What would you do?

  • Claire Conroy

    Actor

    hey guys I am doing a low bud feature film in April from 2nd till 28th but have just been called by a director to possibly do Amy Adams standin in a feature film. Of course they both overlap!

    They have offered me a trial week in dublin for the standin job and they will then decide whether to use me for the full film and it starts filming on tuesday. What I am proposing is that I will do the trial week from this tues then fly back and do my film, return to set April 25th and shoot the last six weeks of the film. Can anyone give me advice??? Has anyone done Double or standin work before, if so do they need you for the full shoot. I am not willing to give up my own acting job but it is potentially a big opportunity. I need to contact them later today!xx

    • 1st Apr 2009
    • 1804
    • 22
  • Simon Weir

    Actor

    if it were me, i'd go for the bigger job. a better opportunity to work on a larger production and make good contacts. low budget features can just disappear and your performance with it. good luck, nice to be wanted !!

    • 27th Mar 2009
    • 1
  • Alan Brent

    Actor

    I'm with Simon on this. You make few useful contacts on low budget and many more quality contacts on genuine feature films. Make sure you get a credit!

    • 27th Mar 2009
    • 2
  • User Deleted

    This profile has been archived

    Absolutely agree with every one on this, do the bigger feature film. Much better credit and the possible contacts will be much more useful to you. Go for it, good luck.

    x

    • 27th Mar 2009
    • 3
  • Mark Kempner

    Actor

    Bigger job with proper pay v low budget...Hmmmm...easy choice I'd say! If you can afford to not have money coming in...and your role in the low budget job is fab...and its a great production...then your choice is harder maybe? However, go with the money and the chance of making much better contacts all round for the future?

    Stand-ins often do not get treated much better than the extras ...so be prepared for that. They crew will get to know you by name and all that....but do not expect more than that. It looks very boring work. I spoke to a stand-in on a film I was in...and he'd had enough of it after a few weeks!

    You will be required all the time the actress you are standing in for is being used....be prepared for long days and or nights. the main actress will be in her nice warm winnibago whilst you are doing the standing in!

    • 27th Mar 2009
    • 4
  • Kelly Freemantle

    Actor

    Amy Adams Job definately.

    U will meet established people in the business and a good chance to network

    • 27th Mar 2009
    • 5
  • Claire Dodin

    Actor

    Really? You guys would do stand in instead of acting in a film?

    I wouldn't (provided that I really like the film I'm supposed to shoot)

    Stand in will be good money, but it's crew, not acting.

    If I were you, I'd explain the situation to the big film people, it's very possible that they'll be ok for you to have the time off to shoot the other one.

    Being honest upfront is the best policy, but there's a chance you'll lose the job, so only speak if you are willing to lose it.

    If you are shooting for 3 weeks on your low budget, there's a good chance you are a lead character. You will get much more out of it than being a stand in. Yes you'll meet some people on the big film, but they'll see you as crew, and you'll also meet people on the smaller film, but they'll see you as a leading lady. All these people will make more films, the smaller film crew is much more likely to employ you again as an actress. All film makers started by a low budget feature.

    On your resume you can't put the stand in job, the lead in a feature will look good.

    In my mind there is no doubt that the low budget film is the right choice to make; provided you think they are professionals and you like the script (I imagine you wouldn't do it otherwise)

    • 27th Mar 2009
    • 6
  • Forbes KB

    Actor

    Big Film or LB Indie Film? Had the same sort of choice to make earlier this year, but the two roles I had been cast in were both actual roles!! You're issue is the two jobs are not the same.

    I'm actually going to go against the majority opinion here, which isn't unusual for me, because although nicely paid and an interesting opportunity stand-in job isn't an acting job! The majority of Stand-In work is just that...standing in for the named actor while the crew set up the shot! It's technically a crew position and embedded deep within the crew credits and not in the cast!

    If I could afford to ignore the financial issues and look purely at a career progression issue, I'd take the risk and do the LB Indie film. Both opportunities may lead to better things but do you want to act or just stand there while the lights are set up?

    My tuppence worth...sometimes not worth tuppence but hey, it's only my opinion!

    • 27th Mar 2009
    • 7
  • Forbes KB

    Actor

    Myself and Claire were obviously typing out our messages at exactly the same time!

    Thank goodness I'm not the only devils advocate!

    • 27th Mar 2009
    • 8
  • Claire Dodin

    Actor

    yes, thanks Forbes! :-)

    • 27th Mar 2009
    • 9
  • Clare Cameron

    Actor

    yep, have to agree with Claire - you'll literlaly just be standing in so that they can line-up the shot/lights; there's no guarantee of getting contacts, just a lot of money. Also, have you already committed to the low-budget film because if so do you not think it's a tad unprofessional to pull out because you got offered a better job? Large movie stars can do that but, at our level it's hardly going to endear yourself to what could be future professionals. Furthermore, it's due to start shooting next week which is insanely short notice to pull out of a job

    I certainly think it's best to be honest about your commitments, and yes, if you can do both, you'd be crazy not to. Also, think about the possibility that you might pull out of the low-budget feature, do the week's trial and then not be asked to do the remainderof the film (can't imagine why not but then I've never heard of a trial week....) - anyway, you could very well be left with nothing but a bad reputation with the LB film-makers

    • 27th Mar 2009
    • 10
  • User Deleted

    This profile has been archived

    I'm with the minority, I'm afraid. Stand ins are just regarded as pieces of the set. You stand around for hours whilst shots are set up around you. You are not an actor. You are crew and when the action starts they will no longer need you til the next shot set up.

