Derren Brown Show

[littlehulkster]

Originally Posted by Mick Houlahan

Ehh, Derren's doing magic tricks all the way. And since Blaine and Angel have so blatantly broken the TV magicians' compact with the audience - that camera tricks are not used (and I count cuts, one-way angles, and retakes - say when a signed card is involved,) then why shouldn't Derren go ahead and use the same exploits? They've pretty much ruined magic on trelevision.

Derren is hardly blameless in this, I've seen some of his tricks on TV being appallingly edited. That one with where he plants a "suggestion" in the ad men comes to mind right away. It's a pretty simple trick, but it's edited really badly, not even attempting to remove the suspicion of cheating, which is supposed to be a big deal.

Keep in mind, too, that he was doing this while Chris Angel was still disapearing doves for his hair metal band.

[Mick Houlahan]

I wasn't very clear - I'm not holding Brown blameless at all. He's absolutely pulling the same crap. When I say "they've pretty much ruined magic on television," I'm putting Brown in the same category as Blaine and Angel.
Was just being sarcastic when I asked why Brown shouldn't follow suit.

[littlehulkster]

I really don't think this is as big of a deal as some people, though. Magicians are entertainers first, and if they have entertained their audience, they have succeeded. Those of us who know their dirty little secrets can critique their techniques until we're blue in the face, but for the layman who provides their living, entertainment is the only thing that matters.

I can't be too hard on guys like Criss Angel because of this. He might use camera tricks and stooges, but he entertains people, and at the end of the day, that is the most any of us can hope to accomplish.

[JFrankA]

Originally Posted by littlehulkster

I really don't think this is as big of a deal as some people, though. Magicians are entertainers first, and if they have entertained their audience, they have succeeded. Those of us who know their dirty little secrets can critique their techniques until we're blue in the face, but for the layman who provides their living, entertainment is the only thing that matters.

I can't be too hard on guys like Criss Angel because of this. He might use camera tricks and stooges, but he entertains people, and at the end of the day, that is the most any of us can hope to accomplish.

Hear, hear.

[AgeGap]

Originally Posted by littlehulkster

I really don't think this is as big of a deal as some people, though. Magicians are entertainers first, and if they have entertained their audience, they have succeeded. Those of us who know their dirty little secrets can critique their techniques until we're blue in the face, but for the layman who provides their living, entertainment is the only thing that matters.

Hear ye and hear him.

Originally Posted by littlehulkster

I can't be too hard on guys like Criss Angel because of this. He might use camera tricks and stooges, but he entertains people, and at the end of the day, that is the most any of us can hope to accomplish.

Meh! Once a magician starts using camera tricks and stooges the magic ends. The bond of trust with the audience is lost. Everything from that point is reasoned away with camera tricks or stooges.

[hairy potter]

I went to see Derren Brown's show "Something Wicked This Way Comes" and came away very disappointed. I had seen his TV shows which I now realised were heavily edited.

In the theatre he was unable to successfully pick out a liar from a group from the audience and had to pay her £50.00 which he had offered if he failed.

I had seen him do this on TV but in the live show he failed.

The second half of his act consisted of wlking on broken glass which I saw done more than fifty years ago.

The whole show was very disappointing.

[Chris H]

Originally Posted by hairy potter

In the theatre he was unable to successfully pick out a liar from a group from the audience and had to pay her £50.00 which he had offered if he failed.

I had seen him do this on TV but in the live show he failed.

That's what makes the show interesting. The fact that he is not always right. This is an interesting technique often used deliberately by mentalists, which I shan't discuss at length here. But the drama in Derren's act comes from the audience not knowing if what he is doing is real or fake.

Cheers,

[hairy potter]

I have always been very interested in mentalism, the best, in my opinion, being Joseph Dunninger. There are a number of extremely good mentalists in the UK who are head and shoulders above Derren Brown but are rarely seen on TV.

Some of DB's tricks are quite elementary plus the fact that most of his handpicked audience are usually students who have little experience of magic.

I have stopped watching him now after his farcical attempt to predict the lottery.

Cheers

[Lothian]

Originally Posted by hairy potter

I have always been very interested in mentalism, the best, in my opinion, being Joseph Dunninger. There are a number of extremely good mentalists in the UK who are head and shoulders above Derren Brown but are rarely seen on TV.

Name names.


Note. I am not disagreeing rather I would be interested in going to a show.

[hairy potter]

Originally Posted by Lothian

Name names.


Note. I am not disagreeing rather I would be interested in going to a show.

How many would you like?

Here are three:

Marc Spelmann, Paul Stockman, Doug Segal.

[Lothian]

Originally Posted by hairy potter

How many would you like?

Here are three:

Marc Spelmann, Paul Stockman, Doug Segal.

Thanks, I will look them up but any on tour (in the N.E.) would be good.

[commandlinegamer]

Need help: I'm trying to remember the quote someone made about magic and revealing tricks. It's something like if a magic trick is truly magical even after you know how it's done.

[The Drain]

I have been an ardent admirer of Derren Brown ever since he revealed his guaranteed way of backing the winner at the races, every time.

