The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Magic names and the media » » Penn & Teller (0 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5~6 [Next]
MichaelCGM
View Profile
Inner circle
Oklahoma City
2266 Posts

Profile of MichaelCGM
Quote:
On 2011-01-07 17:11, Jim-Callahan wrote: Not saying they are not good at what they do. But saying what they do is not good.

I find myself agreeing with you. Nicely said.

Quote:
On 2011-01-07 17:52, Jim-Callahan wrote: Why not go on get in a fight with them then start a web series exposing them? Take apart their enire act and pay for the web sites promotion.

They definitely deserve it, but it would also expose methods utilized by other performers. As much as I'd love to see them taken down a peg or two, we really don't need more exposure. Whadayathink?
Magically Yours,

Magical Michael

MagicalMichael.com Smile Laus Deo!
bobser
View Profile
Inner circle
4176 Posts

Profile of bobser
Quote:
On 2011-01-07 22:07, MichaelCGM wrote:

Quote:
On 2011-01-07 17:52, Jim-Callahan wrote: Why not go on get in a fight with them then start a web series exposing them? Take apart their enire act and pay for the web sites promotion.


They definitely deserve it, but it would also expose methods utilized by other performers. As much as I'd love to see them taken down a peg or two, we really don't need more exposure. Whadayathink?


Jim's not talking about exposing magic per say. The only thing that would be exposed is Penn and Teller's act, their ENTIRE act. I'd say all things considered that that's a pretty fair sentence, which of course would send out a message to the world that magicians don't take sh-t.

First things first; I think the small fella talks. When John Archer was on I saw him mouth the words to the big guy:"This guys a lot f---ing funnier than us. Lets expose the b-stard."
Bob Burns is the creator of The Swan.
Mike Ince
View Profile
Inner circle
2014 Posts

Profile of Mike Ince
I think Penn loves to be hated. Don't fuel his fire.
The secret of deception is in making the truth seem ridiculous.
SWNerndase
View Profile
Regular user
168 Posts

Profile of SWNerndase
I haven't seen the show (is it available in the US yet?), but I did take a look at the Twitter feed for #foolus.

It seems the opinion here is not shared by the general public who mostly raved about the show and the magicians on the show. I'll reserve judgement until I can see it for myself, but most of the comments are favorable.

SWN
markmiller
View Profile
Special user
729 Posts

Profile of markmiller
Here's the current headline on Itricks.com: Twitter Punditry Over The Moon For Penn & Teller’s Fool Us, Series Next? US Show Far Behind?
DR STEVE HOSKINS
View Profile
Special user
North Wales, UK.
831 Posts

Profile of DR STEVE HOSKINS
I did enjoy the show,great production & great acts. I was uncomfortable with the exposure though and thought it unnecssary.
But I was made up for John Archer, - well done John.

Steve
KerryJK
View Profile
Special user
Northampton UK
621 Posts

Profile of KerryJK
The pitch for the show was Penn and Teller challenging anyone in the UK to come and try and fool them. "If you can't," said Penn, "Go home".

From that premise, this show was always going to have exposure involved. Anyone who tuned it expecting P+T to throw their hands up at everything and say "wow, golly, real magic!" has either never seen, heard of or read anything by or about the duo and their previous work or lives in a dream. Likewise, a smug "sure we know how that's done, next!" response wouldn't have satisfied the audience.

So what I feared was an X-Factor audition style parade of deluded wannabes (hey, I could have got booked for that!) who would then have their Penguin Magic routines torn apart by Penn Cowell, interspersed with the odd decent magician to keep the dream alive. Instead we saw a terrific selection of performers, performing strong routines that were treated by all concerned as the quality performances they were. The biggest exposure of the evening was the explanation/deconstruction of the 10 of hearts routine, but that guy should have known that such a common prop with an NLP smokescreen wouldn't do the business and I honestly can't think of another way Penn could have put it. Maybe this was a trick that just shouldn't have been on the show. The other two tips were about false shuffles (though even that was confused into a mock debate about the existence of full and half shuffles) and a begrudging theory on John Archer's envelope trick. Both were denied. The rest of the 'exposures' gave away nothing, using specialist language, vague techniques that everyone in the audience knew anyway (references to Ali Cook's "puppetry") and, in the case of the compressor illusion, a diagram by Teller shown only to the performer to get his affirmation and then destroyed.

All in all, I'm with the mass audience - I really enjoyed this and think it was on balance a good showcase for the art of magic. For those who think referring to the very existence of a method reduces magic to a puzzle... well, that's why we're in trouble if secrets are all we have, though I would perhaps have liked more reference made to the fact that, in magic, there is never just one way of doing anything.
People will naturally look for explanations for things they don't understand and don't like to be treated as idiots; the balance is in showing them enough respect and openess to let them drop their defences and enjoy the experience for what it is, a magical experience based on a willing suspension of disbelief. It's fun to be fooled, it's not fun to feel like a mug.
Gatehouse
View Profile
Regular user
Cardiff, UK
117 Posts

Profile of Gatehouse
Quote:
People will naturally look for explanations for things they don't understand and don't like to be treated as idiots; the balance is in showing them enough respect and openess to let them drop their defences and enjoy the experience for what it is, a magical experience based on a willing suspension of disbelief. It's fun to be fooled, it's not fun to feel like a mug.


Just want to point something out here...

