Something I tweeted not too long ago got a lot of feedback. My tweet?

Never underestimate the power of the agent-casting relationship. What would be unpleasant in a “producer to actor” discussion is EASY for us.

The feedback I got? Questions, questions, questions. “Examples, please?” “Like what?” “What do you mean?” Stuff like that.

Now while I love Twitter madly, there’s only so much a Bonnie can do in 140 characters. 🙂 So, here’s the longer answer on how agents and casting directors can work together to smooth over issues that would be more difficult when dealt with between actors and producers.

Let’s start with issues of appearance. The actor will likely be cast, but there’s something producers want changed. Shorter hair. Dying of the hair. Shaving facial hair. Dropping weight. Putting on muscle. That sort of thing. For this project I’m currently casting, we wanted a particular actor for a military role and the actor has long hair.

Put the producer on the phone with the actor and you’ve got the person who is making the decision asking the person who really wants the role to make a change. It’s going to be tough for the actor to say no, when human instinct is to please others — especially when the actor wants the role (or else he wouldn’t have auditioned). Perhaps they have just met at the callback. There’s not a lot of history.

Add the filter of the casting director and the agent. Now you’ve got people who have an ongoing relationship. People who have dealt with one another on multiple projects. There’s history. And it’s two people who care about the project and the actor, but who are able to talk dispassionately about the issue. Neither of these folks cares too much whether the actor is going to cut his hair or drop or gain weight or dye her hair or shave his mustache or whatever the issue is. As long as it’s within the actor’s brand, the agent is probably okay with asking that it be done. As far as the actor is concerned, the CD figures, if it’s not this actor, we’ll go find another. As far as the agent is concerned, if the actor isn’t willing to make the on-brand change (assuming there’s no other booking for which the decision is made for them), and that means it’s not this project, the agent will continue to hustle to get another audition for the actor.

These parties are further removed from the emotion of it all, and can talk, simply, about what needs to be done. An actor put on the spot at the decision-making moment may squirm. The producer may not want to be the one to bring up something that’s potentially uncomfortable to discuss with someone he’ll eventually hire. And let’s think about the director, in this scenario. If he’s the one pulling the hardest for a particular actor, imagine how things can go off the tracks if he has to speak with her about issues that always tend to make people cringe.

Like what? Let’s say the issue is money. Let’s say the issue is a lot of money. And if the director, for example, knew exactly how stressful the back-and-forth negotiations were, point by point, he would no longer be as excited about working with that actor on set. In fact, if the director were in the loop, he may say — five stages earlier — “forget that actor. Let’s cast our number two.” But because to the casting director, it’s about getting the deal done (and it’s one deal of many on that particular project) and to the agent, it’s about getting the best possible deal for the actor without costing him the role due to going too far with the requests, it’s easier for these parties to have conversations that would be uncomfortable between the hirer and the hiree.

Say it’s a kid actor and there’s a lisp that we feel may be “put on” as an affectation. It’s possibly something a parent has told the kid to do to come off as younger. No one on the creative team wants to have a conversation with the parent of a kid actor, and of course, not the kid himself, when we’re talking about something that could be an affectation but could just as easily be a speech impediment! But put the CD and the agent on the phone with one another. No muss, no fuss. Quick, easy conversation about whether this is an issue or something we can direct out of the kid who is otherwise right for the role. The family needn’t know we inquired. The producers needn’t feel like bad guys for being insensitive.

These people smooth things out! And actors have no idea how often this is happening. Good.

These folks are buffers to the creatives who are going to have to work together. They have an existing relationship that makes the conversation easier. This goes for date changes, rate disputes, perks, issues of billing, and way more personal topics such as issues of personal hygiene, willingness to work with a trainer or speech coach, an actor’s private on-set needs that could come off as demanding if not run through the proper filter.

Because neither the agent nor the casting director will be working together in the intense moments between “action” and “cut,” their conversations can make sure those creatives who do have to stay in love with each other a little bit have the best possible advantage to make that happen.

Bonnie Gillespie is living her dreams by helping others figure out how to live theirs. Wanna work with Bon? Start here. Thanks!

Originally published by Actors Access at http://more.showfax.com/columns/avoice/archives/001410.html. Please support the many wonderful resources provided by the Breakdown Services family. This posting is the author’s personal archive.