British stuffed animal ad mentalism?

Merko · 2nd December 2007, 12:29 PM

Recently a colleague of mine told me about a trick he'd heard about. Supposedly, some British mentalist had hired a couple of PR guys to do an ad for stuffed animals. They got something like 4 hours to come up with a sketch for an ad. Previously, the mentalist had put a sealed envelope in some safe place. When the four hours had passed, the PR guys presented a sketch of some animal arriving at the Pearly Gates, greeted by St Peter. The mentalist then had his sealed envelope opened, showing a stunningly similar sketch, featuring St Peter and the animal in roughly the same positions even.

Did anyone hear about this trick? According to my colleague, the workings of the trick was revealed later, and I'd like to confirm whether the story is true.

tkingdoll · 2nd December 2007, 12:34 PM

It was Derren Brown. The working of the trick was revealed as part of the show but, as with any magic trick, the explanation given as part of the act is not actually how it was done. Derren claims in the show that the method is a series of subconscious suggestions placed along the guys' taxi route, but this is in fact nonsense.

The actual method is quite straightforward but my lips are sealed

rebecca · 3rd December 2007, 03:15 AM

Originally Posted by Merko

Recently a colleague of mine told me about a trick he'd heard about. Supposedly, some British mentalist had hired a couple of PR guys to do an ad for stuffed animals. They got something like 4 hours to come up with a sketch for an ad. Previously, the mentalist had put a sealed envelope in some safe place. When the four hours had passed, the PR guys presented a sketch of some animal arriving at the Pearly Gates, greeted by St Peter. The mentalist then had his sealed envelope opened, showing a stunningly similar sketch, featuring St Peter and the animal in roughly the same positions even.

Did anyone hear about this trick? According to my colleague, the workings of the trick was revealed later, and I'd like to confirm whether the story is true.

Yep, Derren Brown. Here you go:

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

m_huber · 9th December 2007, 05:47 PM

Does this type of trick have a name?

Azrael 5 · 11th December 2007, 05:15 AM

Originally Posted by m_huber

Does this type of trick have a name?

Drawing duplication.

Merko · 12th December 2007, 03:21 PM

Thanks for the hints. I do wonder where St Peter entered into my colleague's mind.. :-)

pjh · 13th December 2007, 03:02 AM

It would be a wonderful trick if the 'reveal' at the end wasn't one long piece of camera trickery and editing.

If you watch the famous taxi ride carefully you can see that none of the stuff they supposedly see during the ride is shown either with the subjects in frame or there is a continuous pan from them to the 'subliminal influences'.

Derren is such a rubbish magician that he regularly stoops to camera tricks to achieve his effects - and for those who disagree - the 'reveal' at the end is part of the trick as far as the TV audience are concerned, those claiming that as long as he duplicates the drawing 'fairly' he can do whatever he wants afterwards are just just deluding themselves.

This trick purports to show Derren subconsciously influencing the ad guys to draw a picture - that's the full trick that the TV viewer sees - that trick is achieved purely using camera tricks - a dishonest edit of the taxi ride - once you allow camera tricks in TV magic the whole thing is pointless - anyone with an editing machine can be the world's greatest magician - rubbish.

Azrael 5 · 13th December 2007, 04:19 AM

Originally Posted by pjh

It would be a wonderful trick if the 'reveal' at the end wasn't one long piece of camera trickery and editing.

If you watch the famous taxi ride carefully you can see that none of the stuff they supposedly see during the ride is shown either with the subjects in frame or there is a continuous pan from them to the 'subliminal influences'.

Derren is such a rubbish magician that he regularly stoops to camera tricks to achieve his effects - and for those who disagree - the 'reveal' at the end is part of the trick as far as the TV audience are concerned, those claiming that as long as he duplicates the drawing 'fairly' he can do whatever he wants afterwards are just just deluding themselves.

This trick purports to show Derren subconsciously influencing the ad guys to draw a picture - that's the full trick that the TV viewer sees - that trick is achieved purely using camera tricks - a dishonest edit of the taxi ride - once you allow camera tricks in TV magic the whole thing is pointless - anyone with an editing machine can be the world's greatest magician - rubbish.

You are boring pjh,and Im sure revealing methods isn't allowed on here.

pjh · 13th December 2007, 04:26 AM

Originally Posted by Azrael 5

You are boring pjh,and Im sure revealing methods isn't allowed on here.

Not as boring as your Derren fanboyism, and now you're going to tell me that editing two separate films together is a top secret magician's method? Hilarious.

DJM · 13th December 2007, 08:38 AM

You can't say Derren is a rubbish magician, because he's done many great stage shows live without the use of editing. Would be more fair for you to say he's a rubbish TV magician.

But then you could say the same about Copperfield, who has done many effects with camera tricks and stooges, the same as other magicians who have had TV shows.

At least this specific effectwas made that way that the participants were not used as stooges, and there's a big chance they were fooled the same as the viewers when they got to watch the finished product on TV. Is there a camera trick involved? Yes, and I don't like it either. But at least the reactions of the ad people were real, which is part of what magic is about.

