|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5 | ||||||||||
Chris K Inner circle 2544 Posts |
Quote:
On 2008-08-07 21:59, Nathan Pain wrote: Yeah, man, you did great. Let's see I went: Louis Ramey Jeff Dye Iliza Marcus Jim All over the place. I thought Louis hit the patriotic, "red-neck" (quote, not a judgment, fyi), and african-american vote based on his set. Obviously, I was wrong (this is assuming they were announced in reverse order, don't remember them saying it explicitly but that is my assumption). Marcus had a strong set, which I said, but I thought going first people might forget about him. Thought Jeff's looks would play more. And Jim, although brilliant, isn't for the mainstream US audience. Excellent job, Nate. I still think it was Iliza's weakest set (except for the set she did that night) but I am very happy she won. I thought she was the best at the SF Showcase (I was there, remember) and rooted for her and Jeff the whole way, which I mentioned PRIOR to the final results (just so nobody accuses me of jumping on the bandwagon). I had hoped for a better turnout of people trying to back-up all their talk with a real life example. I thought it would be very educational to everybody involved. In the end, however, it was very informative for me, on many levels. Here's an obvious one: number of distinct posters prior to asking people to put their money where their mouth is: 20 number of posters who posted in between the last two episodes, after the challenge was laid down (where you could have voted): 7 number of those 7 posters who actually put their money where their mouth was: 2 That's right of all the people throwing out all kinds of theories, 2 people. TWO! And one (not me) was *** near spot on. That is what I learned, of 20 people, 18 spout off theories and arguments and such but never actually do anything. That is what I learned. Just like the very first post, this isn't a new thought, just a very good illustration showing a very sad fact. Thanks for proving me right guys, except for you, Nate, why you have to go and spoil it all by showing that somebody on the Café has integrity and intellegence, JEEZ! -Lem |
|||||||||
Floyd Collins Inner circle Ohio 1633 Posts |
"Thanks for proving me right guys, except for you, Nate, why you have to go and spoil it all by showing that somebody on the Café has integrity and intellegence, JEEZ!"
Lem, why must you belittle others?
No one said it would be easy, or did they?
Check out my all new book "Chicken Scratches" visit my lulu store for more information. http://www.lulu.com/spotlight/thecenterstage http://www.collinscomedymagic.com |
|||||||||
MagicbyCarlo Inner circle has squandered his time making 1062 Posts |
Filter. I agree with Greg, Rick and Thomas on many points. Great topic. My father use to say "Believe none of what you hear and only half of what you see." In other words look at everything critically. Advice, criticism, or praise is no different. Another great saying is "Money talks and ******** walks." So filter and check your check. This forum is full of experts, myself included; but I'm at least aware enough to know that there are no absolutes and that opinions can be different varied and valid for the possessor and those who think like them but not so much for others. So I guess I have always been aware that I'm clueless and I'm certain that many, if they were willing to put aside their egos, would admit the same. We can't, and shouldn't, all wear the same size and color suit, so how could everyone’s taste apply to everyone else?
It just dawned on me! I’m even clueless when it comes to this; so I guess: I’m not too clueless to know that I’m clueless. Or am I?
Carlo DeBlasio
<BR>Entertainment specialist <BR>and all around fun guy! |
|||||||||
Nathan Pain Inner circle iowa 2825 Posts |
I would just like to say that I am awesome...bow to me!
Nathan
...
|
|||||||||
Paul Budd Elite user It's a shame he's only made 435 Posts |
It's so funny when someone on the Café "reads my mind" and posts a topic like this one.........
I've only done about 7 shows in my whole adult life.......but I was deeply involved in theater in H.S. and a little so in college (mostly on the technical end of things). I've been involved a couple of times when my magic club, though, has done large benefit-type shows....and it tickles me how so many people are so congratulatory of themselves afterward and I think, "Dear Lord, I could hardly stand to be in the room when you were on stage." - -please, don't ever make the mistake of thinking that because people clapped, they liked you.....sometimes it's their desire to hurry you off stage that motivates them to clap.
