ActorsLife.com : Casting Director & Author: Bonnie Gillespie, Cricketfeet, Self-Management for Actors

Bonnie Gillespie, an author and casting director, has taught seminars to working actors in Atlanta, New York, and Los Angeles. Her books include Casting Qs: A Collection of Casting Director Interviews, Self-Management for Actors: Getting Down to (Show) Business, and Acting Qs: Conversations with Working Actors.

Bonnie specializes in casting SAG indie feature films and regularly produces the Cricket Feet Casting Actors Showcase. She is co-founder and co-host of Hollywood Happy Hour and co-founder of the Flickering Image Film Festival. Her weekly column, "The Actors Voice," is available at Showfax.com.

Recently, Bonnie was named a Top Film Casting Director in Back Stage West's "Best of Los Angeles" Issue; was interviewed on BBC Breakfast and Judy Kerr's Internet series, Acting Is Everything; and co-hosted the pilot for The Reel Deal—a new web series for The Hollywood Reporter.

Hey, don’t I recognize you from such films as Airheads and Romeo and Juliet Revisited? What made you give up acting and go into casting and writing? Do you ever miss it?

Heh. If you recognize me from "Airheads," I'll buy you a cookie. Seriously. The only person who was able to pick me out in that one was this guy I was dating a few years later, when we watched the movie on TV. I said, "Oh, yeah. Here comes the scene I was cut out of." And he said, "Isn't that your cleavage?" And yup. Sure enough, it was. Hee!

My transition into writing and then casting was actually really organic, and looking back at it I can't imagine my life turning out any other way. I had this really great survival job (which all actors need, when they're getting started) writing a column for "Back Stage West" wherein I interviewed casting directors each week. By the time I had interviewed over 200 casting directors, I began to realize that theirs was a very cool job. When one of the CDs I interviewed asked me to come on as casting coordinator for a new show for Fox, I decided to try casting on for size. And it was a great fit!

My mother would've told you that I was always a writer. I remember fighting with her when I was a kid actor. She would say, "My daughter, the writer," and I would stomp and yell, "Muh-thur! I am an ACTRESS!" I was so damned determined to act, and the fact that I wrote ALL the time didn't mean anything. Writing was just something I did, not something I had plans to pursue. So, even though I got two degrees in Journalism, acting was always the plan. Until it wasn't, anymore. And the most regular source of income I've had in life has been—you guessed it—writing. It's only in the past year that I've begun to refer to myself as a writer. Somehow, I felt that I was just a hobbyist. Turns out, I am a writer. And, of course, a casting director. A true Hollywood hyphenate. Luckily, this town embraces and encourages such folks.

Quite frankly, if I missed acting, I'd return to it. I was a fairly competent actor. A talented performer with way more business sense than passion for the craft. I am thrilled every time I'm able to cast an actor in a role. Way happier than I used to get, when I would book a role. That makes it pretty clear to me that I'm doing what I'm supposed to be doing right now. The pursuit of acting is tough work and I'd always rather do stuff I'm more successful doing. I had no idea how satisfying and fun casting would be. As I like to say, "If I had known how popular going into casting would make me, I would've done it in high school." So, if I had any quest for fame with that dream of being an actor, I've far surpassed that via casting. See, I wasn't into acting for the "right" reasons. My motivations were off. This is a much better fit for me.

One of your first professional casting jobs was on the dating show Mr. Personality which was followed by The Entertainer. How did you manage to escape reality TV and make the leap into doing some really well regarded indie films?

It was a conscious choice. After "Mr. Personality," I worked as casting coordinator on "Paradise Hotel," which was really wonderful. I had a blast on that show and considered staying on with the production company during the run of the show, rather than just being a part of the initial casting.

But having been an actor, I felt pretty strongly about the fact that "casting" should be defined as "finding the right actors for the roles to bring a writer's words to life and a director's vision to the world." Reality TV casting was more about finding people with low social boundaries, extreme narcissism, and a willingness to do just about anything to be on TV. That may come off as judgmental or snarky in writing, but trust me, I respect the process and I actually enjoy watching reality TV as much as the next guy. It just wasn't terribly fulfilling for me, as a member of the casting team.

