(Close Window)
Topic: Copperfield should come and save Cirque's BELIEVE...
Message: Posted by: Pakar Ilusi (May 9, 2009 12:40AM)
He won't do it, imho...

But he could...

I think he should.

Be good to show the World some real Live Magic.

:online:
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (May 9, 2009 02:43AM)
And why exactly "should" he?
Message: Posted by: Pakar Ilusi (May 9, 2009 09:27PM)
'Cause Angel is giving all of us Magicians a bad rep...

It would actually be good for Copperfield to be seen to do this, imo...

Angel is like that brat younger brother who thinks he "knows everything" but now that BELIEVE has bombed, Copperfield should come and "have a talk" kinda thingy with him...

Not that Angel would ever ever consent to that, not publicly at least...

Copperfield probably is the only one in a position to even have the "standing" to do this... Again, imo...

That's why I think Copperfield "should" do this...

Imho...

:online:
Message: Posted by: mantooth (May 9, 2009 11:28PM)
It would in no way help Copperfield to do this. If Believe goes down, David sells more tickets to his Vegas show... Copperfield makes like 57 million a year now... Angel got 100 million for 10 years... That'd be a big pay cut.

The only way DC could help it would be if it was done his way. Cirque would never let that happen.

Cirque + Magic isn't a good combo. If you're expecting to see a Cirque show, you're disappointed, and if you're expecting to see a magic show, you're disappointed. You can't have both. One has to take a back seat.

Now add Angel and his stupidity and ego, and it's a disaster.

For DC it's a no win no matter how you look at it. For it to be good, it'd have to be a David Copperfield show. If that's the case, it wouldn't be the Cirque show Believe anymore.

It's doomed no matter how you cut it.

But for the record, DC kicks Angels ass ANY day of the week.
Message: Posted by: Slim King (May 9, 2009 11:39PM)
David Copperfield is laughing all the way to the bank. :)

He's NOT HELPING!
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (May 10, 2009 08:22AM)
Why would he? It is delusional to think he would want too.

It is also delusional to say Criss is "bad for magic". His show is not great, he does not seem to have been the person I would put in the forefront, but it is not good or bad for magic.

What IS bad for magic is the LEGIONS of guys out there DOING BAD MAGIC. Guys who do tricks so badly they expose them simply by sucking. To dwell on Criss and say he is "bad for magic" is delusionl. Let it go. One guy doing one bad show is not going to affect magic in the grand scheme of things. He will succede or he will fail and magic,a nd life will move on.
Message: Posted by: Pakar Ilusi (May 10, 2009 10:32PM)
Danny, Life will move on regardless of anything ANY Magician does. It is never THAT important.

And I did state that I don't think either Copperfield or Angel would do this.

I just think he, Copperfield, SHOULD. If you and he and Angel don't, fine.

And I am a little bit delusional. :)
Message: Posted by: Chris H (May 11, 2009 06:39AM)
[quote]
On 2009-05-09 01:40, Pakar Ilusi wrote:
He won't do it, imho...

But he could...

I think he should.

Be good to show the World some real Live Magic.

:online:
[/quote]

If he does, can we just make sure it's [i]after[/i] his Australian tour? ;)

Cheers,

Chris
Message: Posted by: critter (May 13, 2009 08:35AM)
Hm.
Somehow, I believe that these sorts of antics do a lot more harm to the integrity of magic than an occassional flop:
http://www.thecellfreak.com/blog/listen-to-rapist-david-copperfields-creepy-voicemail
http://www.theinsider.com/news/430593_David_Copperfield_allegedly_tried_to_bribe_victim
Message: Posted by: WRandall (May 13, 2009 02:19PM)
[quote]
On 2009-05-13 09:35, critter wrote:
Hm.
Somehow, I believe that these sorts of antics do a lot more harm to the integrity of magic than an occassional flop:
[/quote]

Umm, that has nothing to do with the "integrity of magic". And so nice of you to post a link that calls DC a rapist, when the case never even made it to court.

Will
Message: Posted by: critter (May 14, 2009 06:15PM)
I don't know if he did the act in question, but I do know what was on those recordings. Still creepy.


But, let's consider what we know DC is guilty of. He has the largest collection of magic artifacts in the world, and the general public is forbidden to see it. He spoke many times of opening a public museum, but he never has. Instead of preserving magic history for the world, he hordes it for himself and his invited friends. By refusing to allow the public access to such a museum, he is hurting magic, in my opinion.

You don't have to like Criss Angel, I don't have to like David Copperfield, that's what makes America great.


