ATTWN Auditions - Night 2

Wow! What a turn-out last night. It was great.

I got several younger men, just as I'd requested. I got a guy who'd be great for Blore. I got a young guy who'd be great either as Lombard or Marston. And I got a guy who'd be great as Lombard or Blore. If you do a Venn diagram of that, you see where things fall: #1 would be Blore, #2 would be Marston, and #3 would be Lombard. The teeter-totter is this: #2 is REALLY good a Lombard, but I don't have anyone to play Vera across from him (more on that below). He's also REALLY great as Marston, but Marston is only on in the first act, and I'd like to use him as much as possible. #3 is a long-time actor with Conejo, and I've been dying to work with him for years, since I saw him in a farce several years ago with my friend Cupid Hayes (another Sumner Academy alum). He takes direction well, but he's not my ideal Lombard, but then, who is, really? The key will be the honest interactions with Vera.

Vera, Vera, Vera. Two of my favorite ladies showed up last night, both reading for Vera. One took the previous direction I'd given her and ran with it nicely. The second is solid and one of the hardest working actresses I know, and her take at times was a bit more "Damsel In Distress", although she surprised me with a very harsh reaction to one of the other character's lines, which gives me great encouragement. The rest of the ladies reading for Vera were okay, took direction fairly well, but just didn't read as well as the other two.

For Emily, I got about three or four ladies who did very well again. One was the actress mentioned above, and she nailed it. Another was a woman I'd worked with in a technical capacity on another show, and she read very well for the part as well. And the other lady who read captured the snobbish aspect of Emily very well, but didn't reveal much vulnerability to me when directed to do so. My best Emily so far has come on the first night.

I also got what I believe to be a VERY strong Armstrong last night, and another option for Wargrave. I have options for Rogers and Mrs. Rogers, but it all depends on how the rest falls together this evening. Oh, yeah, and for Narracott, I have a possible one-two punch in association with casting another role, but more on that later.

All things said, I have a good possible cast as of today, even if no one else shows up tonight. It's not ideal, but they would all work their asses off to support each other, and that's usually more important than trying to find the ULTIMATE person for each role. I have had nothing but wonderful support and encouragement for the production from everyone involved, and that's worth more than tilting at windmills in search of the PERFECT cast. If you're looking for one, you'll never find it, but if you look for the best people with which to surround yourself, the cast will be perfect naturally.

Good luck to anyone auditioning tonight!

- Sean

ATTWN Auditions - Night 1

Auditions went well last night. Thanks to Dave and Deidre Parmenter for having the theatre up and ready for me when I got there last night, and to Shawn, Arryck, and Chris for stopping by for support later. It's great to be part of such a warm, supportive group.

I had nine folks show up to audition, all pretty good. If I had to cast today, I'd be missing three men: minimally two younger men for Fred Narracott and Tony Marston, and an older man for Rogers. The two young men who did show up both gave respectable reads of both Lombard and Blore, but the chemistry didn't quite click. The three older gentlemen I had would be fine in the Wargrave, MacKenzie, and Armstrong roles, and each took direction very well when given. Surprisingly, only one young woman showed up for the Vera role, and she not only nailed it quickly, but she improved with the MANY subsequent reads she gave supporting the other auditioners. For the roles of Emily Brent and Mrs. Rogers, I had three very talented women audition, any of which would do very well. One was EXCEPTIONAL as Emily Brent. The other was VERY GOOD as Mrs. Rogers. Both took direction well.

One of the best things about last night was to hear the updated script read by the actors, particularly the two monologues. Both were probably a little long, and could each use some trimming for length, but the dialog flowed nicely and gave me a good idea of the actor's range. The sides worked well, and again, some of them were a SMIDGE longer than I'd like. Of particular note were the Blore/Lombard and Marston/Armstrong sides. An auditionee commented that she'd forgotten or not realized how humorous the script was. I agree, and can't wait to get the cast complete so we can hear it read aloud for the first time.

More tonight. If you're reading this, ATTWN NEEDS YOUNG MEN!