So, between "Paradise Hotel" and "Love Again" (another reality show for Fox that cast but never shot—believe me, you are all better off for that last part being true. It was a bad, bad idea for a show), I put together my first little casting resumé (and it was very much like that first little acting resumé, wherein you list the couple of student films, community theatre plays, and all of the classes you've taken and hope someone will give you a shot at something bigger). I answered a crew call in "Back Stage West" for a SAG Experimental feature film (this contract was so low-budget that it doesn't even exist anymore). The total budget for "A Dull House" was $25,000 and I worked for six weeks casting a dozen speaking roles for a whopping $100. (I call this the "copy, credit, meals" phase of my casting career.)

But what's important about having taken on that gig was that it earned me my first full CD credit. I knew I didn't want to go the route of "casting assistant, casting associate, work your way up to casting director in a decade—maybe." I wanted instant gratification for this new career choice, and I figured that meant being willing to work really hard for very little money to get the experience and build up my reputation for doing good work. Very much like acting, right? And having been an actor for 20 years, I knew the deal. So, I just applied that to casting and continued to build relationships and a nice little resumé of cool indie films.

I created a business model of casting material I loved, working with crews I adored, and going after actors who aren't in it for the money. That has—so far—turned out to be a really good business model for my casting company. I am proud of every project I've cast and, by and large, I am eager to work with everyone again and again. I get thank you notes from cast and crew on every project I cast. They're all so happy for having been put together. That, to me, is very important. On low-budget indies, no one is in it for the money. So, it becomes really important that everyone have a good time.

I did go back to reality TV for one last show—with a full CD credit—in 2004. That was "The Entertainer" and it allowed me to go home to Atlanta to do the local casting there and in Nashville. Reality TV pays its casting directors very well. It was nice to have come off a bunch of really low-paying indie film gigs, go home in October to earn a full CD credit and make a buttload of money, and then come back to LA recharged for doing indie films. But I absolutely made a choice to stop doing reality TV casting after that. I was ready to start commanding a better paycheck for my indie film casting work (now that I had "festival cred" to back up my work) and knew I had to pick a niche. This industry is all about specializing. I am thrilled with what I've chosen to specialize in.

You’ve managed to cast a bunch of indie films with different feels and styles. One of the most interesting is Trees Grow Tall and Then They Fall. How was it different casting a Dogma film? Did you take anything away from that experience that you bring to your auditions for more traditional films?

I've always been a huge fan of improv, so if the director of any project I'm casting is into it, I'll ask actors to improvise a bit during their auditions. (That's one of the luxuries of film casting. In TV casting, you'd better not ever improvise, right? Eesh. Such restrictions!) In casting "Trees Grow Tall and Then They Fall," we gave the actors scenarios and character descriptions and then just had them "play." It was great. Obviously, I can't go that far with the improv in most traditional audition settings, but I do love to see actors add a bit of personality to their read, really bring themselves to the role.

I mean, that's what casting requires, right? Finding actors who embody the spirit of the character. And it's nice to see them bring that to their very first read. When the directors are down with it, they'll ask actors to improvise in character at callbacks, etc. I love that stuff! It's so creative.

You’re one of the most accessible casting directors on the planet. It only takes an actor armed with Google seconds to find your blog, Myspace page and a dozen other ways to get in touch with you. Has this been a benefit or a blunder for you? Has it helped you do your job?

Something interesting happened in 2007. I went from being accessible to being flat-out high-profile in some circles. That has been weird, for sure. I was late to the MySpace party, but it really helped me do my job. Actually, both of my jobs. As a weekly columnist for Showfax.com, I need to keep up with what actors are talking about, what's important to them. And I only encounter a fraction of all auditioning actors out there, since I don't cast episodic TV or commercials. So, I need to stay plugged in and my blog and my MySpace page have really helped with that.

I also post at a few message boards [visit here or here] and keep an eye out for what issues are relevant to working and aspiring actors everywhere. When I started using MySpace to promote my column, the readership tripled. (At that point, I asked for a raise. Hee!)

Because I both write and cast, I don't feel the need to insulate myself like many CDs tend to do. If I were only a casting director, I might make myself a little harder to reach (and honestly, I have begun to eliminate some of the accessibility in the past few months), but as a writer, I need to be reachable. I need to hear from my readers, to find out what they need me to write about. So, I'll always be highly Googleable. I just may have to hire someone to answer my email at some point. Ha! That sounds crazy, but it's almost getting to that point. I get hundreds of messages each day. Most, from actors.