[quote]
On 2009-05-13 15:19, WRandall wrote:
[quote]
On 2009-05-13 09:35, critter wrote:
Hm.
Somehow, I believe that these sorts of antics do a lot more harm to the integrity of magic than an occassional flop:
[/quote]

Umm, that has nothing to do with the "integrity of magic". And so nice of you to post a link that calls DC a rapist, when the case never even made it to court.

Will
[/quote]
Message: Posted by: Domino Magic (May 14, 2009 07:19PM)
So Critter, what it basically comes down to for you is you want access to Copperfield's museum and you can't get in. It's a private collection and he's free to do with it as he wants. To quote a recent post here on The Café - "That's what makes America great."
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (May 14, 2009 08:07PM)
Critter, many people have many great artifacts that they never show in public. Do you hate them as well or just selfishly hate those who horde what you want to see?

Know what would really show him? You should go amass tons of money, and buy the artifacts, and then show them to the public.
Message: Posted by: critter (May 14, 2009 08:32PM)
Incorrect. What it comes down to is that the collection could be a means to educate the general public on the illustrious history of magic.
I could easily write a letter asking for an invite, but it's not about me not seeing the collection, it's about missing an opportunity to educate the masses.
A public museum with the right publicity could only help magic.
Indiana Jones villian: "It belongs to me!"
Indiana Jones: "It belongs in a museum!"
Don't disrespect Dr. Jones.



[quote]
On 2009-05-14 20:19, Domino Magic wrote:
So Critter, what it basically comes down to for you is you want access to Copperfield's museum and you can't get in. It's a private collection and he's free to do with it as he wants. To quote a recent post here on The Café - "That's what makes America great."
[/quote]
Message: Posted by: critter (May 14, 2009 08:41PM)
Boy, we don't like it when someone talks bad about a popular magician, do we?
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (May 14, 2009 08:41PM)
Do you think the public has any real interest in such a history? Hardly.
Message: Posted by: critter (May 14, 2009 08:45PM)
But that's just the point. If you put it out there they will eat it up.
They are cattle. People payed to go to "Bodies" in Vegas when they could have audited an A&P course at any University and seen the same thing.
I think DC recognized the potential when he announced that he would make the museum, 20 years ago. He just didn't follow through.

Posted: May 14, 2009 9:46pm
As for the quip about me buying his collection and opening a museum, if I could then I certainly would.
It would be like the EMP in Seattle.
Museums are important.

Anyway. I've said all I had to say. Some might understand how I feel, some might not. Just putting it out there.
Message: Posted by: Domino Magic (May 14, 2009 09:17PM)
[quote]
On 2009-05-14 21:45, critter wrote:
I think DC recognized the potential when he announced that he would make the museum, 20 years ago. He just didn't follow through.
[/quote]

David has a lot of projects going on at the same time and there still may be plans to open to the public. Just because it's not happening in your time line doesn't mean it's not going to happen. 20 years ago he may have announced a museum (I don't remember the exact date) BUT he didn't even own the building that it's currently in 20 years ago.

[quote]Boy, we don't like it when someone talks bad about a popular magician, do we?[/quote]

Some of us, who actually know David (I've known him for almost 30 years - almost before you were born)tend to get defensive when someone like you brings up a past allegation that has nothing to do with the topic at hand. Obviously YOU DO have something against David.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (May 14, 2009 09:28PM)
I will say this about David, he would never say that "people are cattle". He has too much respect for his fans.

The stuff is HIS. HE gets to decide what is done with it. Why should you be able to tell him what to do with it? For now we still live in America.
Message: Posted by: Domino Magic (May 14, 2009 09:54PM)
Back to the topic at hand:

[quote]
On 2009-05-09 01:40, Pakar Ilusi wrote:

Be good to show the World some real Live Magic.

[/quote]

The world can see some real live magic - they go to see David's live show. He spends a lot more time in Vegas now than he previously has and has been previously posted, it's not in his best interest to team up with another show, when his show does well at the box office and stands strong on its own.

When Roy was mauled several years ago, there was "talk" that they were trying to get David into the Mirage. Obviously that didn't happen and something like that will never happen. At this point in his career, David is only going to do projects that interest him artistically.