- Sean

Auditions Tonight!

Tonight's the night.

I've completed the calendar (see Links to the right to access). I then added that to the printed audition forms and made up 50 of them. If we have more than that, I'd be shocked.

My next job before this evening is to get an audition piece and some sides for everyone to try. Crap! That means at LEAST eleven sides and two monologues.

I'd better get cracking...

- Sean

Angel Street Auditions - Night 2 & 3

Well, the persistent problem of live theatre rears it's Medusan head again: WHERE ARE THE MEN?

The ratio of male to female auditioners for Angel Street is a fairly solid 1:4. And to be even more critical, the ratio of role-appropriate male auditioners to role-appropriate female auditioners is about 1:8. The women who've auditioned are just that good, honestly, and it will be a tough choice for Arryck. Now, this isn't to suggest that the men aren't that good, but the two male roles in Angel Street call for very specific character types, both with very particular looks, physiques, and vocal talent.

It's been tough.

Callbacks for Angel Street are tonight, and Arryck will definitely be trying all possible combinations of actors to get the best mix. I probably won't be there tonight to lend my input, but I made sure that I offered as much as I could last night.

And this shortage of role-appropriate men for Angel Street will definitely affect me in my upcoming auditions for ATTWN. Arryck is likely to cast as Mr. Manningham the one person I've seen who who'd be good for Philip Lombard. I can only hope that more actors will come out and surprise me starting Sunday.

And the plethora of talented women is going to make things, actually, quite difficult for me. For example, the three women who I've seen at Angel Street auditions who I feel would be perfect for Vera Claythorne in ATTWN will give me more than enough raw talent to choose from. Where it becomes painful is having to cast one actress in the plum role of Vera, and then having to make the decision whether or not to relegate the "runner up" to the roles of Mrs. Rogers or Emily Brent. Do I put a talented person in a role not suited to them, just to keep the talent base high? Or do I insert a less talented actress who might look more appropriate?

Again, tough call.

On the upside, my blocking for ATTWN is coming along VERY well. I'm on the third revision of the script. I'm about 1/3 of the way through typing the blocking in the script. I'm also trying something I've not done extensively before and typing sections of lines side-by-side, so that conversations overlap and often occur at the same time. This can be tricky because as-written the script is MEANT to be spoken sequentially, like a traditional play. But it's not often real enough, dialog-wise. I sometimes have to take two scenes that occur sequentially and stack them up, side-by-side and blend the dialog. Sometimes I'll have to pad it a bit with some new lines spoken sotto voce.

But what's REALLY hard right now is to keep track of where everybody is on stage. I might have to resort to the old "board game" approach, and double-check the blocking sequentially in the script with a floor plan. It will probably look like a game of Clue on my desk for a while. The good news is, as more characters are killed off, the easier it will be to keep track of them.

And I'm jazzed about ATTWN auditions this coming Sunday.

- Sean

Angel Street Auditions - Night 1

I'm working closely with the production team of Angel Street. Their show is the mainstage show, and although I say we're "In repertory" with them, the truth is, we're using their set, lights, and spare stage time.

So to help myself by helping others, I'm designing the set for them and therefore for ATTWN as well. I'm also doing the lights, and making it easier for Arryck to make his show as worry-free as possible. The benefit is that my show will also be as worry-free as possible.

Also part of the collaboration is the fact that I'm sitting in on the Angel Street auditions. Last night (1/21) was the first evening of auditions for their show, and the turnout was pretty good. They had a cadre of VERY talented folks audition, but not all the roles are there yet. Some auditions were OUTSTANDING. Some were good. Some were not. I was crawling in my skin, wanting to stand up and audition for either Mr. Manningham or Rough myself, but I tempered my excitement and let the very talented set of auditioners shine themselves.

I was also antsy, looking carefully at the checkbox on the audition form that indicated whether or not the actor was interested in auditioning for ATTWN if they were not cast for Angel Street. Sadly, a few of the folks marked "No" on their forms, but their auditions were very strong and Arryck will likely use them anyway. Equally melancholy were those who marked "Yes", but who were so good that Arryck would be crazy not to cast them.

