Author Archives: Tim Austin

Worth

Posted on by

Frost fiction, short stories, poems, non fiction, fiction.

The woman flicked the notes carefully through her fingers, tapping the stack of cash against her desk and peering up over her horn-rimmed glasses.

“Not police?”

The man shook his head.  There was a note of threat to the question and he turned away, fixing his gaze through the doorway, his heart racing.

Silken bronze skin swept beneath long curls of onyx hair.  Asian eyes were lidded and docile.  The woman he desired tugged her skirt over a blackened bruise.

“You like?” the Madame slipped the money into a draw, her finger stroking a pistol.

“Yes.  Very much,…”

Note from the Author:  “This story is based on an event I witnessed personally many years ago, while in Soho for an audition. I didn’t catch much of the conversation – just a man and a woman trying to tempt him into a doorway. The words “Not Police” are forever etched in my mind. It made me so sad.”

Another in our series of 100-word short stories by Tim Austin. Whatever genre you love, there’s a story you’ll enjoy over at onewordonestory.org.

Come back on Tuesday for another. See you then!

Torn

Posted on by

Frost fiction, short stories, poems, non fiction, fiction.

Eddie’s mouth was hanging open.  He wasn’t entirely sure what had happened.

Around him people were staring, forks held comically close to mouths, awkward coughs and murmurs circling the room like sharks.  Behind him a door slammed closed.

“Can I get you a towel, sir?”

The Maître D remained professionally aloof but Eddie could see sympathy in his eyes.

“I,…. think I’ll have the bill, please.”

Eddie picked up the two halves of paper, her telephone number shredded.  They’d been talking about their blind date.  She’d asked what he enjoyed.

Somehow “Chilling to Netflix” was the wrong answer.

 

Another in our new series of 100-word short stories by Tim Austin at onewordonestory.org. Whatever genre you love, there’s a story you’ll enjoy.

Come back on Friday for another. See you then!

Faith

Posted on by

Frost fiction, short stories, poems, non fiction, fiction.

Jeanie held her arms out to each side.  The balls of her feet balanced against the edge of the stage: her heels hung in the air.

“That’s it, Jeanie: now fall back and the other girls will catch you,” the teacher cooed.

“Well of course they will,” Jeanie thought.

She knew them.  Jeanie knew they’d do exactly as they were told.  Jeanie had dunked the geeky one’s head in the toilet just last week.  The spotty one still had a bust lip.

She closed her eyes and fell backwards.

There was a giggle.

Promo Image by Charlie Foster via Unsplash.

The first in a new series of 100-word short stories by Tim Austin at onewordonestory.org. Whatever genre you love, there’s a story you’ll enjoy.

Come back on Friday for another. See you then.

Thatcherism: The Ideology that Broke Britain.

Posted on by

margaretthatcher

The passing of Margaret Thatcher, who died on Monday aged 87, isn’t a time for rejoicing – even for those of us on the left, writes Tim Austin.  It’s a time for reflection and action.

While there can be an understandable feeling of jubilation in the communities that suffered horrendous poverty, persecution and unemployment as the result of the policies enacted by Maggie, I feel that celebrating her passing would do far more harm than good.

Quite beyond the crass tastelessness of finding joy the death of a frail old lady with Alzheimer’s (and I honestly believe that we should show compassion, even to our enemies), there is a danger of handing a moral “high ground” to those people who still see her as a saint.  It’d be a Thatcherite tabloid field day:  open season on the “loony left” and the “wet liberal mob”.

As someone who honestly detests the failed ideology of those currently holding the reins, it is not a backlash that I’d welcome – especially if we’re to get this country back on its feet.

So what should our response be?  Should we remain silent, contrite and “well behaved”?

Not quite.

For the right wing media are already playing a game that I find equally distasteful: the attempted deification of the “Iron Lady” and a shameless astro-turfing the social damage she did.  And I don’t think that this should stand.

David Cameron has already come out swinging, harping on about how Thatcher “Saved Britain”, a cry that has been welcomed as some kind of biblical truth by writers at the Daily Mail.

Now, while the country was certainly in a fairly poor state in 1979 and many of her policies (the privatisation of heavy industry and the winding down of the coal pits) were, with hindsight, inevitable, it was her callous disregard of the social consequences that will always stick in my mind.