Azrael 5 · 13th December 2007, 10:03 AM

We've been through this.
Its a false explanation for the trick.It's not a trick edited to make it happen.
How Derren wants to explain how his tricks work to the viewing public is up to him.
I'd rather see a lie in the explanation than in the trick(Criss Angel Copperfield,Blaine)

AgeGap · 13th December 2007, 10:44 AM

Originally Posted by Azrael 5

Drawing duplication.

He draws a second gun and fires that one instead.

It is a matter of opinion and taste that Derron is a good magician or not. He has brought magic in the UK back into the spotlight. What he does is seen as trendy and not the usual nerdy/cheesey stuff. What he does is not magic for magicians, he has took magic to a much wider audience. This is a good thing. What he does may only be tricks but like we all know, its not the trick but it is the presentation that really counts. Derron excels at presentation.

JonWhite · 13th December 2007, 11:32 AM

And that seems to be the problem here, in understanding the difference between the actual trick and the presentation that it is packaged within.

pjh · 13th December 2007, 12:47 PM

Originally Posted by JonWhite

And that seems to be the problem here, in understanding the difference between the actual trick and the presentation that it is packaged within.

For me watching the clip the 'trick' is "Derren brings the ad guys on a taxi trip and they then draw based on how they were influenced", pure and simple.

Put another way, if Derren asked them to draw the ad and then produced a sealed envelope with the result in and left it at that it would not be the same effect, and tbh Derren probably wouldn't have a TV career.

Trying to say that the explanation is not part of the trick is a wonderful example of cognitive dissonance in Derren fans, your fanboy love for Derren is unshakeable so you make up some bull about how this dishonest technique is justified - and from 'skeptics' too!

I don't think that TV special effects or editing suite shenanigans have *any* part in a TV magic show, the camera must at all times (within reason) be a fair observer of what you would have seen with your own eyes if you had been there. The film of the men arriving by taxi is film a combination of scenes cut out of sequence and material filmed at another time cut into the journey - I still believe that as TV goes it's both rubbish and dishonest.

JonWhite · 13th December 2007, 01:45 PM

Originally Posted by pjh

For me watching the clip the 'trick' is "Derren brings the ad guys on a taxi trip and they then draw based on how they were influenced", pure and simple.

And now feel cheated because a magician lied to you within a performance? He even began the show saying something along the lines of not believing what you were about to see.

Quote:

Put another way, if Derren asked them to draw the ad and then produced a sealed envelope with the result in and left it at that it would not be the same effect, and tbh Derren probably wouldn't have a TV career.

Agreed. It is precisely his clever re-packaging and presentation of what usually amounts to old mentalism standards that makes him stand out and the highly respected performer he is.

Quote:

Trying to say that the explanation is not part of the trick is a wonderful example of cognitive dissonance in Derren fans, your fanboy love for Derren is unshakeable so you make up some bull about how this dishonest technique is justified - and from 'skeptics' too!

Much as I respect and enjoy Brown as a performer, I am no-ones fanboy.
(I am however considering becoming Eva Green's stalker.

)

Along with others, I just see things differently to you.

Within a performance a magician offers explanation porkies. It's the nature of the job. The use of a manipulated non-linear timeline was an extension of this.

Quote:

I don't think that TV special effects or editing suite shenanigans have *any* part in a TV magic show, the camera must at all times (within reason) be a fair observer of what you would have seen with your own eyes if you had been there. The film of the men arriving by taxi is film a combination of scenes cut out of sequence and material filmed at another time cut into the journey - I still believe that as TV goes it's both rubbish and dishonest.

The trick seemed to work just fine on the ad men, who were there.

Whether news or reality show, TV is hardly a fair, objective observer of, well, almost anything.

Azrael 5 · 13th December 2007, 02:08 PM

Oh poor pjh,howwibble magician tricked him.
Bad bad magician.

tkingdoll · 13th December 2007, 02:35 PM

pjh, the phoney explanation is as much misdirection for the audience as some distracting patter during a card routine in a live stage show. If you don't like the fact that magicians lie for a living, that you shouldn't believe any method they reveal because they are not in the business of revealing methods, then your argument is with the concept of magic performance and not Derren Brown.

ETA: I mean that in the context of the trick in the OP and many of Derrens others. However, he has and does reveal genuine methods too.

Azrael 5 · 13th December 2007, 02:40 PM

pjh repeat after me:

Pwned!

pjh · 14th December 2007, 09:47 AM

Originally Posted by Azrael 5

pjh repeat after me:

Pwned!

I presume you're referring to the old thread where you continued to shriek that as a "magician" the only way Seance's girl in the spirit cabinet trick could be achieved was via hypnosis or suggestion until ... we you well and truly were ... "pwned"

Quote:

Oh poor pjh,howwibble magician tricked him.
Bad bad magician.

See above answer.

Originally Posted by JonWhite

And now feel cheated because a magician lied to you within a performance? He even began the show saying something along the lines of not believing what you were about to see.

So you can read my mind can you? That's quite a claim, how about addressing what I say rather than what you think the state of my mind is?

Quote:

Whether news or reality show, TV is hardly a fair, objective observer of, well, almost anything.

I see no difference to Derren editing in a fake explanation and say Blaine editing in a fake levitation, they're both dishonest within the implied contract TV magicians have with their audience. Once you stoop to TV effects it ceases to be a demonstration of 'magic' but becomes TV drama.

I really couldn't care less how honest or dishonest other 'reality' TV shows are, for me when a magician is achieving his effects using dishonest edits he has ceased to be a magician.

What I find really hard is how much shrieking and childish behaviour one person (me) saying what I think is causing, you fanboys are too much! I can't have an opinion no?

Originally Posted by DJM

You can't say Derren is a rubbish magician, because he's done many great stage shows live without the use of editing. Would be more fair for you to say he's a rubbish TV magician.

Well that's the point, I've seen the TV version of something wicked and tbh it's quite crap - certainly nothing on his made for TV stuff, it shows how poor he is in the flesh so to speak - the show was full of filler like blockhead, walking on glass and stopping your pulse - perhaps one reasonable effect in the whole show.

Azrael 5 · 14th December 2007, 09:54 AM

Originally Posted by pjh

I presume you're referring to the old thread where you continued to shriek that as a "magician" the only way Seance's girl in the spirit cabinet trick could be achieved was via hypnosis or suggestion until ... we you well and truly were ... "pwned"

Without seeing the quote from said thread I have no idea what you are referring to.Kindly publish this information.

Southwind17 · 14th December 2007, 10:34 AM

For what it's worth, I only realized recently how much some of these so-called magicians resort to TV trickery to achieve the seemingly 'magic' effects they do. As such I agree with pjh's sentiment, and I, too, would be inclined to classify it as something other than 'magic'. There's little skill involved, and if I had access to the same resources that they do I'm pretty sure I could perpetrate the same or similar effects.

JonWhite · 14th December 2007, 10:41 AM

Originally Posted by pjh

So you can read my mind can you? That's quite a claim, how about addressing what I say rather than what you think the state of my mind is?

What claim? It It was even phrased as a question.

Nonetheless, with your constant whining about being treated dishonestly it is a fair assumption.

Your point has been addressed here several times. You just don't seem to get it.

Quote:

I see no difference to Derren editing in a fake explanation and say Blaine editing in a fake levitation, they're both dishonest within the implied contract TV magicians have with their audience. Once you stoop to TV effects it ceases to be a demonstration of 'magic' but becomes TV drama.

You see no difference, others here do.

Brown fulfilled his "contract" by performing a credible effect (a drawing dupe) and presenting it in an entertaining way.

Quote:

What I find really hard is how much shrieking and childish behaviour one person (me) saying what I think is causing, you fanboys are too much! I can't have an opinion no?

Of course you have your opinion.

But you are the one here childishly shrieking "fanboy" insults just because we happen to disagree with you.

Quote:

Well that's the point, I've seen the TV version of something wicked and tbh it's quite crap - certainly nothing on his made for TV stuff, it shows how poor he is in the flesh so to speak - the show was full of filler like blockhead, walking on glass and stopping your pulse - perhaps one reasonable effect in the whole show.

To a limited point I agree. I thought the middle "carni" section as shown somewhat weak also. Still, when I see bands play live I do not expect to be blown away by every track performed either. Overall it was still a well executed and enjoyable show.

And having seen him perform the "Seance" show live, IMO he really has got the chops in the flesh.

JonWhite · 14th December 2007, 10:50 AM

Originally Posted by Southwind17

For what it's worth, I only realized recently how much some of these so-called magicians resort to TV trickery to achieve the seemingly 'magic' effects they do. As such I agree with pjh's sentiment, and I, too, would be inclined to classify it as something other than 'magic'. There's little skill involved, and if I had access to the same resources that they do I'm pretty sure I could perpetrate the same or similar effects.

If the actual effect - a drawing duplication - was also acheived by nothing more than editing also then I'd agree with you, but it wasn't.

It was a skillful execution of a mentalism standard that fooled the ad men present. The subsequent manipulated "explanation" was simply mis-direction to add a greater layer of mystery.

Southwind17 · 14th December 2007, 11:24 AM

Originally Posted by JonWhite

To a limited point I agree. I thought the middle "carni" section as shown somewhat weak also. Still, when I see bands play live I do not expect to be blown away by every track performed either. Overall it was still a well executed and enjoyable show.

You'd be pretty miffed if it transpired the band was miming though!

JonWhite · 14th December 2007, 11:45 AM

Originally Posted by Southwind17

You'd be pretty miffed if it transpired the band was miming though!

Fortunately I'm not a fan of The Spice Girls.

I'd see it more in terms of the actual singing being just fine (OK, maybe not using the Spice Girls example here) but the mutton as lamb packaging and dance routines being choreographed in a particular way you don't like.

Southwind17 · 14th December 2007, 11:53 AM

Originally Posted by JonWhite

Fortunately I'm not a fan of The Spice Girls.

I'd see it more in terms of the actual singing being just fine (OK, maybe not using the Spice Girls example here) but the mutton as lamb packaging and dance routines being choreographed in a particular way you don't like.

Well I see it as much more than that. Miming to a recording seems like a pretty close analogy to me, i.e. false pretenses!

JonWhite · 14th December 2007, 12:05 PM

Originally Posted by Southwind17

Well I see it as much more than that. Miming to a recording seems like a pretty close analogy to me, i.e. false pretenses!

Do you see the actual core magicians trick - the drawing dupe - as false pretenses?

(yeah I know it really was, but I mean done in a way anyone could just walk off the street + edit suite and do sense)

Everything else was packaging.

When magicians/mentalists do this effect live on stage they have to wrap it up in a different way, but their wrapping is just as much a lie. As said, it's the nature of the job. This was done for TV so Brown made full use of the medium for his "explanational" wrapping. Nonetheless the core effect remains and requires magic skill to pull off either way.

tkingdoll · 14th December 2007, 12:35 PM

Originally Posted by Southwind17

Well I see it as much more than that. Miming to a recording seems like a pretty close analogy to me, i.e. false pretenses!

You know nothing about magic. I recommend you never try and get a job in television.

JonWhite · 14th December 2007, 12:43 PM

Originally Posted by tkingdoll

You know nothing about magic. I recommend you never try and get a job in television.

After 15 years in TV, I recommend that too. Regardless of knowledge of magic.

Southwind17 · 15th December 2007, 05:15 AM

Originally Posted by tkingdoll

You know nothing about magic. I recommend you never try and get a job in television.

Thanks for the cold reading; I'll keep it in mind!

HappyHarryHampton · 4th January 2008, 02:50 AM

There is an edit in the video.

Darren is holding the envelope and places it on the table.

But before that there is a shot of the envelope already on the table (before he has placed it there).

It's discussed on YouTube.

Derren's tricks are not what they seem (hey big surprise) but also they are not honest according to traditional magician ethics (don't use camera tricks).

This was presented as a continuous shot (with multiple camera angles), but it isn't. It's fishy and must bring into question the veracity of the 'ordinary' people involved in the film. Did they do retakes?

Although it has to be said.. the duplicate picture in the envelope is not exactly a new trick (is it Uri) and stooges would not necessarily be required!

The subliminal psycho babble is just window dressing.

Azrael 5 · 4th January 2008, 02:55 AM

Happy Harry can you go away now,you're spamming the forums.

HappyHarryHampton · 4th January 2008, 04:57 AM

Originally Posted by Azrael 5

Happy Harry can you go away now,you're spamming the forums.

In what way is discussing the video edit in this trick spamming? It's a fact, the trick is presented as a continuous take with multiple camera angles and 'ordinary' members of the public. The video edit suggests it's not that at all.

Does Derren cheat? (I mean cheat in the way magicians consider cheating).

Why so touchy about Derren Brown?

JonWhite · 4th January 2008, 05:03 AM

Originally Posted by HappyHarryHampton

Does Derren cheat? (I mean cheat in the way magicians consider cheating).

No.

Quote:

Why so touchy about Derren Brown?

Why so obsessed?

2nd December 2007, 12:29 PM	#1
Merko Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 1,901	British stuffed animal ad mentalism? Recently a colleague of mine told me about a trick he'd heard about. Supposedly, some British mentalist had hired a couple of PR guys to do an ad for stuffed animals. They got something like 4 hours to come up with a sketch for an ad. Previously, the mentalist had put a sealed envelope in some safe place. When the four hours had passed, the PR guys presented a sketch of some animal arriving at the Pearly Gates, greeted by St Peter. The mentalist then had his sealed envelope opened, showing a stunningly similar sketch, featuring St Peter and the animal in roughly the same positions even. Did anyone hear about this trick? According to my colleague, the workings of the trick was revealed later, and I'd like to confirm whether the story is true.
Merko Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 1,901

2nd December 2007, 12:34 PM	#2
tkingdoll AKA TEEK Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Up Myself Posts: 12,471	It was Derren Brown. The working of the trick was revealed as part of the show but, as with any magic trick, the explanation given as part of the act is not actually how it was done. Derren claims in the show that the method is a series of subconscious suggestions placed along the guys' taxi route, but this is in fact nonsense. The actual method is quite straightforward but my lips are sealed
	__________________ www.stormmovie.net Official website of Tim Minchin's Storm Movie

9th December 2007, 05:47 PM	#4
m_huber Muse Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 828	Does this type of trick have a name?
m_huber Muse Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 828

11th December 2007, 05:15 AM	#5
Azrael 5 Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Yorkshire,Uk Posts: 5,032	Originally Posted by m_huber Does this type of trick have a name? Drawing duplication.
	__________________ "I achieve these results through a mixture of magic,misdirection,suggestion and showmanship"-Derren Brown

12th December 2007, 03:21 PM	#6
Merko Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 1,901	Thanks for the hints. I do wonder where St Peter entered into my colleague's mind.. :-)
Merko Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 1,901

13th December 2007, 03:02 AM	#7
pjh Thinker Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 218	It would be a wonderful trick if the 'reveal' at the end wasn't one long piece of camera trickery and editing. If you watch the famous taxi ride carefully you can see that none of the stuff they supposedly see during the ride is shown either with the subjects in frame or there is a continuous pan from them to the 'subliminal influences'. Derren is such a rubbish magician that he regularly stoops to camera tricks to achieve his effects - and for those who disagree - the 'reveal' at the end is part of the trick as far as the TV audience are concerned, those claiming that as long as he duplicates the drawing 'fairly' he can do whatever he wants afterwards are just just deluding themselves. This trick purports to show Derren subconsciously influencing the ad guys to draw a picture - that's the full trick that the TV viewer sees - that trick is achieved purely using camera tricks - a dishonest edit of the taxi ride - once you allow camera tricks in TV magic the whole thing is pointless - anyone with an editing machine can be the world's greatest magician - rubbish.
pjh Thinker Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 218