I know for years David didn't want to be a "Vegas act" - meaning a show that is continually running in Vegas. While he has respect for guys like S&R who did make Vegas their career, it's not the direction he wanted to go.
Message: Posted by: critter (May 14, 2009 11:32PM)
And people who know Criss Angel have attempted to defend him on here as well. When I said "Boy, we don't like it when someone talks bad about a popular magician, do we?" I was pointing out the hypocracy of smack talking Criss Angel and then getting defensive when someone does exactly the same thing to THEIR favorite magician.
Incidentally, I never said I believed he did what he was accused of, just that what was on the tape in that link was creepy. It creates a bad image.
I also don't have to like every decision that a celebrity makes just because they are a celebrity. I still think Metallica are fantastic musicians even if I've disgreed with pretty much all of their personal decisions.
Likewise, I think that Copperfield did some cool stuff in the 80's. He was the first magician I ever saw live. I just disagree with some things he's done.
It's his right to make the decisions he does, and it's my right to disagree.
There's no use getting defensive. I have my opinion and you have yours. It's unlikely that either of us will convince the other one of anything else and losing your temper is just a waste of energy and bad for your health.





[quote]
On 2009-05-14 22:17, Domino Magic wrote:
[quote]
On 2009-05-14 21:45, critter wrote:
I think DC recognized the potential when he announced that he would make the museum, 20 years ago. He just didn't follow through.
[/quote]

David has a lot of projects going on at the same time and there still may be plans to open to the public. Just because it's not happening in your time line doesn't mean it's not going to happen. 20 years ago he may have announced a museum (I don't remember the exact date) BUT he didn't even own the building that it's currently in 20 years ago.

[quote]Boy, we don't like it when someone talks bad about a popular magician, do we?[/quote]

Some of us, who actually know David (I've known him for almost 30 years - almost before you were born)tend to get defensive when someone like you brings up a past allegation that has nothing to do with the topic at hand. Obviously YOU DO have something against David.
[/quote]
Message: Posted by: Douglas Lippert (May 15, 2009 01:04AM)
[quote]
On 2009-05-14 20:19, Domino Magic wrote:
So Critter, what it basically comes down to for you is you want access to Copperfield's museum and you can't get in. It's a private collection and he's free to do with it as he wants. To quote a recent post here on The Café - "That's what makes America great."
[/quote]

Hahaha. Thank you so much for the good laugh.
Message: Posted by: Domino Magic (May 15, 2009 07:33AM)
[quote]
On 2009-05-14 21:46, critter wrote:
Anyway. I've said all I had to say.
[/quote]

So I guess that statement was more of a rumor.

[quote]
On 2009-05-15 00:32, critter wrote:
And people who know Criss Angel have attempted to defend him on here as well. When I said "Boy, we don't like it when someone talks bad about a popular magician, do we?" I was pointing out the hypocracy of smack talking Criss Angel and then getting defensive when someone does exactly the same thing to THEIR favorite magician.
Incidentally, I never said I believed he did what he was accused of, just that what was on the tape in that link was creepy. It creates a bad image.
[/quote]

First of all, I never said anything about Criss Angel, so I don't know why you are ONCE AGAIN taking this thread off topic (which I tried to put back on topic). You did however say things about Copperfield which had nothing to do with the topic at hand.

[quote]
On 2009-05-15 00:32, critter wrote:

There's no use getting defensive. I have my opinion and you have yours. It's unlikely that either of us will convince the other one of anything else and losing your temper is just a waste of energy and bad for your health.
[/quote]

You seem to want to play dirty regarding Copperfield - you bring up a false allegation that has nothing to do with the topic. Why is that? It doesn't hurt magic. If a popular actor has a similar allegation, does it hurt acting? How about music? No it doesn't - it just hurts that person.

Here is one of the biggest differences between you and me. I've known Copperfield for many years, you don't know Criss Angel (I figured if you did know him there would be a pic of you and Criss instead of Teller), so when you put out posts like you did above, that adds nothing to the topic, yeah, I'll get a little defensive because you're talking about someone I know. Lose my temper? No, you're not worth it.

Now why don't you find something constructive to add to this topic and if you can't, then take your own advice move on.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (May 15, 2009 07:44AM)
[quote]
On 2009-05-15 00:49, critter wrote:
And yet you think you have the right to tell me what to think. Interesting.