A little careful planning, an injection of cash into areas set to be decimated, and a longer-term approach to the winding down of those industries, giving time for communities to adjust and survive, would’ve made all the difference.  But her ideology – the ruthless, black and white, survival of the fittest ideal – wouldn’t allow it.  The resultant devastation and social upheaval is still being felt today:  the underclass of benefits dependency, the ghettoised communities, one of Europe’s worst levels of social mobility and a general feeling of desperation in areas that were once hard-working and proud.

The people who live with Thatcher’s ruthless and callous legacy wouldn’t agree that she “Saved Britain” – she certainly didn’t save it for them.

And let’s not forget the further ideology that she introduced: Thatcherism – the creed of greed.

With the wholesale deregulation of the financial sector and the selling off of social housing stock, she created a credit bubble that taught the nation that it was their inalienable right to have whatever they wanted, without consequence.  And rather than recognising that this was unsustainable, as we’ve now painfully discovered, she spurred it on, lauding the rich and promoting an ideal that money, in of itself, was the new measure of wealth.  No longer would wealth be measured by happiness or community or self respect or the care you show to your fellow man – it’d be measured in greed.

After all “There’s no such thing as society”, right?

And even now, after being hit by 3 harsh recessions when boom crashed down into the inevitable bust, it is still this ideal that politicians continue to follow – growth comes from consumption, growth will make you happy, it is your duty to make yourself richer and anyone who tells you otherwise is probably a commie.  I see these sentiments daily in political sound-bites and the right wing media opinion-pieces.  Thatcherism is still very much alive and kicking.

And has it worked?  No.  We’ve now got some of the worst working wages in the developed world, as the more selfish among us follow through on the Thatcherite ideal – profit first, people second, make me rich and that’s all that matters.  We’ve seen the financial services gamble with pension funds and crush entire currencies, throwing tens of millions of honest working people into poverty. And worse, we’ve seen the victimisation of the poor in society as “scroungers” and “cheats”, because clearly they’re just not trying hard enough, are they?

We’ve become a far more cynical, more selfish, more divided and less compassionate nation than we were before the Thatcherite social experiment began.  If our society is “broken”, as the Tories delight in reminding us, it’s because Thatcherism broke it – and more Thatcherism sure ain’t going to fix it!

So maybe now isn’t the time to celebrate in Thatcher’s death but we cannot let her mistakes pass history by.

If you agree with me, make your voices heard.  Take this time to argue the case for a progressive alternative.  Remind everyone who holds Margaret Thatcher up as an icon, that her policies, rhetoric and ideology, while making them and their rich friends vast fortunes, have, ultimately, left this nation a much, much poorer place to live.

Just show a little class while you’re at it, eh?

"It's the Audition, Stupid!" Book Review and Interview with the Author.

Posted on by

“It’s the Audition, Stupid!”

It’s a brave opening gambit; a book that insults without giving you a chance to buy it a drink first. But if that upsets you then you’d better grow some thicker skin because Brendan McNamara’s 2011 book about casting doesn’t shy from delivering a few home truths.

And quite right too.

If you purchase the book then you probably are, or are intending to be, an actor. Good luck.

It’s a cruel and unforgiving career and, while the book gives invaluable advice on casting, the real value of “It’s the Audition, Stupid!” comes from its realism – a realism which newcomers to the industry would do well to embrace.

The book itself discusses the intricacies of the casting process in refreshing detail. As an actor popping in and out of castings, which may, on occasion, only last 2-3 minutes, it seems a very arbitrary and mysterious process.

Casting directors too can seem a mysterious and distant bunch, with many actors sending off CV after CV and never hearing a word back. Brendan McNamara’s book does a great job in explaining the casting process and humanising casting directors.

Much of the advice given by the book seems, in retrospect, to be common sense – but it’s amazing how un-common common sense can be. The advice is frank, clear and given with tremendous goodwill.

The book is not just about improving actors’ attitudes towards auditions, it covers everything from drama school training to how to approach the right people. It also talks over the differences between auditioning for stage and screen work and the gulf between the two.

It’s a fascinating and valuable read, and if you’re an actor, it may just become your new best friend.

I had the pleasure of chatting with Brendan himself recently. You can find a copy of the interview below.

“It’s the Audition, Stupid!” is available now in paperback. You can find out more at www.pinterandmartin.com or buy a copy of the Kindle e-book version at Amazon. It’s the Audition, Stupid!: The actor’s essential guide to surviving the casting and getting the part

Tim Austin is a stage and screen actor based in the UK. You can read more about him at www.tim-austin.co.uk

 …

Frost Mag;

Hello Brendan. You started off as an actor – a pretty successful one too. What was it about casting directing that made you move away from the acting? And would you go back to acting full time?

