Welcome And Introducing Dean Armstrong

Greg Staffa 0:00

You're listening to the Staffa Corner Podcast, a Staffatarian look at entertainment and life with your host, Greg Staffa. My guest today is actor, director, and acting coach Dean Armstrong. You may recognize Dean from projects, including A Queer as Folk, Solid 3D, Wrong Turn Four, but his career extends well beyond that on the screen. He spent years helping other actors and currently appears in Reacher season four. Dean, thanks for joining us today. Greg, really appreciate you having me

Growing Up In Small-Town Ontario

Greg Staffa 0:52

on. So tell us a little bit about your upbringing. Where are you from and what got you started in acting?

Dean Armstrong 0:58

That's a fantastic question, Greg. Where am I from? I grew up in a uh small town a couple of hours north of Toronto in the 70s called Owen Sound. Uh, not the end of the world, but believe me, you can actually see it from there. Um, I grew up at a time where, you know, calling Toronto was a big deal, uh, let alone actually going to Toronto just wasn't uh really a thing at that time, and certainly not uh in my family. And to kind of qualify how my relationship to this small city uh ended up uh, you know, taking me into the States, into New York uh on a Broadway run for a couple of years uh was kind of a crazy journey. But uh no one in my family remotely closely linked to the arts. I just thought it was one of those things that, you know, who did that? I certainly didn't know anybody that pursued acting. Uh as much as it was something that uh was of interest to me, it just didn't seem logical or even practical. But uh my intention was to go away to university and and pursue law, not even entertainment law, but environmental law. Uh and it was uh by taking that next step, kind of in my educational development, that uh I found myself migrating to people in the arts when I was in university. And, you know, finding out that people were actually uh considering that as a vocational pursuit was kind of eye-opening and kind of exciting, terrifying, but also exciting. So uh after uh a number of years of post-secondary at Queen's University in Kingston, I um had moved to Toronto shortly. After that move, I'd kind of began the inception of what is known today as Armstrong Acting Studios, which I started in 1997, but found myself moving to New York City in '99 to uh work on the Broadway musical Rent, uh, which was also kind of an extraordinary uh first. Both Rent and you had mentioned just in the introduction, that I had worked on Queer as Folk, which uh was also one of my first TV film uh auditions ever. Uh and the booking with that show, which was originally a two-episode contract that became five years for me on that show, uh, was happening simultaneously uh when I was uh doing rent uh in New York City as well. But started in a small town in the 70s and found myself uh in 1999, by God's grace, uh starting in a show that you know really kind of also changed my life.

Early Signs And Choosing Theater

Greg Staffa 3:38

Now you said that you really didn't see the path initially to become an actor. Like we're looking back now, were there signs? Were you, you know, a creative child where you didn't have many friends that you had to make up imaginary friends? What was the childhood like? Was there was there little signs that you saw now that said, yeah, I can see how this all happened? Sure.

Dean Armstrong 4:02

I mean, like every public school in elementary, uh, you're introduced to uh storytelling. And there would be those annual plays that I would have the wonderful fortune of of starring and working on. And it was very clear to me at an early stage that I enjoyed entertaining people. Uh predominantly I enjoyed making people laugh. And that was obviously something that was an intuitive thing, an identification thing when it came to uh understanding my relationship to uh to people and storytelling, for lack of a better description. But again, in this in this small town and at that period, the first time that I was introduced to studying theater arts wasn't until uh grade 11. And uh that was the first time I ever taken had taken a drama class. It was offered in grade 11 and in grade 12. I took it both years. I did very well in those classes. Uh, there was certainly something in those classes uh that I experienced about myself that I again identified as something that I loved doing, something that I I guess was good at. I did receive uh scholastic opportunities through those studies uh at the end of that grade 12 year in a monetary capacity. Uh again, it just didn't seem realistic. And of course, at that time in Ontario, uh, there was also a grade 13 year. So theater arts was offered in grade 11 and grade 12, and then there was this grade 13, uh, which was called your OAC year or your Ontario Academic Credit Year. And that year was made available to those students who are interested in pursuing university versus college. And I had opted obviously for that grade 13 year. And within that year, I did not have a theater arts program. So it was only in that grade 11 and grade 12 year that I had had those experiences, which obviously served as a bit of a springboard for me to go, oh, this is something that I love to do. I kind of envisioned myself, you know, pursuing my law career. And then at the same time, once that was established, you know, doing community theater in whatever city I ended up in. But as it turned out, uh it was that relationship in grade 12 that once I had started university in 1992 uh and got into a co-ed residence uh where I was interacting with people in different disciplines, you know, whether it was commerce or engineering or sciences or the arts. And I had started in the sciences uh with that bigger intention of environmental law pursuit, and then had switched my major uh from the sciences into theater arts in my second year, and then completed that four-year honor degree, and then um ended up uh, of course, writing LSATs, applying to teachers college. Inevitably, I ended up going to teachers college with the idea that I would subsidize myself as an actor through teaching while I was pursuing this career. I was just super lucky, Greg, that I started working right away uh when I had moved to Toronto. And I had not anticipated that. And I built my career in stage because it was what I studied, it was what I understood. And it was a couple of years before I had decided to shift that gear into TV film focus. And like I said, uh that gear shifting happened in 1999, and that was when Queerus Folk had happened, and that of course carried on for for five seasons.

