The Genii Forum

Got this link from The Roger Ebert Club:

http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/3027b4 ... -ricky-jay

Ricky Jay is a terrific actor.

He does a great job playing himself in this!

Ricky Jay never acts. He says the words and never bumps into the furniture.

Watch it with the sound off. It's great. I kept trying to imagine Ricky Jay wtih long hair in that card throwing pose. Nice work.

I suggest you try saying the words, not bumping into the furniture, and see if you can get hired to work in films and TV.

It's not so simple.

I totally ignored this when it was sent to me last week. Who knew that people would find it so interesting. Just goes to show that you never know what will appeal to the audience until you do it.

Mamet has an interesting take on the job of the actor. True and False - interesting book.

Simple nothing, it's darn near impossible. Been trying it for years...

His latest book, which he discussed with Ricky during a live appearance, "Theatre", is also very very good!

Richard Kaufman wrote:I suggest you try saying the words, not bumping into the furniture, and see if you can get hired to work in films and TV.

It's not so simple.

It helps if you're best buddies with David Mamet, too.

Jay's best performance was in Heist. His worst in that Bond flick.

Ricky is the first guy to say that he has a way to go before being a "great" actor.

I thought his turn in "The Spanish Prisoner" was quite good and he also did well in the HBO mini-series "Deadwood."

Dustin

Brad Henderson wrote:Mamet has an interesting take on the job of the actor. True and False - interesting book.

Yep. It's pretty muchsay your lines and don't bump into the furniture. Results in some awful performances if you're not watching William H. Macy or Joe Mantegna.

-T

It privileges the role and responsibility of the writer above all.

Someone just sent me a short film with a similar title, 'Erotic Magician'.

The quality seems to be a little lower than the Mamet offering though.

http://www.fuzzwich.com/?_fz_aid=1086487

Tim, that's neither interesting nor funny.

Well, it is certainly no cake fart!

Ah, that touch of class.
Keep it private, Tony.

Richard Kaufman wrote:Tim, that's neither interesting nor funny.

True

Brad Henderson wrote:It privileges the role and responsibility of the writer above all.

Agreed. And yet, when you let great actors at the material under someone else's direction, you get glory like "Glengarry Glen Ross". Otherwise, you get people reciting text at the camera, like Steve Martin in "The Spanish Prisoner".

-T

Hey - 'Glengarry Glen Ross' is my all time favourite film.

You should all try and check it out!

Joe

PS I have always being fascinated by Mamet's theories on acting. Basically that it should involve no theory or technique. Instead to be a great actor is something you are born with, and can build on by gaining experience on the stage, trusting the script (for instance there is nothing a good actor can do about a bad script) and just generally 'improving yourself' (eg your voice, your posture and perhaps learning other artforms like dance, comedy or magic). I would love to know what others think about David's intriguing anti-theory theory?

I will tell you that some actors feel he overwrites. If you read his scripts, you will notice that he writes every breath the actor should take, every stutter and every stammer and pause...it's all right there on the page. He's very meter conscious, so to do it justice you must follow all of his stage directions. It can actually be very liberating for an actor...It's an "outside in" approach as opposed to the "inside out" methods more popular in America.