13th December 2007, 04:19 AM	#8
Azrael 5 Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Yorkshire,Uk Posts: 5,032	Originally Posted by pjh It would be a wonderful trick if the 'reveal' at the end wasn't one long piece of camera trickery and editing. If you watch the famous taxi ride carefully you can see that none of the stuff they supposedly see during the ride is shown either with the subjects in frame or there is a continuous pan from them to the 'subliminal influences'. Derren is such a rubbish magician that he regularly stoops to camera tricks to achieve his effects - and for those who disagree - the 'reveal' at the end is part of the trick as far as the TV audience are concerned, those claiming that as long as he duplicates the drawing 'fairly' he can do whatever he wants afterwards are just just deluding themselves. This trick purports to show Derren subconsciously influencing the ad guys to draw a picture - that's the full trick that the TV viewer sees - that trick is achieved purely using camera tricks - a dishonest edit of the taxi ride - once you allow camera tricks in TV magic the whole thing is pointless - anyone with an editing machine can be the world's greatest magician - rubbish. You are boring pjh,and Im sure revealing methods isn't allowed on here.
	__________________ "I achieve these results through a mixture of magic,misdirection,suggestion and showmanship"-Derren Brown

13th December 2007, 04:26 AM	#9
pjh Thinker Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 218	Originally Posted by Azrael 5 You are boring pjh,and Im sure revealing methods isn't allowed on here. Not as boring as your Derren fanboyism, and now you're going to tell me that editing two separate films together is a top secret magician's method? Hilarious.
pjh Thinker Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 218

13th December 2007, 08:38 AM	#10
DJM Muse Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 791	You can't say Derren is a rubbish magician, because he's done many great stage shows live without the use of editing. Would be more fair for you to say he's a rubbish TV magician. But then you could say the same about Copperfield, who has done many effects with camera tricks and stooges, the same as other magicians who have had TV shows. At least this specific effectwas made that way that the participants were not used as stooges, and there's a big chance they were fooled the same as the viewers when they got to watch the finished product on TV. Is there a camera trick involved? Yes, and I don't like it either. But at least the reactions of the ad people were real, which is part of what magic is about.
DJM Muse Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 791	Last edited by DJM; 13th December 2007 at 08:39 AM.

13th December 2007, 10:03 AM	#11
Azrael 5 Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Yorkshire,Uk Posts: 5,032	We've been through this. Its a false explanation for the trick.It's not a trick edited to make it happen. How Derren wants to explain how his tricks work to the viewing public is up to him. I'd rather see a lie in the explanation than in the trick(Criss Angel Copperfield,Blaine)
	__________________ "I achieve these results through a mixture of magic,misdirection,suggestion and showmanship"-Derren Brown

13th December 2007, 10:44 AM	#12
AgeGap Master Poster Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: St.Helens, UK Posts: 2,386	Originally Posted by Azrael 5 Drawing duplication. He draws a second gun and fires that one instead. It is a matter of opinion and taste that Derron is a good magician or not. He has brought magic in the UK back into the spotlight. What he does is seen as trendy and not the usual nerdy/cheesey stuff. What he does is not magic for magicians, he has took magic to a much wider audience. This is a good thing. What he does may only be tricks but like we all know, its not the trick but it is the presentation that really counts. Derron excels at presentation.

13th December 2007, 11:32 AM	#13
JonWhite Muse Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: London Posts: 644	And that seems to be the problem here, in understanding the difference between the actual trick and the presentation that it is packaged within.
	__________________ "In cases where prior knowledge is available, the alternative to 'an open mind' is not 'a closed mind'. It is 'an informed mind'. In such contexts, any appeal to 'keep an open mind' is an appeal to prefer ignorance over knowledge" Ian Rowland Last edited by JonWhite; 13th December 2007 at 11:38 AM.

13th December 2007, 12:47 PM	#14
pjh Thinker Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 218	Originally Posted by JonWhite And that seems to be the problem here, in understanding the difference between the actual trick and the presentation that it is packaged within. For me watching the clip the 'trick' is "Derren brings the ad guys on a taxi trip and they then draw based on how they were influenced", pure and simple. Put another way, if Derren asked them to draw the ad and then produced a sealed envelope with the result in and left it at that it would not be the same effect, and tbh Derren probably wouldn't have a TV career. Trying to say that the explanation is not part of the trick is a wonderful example of cognitive dissonance in Derren fans, your fanboy love for Derren is unshakeable so you make up some bull about how this dishonest technique is justified - and from 'skeptics' too! I don't think that TV special effects or editing suite shenanigans have any part in a TV magic show, the camera must at all times (within reason) be a fair observer of what you would have seen with your own eyes if you had been there. The film of the men arriving by taxi is film a combination of scenes cut out of sequence and material filmed at another time cut into the journey - I still believe that as TV goes it's both rubbish and dishonest.
pjh Thinker Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 218	Last edited by pjh; 13th December 2007 at 12:52 PM.