What I admired about that 'trick' was the way in which so many people were led along into thinking that something clever was going on. In the end it was revealed as a victory for skeptical/critical thinking over gullibility.

DB's championing of the skeptical cause is why I like him.

[Merko]

Originally Posted by littlehulkster

Derren is hardly blameless in this, I've seen some of his tricks on TV being appallingly edited. That one with where he plants a "suggestion" in the ad men comes to mind right away. It's a pretty simple trick, but it's edited really badly, not even attempting to remove the suspicion of cheating, which is supposed to be a big deal.

I think there's a distinction there though, because that editing is not really part of any "magic" effect. I mean, it's not like anyone would have been very impressed if he had really set up those posters, printed those t-shirts etc. The editing is just a cheaper way of doing something completely ordinary.

That said, I would never be more amazed by some TV trick because I trusted the magician that he or she does not use TV editing. Trust? Magician?! About their show?!!!?!!

If they have a large audience, and particularly if the audience contains some well known people who probably would not play along, that might have an effect on me. If the studio is empty, or contains a few students or maybe some celebrity type like an actor or (former) sports star who might well think it's harmless fun to play along, then I simply expect that this is what may be what is happening and I'm not that impressed if that would explain the effect.

[littlehulkster]

Well, in my mind, one of the key elements of a good trick is removing the suspicion of apparent cheating.

That trick was edited so Derren could have walked into the room and sat there while the admen drew their picture, then draw his own, stuff it into an envelope and use the cuts to make sure no one was any the wiser.

While he probably didn't do this, the editing takes away from the trick because that obvious conclusion of apparent cheating could be very easily made. A good magic trick should have people searching for wild and outlandish answers for how you did it, not really simple ones.

[Chris H]

Originally Posted by littlehulkster

A good magic trick should have people searching for wild and outlandish answers for how you did it, not really simple ones.

I respectfully disagree. A good magic trick should leave no possible explanation, and be so powerful that the audience don't even bother to look for answers.

Cheers,

Chris

[BPScooter]

I'm ready to vote for the "Crappiest Magician who Ruined Everything" award. Houdini tops my list, the scumbag. He made it look like he really did stuff. Penn and Teller completely spoiled my fun forever. Derren Brown will have to work pretty hard to overtake those guys in the category of magic crappitude in the age of TV. I must now go soak my own head and get over it.

[Garrette]

Originally Posted by Chris H

A good magic trick should leave no possible explanation, and be so powerful that the audience don't even bother to look for answers.

I must agree. I never really liked the idea that any magic trick that entertains its audience is a good one.

[arthwollipot]

Originally Posted by Garrette

I must agree. I never really liked the idea that any magic trick that entertains its audience is a good one.

Isn't entertaining an audience kinda the primary goal?

[Chris H]

Originally Posted by arthwollipot

Isn't entertaining an audience kinda the primary goal?

It depends on the audience.

[arthwollipot]

Originally Posted by Chris H

It depends on the audience.

If the audience is yourself, then the goal can be improvement of skills. But if there's an audience at all, what is the purpose of doing magic?

[Garrette]

Originally Posted by arthwollipot

Isn't entertaining an audience kinda the primary goal?

I should, I suppose, have made the sarcasm more obvious?

[arthwollipot]

Originally Posted by Garrette

I should, I suppose, have made the sarcasm more obvious?

Mmm, probably.

[Garrette]

Originally Posted by arthwollipot

If the audience is yourself, then the goal can be improvement of skills. But if there's an audience at all, what is the purpose of doing magic?

In the broad sense, and the sense to which I really adhere: it is to entertain the audience. But there are some points to consider.

1. To be pedantic, the purpose may, in fact, be to sell products, either the performer's products or a company's products. Some of the most financially successful magicians don't primarily perform for audiences in the sense you are used to but instead make very lucrative livings performing almost exclusively at trade shows. In those venues, the entertainment is secondary to succesfully pitching the trademark.

2. Even if the purpose is to entertain, that only applies externally and only because one wants to assure a next audience. There may be, in fact, magicians who perform because it pleases them (one hopes most are like this) and that entertainment of the audience is secondary. Actually, I think it is a sad fact that, in my experience, the majority of amateur performers fit in this category in a bad way. Look what I can do! as opposed to Are you having fun?

3. Again, even if entertainment is the purpose, Chris H's point is not entirely incorrect in that there are better (presentations of) effects than others. I liken it to productions on Broadway. "Seussical" is an entertaining little play, even a good one, but it's no "Phantom" or "Les Miserables" or even "Noises Off!"

[arthwollipot]

And there you have it. A good answer. Thanks, Garrette.

[BPScooter]

I wish...
I could have been around to hear Charlie Parker play 27 choruses on "how high the moon" changes, see Ben Hogan swing a golf club, or even When JFK was Shot. But I'm too young for that.

I'm also equally too young to have seen Dai Vernon, or Slydini, or Cardini.

Where are my modern icons? Tiger Woods is a good start, for the golfer, but who next?