Brendan;

I don’t think I’d ever act again. I was very confident as a child, I was quite quirky,… [but] I didn’t have a craft and the more I see great actors, I see a craft.

I’d no time for doing accents, which was very limiting. I was cast as a West of Ireland “cheeky chapy” and that was the extent of it, and that bored me senseless. A career of that wouldn’t’ve made me happy.

I got into casting because it started as a part time job when I was trying to pick up auditions and just became an obsession and love, basically.

Frost Mag;

Have you kept the same contacts from your acting and has that helped you in your casting?

Brendan;

Not really. A lot of contacts would’ve been in Dublin. If what you’re alluding to is “Are contacts important?” then yes. In every regard. Networking and contacts are, for an actor especially, or any industry professional, immense. You’ve got to have them.

Actors have to be pro-active. They should go to festivals, they should go to screenings and opening nights and everything because you don’t know who you’ll meet and it can help.

Frost Mag;

Do you feel that your past as an actor has given you an advantage as a Casting director? Does it, perhaps, give you an edge?

Brendan;

I think its definitely had an impact, I don’t know about giving me an edge, but it certainly helps me when I work with actors.

Essentially my job is to get the best performance from actors when they come to audition for me. The fact that I relish reading in with actors and do my best to give them something when reading opposite helps the actor and helps me.

Frost Mag;

Having spoken to fellow actors at castings and networking events, I’ve found that many of them consider casting to be a tad, if I may say, “elitist”. By that I mean, only interested in graduates of certain schools and certain universities. I don’t know if that’s true. I personally react a little against that.

Brendan;

I think that’s rubbish. I mean there might be casting directors who favour those schools and obviously I can’t speak for everyone but in my own terms, I have never brought someone in because they went to those schools. To be honest, I don’t even look for that any more.

I like nothing better than bringing in someone new. Who isn’t even based in London, who doesn’t even have an agent, who I’ve seen in something, I like their CV or I’ve spoken to or met them.

There’s so many myths about casting directors out there, made up by people; drama schools or people who just aren’t getting work. You have to realise – my job is very simple; I bring in the best people to make me look good because if I can bring in the best people and they all do great auditions then I look brilliant.

If you come in as an actor and don’t do a god job, I look bad. My job is to make you do a good job. Every actor that comes in I want them to be brilliant, I want them to be prepared, I want them to the best they can do because they make me look brilliant.

All these myths about a casting director being obstructive or getting in the way is rubbish.

Frost Mag;

What is it in a showreel that really jumps out at you, or is that different for every project that you’re casting?

Brendan;

Sometimes I don’t need to refer to it because I’ve seen the work that the actor has done or I’ve met the actor.

I sometimes have to refer to a showreel to check someone’s physicality or their accent or if I’m unsure how they look in their photo. But obviously if you’ve got a reel that has a great performance on it that’s what I’m going to tune into as well.

I don’t think there’s one thing. It could be anything; it could be a flash of the eyes.

For us it’s a reference or it’s something that I could send to a director and say “I like the look of this person, what do you think?” So if the work on it is strong or a good representation of the actor then it’s a very useful tool, basically.

“It’s the Audition, Stupid!” is available now in paperback. You can find out more at www.pinterandmartin.com or buy a copy of the Kindle e-book version at It’s the Audition, Stupid!: The actor’s essential guide to surviving the casting and getting the part
Tim Austin is a stage and screen actor based in the UK. You can read more about him at www.tim-austin.co.uk

 

A Laboratory of Theatre; There's a New Venue in Town.

Posted on by

It doesn’t look like much from the outside but Manchester’s newest theatre space, the 3MT Venue, might just be one of the most important small venues in the country, writes Tim Austin.

Built in the gutted remnants of an abandoned shop, the 3MT is a self-styled laboratory of theatre. It’s a melting pot of new talent where musicians share the same stage as burlesque dancers; a place where first-time writers can test their material and aspiring actors can cut their teeth.

But it didn’t start out life this way. In fact, it didn’t start out life as a theatre project at all.

The two people behind the project are long-time theatre practitioners and teachers Gina Topliff-Frost and her husband John. Earlier in the year they opened a costume shop on the third floor of the city’s famous Afflecks, intending to sell off some of their old wardrobe stock.

In an attempt to attract and entertain new customers, they began inviting local actors and writers to produce Three minute long sketches within the shop. Afflecks liked the idea and soon offered them the opportunity to rent a larger shop on the ground floor and the Three Minute Theatre was born.