13th December 2007, 01:45 PM	#15
JonWhite Muse Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: London Posts: 644	Originally Posted by pjh For me watching the clip the 'trick' is "Derren brings the ad guys on a taxi trip and they then draw based on how they were influenced", pure and simple. And now feel cheated because a magician lied to you within a performance? He even began the show saying something along the lines of not believing what you were about to see. Quote: Put another way, if Derren asked them to draw the ad and then produced a sealed envelope with the result in and left it at that it would not be the same effect, and tbh Derren probably wouldn't have a TV career. Agreed. It is precisely his clever re-packaging and presentation of what usually amounts to old mentalism standards that makes him stand out and the highly respected performer he is. Quote: Trying to say that the explanation is not part of the trick is a wonderful example of cognitive dissonance in Derren fans, your fanboy love for Derren is unshakeable so you make up some bull about how this dishonest technique is justified - and from 'skeptics' too! Much as I respect and enjoy Brown as a performer, I am no-ones fanboy. (I am however considering becoming Eva Green's stalker. ) Along with others, I just see things differently to you. Within a performance a magician offers explanation porkies. It's the nature of the job. The use of a manipulated non-linear timeline was an extension of this. Quote: I don't think that TV special effects or editing suite shenanigans have any part in a TV magic show, the camera must at all times (within reason) be a fair observer of what you would have seen with your own eyes if you had been there. The film of the men arriving by taxi is film a combination of scenes cut out of sequence and material filmed at another time cut into the journey - I still believe that as TV goes it's both rubbish and dishonest. The trick seemed to work just fine on the ad men, who were there. Whether news or reality show, TV is hardly a fair, objective observer of, well, almost anything.
	__________________ "In cases where prior knowledge is available, the alternative to 'an open mind' is not 'a closed mind'. It is 'an informed mind'. In such contexts, any appeal to 'keep an open mind' is an appeal to prefer ignorance over knowledge" Ian Rowland Last edited by JonWhite; 13th December 2007 at 02:22 PM.

13th December 2007, 02:08 PM	#16
Azrael 5 Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Yorkshire,Uk Posts: 5,032	Oh poor pjh,howwibble magician tricked him. Bad bad magician.
	__________________ "I achieve these results through a mixture of magic,misdirection,suggestion and showmanship"-Derren Brown

13th December 2007, 02:35 PM	#17
tkingdoll AKA TEEK Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Up Myself Posts: 12,471	pjh, the phoney explanation is as much misdirection for the audience as some distracting patter during a card routine in a live stage show. If you don't like the fact that magicians lie for a living, that you shouldn't believe any method they reveal because they are not in the business of revealing methods, then your argument is with the concept of magic performance and not Derren Brown. ETA: I mean that in the context of the trick in the OP and many of Derrens others. However, he has and does reveal genuine methods too.
	__________________ www.stormmovie.net Official website of Tim Minchin's Storm Movie Last edited by tkingdoll; 13th December 2007 at 02:59 PM.

13th December 2007, 02:40 PM	#18
Azrael 5 Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Yorkshire,Uk Posts: 5,032	pjh repeat after me: Pwned!
	__________________ "I achieve these results through a mixture of magic,misdirection,suggestion and showmanship"-Derren Brown

14th December 2007, 09:47 AM	#19
pjh Thinker Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 218	Originally Posted by Azrael 5 pjh repeat after me: Pwned! I presume you're referring to the old thread where you continued to shriek that as a "magician" the only way Seance's girl in the spirit cabinet trick could be achieved was via hypnosis or suggestion until ... we you well and truly were ... "pwned" Quote: Oh poor pjh,howwibble magician tricked him. Bad bad magician. See above answer. Originally Posted by JonWhite And now feel cheated because a magician lied to you within a performance? He even began the show saying something along the lines of not believing what you were about to see. So you can read my mind can you? That's quite a claim, how about addressing what I say rather than what you think the state of my mind is? Quote: Whether news or reality show, TV is hardly a fair, objective observer of, well, almost anything. I see no difference to Derren editing in a fake explanation and say Blaine editing in a fake levitation, they're both dishonest within the implied contract TV magicians have with their audience. Once you stoop to TV effects it ceases to be a demonstration of 'magic' but becomes TV drama. I really couldn't care less how honest or dishonest other 'reality' TV shows are, for me when a magician is achieving his effects using dishonest edits he has ceased to be a magician. What I find really hard is how much shrieking and childish behaviour one person (me) saying what I think is causing, you fanboys are too much! I can't have an opinion no? Originally Posted by DJM You can't say Derren is a rubbish magician, because he's done many great stage shows live without the use of editing. Would be more fair for you to say he's a rubbish TV magician. Well that's the point, I've seen the TV version of something wicked and tbh it's quite crap - certainly nothing on his made for TV stuff, it shows how poor he is in the flesh so to speak - the show was full of filler like blockhead, walking on glass and stopping your pulse - perhaps one reasonable effect in the whole show.
pjh Thinker Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 218

