Precisely The Point.
Oh huzzah and joy for the internet.
I wrote a couple of days ago about what I saw to be a classic example of the bad casting call. I think my post was pretty clear that I did this not out of any desire to blacken the name of the director responsible, but rather to highlight the importance of wording these posts correctly.
There has been a lot of anger about the unpaid work that gets advertised on Shooting People and a lot of hot air spouted about exploitation. This post seemed a classic example of why the actors who use Shooting People often feel so hard done by, why they feel that there is so little good work available to them on the site. Actors wrote in support of my post both on the site and to me in person.
However Mark McDermott’s eloquent defence of his project (which you can read here http://shootingpeople.org/blog/category/bensblog/2010/02/not-a-good-casting/) proves my real point. I made it plain in my original post that I didn’t believe Mark was trying to exploit anyone and his reply makes it clear that he is an intelligent, thoughtful, dedicated professional who is trying to make a challenging and complex film. In short, Mark is actually precisely the sort of director that the actors who use SP should want to work with.
I’ve not set out to attack him personally and I’m sorry if anyone felt that it was unfair of me to name him, I was simply quoting from a public posting not divulging any private conversations. However I am glad that his reply has given me this chance to publicly praise him – and also given him a chance to set straight a few of the confusions about his project that his posting created. I am far from alone in seeing the underscoring of the importance of female nudity in a project as a worrying sign and it’s great to read that far from insisting on it, the matter is entirely open to discussion.
However, the crucial point remains – through some bad choices of wording this talented director has made his project look much less appealing than it actually is. Not only that but in so doing he has added to false perception that the SP Casting list is full of men desperate to cast naked women and that it doesn’t contain gem jobs that will open up an actor to some new and brilliant creative partnerships.
The biggest problem with an online service like Shooting People is that contributors often forget who they are actually writing to. In your room, at your computer, the delight is how personal and chatty a service like SP can be. But don’t forget that it is read by thousands of people. Advertising a job on Shooters is not something you should do in a hurry because, as we have seen, it is all too easy to create a very false impression as to the nature of the project you are embarking on.
Equally, I have long thought that many of the actors who attack the jobs on SP do so without a full understanding of what is going on. The fact that Mark has turned out to be such a genuine and thoughtful person rather proves that point.
James February 18th, 2010 at 6:08 pm
“Joy for the Internet” indeed! I love these kind of things/interactions… I’ve called him “a hack” but I want to apologize for that. If I didn’t read his comments I would still think that the guy is a hack…
James MacGregor February 19th, 2010 at 2:39 pm
This latest Casting Call posting on your blog confirms my contention that you would have been well advised not to have named anyone when criticising what they have done, even when that criticism is quite eloquent and attempts to deny any defamation in advance, because the question the law asks is not “Did the writer set out to defame an individual,” but “Was some individual defamed?”
Named deeds by named perpetrators are forever linked. If in the eyes of that person and his friends the named person’s character and otherwise good standing appears to have been diminished by what you have written then a court might find that you are guilty of defamation.
The power of the written word, like that of the screen image, is immense and needs careful thought in its execution, especially if it is expressed in one of the Movie Maker world top 50 film maker blog sites. With that power comes responsibility. Good job Matt took your criticism so well!
Keep up the good work Ben, but go carefully on the castigations. otherwise I fear that one day it could cost you a great deal of money.
The watchword is respect.
James
Tom March 2nd, 2010 at 10:08 am
Hello shooters (and shootets)
I stumbled upon this debate yesterday, a few seconds before hitting send on my own casting call. Yikes! that was a close one!
I’d be humbled to get an opinion on my own casting call before i unleash upon the online actors community :
———————————————-
Scouting for an actor to play LEAD ROLE – an assassin in a short rude/romantic comedy. Applicants should look 23yrs old (so – 20-25 is fine.) Having beard or stubble is ok!
An american accent or an ability to talk like an old-timey-humphrey-bogart-detective is a definite plus.
The role is funny, but in a deadpan manner – must be able to deliever ridiculous lines in serious tone. Also requires to talk really, really fast.
Must be able to arrive to mile end, shooting would take about 2 days somewhere this week or the middle of next week.
Student film, so no salary! Crew and cast working for credit only : The movie will be uploaded to numerous online video streaming / community websites, as well as to a dedicated website containing detailed cast/crew bio and contact info. Will also be sent to many festivals – luftfest, flipside, raindance, and more.
——————–
Have i included enough/too much info about the role?
Is it clear that i can’t pay anything, that no one is getting payed? is that an acceptable practice for short student films?
Is the promise of a dedicated website with detailed bio/contact info enough of a compensation?