Should You Write Scripts With Specific Actors in Mind?

Having specific actors in mind during the writing process can be incredibly useful. However, it primarily depends on your intention while doing so.

Visualization is a key screenwriting tool. Since you’re writing for a visual medium, it’s best to visualize as much of the story, settings, characters, scenes, and sequences as you can before you type a single word.

Casting real actors in your head helps your imagination come together. But like many creative tools at your disposal, it all comes down to your intention and how you use those tools to craft a worthy screenplay.

With that in mind, here we offer a simple breakdown to answer this very common question. 

There are two ways screenwriters tend to approach writing a role with a particular actor in mind: Archetyping and Intended or Preferred Casting.

The first is the ideal path to take, giving you the opportunity to open up your creative process even more. The second can be a slippery slope, especially for new screenwriters who have yet to become established in the industry. 

Archetyping involves either using a particular established aesthetic for a character or envisioning a specific actor in the role to aid the visualization process.

Most screenwriters use archetyping in some form, whether they are aware of it or not. With archetyping, it’s not about the screenwriter believing that the role must be played by this actor. It’s more about using a particular actor as a mental reference point to quickly understand and see a specific tone, personality, dialogue delivery rhythm, and overall presence.

Archetyping is a visualization tool. When you begin to develop characters, you may use archetyping to imagine:

• The quiet intensity of Cillian Murphy
• The grounded strength of Emily Blunt
• The unpredictability and explosive intensity of Joaquin Phoenix
• The understated charm of Ryan Gosling
• The seductive but dangerous presence of Eva Green

It’s about giving your imagination a simple point of reference. Once that’s in there, you’ll find that your mind uses such references to piece together scenes much more easily. It can be far more effective than having a blurry image of a character in mind. When you need to see the scene before you write it, it’s difficult to have the face or shape of the character you’re guiding blurred out in the frame of your imagination. 

There’s a line screenwriters can cross when they have cast their script during the writing process. Visualization can turn into intention. You can become too married to that imaginative casting choice, preferring that specific actor to be the only one who can pull the role off.

Instead of using an actor as a point of reference, you may fall into the trap of writing specifically for that actor.

You may start to believe:

• The role is perfect for that actor.
• The character only works if that actor is cast.
• That your script is a vehicle for the actor and can only be shopped to them. 

And as you write, you may find yourself using that actor’s previous performances to supplant the actual character you have conjured. The character can then slowly become less of an original product of your imagination and your story, and more of a continuation of an actor’s previous resume.

One of the most concerning issues when this happens is the flexibility of casting. Writing for an actor narrows the chances of your script being purchased and produced because you only have one option when packaging your script, whether you are packaging it yourself, through your representation, or with a collaborating development executive.

Managers, agents, development executives, and producers are pretty savvy at noticing when a character has been tailored for a specific actor. This can unintentionally reduce the range of potential casting options in their eyes. Any lead role that describes overly specific character traits, attributes, and aesthetics severely limits the casting potential.

From an industry perspective, that’s a huge hurdle in the packaging process. 

• Projects evolve
• Actors have limited availability
• Budgets become a concern
• Creative directions can differ or change 

Lastly, you can limit the character itself by writing for a specific actor. Writing towards an actor’s specific strengths and nuances can box the character in. This can easily lead to:

• Predictable behavior
• Repetitive dialogue behavior
• Less room for discovery

Focusing too highly on one version of the character (your intended or preferred casting) can make them feel less original. 

Flexibility can be mistaken by newcomers as a flawed or underwritten character. In actuality, flexibility is a strength. It’s a collaborative medium. When directors and actors enter the collaborative process of bringing a screenplay and its characters to life, they will want to bring their own nuances and interpretations to the mix.