Ah, well, we'll wait and see. I have 11 roles to fill. We'll see how it shapes up.


- Sean

Our Version of the Rhyme

Here's our version of the Ten Little Soldier Boys rhyme. The name at the end is the victim for that line.

---

Ten Little Soldier Boys

Ten little soldier boys, going out to dine,
One choked his little self, and then there were nine. (Marston)

Nine little soldier boys, sat up very late,
One overslept himself, and then there were eight. (Mrs. Rogers)

Eight little soldier boys, traveling to Devon,
One got left behind, and then there were seven. (MacKenzie)

Seven little soldier boys, gathering some sticks,
One chopped himself in half, and then there were six. (Rogers)

Six little soldier boys, playing with a hive,
A bumble bee stung one, and then there were five. (Emily)

Five little soldier boys, heading off to war,
One was judged unfit to serve, and then there were four. (Wargrave)

Four little soldier boys, going out to sea,
A red herring swallowed one, and then there were three. (Armstrong)

Three little soldier boys, walking in the zoo,
A big bear hugged one, and then there were two. (Blore)

Two little soldier boys, playing with a gun,
One shot the other boy, and then there was one. (Lombard)

One little soldier boy, sitting all alone,
He went and hanged himself, and then there were none. (Vera)

---

- Sean

Character Notes - Judge Wargrave

Well, what more can you say about Wargrave than "He's got one hell of a poker face!"

In Americanizing the script, two of the words I searched for in the text were "should" and "have". American's don't use these two words in the same way that the English do, so I worked to remove them wherever possible in the dialog. But I DIDN'T remove them from Wargrave's lines because I want him to retain that formal fell of the King's English, even though he's American. It gives him an air of authority rather than insanity.

What the actor playing Wargrave and I will have to do is carefully meter the "give away" lines to make sure they're not too smarmy and obvious. I want repeat viewers (yeah, if we're lucky), or those familiar with the play to "get" his little hints and be able to watch him from start to finish as he knocks each character off.

As with Vera, I will have the actor auditioning for Wargrave read the final monologue. I need a clever balance of believable insanity and methodical misanthropy. He will be fun to watch...


- Sean

Character Notes - Doctor Armstrong & General MacKenzie

General MacKenzie is a dinosaur. What I'm looking for from the actor who plays him is a uniqueness. This can't be a sterotypical, Alzheimer's-affected old war veteran... well, let me re-state that: he CAN be portrayed that way, but I'd prefer to see something interesting done with him. WHY does Marston's death affect him so deeply? Does Marston remind him of the man he sent to die back in WWI? I think probably, yeah. And I think Vera ABSOLUTELY reminds him of his wife. I'd like to see him see the two together, and possibly Vera and Lombard as well, and somehow link the scene to when his wife was flirting. THAT would be interesting. Then, to watch his mind fall apart before he's killed... awesome!

For Dr. Armstrong, I think he sees in Tony Marston himself, particularly when drinking/drunk. I'd like to see him slowly unravel as well, so that we too believe that he has gone off his nut enough to kill himself. I think either Mrs. Rogers or Emily Brent reminds Armstrong of the woman he accidentally let die in the operating room during his residency as a surgeon, and I'll want to see that connection (depending on the appropriateness of the actress' physique). I really think there's a hatred/distrust of women, hence his belief that Vera is the killer. I think he may have been once jilted by a woman like Vera in his youth.


- Sean

Character Notes - Philip Lombard

Of all the dialog that bugs me the most, it's Lombard's. I understand the type of hero that she was creating for 1940 England, but I don't think it's a character that audiences now in 2007 will relate to. As written, he's cartoony, sexist, and a typical stereotype of the 40's war hero.

I don't buy it.

