting that works is an emotional contact sport. We need Actors who throw real punches with real
emotional energy that the other guy can feel.

Is there a difference between the inner and the outer?

Basically, is there subtext in the acting? Is what we're seeing all there is to it, or is there more going on?
Many Actors bring surprisingly one‐dimensional characters to auditions where they're just playing the
text. But when you create an inner that's different from the outer, the character becomes layered, and
interesting... because suddenly we're trying to decode what they're really thinking.

Are there images behind the words?

When they're talking, are they just saying words, or are they talking about something they're seeing on
their mental screen? Most Actors don't flesh out the character's reality for an audition, but it's a big
missed opportunity. As soon as you're talking about real objects and people, suddenly the character has
brain activity, and it shows.
Are they believers?
The media has given some Actors a reputation for being air‐heads who will believe anything. But this is a
feature, not a bug. You're a better Actor if you more readily believe things.

Can they do the whole arc?

The Actor should both be able to do the before and after. We need two script excerpts to test this. And
of the two, the more expressive part of the arc is more important to test.

If the story starts with him quiet and stoic... but he finally breaks down, can he do the breaking down?
You can always turn the volume down on something that's too expressive. But you can't turn the volume
up on something that isn't there. Countless Directors have gotten hurt hiring someone with a quiet and
mysterious mood. And then when the Actor finally has to come out of his shell, he just doesn't have the
acting chops.

What is their range?

Meaning, are they flexible, or are they a one‐trick pony? When you give good direction, does something
change or do you get the exact same thing again?

Are they dynamic?

Are they playing a single note throughout the scene, like a fixed attitude or personality? And are they
stuck on it? Or is their personality fluid and flexible so they have a range of responses available to them?

How do they handle beats/transitions?

Do they suddenly change? Or don't they change at all? Or is there a nice transition as the beat hits
them?

Do they love acting?

Or is it more about getting the part? Now, of course, every Actor likes acting. But there are some who
more just like acting for its own sake. And there are some who care more about getting the part for its
own sake.

We want Actors who bias towards being good at acting because it’s fun to be good at, where the work in
itself is interesting, and the reward is discovering something new.

And this is just about your gut feeling. That you might notice they take risks and make bigger choices.
And it doesn't bother them as much to fall flat on their face with the wrong choice. And they think it's
fun to get directed.
Do they take pleasure in the character's flaws?
Do they jump right into a character who has some serious psychological problems, is that fun for them?
Or are they afraid of going there? Or are they concerned about their image as a person?

Do they have their own opinions?

This is tricky, because let's be clear that you are the highest authority on the set, and you make the final
decision. But within that, we don't want Actors to be mindless robots who quietly keep doing what we
ask for, even when it doesn't work. We also don't want Actors who push back against your direction,
especially at the audition, that would be a huge red flag.

But somewhere in the middle, there's an Actor who both contributes and has feelings for or against
ideas, but who still totally respects your final decision and does her best with it.

Don't they give a shit (in a good way)?

Giving too much of a shit is an obstacle as an artist... like following the rules of the art‐form, acting
correctly, caring what everyone thinks.

You're a better artist when you give less of a shit... and that doesn't mean that you're hostile. It means
that you have your priorities and your values and your artistic loyalties sorted out, and you're only trying
to please certain people. But of course, one of those people has to be the Director, or we’re in trouble.

Do they have life experience?

Do they bring something that's bigger than movies? Do they know something about life that gives them
authority as an artist and that comes out in their work? Or are they just competently doing the work,
but without any point of view?

Shyness that comes off when acting?

There are some Actors who are too big for society, and who seem quiet out in the world. Until they start
Acting, and then suddenly the chains come off. We want people with big personalities. So that after all
the directing and endless coverage, there's still some life left.

Do they work the way that you do?

For example, if you like to improv while shooting, you should have the Actors improv at the audition. If
you prefer meticulous character building, you should do specific directing at the audition.

But you can't limit yourself only to Actors who work exactly like you. Great Actors come in all shapes and
sizes, and you should be able to work with all of them.