Why Canadian Shows Struggle In US

Greg Staffa 7:54

Wow. Now, this next question might be a little bit above your pay grade, but there are a lot of shows US-based filmed in Canada, but there's also Canadian productions that are Canadian-based filmed in Canada. Shows like Flashpoint, which you were on for two episodes, is one of the notable ones that made it to the US audience. Uh Dew South was another one. Why is it when so much is filmed in Canada, there's so much talent in Canada, there's so many productions in Canada, why does Canada seem to have a problem getting more shows to the US that are Canadian-based?

Dean Armstrong 8:34

Uh, that is a great question. I I do think uh that production has changed in in recent years when it comes to an elevation of uh production value and things that don't traditionally look like, oh, that feels Canadian, or it feels in the absence of some of those more bolstered uh US budgets of shows coming into Canada. Because the end of the day, all of these shows that are American that shoot in Canada are using Canadian crews. They're using Canadian talent uh from leading roles to you know supporting roles to recurring roles to principals and actor roles in these shows. Uh, but there has been historically, I think, a real deviation and departure from uh a production value component that, you know, really differentiates that American stuff versus that Canadian stuff. Uh, you know, you mentioned Flashpoint, and you know, there was um, you know, at that time, if you can remember back when it was on the heels of SARS, but there were a number of uh uh strikes that were taking place in the U.S. at that time, and uh a lot of the networks were desperate for content and started bringing shows, uh airing shows that were Canadian produced uh on U.S. networks, like Flashpoint, that all of a sudden put a spotlight on Canadian shows in a different way. But, you know, there are other shows too, like Degrassi The Next Generation or even RenegadePress.com, some of these teen-driven shows that have had a massive impact uh on the North American audience. Um, I do think that uh, like I said, there's there's been a significant departure from some of the uh what I would define as a Canadian feel with some content. I mean, Shits Creek is another great example of a show that shoots up in up in Canada that has had an enormous impact south of the border. And so I think that there are shows that are are defining themselves in a way that uh are comparative in experience. Uh, again, a large part of that just production value where you feel the money on the screen. Um, but Canadian talent is, as you said, you know, a lot of amazing people in Canada, you know, found themselves as mainstays in the US. Uh, a lot in the comedic genre, uh, but a lot in the dramatic genre across the board, whether we're talking about Jim Carrey or Mike Myers or John Candy or Marty Short, uh, or even someone like Keanu Reeves. You know, it's it's there's been an enormous wealth of talent that have found themselves on an international stage uh that uh, you know, frankly just felt that there was a different level of recognition moving south of the border. And I think in a lot of ways there is a bit of that mentality uh for a lot of talent, uh a lot of agents associated with that talent to go. There's a, it's a, you're in a different league when you're south of the border. And I know that that has been true historically. I think that there is some of that cachet to date that uh identifies uh an actor in a different way when they have that uh U.S. affiliation. But uh at the end of the day, I think the crews that define that work historically and currently, uh the the people, the actors, the talent that have been associated with uh shows um shot in Canada historically that have cross-pollinated, uh, all of that talent uh is still the same. And uh it is an interesting question when it comes to uh what type of traction. And in all honesty, Greg, the answer really may be just in context of volume. There's just less people in Canada, less production Canadian-driven, developed in Canada comparatively to the US market. And I do think uh because of this digital era, um, and you know, shows finding themselves on these international platforms, Netflix, Prime, Apple TV, whatever else it might be, you know, I I think that uh we are going to see more of it. I just don't think that the volume is going to be consistent uh with the volume of production that is generated in the US simply just because of just because of numbers.

