|
|
|
|||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7 [Next] | ||||||||||
Bambaladam Special user 636 Posts 
|
Quote:
On 2005-03-09 19:59, Tom Cutts wrote: No, that would be an erroneous assumption. We have been to shows, and we have seen TV specials. I understand you want to puncture my arguments, but the fact that these names don't make it to my town very often doesn't make me unfit to judge a video production. Quote:
On 2005-03-09 20:44, Richard Osterlind wrote: Richard, Thanks for your response. I think we are talking about different things in a way, and I am fully prepared to agree to disagree. In a lot of ways, you are right to say that suitable efforts are made. I also think I am right to say that other or more efforts would suit my tastes better. I think this is the best note for me to go out on in this debate. I really have no serious disagreement with anyone here, and if someone feels my criticism has been frivolous, my apologies. I would have to say I thought I was staying within the bounds of the constructive and useful. Peace, Bamba |
|||||||||
Richard Osterlind V.I.P. 2213 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2005-03-09 21:20, B&B Magic wrote: Brandon, Again, I can only talk about my own videos. We usually spend one day planning the shoot with Louis Falanga and the camera crew.We start shooting the live show the next morning at about 9:30, break for lunch and continue into the afternoon. That part usually is over by about 4 or 5. Then, after supper, we start the explanations for a couple of hours and finish them up the next day. It is pretty intensive for the 2 days, but Louis does a great job of making everyone feel comfortable and there is usually a day or 2 after for R & R. The studio is absolutely gorgeous with Lake Tahoe stretched out in the background! Finally, Louis and everyone who is part of the L&L staff are the nicest people in the world! Richard PS. About the billet in my pocket: with so many effects, I had props in my pockets for the next 2 weeks! |
|||||||||
|
realorcy New user 79 Posts
|
If the L&L Audience's reaction is really real,I am very happy.I don't want pay for the pretending reaction,I prefer to believe Jon and Dave's reaction are real.I want to be fooled by magicians,not the audience.
|
|||||||||
kOnO Special user 548 Posts
|
I guess L&L Publications must be on to something good I have never seen an Audience get such a response as in this forum.
I guess anything that keeps the L&L name beeing discussed by so many magicians for this long can't be all bad for business. If Jon is not on there payroll then maybe he should be. Keep the GREAT video's coming to us. Thanks kOnO
It is a lot easier to get older than it is to get wiser.
|
|||||||||
|
JoeFreedom Regular user 164 Posts
|
I believe that having a decent audience with good reactions is an important part of the packaging. when I first began watching Sankeys' Secret Files DVD's I almost let them rot on my shelf because of the lack of production values. That would have been a very foolish mistake, but an easy one to make if you didn't know the performer. L&L really gives us a complete package, and while the audience may or may not be any number of things, they do provide us with a gauge. We don't watch in a vacuum and L&L realizes this.
Joe
JoeFreedom
Whether you think you can, or think you can't, you're probably right. |
|||||||||
Tom Cutts Staff Northern CA 5931 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2005-03-10 02:29, Bambaladam wrote: Not trying to poke any holes. Just trying to get clarity. What you actually wrote Quote:
I don't have a lot of opportunities to watch live performers where I live, there's not enough on tv, is that there are not enough live performances period either truly live or on TV. There was no qualifier as to magicians, or big name magicians, or... That is why I asked if we were to assume that you just hadn't experienced much live performance and therefore really had nothing much to compare these video projects to. Nothing more. |
|||||||||
|
Mark Ennis Inner circle Raleigh, NC 1031 Posts
|
I would rather have a spectator like John that overreacts to everything than a bunch of duds that have the attitude of "entertain me, I dare you."
Am I the only person that is not turned off by the L & L audiences?
ME
|
|||||||||
|
chappelly Special user Down Under 744 Posts
|
I'm with you Mark.I reckon the audience themselves are entertaining and add a lot of life to the production even though some of the reactions are over the top.They encourage the magician and make the video enjoyable to watch.
|
|||||||||
|
realorcy New user 79 Posts
|
John and David make the video looks more entertaining,make the performance looks perfect,I enjoy the L&L DVDs.But there is no perfect in realworld. I still wanna see the magicians handling the impromptu laypeople.I enjoy Greg Wilson's on the spot because of the realworld performance.
|
|||||||||
|
Seth Special user 566 Posts
|
Wouldn't you like John and David to be asked whose performance they enjoyed the most? and whose was the most magical? and whose was the most funny? and so on...
|
|||||||||
|
stannmaple Elite user 487 Posts
|
Does Greg Wilson "In Action" use these same people? From the demo, it looked like real people on the streets etc...
|
|||||||||
Cameron Francis V.I.P. 7025 Posts
|
I just started watch In Action. For the most part, it's out on the streets. By the way, I'm a big fan of the first dvd. Haven't watched the other two yet.