14th December 2007, 09:54 AM	#20
Azrael 5 Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Yorkshire,Uk Posts: 5,032	Originally Posted by pjh I presume you're referring to the old thread where you continued to shriek that as a "magician" the only way Seance's girl in the spirit cabinet trick could be achieved was via hypnosis or suggestion until ... we you well and truly were ... "pwned" Without seeing the quote from said thread I have no idea what you are referring to.Kindly publish this information.
	__________________ "I achieve these results through a mixture of magic,misdirection,suggestion and showmanship"-Derren Brown

14th December 2007, 10:34 AM	#21
Southwind17 Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Location: Location Posts: 4,462	For what it's worth, I only realized recently how much some of these so-called magicians resort to TV trickery to achieve the seemingly 'magic' effects they do. As such I agree with pjh's sentiment, and I, too, would be inclined to classify it as something other than 'magic'. There's little skill involved, and if I had access to the same resources that they do I'm pretty sure I could perpetrate the same or similar effects.
	__________________ The views expressed here do not necessarily represent the unanimous view of all parts of my mind "Always" and "never" are two words that you should always remember never to use. Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. Why is it that when I ask for a pair of hands a brain comes attached?

14th December 2007, 10:41 AM	#22
JonWhite Muse Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: London Posts: 644	Originally Posted by pjh So you can read my mind can you? That's quite a claim, how about addressing what I say rather than what you think the state of my mind is? What claim? It It was even phrased as a question. Nonetheless, with your constant whining about being treated dishonestly it is a fair assumption. Your point has been addressed here several times. You just don't seem to get it. Quote: I see no difference to Derren editing in a fake explanation and say Blaine editing in a fake levitation, they're both dishonest within the implied contract TV magicians have with their audience. Once you stoop to TV effects it ceases to be a demonstration of 'magic' but becomes TV drama. You see no difference, others here do. Brown fulfilled his "contract" by performing a credible effect (a drawing dupe) and presenting it in an entertaining way. Quote: What I find really hard is how much shrieking and childish behaviour one person (me) saying what I think is causing, you fanboys are too much! I can't have an opinion no? Of course you have your opinion. But you are the one here childishly shrieking "fanboy" insults just because we happen to disagree with you. Quote: Well that's the point, I've seen the TV version of something wicked and tbh it's quite crap - certainly nothing on his made for TV stuff, it shows how poor he is in the flesh so to speak - the show was full of filler like blockhead, walking on glass and stopping your pulse - perhaps one reasonable effect in the whole show. To a limited point I agree. I thought the middle "carni" section as shown somewhat weak also. Still, when I see bands play live I do not expect to be blown away by every track performed either. Overall it was still a well executed and enjoyable show. And having seen him perform the "Seance" show live, IMO he really has got the chops in the flesh.
	__________________ "In cases where prior knowledge is available, the alternative to 'an open mind' is not 'a closed mind'. It is 'an informed mind'. In such contexts, any appeal to 'keep an open mind' is an appeal to prefer ignorance over knowledge" Ian Rowland Last edited by JonWhite; 14th December 2007 at 10:42 AM.

14th December 2007, 10:50 AM	#23
JonWhite Muse Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: London Posts: 644	Originally Posted by Southwind17 For what it's worth, I only realized recently how much some of these so-called magicians resort to TV trickery to achieve the seemingly 'magic' effects they do. As such I agree with pjh's sentiment, and I, too, would be inclined to classify it as something other than 'magic'. There's little skill involved, and if I had access to the same resources that they do I'm pretty sure I could perpetrate the same or similar effects. If the actual effect - a drawing duplication - was also acheived by nothing more than editing also then I'd agree with you, but it wasn't. It was a skillful execution of a mentalism standard that fooled the ad men present. The subsequent manipulated "explanation" was simply mis-direction to add a greater layer of mystery.
	__________________ "In cases where prior knowledge is available, the alternative to 'an open mind' is not 'a closed mind'. It is 'an informed mind'. In such contexts, any appeal to 'keep an open mind' is an appeal to prefer ignorance over knowledge" Ian Rowland Last edited by JonWhite; 14th December 2007 at 10:51 AM.

14th December 2007, 11:24 AM	#24
Southwind17 Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Location: Location Posts: 4,462	Originally Posted by JonWhite To a limited point I agree. I thought the middle "carni" section as shown somewhat weak also. Still, when I see bands play live I do not expect to be blown away by every track performed either. Overall it was still a well executed and enjoyable show. You'd be pretty miffed if it transpired the band was miming though!
	__________________ The views expressed here do not necessarily represent the unanimous view of all parts of my mind "Always" and "never" are two words that you should always remember never to use. Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. Why is it that when I ask for a pair of hands a brain comes attached?

14th December 2007, 11:45 AM	#25
JonWhite Muse Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: London Posts: 644	Originally Posted by Southwind17 You'd be pretty miffed if it transpired the band was miming though! Fortunately I'm not a fan of The Spice Girls. I'd see it more in terms of the actual singing being just fine (OK, maybe not using the Spice Girls example here) but the mutton as lamb packaging and dance routines being choreographed in a particular way you don't like.
	__________________ "In cases where prior knowledge is available, the alternative to 'an open mind' is not 'a closed mind'. It is 'an informed mind'. In such contexts, any appeal to 'keep an open mind' is an appeal to prefer ignorance over knowledge" Ian Rowland Last edited by JonWhite; 14th December 2007 at 11:47 AM.