If a DB sort of character fills the void, then at some level I so want to welcome the arrival that I may fail to check my wallet and my watch, and not "look sharp" ala Joe Jackson.

[Garrette]

I think DB does fill the void, though I'm less certain about some of his latest stuff, and if you stay in the Mentalism realm, it's easy to find a few others. Max Maven is considered top of the art (though personally-while I love his ideas and effects-I find his performance persona offputting), as is Banachek. Richard Osterlind, for my money, is as good a thinker in the field as anyone, and as good a performer, too, except in metal bending where Banachek is untouchable.

The interesting bit about those four is that they all have bodies of published work that are classics, or should be. Banacheck's first book ranks up there with Corrinda, though in a different sense; his third book received the same great reviews but is not a classic, imo. Maven wrote more than one classic. Everything Derren Brown has written has been a classic, and a first edition of his first book will fetch you more than a first edition of any of the others.

I'm on less sure footing when discussing traditional magic, but there are living legends out there whom it is still possible to see perform. Lorayne, McBride (in his younger days; I don't care for his more recent performance pieces), Paul Harris, Marty Polio (as much or more a comedian as a magician, but excellent at both). Others.

Of those, I only possess manuscripts by Lorayne and Harris, but they both produced classics. No one, and I do mean no one, writes more clearly--and yet interestingly--than Harry Lorayne when it comes to describing magic, and he always presents only the central issues. Paul Harris' three volume opus is spectacular.

Ah, well. Now I'm rambling. The point is, there are masters out there, sometimes where you don't expect them. My single favorite magical moment remains one I have described on these fora before and involves watching a countertop demonstration of Chameleon Coins by the owner of Zeezo's in Colorado Springs. It was astonishing in its brazen simplicity and devastating impact.

[Garrette]

Forgot to mention Cyril. My only knowledge of him is through Youtube, but man I would pay a lot to see him in person.

Other icons abound: Tamariz, Riggs, Maue (I'd pay a lot to see him, too). There are more.

[Senex]

I'm going to mention someone who had influenced me at a young age to study what was and what was not possible. He has had an overall beneficial affect on my life. I've seen him perform at least 7 times and never felt cheated. He is an excellent entertainer in that he gives everything he has at every performance. He also was very nice to me the couple of times I met him (I have a photo of him with his arm around me when I was 11 and he was pretty honest when I asked him questions). He was a favorite of Johnny Carson. Randi mentioned in his book about Geller that this guy wasn't someone who cheated people. He only performs for large paying audiences and never does "readings" or any stealing money woo. Half his show is a fairly typical hypnosis act yet he unfailing states there is no such thing as hypnosis and it is all suggestion. He has written a number of books (his first book which I have a signed copy is only 6 feet from where I write this) that does indeed contain misleading statements about ESP but very informative information about the nature of suggestion.

No cheating. Guess the mentalist before looking below....















The Amazing Kreskin!

Yeah, I know he has lost a step after he turned 70 and he did make me believe in woo when I was young but he made me believe I could perform woo myself and when i went to Lou Tannen's magic shop and purchased an encyclopedia of mentalism I learned how even a sharp 13 year old like myself got tricked.

The brilliance of Kreskin is he can do a show for thousands without a single stooge. He only needs his clipboard. The paper, pencils, plastic bags the audience uses can be bought by the theatre before he gets off the plane with his small suitcase.

His show is an amazing demonstration of minimalism and suggestion. No one can perform hellstronism like Kreskin. When Kreskin does his suggestion (hypnosis) part of the show he really makes it fun because of his personality. The guy is as professional as they come.

[BPScooter]

I barely remember as a little kid in the 70s seeing Kreskin on something like the Merv Griffin or Michael Douglas network talkshows. His overall look, with the big glasses as I recall, remains in my mind. Randi mentions him in the books I have, and doesn't seem to "out" him as a fraud, which seems to me high praise coming from the Amazing Randi at that time. All that makes me think you're right, Kreskin must have been pretty darn good.

[Senex]

Originally Posted by BPScooter

I barely remember as a little kid in the 70s seeing Kreskin on something like the Merv Griffin or Michael Douglas network talkshows. His overall look, with the big glasses as I recall, remains in my mind. Randi mentions him in the books I have, and doesn't seem to "out" him as a fraud, which seems to me high praise coming from the Amazing Randi at that time. All that makes me think you're right, Kreskin must have been pretty darn good.

Kreskin was a regular on the Douglas and Merv shows not because he was a cold reader but because he was menatalist -- not a woo. He did the equivalent of magic tricks. Penn Jillette has admitted to being caught up with Kreskin's ability when he was young and Penn states he has a low opinion of Kreskin because he was fooled as a youngster. I think that Penn and I have something in common -- we both knew Kreskin stated his show was plain magic and suggestion and when we researched mentalism we learned what really was possible. Kreskin did us a favor. We both wanted to be him and learned through research he was just an entertainer.

Kreskin has actually gone woo in his old age. Look back and look at Kreskin thirty five years ago to see how he was a positive in his glory days.