I have been performing mentalism now for about 2 years. Most of the venues have been smaller parties of 30-60 people and well received. Last night I performed for a dinner of 300 people and I realized within 4 minutes of the 25 minute act that I lost half the room.
Looking over the video I think with a crowd that large I need more quick punches and wow factors. I opened with a quick 30 second introduction -
- think of a number between 1-10
- think of a fruit leading into a book test
Then I performed Chronologue and closed the show with a printed advertisement prediction via a chameleon chest that was loaded with info from each table.
How do I expedite these or any "mentalist" routine without losing impact?

David, while think of a number 1-10 may be a quick opener it has some problems. The biggest is they seen it before. This 1-10 thing may be part of the problem. Since the effect does not grab the attention of your audience enough to keep them in their seats.

The other problem is if your show was after dinner at a conference the people will get ready for the activities of that event scheduled late that evening. don't know what the venue was but it could be venue related. Something to look at.

My rule of thumb is if they can't hear you and can't see you then you're in trouble. 300 people in a theater or auditorium where they are coming to see you may be no problem whereas if the people are spread out in a catering hall with columns etc. in the way you can have problem. The venue and mood of the people can also effect your show. You want to perform for a sober audience either before dinner or after they have eaten. If you can get all these details worked out before you sign on to do the show then assuming you have a good act you should do well.

Steve

Without actually watching the video, it's impossible to make an accurate assessment of your show.

However, if your show has a strong enough premise, it should be able to be scaled up from 30-60 people to over 300 with only slight adjustments in presentation, mostly by using larger "props" so that more people can see what you're doing (although this is not absolutely necessary in all cases).

A psychological force of a number between 1-10 does seem rather weak. Why not use the 37 force instead with such a large group of people (or even one of the riskier forces)?

Did you just perform seemingly unconnected mentalism "tricks," or did you give your audience a chance to get to know you (or your persona) as you took them on a journey from premise to conclusion?

And finally, Steve is correct. Were you properly miked and lit so folks could easily hear and see you? Did you perform before dinner, during, or afterwards? Was the audience primed to expect some entertainment?

Have you ever performed for 300 people? It is a somewhat different experience. When a band goes from one level of venue to the next, they often experience similar growing pains. Broadcasting one's self to 300 people has different requirements then for 50 people.

I don't believe the missing element was punch, since it seemed to work for smaller groups. My first consideration would be "Did you connect with the back 2/3 of the audience?" Did you broadcast well to the entire audience? Not just technically but also emotionally.

Agreeing with Tom.. a different size audience can make quite a difference in how different effects are perceived.

I think Tom is spot on. Whenever I see an inexperienced performer struggle in that environment, it's invariably because they’re not working the whole room. Also, when you watch the video back, keep in mind that the camera may have had a better view than many of the audience. If there wasn’t a proper stage, anything that happened below chest height could well have been lost on most of them.

When I work a large audience, my main focus during the first part of the act is on gaining the interest and attention of everyone in the room. I would always select and script the first few routines with that goal in mind. Remember, you haven't failed if you don't have everyone’s full attention within the first 4 minutes. You still have time to build and engage everyone’s interest. But until I had everyone with me, I would focus everything on building rapport, rather than just carrying on with my planned material.

Some of the effects you mentioned really need an engaged audience in order to work. The Chameleon Box, for instance, is not something I’d want to attempt until after I had an audience with me. Any routine involving lots of billets being collected up is almost guaranteed to struggle if you don’t already have their interest before it starts.

Sean

I never performed for 300 people.
the video setup had two screens and a fixed camera on me but there was only one microphone which was not wireless - that limited me.
I do engage the audience before "jumping into" the psychological forces - but apparently not enough.
I connect my mentalism - I don't just perform feats to show off.
I think what threw me off was the wired mic. It took away freedeom of movement and was a tad awkward for me.
I definitely question the venue and will be more selective and cautious about shows.
I do agree that the forces are weak and definitely looking for a more powerful and exciting opening that "connects" with an audience

Is it possible to talk too much? In other words when I perform for the smaller groups I felt they had more patience for me to do my build up - maybe the build up should have been shorter for the larger audience?

