Tech Meeting & Costume Measurements

Thanks to everyone who made it to the tech meeting on Saturday. We hashed out the costume details, discussed props, lights, sound, and other issues.

We'll be taking costume measurements on Tuesday and Wednesday, and actors should bring in ANYTHING they have from their personal wardrobes or costume inventories that we might be able to use.

Also, here's the Costume Information I emailed earlier today...

• COSTUMES
  Men, please bring in dress shirts, ties, suits, sport coats, hats, London Fog's or Mackinaw's, and dress shoes that you own or have access to that might be period appropriate (1941). ANYTHING you have that might work would be ideal, as the less we have to make or alter, the better.
  Women, please bring in shoes, hats, shawls, capes, raincoats, purses, business suits, dresses, blouses, or skirts that would be period appropriate (again, 1941). We know that we will likely have to find dresses or suits for the ladies, but if you have ANYTHING, that would be great.
  
• HAIR
  Men, we will review some of the styles from that time and find a look appropriate for you. We'll discuss time frames for getting your hair cut, and whether or not you have a stylist who can adapt.
  Women, we're going to try to avoid wigs. All three ladies have hair that will work fine for their characters, I believe, but we'll figure out what we need, styling-wise.
  
• BASEWEAR
  All actors are responsible for base undergarments for their characters, including t-shirts, dress socks or stockings, underwear (boxers, briefs, bras, etc.). Men will be responsible for dress shirts (as needed). Actors will also be responsible for ensuring that these items are cleaned and pressed as needed for each performance or dress rehearsal, up to and including providing multiples of those items as needed.
  
• MAKE-UP
  Actors will be responsible for providing their own make-up, although I don't anticipate that much will be needed. Men should probably use no more than a light powder or cream base with powder top coat to cut shine and define facial features as necessary (aka, men probably don't need makeup). Women will have period appropriate make-up. Vera will be the most made-up. Emily and Mrs. Rogers will have SOME character make-up.

- Sean

Act Two & Why I Blog

So we're working on Act Two this week, clarifying the blocking that I've already included in my version of the script. No need for Tami or Leland or Jerry, as they're dead. They've ceased to be. They are ex-characters. They are pushing up daisies. They've passed on. They're six feet under. They are no more.

The second act has a GREAT deal of technical blocking that we will have to CAREFULLY practise. The second scene involves lit candles on stage, so we are coordinating with the Ventura County Fire Department's Fire Prevention Division. We'll likely need a "Fire Team" with a specific fire plan in the event that something happens with one of the candles. Preparation and preparedness is the key. We will be using firearms, firing three shots: one in 2-2, and two in 2-3. We've already started blocking in where and when the hard rubber prop will be used, and when it is exchanged with the "hot" gun. We'll have a blood splatter effect that will effect one of the cast members. And we have a tightly choreographed hanging/choking sequence that will require tremendous amount of care by the two actors involved.

Fun. Fun. Fun.

And the other question has come up: Why Do You Blog?

Well, it's a bit like a diary, in that I can transcribe ideas that are swimming in my head so that I might better act on them and ensure that they are carried out. But it's UNLIKE a diary in that it's open to all to read. That keeps me both honest and mindful of what my role as director is: to shape and guide the show towards an entertaining representation of the author's story. The blog also serves as a communication tool for those involved in the project, although I can't assume that all will read and comprehend it. This cast and crew, however, are very good about coming here when they need access to the vision of the show that I've set forth. I don't think it's presumptuous or ego maniacal, but it gives everyone access to the thoughts I've given to various components of the show. It allows me to answer questions once and not have to be impolite or stingy with my time.

So that's that. Hope it helps. Feel free to comment. I absolutely read them all.

- Sean

Wednesday Work

Wednesday night's rehearsal went later than I'd have liked. I went through 1-2 and then went back to do 1-1 for those who had conflicts on Tuesday. Sorry about the late night everyone. It will be the exception, not the norm.