But even before I went into casting or felt comfortable calling myself a writer, I was this accessible. It's just always been my plan to be a public person (hence the acting ambitions since childhood). And, for me, that means being out and about—both online and in town. I enjoy it.

To follow up on that, what’s the best way for an actor to keep in touch with you without annoying you to no end? Sending you an endless stream of e-mails? A personal podcast? Postcards?

Ha! Emails, as you can see from the above answer, are gonna be skimmed at best. I do read all of my comments at MySpace. I do open all of my snail mail. (Well, that's not fair. Rockstar Intern Julie opens all of my mail, but I do look at it.) I love postcards because they're unobtrusive, they remind me you're out there booking work or changing representation or getting new headshots (or plastic surgery) and I can very easily reconnect with you. And hopefully, when I'm next casting something and your headshot comes through the electronic submissions, I can say, "Oh yeah! He told me he was working on a play when he last postcarded me. I respect that. Let's see him for this role."

You mentioned a personal podcast, and honestly, I keep up with what actors are putting out there on their blogs, their MySpace pages, their YouTube channels to such an extent that they don't even have to send me notifications of such content. If an actor has something really cool and innovative going on, we're gonna see it. And while we might not have an immediate need to cast an actor who has impressed us, we will remember that actor when the time is right.

Look at your contact with casting directors as billboards on the side of the road. Advertisers don't put those up because they're hoping someone will see a Coca-Cola billboard, slam on the brakes, and pull a U-turn into a 7-11 to buy a Coke. They put 'em up so that when you are next faced with a tasty beverage decision, you will think of Coke. Your CD contact is like that. You're not looking to get us to take immediate action. You're just reminding us that you're still in this thing. (Believe me, with the number of actors who bail on this business every day, it's important to remind us you're around.)

You’re very well known for putting out almost every one of your breakdowns on Actors Access for every Joe Actor to submit on instead of closing off submissions to only agents and managers. Might I ask why you do this? Have you really cast any unrepresented actors in parts because of their submissions?

Oh, sure! That's a casting director's favorite day: when she can call an actor who has no agent, no manager, maybe not even a SAG card, and say, "Hey! You got the part!" It's so thrilling to help make a difference in someone's career level with just one phone call. Yeah, we'll always go after "name" actors and definitely see the actors with top agents and all that. But I reserve a percentage of slots at every audition for actors who otherwise wouldn't get a shot at reading for me. I remember—from my days as an actor—that having no agent, having no SAG card does not automatically make you less talented or less right for the role than someone with an agent, with a SAG card. (Just like having an agent or a SAG card doesn't automatically equal a guarantee of someone's talent or "rightness" for a role.)

The reason I put the breakdowns out on Actors Access is really simple. I put out a breakdown for a feature film in 2005 ("Chandler Hall") to only agents and managers. About three months after the film had wrapped shooting, my husband went to the PO Box and brought back this huge tub of submissions, all directly from actors. I was like, "What the hell?!?" Something clearly had just happened with that breakdown for this long-ago cast project. Luckily, one of the actors submitting herself included a printout of the breakdown in her submission envelope. So, I was able to see exactly what had happened.

Some scammy-ass opportunist stole the breakdown I had released to agents and managers only and SOLD IT to actors (for like $20/mo. to access "real Hollywood breakdowns") through this scammy website promising fame—and they had changed some key information in the breakdown. Like the fact that I was accepting electronic submissions only (so, now I had all of these hard-copy submissions I had never asked for, nor would ever really consider). Like the fact that the submission deadline was months ago (so, now all of these actors thought they had a shot at this project—which was already in the can, for cryin' out loud). It just really pissed me off that some jerk was making money off selling bogus, stolen, modified breakdowns to starry-eyed actors, and here they all sent in headshots because they thought they had a shot with this project and with me. It just hurt my heart to see.

So, I asked myself how I could prevent such a thing from ever happening again. Simple. Devalue the breakdown by making it free and visible to all actors everywhere from the very beginning. Does this mean I have to filter through thousands more submissions than I may want to for each role? Yup. But it's a small price to pay vs. the price actors were paying to see that bogus information. And if I can help keep that from happening by spending a few extra hours looking at submissions, so be it. (That said, there are actors out there who don't respect that I've made it clear that I'm accepting electronic submissions only through Actors Access and they will totally disregard my submission instructions and email a headshot, snail mail a headshot, call me, try to get me to consider them via MySpace, etc., when all they have to do to be considered is click SUBMIT on Actors Access.)

