(Close Window)
Topic: Shin Lim second passage at Fool Us - Edited ?
Message: Posted by: Alex DLF (Jul 31, 2017 10:21AM)
Hi guys !

I was wondering about the second passage from Shin Lim at Fool Us, I had some concerns about it.

First, the fact Pen and Teller were fooled by the act.

Second, the act was shot at least two times and the final video is edited from those passages. You can notice the sleeves going up and down his arms by themselves, quite a few times. I timed the most obvious moment here :

https://youtu.be/thIlxChNYqk?t=3m23s

So my question is : is it normal that those acts are edited when the aim is to fool P&T with your best act ? Or maybe there were flashes in the actual performance so Shin wanted to shot it again so it looks perfect on video ? I don't understand the aim.

It would be cool to discuss this !
Message: Posted by: Ceierry (Jul 31, 2017 10:31AM)
Hey Alex. I believe the replays are edited yes, like the Jay Sankey one.
Message: Posted by: MeetMagicMike (Jul 31, 2017 11:06AM)
Penn has commented on his podcast that the host, Alison, wears the same dress all season because the acts we see on one show were not necessarily all filmed on the same day. I guess they move the acts around so that you get a good mix on each show.

I didn't realize the acts themselves could be edited but it's not a shocker. We've seen this on America's Got Talent where parts of an act are edited out and the result is that the trick seems even more impossible. This happened on the performance of Card Toon and lead to much debate because it looked like he didn't make "the move".

I'm sure the acts do a full dress rehearsal which is taped and gives the editor shots that he can drop in if needed. There are lots of reasons an editor might need to do this.

It would be nice if Penn and Teller would address this on the show. I doubt the editing covered up anything major.
Message: Posted by: Neznarf (Jul 31, 2017 11:31AM)
Good info. thanks guys. Alyson Hannigan wearing the same BLUE DRESS made me comment each time wife and I watched P&YFU.
Now I know.

Most Red Headed Women I know never wear RED.
Message: Posted by: WitchDocChris (Jul 31, 2017 12:14PM)
I wouldn't be surprised if they edited it at all. Why wouldn't they? It's a show. They want the best show possible, so editing to make sure the performer is represented well is a good thing. Just like when magicians go on to a talk show and they make sure they are getting the best angles for the home audience to experience the magic.

That's why Penn & Teller are the ones judging. They are working on the idea that as famous and experienced magicians, laymen will trust their judgment as to whether something fooled them or not. The show is not named "Penn & Teller - Fool the audience", it's called "Penn & Teller Fool Us". The audience is just there to watch it happen, not to provide guesses themselves.
Message: Posted by: David Numen (Jul 31, 2017 12:37PM)
Does it matter? It's not as if it's a real competition - it's an interesting way to get a magic show on TV. Yeah, people like Shin have the genius to fool P&T but does anyone believe a magician as talented and knowledgable as Andi Gladwin REALLY thought that routine would fool the boys? Does anyone really think the lady with the knives thought for a second her routine would fool them? I'm quite sure neither did but both welcomed the opportunity for international TV exposure.
Message: Posted by: MeetMagicMike (Jul 31, 2017 01:01PM)
It matters in the sense that it's a good idea that people discussing the performances know what they are discussing.
Message: Posted by: WitchDocChris (Jul 31, 2017 01:05PM)
Yes there certainly seems to be two types who go on the show - those who are genuinely trying to Fool P&T, and those who are just going to get the exposure and do not care at all if they fool them. Both are valid, assuming one leverages the exposure effectively.
Message: Posted by: David Numen (Jul 31, 2017 03:03PM)
[quote]On Jul 31, 2017, MeetMagicMike wrote:
It matters in the sense that it's a good idea that people discussing the performances know what they are discussing. [/quote]

What does that even mean?

