(Close Window)
Topic: Chris Angel critique?
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Oct 31, 2003 08:28PM)
Any thoughts on his show tonight on SciFi?
Message: Posted by: Terry Holley (Oct 31, 2003 08:48PM)
45 minutes in and I will say this: Different with shades of someone else!

Terry
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Rice (Oct 31, 2003 09:01PM)
Did anyone try the touch the screen thing? Did it work?
Message: Posted by: SOHartist (Nov 1, 2003 11:54AM)
Yeah, I followed his instructions, he said to put your finger about an inch away from his, but, to my dissapointment, nothing happened. :(

Michael
Message: Posted by: boblinds (Nov 1, 2003 12:17PM)
Too much water in the air in Florida, Michael. If you were in a drier climate, you might have gotten a nice little static electricity shock from the front of the TV screen. (Though, I think you'd need to be closer than the one inch Angel indicated...)

By the way, his name is spelled Criss.
Message: Posted by: Bill (Nov 1, 2003 02:18PM)
I think you guys missed the joke. He wanted you close to the screen, then he had a demon face that popped out screaming to startle you. :rotf: :rotf:
Message: Posted by: boblinds (Nov 1, 2003 04:02PM)
Yeah, I DID get that Bill, but I'm jaded by those Internet shockwave files. I was looking for something DEEPER... :bg: (The scare WITH an electric shock could have made some folks magically produce water, tho. ;) )
Message: Posted by: Anabelle (Nov 1, 2003 04:40PM)
I taped his show and just watched it a little while ago. His street stuff did remind me of David Blaine a little, but I guess any magician doing that kind of magic would. He's very bizarre and theatrical, I liked his special a lot! I'm curious to see his DVD coming out early next year.

Anabelle :giving:
Message: Posted by: dpe666 (Nov 1, 2003 05:32PM)
[quote]
On 2003-11-01 17:02, boblinds wrote:
Yeah, I DID get that Bill, but I'm jaded by those Internet shockwave files. I was looking for something DEEPER... :bg: (The scare WITH an electric shock could have made some folks magically produce water, tho. ;) )
[/quote]

You expected him to create a shock through your TV? His name is Criss ANGEL, not Criss GOD. :devilish:
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Nov 1, 2003 07:11PM)
The coin in arm bit got my attention. That took alot of guts, given the social issue of 'cutters'. The look of the trick was impressive. Wish they filmed things a bit more objectively. Likewise the puddle vanish was quite a sight.

About 10 min into the show I noticed a resemblence to Pauly Shore. Then I kept hearing that voice and had to keep from laughing.

Got a spider in your soda buuuudy?

The wall walking and stage goth stuff was quit good. Marilyn Manson might want to take him on tour.
Message: Posted by: rowdymagi5 (Nov 1, 2003 07:33PM)
I didn't care for the camera angles, they kept jumping from one angle to another. Just my opinion!
Message: Posted by: DanielGreenWolf (Nov 1, 2003 11:07PM)
[quote]
On 2003-11-01 17:40, Anabelle wrote:
His street stuff did remind me of David Blaine a little, but I guess any magician doing that kind of magic would.

Anabelle :giving:
[/quote]

I think the real street magicians of the world, myself included, would be slightly offended by that statement. Narcoleptic lethargy is not our performance style. In fact, most of the best are nowhere near it.

---Malak
Message: Posted by: boblinds (Nov 1, 2003 11:55PM)
You are an evil man dpe666. :)

I was serious about the shock, however. With the electrons hitting the phosphors on the video screen, it is very common for a light electrostatic charge to build up. Therefore, it is pretty easy to get a light shock from a TV screen if the atmosphere is cold and dry.

When he talked about putting your finger near the screen, I automatically assumed that he was taking this into account.
Message: Posted by: Donny Orbit (Nov 2, 2003 12:44AM)
Personally I like Chriss Angel's specials. I would love to see an actual stage show live. If you have seen his first special as well as this one, you would see this one was a little heavier on editing. The effects were, however, on a grander scale. On a rating of 1 to 10, I would give it a solid 8.

XX
Message: Posted by: Magic_Mailman (Nov 2, 2003 03:49PM)
I liked the parts on the special that showed his actual stage show. That has me wanting to see him if he comes to town. All in all it was entertaining to me.

