Proof that Criss Angel is the lamest ever [Archive]

Cain

25th June 2007, 12:34 PM

KingMerv00

25th June 2007, 12:40 PM

The pictures are not showing because bandwidth has been exceeded. I thought the YouTube clip was bad. I dunno, I just don't care much for his style. What I saw was product placement, bad acting, and made for TV magic.

I watched the clip with the sound off and skipped right to the end so I have no complaints.

I am puzzled as to what Nathyn is upset about. What do you expect? REAL magic?

MelBrooksfan

25th June 2007, 12:45 PM

I watched the clip with the sound off and skipped right to the end so I have no complaints.

I am puzzled as to what Nathyn is upset about. What do you expect? REAL magic?

I'm guessing he's just disappointed in how simple and easy the illusion was?

The Central Scrutinizer

25th June 2007, 01:03 PM

I'm guessing he's just disappointed in how simple and easy the illusion was?

Most of them are.

I think it was Penn who said that if people could see how most stage illusions are done, they would be very disappointed.

tsg

25th June 2007, 01:09 PM

Most of them are.

I think it was Penn who said that if people could see how most stage illusions are done, they would be very disappointed.

Someone (possibly Penn) once said the difference between a great illusion and a cheap trick is knowing how it's done.

MelBrooksfan

25th June 2007, 01:17 PM

Most of them are.

Well of course. The sentiment has been repeated in almost all magic literature I've read. Simple illusions sort of help stack the deck in your favor. When people are fooled, some/most tend to instantly assume some sort of grand deception (See: The Kennedy assassination, 9/11 conspiracy theories, etc). The simple solution often never crosses their mind. This illusion, and other television specials, does suffer because the audience can view it again at their pleasure. This illusion was, as admitted on that site, dissected through repeated viewing and slow motion. I hardly think that detracts any from the illusion if such means had to employed.

KingMerv00

25th June 2007, 02:33 PM

I'm guessing he's just disappointed in how simple and easy the illusion was?

True...it would be better if it were performed using a shrink ray or some kind of Nightcrawler-esque mutant powers.

noblecaboose

25th June 2007, 05:24 PM

This is why I think magic on television is somewhat incredibly lame. I mean, we see impossible things on TV shows all the time, what's to stop magicians from using the same, tired, old special effects and editing to make things look convincing? Live magic uses special effects trickery too, of course, but it's not on a friggin' two dimensional screen for crying out loud.

Azrael 5

25th June 2007, 05:58 PM

This clip must be 20 years old and it knocks Criss Angel into a cocked(top)hat!
You don't need editing and special effects to amaze.Take note Angel.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Cr2zKCsbkdA

Raphael

25th June 2007, 06:25 PM

http://members.cox.net/thinkcrazy576/Criss%20Angel.htm

See? Look, it's just stupid camera angles!

What a hack! :mad:

Next you'll be telling me Copperfield didn't really make the Statue of Liberty disappear.

Checkmite

25th June 2007, 08:47 PM

I am puzzled as to what Nathyn is upset about. What do you expect? REAL magic?

It seems that way. 9 out of every 10 tricks I know involve line-of-sight manipulation. From "another angle", every trick is "stupid".

I should also note that the trick Criss did in that video did not involve special effects or editing. He did it in front of a live audience for pete's sake.

Bob Klase

25th June 2007, 09:24 PM

This illusion was, as admitted on that site, dissected through repeated viewing and slow motion. I hardly think that detracts any from the illusion if such means had to employed.

That methods has worked well over the past 100 years when many other (some well-known) magicians (Ralph Adams for one) used it hundreds of times on stages. I'd hardly call any of them "the lamest ever" for using it despite the fact that video tape and a computer might uncovered less that perfect setups when they did it.

Azrael 5

26th June 2007, 05:23 AM

It seems that way. 9 out of every 10 tricks I know involve line-of-sight manipulation. From "another angle", every trick is "stupid".

I should also note that the trick Criss did in that video did not involve special effects or editing. He did it in front of a live audience for pete's sake.

Criss Angel's "live audiences" are debatable in most of his videos,as his tricks are in the majority camera tricks/digital effects.

Like this:
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=baHxmkiuptg

a_unique_person

26th June 2007, 05:33 AM

http://members.cox.net/thinkcrazy576/Criss%20Angel.htm

See? Look, it's just stupid camera angles!

What a hack! :mad:

I bought a couple of tricks. The first rule is, don't tell anyone how it works, second rule, don't do it twice.

DJM

26th June 2007, 08:53 AM

The problem with Criss is that you don't even need to look for the secrets, beause it's usually visible right there before your eyes. That original link only showed one effect from many where the crew doesn't care if they don't get the right results.. they will broadcast it anyway. Which is weird because it's not live TV after all.