It's a TV magic performance. It's not a dem for a product - in which case I agree editing is questionable...but as a TV performance I see no problem with editing. The only people it would offend are those trying to work out how it was done...
Message: Posted by: MeetMagicMike (Jul 31, 2017 03:41PM)
You don't agree that people should understand what they are discussing? Alex simply pointed out something that
Many people didn't' know.
Message: Posted by: Ray Haining (Jul 31, 2017 04:01PM)
Another example--and a perfect one at that--of why, in my opinion, magic on TV doesn't work and does nothing to promote magic as a performing art and, in fact, does actual harm to laymen's conception of magic.
Message: Posted by: WitchDocChris (Jul 31, 2017 04:23PM)
What, exactly, was in this clip that in any way harmed popular perception of magic?

I'll point this out, by the way - Shin Lim is one of the only magicians my family has ever mentioned to me that they liked.
Message: Posted by: korttihai_82 (Jul 31, 2017 05:02PM)
[quote]On Jul 31, 2017, WitchDocChris wrote:
What, exactly, was in this clip that in any way harmed popular perception of magic? [/quote]

Well, I would count extensive overuse of two methods quite harmful. My laymen friends reaction to act can be summed up by one comment by a good friend of mine; " Does he really assume people don't realize that he is dragging all those black objects off the table edge".... But of course it is hard for magicians to admit that most laymen CAN THINK!!! Often better than magicians and they can also be polite and not say anything.

J-M
Message: Posted by: Last Laugh (Jul 31, 2017 05:24PM)
I don't thing there is a major loss of enjoyment even if people may have an inkling as to how some (small) portions of an effect are done...
Message: Posted by: MagicMan1957 (Jul 31, 2017 05:53PM)
Did he really fool Penn and Teller? NO.

That being said..... did they know how he did every single move in that routine? Maybe not.

And remember they were fooled by a chicken a few episodes back !
Message: Posted by: tomd (Jul 31, 2017 06:59PM)
This is free exposure for magicians in general.. shows like this are the reason that people take such an interest when you introduce yourself as a magician/mentalist. AGT, P&TFU, Dynamos specials, Blaines specials, even criss angels stuff all add to it.

I really wish I did care whether or not P&T were fooled, but I don't. All it is, is more people talking about magicians and magic.

And yes it was probably edited, and it doesn't matter (or at least to us it doesn't, I could imagine a layman noticing the fishy edits and crying foul! But we know better)
Message: Posted by: MeetMagicMike (Jul 31, 2017 08:10PM)
Korttihai_82 wrote

[quote]Does he really assume people don't realize that he is dragging all those black objects off the table[/quote]

I'd be surprised if most layman thought in terms of black art and lapping without ever having been exposed to the ideas. Even as a magician it surprises me that black art is as effective as it is here. Of course, there are always exceptions.

As for magic on TV some people want to think only in extremes. A little editing or mechanical help isn't going to instantly destroy magic but on the other hand we can't just say "anything goes".

If anything goes as far as magic on TV then there is no point to magicians on TV. Just watch a Harry Potter movie. What is the point of some guy practicing a lot of technique when CGI is so much more effective? Magic shows have to have at least some credibility or it is pointless.
Message: Posted by: tomd (Jul 31, 2017 09:17PM)
[quote]On Jul 31, 2017, MeetMagicMike wrote:
Korttihai_82 wrote

[quote]Does he really assume people don't realize that he is dragging all those black objects off the table[/quote]

I'd be surprised if most layman thought in terms of black art and lapping without ever having been exposed to the ideas. Even as a magician it surprises me that black art is as effective as it is here. Of course, there are always exceptions.

As for magic on TV some people want to think only in extremes. A little editing or mechanical help isn't going to instantly destroy magic but on the other hand we can't just say "anything goes".

If anything goes as far as magic on TV then there is no point to magicians on TV. Just watch a Harry Potter movie. What is the point of some guy practicing a lot of technique when CGI is so much more effective? Magic shows have to have at least some credibility or it is pointless. [/quote]