Tony
:bat:
Message: Posted by: owenscott (Nov 2, 2003 04:59PM)
I can do same as him, if I had 30 stooges and terrible camera crew. Very much not impressed.
Message: Posted by: Thoughtreader (Nov 2, 2003 07:49PM)
Impressive for laypeople which is what counts. He fits the demographic he plays too which is where your focus for such shows needs to be. Well done. Do you really think he is worried about impressing or not impressing anyone in here?!?!?!?! Come on, he cares about his PUBLIC and they were and are suitably impressed. The other difference between him and everyone else is that HE was the one with the second television special under his belt, not you or them.
PSIncerely Yours,
Paul Alberstat
Message: Posted by: Mike Robbins (Nov 2, 2003 08:14PM)
[quote]
On 2003-11-01 12:54, SOHartist wrote:
he said to put your finger about an inch away from his
[/quote]

Ohhh! I thought he said "pull my finger". I was about to say that he ripped off my uncle's trick. :rotf:

Mike
Message: Posted by: Dark illusionist (Nov 2, 2003 09:43PM)
I am so incredibly upset. I had to do a show Halloween night so I set the VCR to record the show. Its just my dad forgot to hit play. I am desperate for a copy of the show. If anybody taped it PLEAS PM me and I will pay for shipping as well as the tape, or if you want I will mail it back when IM done. PLEAS help a brother out, I can't wait for the rerun. O, you could also help me out by letting me know when its going to be on again.
Message: Posted by: MisterE21 (Nov 3, 2003 02:28AM)
Hey Dark, I'll do you one better:

I set the dang thing up to record and it recorded jsut fine...'cept the cable box was on MUTE. So, I've got it recorded, but with NO SOUND....

Ugh...

I second the request for a copy, if anyone recorded; I'll also pay for shipping/tape.

E
Message: Posted by: rowdymagi5 (Nov 3, 2003 08:14AM)
Well said Paul!
Message: Posted by: Lee Darrow (Nov 3, 2003 09:54AM)
<Rant mode ON>

Paul, you said what I have been saying about ALL of the guys who get on the tube - THEY are making it possible for the rest of us to GET MORE WORK!

Chris Angel's special was very cutting edge in approach (even if the constant camera changes were a bit disorienting at times), had solid magic and some very innovative stuff to boot! I loved the vanishing puddle, the fish hook hang and his takes on what it is to DO this stuff!

So, for the Monday Morning QuarterPalmers - when you get your second TV special, then criticize. Until then - CASH IN ON IT!

Guys like David Blaine and Chris Angel are out there keeping magic in front of the public, creating demand for MORE magic and MORE magicians.

Dissing them doesn't do anyone any good and only demeans the person doing the dissing. These guys are laughing all the way to the bank and their next three years worth of bookings! They have created more talk about magic than anyone since Doug Henning back in the 70's.

When you can say the same, THEN talk. Until then, frankly, it's all sour grapes.

All I have to say to them is "Thanks guys!"

Lee Darrow, C.Ht.

<Rant Mode OFF>
Message: Posted by: WR (Nov 3, 2003 01:14PM)
[quote]
On 2003-11-01 20:11, JonTown wrote:
The coin in arm bit got my attention. That took alot of guts, given the social issue of 'cutters'. The look of the trick was impressive. Wish they filmed things a bit more objectively. Likewise the puddle vanish was quite a sight.


Got a spider in your soda buuuudy?

The wall walking and stage goth stuff was quit good. Marilyn Manson might want to take him on tour.
[/quote]
The coin the arm was COOL. I drooled as I thought of the uses for it.
WR :wow:
Message: Posted by: Chad Sanborn (Nov 3, 2003 04:36PM)
I can say he packed alot of stuff into one show. I like the puddle vanish the best. Truly an original effect, and a magical twist on a childhood memory we all have.
I will also go out on a limb and say that the coin in the arm will be available on the market in some form within the next 6 months.
This very trick was discussed here at the Café last year in September! So now that it has been on TV, you can bet it will hit the market.

