Table Readings

Here’s a Friday Question that became an entire post.

It’s from Marka.

I've wondered about table reads and how much you can trust them. Especially when you're directing and aren't familiar with the cast.

I assume there are folks who laugh at things that aren't funny because they want it to be funny, or want to be supportive. Others might be grumpy, hung over, or whatever and don't laugh at funny things because of that. Other casts must have honest and accurate reactions.

How accurate are table reads as a means of judging a script? Are these pitfalls things that happen? What other things are you looking out for with them, other than listening to them read the script?

Believe me, it’s not an exact science.  All of the factors you mentioned do come into play.  

But generally you can get a sense of whether the script works or not.   If it doesn’t it becomes glaringly apparent at a table read.  

If the table read goes well that still doesn’t guarantee the show won’t go south during the week.  But it’s a decent indication.  

If you have physical comedy or humor that depends on sight gags or costumes, none of that will be realized in the table read.  So you have to factor that in.  

Also, some actors are just bad at table reads.  If you know that going in you at least don’t get scared, but it’s hard to judge when the actor stumbles through the script or reads it flat.   Or, in the case of some stars, eat through the table reading.  

Laughs can be deceiving.  Sometimes a line will get a big laugh at the table reading then nothing during the week.  Your inclination is to keep the line since you heard it work.  But when lines are delivered on their feet the dynamics sometimes change.  I’ve learned not to completely trust stage reading laughs.  If a line dies on the stage, despite its reaction at the table read, I replace it.

What I look for mostly during the table read is whether the story works.  Does it track?  Are the attitudes right?  Are steps missing or rushed or repetitive?  I’m also keeping track of the actors.  Does a character drop out of the story?  Is he in a big scene with only three lines?  If there’s an argument, do both sides get to make decent points?   Are there too many zingers?  Do dialogue scenes seem forced?    Does someone come off unintentionally hateful or stupid?  

But like I said, it’s a very inaccurate yardstick.  There have been times when a show had a compressed production schedule.  So we had the table reading in the morning, the cast then got the script on its feet and we went back for a run-through that afternoon.  During their rehearsal time we would get a jump on the rewrite for tomorrow’s script, but when we saw the run-through, occasionally there were lines we were prepared to cut that worked.   So the takeaway there was fix the story but give jokes a chance to work on stage.  

I will say this:  table readings for pilots have gotten out of hand.  There are so many executives and industry people that arrive for the table read that instead of the cast sitting around a conference table, they’re all on a dais facing out to the audience.   How the hell are they supposed to relate to one another?   Zoom calls are more intimate.  

Stage play rehearsals often have “table work” days planned in.  More than just reading the script the actors and director will spend a few days really analyzing the text.  But in TV there’s no time.  So it’s a tool — often useful — but sometimes misleading.  

Hey, why should any part of the process be easy?