[quote]
On 2009-05-14 22:28, Dannydoyle wrote:
The stuff is HIS. HE gets to decide what is done with it. Why should you be able to tell him what to do with it? For now we still live in America.
[/quote]
[/quote]

No I am simply telling you that what you think is not relevant. I am telling you that no matter WHAT you think, Copperfield does what he does and has every right to.
Message: Posted by: Domino Magic (May 15, 2009 09:59AM)
Another attempt to get this thread back on topic:

[quote]
On 2009-05-10 00:28, mantooth wrote:

Cirque + Magic isn't a good combo. If you're expecting to see a Cirque show, you're disappointed, and if you're expecting to see a magic show, you're disappointed. You can't have both. One has to take a back seat.
[/quote]

I think there is a possibility for Cirque & magic to work, however it wouldn't be with a well known illusionist. Actually when I first heard that Criss was teaming up with Cirque, I thought it was a great idea. While I'm no fan of his TV show, I have seen him perform illusions from his live show and he had some excellent presentations. It was surreal, much like Cirque and the two would seem to compliment each other. Obviously that has been proven wrong.

What Believe is today vs what it originally started out to be are different shows. If Cirque stripped out all the Angel influence and started all over, with a more cooperative performer OR no specific illusionist - just one of their performers playing the part of an illusionist, meaning their would be a magical character in the show, then it may be a more interesting show.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (May 15, 2009 10:30AM)
In Branson here the Acrobats of China have a show. It is fantastic, and sort of Cirque' style with Chinese flair. A fantastic show.

They have a magician at times, and she is fantastic as well. The show is not built around her, but rather she is a part of the show like the plate spinners, carpet twirlers, and jar juggler. This formula works spectacularly.
Message: Posted by: critter (May 15, 2009 04:04PM)
The entire premise of this thread is based on an assumption that Criss Angel is the reason that Believe is not good. Criss Angel, who had a successful broadway show.
The real fact is that Criss Angel is good, Cirque is good, they just don't mix.
Saying you want to replace CA in this show puts the blame on him.
You started off with unfair judgement about Criss Angel, so I showed you how it feels when someone does it to your guy.
Nothing constructive can come from this topic. The object lesson from the show is that magic and French acrobats just didn't mesh in this format.
You can't just replace Criss Angel and think that will fix the show.
The show doesn't appeal to the general public. I doubt there is any fixing it.
Going "Haha, Criss Angel did a bad show" certainly isn't constructive.
Message: Posted by: Ray Pierce (May 15, 2009 06:31PM)
[quote]
On 2009-05-15 17:04, critter wrote:
Criss Angel, who had a successful broadway show.
[/quote]

I think that has been debated a little bit and is far from a universally accepted fact. He did a small show in the basement of the WWE building in NYC that was four walled with his parents money. It might have been on the street of "Broadway" but that doesn't make it a "Broadway Show". I could do Cups and balls in Times Square but I wouldn't call it a Broadway Show as it wasn't in a legit house in the theater district.

Was it Successful? That depends on your standard. Hopefully they broke even and his parents weren't out anything in the end. I'm not sure if it made money although I'm sure that wasn't his goal. It did increase awareness of his identity so from a PR standpoint I'm sure he billed it as "successful".

That's like his "Madison Square Garden" performance which was a small show he did as people were leaving a huge Halloween event at the Garden.

Criss has done a lot of work and racked up some impressive stats, I just think we should be realistic about past credits.
Message: Posted by: Domino Magic (May 15, 2009 10:31PM)
[quote]
On 2009-05-15 17:04, critter wrote:
The entire premise of this thread is based on an assumption that Criss Angel is the reason that Believe is not good.

Saying you want to replace CA in this show puts the blame on him.

You started off with unfair judgement about Criss Angel, so I showed you how it feels when someone does it to your guy.

Nothing constructive can come from this topic. The object lesson from the show is that magic and French acrobats just didn't mesh in this format.

You can't just replace Criss Angel and think that will fix the show.
The show doesn't appeal to the general public. I doubt there is any fixing it.
Going "Haha, Criss Angel did a bad show" certainly isn't constructive.
[/quote]

Actually you're making incorrect assumptions. I know people that were involved in the production of the show and the show that is currently running is not the show that was originally planned. There were numbers that were changed & dropped because of problems with...wait for it...Criss.

So Critter, I am not making assumptions.

So why all the hate towards Criss? Well he really set himself up for it. When you portray yourself one way on TV and your fans expect to see that in person and all they get is a sub-par magic act, he's going to get some heat. In press conferences before the show opened, he promoted this show as something that was going to change magic. He couldn't live up to the hype - not only the press conference hype, but the hype from his TV show and the expectation he set for his audience.

So I go back to what I previously posted in that I think that a Cirque show with a magic theme is VERY workable, BUT without Criss because take him out of the equation and Cirque can do what they know how to do - produce successful shows. With an unknown magician or just a Cirque performer portraying a magical character, the audience has no expectation of walking on water or levitating between buildings.

