Size? Age? Beauty? Should it make a casting difference?

[evadiva]

Posted: 6/22/07 at 10:02pm

Stuff on the boards got me thinking.......

How important is it that a person be (for example) slender..... or physically attractive...... or age appropriate..... for a role?

How often should PHYSICAL APPEARANCE matter - in your opinion....?

[wonderfulwizard11]

Posted: 6/22/07 at 10:06pm

If it's important to the role, the person should be cast (or made up if possible) accordingly.

[Elphie4ever]

Posted: 6/22/07 at 10:06pm

as a aspiring actress i believe that neither should matter: age, beauty, size, race, etc. it all depends on the talent level a person posses.there is somewhat of a belief that casting directors pick the majority over the minority (according to a friend of mine who auditioned for a role) but i think its more of the level of talent a person has in their singing and acting. thats just my opinion because hey i admit i need to lose weight to be the "ideal" size for broadway to accept, because they mostly accept the slender people over the overweight people. thats how society is based on though unfortunately those aspects do matter, but i believe talent matters too

[evadiva]

Posted: 6/22/07 at 10:09pm

Ever notice how often a script says the leading lady is "beautiful?" I always found that to be daunting. Am I beautiful????

I have a good friend who says that because she is overweight, she will never be the leading lady. She's always cast as the character role.

I think that sucks so bad. There's so much more to her. Granted the character roles are great, but why can't she be a Julie Jordan? Or an Eponine?
Updated On: 6/22/07 at 10:09 PM

[CapnHook]

Posted: 6/22/07 at 10:18pm

1) It's up to the playwright as to what "type" the character is. If they leave it open, or it is unclear, it is up to the casting director or director (but mostly producers) on what type they are looking for.

2) Rules are meant to be broken.

[ILoveMyDictionary]

Posted: 6/22/07 at 11:04pm

Age is defenitley important. You wouldn't want to see an 18 year old Lady M. Or a 50 year old Juliet. Unless it's called for in the script and there are references made to the race, size or beauty of a person than it shouldn't matter. But of course the casting people are going to have an image in their heads before the auditions. All you can do is pray that you fit that image.
Updated On: 6/22/07 at 11:04 PM

[trinaaron]

Posted: 6/22/07 at 11:16pm

I wish I could say physical appearance doesn't matter, it's all about talent, but I just don't think it works that way. For example, Beauty in Beauty and the Beast really shouldn't be 52 and 100 lbs overweight. Ulla from The Producers is another example. The beauty of these characters are major plot points and the audience does have eyes and can see if the actor doesn't fit that. Conversely, Tracy from Hairspray is plump, Jan (I think that's her name) from Grease is usually presented as the least attractive of the Pink Ladies. If physical attributes of a character are mentioned, it is generally not a good idea to cast against that. However, I see no reason why a less than attractive Eponine wouldn't work, or a heavier Sally Bowles. Unfortunately, we live in an image obsessed world, and the people who put on these shows are no different.

[BroadwayEnthusiast2]

Posted: 6/22/07 at 11:24pm

It shouldn't matter at all. Of course show's like Hairspray and The Color Purple ask for specific traits in their characters, but in other musical or plays it should not matter what size or color you are. I'd like to see a 200 lb. girl play Millie or a black girl play Paulette or Galinda.

[AnnaK<3LMIP]

Posted: 6/22/07 at 11:24pm

Well, since the novel, the physical description of Eponine is that she's rather pretty. But, it's true, rules can be broken. We can't expect to find Lea Salonga everywhere we go. I don't think it's THAT important to Eponine to be pretty anyway.
HOWEVER, you may find me a little close-minded for saying this, but Eponine is dirt-poor, living on the streets, and starving. She would have to be at least a little bit on the slim side...does that make sense?

Sometimes it's needed, sometimes it's not.
Do I think there should be a "pretty" sterotype? Well, what I think is pretty, others think is ugly. What a producer/director might see in a girl they cast, I may go "What?? well..geez..she's not very attractive", and to them she may be the most beautiful girl on the stage.

It's tough.

[nygrl23]

Posted: 6/23/07 at 12:09am

That's all casting tends to be about--physical type. Casting directors have little or no imagination most of the time, but that's another thread.

[popular_elphie]

Posted: 6/23/07 at 2:19am

I agree about size and beauty, but age? Let's get Chita Rivera to be in SPRING AWAKENING - hey, she's talented, right?

I'd love to see a black girl play Glinda (or even Nessarose), or an Asian play Elle Woods or something. It really wouldn't matter. But age is a major factor.

[bially082]

Posted: 6/23/07 at 5:05am

Race,age, and weight are HUGE factors all the time. It's rarely about talent by the time we get to Broadway. It's about fitting a look, an image. SO yeah, being overweight is a major issue for those wishing to be leading ladies. Lose the weight, then go on the auditions. and age-wise, wait till you're the right age. Thats a big factor too. When they literally have thousands to choose from why should a casting director deviate from what he's looking for? Just cause someone has a nice voice? Get in line sister, everyone does in the big time.

[evadiva]

Posted: 6/23/07 at 12:22pm

Bially, wow! Spoken like a true Julian Marsh!
Updated On: 6/23/07 at 12:22 PM

[Neverandy]

Posted: 6/23/07 at 12:25pm

It will always be a factor. It will never change.

[i.heart.link]

Posted: 6/23/07 at 12:33pm

bially082 is right. I mean we all want to say that nothing should matter, the most talented people should get the roles, but thats not the world we live in.

[Jon]

Posted: 6/23/07 at 12:42pm

Why should the theatre be any different than the movies? Would the movie TITANIC have worked if Leo DiCaprio's role had been played by Jack Black? If Kate Winslet's role had been played by Meryl Streep?

[evadiva]

Posted: 6/23/07 at 12:45pm

No s!#$, OF COURSE it will always make a difference and it will never change. This is common knowledge.

But how important is it to you, personally, as an audience member?

And how important do you think it should be?

Would you accept a leading man shorter than his counterpart?

Or an overweight ingenue?

Or a balding heartthrob?

Etc.

[Ryan2]

Posted: 6/23/07 at 12:50pm

Roles should be cast as suited for the role written. simple.

Little things like no hair can obv. be tackled by hair/makeup/costume - but things like weight, color, extreme and noticable features cannot be overcome and sometimes people just arent suited to the role no matter how well they could perform it.

[i.heart.link]

Posted: 6/23/07 at 1:02pm

I thnk it does matter to the story if the actors are appealing. You're right i don't want to see a bald, short, fat man play the heartthrob. But i don't think looks are really important in casting. I mean if you have the talent they're going to hire you unless you look like a complete troll. I've seen plenty of leads who aren't very attractive.

[mustard]

Posted: 6/23/07 at 1:16pm

I don't know, I get bored when I see too many pretty, airbrushed looking people. Nothing wrong with a balding leading man in my eyes. Sometimes it's more endearing.

Then again, I have a things for nerdier types.

Obviously, the person has to fit in well with the rest of the cast so it's not jarring, but I don't think people onstage have to be perfect and have perfect teeth, skin, etc. Movies, yeah. I don't want to see that **** on the big screen, but live actors can charm me no matter what they look like, generally.

[Ryan2]

Posted: 6/23/07 at 1:53pm

whatever is more widely appealing and suitable for the Box Office comes into play too

[The Distinctive Baritone]

Posted: 6/23/07 at 2:36pm

Evadiva--

Unfortunately, it all matters--most of the time. Casting is not (and should not be) a talent contest. It's about finding the best person FOR THE ROLE.

Now, this can mean any number of things. Some roles do have very specific physical/age/race requirements, whereas others have none. Ultimately it depends on the role and the show itself. Denying an actor a role because they don't "look" the way a character should is not mean, or racist, or anything else, it's just practical.

[somuchtodo]

Posted: 6/23/07 at 3:47pm

Broadway isn't a talent show - it's a business. "Most talented" is an opinion. For most productions, the talent pool is deep enough that they can cast on looks as well as talent.

[bwaygal1]

Posted: 6/23/07 at 3:54pm

For certain roles, appearance is a HUGE factor-When you're playing real people, appearance is a really big issue, IMO. The audience will most likely (some if not all audience members) have seen pictures of the individual. They need to believe the person on the stage is the one they've seen.
Just my two cents.
Also-casting is largely about a 'type' and if you don't fit that type, you can be as 'talented' (that's a relative term) as you want, you won't get the role.

Posted: 6/23/07 at 3:58pm

Broadway isn't a talent show - it's a business. "Most talented" is an opinion. For most productions, the talent pool is deep enough that they can cast on looks as well as talent.

Exactly. I don't think there's a clear-cut answer for this question simply because there are so many factors that go into a decision such as this one. Most of the time, I'd say casting the person who has the most talent with the least amount of strikes, so to speak, against him or her (e.g. doesn't physically look the part, isn't the right age) probably makes the most sense. If that means occasionally hiring someone with slightly less talent because he or she physically fits the part perfectly, I'm all for it. In all honesty, I think watching a completely unattractive woman attempt to play a character like Mimi in Rent simply because she had the best voice (and maybe even acting) would be distracting enough to negate the advantage she had over someone who physically fit the part while still being a good performer. Maybe harsh, but true, at least in my view.