Queer As Folk Role That Grew

Greg Staffa 12:58

Thanks for that. Leaning, I mean, when you started off acting, you did, you know, appearance here and appearance there, and appearance there. But like you said, Queer as Folk really was it was supposed to be a short-term thing, but then it turned into a long-term career project. Yeah. Did your attitude change? Did your mindset change? What was it about that approach that turned helped turn you know something that was short-term into something long-term?

Dean Armstrong 13:27

Uh, well, that uh was at the the the God-given grace of Russell Davies, uh Ron Cowan and Dan Lippman. Uh Russell Davies, of course, the uh creator of the original British series, Queer as Folk, um, and Ron Cowan and Dan Lippman, who were the executive producers and writers of uh the US adaptation of that original British series. Um, we had shot the pilot, and uh, this particular character that I played in the British series um was uh only in that British series for I think two episodes. So there was a consistency in context of what uh my uh who my character was, this character Blake uh Wizeki, who uh was uh in the British series, um he kills one of the main protagonists in the uh I think it's in the pilot, um, accidentally, of course, uh through an overdose situation, which kind of terminated um that storyline for both of those characters. And I think the conversations uh based on this inspiration of what I had brought to the table with the representation of this character was kind of twofold. Number one, I had never approached this character who was um obviously a drug user. Um, he was kind of portrayed uh in a way in the US, um sorry, in the British series as a bit of an antagonistic figure. Um, after the uh the overdose, he takes, you know, the guy's wallet, uh takes money. And there is a real negative association with this character. And I think I had brought in my interpretation of Blake this um this innocence, um, this naivete, this genuineness of attraction uh to this character, Ted, played by Scott Lowell, who is an extraordinary talent and one of the greatest uh actors I had had the opportunity to work with and remains so um to date. But there was this real genuine um uh uh uh love for this character that I tapped into and it this uh uh affectation, um, this um disease, if you will, that Blake had uh with with crystal meth, with uh other drugs, that he it wasn't his fault, but he was certainly trapped in that world. And I think it was an accident. The overdose was an accident. And I think that they saw in this storytelling in the pilot that there was this genuineness and dynamic between Ted and Blake. And on top of that, a real responsibility to commit to the theme of drugs in not only uh uh this community, uh, but in general, uh, about addiction and about the dangers of addiction. And uh they felt that there was a real responsibility to say, hey, drugs is an enormous part of this community. And we have to represent that and represent it authentically. And as this storyline, of course, grew, um, this character, Blake, uh, evolved from being a drug addict to being a drug counselor. And uh, you know, the number of people over the years that I've received uh written communication from, people that I've run into on the streets, um, that talked about uh how grateful they were that this story was represented in Queer as folk uh through this character dynamic and how it helped them overcome their own obstacles and challenges with drug addiction, or whether it was their own or a partner or a family member, someone that they knew, um, that there was just a real appreciation across the board that the show had taken this issue very seriously and uh addressed it with this positive change and this evolution and this ability to overcome uh one of the most difficult, uh, I think personal obstacles uh someone in an addiction position could experience. So, you know, it it was just of really great fortune that my interpretation of Blake and the subsequent execution of that interpretation in The Pilot was received so well by Russell Davies and Ron Cowan and Dan Littman that they went, there's a way to tell this story in such a way that isn't as dark as the British series. And we owe it to our audience to represent this issue in this community and to have a positive kind of evolution and kind of uh outcome uh for somebody that obviously was struggling with this problem in a really detrimental way.

Acting Like Every Role Matters

Greg Staffa 18:29

Was that a good lesson for you as an actor? Because I would assume a lot of these jobs are almost like temp jobs where you're hired for a day or two and then you're done and you move on. I would have to assume as humans, there's almost kind of a uh an attitude of, oh, I I'm dismissive, it's just gonna be a day or two, and then I'm on to my next searching thing. So you're not fully invested. Was there a realization that you know any role could become, you know, three seasons, four seasons, even though you're there initially for only two episodes, that you gotta put everything in there in order to see where it might become?