It's not the effectiveness of the technique, it's the amount of times it was used. Certain laymen will be able to discern that the hand motion has something to do with the trick, in the same way that certain laymen will suss a rough method for the classic Color change, if it was repeated in front of them multiple times. Other people will still be none the wiser.
Message: Posted by: willmagicman (Aug 1, 2017 08:26AM)
Some very interesting comments here guys. Personally, I feel that Shim has scraped the bottom of the barrel here. By that I mean, there's a heck of a lot of this 'black magic' stuff about right now. Loads of magicians are doing it, I feel it's being over done, and only the most gullible of lay persons are actually 'fooled' by it. I really like Shin Lim, but it seems to me that instead of carrying on as he set out and taking his magic to new levels, he is stagnating, and is getting a reputation of being 'the guy who's good with the black stuff'. I admit that his routine was beautifully presented, and he has a wonderful stage persona, [The quintessential magician] but I kind of expected something a little more interesting other than just flashy card production. Maybe next time he'll surprise me and come out on stage wearing a white suit and use a white card mat! Lol. One more thing,.. did anyone else notice how terrible the card spread was in the beginning of his routine? It looked awful to me as it lacked uniformity, and there were large gaps between some of the cards. I'm pretty sure I know why this was the case,as no doubt do most of you guys do, but I'm just saying .. it didn't look very good to see someone with his card handling talent making such an awful job of his spread, and this drew my attention immediately.

I agree with previous posters that in no way were the shows hosts fooled, but admitting to the audience that they were fooled could possibly have tarnished their reputation

Will.
Message: Posted by: WitchDocChris (Aug 1, 2017 09:07AM)
Here's the thing. I don't spend much time around magicians, and most of my friends aren't even all that interested in magic in general. In general they are the ones who are sharing videos like Shin Lim's performances, and texting me asking if I've seen it. Therefore, the actual lay audience (not the magician-adjacent-lay-audience) seem to enjoy his performances plenty.
Message: Posted by: Race Blakhart (Aug 1, 2017 12:02PM)
[quote]On Jul 31, 2017, korttihai_82 wrote:
[quote]On Jul 31, 2017, WitchDocChris wrote:
What, exactly, was in this clip that in any way harmed popular perception of magic? [/quote]

Well, I would count extensive overuse of two methods quite harmful. My laymen friends reaction to act can be summed up by one comment by a good friend of mine; " Does he really assume people don't realize that he is dragging all those black objects off the table edge".... But of course it is hard for magicians to admit that most laymen CAN THINK!!! Often better than magicians and they can also be polite and not say anything.

J-M [/quote]


I have a handful of these memories from childhood. I can remember looking around at the other spectators and thinking "I don't think I'm supposed to have seen that" or "why isn't anyone mentioning the [insert gimmick or move here]" and so on and so forth.

To this day I honestly still wonder how many other people catch the stuff I tend to catch.
Message: Posted by: WitchDocChris (Aug 1, 2017 01:24PM)
I really think that's a matter of poor performances and engagement.

I have 5 distinct memories of watching magic as a kid. 2 of them were terrible performances and I saw everything because I was bored. 1 of them, my only memory is being absolutely terrified the guy on stage was going to kill himself with one of those static/plasma ball things. I was about 7 if I recall correctly.

The two I remember thinking were magical - one was a guy who was producing "Full" cocktails from behind silks, wearing short sleeves. I've been reminded of the guys name a dozen times but I can never remember it. I liked that, because he wasn't just holding cards behind his hands and then showing them - it was actually fun to watch. The other was Ricky Jay and his 52 Assistants, which needs no further comment.

The thing that seems to determine whether I, personally, catch the secrets is caring about the show. If I'm engaged and enjoying myself, I miss everything. If I'm bored and not paying attention to what the guy on stage is saying, I see everything.

That probably translates to most audiences, I would think. I've had times when I made what I felt was a major blunder, which I could tell flew right by the audience because I was fortunate enough to be charming at the moment.
Message: Posted by: Ray Haining (Aug 1, 2017 04:48PM)
I didn't know "Ricky Jay and His 52 Assistants" was performed on TV. Missed that one.
Message: Posted by: The Duster (Aug 1, 2017 05:56PM)
I read that as being 5 'live' not TV performances he saw

But I could be wrong - that's just what I thought as I read it
Message: Posted by: Yuan Moons (Aug 1, 2017 08:27PM)
After coming back from a terrible accident and doing another masterful performance Shim still gets slagged off, dissected and exposed on the Café. No one hates magicians more than other magicians. 😂
Message: Posted by: The Duster (Aug 1, 2017 09:11PM)
I'm new to magic so before my time