14th December 2007, 11:53 AM	#26
Southwind17 Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Location: Location Posts: 4,462	Originally Posted by JonWhite Fortunately I'm not a fan of The Spice Girls. I'd see it more in terms of the actual singing being just fine (OK, maybe not using the Spice Girls example here) but the mutton as lamb packaging and dance routines being choreographed in a particular way you don't like. Well I see it as much more than that. Miming to a recording seems like a pretty close analogy to me, i.e. false pretenses!
	__________________ The views expressed here do not necessarily represent the unanimous view of all parts of my mind "Always" and "never" are two words that you should always remember never to use. Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. Why is it that when I ask for a pair of hands a brain comes attached?

14th December 2007, 12:05 PM	#27
JonWhite Muse Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: London Posts: 644	Originally Posted by Southwind17 Well I see it as much more than that. Miming to a recording seems like a pretty close analogy to me, i.e. false pretenses! Do you see the actual core magicians trick - the drawing dupe - as false pretenses? (yeah I know it really was, but I mean done in a way anyone could just walk off the street + edit suite and do sense) Everything else was packaging. When magicians/mentalists do this effect live on stage they have to wrap it up in a different way, but their wrapping is just as much a lie. As said, it's the nature of the job. This was done for TV so Brown made full use of the medium for his "explanational" wrapping. Nonetheless the core effect remains and requires magic skill to pull off either way.
	__________________ "In cases where prior knowledge is available, the alternative to 'an open mind' is not 'a closed mind'. It is 'an informed mind'. In such contexts, any appeal to 'keep an open mind' is an appeal to prefer ignorance over knowledge" Ian Rowland Last edited by JonWhite; 14th December 2007 at 12:31 PM.

14th December 2007, 12:35 PM	#28
tkingdoll AKA TEEK Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Up Myself Posts: 12,471	Originally Posted by Southwind17 Well I see it as much more than that. Miming to a recording seems like a pretty close analogy to me, i.e. false pretenses! You know nothing about magic. I recommend you never try and get a job in television.
	__________________ www.stormmovie.net Official website of Tim Minchin's Storm Movie Last edited by tkingdoll; 14th December 2007 at 12:36 PM.

14th December 2007, 12:43 PM	#29
JonWhite Muse Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: London Posts: 644	Originally Posted by tkingdoll You know nothing about magic. I recommend you never try and get a job in television. After 15 years in TV, I recommend that too. Regardless of knowledge of magic.
	__________________ "In cases where prior knowledge is available, the alternative to 'an open mind' is not 'a closed mind'. It is 'an informed mind'. In such contexts, any appeal to 'keep an open mind' is an appeal to prefer ignorance over knowledge" Ian Rowland

15th December 2007, 05:15 AM	#30
Southwind17 Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Location: Location Posts: 4,462	Originally Posted by tkingdoll You know nothing about magic. I recommend you never try and get a job in television. Thanks for the cold reading; I'll keep it in mind!
	__________________ The views expressed here do not necessarily represent the unanimous view of all parts of my mind "Always" and "never" are two words that you should always remember never to use. Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. Why is it that when I ask for a pair of hands a brain comes attached?

4th January 2008, 02:50 AM	#31
HappyHarryHampton Scholar Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 83	There is an edit in the video. Darren is holding the envelope and places it on the table. But before that there is a shot of the envelope already on the table (before he has placed it there). It's discussed on YouTube. Derren's tricks are not what they seem (hey big surprise) but also they are not honest according to traditional magician ethics (don't use camera tricks). This was presented as a continuous shot (with multiple camera angles), but it isn't. It's fishy and must bring into question the veracity of the 'ordinary' people involved in the film. Did they do retakes? Although it has to be said.. the duplicate picture in the envelope is not exactly a new trick (is it Uri) and stooges would not necessarily be required! The subliminal psycho babble is just window dressing.
HappyHarryHampton Scholar Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 83

4th January 2008, 02:55 AM	#32
Azrael 5 Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Yorkshire,Uk Posts: 5,032	Happy Harry can you go away now,you're spamming the forums.
	__________________ "I achieve these results through a mixture of magic,misdirection,suggestion and showmanship"-Derren Brown

4th January 2008, 04:57 AM	#33
HappyHarryHampton Scholar Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 83	Originally Posted by Azrael 5 Happy Harry can you go away now,you're spamming the forums. In what way is discussing the video edit in this trick spamming? It's a fact, the trick is presented as a continuous take with multiple camera angles and 'ordinary' members of the public. The video edit suggests it's not that at all. Does Derren cheat? (I mean cheat in the way magicians consider cheating). Why so touchy about Derren Brown?
HappyHarryHampton Scholar Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 83

4th January 2008, 05:03 AM	#34
JonWhite Muse Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: London Posts: 644	Originally Posted by HappyHarryHampton Does Derren cheat? (I mean cheat in the way magicians consider cheating). No. Quote: Why so touchy about Derren Brown? Why so obsessed?
	__________________ "In cases where prior knowledge is available, the alternative to 'an open mind' is not 'a closed mind'. It is 'an informed mind'. In such contexts, any appeal to 'keep an open mind' is an appeal to prefer ignorance over knowledge" Ian Rowland