What's starting to happen is that the folks are starting to "breathe" their parts a bit. We've moved past line readings, and now that their brains are focused on "where" they need to be (as opposed to "why") they just let the lines loose, which is good. I encourage anyone at this phase of production to take a moment and reflect on how well the lines read when you're not thinking about them. That's a feeling you'll want to integrate back in, once this blocking is under your belt, and you start bending the words to fit the character you're developing. All too often, actors get used to/comfortable saying a line a particular way. It can't be that way. There can be phrases in your character's vernacular that come out frequently (cursing to Blore, "Killer" to Marston, the high-brow English of Wargrave, etc.), but it still has to be fresh, and you have to train your brain to allow your mouth to interpret it NATURALLY every single time.

Enough Acting 101.

I'm working on Saturday at 10:00 AM in the expansion on set stuff. As usual, those who are interested are always welcome.

- Sean

Blocking Act One - Scene One

Yeah, so we were missing a few people last night, but all-in-all, things went well. We clarified a few hiccoughs in my script-bound blocking and improved on a few others. We already have an arm's length of props, even though I'd hoped to keep it on the minimal side.

We continue tonight with 1-2, and we'll go back for anyone who missed last night.

No rehearsal on Sunday, 2/11. No rehearsal on Wednesday, 2/14.

- Sean

First Week

The full-show read through last night was great. It was good to hear the whole thing done, and it gave me a sense of where the corn still lies within.

A side note: one of the things that's most frustrating is to come to the end of a scene and realize that a person who's been reading is now "dead" and you won't be hearing anything more from them. With both Tami and Leland (gone after Act I - Scene I), I was more than a bit melancholy that I wouldn't be hearing more of their wonderful characterizations... gone too soon.

Anyway, Tuesday and Wednesday night will be the blocking adjustments for Act One. We'll try to get through the whole thing and then back-track to fill in anything anyone missed. Even though I've already "blocked" the whole thing, it's only paper-based, and I want to run it through a reality check. It will also give me a chance to shake out prop and costume notes for Mike and the costume ladies (Mary, Rita, Angie).

The script and "sound" of the show is right-on. Many actors spoke excitedly with me during the break and after the rehearsal regarding the possibilities of the script. It's going to be fun.

- Sean

The Cast Announcement

Here's the bulk email that was sent out to all those who auditioned (who gave a valid email address), and to Conejo team members.

---

Hello Everyone,

Thanks to everyone who graced us with their talent during auditions for Conejo Player's production of Agatha Christie's And Then There Were None. With nearly fourty auditioners, the turn out was beyond my wildest expectations, so I thank you for your interest. To everyone's credit, I could have compiled at least two, if not three, solid casts for this production: the talent pool was just that good, so you are all to be commended.

Given that, I've established what I think is the best cast possible for this production. We've a great mix of both familiar and soon-to-be-familiar faces, and I'm pleased to announce them to you:

Rogers: Aaron Van Etten - Aaron's delightful sense of humor, combined with his willingness to try new things during auditions made him the best choice for the role of Rogers. I think the thing I remember most about Aaron is the great smirk he flashed to the actress reading Mrs. Rogers. It was that, slightly wily edge I wanted. Rogers loses his wife, and I need to see those range of emotions.

Mrs. Rogers: Tami Keaton - Tami gave exceptional reads for EVERY female character, but she was the only one who captured Ethel's manic mood. While she would have been great in any role, she truly was the only one who nailed this character. Also, having seen her in numerous productions, I know the level of quality and committment she brings to the table.

Fred Narracott: Jeff Schaver - Jeff read for me last night as Narracott and was perfect. Narracott's only on stage for about three minutes, but I know that Jeff will make the most of those minutes as he has before. I feel that everyone else who I was considering for this small but important part came across as "acting" too much, essentially trying to push those three minutes to the brink. Jeff won't do that. Like Narracott, he's here to "deliver" the exposition necessary to set up the rest of the play. I love working with Jeff, and this will be fun.