Dean Armstrong 19:08

Yeah, 100%. I've never approached any character with the idea that uh they do not have a life outside of these couple of scenes. Um, that you approach every character as you are your lead in your own story. Uh, it's not to obviously distract from some of the fundamental or instrumental uh kind of functions of a character in storytelling, but at the end of the day, there is an authenticity and there is a truth, and there is a story associated with every character that you play, regardless of how big or how small. Um, so I think I've always uh approached uh my work uh from the perspective of committing to the life of this story outside of the given scenes that you have a responsibility to committing to that support whatever narrative. And to be quite honest, in my collaboration with talent, you know, my actors uh I obviously bring in that same philosophy uh to our collaborative work to ensure that we are elevating this in such a way that really does differentiate that actor from the rest of the competition. I think in part it is due to looking at telling this story as effectively as possible, uh, regardless of its uh uh size of role. And I will say, uh, and even recently, uh there's uh a client of mine out in Los Angeles uh who had a uh a co-starring role edition for 911. And, you know, they had called about uh possibly uh scheduling a uh a coaching session, and you know, they were they were on the fence about whether or not it was necessary uh because it was only a couple of pages, and there were two characters. Interestingly enough, they were it was a Fed character, and it the character didn't even have a name. And so casting had asked them to aud for two like Fed one and Fed two. And so I said, no, no, uh a thousand percent. Come in, come into the studio, we'll work on this. And I said, of the two, this one makes the most sense, but this is the angle that we're actually going to take. And we're going to assume that this particular character has this level of contribution to the storytelling as the series continues on, even though it's written as a co-starring role, which is under five lines. I said, there is a much bigger picture here, and I see this from a writer's perspective, you know, going this could be uh a massively contributory character to the storyline. And anyway, we had made uh uh very specific choices in context of representing this character, uh, everything down to um, you know, physical specifics, tonal specifics, rhythmic specifics. And uh, of course, this he was booked uh for uh This role. And it was the role that I had anticipated he would be booked for. And that one episode became six episodes in the season and became a major antagonistic figure in the storytelling for that season. And just another example. And Greg, I've got literally hundreds and hundreds of stories of making contributions in the audition process that truly inspired casting to move in the direction of hiring those actors, my actors, and the choices that we had discovered and executed in those self-tapes were choices that materialized in the actual episodes themselves or in the features themselves. So, yes, I believe this casting process is so it is such a creative and collaborative dynamic that most actors fail to really identify. Most actors get trapped by the structure of what is on the page. And every team is desperately hoping and praying that the next actor that they see is going to make their job easier, that they're going to be inspired by the choices that have been executed by that talent. Because that is the talent's job. That is the actor's job is to show them how you see this, to excite them about the possibilities of how this character could exist on the day. And all subsequent storytelling throughout that series or whatever else it might be. But there is so much power that the actor has that I think they fail to identify when it comes to impressioning those people that can hire them. And that's what I love to do is just kind of look at this and go, well, let's think about this a little bit differently. How can we showcase this in such a way that is still anchored to the fundamental truths that are on the page, what the writers intended, but at the same time showcases this role that capitalizes on showcasing the unique specifics about the individual through this lens that uh, again, is different than what other people are doing. And I do think that that is a leading difference when it comes to that end product that uh is less carbon copy like every other actor's submission. Because why are they carbon copies? Well, because everybody gets the same script. Everybody looks at that breakdown and that character description. Every actor seems to be 1000% committed to the punctuation that's on the page. And you start to hear the uh uh the memorized punctuation because every actor breathes at a period or at a comma or raises their voice when there's an exclamation mark or the inflection comes up when there's a question mark. And you just start to hear it again and again and again, and they they isolate an intuitive, natural base emotional beat in those scenes, and then they commit to that, failing to realize that their on-camera editions always have to be far more colorful, far more tiered, far more dynamic than the way the scenes will ever be shot on the day, because within these 60-second, 90-second, 120-second windows or the self-tape edition, it is your job to demonstrate your range and your flexibility, not just you as the actor, but obviously the range and the flexibility of the character, to see this character outside of the edition scenes that have actually been given. So when you approach things that way, it does elevate those uh those self-tapes in such a way that whether it's a co-starring role, whether it's a principal role, whether it's a guest star or a lead, it has a truth that is unique, specific to the actor, and showcased in such a way that again differentiates them from other people that are making those submissions.

Where Actors Find Inspiration

Greg Staffa 25:46

People come to you because you you coach actors and you help them with their their auditions. So you're the one that they go to. Has there ever been an opportunity where someone came to you looking for your help? And in working with them, you said, Oh my god, that was brilliant. I'm gonna borrow it for my next audition.

