(Close Window)
Topic: Hans Klok's Osmosis
Message: Posted by: j.i.s. (Dec 9, 2007 03:56PM)
We saw Lance Burton osmosis and was amazing ...same about Rick Thomas version and now is time for Hans Klok osmosis...Dear fellows I am speakless....for this kind of moment we live ...remember for this kind of moments we fall in love about magic art...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-cnrM5s7WA

Thank you
Jis
Message: Posted by: Sam Pearce (Dec 9, 2007 04:09PM)
Personally, I disagree...

The near four minutes of dancing at the start of Hans' routine is unnecessary, and I found it quite boring and skipped through most of it.

Out of the three you mentioned, IMHO Lance's is by far the best as it gets to the point right away and is far more magical.

Just my opinion.
Message: Posted by: DanielSteep (Dec 9, 2007 04:33PM)
Have to agree with same... Lance all the way..
In both Ricks and Hans' I skipped through the dancing, as it was getting boring.

Daniel
Message: Posted by: Matthew W (Dec 9, 2007 04:49PM)
I enjoyed Lances, but the vanish in Ricks is so much more magical to me.

-Matt
Message: Posted by: magic4u02 (Dec 9, 2007 05:07PM)
I agree with Matt in the fact that I like the vabish better in Rick's version. If I recall. In Ricks it appears that the person is actually emergeing or coming through his body.

However, I have to disagree that the dancing and music in the beginning is unnecessary. I actually enjoyed it because it established the mood and presence of the illusion before the effect was even done.

To me magic does not always have to be all about the illusion itself. In this case the dancing and the music were an intrical part of the entire entertaining experience he is trying to create. There is a bit of storytelling happening through the dance and music that leads up to the vanish.

Kyle
Message: Posted by: ClintonMagus (Dec 9, 2007 08:09PM)
Maybe it's just me, but I'm just about tired of all the slutty, lesbo dancing that dtracts from the magic and turns a 15-minute magic performance into a 90-minute "spectacle".
Message: Posted by: LeeAlex2002 (Dec 10, 2007 05:45AM)
Lance Burton certainly presents the most motivated version out of all three.

The leg on the Rick Thomas version for some reason always brings a grin to my face - although it is not, it just looks fake!! :))
Message: Posted by: The Mirror Images (Dec 10, 2007 07:29AM)
I am sure that Lance has the best presentation. But I also feel this is an artist presentation. I feel that we all forget that not only magic shows consist of magic but also entertainment. Thus I feel that Hans presentation was very entertaining and that an audience would be entertained too. Remember if you just want to see the min of magic then it would be a boring show. Add entertainment value to the show and you have all the element that makes people come and see the show. I think we all forget that we as magicians have to also entertain our audience. Each magician has there own take on it.

I thought the vanish was pretty cool.

Best
Message: Posted by: magic4u02 (Dec 10, 2007 11:12AM)
Exactly and nicely stated. That is my point here. Often times we as magicians fall in love with ourselves. This simply means that we fall in love with the trick and the illusion we are presenting. Nothign wrong with enjoying what you do, but the fear is forgetting your audience. It is the audience that all of the magic should be aimed at. We want to create a sense of magic but we also want to entertain them through the magic that is taking place on stage. This does not always have to be just the illusion itself. I like the fact that the illusion has more to it then just the illusion or trick. There is dance and music that creates mood and drama before the illusion takes place. To me it is more entertaining to an audience this way.

Kyle
Message: Posted by: ClintonMagus (Dec 10, 2007 11:37AM)
Don't get me wrong... I enjoy a certain amount of extraneous "entertainment" or setup to the illusions. I'm just tired of sleazy, quasi-strip show dancing of the type that would embarrass me should my family be watching. Illusionists in years past could achieve the same "entertainment" value without resorting to the bumping and grinding that make folks uncomfortable. I just know that I wouldn't want my daughters up there "performing" like that.
Message: Posted by: Keith Jozsef (Dec 10, 2007 12:51PM)
I can't understand what would make you uncomfortable or embarrassed about that choreography. The "slutty, lesbo-dancing" remark is a little bit over-the-top. I watched 3 times looking for something overly-gratuitous...but couldn't find anything worth mentioning. I've seen far worse, as I'm sure many have. People often forget--not everything is designed for a "family-audience"--nor should it be. The mere fact that Hans' show aired on Fox Family Channel would suggest that few, if any, thought the piece questionable enough to edit out.

Keith Jozsef
Message: Posted by: magic4u02 (Dec 10, 2007 01:00PM)
I can totally understand and respect that AMOSMC. We have to set the entertainment value to what our target market is and who we are performing for that make up our audiences. That will dictate a lot of what we do and how we do it.

Hans Klok performs mainly for vegas style crowds a lot and that dictates a lot of his style and the way he performs the routines for the illusions. I also was not overly offended by what I saw as well. I have seen far far worse in my opinion. I thought the dancing was pretty well done and tasteful.

Kyle
Message: Posted by: JoyJoy (Dec 10, 2007 02:17PM)
[quote]
On 2007-12-10 14:00, magic4u02 wrote:
I can totally understand and respect that AMOSMC. We have to set the entertainment value to what our target market is and who we are performing for that make up our audiences. That will dictate a lot of what we do and how we do it. [/quote]
Thatīs a different topic - so only a short input: I understand me as an artist, so my main target is to express! To entertain is (not irrelevant but) a minor point.
If somebody only is an entertainer - okay... but thatīs not enough for me.