Vera Claythorne: Linda Schaver - For the other ladies who auditioned for Vera, the thing that Linda captured most succinctly was her ability to play a range of emotions. Her sassy side during the argument with Lombard was spot-on, and her monologue as Vera showed the best blend of smoldering hatred and profound sadness I've seen. I've also worked with Linda extensively and she is one of the hardest-working, most dilligent actresses I know. While some actresses will say they deserve or have earned a role, Linda never would. She "is" the role.

Philip Lombard: John Eslick - John is also a hard worker. He took each piece of direction I gave him and ran with it. His Lombard always maintained a cool likeability that, while sometimes strained, never cracked or fell away. His Lombard was the one I knew audiences would enjoy watching for the entire course of the show, and he balances Linda's Vera very well, both physically and vocally. Like several of the others, I've seen John in other shows and have been dying to work with him since, because I have a great sense of the depth of talent there that can be channeled to great purposes.

Tony Marston: Leland Raymond - As those who were there will concur, Leland gave a knock-out read for both Lombard and Marston. At the readings last night, he proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that no one else could turn this pompous, despicable fop into a pleasantly likeable character. My great pain is that we don't see more of him beyond the first scene of the first act, but I am thrilled to have him with us, and am excited to have enticed such a talented young man into our group.

Bill Blore: Jack Impellizzeri - As with Leland, Jack absolutely solidified the character of Blore during auditions. The nice "wise guy" edge he brings to the vocalizations, the intensity with which he interacts... all make him another great addition to the Conejo family, and I look forward to working with him.

Gen. MacKenzie: Jerry Nehring - Jerry's self-adapted monologue was a wonderful mix of the expository lines from Christie and additional characterization that he himself did. The point is that he came in knowing EXACTLY what part he was right for, and he nailed it. He has the look. He has the voice. He has the wonderful combination of frazzled intensity and wounded compassion that will turn MacKenzie into a living, breathing person, rather than a cardboard characterization of an old war veteran.

Emily Brent: Helene Benjamin - The epiphany for me with Helene was when I had her read one of the sides twice: once playing Emily hard-as-nails, and the other playing her as absolutely vulnerable. No one else showed near that amount of range in the character. Many were good as Emily. Helene was GREAT.

Wargrave: Howard Leader - Howard's energy and enthusiasm are infectious. He was there every night of auditions, and I think that persistence was the nudge that pushed me in his direction. By his own admission, he's a student of theatre and finds something new in every experience he has. A few actors out-read him, absolutely pegging the "scary" meter. But the realization of Wargrave's true intent has to happen as a complete surprise, and then only happens for about three minutes as the end of the show. I needed someone like Howard who could consistently supply the stern-yet-fatherly Wargrave for three-quarters of the show, making the transition that much more shocking. That is exactly what Howard can do.

Dr. Armstrong: Mark Fagundes - I was edging dangerously to a BAD choice regarding the role of Armstrong, and fate being what it was, Mark was absolutely the best choice. His reading last night confirmed that beyond a shadow of a doubt. A typical characterization of Armstrong would be a jittery old doctor, but I LOVE where Mark has gone so far. Armstrong is absolutely a sad-sack at times, but there's a reason there, and Mark hints nicely at those reasons without them having to be explained. PERFECT! He's younger than Armstrong would typically be cast, but it's perfectly within the realm of plausibility. With a few touches of grey in the temples, I have no problem believing that he's an accomplished neurologist.

So, that's our cast. I hope those not cast this time will continue to audition for Conejo Players Theatre. Our next production to audition will be the premiere of 4318 Clarendon Road, a delightful new play by George Tricker, set in an Italian-American household in 1950's Brooklyn. Think: Brighton Beach Memoirs meets Buca di Beppo. Auditions will be held from April 22-24.

Thanks again to everyone. Our sister show, Angel Street, opens on April 13. Our show, And Then There Were None opens on April 21. We hope to see you there!

- Sean Harrington, Director
- Marya Harrington, Producer