Chad
ps...you can find the discussion of the Coin In Arm
here
http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewtopic.php?topic=10034&forum=3
Message: Posted by: mdspark (Nov 3, 2003 11:34PM)
Owenscott,

I couldn't AGREE WITH YOU MORE! Poor show..anyone can do miracles with camera editing...that shows the skill of the video editor NOT the magician. One David Blaine is enough! Poor taste, tacky....a 'SLUM' approach to the art of magic.

I noticed the obvious absence of a camera trickery disclaimer in the show..hummmmmmm....Same old stuff..just done with 'goth make-up'... that is minus the "tricks" done with slick editing and camera trickery..which is not to be confused with the TRUE Art of Magic....

Yeah, yeah...I don't have any 'TV Specials' under my belt to brag about (Neither do I want any)...Inspite of this, I am still allowed to have an opinion. And anyone is allowed to disagree with me whether they have TV specials under their belts or not...
Message: Posted by: MindExplosion (Nov 4, 2003 12:22AM)
I liked the special a lot, Criss Angel is one of my favorite magicians. He has a great and unique style that is interesting and draws people in.

But I think it's a bit sad when people are so strongly against video editing in magic on TV. It seems like many magicians simply refuse to accept new technology and actually use it to good effect.

I liked his special, video editing and all. He's a good magician, and a great entertainer.
Message: Posted by: the levitator (Nov 4, 2003 10:30AM)
Just remember that professional magicians know who their audience is. Perform for people, not magicians, and you won't be dissapointed. For those who whine and over-critique other magicians who are successful, consider the source and know that professional magicians ( I don't mean full-time, I mean those who act professionally) love nothing more than to see magic become more popular in the mainstream, whether it's due to fantastic sleight of hand or fantastic editing and presentation. Video is a communicative medium, just like magic. And the presentation of video is just as important as the presentation of magic. I'm not a huge fan of David Blaine, but I love what he has done for magic, and my bookings.

mr. hypno is dead on. Guys like Blaine, Angel, Burton and Copperfield are helping us to stay active! Maybe instead of bagging on magicians who are keeping our artform alive in the minds of the public, the naysayers have a better way to keep the popularity of magic strong.

What has always sturck me as completely contradictive are "artists" who insult other artists performance style or appearance. Isn't our job as entertainers to create a character? I may not be a big fan of Gospel magic, but I know a fantastic gospel magician who has a great character that works well with his personality. Would I ever make it as a Gospel magician? NO! Does that give me the right to critisize someone just because I don't agree with their outfit or performance style? I may have the right, but any performer with an ounce of respect for the art would recognize that the house of Magic has many rooms. And we should encourage anyone out there actively keeping our artform alive regardless of their style or eyeliner color.

I thought armchair quarterbacks were bad. Armchair magicians are even worse.
Message: Posted by: MisterE21 (Nov 4, 2003 01:04PM)
What seems odd to me is magicians inability to seperate pesonal dissatisfaction from overall opinion...


By this, I mean, it amazes me how often we read something like "I didn't like so-and-so...he sucks and needs to die slowly." Because you didn't like him, he sucks? Isn't it more accuract you to that because you didn't like him, you didn't like him...nothing more, nothing less.

I may not like opera music, but that does not mean that "opera sucks." I means that I have certain tastes and opera is not one of them. I thought this distinction was something that most people could make quite easily after a certain age...it appears I may hae been wrong.

E
Message: Posted by: WR (Nov 4, 2003 02:06PM)
[quote]
On 2003-11-04 14:04, MisterE21 wrote:
What seems odd to me is magicians inability to seperate pesonal dissatisfaction from overall opinion...


By this, I mean, it amazes me how often we read something like "I didn't like so-and-so...he sucks and needs to die slowly." Because you didn't like him, he sucks? Isn't it more accuract you to that because you didn't like him, you didn't like him...nothing more, nothing less.

I may not like opera music, but that does not mean that "opera sucks." I means that I have certain tastes and opera is not one of them. I thought this distinction was something that most people could make quite easily after a certain age...it appears I may hae been wrong.

E
[/quote]
Well said. I used to bad mouth Blaine becuse it was the cool thing to do. I feel alot of people Dis. Pro. Magi becuse they are jelous of their sucess. Sad really.
WR :wow:
Message: Posted by: the levitator (Nov 4, 2003 04:27PM)
Well put Mr.E21! Unfortunately, age does not define maturity, and there will always be those that don't even understand the excellent point you made.