One of the projects you’re working on now is the web series “Lily Did It.” How has casting a web series been different than working on an indie film? Do you look at actors differently when you’re looking at an ongoing job (regular on a web pilot) as opposed to a six week job on a film?

I have to say, working on LilyDidIt.com has been a great experience. Anna Christopher—one member of the writing/directing team—is someone I've worked with many times before and I refer to her as "My Ron Howard." (And that would make me "Her Jane and Janet," since they cast all of his films and he only ever hires them—people are very loyal in this business.)

She's amazing. Visionary. Brilliant. So very talented and such a blast to work with. I would say I want to be her when I grow up, but she's a decade younger than I am, so I guess I just have to be her biggest fan and a very satisfied colleague and creative collaborator. Because I had cast projects for Anna before, I actually didn't approach casting the pilot for this web series any differently than when we're doing indie films.

We have a shorthand that's really wonderful. It allows us to get a lot done in a short period of time and we communicate very effectively. And that has informed the process of casting LilyDidIt.com more than its destination (the web vs. TV vs. movie theaters vs. stage).

That said, definitely there are concerns with putting a series regular in place that might not exist with a supporting character in a film. With any series regular—whether it's on TV or online—you're basically choosing someone that viewers are going to invite into their home (hopefully) on a regular basis. They're gonna need to really like that person (even if the actor is playing a "bad guy") in order to invest that kind of energy and commitment to view week after week. So, the actor's personality becomes even more of a factor than it might be in casting a film. Sure, we always want to put the best people possible together on a project, but in casting a pilot, you need that charisma to be undeniable from the first moment that person steps into frame. Everyone who sees that actor, that character, needs to feel positive about that experience. Every actor's "real self" shines through as he or she acts (it's what we love about 'em), so divas or meanies aren't going to book series regular gigs unless their draw is so very strong that we'll put up with the other crap, just to score the ratings.

There's also the issue of stamina on the job. An actor working on a film for a few days or even a couple of weeks can leave and reboot, take some down time after the shoot, do something totally different on the next project to recharge the creative passion. Actors who are cast as series regulars are committed to portraying these characters for years if the project takes off. Imagine offering Matt LeBlanc the role of Joey in pilot season 1994 and saying, "You're gonna be playing this dumb, pretty guy for 12 years. And really, even when you're playing other roles, people are going to say, 'Oh, that's the guy who played Joey' when they see you." Of course, an actor hearing that he may be employed—and making TV money—for over a decade is gonna jump at the chance and he might even offer to change his name to Joey if it helps him get the job. (It doesn't. I'm kidding, here. Don't offer such a thing, ever.) It's a "quality problem" and one most actors hope to have someday.

But yes, the concern is there. Does this actor have the stamina to "bring it" every week, 22 weeks per year, God willing for years and years to come? And there's really no way to know that for sure, except to work with people who are generally committed, talented, passionate, and professional. Then, even if they're the type who might get bored with a character after a couple of years, they're professional enough to stick out their commitment and then move on with grace and style.

I have to ask this question because it always elicits interesting responses. What’s the one thing an actor can do to get on your “bad side?”

Disregard what is very clearly already "out there" because "it couldn't possibly apply to me." As you've mentioned, I'm way Googleable. Anyone who reads my column each week, who has skimmed one of my books, who has visited my MySpace page or my FAQ should get a really clear sense of where my boundaries are and how not to piss me off. Amazingly, there will always be an actor or two who comes in to read for me who has done absolutely zero homework on me.

This, to me, is totally disrespectful of our (hopefully) long-term professional relationship. I mean, before an actor comes in to read for me, I know his name, his credits, his representation, I've watched his demo reel, I've done my homework on him. So, for him to enter the room and blow off something that would be so easy to learn about me (and no, I'm not going to spell out examples, because that is precisely the point, right?) shows me that he doesn't respect our relationship and doesn't feel that our future together is worth investing a few moments in finding out "What's it gonna be like to go read for Bonnie Gillespie." And y'know what? I can make sure that lack of investment in the future relationship pays off. Heh.

Sad, isn't it? But some actors treat their profession as a joke. They don't read the script. They don't even read the sides for the other characters in the film (in which they might learn things about their character that help inform their audition). They might not even know if it's a comedy or a drama. They show up happy to be there, but not at all ready for the opportunity they're getting. And I know the numbers. I'm always left thinking about the thousands of other actors I didn't call in for that audition slot, while some jaggoff digs a hole for himself by showing me how lightly he takes this storytelling endeavor he's hoping to be a part of.