Dean Armstrong 26:07

Uh well, I think there is an answer to this that isn't quite as specific as, oh, I'm going to borrow that. You know, and I think we are all influenced by the things that we experience in our lives that change the way we approach uh our relationship to work. But I I think the answer to that is we become better uh as actors uh through the influences of the things around us. And the more we can tap into those kind of specifics, um, I think it redefines the work that we actually have. And I think that I've always said you never fully understand something, Greg, until you are able to uh take an idea, communicate that idea to someone else so that they understand it. You never fully understand something until you're able to take that idea to someone else, communicate that idea to someone else so that they understand it. So it's my way of saying I understand myself better by looking at the choices that actors make, or perhaps the choices that they don't make. It forces me to step outside of my own work in my own process and go, hey, why aren't I exploring this or doing that? And I think every hour, every second, every month or year that I've committed to elevating the work of actors has enabled to understand my relationship to my work better. So it's not that I've seen somebody in this collaborative process that has done something that I want to take from, but there are moments of discovery that can serve as a point of inspiration. And I think, and at the end of the day, I think that's what we're really all striving to achieve or to find is are those inspiration moments. What are those inspiration moments on the day? And I think we pray for those things because as actors, we do our homework, we do our prep work, we um make specific choices associated with the representation of our responsibilities. And when we arrive on the day, we pray for inspiration, we pray for how the wardrobe is going to have an impact on our physicality, how that impact on our physicality has an influence on our rhythm of speech, our breath, our cadence, all of those other specifics, how a property, uh a set piece inspires a moment. These are the immediate things that I think enable an actor to acclimate in a world of true action and reaction, where that authenticity lives. And so I think we we pray for inspiration on the day, we pray for inspiration in this collaborative process in the documentation of self-tapes. And not that I have, like I said, taken something specifically, although when I when I think about this, Greg, um, and I talk about the life experiences that we all have that have an influence and an impact on the execution of choices within our work. I played this character, just to circle back a little bit on it, but played this character, Blake on Queer's folk. And uh, I'm not a crystal meth drug addict. I've never tried crystal meth, uh, nor am I a drug user. So there were all kinds of question marks I had associated with how I represent this character, which I needed to do a lot, in a drug-influenced state. And we had professionals on set that we could chat with to talk about the impact of crystal meth on um uh on it on someone using it, what uh the physical symptoms would be. And, you know, while that was useful, uh within what we do as actors, representing life or trying to achieve a level of authenticity, we don't always know what is translating in a world that is authentic to the audience. Am I doing too much to represent this moment of drug affectation uh and the audience doesn't buy it? Or am I doing too little for uh to represent this drug affectation and the audience doesn't believe it? Because often what feels right in the world of acting and in the world of screen representation doesn't necessarily translate well. It doesn't translate in a way that people buy it. So talking about stealing, and I don't think anyone in the world would have ever made this correlation, but Helen Benam Garrier's representation of Ophelia in Mel Gibson's Hamlet, in her state of madness upon learning of her brother's death, her father's death, that Hamlet's rejecting her. She goes into this state of uh, I mean, she loses her mind. And the representation of that had always stayed with me in such a way that I went, fuck, I mean, I just bought it. I bought it. I stole from her representation of Ophelia's madness some of those traits, for lack of a better word, in the representation of my affected states uh through the use of crystal meth, in the representation of Blake. And you know, I'm sure you've read or heard stories of other actors. I mean, I read not that long ago that Heath Ledger's representation of the Joker was stolen from Tom Waits, which uh just in his physicality and the way he held his body and where he placed his vocal register and his rhythm, um, stolen from that. When you see it now, you can't unsee it. That there was that influence. So I've not seen something in my collaborative process working with actors that I just went, oh, I'm gonna steal that. But I've been inspired from and it's made my work better. But I am constantly stealing from people watching encounters with strangers or family or friends. I mean, it's like Mike Myers and his representation of Dr. Evil being influenced by Lauren Michaels. There are, I think, you know, countless examples of people that have had moments in their lives that have resonated with them that inspired to bring that to their storytelling in a way that uh has just such a profound and significant influence on the audience.

Self-Tapes And Controlling The Frame

Greg Staffa 33:49

Now you mentioned self-tapes, and the audition process has really changed post-COVID, where it used to be used to go in an audition. As a coach, I'm sure self-tapes is nice because you can kind of control that environment. But as an actor, do you like that because you're not able to to play off what they the feedback that you're given or you're make adjustments on the go? Or is there a method that you prefer or well?