I do think Lombard is attractive. I think he's intelligent and jaded as well, and that's what draws he and Vera together. But I want to humanize him, so every chance I get, I'm going to take him down a few pegs, image-wise. When Marston chokes on the cyanide, he will vomit all over the back of Lombard's dinner jacket. When he and Vera get into the "HAVE A DRINK!" argument, she gets angry and splashes the water from a vase of flowers on him when his back is turned. He spends most of the end of Act One soaked to the bone from being outside, searching the island. He's dry for the first part of Act Two, but when Blore's head is crushed in, he gets sprayed with blood, soiled again. Actually, this will also facilitate not having to puncture a blood pack after Vera shoots him, so that's a bonus.

Lombard is a VERY logical man, and Blore drives him nuts. I think that the most confused he becomes is right after Wargrave is killed. He believes that Wargrave is the killer, but when the judge is eliminated and Vera goes crazy, his brain scrambles to adjust his solution.

I also think his sense of humor and delivery are important. He, by his own admission, has a rather macabre sense of humor. I want this to be a character hallmark.

- Sean

Character Notes - Vera Claythorne

I like the character Vera. Depending on the actress, she could be anywhere from 19 to 49 as far as I'm concerned, so long as she's sexy, intelligent, flirtatious, and just a little mad. I've clarified the relationship between her and Hugh, the man who was the uncle of the boy she cared for. I can't justify having her be blindly, helplessly in love with him, enough to give him the slack that offers opportunity for him to cause the death of his nephew.

I have to see her as world-wise and jaded. To have a child die while under your care is devastating, and the only way she could possibly function is to suppress memories and culpability for that event. To realize that the person you thought loved you was manipulating you into the scheme... horrific, to say the least!

While I don't think Lombard is the first man Vera's shown interest in since Petey died and Hugh dumped her, I do think he's the first one she's considered becoming romantic with. I simply CAN'T buy the final line of the play, where Lombard utters a modified version of the nursery rhyme, "One little soldier boy, sitting all alone; they got married and then there were none." suggesting that Vera should somehow forget all the hideous events of the weekend and simply run away and marry him... ridiculous. That, and it's a stupid re-write. He changes the subject from ONE little subject and then switches to THEY in the second half... idiotic and sloppy, and I don't think Vera would buy it. So I have her reacting accordingly after his line, letting him know what a fool she thinks he is, but still offering hope that they might have a future together after this.

I'm looking for an actress who can REALLY pull of the break-down Vera has after Wargrave is killed, when she blames Blore, Lombard, and Armstrong. I will likely have actresses read that closing monologue. The strong, self-confident Vera will be easy for most. The trick will be the Vera who's ready to lose it.

- Sean

Character Notes - William Blore

Well, while we're on the thread of gay characters (see the previous post on Emily Brent), I also think Detective Blore being gay would be an interesting approach as well.

The script and the novel suggest that Blore was previously a detective, and then went into private practice as a private investigator or detective. Being close friends with a private investigator was part of that notion, as I have a small bit of insight into how they do what they do (and why).

One thing that's interesting in the script is how utterly disinterested Blore is in Vera Claythorne. He also seems to have an absolutely polar dislike for Emily Brent. However, I take his constant bickering and banter with Lombard as... well... flirting, kind of.

Now, understand that this is COMPLETELY subtextual: I would hope that, if this was the choice of the actor, that we wouldn't wind up with a swishy, stereotypical "hetero-imitates-a-gay-man" approach. If it's going to be done, it would have to be done in the context of the character. If Blore were gay, he would have had to hide it DESPERATELY in all his years on the force. This was 1941, and gays were rarely open with their relationships.

I also believe that one of the misconceptions of Blore made by most of the other characters, is that he is stupid. I don't believe that to be true. I believe he is impulsive, stubborn, and jaded, but I don't find him stupid, myopic, or lazy.


- Sean

Character Notes - Emily Brent

If you hit Wikipedia for Agatha Christie, you'll find that the "old spinster" is a typical character within her works. One of the most popular Christie characters, Miss Jane Marple, is just such a character, but Emily Brent is no Jane Marple...

