Sunday, June 26, 2011

Other Actors Homes Dept.

And On Fridays Its BENSON Night!

6 comments:

lower case gothamite said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
lower case gothamite said...

Dear Sirs or Madams Who Have Nil,

I am not sure if you have had a chance to review my little 2-part stink bomb of braggadocio & gratitude sent by way of your comments forum of Saturday 06/25/11. But I did in fact quite earnestly wonder if you were amenable to the notion of providing me with some much needed kareer advice. If so, please find below a question that has been vexing me for some time. I'd be most obliged to receive your prompt and thorough reply. I will follow up with my several other Q's based on the qualitative virtues of your A.

Some years ago I was invited to audition for a mid-size supporting role in a cheap little filmette. Let’s call the character Rhonda Silverstein (a Jewess) -- described in the breakdown as:

RHONDA SILVERSTEIN: “The ugliest woman in the world. Fat, squat, sweaty, mustachioed, stinky, acne-riddled, greasy-haired, mole-covered, eats with her mouth open, drools constantly, yells at everybody. A total bitch.”

Needless to say, I had a GREAT callback and, according to my (now erstwhile) agent, word on the street was that the part was (you should pardon the expression) "mine to lose." Truer words were never said.

After a week’s time, I was informed that they were “going urban” for the role of Rhonda Silverstein but that the producers were so enchanted with my "ugly work" (I am a method actress, natch) that they wanted to throw me a bone and offer me the role of Rhonda’s friend, SHELLY. I checked the breakdown. Find below, the information provided in its entirety.

SHELLY: Uglier than Rhonda.

My several questions involve readin’ ritin’ and rithmatick.

1. If you are playing a character that is described as “uglier than [the ugliest woman in the world.]” – brackets mine. Then, mathematically speaking, is this considered sound usage of the transitive property of inequalities? Or rather, a false syllogism?

Correlative Q: If applicable, would it have been a good idea to work one these properties into my "back-story?"

2. 3. 4. etc. Also, on the grammar end, if the superlative form is already in usage -- suffixed and annexed -- to the modifier of the “lesser” noun, what gives with the comparative form being retroactively applied to the "greater" noun? Isn’t a superlative the farthest one can go, adjectively speaking? No longer open to further modification? Top o' the heap? Terminus? End of line? Ain't no mountain higher? Left the building? Blackout? Last Call? Basta? Kaput? Check the gate?
I ask because I'd like to add some superlatives to my resume. But only if I can come by them honestly. As I am not yet wholly bereft of integrity. Like you guys.

And ah 5, 6, 7, 8!
More so, on the stylistic, philosophical & semio-logical fronts:
What would Robert McKee think? Is this just some impish syntactical Vulcan mind meld (and therefore wholly dismissible as it involves a Star Trek reference)? Or is this all just because Rhonda’s character worked more days? Or, in the final analysis, just because the other actress was packaged into this cheap little filmette by those conniving douche bags over at Paradigm?

Thanks in advance for your kind consideration of the above,
lowercase gothamite

Eight Ball said...

Answers: 1. False.
2-4.Forget the Resume. Its 2011. Tweet what you eat.
5. McKee would think "maybe I should charge more.."
6. Rhonda's character was changed to a black man.
7. There are no douche bags at Paradigm. No one douches at all there.

lower case gothamite said...

Dear Sirs or Madams WHN,

Thanks for your full and timely reply, Eight Ball! My resume fits very nicely onto just the one tweet! Who knew?

So here’s a poser.
I recently performed in a small "play" as part of a "new play festival" under (what only the Cabin Boy may be familiar with) a "showcase contract." Although I am, as a girl, not really very good at math, I have checked my figures with regard to payment per hour repeatedly. The results of which are consistently this: I spent a month (a MONTH I tell you!) earning $4.76 an hour in an airless garden shed while wearing a plastic Haz-Mat suit in a play described by the Village Voice as "under-cooked." Plus which, there was stage smoke involved.

According to the New York State Department of Labor & Unemployment Services (whose employees, weary of my late-night phone calls, sent me to your blog in the first place!) the minimum wage is currently set at $7.25 per hour. For boys anyway.

Like Gaul, my curiosity is divided into three parts.

1. Can you put a positive spin on the situation described above?
(Perhaps Cabin Boy can weigh in on this one. As he is a gay. And therefore a bit more upbeat in his outlook).

2. Re: NYS Dept. of Labor and Unemployment Svcs.
Now that I have been released from my indentured servitude with the krap kings of lower pretention-town, I have re-certified for my “government job” with the good folks up by Albany way.
a. When asked if I am “ready, willing and able” to work, just how specific and/or truthy do I need to be?
b. Is “lack of work” the same as “work is nil”?

3. Factoring in the remote possibility of readiness, willingness and ableness w/r/t: minimum wage jobs,
What is the proper line reading for the following phrase?

A. DO you want fries with that?
B. Do YOU want fries with that?
C. Do you WANT fries with that?
D. Do you want FRIES with that?
E. Do you want fries WITH that?
F. Do you want fries with THAT?
G. Really Ensign? A Happy Meal? HAPPY?? Who do you think you’re kidding???

Anonymous said...

Cabin boy sez, "I'm in love. I think lcg could possibly flip me. I could listen to her talk about grammar and the hourly wage for showcases all night. I give her two big 'jazz hands' up!"

lower case gothamite said...

Thanx for the ups CB!
As you can imagine, it gets worse.

Here’s how things sit:
I may not have earned enough “shekels” (as we say here in Hymie Town) in this “fiscal year” (as Lehman Brothers puts it) to receive even the minimum amount of Unemployment Benefits (as per Albany directive).

So I’d like to find an alternative means by which to “work the system” (as it’s pronounced at Julliard).

While floundering about in the recently drained dramaturgical morass, my tar-black soul was shattered beyond all measure of recognition or repair. What with my be-numbed state and all, I neglected to tell the stage manager in a timely fashion. So she did not file an accident report (form C-4) on my behalf. Cue the sad trombones.

Now I wonder if I am still eligible for Workmen’s Comp and/or Permanent Disability Benefits – ex post facto.

Here’s my Q in pursuit of an A:

Is there anything that can be done retroactively?
And by “retroactively” I mean as far as back as say... 1986?