Dean Armstrong 34:17

I I don't subscribe to one method because I don't believe one method works for all actors. I believe there's as many methods on the face of the planet as there are actors, and it's really the sum total of the books that they've read, the directors they've worked with, the casting experiences they've had, the instructors uh uh that they've that they've learned from, whatever else that might be. And people basically use whatever works for them, and that defines whatever that method or approach is that leads to a result, um, whether that's a booking or um a real confidence in what's been executed. But two more specifically to your question uh about self-tapes, it it is uh the way of the new world post-COVID in the US market. However, in Canada, where I grew up, um, and where most of the careers of uh of international stars I've launched was from my Toronto studio through self tapes. You know, they self tapes have been around in Canada for almost 15 years prior to COVID. And it was the way I remember uh being in the US and doing rent and and and having an edition coming up and not able to do it and saying, Can I send in a self tape? And they're like, What is a self tape? At that time, of course, you were going into a space and documenting the work on a VHS tape, you know, FedExing these tapes off. People would have to put it into a VHS player, they'd have to play it, they'd have to rewind it to share it with another executive at the studio or the director or whoever. It was so impractical. But Canada had invented uh this uh e-tape or electronic tape submission structure year decades before uh COVID had ever happened. So I was very familiar with it. And while there are benefits to going in the room, i.e., you you develop a relationship with the casting director um that is friendly, uh, which is great. It provides you the actor uh an opportunity to receive a direction from the casting director to see if they're able to apply it. Uh, I think that being in the room um uh could be very advantageous if you had producers there, if you had the director there who can collaborate with you in real time. I think that there are tremendous advantages of that at that juncture. And when I say at that juncture, you've done an addition, you've now you're at the callback stage, and you've now gone to, you know, uh you've you've passed that and now you're at the uh the the screen test stage. But for me, the screen test stage, which is when the work is actually uh on camera, uh, because historically in the States, you would do these pre-reads. You would just go in and you would read. Sometimes there would be a camera, most often there would not. And when there was a camera, um, it would often be in the wrong place in the room. So you would be getting kind of a profile of the actor and a wide shot. And it was not useful in serving the storytelling in that actual frame. So for me, the self-tape is always the screen test. And if I can control the production value, if I can control and elevate my choices to a place that I'm showcasing my absolute best work for the team, that is the major victory and win. I would way rather do a self-tape than go in the room because I want to show them what they're gonna get on the day. When you go into an audition, there can be all kinds of other factors that can potentially negatively influence the actual product that the actor delivers on the day. You know, um, I've always said the first pass of an audition is kind of like a crepe. The first one is always a throwaway. You know, you don't often get that opportunity, or you didn't at least, in the historic structure of going in the room. You know, it might be you're in and out. You do one pass, and it might have been a shitty pass and not necessarily the best representation of what you're capable of doing. And so if I can control the environment, I can control what I know is happening in the frame, which is the storytelling in that frame. I want to be the person that controls those details. I want to be the one that influences casting to see this character in the way that I see this character. And so the way that I shoot it, the way that I structure it, all in my mind will be consistent with the same way that this scene is going to be shot on the day. And I'll be honest with you, Greg, I've got an insane track record of enabling actors to book work and for actors that weren't booking work for years to all of a sudden find themselves being regular working actors. And most of my actors bypass any of those callback stages because it is so strong in the initial submission that the casting team knows beyond a shadow of a doubt that this is who they want. So not only am I controlling the uniqueness of the content, but I'm controlling the specifics of the production value. So the combination of those things leaves a lasting impression that is very, very difficult to compete with by any other actor going out for those same roles. So uh I love the self-tape world. I also love the opportunities that it affords for people that wouldn't have otherwise got in a room. Back in the day when casting were restricted to the hours of a day in a physical space and could only maybe bring in 30 actors in a day, if that many. Now they're, and I feel sorry for casting directors, honestly, because the volume of their work has changed so dramatically. Where they could see maybe, you know, 20 to 30 people in a day. Now they might have 300 submissions that come in a day. So not only are more actors getting opportunities to be seen by casting directors, you know, they're strategically placing themselves in a way to really control the production value and the choices that they execute through this material for casting. So I think there is a real platform here for actors to change the results that they're getting because uh there is the ability to collaborate with someone like myself, uh a coach, to get into a studio space, to shoot this in such a way that's really exciting. And frankly, I've seen some self tapes be actually better than uh the way some of the, you know, the scenes end up are shot on the day. Uh great interesting example of that. Sorry uh to digress a little bit, but Rachel McAdams has a phenomenal um uh screen test that's available online for the notebook. And when you take a look at that initial kind of breakup scene after the couple has got back together, and you take a look at the choices that uh Rachel had explored in demonstrating range of this character from 16 years of age when these these characters first meet to being in her 20s when they end up meeting again. Uh, it is far more dynamic, far more tiered, far more layered, far more colorful than the way that scene is actually shot on the day. But it's because Rachel understood the relationship to the casting process in such a way that she defined the work to say, hey, I let me show more of myself and not less.