To an actor being a casting director seems like a pretty wonderful job. The actors only see their colleagues begging the casting director for jobs and the casting director sitting in their castle deciding who to make into the next superstar. What are a couple of truths about being a casting director do wish every actor knew?

Actually, what I wish actors knew about casting is something that would help them do a better job as auditioning actors, more than something that would let me off the hook for looking like a princess on a throne. (Because, dammit, I am! Hee!) Actors don't realize how random and illogical casting decisions sometimes are. Heck, forget "sometimes." Almost always. And if actors sat in on auditions as interns, camera operators, or readers, they would learn so very quickly that it's not about finding the most talented actor for the role. That's a part of it, but it's also chemistry and matching and not reminding the director of his ex (And how could you know or control that?) and timing and deals made with agents for packaging and all sorts of boring stuff that isn't at all on an actor's radar.

Other than that, I think actors would be amused by how business-y our job can be, when we're closing deals with agents or negotiating points, making lists and lists and lists. It's a job that is both very creative and very administrative. But it's the creative part of it that most people think about, when they imagine what our days look like. There's a lot of paperwork involved too.

Self-Management for Actors is such a unique book. There are a million books out there on how to act and most of the books on the business of acting center on how to find an agent and get other people to help you on your career. Your book focuses on things actors can do on their own to improve their careers. What lead you to take such a different spin on the “business of acting” book?

I never saw it as that different from anything else that was out there, when I started writing it. It wasn't until I started getting feedback on it and reading reviews that I realized, "Hey. You've hit on something pretty special here, Gillespie. Good for you." It's just sort of how my brain sees the non-craft part of acting, all written out in one place. But my weekly column is an extension of that too. I always felt there were many people out there better equipped to cover the craft of acting, but dangit, I was really good at the business side of acting even before going into casting (and I assumed other actors were too. It never occurred to me that this was something actors struggle with, until I was no longer an actor and I started fielding questions about casting due to my column at "Back Stage West"). So, when I started looking at trends in these questions I was fielding—almost always questions about the business side of acting—I was like, "Um, duh!" when I would write up an answer (either at a message board or via reply email). It took my husband (my fiancé at the time, actually) saying, "Um, Bon, it's not 'duh' to us. Actors don't get the business stuff like you do. We need these questions answered."

A little backstory: I had been a teacher for a very short period of time between getting my MA in Journalism and coming back to Los Angeles to pursue acting "one last time" in '98. In addition to teaching middle school broadcasting and technology, it was my job as Instructional Technology Coordinator at the school to teach teachers how to integrate technology into their classrooms. (Yes. I'm a big ol' geek. It's true. I was actually working on a PhD in Instructional Technology before dropping out to move back to LA.) So, one of my specialties was bringing scary concepts (to these technophobic teachers) into a perspective—usually through analogies—that made them manageable. Because no one is going to try something scary when it looks impossible. So, the goal was to make it look less impossible and "just" scary.

Doing drop-offs at studio lots may seem scary, but it's not at all impossible. Submitting yourself on projects when you have no agent may seem scary, but it's not impossible either. Proving to the power players in this business that you can—and will—succeed all on your own if you have to is a great way to get them fired up about working with you. And I have cast an actor in a lead role who really was lucky to get an audition for the small supporting role on which he was initially seen. He had no agent, was only recently SAG-eligible, and was new to LA. I took a chance on him for this tiny role and he blew me away. I asked him to read for the lead (even though we were making name actor offers for that role, and not auditioning anyone for it at all). He pulled a copy of the script out of his backpack right then and asked, "What scene?" I was so sure he would need to get a copy of the script, read that character's lines, decide on a scene to use, prep for the audition, come back later, etc. But no. As part of his prep for the minor character, he downloaded the entire script, read it, made notes, WANTED to read for the lead and was READY when that opportunity was presented to him. I was amazed at his commitment to his craft and this project. And, of course, he was brilliant in that audition, booked the role, fell in love with his costar, and now they live together and have a new puppy. I think they named her Bonnie.

