production

The year was 1923, and thousands of people a month were flooding into Los Angeles in hopes of finding a job in the nascent film business.

Many planned to start as background actors, dreaming they’d be discovered by a director and finally get their big break. These behind-the-scenes actors would wander from studio lot to studio lot, lining up in hopes of being cast.

But the chaos of aspiring actors searching for jobs eventually became too much. Even silent screen star Mary Pickford took to warning wide-eyed newcomers that they should save enough money to survive for five years before coming out to Hollywood.

Out of calls to create safeguards around this fledgling business, and more order around background acting opportunities, emerged the Central Casting Corp.

Central Casting — now so eponymous that its name has become a cultural phrase — celebrated its 100th anniversary earlier this month.

I recently spoke with Mark Goldstein, president and chief executive of the Burbank-based company, to talk about changes in the industry, including the threat of artificial intelligence, runaway production and the role of a background actor in 2025.

Goldstein acknowledged the tough environment for background performers, also commonly known as extras, who populate restaurants, parks and other film and TV scenes to make the environment seem more realistic — all without saying a word.

After the lows of the pandemic, and then the explosion of content during the peak TV era, one of the main challenges for Central Casting’s members is just finding new roles, he said.

“There’s been a little bit of a pullback in production over the last year,” said Goldstein, who serves as president and CEO of Central Casting as well as production finance and management tools firm Entertainment Partners, which owns the agency. “It’s really just constantly finding the right roles for people.”

In Southern California, of course, jobs have been more scarce as production has flowed to other states and countries offering steeper film incentives.

Then there is the advent of computer-generated imagery, which has lessened the need for massive crowd scenes that were once standard.

“Before [CGI] technology, we may fill up an arena, like we may fill a 5,000-person shoot or a 10,000-person shoot,” Goldstein said.

Remember the long lines for casting calls?

No more.

More recently AI has been a key concern for background actors, though Goldstein said he doesn’t think the new digital tools and the rise of synthetic characters will eliminate the need for background actors.

“There’s a lot of conversation [about] is it human or technology? And we kind of view it as human and technology,” he said. “The consumer wants believability, and so there’ll be situations where it’s really important to have the human role involved, but there may be other situations where AI and technology can be helpful.”

He added: “We have legendary people that started their career because they wanted to follow their dream to become an actor in Hollywood,” he said, ticking off the names of famous alumni such as Clark Gable, Carole Lombard, Eva Longoria, Will Ferrell and Brad Pitt. “And we don’t see that changing.”

Despite the challenges, aspiring actors still register with Central Casting every day, Goldstein said. The company has 200,000 background actors in its database, with more than 20,000 new names added a year. About 3,000 are placed in roles each day, the company says.

One of those is Jaylee Maruk, 38, who signed up with Central Casting in 2009 and has worked steadily ever since.

Maruk works often on “Grey’s Anatomy” and has credits on Hulu’s “Paradise” and Apple TV’s “Shrinking.” She once stood in for Greta Lee in Apple TV‘s “The Morning Show.”

“What I love about doing background is it really gives a solid foundation about what it’s like to be on set and what the expectations are,” Maruk said.

But she worries about her future, especially with the rise of AI and the migration of production.

“Productions will pack up and leave,” she said. “They’ll go somewhere cheaper, and it’s becoming harder and harder for us. That’s really the biggest concern, trying to entice and support productions staying here.”

Towns in far-off countries like Hungary and Turkey can be made to look just like places in America, she says. And they can cast local residents instead of U.S.-based performers like Maruk. After all, background actors don’t have speaking roles, so not speaking English isn’t a problem.

“We want our work to be here,” said the Lake Balboa resident. “Our families are here, our lives are here.”

Last year, I got a glimpse into the world of background acting when I covered the annual Los Angeles Union Background Actors Awards. Though tongue-in-cheek at times — the awards themselves are called Blurries — the ceremony and winners’ speeches also highlighted these actors’ key roles in Hollywood.