But I think the hate for Shim goes back to a lot of his releases and how scammed ppl felt

Like flash deck (V2 coming out a month later as an improvement) great for the ppl who preordered V1

V2 still not working (lasting many performances)

And many other releases of his

So maybe that's where the haters come from, they have been taken in by shim in the past

As I said, before my time, so just speculation on my part this is behind any bad feeling today towards him
Message: Posted by: acortest (Aug 2, 2017 01:00AM)
[quote]On Jul 31, 2017, Neznarf wrote:
...made me comment each time wife and I watched P&YFU.
[/quote]

I want to watch Penn & 'Yeller' Fool Us. When is it on? (joking) ;)

I'm going to see the real Penn & Teller out in Vegas during Magic Live here in less than 2 weeks. I'll ask Penn after the show what's the deal with the editing 2 performances together. I'd ask Teller (or Yeller) but he probably wouldn't tell me (OK, I promise I'm done with the 'Yeller' jokes now) ;)

I will report back with my findings
Message: Posted by: broothal (Aug 2, 2017 01:39AM)
Hah - I remember thinking: "They should edit the act - too many flashes" when seeing it. Didn't even notice that this _was_ the edited version. It does take a bit of the magic away knowing this - I like to be impressed by the skills of the magician, not the cameraman.

Also, they where quick to acknowledge that he fooled them, so here's a bit of conspiracy theory: His movements sweeping cards into the servante where so obvious and seemed exaggerated - as if he wanted them to think he was lapping. And then they guessed: "You where sweeping black art cards into a servante". He has some other clever way of accomplishing the trick, so they guessed wrong and indeed he fooled them. But then they felt bad for exposing something like a servante and edited out that part and simply re-shot a: "You fooled us"
Message: Posted by: Orlan (Aug 2, 2017 02:11AM)
[quote]On Aug 1, 2017, WitchDocChris wrote:

The two I remember thinking were magical - one was a guy who was producing "Full" cocktails from behind silks, wearing short sleeves. I've been reminded of the guys name a dozen times but I can never remember it. I liked that, because he wasn't just holding cards behind his hands and then showing them - it was actually fun to watch. The other was Ricky Jay and his 52 Assistants, which needs no further comment.
[/quote]


You might be thinking about Peter Marvey in World's Greatest Magic III. Most impressive card manipulation act I've seen, I don't even want to know how. That was my favorite episode of the WGM. It also featured Guy Hollingworth (with his name misspelled in the lower third), David Williamson, and Jean-Pierre Vallarino.
Message: Posted by: Race Blakhart (Aug 2, 2017 05:53AM)
[quote]On Aug 1, 2017, Ray Haining wrote:
I didn't know "Ricky Jay and His 52 Assistants" was performed on TV. Missed that one. [/quote]
While I think he meant live, I have seen it somewhere on television before.
Message: Posted by: WitchDocChris (Aug 2, 2017 09:08AM)
Ricky Jay and his 52 Assistants was on HBO in 1995. I never saw it live. My parents recorded it when it aired, and I watched the recording a couple times a year, whenever I stumbled across the VHS. Then when I got into magic I got another copy and watched it pretty frequently.
Message: Posted by: Ray Haining (Aug 2, 2017 10:17AM)
The only time I've seen Shin Lim perform was in his "At the Table" lecture. I was quite impressed. The black art stuff fooled the heck out of me, and his Dream Act was amazing.