Greg Staffa 41:40

We're

Joining Reacher After Near Misses

Greg Staffa 41:41

running out of time, but I'd be remiss not to talk about Reacher. Uh, this was a series that you had auditioned for several times before getting this role in season four. Yeah. Uh what was it about the series that you were so adamant about being a part of that world?

Dean Armstrong 41:58

I mean, it's such a great show. Uh, I mean, it checks off so many boxes and context of entertainment value. Uh, it's funny, it's action-packed, it's suspenseful. Uh, it's just a phenomenal show. Um, and there are a lot of phenomenal shows out there, I might add. Uh, Reacher is one of many shows that I aspire to, um, you know, sharing a screen with uh actors that I have got a tremendous amount of respect for. Uh, I had a Reacher uh over the two uh the three preceding seasons. There were many uh roles that were close calls over that period, but nothing that really finally turned over. Season four was just happened to be the right fit. And I had actually additioned for two roles in season four. Um, this was the one that clicked, and I'm glad it was this particular role because I just had so much fun. Honestly, one of the best experiences to date in my life for collaborating with people that were having so much fun. And I think that uh it's it's very clear the enjoyment, the love, and the enthusiasm that every one of those crew members, everyone of the cast, everyone of the team, uh really uh it's evident how much they all love it. And uh, I mean, I've had fun on everything I've done, but this was just I I felt like I was in high school and we were all just making something that we're all so really uh excited about. And uh yeah, I just just it was just a a real a real gift um to finally uh step into a role on the show and such a fun role that um uh I I think has uh and will continue to have uh a real uh resonance with with the audience.

Greg Staffa 43:55

Now, most actors would dream about having one. Fight sequence with Reacher to be able to put that on their demo reel to be able to say, you know, this is my going up against Reacher. Your character was basically a mixture of the Black Knight from the Monty Python series and the Energizer Bunny, where you basically get your ass kicked in almost every episode over and over again. What was that like? And now it's already here, but the infamous jail scene. Um what was that like getting that script and going, he does what to me?

Dean Armstrong 44:33

Yeah, I mean, I I read it and laughed. Uh, I mean, uh, on paper, it's pretty dark. And in execution of the scene, it's pretty dark uh to have something this grotesque and violent uh happen. But I I did, I laughed, and it's to your point, it's like this character, in the moment that he meets Reacher, almost gets his neck broken. So, and then from there to getting his ass kicked uh in the interrogation scene with a chair, you know, across my face, and then uh a trank gun. And of course, in leading that, of course, into um the jail sequence, uh, it just gets worse and worse and worse for this character. And and I think reading the scripts, I I just I continued to laugh because I'm going, well, this guy is so tenacious, and he just cannot, there's so much ego here. And in what jurisdiction is he operating on when he's taking the liberties to you know dress up like Philly PD and go into what was his game plan? I think one of the funniest lines is after he kicks my ass on the pier and he's like, What was your plan? And he's like, you know, get you, throw you in a van, ask you some questions, and that was it. That was his plan. It's like he he continues to operate in the absence of any real intelligence. And uh, I think that it really offers some levity if you can see that for what it is, um, as opposed to this guy that just takes his job really seriously. Um, it offers some great levity in the storytelling with a guy that uh just doesn't know when to quit, uh, and frankly, uh operates outside of the law in order to satisfy and cater to his ego.

Playing Foster And Taking Hits

Greg Staffa 46:39

And I just have two more quick questions. Apologize for going a little bit over here, but this will air after the finale. So, warning on this spoilers ahead, but it'll be after the finale. Your character has had so much fun, I would say, getting his ass kicked by Reacher. And in the finale, your scene reminds me in Daredevil and Wolverine, there's a scene where Pyro comes back and Hugh Jackman punches him and says, Not everyone gets uh um a speech. And your death was a little anticlimactic. Was that fitting for your care? What did you think about that? Where it doesn't come down to a brawl, you versus Reacher. It almost becomes a comedic moment where you're like, okay, here we go again. Bam.