Anyway, the point is, I know for a fact actors can make their own way in this business. It's not always easy, but it's not supposed to be easy. It's supposed to be you, living your dreams. And there's work to be done, to make those dreams a reality. Bonus for that actor I just mentioned? I picked up the phone and called one of my favorite agents and said, "You have to see this kid." He did. He loved him. Signed him. And sent him out on seven pilots that next pilot season. He tested at network on two of them. Not bad for his first year in LA, huh?

I don't know that any book can teach actors how to be that professional, that prepared, that committed and excited about life and this career choice. Most actors will pursue acting without ever reaching the level of success they hope for. But the pursuit itself has to be gratifying for you. And I hope my book focuses on that element of this whole thing. We all want to be around people who love what they do every day. That's true in any profession. Life's too short to spend with a-holes who are too bitter to realize how great they've got it. Most of what's in my book—I hope—is common sense about how to navigate this business and not give your power away (actors are notorious for doing that). If that makes it unique, well then, I'm even more pleased that I got that information out there in a form where others can consume it and apply it to their lives.

I hear there’s an updated and revised 3rd edition of Self-Management for Actors in the works. What changes should we look for? What’s changed about the business in the last few years that made you want to revise your opus?

Heh. Well, the big reason for doing the new 3rd edition stems from the fact that we were running out of the 2nd edition and were gonna have to do another print run, either way. So, we could either spend money reprinting the 2nd edition (which was originally released in February of 2006) or spend a little bit more money printing a new edition. And, since we were gonna be out the dough either way, we might as well put out something that is updated, revised, right on top of the trends and changes that have taken place in these last two years. (We sort of set that up as the way we would treat this book, when we put out the 2nd edition so soon after the 1st edition, which came out in October 2003.) Of course, that means a lot of work overhauling the book for this new edition, but it's gotta be done at some point, so why not now, y'know?

As for changes specific to this edition, the biggie is going to be the addition of a whole new section, called "Advanced Self-Management for Actors." It's going to cover things like transitions in representation, dealing with the press, negotiating a back-end deal, etc. New and updated essays from professional, working actors, so readers can hear from those who are out there doing it every day. New actors being "typed" in the "What's My Type" chapter. Those are probably the top differences.

Changes in the business over the past few years include the overwhelming use of electronic submission services like Actors Access and, commercially, LA Casting; total saturation of color headshots; the end of the reign of "Academy Players Directory" as a source for actor information; the rise of YouTube and MySpace as legitimate outlets for creative endeavors—to such an extent that all of the major agencies have departments devoted to scouting talent online; that sort of stuff. But the basics remain the same: Actors control their destiny to a much greater extent than they may believe.

Along with actor Blake Robbins you wrote Acting Q’s which is a series of interviews with working actors from all over the business. What are a few things you took away from this experience that you’d like to pass on to all the aspiring actors out there reading this?

My favorite lesson from doing the interviews with Blake for "Acting Qs" is that every actor feels alone at some point. Every actor wonders where the next job is going to come from. Even a series regular feels "out of work" for more than half the year. I figure—if actors can get okay with that sense of uncertainty; that awareness that they will spend most of their career in search of future work, investing in relationships in order to build potential opportunities for work; and that need to push all of that out of their minds while they're creating and auditioning—they'll do just fine in this business. But if they walk around sure that their lives will change the second they earn their first big paycheck as an actor, they're both wrong and setting themselves up for a much harder road than they need to experience.

One of your other projects is the Cricket Feet Casting Actors Showcase. There are so many showcases going on in Los Angeles, why do another? What makes this showcase different?

We do. We're what makes this showcase different. I know that may sound silly, but that's really the bottom line. The decision to produce a showcase was not something I went into without a whole lot of planning and research. In my first few years of casting, I've attended over 100 actor showcases and seen some really great ones and really bad ones. I began to develop a sense of what material is over-done, what production values were met with the most positive reaction by the industry, what some of the biggest mistakes other producers were making. Mainly, those were allowing actors who would only ever be cast as supporting characters or wacky neighbors to play lead roles in showcase scenes, choosing industry-insider material, or doing way heavy drama and over-exposed material. Because so many other showcases seemed to let actors choose how they'd be cast (because, hey, it's their money, so why shouldn't they drive the bus), I knew it would be important to cast actors in exactly the kind of roles the industry would "buy" them doing, right then.