What I find sad about the Penn and Teller Fool Us show is here are two guys who rose to fame by being exposers of magic sitting in judgment of some very fine magicians. It is disheartening to see the likes of David Roth, Jay Sankey and others parade before these self-styled grand pooh-pah's of magic seeking their most-high and illustrious nod of approval. Rather sickening, in fact.
Message: Posted by: MeetMagicMike (Aug 2, 2017 12:35PM)
Penn and Teller didn't "rise to fame by being exposers of magic". They rose to fame by working hard and thinking hard about what they do. True, they exposed some concepts (as pretty much every performing magician does). I don't agree with every exposure decision they made but I've grown to respect them more and more over the years.
Message: Posted by: WitchDocChris (Aug 2, 2017 12:53PM)
You put that in better words than I could have, MeetMagicMike.
Message: Posted by: The great Gumbini (Aug 2, 2017 10:22PM)
They were fooled by Shin Lim. Yes they, like us may know some aspects of the routine but over all they could not piece together ALL that was done. Shin Lim brings many "moving parts" to his performances. In my opinion he is the best card magician I've ever seen. They may be able to watch the video in slow motion to help them but remember that is not privy to them at the time of performance. Shin Lim did fool them and he did yet another great job!

Good magic to all,


Eric
Message: Posted by: Boomer (Aug 2, 2017 11:11PM)
Great editorial by Mike Close in the August 2017 issue of M.U.M.

He talks about Fool Us, Masters of Illusion, AGT, Carbonaro Effect, etc.


Dave
Message: Posted by: Ray Haining (Aug 3, 2017 11:09AM)
[quote] On Aug 2, 2017, MeetMagicMike wrote:
Penn and Teller didn't "rise to fame by being exposers of magic". [/quote]

Please.

The first time I heard about Penn and Teller was in about 1987 or 1988. I was working in an office on Long Island, NY. A fellow worker asked me if had seen the magicians Penn and Teller on Broadway. He excitedly told me, "They're not like other magicians. They show you how they do the tricks!"

Does nobody remember Penn instructing a whole audience of hundreds to stand up and do, in unison, the vanishing silk trick using a TT, which he had previously taught them (laymen all) to do (and supplied them each with a TT and silk)? Ask anyone who was doing that trick at the time how they felt about that.

Or what about the show where Teller was run over by a tractor trailer and then immediately the "non-exposers," casually, went into how it was done.

On and on.

And let's not forgot how their approach to magic inspired others to follow the same route (hint: one wore a mask).

I think magicians' irrational "love" for Penn and Teller can only be explained as some sort of variation of the Stockholm syndrome.

As far as Shin Lim's performance on Fool Us being edited, I watched his "At the Table" lecture, where there was no chance of it being edited, and thought he was great. But I would not have wasted my time watching him on a show such as Fool Us, where there is no guarantee the performances won't be edited.
Message: Posted by: willmagicman (Aug 3, 2017 11:36AM)
This topic is getting interesting. I see firm 'camps' being set up. Who do I go with? Shall I toss a coin? ... Aw man! ... I've gleaned a few bits of information so far though:

1, If you dare to critisise Shin Lim .... then you're classified by some as a 'hater'. And 'hate' is not a very nice word at all in the context of this topic ... I don't for one minute think that anyone here 'hates' Shin lim. Maybe we 'Hate' 'Adolf Hitler', but not Shim.

2, As for loving Penn and Teller: ..... Well it seems your 'Damned if you do, and ***ed if you don't'!

3, Ray made me laugh in his above post when he quoted the 'Stockholm syndrome'. Nice one Ray! Very funny.

Will.
Message: Posted by: harris (Aug 4, 2017 10:10PM)
I was first introduced to P&T in San Francisco.
There was a 3rd member creating Asparagus. (Or another vegetable)

My wife liked Shin's performance.
She is also a fan of folks like the creator of the FISM Champagne Coin & Card act.
She(my wife)was not totally fooled and caught things I did not.

We both enjoyed the total package - edited or not. M

Harris
This post was edited/NOT
Message: Posted by: lynnef (Aug 5, 2017 03:40PM)
[quote]On Aug 1, 2017, Yuan Moons wrote:
After coming back from a terrible accident and doing another masterful performance Shim still gets slagged off, dissected and exposed on the Café. No one hates magicians more than other magicians. 😂 [/quote]

Further down your post, we find Penn and Teller being slagged as well. I loved Shin Lim's act, and think P and T were indeed "fooled". Servante? maybe, or maybe black cloth???? Or maybe wild cards??? lap, or maybe topit???? maybe maybe maybe. We've all seen Penn and Teller come up to a magician with notes in hand, which turned out to be a wrong 'guess'. I also thought it was a 'masterful' performance, Yuan! However, I don't know if it's hate, or just old fashioned jealousy coming from the Café! Lynn
Message: Posted by: magicnorm (Aug 5, 2017 06:41PM)
Touche' Lynn, I believe you hit the proverbial nail right on the head. I think what is thought but not said is " how cool, wish I could be the one doing that ". Kudos to Shim Lim, Great Job!!