Dean Armstrong 47:28

Well, I think that's what it was, right? It's like this season after fighting the Dutch giant, it's just like, what who what can how can we challenge Reacher this season? And it's like they throw everything at him in season four. And I am just one faction that is, you know, out to get him, if you will. And there's like a long line of people that want to kill Reacher. And uh, of course, and that is that moment that happens. It's like, oh, it's finally Foster's moment to he has uh, you know, he has that victory that he wants to celebrate. And then, of course, he gets killed by someone else that wants to kill Reacher even more so than I do. So I it it is kind of anticlimatical for Foster because it's such an enormous fail, but it's in concert with every fail that Foster experiences over the course of the season. So I kind of identify on two fronts that yeah, it it does feel a little anticlimatical, but it's completely in concert of every fail in every episode that Foster is in. Just when he thinks he's got Reacher, he doesn't. And what could possibly get in the way of this satisfaction, this moment of killing Reacher? Uh, when no one else is around, everybody else is dead, as he assumes. What could possibly get in the way? And of course, you know. So uh, would I have liked to have seen a bigger fight? I think he'd been through so much. I don't think the audience needed to see another physical encounter. Uh, obviously, there's no contest here between me and Alan. Uh, it's absurd. So I think that it was very fitting. Every scene was anticlimactical for Foster. He just constantly failed. And uh sadly, um it cost him his life at the end. Uh, I used to, I was joking with Sam Hill and joking with Nick. I'm like, you know, we don't really know if Foster's dead. You know, maybe he was able to uh uh you know prevent himself from bleeding out entirely. You know, maybe we maybe we somehow build in a an

Death Scene Spoilers And Identity Question

Dean Armstrong 50:00

extra shot where we just see my hand and a finger twitch and he comes back in a future season because uh that to me would be in concert of the absurdity of this character and his journey over the uh the the you know season four.

Greg Staffa 50:15

I will say that final episode, and I don't know if you've seen the the full episode yet, uh, because it's prior to it airing, but not after we record this. But that's one of the most brutal episodes of any show I've ever seen. It is. Just I mean it is as far as what it takes. Final question, and I appreciate you coming on. Uh, so much of what you do is tied to the work that you've done. It's you know hard not to say Dean Armstrong and mention Reacher. It's not you know hard to mention Dean Armstrong and Queer Eye. But when you get up in the morning, you go into the bathroom, you splash a little water in your face and look in the mirror. Who is it that you see?

Dean Armstrong 50:54

Wow, that's a great question. Wow, Greg. Who do I see? Wow, I want to answer this in such a way that is completely true uh in all future references. Yeah, I I I think you just you see the artist, you see the person that constantly has identity shifts, you know. Uh we will always audition in our careers far more times than we will ever book the job. And while my resume reflects however many actors I've played over the past 30 some odd years, there's that many more characters that I have played in self-tapes uh with the hopes of of landing that role. And you're constantly assuming this illusion, this identity. And when you wake up in the morning, um there is this kind of neutrality. There is this kind of this this palette. It's uh you know, the musician with an instrument, uh, the artist with a a blank page and and uh and a brush. And I I you don't see one specific thing. It is it's an artist that's all inclusive. And uh I I really look forward to uh the days ahead in my career and the roles that I will play, and uh knowing that in so many different uh audiences' lives, uh you represent something different for them. There's always a role that resonates the most with someone for whatever their personal reasons are. And, you know, it's hard for people to meet Alan in person and not see Reacher, for example. You know, I think as an artist, you you strive to be identified as the person, but that person is that artist. And that artist, uh, like Clay can be molded into so many different versions of yourself. You know, the artist is extraordinarily humble, and the artist is terrified and excited at the same time. And you live in that anticipation and that hope for that next adrenaline rush, that next uh injection uh of artistic exploration that will ultimately shape and define yet another version of yourself.

Greg Staffa 53:31

Well

Closing Thanks And Where To Watch

Greg Staffa 53:32

said. Well, Dean Armstrong, thank you so much for coming on. Uh Reacher, the entire season four is out on Amazon and Nagley gets released. I think they're releasing everything at once. So it'll be out by the time this episode airs. But check out Dean and uh Reacher, and I appreciate you coming on.

Dean Armstrong 53:52

Greg, it was my pleasure. Thank you for asking some questions that made me think about myself a little bit differently today in relationship to my work, which I can only be grateful for because every day it's just about that evolution and that growth. And uh, you had some really thoughtful uh questions uh to that regard, and I appreciate it. Thank you.