An additional goal was to be sure the actors' marketing materials were at their best. I was tired of attending showcases, getting an industry kit filled with headshots, and then seeing typos on the resumés (or—egad—the use of "principle" instead of "principal" to describe the size of a role). I began to think, "C'mon, showcase producer! Show some pride in the overall product you're turning out. Don't let a single one of these showcasers slide by without your meticulous attention to how they're presenting themselves, just because their check clears!" I also noticed that a lot of showcases were charging a ton of money to their participants and then laying out the cheapest snackfood and Two Buck Chuck to drink. I know how much it costs to rent facilities and hire a director, technical director, stage manager, and insure the space for the performances. So, "Where is that money going," I would ask myself.

The problem is, I had been batting around the idea of producing a showcase for three years and could never seem to get it off the ground. It was going to be so much work and I really was going to need a producing partner. A showcase coordinator to help with some of the heavy lifting. Yes, I had met with potential producing partners before, but we always ended up having done a great meeting and then never moving forward. So, when Eitan Loewenstein asked if he could help—you may know him. He's a very talented actor and he writes this column you should read—I said the same thing I said previously to other potential partners: "Let's meet." And we did. And the rest, as they say, is history. We have a very transparent producing process and every actor dollar goes toward the production and promotion of the showcase itself, so we're very proud that the industry feedback has consistently included comments like: "The best showcase I've ever attended."

I should hope so. We've worked really hard to put it all together. It's exciting to see so many talented actors getting exposure to great agents, managers, casting directors, filmmakers, and producers through their showcase performances and post-showcase networking reception. And even more exciting that the industry has come to expect such outstanding showcases from us in such a short period of time. That reputation will help everyone involved.

What is your favorite thing about the entertainment industry? And of course, your least favorite?

Hmm. Favorite thing would be the endless opportunities for anyone to "make it" in this industry. I know people tend to focus on the rejection involved in show business, but I've never seen this world like that at all—even when I was acting. In what other industry can you have nothing more than a look, natural talent, and one good photograph and have the opportunity to read for a role thousands and thousands of actors want to call theirs? When five actors make it to final callbacks on a film I'm casting, I've heard an actor complain that this means she only has a 20% chance of booking the role—and she doesn't like those odds. Are you kidding me? Some roles receive thousands of submissions and we have to choose maybe 25 or 30 actors we're going to meet for prereads. We narrow it down to our top five and you can't see how far you've come to get to the top five? Wow. That's backwards to me. There's no rejection there. Being told you don't even get the opportunity to call yourself an actor would be true rejection. Everyone gets a shot, if they want it, here. I love that.

Least favorite thing would be... hmm... maybe how casually some folks approach their careers. Same stuff I mentioned before about not being prepared for an audition, not being professional, not doing the very basic homework required of any profession before you face a job interview. But, in a way, I guess it's fine that some people don't see this as a profession to be respected. That means more bookings for the actors who do "get it." Actor Darwinism, baby.

So what’s next for Bonnie Gillespie? What other projects do you have on the horizon?

Within the next few months, we'll be launching a web-based extension of the Cricket Feet Casting Actors Showcase at the Virtual Channel Network —a website created by Breakdown Services and "The Hollywood Reporter." This is a fantastic opportunity for the actors and writers behind the Cricket Feet Showcase. They're going to be shooting scenes that scored very well in the industry feedback forms at each of the three showcase editions we produced in 2007, and I suspect we'll continue to involve actors who showcase in 2008 and beyond in this VCN project as well.
As you already know, I'm working on the 3rd edition of "Self-Management for Actors" and am turning "Casting Qs" (my first book) into an eBook format, with each casting director interview available as a separate PDF download. I'll continue to work on adding new interviews to the mix, time permitting. My weekly column, of course, is at Showfax.com, and I love getting to do that gig. It's awesome.

And in the casting arena, two films I've been working on for the past year or so are finally heading into production, so those will fire back up, along with three new films for which I'll be releasing breakdowns in the next few weeks. All are in the $500,000 to $4,000,000 budget range, so still really low-budget by "big Hollywood" standards, but I love that we're getting into the SAG Low Budget contract area, and that means the actors are getting paid better—and I'm getting paid better—and because the money is really secondary to the material and the people anyway, I'm just thrilled to have such amazing scripts coming my way. The filmmakers I worked with a few years ago are coming back around to me for their next projects, and that's really gratifying.

I remain a work in progress and I learn something new every day about this business. That, for me, is always what's next: To keep on learning. To keep discovering. To keep living my dreams every day.