It really depends on what you're talking about. If what you are saying engages your audience then you can have more liberty to speak at length.

-rob

I use a wired mike all the time and always rehearse my act with a microphone on a stand. If you haven't actually choreographed your act to include a hand-held mike and rehearsed with a stand to work out the blocking of all your movements – then it becomes a huge obstacle when you find yourself faced with one. It’s like suddenly having to perform your show with your hands tied together!

Bill Cosby and many other entertainers did nothing BUT talk for multiple hours. In my experience with dinner theater (I hate them) and after dinner entertainment is that people who are far away from the performer feel they don't have to pay attention. The rest are being polite. You have to come out with authority and target the back of the room with your body posture, inflection, etc. Eye contact is big.

Weakness, insecurity, and nerves can be smelled a mile away by an audience and losing them is often a sign that they are uncomfortable and would rather talk amongst each other. That said, I've done dinners in the past where many couldn't hear and/or see and we lost them quickly. I've also had dinner theaters where they just didn't care one bit about the entertainment and almost felt like we were interrupting their good time. Not good. And I refuse to compete with the service or with food. All the food and plates must be gone off every table and the service people out of the room before I will go on. Period.

All that said, if the audience up front reacts to what you do, the rest will want to know what's going on. I'm sure you've done stuff close-up before that caused a big reaction and people all over started pouring in to see what was going on. With good magic/mentalism, there's no such thing as a performance for just a couple of people if there are people around. It quickly becomes a performance for the entire place, even if you don't want it to be. "Do it again" "he didn't see" "just one more time" "show my friend"

So, I'd be more concerned about the fact that the reaction from the audience who was paying attention wasn't good enough. And of course, first impressions are so important. Is the first thing you say interesting? Does it intrigue people and make them want to find out what's going on? I feel it usually best to start out with something incredible and then introduce yourself. Any newspaper story starts with a headline that gets your attention and makes you ask questions. It helps if the first sentence that comes out of your mouth captures the interest of the audience. That will give you enough time to finish the first effect and if you blow them away with that, they'll make sure not to miss anything else.

If I came out on stage and said "There are three main things I like about being naked" chances are every single person in the building would be paying attention to the next 2 or 3 minutes of what I said. Of course I might not be rebooked...but you get the idea lol

Dude!!
I had the same exact experience Yesterday!
I have always performed for groups of 50 people
but yesterday performed in an open theathre for 200-300 people and I also had the problem of the mike AND... my lighter wasnt working because of the wind.. ill have to remember to get a zippo.
and I thought it was just ok..
people did applaud and stuff
but they applauded more the magic tricks than the mentalism effects (which I consider stronger)
for example they applauded more the healed and sealed effect than when I did my book test routine...

I thought people didn't like the show but backstage people were excited with my performance and a lot of spectators got close to ask me for my businesscard and congratulate me

here is the thing.. usually in a room of 50 people you get to be closer and get the energy, but in a theatre of 300.. that;s not the case, is just a different. I did notice that I don't think I managed to get all the audience into the act.. maybe next time I will open with bank night or a chair routine.

Also, I had another thought. If you had video screens, everyone was watching the screens and not you, even those near the front. That completely changes eye contact. If you aren't looking at the camera, you aren't looking at the audience. In those situations I think you have to perform for the camera, not the audience. I don't like that, personally. I'd have my logo or something on the screen until I needed a closeup of something shown (like the spoon, or the spec's hand, etc.).

Kreskin performs long, drawn-out effects to large audiences. So do many other mentalists. My guess—and I wasn't there so I can't be sure—but my guess is that the rapport of ANTICIPATION was not built up even before you entered.