Look no further than:

• Johnny Depp coming to the role of Jack Sparrow in Pirates of the Caribbean
• Sigourney Weaver taking on the character of Ripley in Alien 

Jack Sparrow wasn’t written with the swagger that Johnny Depp brought to the role. He wanted Sparrow to be unpredictable, dangerous, and sometimes cartoonish, while injecting additional traits like slurred speech, dreadlocks, and heavy eyeliner. He modeled his portrayal of Jack Sparrow on Rolling Stones guitarist Keith Richards.

In turn, Ellen Ripley in the original Alien script was a character called Ripley, and it was written as a man. The original interpretation of the character was written as a more traditional male lead role. When Weaver was brought on board, the role changed while also retaining some of the original male character's machismo.

Point being, you always want to keep potential casting open to different interpretations.

When a character is built on strong fundamentals like clear motivation, distinct voice, and emotional depth, those elements can be interpreted in different and sometimes better ways by different actors.

That means:

• The role has range
• The character has multiple dimensions
• The story can adapt to different interpretations

In the eyes of an actor, when a role is flexible, there’s something there to play with, as opposed to a cookie-cutter role they’ve either already played ten times before, or something they’ve seen other acting peers do over and over. 

There is an exception within the industry regarding when writing for a specific actor makes sense.

When a screenwriter is attached to a writing assignment that already has an actor committed to the project, the screenwriter can obviously cater to the strengths and repertoire of that actor.

Sometimes a writing assignment doesn’t have an actor attached, but the development executive or producer in charge may want you to develop the character for a specific actor that they’d like to approach.

• Maybe they’ve worked with that actor before.
• Maybe financiers and distributors want a specific type of actor to headline the project so they can sell it to foreign markets.

In those cases, the intention is strategic.

But if you’re writing on spec (under speculation that you’ll sell the script and see it produced), it’s always best to keep the casting options as open as possible. 

Let’s go back to what most screenwriters should be doing in most situations - using specific actors as archetypes for their original characters. 

As we discussed above, it’s difficult to visualize a scene when the character’s look is blurred. That’s why it’s beneficial for you to cast your movie in your head before you start typing, with the overarching caveat being that you’re not specifically writing for that actor. Keep your expectations on the casting end down. Instead, it’s best to cast your roles with archetypes with the notion that the characters you’re creating are offering those archetypes a role they haven’t played before. When you think of casting your archetypes in that way, you’ll also be giving yourself more freedom to write whatever you like with no pre-groomed aesthetics.

This will give you those faces to assign to your characters. And those faces can always change and adapt as your story does. 

Dialogue is just words written on the page. It’s about how the words are delivered. Casting your archetypes helps you hear the words through the actors' mouths.

When you loosely associate a character with a particular actor as an archetype, the lines will come out more naturally as you write them because you can hear the archetype’s usual vocal rhythm and energy. And you can alter their usual delivery as you wish.

This usage of archetypes can help you in the same way they can with visualization. Now you’re able to hear your dialogue spoken in a certain way. It’s tremendously helpful while writing dialogue. 

The goal is to use your archetype casting instincts as a way to support your writing without locking it into a certain box. 

Visualizing a character through a familiar lens is helpful. You can let that guide you early on. It can help you find a character's voice, rhythm, and attitude. But always stay open to change. As you develop your characters, you can always let them develop beyond your initial archetype choice. 

You don’t need to use an actor’s whole persona as an archetype. It’s best to find particular traits they’ve shown in certain roles, or maybe continual traits they’ve utilized in most of their body of work.

You may know of and appreciate a particular actor who can:

• Be reserved but observant (Tom Hardy)
• Quick-witted under pressure (Ryan Reynolds)
• Emotionally guarded but deeply empathetic (Zendaya)

If you focus on the desired traits, you’ll avoid outright writing for the actor. 

Embrace archetypes because they can be very helpful in the development and writing process. And, yes, they can also help the industry see what you’re seeing for potential casting. But always avoid writing characters surrounded by the boundaries of being too specific.

One of the most fun parts of screenwriting is casting your archetypes. It’s a thrill to see your movie with your dream cast in your imagination. Just be sure to never let that limit you, your characters, or your script.