Brent seems to embody every stereotype of a prissy, old spinster. She's ferociously devout in her religious beliefs. She is jealous and hateful of those younger, than her, particularly Vera Claythorne. She carries a Bible with her at all times, and spews forth quotes from it like daggers. Her only kindred spirit seems to be, ironically and tragically, Judge Wargrave.

Her relationship with her alleged victim (Beatrice Taylor in the original; Betty in ours) is what I'd like to really like to see my actress develop. I think Emily is quite probably a lesbian, and that Betty and Emily had a sexual relationship while Betty was in Emily's employ. But Betty was young and still figuring herself out, and I think she also had a boyfriend (or two) at the same time. When Betty became pregnant, Emily came to the stark realization that Betty was not only unfaithful, but also not a kindred spirit. I'm sure she imagined that Betty had probably told her other partners about hers and Emily's affairs, and the combination of all of these things drove her to lash out relentlessly at Betty, causing her to commit suicide.

The text supports this in wonderfully subtle ways...

• "That girl, Beatrice Taylor, was in my service." - Yes, probably very much in your service...
• "She had nice manners and was clean and willing. I was very pleased with her." - Emily must have really been taken with Betty.
• "It was some time before I found out that she was what they call 'in trouble.' It was a great shock to me." - If Betty had been sexually active with Emily at the same time that she had been having sex with men, imagine how repulsed Emily would have been, especially considering that Betty MUST have had vaginal intercourse, now that she was pregnant.
• "I've no patience with this indulgence toward sin." - I think Emily is punishing herself as much as the memory of Betty in this statement.

So, I think Emily is an incredibly deep and complex woman who's heart was broken, probably by the first person she had ever confided in regarding her sexual orientation. She was probably no more religious than the next person before Betty's betrayal, but it and the suicide, which she undoubtedly feels tremendous guilt for, pushed her into this position.

I think the worst thing that someone could do with Emily would be to present a caricature of a spinster. I think there has to be more there.

- Sean

Character Notes - Anthony Marston

The main thing I like about the character of Tony Marston is his absolute and utter disregard for anyone other than himself. He is undoubtedly guilty of mowing down the two kids, although he doesn't see it as a crime. As he puts it, "Got my license revoked. Damned nuisance!"

I've always enjoyed socialite characters, people who have grown up with an ethic that goes against all of the traditional "values" that most of us have. It puts them in a mindset that offers the potential for absolute greatness, but which usually flies in the face of decency and ethics. I've seen them on stage and screen, and I've met them in real life and considered them good acquaintances (they each called me "friend" but I doubt they truly regarded me as such).

Perhaps it started with Gatsby. As with most, it was required reading in eighth or ninth grade. I loved that there was this person with "traditional" values who was now set free in this strata of carefree bliss, and that it's those very "traditional" values that become his undoing. I love what Fitzgerald did with that.

So, with Marston, I see a young Beverly Hills socialite child, probably the son of a big Hollywood executive, but with no talent or ambition to follow in those footsteps. Marston doesn't once name drop during the script, and that's interesting in that he probably hob-knobs with all sorts of big names, but he is in such a strata that he doesn't feel compelled to adopt a coolness-by-association demeanor. The only person he mentions is "Old Badger Berkely", updated to "Buster Berkeley" in our version ("Badger" is a common, upper-crust nickname in England, and "Buster" seems appropriate for America). The reference suggests an acquaintance (rather than friend), someone who might offer enticement enough to get him to drive 200 miles up from Los Angeles to the island.

When Tony is poisoned, I think the shock is genuine and is believed at first by the others to be a practical joke on his behalf. I want a nice, long pause after his death, with the slow, uncomfortable realization that he has died, slipping smoothly into the minds of the other guests.


- Sean

Character Notes - Fred Narracott & The Rogers

Fred Narracott is used in ATTWN purely as an exposition and scenario establishing tool. Narracott helps establish the credibility of the primary means of escape that any of the other characters would have. The simple, "play it by the rules even if it sounds crazy" manner of his speech helps to support his acceptance of the scenario created by the mysterious Mr. Owen. I need Narracott to be a simple, blue-collar worker who does what he's told and doesn't ask questions.