So let's run with one more assumption. Cirque shows don't fail. They don't get bad reviews. They have taken over Vegas and have successful companies around the world and on tour. They have a successful formula. The one show that is getting bad reviews and is failing financially is Believe. So one has to assume that it's because of Criss Angel - who has little to no experience producing a live show - especially a show of this magnitude. He wouldn't listen to the experts, didn't come prepared and consistently showed up late for rehearsals. On second thought, we don't have to assume anything. The answer is obvious.

Oh, by the way - not all of the acrobats are French and David Copperfield DID have a successful Broadway show. I'm just sayin'.
Message: Posted by: Ryan_B_Magic (May 16, 2009 02:14AM)
Hey what do you guys think makes a good magician? Criss Angel is over rated but how his he bad for magic? I think he is a lot better than a lot of other magicians out there. What if there was a new magicain that had a more copperfeild style and is more famous everyone will be saying how he is just an average magician.
Message: Posted by: Domino Magic (May 16, 2009 08:17AM)
Ryan,

While I don't care for Criss' style, that doesn't make him a bad magician. Not everyone has to be like Copperfield and thankfully many are not. We need to have more diverse performing styles in magic - whether that style appeals to the magic community is not a concern.

Criss is bad for magic in one way - he uses camera tricks or manipulates the camera so that the effect you're seeing on TV cannot be duplicated live. So he sets up an expectation. It doesn't matter that another magician can't do what he does - but HE can't even do what he does in a live setting. Surely if you can levitate from building to building, it would be a piece of cake to float around the theater, within inches over the audience. But obviously he can't do that. However that is what the audience expects. So they go see him live expecting to see what they saw on TV and all they get an average magician.

Criss hasn't been able to make the transition many before him have, which is going from TV to a live show. In the 50's you had Milbourne Christopher, the 60's Mark Wilson, 70's Henning and from the 70's through today you have Copperfield. All these guys could do a TV show then bring those illusions to the live stage. Criss can't. So if your magic is only good on TV, then ANYONE can become a magician.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (May 16, 2009 10:22AM)
I unlike most of the "I hate Criss crowd" do not presume to speak for what makes a "good magician". I know what I prefer, and certainly the style and charector Criss has carved out is not for me.

This does not however make him "bad for magic", and all the other nonsense I keep hearing and reading.

I mean magic on TV is a darn tough way to go about it. A weely show based on what he tried to sell it as is REALLY tough. I think he simply over reached is all, and the result was what we saw and I guess still see as Mindfreak. (I have no idea if it is even on any more in truth.

I think David did a wonderful job with most of his specials on TV, I think Doug Henning was great, Mark Wilson, and also Don Alan. I think the Worlds Greatest Magic was good at first and sort of went a bit down hill in my view.

I find it odd when people were saying Criss and his sort were the "future of magic" and that this was where magic was going. With his show going the way of the T-Rex, maybe this is not so true after all.

So while I can speak for me, and interview those I know, I don't speak for the world. The world seems to be speaking and David is still at the top. This says a lot for his show and his theories.
Message: Posted by: Ray Pierce (May 17, 2009 11:39AM)
[quote]
On 2009-05-16 09:17, Domino Magic wrote:
Criss hasn't been able to make the transition many before him have, which is going from TV to a live show.[/quote]

I fully agree with your last post. You had some great points.

Since you know David well, I'm sure you know that he had a similar transition problem as after several years of television specials with effects designed specifically for them, he didn't really have much material that would work live. It took a while to convert the methods to something practical for live shows.

The difference with him is that he did create more practical methods and now has years of experience as a proven commodity.
Message: Posted by: Domino Magic (May 17, 2009 01:11PM)
Ray,

You're correct and it was for a variety of reasons. However there were also some spectacular effects, like the floating Ferrari that was able to make it to a live audience.

It was a different mind set back then and several issues of out David's control. First of all it wasn't his money, so the producers paid for everything. While he did do many live shows - Vegas, Tahoe and others, at that point in his career there was never the thought of touring. When the early specials were created, or more specifically, when the illusions for the early specials were created, they only had to hold up for several rehearsals and the taping. Some illusions actually had to be reconstructed to withstand the rigors of daily use.

There was a pivotal moment in David's thinking however and this is where David moved TV magic forward and Criss later took it backwards. For years and years the magic that went on TV specials was created in solitude. Meaning the performer, the consultants and the builders brainstormed ideas, put it together, rehearsed it and then put it on national TV. That would have been the first time it was seen.