NM
Message: Posted by: lynnef (Aug 6, 2017 12:18PM)
[quote]On Aug 5, 2017, magicnorm wrote:
Touche' Lynn, I believe you hit the proverbial nail right on the head. I think what is thought but not said is " how cool, wish I could be the one doing that ". Kudos to Shim Lim, Great Job!!

NM [/quote]

That said, I also wanted to show appreciation for the OP, who asked an honest question about editing. The OP shows some editing was done (perhaps time considerations?); however, I don't believe Shin Lim is a camera-effect magic act. I still think the fellows were fooled. There were so many parts to the act (manipulations, color changes, wild card, etc) all blended into a great act. Lynn
Message: Posted by: Illucifer (Aug 7, 2017 12:47AM)
I work with Shin on a daily basis. He is a talented and generous performer. As for what real audiences in a live setting think, well, I see and hear them respond to his act several times a day with gasps of astonishment and enthusiastic applause.
Message: Posted by: magic___lover (Aug 7, 2017 03:13AM)
[quote]On Aug 5, 2017, lynnef wrote:However, I don't know if it's hate, or just old fashioned jealousy coming from the Café! Lynn [/quote]

It's so lazy to say someone is jealous if they don't agree with your view on a performance.

I found it very boring. Too much black art, really obvious disposal of the black cards and then the trick deck when spread looking like what it was. i.e. you were seeing about 1/3 of the cards in the spread. I also hated the music and pretentious poses. Loved Penn's mockery of that.

Am I jealous of him? No. Do I hate? No.

I just didn't like it.
Message: Posted by: lynnef (Aug 7, 2017 04:40PM)
Check out magic names and media forum!!! Fellow Café magician David Parr is due to appear on Fool Us (inviting all in Chicago area to an Aug 11 viewing). Perhaps we'll all be able to follow up on the 'editing' question then. Lynn
Message: Posted by: David Parr (Aug 10, 2017 11:28PM)
My experience: There were eight acts recorded on the same day as I was, and there was no time for retakes. I got one shot at it. P&T had never seen my act; Aly Hannigan had never seen my act. P&T don't even know who is booked on the show until that person's name is announced in front of the cameras. Having now viewed the episode, I can see where the editors trimmed out tiny bits of my performance to make it run faster — a few words here and there, a tiny moment of inactivity. But they in no way altered the effect or hid anything related to the method. As far as that goes, the TV viewer is seeing exactly what the live audience saw on the day.
Message: Posted by: the Sponge (Aug 10, 2017 11:36PM)
I have read other places, black art effects are usually shot twice because the lighting needed for the cameras is quite bright and reveals the workings. So they do it once with regular lighting for the audience (so they can get actual reactions) then again either with camera lighting either without an audience or it is just spoiled for them. Perhaps this could have something to do with the two tapings?

s
Message: Posted by: WitchDocChris (Aug 11, 2017 08:54AM)
[quote]On Aug 10, 2017, David Parr wrote:
My experience: There were eight acts recorded on the same day as I was, and there was no time for retakes. I got one shot at it. P&T had never seen my act; Aly Hannigan had never seen my act. P&T don't even know who is booked on the show until that person's name is announced in front of the cameras. Having now viewed the episode, I can see where the editors trimmed out tiny bits of my performance to make it run faster — a few words here and there, a tiny moment of inactivity. But they in no way altered the effect or hid anything related to the method. As far as that goes, the TV viewer is seeing exactly what the live audience saw on the day. [/quote]

Thanks for the insider perspective. That actually answered some questions I didn't even realize I was thinking about, regarding the workings of the show.
Message: Posted by: Pointyskull (Aug 11, 2017 11:59AM)
[quote]On Aug 10, 2017, David Parr wrote:
My experience: There were eight acts recorded on the same day as I was, and there was no time for retakes. I got one shot at it. P&T had never seen my act; Aly Hannigan had never seen my act. P&T don't even know who is booked on the show until that person's name is announced in front of the cameras. Having now viewed the episode, I can see where the editors trimmed out tiny bits of my performance to make it run faster — a few words here and there, a tiny moment of inactivity. But they in no way altered the effect or hid anything related to the method. As far as that goes, the TV viewer is seeing exactly what the live audience saw on the day. [/quote]

Loved your 'bell' act. Great fun!
Message: Posted by: David Parr (Aug 11, 2017 02:44PM)
Glad I could give some insight, witchdoc. And thanks, pointyskull!
Message: Posted by: EndersGame (Aug 12, 2017 04:09AM)
I just watched a video clip your performance David, very well done! Using a bell was a lovely touch that really helped make your routine entertaining to watch. And congratulations on being awarded as a "Fooler"! Here's the clip in case anyone else wants to check it out:

[youtube]em7zoY7mMg8[/youtube]

Two other things I'm curious about the show, besides the editing, if you feel like sharing:

1. Do you get much say in how your intro is presented? Or do the producers basically script something they feel says something about you, and tell you what kind of intro package they want to do?

2. Is the post-performance chat with Alyson Hannigan really as brief as it appears, or do Penn and Teller actually get more time to figure things out? I'm always amazed at the clever one-liners in the banter between the show host and performers following the trick, and I've wondered how much of that conversation is off-the-cuff, or scripted/prepared. Do you have any idea in advance what Alyson might ask you, or is that all genuinely thinking on your feet for everyone concerned?

Once again, congratulations on a solid performance, and a successful result, especially in the positive approach you had in your recovery following your accident.
Message: Posted by: David Parr (Aug 12, 2017 02:26PM)
[quote]On Aug 12, 2017, EndersGame wrote:

1. Do you get much say in how your intro is presented? Or do the producers basically script something they feel says something about you, and tell you what kind of intro package they want to do?

2. Is the post-performance chat with Alyson Hannigan really as brief as it appears, or do Penn and Teller actually get more time to figure things out? I'm always amazed at the clever one-liners in the banter between the show host and performers following the trick, and I've wondered how much of that conversation is off-the-cuff, or scripted/prepared. Do you have any idea in advance what Alyson might ask you, or is that all genuinely thinking on your feet for everyone concerned?[/quote]

Thanks, Enders! Glad you dug the performance. As for your questions:

1. If you're referring to the bio segment, that's pulled from an on-camera interview that is recorded the day before the live shoot. So none of that is scripted. It's just me answering questions, from which they choose the pul-quotes. Rick Manfredi was the director for the bio. After our initial interview, he said "I noticed how many times you mentioned books and reading. We're gonna shoot some footage in a bookstore." He did a great job with it.

2. The post-performance interview is always edited down, and mine is VERY edited down. Before the shoot, I asked the producers how long P&T confer to come up with a hypothesis, and they said "About three to five minutes." In my case, they conferred for double that. Alyson ran out of questions to ask me, so I started interviewing her. When P&T still hadn't finished their intense discussion and scribbling on notepads, Alyson and I started doing commentary on what they were doing. Finally, she said "I think they've talked enough. I'm gonna interrupt them." So she waved her hand and said "Boys! I think you've talked enough!" At that point, they had to put their cards on the table. I expected them to at least have a working theory, a guess. When they came up bust, I was shocked — as evidenced by the look on my face. Surprise!

And speaking of surprise, none of the onstage interaction is scripted. The producers keep everything secret from P&T so when the performer's name is announced on camera, it's a genuine surprise. I didn't rehearse with Aly Hannigan. She had no idea what she was in for. I did ask the producers to check on one thing before the segment was recorded: find out if Alyson Hannigan is color blind. She is not.
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Aug 10, 2018 03:21PM)
[quote]On Jul 31, 2017, Alex DLF wrote:
... Shin Lim at Fool Us, ... [/quote] Heard rave reviews from a coworker today. So for the intended audience and repeat views - the TV show as presented seems to have worked.