His face isn't really this long in-person!
___________________________________________ Once Upon A Magician blog |
|||||||||
Jonathan Inner circle Oklahoma 1223 Posts |
I'm glad this thread was brought back up so I could read it. I definitely think this is a huge problem. Interesting that it's so hard to predict response by the public. After all, you are trying to find out what most people will think, so it should be easy to find someone who represents them! But, it's nearly impossible...even after focus groups.
Few experts know anything when it comes to other people. :-/ I'm foremost a performer. I've performed many different kinds of things over my lifetime, it's what I love and what I'm good at. I may not be the best singer, joke writer, sleight of hand artist, etc. but I can probably find a way to do whatever it is in a way that an audience likes...even if it means poking fun at how bad at something I am. I'm not great at coming up with brand new methods or things like that. Banachek and DB are the best at that, IMO and I bow to their talents. I don't have the discipline to be good at sleights and the technical part of magic, and I have difficulty memorizing and remembering names. Now, I believe I'm very adept at creating subtleties and improving effects. So, I have to be inspired by other people's methods or principles and see how I can take it to the next level and structure it in a way that audiences will love. I'm ruthless with myself, and I don't accept anything less than an audience thinking it was best performance of its type that they have ever seen. My goal is to be the most amazing and entertaining show each audience has witnessed. So, any reaction that seems to indicate any less than that, indicates a need to improve. I continue to learn things about performing and audiences that I didn't know before, and probably will never quit learning until the day I die. But, I believe the most important skill necessary to being a good performer is the ability to dissect what happened, separate reality from perception, and find things that indicate something you don't know or are wrong about. It's frustrating that most successful people are successful because they found an area where doing things the way they do them is an advantage. That's very opposite to my approach. I want to find out what it takes to be successful in the area I'm interested in, and learn/grow to do those things. If you don't take that approach I think you are in danger of never reaching your potential, and you won't be able to adapt when situations change (look at older comedians, actors, etc. that continue to do what they've always done even though it no longer works). It happens all the time in the acting world. How often have you seen someone be successful in a particular show or style of movie, but when that show is over or people get sick of that style they find they can't do anything else even though they have the name recognition. They blame it on type-casting, but type-casting only seems to effect actors who can't adapt. You can't act in a movie like you are on a sitcom, you'll look stupid! Robin Williams is a great actor, but he never would have been able to break free from "Mork" if he had done his goofy ADD style in movies. I know I seem all over the place in this post, but my point is that to be a successful performer I think we have to constantly analyze the situation, reality, and ourselves to find how we can be better. Otherwise, we WILL be too clueless to know we are clueless. Equally important, I think we must refuse to settle. A smattering of applause or polite laughter is failure. Over and over again I see people content with a reaction that I would go into a depression over! lol Routining and performing is an art and a skill very different than "magic" or "mentalism", even though I would content that they are more a part of magic/mentalism than anything else. Dane Cook is amazing at these skills, but he is infamous for stealing material. The truth is, however, that he always makes the material he steals better! He takes other people's ideas and improves them. I think he's dirty and cheap, but there's no denying his skill. I saw him perform live in Los Angeles and he was a jerk. He said some really offensive thing and ridiculed a couple of his fans simply because they were excited to see him. The audience at several points turned on him, but he always knew how to get the audience back. He could make the audience react like whatever he wanted. As for "bad audiences", good performers can eventually win over almost any crowd, but there are definitely exceptions. There's not a great comedian who ever lived who has never bombed a set. I've been booed off stage early in my career, and had that situation come up later in my life I would have known never to have gone on that stage. It was suicide! The crowd didn't want to be there and they blamed everything in the show for keeping them from doing what they wanted to do. So, I think that's part of it. I hope this post makes sense. :-/ |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Penny for your thoughts » » Too Clueless To Know We're Clueless? (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5 |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.05 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |