Opening Arguments is looking for additional voices to bring this unprecedented trial to life! If you’re interested in being considered for this opportunity (and potentially future trials), check out the audition selections and send us your best take!
Audition Guidelines
- Select 1 Attorney (Reading 1 OR Reading 2) AND 1 Witness (Reading 3 OR Reading 4).
- Make sure it’s verbatim
- Go for realism, don’t ham it up. Ideally, people would believe this could be real trial audio
- Do not bother submitting if you’re using a plastic cup with yarn for a mic. The quality needs to at least be passable.
- Please – just 1 file total. wav, 16 bit, mono. yourname.wav would be helpful
- Submit your file to martin@openargs.com, subject: Audition
Reading/Acting tips based on previous submissions:
First off, here are some clips of the Fani Willis hearings to get a sense of what this is like in real life
Almost all of the submissions are coming across like someone reading a book. Over and above everything else: please try to imagine who you are talking to. Imagine in your mind, who is your audience as you’re speaking. Are you the judge? You’re likely speaking directly to an attorney or attorneys. Or maybe you’re speaking to the jury, or everyone, depending on the reading.
If you’re an attorney: put a bit of space between you and the mic. The attorneys are usually standing up, possibly even walking around while questioning. Don’t go crazy or anything, but putting a bit of space between you and the mic will do wonders for authenticity. And project. Imagine someone most of the way across the room that you’re speaking to. They and the jury would need to hear you.
If you’re a witness: this is honestly extremely difficult acting, at least in my experience. Often you only get to say “yes” or something short, and you have to try to communicate a lot without saying much. Are you a hostile witness? Which side is asking you questions, is it the side you are “on?” What do you think you are there to do? If you’re there to help put Trump away and the prosecution is asking you stuff, obviously you’re going to be very cooperative (most likely.) If the defense is cross examining you, you’d likely have a different attitude. You likely have practiced somewhat what you’re going to say, at least in direct, but also you are telling a story sometimes in the answers, so imagine you are telling someone a story in real life about something that happened to you.
If you’re the judge: you are like the teacher in a classroom. You’re in charge. But you also don’t want to give anyone any cause to succeed on appeal. Authoritative, but not rude. and again, envision you are talking TO someone. Picture someone right in front of you, or even have someone literally stand in the room with you and direct the lines at them.
Reading 1: The People’s Opening Statement, Mr. Colangelo
Reading 2: The Defense’s Opening Statement, Mr. Blanche
Reading 3: Keith Davidson, Direct Examination
Reading 4: David Pecker, Direct Examination
You must be logged in to post a comment.