Quote:
It should be noted that there is a psychological difference in the appeal, in the manner of presentation, between what we call two branches of the mystic art – ‘magicians’ and ‘mentalists’. While both accomplish their effects by trickery, the mentalist rarely admits it. There is an important reason for this attitude of the mentalist. His mysteries of the mind are impressive only when cloaked in an atmosphere of genuine phenomena.
The Tarbell Course in Magic


My point is, no, people do not want to feel like mugs. They don't want to be ranted at by emphatic magicians who swear blind that the lady in the box was 100% completely ripped apart by that saw.
On the other hand, what they did to John Archer was wrong. Mentalism relies on a bit of cloak and dagger moreso than magic in general and it seems to me that they completely undermined him professionally.

Not cool.

(Just for the record, the quote above (from Tarbell) was courtesy of Bob Cassidy's Fundamentals)
mindpunisher
View Profile
Inner circle
6132 Posts

Profile of mindpunisher
The premise of the show was flawed from the start. It was neverreally about the acts. It was a platform to massage the egos of Pen And Teller. What we all seem to forget is that magic or mentalism isn't really about fooling its about entertaining. And I think John Arches biggest mistake was to be more entertaining than Penn & Teller. They absolutely hated the fact that John was better than what they were. They gave absolutely no credit for the routine/presentation which was I thought really well crafted and very funny and a much bigger component than the method. They tried to dismiss the whole routine as just silly.

Ok Las Vegas is a huge break but to made to beg and crawl on your knees in front of the nation is just not on.
markmiller
View Profile
Special user
729 Posts

Profile of markmiller
KerryJK's opinion sounds right to me. The great thing about the Sawing is that the exposed method is the exact method used to fool the audience. I think that is clever and proves the exposed method is still a good one that works. I think these guys respect the audience at large and make them feel like they are on their side, and at the same time fool and entertain them. Plus they give an opportunity to other fine performers. I think magic is helped, not hurt. The "hook" for the general public of the idea of exposure is more of a presentational premise than a nuts and bolts exposure like the Masked Magician. The contest aspect seems more legitimate than The Magicians, which seems a bit ridiculous.
blackESP
View Profile
Regular user
107 Posts

Profile of blackESP
Why would a mentalist go on a show like this?
Gatehouse
View Profile
Regular user
Cardiff, UK
117 Posts

Profile of Gatehouse
Quote:
Plus they give an opportunity to other fine performers.


Do you really think an 'opportunity' is worth undermining ones professional persona?
In mentalism, where working your character is so important, the exposition that there even is a 'method' contrary to the one you may be claiming is undermining, simple as that.

I do agree however... I don't know why a mentalist would do this show considering the obvious risks (even though it was fantastic so see Archer blow them away)
KerryJK
View Profile
Special user
Northampton UK
621 Posts

Profile of KerryJK
John Archer was introduced as, and is, a comedy magician, so his routine wasn't presented as a demonstration of mentalism. That's possibly why P+T reacted as they did, he caught them off guard.

The NLP dismissal following the "poker face" routine was an anti-mentalist exposure, but Penn especially has a personal zeal against anyone he thinks is making serious false claims based on magical effects so I doubt he'd have much sympathy for holding mentalists to different standards anyway. I remember an interview in which he credited James Randi with showing him that he could "do magic and still be on the side of truth and justice" - my reaction at the time was knickers, I like magic because it's a chance to get away from such mundane necessities for a while - but it helped me to understand where he's coming from.

I'll try and find that Tarbell quote in its original context, thanks for bringing it up.
markmiller
View Profile
Special user
729 Posts

Profile of markmiller
I thnk the Randi quote is more along the lines of, with magic it's possible to tell the truth by lying.
SWNerndase
View Profile
Regular user
168 Posts

Profile of SWNerndase
Got to see the show this morning here in the US. I don't know what everyone is complaining about.

Very good magicians, getting to do what they really do (instead of a one-off trick with a lame celebrity participating) and the "exposure" you all had me worried about was nothing really. The show is focused on method because, well, it's called "fool us" but I felt there was a level of respect for magic, and the magicians on the program, that hasn't been seen on a competition type show before. No one was mocked or embarrassed for not fooling P&T, and while they got "sort of close" to exposing a few things, they were not blabbing methods to the world as the thread here seemed to suggest.

I liked the show. I liked the magicians on the show. I liked that good magic was seen by the public. I hope P&T decide to do more of them.

SWN
markmiller
View Profile
Special user
729 Posts

Profile of markmiller
Definitely a million times better than how magicians are presented on Americas/Britians Got Talent.
Mesaboogie
View Profile
Special user
804 Posts

Profile of Mesaboogie
But why oh why did the magic consultants who picked these acts choose Michael Vincent doing standard card sleights (albeit hard ones and executed flawlessly) and a stage magician doing the "squeeze box"?? Given the point of the programme was to "fool Penn and Teller" these acts should never have been there in the first place.

John Archer was fab though, brilliant routine, well executed, and great patter. He comes across as a very likeable man, as we know he is, and I wish him luck in Vegas.

Andrew
TheMindReader.co.uk

Everyday, in everyway, I am becoming better and better
markmiller
View Profile
Special user
729 Posts

Profile of markmiller
My guess is that for television a bit of variety of the spice of life. If tv execs insisted on including an illusion or some card stuff, exactly what would have been very much better?
edh
View Profile
Inner circle
4698 Posts

Profile of edh
@SWN, what channel did you see this on?
Magic is a vanishing art.
jdmagic357
View Profile
Special user
737 Posts

Profile of jdmagic357
Ok finally saw it and the nay sayers are much to do about nothing. P&T were respectful enough given their vast knowledge and experience. Unlike others we have seen in competitions claiming to be better than everyone on the show, they did a great job.

Peace.
Just cause they say it, doesn't make it true.
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Magic names and the media » » Penn & Teller (0 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5~6 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2020 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.16 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 <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL