(no subject)
Well, it's nearing the anniversay of the first time I saw Max Magician and the Legend of the Rings. I'm not sure how many people actually got to read the entire history of my interaction with Greg Coale, the acclaimed star (Tom Tit Tot) of Max Magician. In that it represents my first and only contact with a true celebrity, and because Mr. Coale's genius has transcended geographical boundaries and become part of my own being, I think it's important that everyone is aware of this. So, I'll include it all below, starting with the review I wrote on IMDB.
IMDB REVIEW - 15 FEBRUARY 2004
Max Magician and the Legend of the Rings is the most fantastic movie I've ever seen, for a number of reasons. Most importantly, the cast, crew, director, make-up "artists", cinematographers all take the movie in complete seriousness. This is remarkable considering the abysmal quality of the line delivery, horrible costumes, EXCEEDINGLY AWFUL script, and absolute lack of skill and knowledge of the craft of film on the part of everyone involved. All these factors combined, however, makes this film a masterpiece of late-night heckling material. My friends and I bought this for $5.50 at the Wal-Mart Bargain Bin, and the investment more than paid off in side-splitting laughs of disbelief.
Max Magician is a middle-class suburban kid with no friends, but a penchant for the magical arts. He has a creepy pedophile neighbor, Mr. Tim, who at one time was a great wizard (apparently) and gives young Max guidance to "achieve his destiny." He gives Max a poorly-constructed "magic book" which allows him entry into the fantastical world of Bluebell Forest. Max is the "savior" of the village that is being tyrannized by Lord Dadga (the worst actor in the history of cinema). He meets all sorts of ridiculous characters, who deliver absurd dialogue with no knowledge of delivery. At the end he saves the village by using his magic book to summon knights out of the ground.
It's necessary to reiterate that there is not a single saving grace in this film except for the (highly unintentional) comedic implications. Every solitary aspect is done with the least skill and least amount of cinematic expertise possible. The script skips from scene to scene, introduces new "plot elements" which had never been alluded to and are now apparently crucial to the "story". The dialogue is cliched and nonsensical. The characterization is ungodly predictable where not non-existent. The characters take long, painful pauses between lines. The entire soundtrack was redubbed and the dialogue very seldom matches up with the mouths moving. The props are pathetic (the "propmaster" on the "behind the scenes" feature shows a battle hammer which was made from a foam swimming toy.) Occasionally we see extras walking around in the background. The foley work is perhaps the funniest part of the movie, as sometimes the background sound of birds will cut out altogether, voices will cut out in the middle of lines, and giant "swooshes" are used for characters getting out of chairs -- the same sound over and over again.
Which brings us to the acting. There is not a single actor with previous experience (except Tom Tit Tot, who is still one of the worst) and it shows more than you would think possible. Of course they get no help from the script, but this is the single worst ensemble of amateur actors ever put together. I can honestly say that with very little doubt. For this reason alone it's probably worth investing in to appreciate just how bad something can be. Only buy Max Magician, even for $5, if you want to truly understand the meaning of "awful" and wish to have many a laugh at the film's expense. If you buy this to entertain your children you may taint their appreciation of art and cinema from a young age. No young person deserves that.
PRIVATE MESSAGE FROM MRGRTAZ2 ON IMDB, 7 APRIL 2004
Hi There
Your review is really quite well written & funny &. I really appreciate you taking the time to write.
I played the character of Tom Tit Tot.
You said I was one of the worst actors.
"There is not a single actor with previous experience (except Tom Tit Tot, who is still one of the worst) and it shows more than you would think possible."
I don't mind criticism and would help me an actor if you would constructively point out the things that you think I could improve upon.
Also, there were quite a few actors in this film who have extensive stage experience and some with quite a bit of TV & Movie experience, I myself included.
If you want to see if I can really act or not, pick up a copy of "Serial Mom". I have several featured shots with the stars in the church scene.
Thanks again,
Greg Coale
PRIVATE MESSAGE SENT TO GREG COALE ON IMDB, 13 APRIL 2004
Mr. Coale
First of all, let me say that it was an honor for my friends and I to receive a message from you. As many times as we have watched Max Magician, to hear from a cast member was beyond expectation. However, I won't hedge around the point here; my friends and I loved Max Magician because it was exceedingly awful. I'm sure you discerned that from my review, and I hope I can say that without offending you. If you really want to hear it, I would be glad to offer you my own insight on the choices you made in your role. (Understand that Max Magician's failure certainly wasn't your fault alone, or even yours primarily. I said your performance was "one of the worst", not "THE worst." There is a two-way tie for that title between Mr. Mitzkovitz and Mr. Danaceau. The movie's failure was an entirely collaborative one.) I will have to watch the movie again for specific sources of criticism; however, I can offer my own broad take on your performance: characterization, delivery, etc.
If it helps, your character was perhaps the only one in the film which didn't evoke outbursts of undesired laughter. It did get a few groans, to be perfectly honest, although this was mostly due to the terrible quality of your dialogue, which was written at a level even below most of the rest of the film, if that's possible. The fact that you had to speak in rhyme which was most often completely nonsensical significantly hampered your perfomance, I'm sure. However, I still didn't feel that your cadence and voice work consistently suited the role. I am reminded of your opening scene in the film, when you ask internally, "What rhymes with magician?" If you go back and listen to the ADR, the inflection of that line doesn't even come across as a question. You put the emphasis on the syllables "rhy" and "gish," and the sentence comes across something like "What RHYMES with Ma-GISH-An?" This is just one example, but it struck me particularly as being unnatural and unbelievable.
At times, the physical work seemed rather uninvolved. Arms at side, dangling akward fake hands. The same frequently went for the facial work. As I'm sure you're aware, when you're hidden under as many layers of prosthetics as you were, you have to make up for the facial subtleties and singularities normally present with a certain level of "explanatory exaggeration," as it were. You were given the opportunity to portray a magical, nonhuman, fantastical creature. As such, your physicality was your greatest resource for characterization, and your failure to utilize it was perhaps your greatest weakness.
Mr. Coale, I respect highly your choice of acting as a career, and your commitment to your craft. I appreciate that a poorly-written, poorly-directed, poorly-conceived children's movie may not have been a great career move, though you have every right to be proud of it, and that given the circumstances (particularly the sub-professional editing, both sound and film), your ability to act might not have been given its due. I certainly intend to check out "Serial Mom." In turn, I'm sure you appreciate the communal effort between actors to contribute constructively to each other's endeavors and help each other improve. I wish you all the best of luck in the future, in your pursuit of success and greater opportunities. I hope you take my criticism in stride, and if there's any other insight I can give you, don't hesitate to ask.
Sincerely,
Russ Hull
(This message was forwarded to Greg Coale via e-mail on 12 Jan. 2005, with the following message introducing it:)
Dear Mr. Coale,
A few months ago, I received a message from you
relating to my review about Max Magician posted on
IMDB, specifically my comments about your acting. I
sent a reply some months ago but doubt you ever got
it. I remembered this message recently, and a google
search turned up your e-mail address (on the TANC's
page). Since your message was so important to me, I
thought I'd take this time to send you a copy of my
reply, which I've included below:
REPLY FROM GREG COALE, 22 JANUARY 2005:
Russ
Nimby Nimby Not!
Thanks!
I see you thought a lot about it and I appreciate your comments and
effort to get back to me.
I especiallyy appreciate the comments about acting with prosthetics.
I sort of agree with your comments about the rhyming. It didn't seem
natural to me either but I did what the director wanted. However,
since the character was other worldly, perhaps other viewwrs may not
have expected the emphathees to be on the expected syllables. This
may be why the director ok's what I did.
So you know, due to no fault of the director, the audio had to be
almost completely replaced after filming; not once but twice.
What is you and your friends background related to the entertainment
industry? How old are you? Have you acted before? Do you have a
degree in acting or film?
Anything other constructive criticism you have is welcome.
Do a google search on my name and you will see many citiques of my
acting and photos of me.
By the way, many of the actors in that film had lots of previous
experience, both on stage and film. Apparently, this film was not
the best career move for them.
Take care,
Greg Coale
IMDB REVIEW - 15 FEBRUARY 2004
Max Magician and the Legend of the Rings is the most fantastic movie I've ever seen, for a number of reasons. Most importantly, the cast, crew, director, make-up "artists", cinematographers all take the movie in complete seriousness. This is remarkable considering the abysmal quality of the line delivery, horrible costumes, EXCEEDINGLY AWFUL script, and absolute lack of skill and knowledge of the craft of film on the part of everyone involved. All these factors combined, however, makes this film a masterpiece of late-night heckling material. My friends and I bought this for $5.50 at the Wal-Mart Bargain Bin, and the investment more than paid off in side-splitting laughs of disbelief.
Max Magician is a middle-class suburban kid with no friends, but a penchant for the magical arts. He has a creepy pedophile neighbor, Mr. Tim, who at one time was a great wizard (apparently) and gives young Max guidance to "achieve his destiny." He gives Max a poorly-constructed "magic book" which allows him entry into the fantastical world of Bluebell Forest. Max is the "savior" of the village that is being tyrannized by Lord Dadga (the worst actor in the history of cinema). He meets all sorts of ridiculous characters, who deliver absurd dialogue with no knowledge of delivery. At the end he saves the village by using his magic book to summon knights out of the ground.
It's necessary to reiterate that there is not a single saving grace in this film except for the (highly unintentional) comedic implications. Every solitary aspect is done with the least skill and least amount of cinematic expertise possible. The script skips from scene to scene, introduces new "plot elements" which had never been alluded to and are now apparently crucial to the "story". The dialogue is cliched and nonsensical. The characterization is ungodly predictable where not non-existent. The characters take long, painful pauses between lines. The entire soundtrack was redubbed and the dialogue very seldom matches up with the mouths moving. The props are pathetic (the "propmaster" on the "behind the scenes" feature shows a battle hammer which was made from a foam swimming toy.) Occasionally we see extras walking around in the background. The foley work is perhaps the funniest part of the movie, as sometimes the background sound of birds will cut out altogether, voices will cut out in the middle of lines, and giant "swooshes" are used for characters getting out of chairs -- the same sound over and over again.
Which brings us to the acting. There is not a single actor with previous experience (except Tom Tit Tot, who is still one of the worst) and it shows more than you would think possible. Of course they get no help from the script, but this is the single worst ensemble of amateur actors ever put together. I can honestly say that with very little doubt. For this reason alone it's probably worth investing in to appreciate just how bad something can be. Only buy Max Magician, even for $5, if you want to truly understand the meaning of "awful" and wish to have many a laugh at the film's expense. If you buy this to entertain your children you may taint their appreciation of art and cinema from a young age. No young person deserves that.
PRIVATE MESSAGE FROM MRGRTAZ2 ON IMDB, 7 APRIL 2004
Hi There
Your review is really quite well written & funny &. I really appreciate you taking the time to write.
I played the character of Tom Tit Tot.
You said I was one of the worst actors.
"There is not a single actor with previous experience (except Tom Tit Tot, who is still one of the worst) and it shows more than you would think possible."
I don't mind criticism and would help me an actor if you would constructively point out the things that you think I could improve upon.
Also, there were quite a few actors in this film who have extensive stage experience and some with quite a bit of TV & Movie experience, I myself included.
If you want to see if I can really act or not, pick up a copy of "Serial Mom". I have several featured shots with the stars in the church scene.