    As for making contacts - if it is a big budget film then the "influential" crew and actors will not mingle with the lesser mortals and certainly not with someone who just stands around!

    Sorry to be harsh but you want to be an actress right? Then act - don't be crew! Who knows how well the indie will be received? How far it will go? Where the Director might be in a few years time? Maybe he'll still be using you as his leading lady and YOU will have the stand in!

    If you can do both then that's ideal as you'll get the best of both worlds and experience the tedium of stand in and the elation of being a leading light!

    Having said that, go with what YOU feel is right and huge good luck either way - oh and well done with getting the offer.

    • 27th Mar 2009
    • 11
  • User Deleted

    This profile has been archived

    I've done stand-in work once, a long time ago (on Peak Practice). It is about on a par with extra work - ie lots of hanging round, though maybe you get to see an interesting production coming together. Can't say I made any useful contacts, is there wasn't any real opportunity to do so. (In fact, I started chatting to one of the actors at lunch time, and she got very uncomfortable and moved tables! Very 'Extras').

    So I'd go with the acting, hands down.

    • 27th Mar 2009
    • 12
  • Mark Kempner

    Actor

    LOL... this thread is attracting a lot of CLAIR'S!!!

    As I said in my first response...you have to way up what you need most. If the part you have in the low b film is really good...and you are convinced that the production value etc will all be really good, and you are def going to get the footage....do that. You will gain far more art wise than any stand-in work. However, unless its going to a really good production standard (and not look like a tsudent film!) ...I'd still take the stand-in work as that could pay your rent etc for a few weeks?

    My mate stood in for Pierce Brosnan on a bond film or two...had a fab time, got on really well with 007!

    I have another other mate who looked just like Christopher Reeves....and hated standing in coz he was treated like the S--T on the bot of the directors shoe.

    If you are good at networking...really good at it...you could easily pick up some good contacts standing in. If its a nice film unit and crew...you will be bored but fine. If its the normal "you are no more to us than a chess piece" crew....you will not do anything other than get cold, bored, and a bit lonely.

    It's a tough one and from the options we've all put before you...only YOU can decide really!

    Spose that really helps....NOT?!!

    • 27th Mar 2009
    • 13
  • Antonio Rochira

    Actor

    If it's a good meaty acting role, I'd have no hesitation going for the LB indie rather than be a stand-in on a big budget.

    I have been a stand-in, and as several have already mentioned it's more like crew work or extra work even, and no-one treated me as an actor.

    Meaty acting role every time!!! (unless you have a utility bill to pay!!)

    • 27th Mar 2009
    • 14
  • Toni Brooks

    Actor

    A stand in is just that and they're never credited - it's not like an understudy job, you literally just stand there in the same clothes as the principals while the lighting and sound guys get it right and then the actors come on and do the scene. Go for the acting job every time and, like extra work, once you're known as a stand in, you'll get offered that type of work.

    • 27th Mar 2009
    • 15
  • User Deleted

    This profile has been archived

    Yeah, forget the standin job. I've worked on a few movies as an extra and watched the standins at work. BORING!

    At least as an extra you get to dress up and sometimes you get to say a line or two.

    The low budget film will have you acting and you can hawk it around to get more work.

    As a standin the crew won't even talk to you, never mind the actors so what chance have you of networking?

    By the way, who is Amy Whatshername?

    • 27th Mar 2009
    • 16
  • Nathan Head

    Actor

    she is best known for playing alongside Meryl Streep in "doubt" (film adaption) and for playing the live-action Disney princess in "Enchanted"

    • 28th Mar 2009
    • 17
  • Rob Talbot

    Actor

    Are stand-ins anything more than extras that bear a passing resemblance from some angle or other to somebody doing an acting job?

    Unlike being a normal extra - you have almost no chance of your face being recognisable on film.

    I'm with several others here. Be upfront about the offer. If it's good money - state that you have a prior commitment to another job but if they are prepared to work around those dates ...

    Reading between the lines they might only need you for one week anyway. The offer "of using you for the full film" could just be a hook :o)

    • 28th Mar 2009
    • 18
  • User Deleted

    This profile has been archived

    Yep. I'd go with the LB.

    The credit would be better than a non credit.

    This is of course if you can afford not to do the money one.

    Will you actually make any contacts on th big film? Not having done this before, I would imagine that you'll be dealing mainly with runners and 3rd.

    • 28th Mar 2009
    • 19