Don't feel too bad WR. We've all been guilty of negative feedback regarding other magicians. But it takes a big person to admit it and grow from it. I don't mind when a magician is making comments about the actual material or technical aspects of another magician's performance. But to judge them soley on clothing, music, or video editing style is childish.
Message: Posted by: Chad Sanborn (Nov 5, 2003 12:03PM)
Trick photography was the biggest problem magic faced when it was first shown on tv. The way around that was to show it live!
When that was no longer feasable, a new way of shooting, called "live to tape" was developed. The show would be taped in front of a live audience. And that live audience was shown to verify that no 'trick photography' was used.
And still to this day, this is the method that tv magic shows use. Even 'street magic' is shot this way, with live volunteers standing around next to the performer.
The problem now is that 'street magic' is angle restrictive, and misdirection dependant! The camera does only shoot from one angle, so that is not a problem. The problem is the misdirection part. The camera does not follow misdirection like the mind does.
So to overcome that we have 'creative editing'. To edit out the parts that could expose the method to the home audience.
The problem is, that this has gone to an extreme. Now editing is being used as a method. So I guess the real question is, is this a form of trick photography?
Well, strictly speaking, no its not. No special effects were neccessary to bring about the effect. (double images, cgi, etc.) But then again the effect could not be done if it wasn't for this editing.
I personally feel that when the editing is used as the method, that is going to far.
Using the editing to control the lack of misdirection of the camera or to control camera angles is a good use of the editing process.
Afterall, magicians have used the stage and its sightlines to control those very same things for centuries. But a magician cannot be onstage and tell the audience to leave and comeback while he swithces things in and out to bring about an otherwise unperformable effect.
This is where we should all draw the line between what is acceptable and what is not.

If it can't be done without the aid of an edit, then it shouldn't be done. And that's my final answer.

Chad
Message: Posted by: mdspark (Nov 5, 2003 04:15PM)
It doesn't matter about "the camera unable to be misdirected"...ITS THE VIEWERS THAT ARE MISDIRECTED DUE TO THE SKILL OF THE PERFORMER! EDITING SHOULD BE A NON-ISSUE IN RELATION TO ACUALLY 'MAKING THE MAGIC HAPPEN'....JUST ASK LANCE Burton.
Message: Posted by: ChrisZampese (Nov 5, 2003 05:34PM)
Mdspark,
Misdirection relies heavily on a relationship between the audience and the preformer, particularly with close-up and street magic. The performer can direct the audiences attention with gestures/questions/head movement etc. You simply cannot do this while on camera. If the camera is focused on the performers hands, how can he 'encourage' the TV audience to look up at his face at that critcal moment?

I think editing in videoed performances is necessary to preserve the integrity of the magic, but I agree with Chad, if editing is used to perform the effect, then it should no longer be marketed as magic. It may be entertaining, but its no more magical than 'Sabrina the teenage witch'!
Message: Posted by: mdspark (Nov 5, 2003 10:56PM)
Chris,
Point well taken...I completely agree with you...You are correct about when the camera is exclusively on the hands....this is were the Director of the shoot needs to be informed of this...shooting the magic simultaneously from different angles. Then selecting the angle that best suites the effect is just good video production...not cheating and making magic happen that couldn't be done inperson.

Correct: "editing that is used to perform the effect" is no longer magic/conjuring.
Message: Posted by: MisterE21 (Nov 5, 2003 11:59PM)
I agree that editing used to perform effects is no longer conjuring, it's simply "movie magic" in my opinion. I also agree that, if you can't recreate the effect in front of a live audience with no camera, you shouldn't perform.

It take conjurors YEARS to overcome the belief that it was all "trick camera work" and it bothers me that now, when the general public DOES believe the things they say magicians do on TV are done without the aid of camera tricks, we're back to using them...I'm afraid magicians are going to end up turning people off to televised magic specials.

However, the concern with exposing method over TV isn't really ABOUT misdirection. Strong misdirection DOES come through a TV and equally misdirect the watcher. However, someone can rewind and watch again and again, purposely NOT being misdirect, and discover the method. One must be very careful.

:)
E