Lance did the best version - in my opinion - also because of the nice reapearrance. Rick has a plus in the "story/motivation" for the illusion.
Message: Posted by: Oliver - Twist (Dec 10, 2007 03:39PM)
Nice version. In my opinion the music fits quit well the illusion.
What would be interesting to know now is, how did he "introduced" the illusion. Unfortunatle we often only see an illusion presentations recorded for the internet when the music starts, but for me an illusion starts even before.
So I do agree with Kyle.

Oliver.
Message: Posted by: briansmagic (Dec 10, 2007 03:52PM)
I have to agree with Keith. I think calling it slutty, lesbo, and sleazy is a pretty ignorant remark. I personally enjoyed the presentation. That aside, I think I wouldn't have had a problem w/ the dancing even if I didn't enjoy it. I can understand that it may not be prime family entertainment, but in reality it isn't that far off. I agree that not everything we do needs to be family oriented. Just my thoughts.
Message: Posted by: LeeAlex2002 (Dec 10, 2007 05:32PM)
I have nothing against the so-called sleaze (which I do not find sleazy in the slightest!), my point however was that Lance performed the illusion in reverse, thus finding a motivation for the cape (which is an integral part of the illusion), whereas the other two presented themselves and then donned the cape, which in my view was not motivated.
Message: Posted by: Keith Jozsef (Dec 10, 2007 06:45PM)
Unless you drape this piece with a matador theme, it's certainly going to be difficult to motivate putting on the cape...
But then again, why do we pick up and have to use a cloth during Metamorphosis, why do magicians don a robe before levitating between 2 poles?
At least with a cape, it belongs to that stereotypical image of a magician, which helps it go unquestioned by the audience.

Keith Jozsef
Message: Posted by: asianmagic (Dec 10, 2007 07:34PM)
The Hans Klok routine seems to me that it would be a to the lay spectator?? When I saw Rick Thomas perform his show in Las Vegas, it did not appear that his version was all that obvious.
Message: Posted by: magicofCurtis (Dec 10, 2007 08:01PM)
The vanish was awesome...... With the cape draping around the chick it reminded me of a vampire and it looked like REAL MAGIC!
Message: Posted by: ClintonMagus (Dec 10, 2007 08:54PM)
If you consider me ignorant because I have a different set of values, then so be it. I won't disagree with your opinion.

Since I have a different set of values and am obviously in the minority when it comes to this sort of thing, I will bow out of the thread.
Message: Posted by: LeeAlex2002 (Dec 11, 2007 03:46AM)
[quote]
On 2007-12-10 19:45, Keith Jozsef wrote:
Unless you drape this piece with a matador theme, it's certainly going to be difficult to motivate putting on the cape...
But then again, why do we pick up and have to use a cloth during Metamorphosis, why do magicians don a robe before levitating between 2 poles?
At least with a cape, it belongs to that stereotypical image of a magician, which helps it go unquestioned by the audience.

Keith Jozsef
[/quote]

Keith, I think what is "wrong" is the timing of when the cape is donned, not the fact that a cape is used for covering. The cape needs to be motivated, or the cape needs to be used as a purely coincidental part of the dress (ie. it may be worn from the beginning of the illusion).

In both Hans and Rick Tomas' versions I feel the cape is used as neither.
In Lance's version the girl is seen from the outset as a character, whose costume is complete with the cape.

If the cape is to be draped after the illusion has been set up, then there may be a change in character. Maybe the magician steals the cape from the girl assistant before she is to disappear.

I feel the cape should be emphasised, or played down, but not just "I need to put on a cape in order for this illusion to work"!

I hope that explains a little bit more of what I am trying to get at!
Message: Posted by: Keith Jozsef (Dec 11, 2007 08:18AM)
LeeAlex2002--

I agree with your statements. In fact, after reading Curtis' suggestion about the vampire image, I think there might be several ways to go with this one. The only reason I think the cape was not on from the beginning, with regard to Rick and Hans, is that their movements/dance steps would have been much more limited.

Keith Jozsef
Message: Posted by: magic4u02 (Dec 11, 2007 10:29AM)
Amosmc: I do not think you have to bow out of the discussion at all. We all can have a difference of opinion and I for one highly respect it. We can all agree to disagree and still learn in the process. That is what makes this a beautiful place.

I would have to agree though with the use of the cape and coming up with a better jsutification for it. I agree that perhaps it is not worn at the start because of the dance moves used my Hans. However, I think it can still be used and presented in a different light.

As Lee suggested, perhaps if hans does not want to wear it at the start, then maybe one of the dancers comes on with it and it is a part of her character. The shedding of the robe from her sybolizes maybe vulnerability. Another possibility is to ave it more ritualistic in feel and approach. She is brought on wearing the robe as a symbol of importance. It is removed from her later in the illusion.

Both of these are not fleshed out in the least, but I am trying to show that there can be a subtle way of making more sense of the robe besides just placing it on before the illusion is performed. Make it a part of the routine and storyline of the illusion.

Kyle
Message: Posted by: magicpatrick (Dec 16, 2007 01:02PM)
Normaly, Hans Kloks ilusions are paced way faster. Didn't saw Lance version.
Message: Posted by: Lusion (Dec 23, 2007 12:50PM)
Personally I think this illusion looks best when done without the cape except in Lances Version.
Message: Posted by: Swann101 (Dec 24, 2007 01:35AM)
The osmosis illusion have always been "ok" to me but never great! I know a lot will disagree. It is just not spectalucar enough considering its size and price. Just my opinion. But I would choose Lances version if I had to pick one!
Message: Posted by: j.i.s. (Dec 24, 2007 01:40AM)
But what price it has his illusion?
Message: Posted by: j.i.s. (Dec 24, 2007 01:41AM)
This illusion not his illusion. sorry