In a smaller crowd such as you're familiar with, just coming out as the entertainer and your opening talk/effect can be enough. But for a larger crowd—with lots of people in the back who cannot see you and be influenced by you as intimately as those up close—it's valuable to "grab" them before you even walk on stage.

A poster of you outside the hall describing how incredible your entertainment is will help.
A recorded introduction describing how you've amazed thousands all over the world (or just amazed people all over your town, whatever is accurate) will help.
If there is an MC and other acts, having the MC refer to you between the other acts ("Later we'll have David who will astound you with his ability to know exactly what you're thinking!") will help.

In planning shows I would suggest that it's important to consider that whatever can go wrong will go wrong and plan accordingly. If it doesn't go wrong, you're ahead of the game. This means planning on working with a wired microphone as well as a wireless. This means planning on working a 300-person crowd with no microphone. And if you use contracts, include that they should supply a wireless microphone.

As one of my teachers told me, "You don't want your best show to be so good that it blows everyone's mind. You want your WORST show to be so good that it blows everyone's mind."

For what it's worth, one of the first things I invested in was a quality (wireless headset) mic (and receiver). This way, provided that the audio in the venue is decent (minimum audio requirements are in my contract), I know that I will always be heard, the way I want/need to be heard, using a mic that I'm comfortable with and suits my performance style/needs.

I'm certainly not suggesting that you go the wireless headset route, as I know there are performers who prefer other options (whether a lavalier - which can be tricky as it won't follow your head movements, or a handheld mic). But if you invest in a good mic system, you've got one of the most important aspects of performing, covered.

In fact, the system is use most often is dual receiver; providing one headset/belt-pack and one wireless handheld (which I use for audience members, as another common mistake in larger venues is not allowing the audience to hear what your 'assistant' is saying).

e

You asked, "Is it possible to talk too much?" YES! I STRONGLY encourage you to pick up Ken Weber's book "Maximum Entertainment". It's pure gold. He says that anytime you speak it should be for 1 of 3 reasons. To elicit Rapt attention, Humor,or to give instructions.

Go pick that book up! It's one of the best out there. It would have eliminated your microphone problem as well. Seriously ... go get it!

Yes, it is possible to talk too much, but Paul Stockman regularly performs effects that involve complete stories extending a 2 minute effect with at least 5 more minutes. It really depends on what you say and how you've set the mood before hand.

I think it went wrong with your opener. Predicting a number between 1 and 10 simply isn't impressive to most audiences, especially when your spectator happens to chose 7. A lot of people know that is a common choice. I would either go for a 3 or 4 digit number or use another effect altogether. A thrown-out paperball with a color force would work better in my opinion and if you throw it right, you can catch the attention of the back of the room immediately. If you can stop those people from losing interest, you've won half the battle, because you won't have a snowball effect of dropping attention from the back spreading across the rest of the audience.

As Tom and others have pointed out, there is a WORLD of difference between performing for an intimate group of 30-50 and performing for an audience of 200+. In addition to concerns of sound, lighting, visibility, etc., the larger the audience the more "commanding" the presence required on the part of the performer. Many of the same effects used for smaller groups can still be used but large accouterments (I've intentionally avoided referring to them as "props") may be required -- i.e., a large tripod mounted flip chart instead of a note pad or clipboard, etc. Unless sightlines are a major problem and there is no other option, I'd avoid the use of video screens or monitors. If the problem is that small objects are involved, the answer is to use larger objects, not video monitors.

With a large group, it becomes even more important that the opening effect is one that will capture everyone's attention.

sbay's recommendation that one read and study Ken Webber's "Maximum Entertainment" is sound advice for any performer.

Watch and learn from veteran stand-up comedians. These guys perform propless shows every night and keep their audiences attention (Sans Carrot-Top). Heck, Rosanne Barr used to have a show on the Las Vegas strip where she would just take questions from the audience and use this as her source material for the entire show. This sounds really familiar. Hmmmmm....

-rob