Thomas and Ethel Rogers are the only two "encumbered" characters in the plot, having evidently been married (happily or not) for at least twenty five years making them both in their late 40's or older. Being in America, I've removed most of the standard servant-style dialog. Rogers addresses hardly anyone as "Sir" or "Ma'am" but does call people by their title, i.e. Mr. Lombard, Judge Wargrave, Ms. Brent, etc. Also, being in California in the 1940's, there's a wide range of ethnic choices I could assign to the Rogers. They could be Black or Caucasian and keep the Rogers names. They could be Latino, and be Tomas and Emelda Rodriguez. I'm sure I could think up something if the right Asian actor came up. My point is, I see no restrictions there.

Mr. Rogers, the butler (for the lack of a better name) is interesting in the way he interacts with Ethel after she's fainted from the voice on the gramophone. Of all the characters, I think both of them are the least likely to have deliberately killed their victim. I do think they tried their best to save Mrs. Brady, but they were not able to get help in time. I think they enjoyed working for her, and I think they feel genuinely guilty at not being able to save her. I think today Mrs. Rogers would be diagnosed with chronic depression and possibly some other bi-polar disorder. I think Rogers knows this and has to keep a tight leash on her, lest her guilty conscience grab hold of her mouth when she gets in a fit and say something untrue about Mrs. Brady. I think part of the problem with Mr. Rogers is that he has some sort of compulsive disorder: drinking, gambling, etc. and that is why they no longer have enough of the Brady inheritance to sustain them. That is why they are on the island. I think Mr. Owen has totally misread the signs and that the worst that either of the Rogers is guilty of is not managing their money very well.

I also don't read Thomas' mood after Ethel's death as indifference or coldness. I think he is merely in shock, plain and simple. He finds solace in completing the small, menial tasks of a paid servant, like chopping wood or preparing a lunch for guests. I don't think he even hears the murder sneak up behind him.

I think Ethel is a VERY superstitious woman who scares easily. That is why she faints so readily at hearing the voice accuse she and Thomas of murder. Her worst fears are brought to light, and although innocent, she feels that the situation would point to her guilt, regardless.


- Sean

Character Notes - Introduction

I've now pored through the script/novel about ten times.

The first five or so read-throughs were the usual, "Director gets his head around the script" familiarization. The sixth and seventh times were in transcribing the script into Microsoft Word, removing the included blocking and simplifying exits and entrances. The eighth and ninth times were to Americanize the dialogue... sorry... dialog. The final reading was to get a better sense of who the characters are.

So, what I'm going to do in the next several posts is to go over my ideas for the characters. I'll start with the minor characters and work my way up to the "major" characters, probably with individual posts for the larger roles.

And here are some thoughts on the Americanization of the script. If you've read the previous several posts, you'll know the range of what I've been considering in terms of this production. I've settled on setting the story off of the central California coastline, just off shore from Cambria, much like Morro Rock in Morro Bay. Instead of driving "down" from London, most of the party will be driving "up" from Los Angeles. The few who come from Plymouth will be driving down from somewhere in the Bay Area. The opening scene of the play will be set on Friday, August 8th, 1941, and all references will use that as a base date. I'm optimistic that I'll be able to find eleven talented actors to take on the roles, but not everyone I get will be great at doing a good English accent. Also, each character is from a different part of England, and the subtleties of those accents would be both difficult to master, and wasted on most Americans. On top of that, you've got "British-isms" peppered through the script, and a 66 year difference between the setting and today, so the language is both dated and foreign. So, I've lightly Americanized the language to sound more like 1940's California. English speakers use quirks like saying "I should have liked to have seen that!" where Americans would say "I'd like to see that!" The passiveness of the British version is supplanted by the more immediate, active voice of the American version: not better, just different. I have done it to simplify the dialog and to make the story flow more freely. I don't like changing it, but it will make for a cleaner, more achievable script to perform.


- Sean