I met background actors who had done the job for years, including one who got his first role as a 12-year-old in “Hello, Dolly!” Many talked about the difficulty of the last few years and the desire for respect for their professional work. Some were full-time background actors; others did the work part time. All were passionate about what they did.

“It really is just preparedness and luck, as they say,” Maruk said. “And also just having a lot of motivation and resilience.”

Stuff We Wrote

Film shoots

Number of the week

James Cameron’s “Avatar: Fire and Ash” brought in $89 million in the U.S. and Canada during its opening weekend. Globally, the film made $346 million, with big hauls in China and France.

That opening total came in at the lower end of box office analysts’ expectations and is also less than the massive opening weekend for its predecessor film, 2022’s “Avatar: The Way of Water,” which grossed $134 million in its domestic debut. But “Avatar” films tend to build momentum at the box office over subsequent weekends, so the Na’vi aren’t vanquished yet.

In addition to “Avatar,” this past weekend also saw strong performances from Angel Studios’ animated “David,” as well as Lionsgate’s thriller “The Housemaid,” pushing the year-to-date domestic box office total a slim 1% above the same time period last year. That’s helpful for theaters but doesn’t bode well for the box office’s overall performance this year.

Finally …

My colleague Josh Rottenberg looks at what movie stardom will mean in an age of AI. In that story, he has an interview with the creator of Tilly Norwood, the AI-generated character that recently sparked a furious debate in Hollywood about the role of synthetics in film and TV.

A Gold Rush movie from director Ang Lee and a biopic set in Long Beach and produced by Snoop Dogg are among the 28 films that have been awarded a tax credit for shooting in California, the state’s film commission said Wednesday.

Together, the 28 films are expected to hire more than 4,800 cast and crew members, as well as more than 22,000 background actors, the commission said. The projects are projected to generate $562 million in economic activity throughout the state.

Of the 28 projects, 18 are indie films with budgets of $10 million or less, five are indies with budgets of more than $10 million and five are non-independent feature films.

Seventeen of the projects will be shooting outside the Los Angeles region, which qualifies them for additional benefits under the revamped California film and television production incentive program that was approved earlier this year. The state has now doubled the annual amount of funds allocated to the program from $330 million to $750 million and expanded the eligibility criteria.

This is the fourth round of TV or film projects that have been awarded tax credits under the revised program. Together, those projects are on track to generate $4.2 billion in economic activity in California and more than 25,000 cast and crew jobs across 4,000 filming days in the state, the commission said.

“In a highly competitive global environment, productions have choices,” said Colleen Bell, director of the California Film Commission. “This round shows that when California puts the right tools on the table, filmmakers want to stay, create and invest here.”

In addition to the “Gold Mountain” film from Lee, which was awarded $7.7 million in tax credits, and the untitled NBCUniversal project from Snoop Dogg ($17 million), an indie film called “Guerrero” directed by Gina Rodriguez was also awarded a $4.5-million tax credit, along with an untitled Sony project produced by actor Glen Powell ($9.9 million).

“California raised me, inspired me, and now helpin’ bring this biopic to life in 2026,” Snoop Dogg said in a statement. “Much respect — that’s real teamwork, ya dig.”

“Stereophonic,” David Adjmi’s heralded drama that won five Tony Awards including best play, is ready for its Los Angeles close-up.

The first national tour production, which opened Wednesday at the Hollywood Pantages Theatre, seems right at home in the music capital of the world. The play about a 1970s rock band on the brink of superstardom takes place in recording studios in Sausalito and L.A., where the Laurel Canyon vibe is never out of sight.

The visual crispness of this L.A. premiere goes a long way toward dispelling doubts that the Pantages is the wrong venue for this ensemble drama. If there’s a problem, it isn’t the cavernousness of the theater. The production, gleaming with period details on a set by David Zinn that gives us clear views into both the sound and control rooms, comfortably inhabits the performance space, at least from the perspective of a decent orchestra seat.

