But with that said any actor who auditions for a role that is well out of their age range takes a risk. Yes they may go in and be so good that the director casts them. But the other side is they go in and make a fool of themselves and piss off the director and casting director for wasting their time.

I will respectfully agree to disagree with you on all your points here. This isn’t about money, although it is; this isn’t about age, although it is; this isn’t about make-up, although it is. This is about your unwillingness to believe that there are actors among us who’re older than you. I have been acting and directing for 47 years now and continue to do so. I was involved in acting from a young age and studied through high school and college and then Post Grad at The Drama Studio, London, England. I’ve been lucky to work at Arena Stage and Folger and many local professional and community theatre in the Washington Metro area. With this passage of time comes some wisdom, I think. Also with this comes the knowledge and experience to know that talent lies in a place that’s void of age. I also know that with a competent director, an actor can achieve higher and new levels of their craft with each and every show, in fact, with each and every performance. I applaud your contention that an actor only needs make-up to portray a role. But I disagree with you that it makes no difference at all. I mean, if your contention were actually true, wouldn’t the movie industry have a plethora of younger actors playing older parts instead of only a handful where the characters age range calls for it?
I want you to think of an audience member watching a show. If, at any time while watching a show with an actor made up to be older, this audience member thinks to himself or herself, “Nice make-up on that actor”, or “I wonder how old that actor really is?” then at that precise moment YOU, the younger actor with the director have lost that audience member and taken them away from the story and the message of the show. Taken the audience from the playwrights intent and into the realm of YOU, “You in your Art”. I’d rather have an audience member engrossed in the play and see the “Art in me”.
Your self absorbs ion is fine! I’ve always believed, “THE PLAY IS THE THING”.
Sorry to disagree, but in this case, I will never stray from what I believe and coach and direct.

Mark Lee Adams
Reviewer
ShowBizRadio

Venues, communities, companies, it doesn’t matter. If a theatre doesn’t want to invest in the best people, it’s not much of a theatre. Lights, sound, costumes, and the time that people give up in order to be in a show, not to mention the time and money audience members put into seeing al show all, in some way are an expense. The cost money.

Yet somehow, someway a solvent theatre invests in them, community or otherwise. A make-up person is not that much of an extra expense, and furthermore they casting of an appropriate actor, regardless of age is worth that investment in the end. It certainly makes little sense to sit around and wait for an actor of 75 if there isn’t one, when a 30 year old can play the part wonderfully with simply the aide of some make-up.

Unless you know somebody personally, and even then, casting is ALWAYS, I repeat ALWAYS a roll of the dice. It is no more so to roll the dice to cast a young person as an elderly person than it is to cast an equally competent older person. It’s all a matter of preferences for the director, and the purpose of me column was to insist that directors start opening their minds more to people playing ages far outside of their actual age, in either direction. To simply go with someone who is older because the role is older is lazy. Just as lazy as saying, “the character is a doctor..we better find a doctor who is willing to be in this show.” (That isn’t a story, that is something I have actually heard directors do, and I was dumbfounded.)

Other than the fact that the only people available in high school plays are in fact high school aged student, I fail to see the intrinsic difference between their community theatre, and the community theatre of a town. Learning doesn’t stop for the actor when school ends, and one of the best ways to learn is by doing.

As I say with every other thing I advise, these are my opinions, grounded on my experience and centered around my concept of the whole actor. I regret nothing that I say, and continue to encourage any actor to follow exactly what I have said in this article, and in any other. I feel it can only do them good.

But if you or any other person don;t want to proceed with acting or directing in that fashion, don’t. I therefore reject your notion that I am not being responsible as a groundless accusation. If sharing an opinion or offering my advice to other actors is irresponsible simply because it does not conform to the status quo, I am not sure what any of us are doing here.

Whenever the theatre bug hits the actor, usually at a young age, the bug will never leave them. We all have been bitten by this bug and I applaud your forging your acting career with such a vigor as you have.

You are, however, in a position of affecting other actors and influencing them by writing on this platform. This is considered by some a great power. But as the quote goes, “With great power comes great responsibility”. So please be careful with your statements.

All actors are put into positions of having to play older roles while we are in training in elementary school, middle school, high school and college. Some of our fraternity are very adept at acheiving all the nuances required of some of these older roles. It is a testiment to these actors talent and abilities on stage.

When the actors broaden there desires to act in other venues, community theatre to be included, the playing field changes. Sure there are a plethera of younger talented actors around, but now the arena is open to all ages. This poses a more competative playing field. A field in which the actors who went to school, played older roles, were quite good playing older roles and now, as Father Time has turned his aging head their way, they are now older. This is not to say they have lost their nack or talent of achieving the same nuances as they were able to do at a younger age. No. Only that they now don’t require the purchase of heavy make-up. Also, the directors don’t have to role any dice with a younger talented actor when they have a just as competent OLDER actor to choose.

Shouting at the theatres to hire a make-up artist is an expenditure of time and steam to which the budget may not have nor should it be bothered with such rantings of younger actors who couldn’t or didn’t get cast in roles their own age.

As to your posting comments on playing an eight year old. I’d suggest that maybe a very highly talented and trained four year old might have just as much of a hold on the nuances required of an eight year old without having to worry about changing his voice or remembering what it was like to be an eight year old.

I’d like to say to all actors. Just BE! Be who you are. It is all we have to offer the audience. For, when the lights go up on you, the audience is looking at you and the character you have brought into yourself. NOT the character you have jumped into outside of yourself. To do otherwise is discernable to the audience and, quite frankly, an insult to them.

Mark Lee Adams
Reviewer
ShowBizRadio