Here's another example of that:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=OQ-BKuBcpd4 (http://youtube.com/watch?v=OQ-BKuBcpd4)

Anyone can see the girl moving to the side right before Criss blocks the view, not to mention the shadow on the left side of the wall. But I believe that Criss was just too lazy to make it better, so they decided to keep it.

For someone who calls himself the best magician in history, he seems more like the kind you see at birthday parties for children.. Actually I take it back, those magicians take the art much more seriously then he ever could.

MelBrooksfan

26th June 2007, 09:35 AM

Criss Angel's "live audiences" are debatable in most of his videos,as his tricks are in the majority camera tricks/digital effects.

Like this:
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=baHxmkiuptg

Debatable. That video nailed it. He was using wires (but, I think anyone could've told you that. He's obviously not levitating for real and stilts are comically out of the question). However, depending on the wire thickness, would it be visible to the live audience in the parking lot? Digital editing is still deplorable and, if the wires were not visible to a grounded audience, it seems like any decent director would've simply suggesting shooting it entirely from the ground in one take.

So, a question is raised: He may be a hack, but he is certainly putting magic into a different sort of mainstream. Should magicians suffer a hack because of the PR boost he gives the profession?

Azrael 5

26th June 2007, 10:23 AM

Debatable. That video nailed it. He was using wires (but, I think anyone could've told you that. He's obviously not levitating for real and stilts are comically out of the question). However, depending on the wire thickness, would it be visible to the live audience in the parking lot? Digital editing is still deplorable and, if the wires were not visible to a grounded audience, it seems like any decent director would've simply suggesting shooting it entirely from the ground in one take.

So, a question is raised: He may be a hack, but he is certainly putting magic into a different sort of mainstream. Should magicians suffer a hack because of the PR boost he gives the profession?

Bolding mine.No he isn't levatoing for real but he claims he is! Also the "audience" watching react as if he is.A real audience would most certainly see the crane holding him up,if not the wires.

Checkmite

26th June 2007, 04:10 PM

Criss Angel's "live audiences" are debatable in most of his videos,as his tricks are in the majority camera tricks/digital effects.

Like this:
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=baHxmkiuptg

I'm not talking about any of Angel's other stunts or Angel as a whole; I'm referring specifically to the video in question.

It's very obvious that there's no digital manipulation in the go-kart disappearance. Nathyn calls Criss a "hack" because of the way the trick is done. But then all magicians would be "hacks", because what he did on that occasion (basically a large-scale French Drop) is how you make a go-kart disappear in front of an audience.

DJM

26th June 2007, 10:46 PM

But he didn't do that infront of a real audience, it was infront of stooges. Anyone who was in that area could have seen how it was done, they are not blind.

That's why I agree about the hack thing, since most of his effects are done by the director, camera men, editor and the help of actors. They are the real magicians on the show. His only job is to just stand there and tell everyone how he is the best in the world.

Checkmite

30th June 2007, 05:00 AM

But he didn't do that infront of a real audience, it was infront of stooges.

Is that something you strongly suspect, or something which has been proven in this particular case?

Either way it wouldn't matter, since if there was an audience, the effect would've been the same. That's not a camera trick, any more than a French Drop would be considered a "camera trick" if someone were to videotape me performing it, as opposed to me performing it in front of a crowd.

Temporal Renegade

30th June 2007, 06:48 AM

Next you'll be telling me Copperfield didn't really make the Statue of Liberty disappear.

WHAT?! That's a LIE! Take it back! :)

DJM

30th June 2007, 08:07 AM

Is that something you strongly suspect, or something which has been proven in this particular case?

Either way it wouldn't matter, since if there was an audience, the effect would've been the same. That's not a camera trick, any more than a French Drop would be considered a "camera trick" if someone were to videotape me performing it, as opposed to me performing it in front of a crowd.

It's obvious from the video that the audience could see the fence the whole time, since it was never hidden. The show tried to make it "disappear" by not filming that area, but looks like it didn't work out much.

And I think it does matter, since this effect couldn't be done with real audience around, and it's something Criss does way too much. Anyone could be a magician with paid actors and a filming crew, I don't see anything magical about that.

Checkmite

1st July 2007, 09:10 AM

It's obvious from the video that the audience could see the fence the whole time, since it was never hidden. The show tried to make it "disappear" by not filming that area, but looks like it didn't work out much.

I didn't see it as the show "trying to hide it". It seemed to me that the fence was arranged so that from the perspective of the camera (and anyone else standing in that area), it appeared to be a single contiguous fence, when in fact it wasn't. That was the "gimmick". The trick was to conceal the moment when the performer "ducked through the gap" with the fire extinguisher fog - a typical smoke disguise. It's a legitimate effect.

Certainly, there are some viewing angles from which the trick would not be effective, but that's true of nearly any trick. Some tricks have very liberal sight angles; some have very conservative sight angles. Making something big (like a go-kart, or a statue of liberty, or a space shuttle) disappear is going to be a conservative sight-angle trick any way you cut it; but that doesn't make the effect less legitimate just because somebody standing "over there" would see everything and wouldn't fooled.