That's a backwards way of doing it. Henning did it that way and so did Copperfield for a long time. So Copperfield made a major change. His thought was 'Let's work this stuff out on the road, in front of real audiences - give it a year of work - THEN we will put it on TV'. It only makes sense that you're going to put your best material on TV.

Well it worked! And there were a few routines that never made it to TV that probably would have.

Getting back to your original point. David had a solid hour or so he could do live. He did it at Caesar's Tahoe, however some of the routines weren't practical to tour with, like the Ferrari. Now we're talking spring 1983 when he did his very first tour. Everyone looked at the older TV specials and realized it wasn't as easy as it looked to just pick and choose routines. So yes, there was the need for some changes. David is a smart guy, which is why he has made the changes he has and has had the longevity to his career.
Message: Posted by: Ray Pierce (May 17, 2009 07:34PM)
[quote]
On 2009-05-17 14:11, Domino Magic wrote:
Ray,

You're correct and it was for a variety of reasons. However there were also some spectacular effects, like the floating Ferrari that was able to make it to a live audience.
[/quote]

I remember all too well. The Ferrari (lol.. or rather John's Ferrari!) was a very practical effect from a magic and design standpoint, just HUGE to travel with. The one you know what took up half of one truck. That's an example of a piece that was built for the real world and televised. The only problem for filming was a lighting issue which resulted in a lot of headaches in editing.

[quote]
It was a different mind set back then and several issues of out David's control. First of all it wasn't his money, so the producers paid for everything. While he did do many live shows - Vegas, Tahoe and others, at that point in his career there was never the thought of touring.
[/quote]

I understand that. I'm talking about the first few specials before Tahoe. I was there in Tahoe for his first casino show. He had some television versions of effects before that wouldn't "exactly" work live. If you know where the mouse came from on the first special, you'll know what I'm talking about!

[quote]
When the early specials were created, or more specifically, when the illusions for the early specials were created, they only had to hold up for several rehearsals and the taping. Some illusions actually had to be reconstructed to withstand the rigors of daily use.
[/quote]

I understand... again, I wasn't talking about sturdiness of the props but methodology of certain effects.

[quote]
There was a pivotal moment in David's thinking however and this is where David moved TV magic forward and Criss later took it backwards. For years and years the magic that went on TV specials was created in solitude. Meaning the performer, the consultants and the builders brainstormed ideas, put it together, rehearsed it and then put it on national TV. That would have been the first time it was seen.

That's a backwards way of doing it. Henning did it that way and so did Copperfield for a long time.
[/quote]

Well.. David did. I'm sure you know that Charlie rehearsed the heck out of Doug's opening special in NY before it was broadcast live. It was envisioned as a live event that was televised and it was created and rehearsed as such.

David's first special was simply a vehicle to introduce the CBS celebrities for the next season's shows to an audience. The original title was "Magic with the Stars" and at the last second it was changed to the Magic of David Copperfield. Joe Cates brought him in to create a lot of interesting ways to present the celebrities so the effects were not chosen for practicality.

[quote]
So Copperfield made a major change. His thought was 'Let's work this stuff out on the road, in front of real audiences - give it a year of work - THEN we will put it on TV'. It only makes sense that you're going to put your best material on TV.

Well it worked! And there were a few routines that never made it to TV that probably would have.
[/quote]

Absolutely agreed. And I don't know of anyone that worked harder than David at bringing the best to the specials.


[quote]
Getting back to your original point. David had a solid hour or so he could do live. He did it at Caesar's Tahoe, however some of the routines weren't practical to tour with, like the Ferrari. Now we're talking spring 1983 when he did his very first tour. Everyone looked at the older TV specials and realized it wasn't as easy as it looked to just pick and choose routines. So yes, there was the need for some changes. David is a smart guy, which is why he has made the changes he has and has had the longevity to his career.
[/quote]

Again, I wasn't talking about tourability (I totally made up that word). I'm speaking of methodology created for the first few television specials that could not work live in it's televised form. Don, David, Jonathon and I had MANY conversations about the methodology for effects that were "television only" methods. having known him well since he first moved to LA and spent a lot of time with him... I am now VERY proud of him for getting out of that mold and creating a live show that toured for years with brilliant thinking behind everything.
Message: Posted by: Domino Magic (May 17, 2009 08:06PM)
[quote]
On 2009-05-17 20:34, WDI Magic wrote:

I remember all too well. The Ferrari (lol.. or rather John's Ferrari!) was a very practical effect from a magic and design standpoint, just HUGE to travel with. The one you know what took up half of one truck. That's an example of a piece that was built for the real world and televised. The only problem for filming was a lighting issue which resulted in a lot of headaches in editing.