The play, which includes original music from Will Butler, the Grammy-winning artist formerly of Arcade Fire, has a sound every bit as robust as one of the blockbuster musicals that regularly passes through the Pantages. The songs, crushed by the actors at top volume, are Butler’s indie rock re-creation of cuts for a part-British, part-American band that bears such a striking resemblance to Fleetwood Mac that a lawsuit brought by a former sound engineer and producer of the group was eventually settled.

Adjmi, like Shakespeare, takes his inspiration where he finds it. And like the Bard, he makes his sources his own, alchemizing the material for novel ends.

The touring production of “Stereophonic” makes clear just how integral the original cast was to the success of the play.

(Julieta Cervantes)

Unfolding in 1976 and 1977, “Stereophonic” offers a fly-on-the-wall perspective of a band at a crossroads. While recording a new album top-heavy with expectations, the group falls prey to romantic conflicts and self-destructive spirals, to toxic jealousies and seething insecurities. The prospect of fame magnifies pathologies that have been intensifying over time.

Diana (Claire DeJean) is the Stevie Nicks of the band. Beautiful, achingly vulnerable and awash in lyrical talent, she is entangled in a relationship with Peter (Denver Milord), the Lindsey Buckingham of the group, who strives for musical perfection no matter the cost.

Their connection is as professionally enriching as it is personally destructive. Diana’s ambition is matched by her self-doubt. She’s susceptible to a Svengali yet doesn’t want anyone to tell her how to write her songs.

Peter, angrily competitive, can’t help resenting the natural ease of Diana’s talent, even as it’s her song from their first album that has put the band back in the spotlight. His genius is ferociously exacting while hers seems to spring naturally from her soul.

Artistically they depend on each other, but the tension between them is unsustainable. And as the play makes clear, there’s no way to keep their personal lives out of the studio.

DeJean and Milord are the most captivating performers in the ensemble. The other actors are solid but this touring production makes clear just how integral the original cast was to the success of the play.

Daniel Aukin’s production, which had its New York premiere at Playwrights Horizons in 2023 before moving to Broadway the following year, hasn’t lost its confident flow. The storytelling is lucidly laid out. But the tantalizing peculiarities of the characters have been whittled down.

The British band members suffer the worst of it. Emilie Kouatchou’s Holly moves the character away from the obvious Christine McVie reference, but her role has become vaguer and less central. Cornelius McMoyler’s Simon, the drummer and weary manager, fills the bill in every respect but gravitas, which must be in place if the character’s ultimate confrontation with Peter is to have the necessary payoff.

No one could compete with Will Brill, who won a Tony for his strung-out portrayal of Reg, a deranged innocent whose addictions and dysfunctions create farcical havoc for the band. Christopher Mowod can’t quite endow this “sad man in a blanket,” as Simon dubs his bundled-up bandmate, with the same level of fey madness that Brill was able to entertainingly supply.

These casting differences wouldn’t be worth noting if it weren’t for their impact on a play that distinguishes itself by its observational detail. Everything is just a little more obvious, including the two American sound guys bearing the brunt of the artistic temperaments running riot in the studio.

Jack Barrett’s Grover, the sound engineer who lied about his background to get the job, sands off some of the character’s rough edges in a more straightforwardly appealing version of the character than Eli Gelb’s bracing portrayal in New York. Steven Lee Johnson’s Charlie, the dorky assistant sound engineer, is an amiable weirdo, though I missed the way Andrew R. Butler played him almost like a space alien in New York.

The play has been edited, but it’s still a bit of an endurance test. Art isn’t easy for the characters or for us. But the effort isn’t in vain.

Adjmi’s overlapping dialogue and gaping silences, orchestrated in a neo-Chekhovian style, renders the invisible artistic process visible. By the end of the play, the tumultuous human drama behind creative brilliance emerges in poignant, transcendent glory.