The phrase "actor in question" is correct and usable in written English.
It is typically used to refer to a specific actor that has been previously mentioned or is currently being discussed.
Example: "The actor in question has received critical acclaim for their latest performance."
Alternatives: "the actor at hand" or "the actor being discussed".
That makes landing the coveted role a very big deal for the actor in question.
To see an alternate or understudy in a role can be revelatory — not just about the actor in question but about the work itself.
The actor in question was Lenny Henry, a man who'd spent much of his career shouting the word "Katanga!" and throwing custard pies at Chris Tarrant while dressed as Trevor McDonald.
(The film in question is Aloha, directed by Cameron Crowe, and the actor in question is Bradley Cooper – who, as it happens, is 40 years old, the same age as Phoenix).
"The Walking Dead" has faced other challenges this year keeping a lid on crucial plot twists: the death of a key character was accidentally revealed ahead of schedule by a Web site selling a Season 2 Blu-ray boxed set (not to mention reports that the actor in question had been cast in another television pilot).
But since the young actor in question was named Derek Jacobi, I'm grudgingly forced to admit that posterity has amply vindicated my mother's verdict.
Mr. Kaye declined to comment on the actors in question, but one he was eyeing, Parker Posey, became unavailable because of a comedy pilot she is developing for NBC.
Lost in Showbiz is happy to learn that one of the porn actors in question, Kacey Jordan, is to star in the adult film version.
Finally, on teleological and functional accounts, these roles are related to one another in part in virtue of their contribution to (respectively) the end(s) or function(s) of the institution; and the realisation of these ends or function normally involves interaction among the institutional actors in question and external non-institutional actors.
Furthermore, given the place of moral evaluation in ordinary human thought and speech, an account couched in morally neutral terms will not be understood as morally neutral, nor will it accurately reflect the experience or self-perception of the historical actors in question.
Moreover, we are bound to encounter these kinds of things not because the actors in question lack a sense of morality but because of the particular kind of moral righteousness that claims of collective responsibility allow those who want to retaliate against their enemies in the name of a higher morality.