Thanks again,
Greg Coale
PRIVATE MESSAGE SENT TO GREG COALE ON IMDB, 13 APRIL 2004
Mr. Coale
First of all, let me say that it was an honor for my friends and I to receive a message from you. As many times as we have watched Max Magician, to hear from a cast member was beyond expectation. However, I won't hedge around the point here; my friends and I loved Max Magician because it was exceedingly awful. I'm sure you discerned that from my review, and I hope I can say that without offending you. If you really want to hear it, I would be glad to offer you my own insight on the choices you made in your role. (Understand that Max Magician's failure certainly wasn't your fault alone, or even yours primarily. I said your performance was "one of the worst", not "THE worst." There is a two-way tie for that title between Mr. Mitzkovitz and Mr. Danaceau. The movie's failure was an entirely collaborative one.) I will have to watch the movie again for specific sources of criticism; however, I can offer my own broad take on your performance: characterization, delivery, etc.
If it helps, your character was perhaps the only one in the film which didn't evoke outbursts of undesired laughter. It did get a few groans, to be perfectly honest, although this was mostly due to the terrible quality of your dialogue, which was written at a level even below most of the rest of the film, if that's possible. The fact that you had to speak in rhyme which was most often completely nonsensical significantly hampered your perfomance, I'm sure. However, I still didn't feel that your cadence and voice work consistently suited the role. I am reminded of your opening scene in the film, when you ask internally, "What rhymes with magician?" If you go back and listen to the ADR, the inflection of that line doesn't even come across as a question. You put the emphasis on the syllables "rhy" and "gish," and the sentence comes across something like "What RHYMES with Ma-GISH-An?" This is just one example, but it struck me particularly as being unnatural and unbelievable.
At times, the physical work seemed rather uninvolved. Arms at side, dangling akward fake hands. The same frequently went for the facial work. As I'm sure you're aware, when you're hidden under as many layers of prosthetics as you were, you have to make up for the facial subtleties and singularities normally present with a certain level of "explanatory exaggeration," as it were. You were given the opportunity to portray a magical, nonhuman, fantastical creature. As such, your physicality was your greatest resource for characterization, and your failure to utilize it was perhaps your greatest weakness.
Mr. Coale, I respect highly your choice of acting as a career, and your commitment to your craft. I appreciate that a poorly-written, poorly-directed, poorly-conceived children's movie may not have been a great career move, though you have every right to be proud of it, and that given the circumstances (particularly the sub-professional editing, both sound and film), your ability to act might not have been given its due. I certainly intend to check out "Serial Mom." In turn, I'm sure you appreciate the communal effort between actors to contribute constructively to each other's endeavors and help each other improve. I wish you all the best of luck in the future, in your pursuit of success and greater opportunities. I hope you take my criticism in stride, and if there's any other insight I can give you, don't hesitate to ask.
Sincerely,
Russ Hull
(This message was forwarded to Greg Coale via e-mail on 12 Jan. 2005, with the following message introducing it:)
Dear Mr. Coale,
A few months ago, I received a message from you
relating to my review about Max Magician posted on
IMDB, specifically my comments about your acting. I
sent a reply some months ago but doubt you ever got
it. I remembered this message recently, and a google
search turned up your e-mail address (on the TANC's
page). Since your message was so important to me, I
thought I'd take this time to send you a copy of my
reply, which I've included below:
REPLY FROM GREG COALE, 22 JANUARY 2005:
Russ
Nimby Nimby Not!
Thanks!
I see you thought a lot about it and I appreciate your comments and
effort to get back to me.
I especiallyy appreciate the comments about acting with prosthetics.
I sort of agree with your comments about the rhyming. It didn't seem
natural to me either but I did what the director wanted. However,
since the character was other worldly, perhaps other viewwrs may not
have expected the emphathees to be on the expected syllables. This
may be why the director ok's what I did.
So you know, due to no fault of the director, the audio had to be
almost completely replaced after filming; not once but twice.
What is you and your friends background related to the entertainment
industry? How old are you? Have you acted before? Do you have a
degree in acting or film?
Anything other constructive criticism you have is welcome.
Do a google search on my name and you will see many citiques of my
acting and photos of me.
By the way, many of the actors in that film had lots of previous
experience, both on stage and film. Apparently, this film was not
the best career move for them.
Take care,
Greg Coale