Now re-named the 3MT Venue, the theatre space is probably one of the most striking and unique venues I’ve ever visited. The auditorium is made up of 70 re-claimed and re-covered chairs, mainly from a Baptist church in Huddersfield. The walls are covered in an eclectic collection of artwork, photographs, theatre programmes and even, I noticed with keen interest, a unicycle. In many ways it bore a closer resemblance to a student flat-share than a theatre venue – but a theatre venue it is; and very a serious one at that.

“This is bums on seats theatre, not box ticking theatre” John tells me as he gives me a tour backstage. Everything you would find in a large theatre space, you’ll find backstage at the 3MT, however the venue currently receives no external grant funding and works on a profit-share basis; if no-one comes to see their shows, they make no money.

But far from being a hindrance, their business model has encouraged the team at the 3MT to be creative in their programming. It has also seen a focus on developing new talent.

“We are a cooperative in mind because we know that, in the long run, the business will benefit from the people we’ve been supporting” explains Gina.

They now have a core team of four in-house actors who produce a regular show based on the Three minute format. They actively encourage new and developing artists to rehearse and perform in the space, balancing a mix of straight theatre, music and variety acts.

Their creative policy encourages emerging performers to try out new work before taking it to the mainstream. Not only does this make it an exciting and refreshing venue to visit but, with funding fears leading to mainstream houses relying more and more on “name” faces to attract audiences, spaces like this are essential for the future of the industry.

Will it make John and Gina rich? Probably not but, then again, I doubt they care; this is a labour of love and their passion and dedication are infectious. And their love for the space is beginning to pay off, with audience numbers rising and more companies taking an interest in the space.

3MT is one to watch.

You can find out more about 3MT by visiting their website at http://www.threeminutetheatre.co.uk

Tim Austin is an Actor and Writer based in the UK. You can find out more about his work by visiting http://www.tim-austin.co.uk

Has Hollywood Gone Potty for Limeys? How the Brits Conquered Hollywood.

Posted on by

A few weeks ago I attended a fantastic industry networking event in Manchester. Among the exhibitors was Industry Hollywood, a company whose sole aim is to help British actors to grow their exposure across the pond. They told me that UK talent is in real demand over in the “Land of the Free”.

So this got me thinking; is this actually true and, if so, why?

Take a gander at the casts of some of the most popular shows on American network TV and you’re sure to come across a fair few Brits. Archie Panjabi in The Good Wife, Linus Richie in Law and Order, Louise Lombard in CSI – this is just a small selection of Brits to “crack” the US drama scene.

The same can be said of many Hollywood movies, with the re-jigged Batman franchise, the upcoming Man of Steel, The Amazing Spider-Man and recent Oscar contenders such as The Social Network all featuring British performers taking roles that could easily be played by Americans.

So, on the surface at least, Hollywood has indeed gone potty for the “Limeys”. But why?

Could it be a cultural thing? In the UK, we have a long and noble theatre tradition, with actors cutting their teeth on stages across the nation before making the move to TV and onto film. In the US this tradition is often reversed. Might this create a different “style” of performance that is now “in vogue”?

In a 2007 interview for the Radio Times, Stephen Fry talked about the difference between American and British actors; “[Take] the supreme relaxed authenticity of a James Stewart or a George Clooney compared with the brittle contrivances of a Laurence Olivier or a Kenneth Branagh, marvellous as they are”

I would certainly agree that you can, at times, see a distinct difference in style when a British actor is dropped into an American TV drama. Take Christopher Eccleston’s short stint in Heroes – he sticks out like a sore thumb. There’s nothing wrong with his performance but it’s certainly different to those around him; he’s performing a role (brilliantly) while those around him are “inhabiting” their characters in a far more comfortable fashion. I’d say the same about the wonderful Hugh Laurie in House.

Now I’m a firm believer that good acting is good acting and I’m wary of the notion that we Brits are in any way “better” than our American cousins. But does our different tradition and altered style make us more attractive to US casting executives? Is there a fashion for “Brit style” acting at the moment?

Maybe not.

In an interview for the Caledonian Mercury, Scottish TV producer Andrea Calderwood, who now works in the US TV Industry, gives another theory; Cost.

“,… Producers are always on the look out for new talent which won’t break the budget. Enter stage right all those eager and ambitious British actors hungry for that Hollywood breakthrough.”