[/quote]

Yeah, the Ferrari was huge to travel with and other than Tahoe & Vegas, the only other time it was performed live was in Rochester,NY at Kodak headquarters back when he was spokesperson for their instant camera (which Polaroid later sued Kodak over).

The other challenge with the Ferrari was the car itself. As you mentioned, the one on TV was John's, however the one used in Vegas came from a car dealer and I had to go to the dealer from time-to-time and arrange for it.

Trivia, for those interested - on the Lear Jet special, David was driven up to the plane in a Ferrari, sort of tying the 2 specials together.

[quote]

I understand that. I'm talking about the first few specials before Tahoe. I was there in Tahoe for his first casino show. He had some television versions of effects before that wouldn't "exactly" work live. If you know where the mouse came from on the first special, you'll know what I'm talking about!

[/quote]

I arrived after Tahoe, in 1981. Yes, you're correct, some of the early material - even up to the Statue special couldn't be performed live. He got a lot of criticism for the levitation on the Statue special because it didn't look like that when it went out on the road several months later.

Yes, I know about the mouse.

[quote]

I understand... again, I wasn't talking about sturdiness of the props but methodology of certain effects.

[/quote]

The early versions of the Psycho Illusion couldn't be performed live. David, Don, David's then girlfriend Sara and I spent hours one night after a show in Vegas completely re staging it.

[quote]

David's first special was simply a vehicle to introduce the CBS celebrities for the next season's shows to an audience. The original title was "Magic with the Stars" and at the last second it was changed to the Magic of David Copperfield. Joe Cates brought him in to create a lot of interesting ways to present the celebrities so the effects were not chosen for practicality.
[/quote]

Brief correction - the first special was on ABC and then Joe brought him over the CBS. After the ABC special, he thought that was it, his career was over (that's how bad he thought it was!)

[quote]
Absolutely agreed. And I don't know of anyone that worked harder than David at bringing the best to the specials.
[/quote]

I don't know anyone who works harder than David - Period!

[quote]
Again, I wasn't talking about tourability (I totally made up that word).
[/quote]

Tourability - hey, that works! And I completely understand what you mean with the early material on TV. It was meant for the specials and that's where most of that material stayed.
Message: Posted by: Ray Pierce (May 17, 2009 08:30PM)
ABC it was... lol... even as I typed that it seemed wrong and frankly I was just too tired to rewrite it!

I forgot about Sara...wow... that WAS a long time ago, she was really great for him though, sad to see her go!
Message: Posted by: critter (May 18, 2009 09:47AM)
To be honest, I don't care for the 'victim' character CA plays either. But I do wish him and all magicians success. I don't think this show can be saved, but I keep crossing my fingers that they find a way.
Message: Posted by: Pakar Ilusi (May 20, 2009 06:36AM)
Wow!

This thread has taken a life of its own...

Anyway, IF this makes any difference...

I didn't mean Copperfield should perform in BELIEVE, he should just come and talk to Angel and advise him... He should "save" BELIEVE by consulting, not perform in it is what I mean...

But it won't happen... One can only wish now...

And thanks for the Copperfield stories guys...

:online:
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (May 20, 2009 08:09AM)
Wow you think he should "advise" Criss? Seriously? Criss has a very long and storied history of NOT LISTENING TO ADVICE LOL.

Just to mention one Johnny Thompson! Look at the list of advisors who have left being less than happy and saying they were not happy with where the show has gone. I believe but am not sure but Luke Jerremy is one of those. If not sorry.

Point is if he ever listened to advice, he would not be in the trouble he is in. Thanks for the morning laugh though.
Message: Posted by: Ba Ba Booey (May 20, 2009 11:20PM)
Perhaps Criss could bring in Johnny Thompson to advise him. Oh wait, that's been done. Maybe he could get Banacheck to help him out. Hmm, that probably won't fly, either. I know. He can get that Playboy chick to draw attention away from this mess. OH, no, that's been tried, too. Okay, I give up.

Why don't we all just leave Criss Angel alone?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJeMUKs7GIg&feature=channel_page
Message: Posted by: Pakar Ilusi (May 21, 2009 08:50AM)
Danny, yer welcome... I'm here all week... :P

That clip settles it then.

Dan Sperry should replace Criss Angel.

:goof:
Message: Posted by: Domino Magic (May 21, 2009 05:58PM)
What Criss should do after he leaves Believe is to launch his own Vegas production. He has the money to do it and certainly the connections for backers if he doesn't want to fund it all himself.