Calcas

1st July 2007, 08:14 PM

Is that something you strongly suspect, or something which has been proven in this particular case?

Either way it wouldn't matter, since if there was an audience, the effect would've been the same. That's not a camera trick, any more than a French Drop would be considered a "camera trick" if someone were to videotape me performing it, as opposed to me performing it in front of a crowd.

Do you honestly doubt that the audience reaction is composed of stooges?

I used to live in Vegas. I still have friends there that told me they SAW this huge crane above the building (on Paradise Blvd) the day that Criss shot this.

Duh.

Checkmite

1st July 2007, 08:41 PM

Do you honestly doubt that the audience reaction is composed of stooges?

I used to live in Vegas. I still have friends there that told me they SAW this huge crane above the building (on Paradise Blvd) the day that Criss shot this.

Duh.

What does a "huge crane" have to do with the go-kart trick? Are you even talking about the same video?

Calcas

2nd July 2007, 12:20 PM

What does a "huge crane" have to do with the go-kart trick? Are you even talking about the same video?
My bad. I was referring to this clip posted earlier exposing his levitation trick.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=baHxmkiuptg

He uses stooges for many of his tricks (like that one, the tearing a woman in half, etc) but not all. The go-kart trick wouldn't need any.

quixotecoyote

3rd July 2007, 01:07 AM

But from the audience's angle wouldn't the gap be visible? It wouldn't be an illusion for them, would it?

Checkmite

3rd July 2007, 02:56 AM

But from the audience's angle wouldn't the gap be visible? It wouldn't be an illusion for them, would it?

No; the fence was arranged so that at the gap, part of the fence veered off slightly and continued behind the other part of the fence (i.e. the gap was along rather than across the audience's line of sight, and therefore they didn't see it). From a distance it looked like a single, solid fence line.

T'ai Chi

3rd July 2007, 03:10 PM

From barely watching Angel's show, it seems the audience has to be in on a lot of things..

MelBrooksfan

3rd July 2007, 09:44 PM

From barely watching Angel's show, it seems the audience has to be in on a lot of things..

Such as?

Niobe

4th July 2007, 07:21 AM

Such as?
http://nl.youtube.com/watch?v=PYufJmltzZ8

Tell me people like this actually exist?

I haven't seen such over the top enthusiasm outside the QVC channel.

ChristineR

4th July 2007, 08:53 AM

Well, stooges are nothing new. And it amazes me how people will believe someone who says "No, we've never met before!" when it's obvious that they've not only met, but rehearsed.

As for special effects, all magicians use special effects. The real question is whether magicians should use digital effects as well as physical effects. And when I think about it, I guess the answer is "why not?"

When asked outright, Angel always admits he's an illusionist. The "real magic" stuff is part of his presentation. Most magic tricks feel like cheating when someone tells you how they're done. You have to judge a magician not only on the difficultly of his techniques, but also the success of his presentation and misdirection.

There's no doubt that Angel has succeeded marvelously in presentation and misdirection. He's got teenage girls who believe he's a Wiccan Warlock! He's got his own TV shows! He's filthy rich!

As for his tricks, well, I'm not volunteering to hang by wires from a crane over buildings. It still takes skill and practice to create his effects.

On the other hand, I find his show extremely boring. It would be better if he used professional actors as his stooges. Star Wars or Dr. Who do the effects and storytelling better, and plenty of traditional magicians do the prestidigitation lots better.

Niobe

5th July 2007, 05:10 AM

I think what most people object to is use of video editing, cuts, stooges, rehashed tricks etc. Slight of hand and other things take skill and practice and can wow anybody even though they're fully aware of the fact he's using trickery. The latter is illusion, the first is the creating an illusion of an illusion.

MelBrooksfan

5th July 2007, 09:59 AM

He's got teenage girls who believe he's a Wiccan Warlock! He's got his own TV shows! He's filthy rich!

He's also in trouble (http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/299794/criss_angels_secret_wife_sues_for_divorce.html)

Calcas

5th July 2007, 10:21 AM

His latest levitation over the Luxor hotel.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XKeSsh61XdY

I'm guessing a platform of glass/mirrors pushes him up. You can make out something at 2:09-2:10 into the vid.

The comments from his rabid fans ("It's NOT fake!!!...he REALLY levitates!!!") are especially good. LOL.

ChristineR

5th July 2007, 10:55 AM

You can see something under his shoes and his knees are braced. I see that in a lot of Angel levitations, actually. My guess is it's a clear rod, but I suppose if I knew the relative virtue of clear rods and mirror platforms off the top of my head, I'd be a famous professional magician. The "light" itself is actually an array of bulbs, so presumably they tuned them.

It's dangerous as hell, though.

Oh, and the fans are hilarious. "Anything in the light room would burn up!" Really? What do they make the light sockets out of?