Are we really just “White Mexicans”, a phrase that is apparently doing the rounds in LA?

Toby Hemmingway, a British actor making huge strides in his career over in America, might have a few words to say about that. In a recent interview for the Guardian, he claimed that British actors benefitted from being more resilient.

“It’s the natural pessimism. Being a good loser. Americans think 15 minutes of fame and it’s all over or it’ll make you. Brits are more dogged and realistic”

It’s an interesting idea; that Brits are more tenacious in their attempts to find work. But is it true?

And, indeed, should we be complaining if we’re simply “cheaper” as long as it get us the work?

Let me know what you think in the comments below0.

This article was originally published at www.tim-austin.co.uk

Doctor Who 'The Wedding of River Song' Review

Posted on by

And so The Doctor goes to meet his fate by the lake in Utah, bringing Season 6 of Doctor Who full circle and wrapping things up in a satisfying and rewarding conclusion.

That would’ve been nice.

Sadly, that’s an entirely different episode to the one we got – and that got on my wick, I’m afraid.

Now don’t get me wrong, ‘The Wedding of River Song’ was a fun episode full of beautiful visuals, cracking dialogue, sweet in-jokes, and nice ideas; it was far from rubbish. Indeed, had it been placed mid-season I’d probably be lauding it as a classic.

It was just as barmy and lovable as we’ve all come to expect, with Pterodactyls chasing kids, Charles Dickens on the BBC Breakfast sofa and a pit full of carnivorous skulls. I was also pleased to see the return of Dorium Maldovar – a brilliant, brilliant character who I was heartbroken to have seen killed earlier in the season. There was even a poignant and touching tribute to the late, great Nicholas Courtney. Good stuff.

No, the problem lay in the basic DNA of its existence. The point of the episode, the whole reason for its being; to resolve the death of the Doctor,… and it is here that I felt it fall flat.

Firstly, while the alternative universe is fun and clever, it is essentially a massive distraction to the business at hand. We’ve had 12 episodes of “Doctor’s Death” foreshadowing so far this series. To me, the enjoyment of all that grandiose myth-building was guessing and wondering how the Doctor could possibly escape. This is, after all, Doctor Who; he was ALWAYS going to escape.

But Stephen Moffat wasn’t interested in telling that story. Indeed, so un-troubled was he by the resolution to this 13-episode jigsaw puzzle that he tossed it away in the final 5 minutes. He was more interested in telling us the tale of,… well I’m not actually sure. It certainly wasn’t “How Amy met Rory” – he’d already done that one in the finale to Series 5.

By creating an alternate reality with a giant re-set switch, and throwing the Doctor’s death away as a cheap and obvious trick, nothing that anyone does at any point in this episode makes a blind bit of difference to the place we end up when the credits roll.

Had River not cocked things up, the Doctor would still have survived his “death”, the Silence would still be patting their collective squidgy backs at a job well done and Amy would’ve continued her lucrative perfumery career.

In fact, the only difference that the alternate reality plot made to the conclusion of the season was that River and The Doctor got married, and blabber-mouth Melody Pond could tell all and sundry that the Doctor was still alive. And I really can’t help feeling that they didn’t need 45 minutes to tell that story – 10 would’ve done.

And that’s this episode’s biggest mistake; although it was exciting and pretty and whiz-bangy, it was, ultimately, pointless. Like a cheap fairground ride, I enjoyed it while it lasted but, having stood in the queue for an hour eating candy floss, I left the podium feeling a little dizzy and wondering whether it was worth all the fuss.

It didn’t help that the climatic reveal of how the Doctor survived his date with destiny turned out to be a rather dull and obvious get-out-jail-free card. From the very second the Tessalector popped back at the start of the episode, I knew how the Doctor was going to survive. It was so blindingly obvious that I convinced myself that it was actually some kind of cunning double bluff. Imagine my crushing disappointment when it turned out to be nothing of the sort.

As a resolution to the “final end” of the Doctor, it felt cheap and unworthy. Indeed, much like the rest of this episode, it felt like Stephen Moffat had written himself into a corner with his dazzling story-arc shenanigans,… only to bottle on the finishing straight.

This has been an outstanding series of Doctor Who, easily the best since the show returned in 2005 – and potentially one of the best single seasons of the show since it’s heyday in the 1970’s. The conclusion deserved to be as epic and clever and thoughtful as the rest of the run.

But sadly, despite the craziness, the adventure and the laughs, ‘The Wedding of River Song’ left me wanting more. And not in a good way.