He would have full creative control, so the success or failure of the show would rest on him - no excuses.

He should make the show prices a little more reasonable to attract more people and establish the show. If he's in it for the long-run, the prices can be increased later on once the show is proven.

He shouldn't over-hype it as Believe has been. Establish a better relationship with the Las Vegas press and let other people praise the show.
Message: Posted by: Ray Pierce (May 22, 2009 08:14PM)
[quote]
On 2009-05-21 18:58, Domino Magic wrote:
What Criss should do after he leaves Believe is to launch his own Vegas production. He has the money to do it and certainly the connections for backers if he doesn't want to fund it all himself.

He would have full creative control, so the success or failure of the show would rest on him - no excuses.

He should make the show prices a little more reasonable to attract more people and establish the show. If he's in it for the long-run, the prices can be increased later on once the show is proven.

He shouldn't over-hype it as Believe has been. Establish a better relationship with the Las Vegas press and let other people praise the show.
[/quote]

I LOVE the idea but it should have said "... what he SHOULD have done.." Just imagine if he did all of those things up front. It worked for Lance. He took his time and learned the market, the players, grew into the larger venues, got the experience he needed to be successful. In other words, he did it the right way.

It's been said that you only get one chance to make a first impression. Criss has definitely made his. He would have to take a huge step backwards to regain any credibility in Vegas. Most people in the local market that depend on tourism dollars for their livelihood don't have the best view of him.

lol... If only you could have grabbed him a few years ago and slapped some sense into him, I think the ideas could have worked!
Message: Posted by: Ray Pierce (May 22, 2009 08:14PM)
[quote]
On 2009-05-21 18:58, Domino Magic wrote:
What Criss should do after he leaves Believe is to launch his own Vegas production. He has the money to do it and certainly the connections for backers if he doesn't want to fund it all himself.

He would have full creative control, so the success or failure of the show would rest on him - no excuses.

He should make the show prices a little more reasonable to attract more people and establish the show. If he's in it for the long-run, the prices can be increased later on once the show is proven.

He shouldn't over-hype it as Believe has been. Establish a better relationship with the Las Vegas press and let other people praise the show.
[/quote]

I LOVE the idea but it should have said "... what he SHOULD have done.." Just imagine if he did all of those things up front. It worked for Lance. He took his time and learned the market, the players, grew into the larger venues, got the experience he needed to be successful. In other words, he did it the right way.

It's been said that you only get one chance to make a first impression. Criss has definitely made his. He would have to take a huge step backwards to regain any credibility in Vegas. Most people in the local market that depend on tourism dollars for their livelihood don't have the best view of him.

lol... If only you could have grabbed him a few years ago and slapped some sense into him, I think the ideas could have worked!
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (May 22, 2009 08:29PM)
Lance was in a successful show right? He was not noted as the primary reason it failed was he?
Message: Posted by: Ray Pierce (May 22, 2009 08:37PM)
Exactly! Criss could have learned a lot from him.
Message: Posted by: Ray Pierce (May 22, 2009 09:11PM)
Exactly! Criss could have learned a lot from him.
Message: Posted by: Domino Magic (May 22, 2009 09:16PM)
It's crazy to think, but Lance has been in Vegas for almost 30 years. Didn't he arrive around 1981 or so? Fresh from The Tonight Show, he drove a beat up old car and lived in a crummy apartment on West Sahara. But you're right, he took his time. He changed his act very slowly when he was at The Tropicana. The 12 minute act evolved, then he added the sword fight and I think one other illusion. It was only after years of being there that he moved to the Hacienda and then ultimately where he is now.

Yeah, Vegas is a tough town. It's unforgiving and everything in it is disposable. If they are going to knock down landmark casinos that made the town famous, they'll kick out ego-driven magician in a second.
Message: Posted by: Ray Pierce (May 22, 2009 10:55PM)
[quote]
On 2009-05-22 22:16, Domino Magic wrote:
Didn't he arrive around 1981 or so?
[/quote]

I think he was at the Body Shop in '80 so that seems about right. He took his time and paid his dues, no way around it! That's why I give him so much credit for going through that discovery phase of creating his own image. It takes YEARS but it does pay off.

[quote]
Yeah, Vegas is a tough town. It's unforgiving and everything in it is disposable. If they are going to knock down landmark casinos that made the town famous, they'll kick out ego-driven magician in a second.
[/quote]

I can't think of an example but I hope you're right.