MOMENT'S NOTICE LIVE 3 - Six impromptu card tricks! Out now! http://cameronfrancismagic.com/moments-notice-live-3.html
|
|||||||||
|
Futureal Inner circle 1695 Posts
|
On Easy To Master Card Miracles volume 8 (from memory) Michael Ammar does The Mona Lisa card trick, and switches out a card before standing it up in a matchbook.
Jannelle (another L+L regular since the Daryl 3 Card Monte DVD) is sitting to his immediate left. She must see the card as he puts it into the matchbook, she's looking right at the face.. Yet she goes nuts when it's revealed at the end. ... Strange. |
|||||||||
kamus Veteran user Silver Spring, Md 369 Posts
|
They may be genuinely enjoying the performances but I'm an another viewer who absolutely cannot stand the L&L audiences. A big part of what constitutes the decision to learn a trick (along with effect and method, of course) is impact on REAL people- in fact I think it is THE most important factor. On the L&L tapes, I don't trust ANY of the reactions, even if some of them are genuine. This seriously degrades the experience for me. I guess I would rather see the tricks with no audience rather than the L&L crew. That way, I could try to imagine how people really would react rather than be distracted by wondering whether people are overreacting or not.
In Derren Brown's Absolute Magic, he makes a strong case for the fact that we as magicians 1) don't give our audiences enough credit and 2) we overlook the fact that many audience members are polite by nature and give us the reactions that they sense we expect from them. This leads to a certain self blindness on our part. The reactions of the L&L crowd are "dream"reactions that we imagine ourselves getting and that perpetuates the self delusion. Another point is, that while I appreciate the general quality of L&L stuff and the high calibre of the magicians they feature, not every trick is a gem. In fact, I think that there are many dull, unconvincing and/or weak routines on virtually every tape and the reactions of the L&L crowd serve to obscure this a bit. Also, considering that these tapes, for the most part are aimed at the hobbyist market, there is no necessity to have large audiences. In the world that I perform in (and I suspect many others of you do too) I find myself performing a trick or two for a single person or a small group of people. It would be better IMO if L&L etc had spectators that reflected this reality more closely. That, however, doesn't mean they can't get people who are open and receptive to magic (or attractive women). I really liked the spectator on John Bannon's Smoke and Mirrors tape. She was obviously genuine and seemed likeable, and she was suitably impressed at various points. Also I found it interesting that she under-reacted at certain other points that a magician might expect a strong reaction (i.e. his psuedo poker deal demo) and gave reactions/comments at other points where the magician might not be expecting something (can't remember an example now). This is valuable feedback. One of the things that I concluded is that gambling demos might be deadly dull for some specs (even receptive ones) or the fact that magician is exposing "moves" (even if they are fake) undermines the mystery inherent in the other card tricks he/she shows. I was always suspicious of gambling demos anyway and her reaction reinforced my personal decision not to employ them. This is not something I could ever have deduced from an L&L tape. Granted, this was one spectator and her reactions alone are not enough to be basing repertoire decisions in the absence of other factors. Still, any and all spectator reactions are solid gold to we students of magic, whether they are reactions to our own magic or some other magician we observe. Every real reaction we get is important grist for our magic mill and should be studied and thought about carefully. I'm just sayin' |
|||||||||
|
Tom Cutts Staff Northern CA 5931 Posts
|
If something does not fit your experience, might it be equally valid, if not more so, to question your experience rather than that of the experienced professional?
Ever play a song from a live album which got a great reaction on the recording, but when you played it for your friends they just said, "That's nice." and went on about their conversation? Who is at fault... the audience from the stadium that night or your friends... or maybe it is the performer? Or maybe there is no "fault" and it simply isn't a good song for you to play in that environment. If you doubt something, even if it is true, who is the cause of self-delusion? Anyone with any real experience in magic will tell you, a good performer can take what others consider filler and make it a feature piece. I have done exactly that and ended up with some routines which my audiences rave about. Is it not the same way in music? Don't we come across bands which do covers of obscure, dismissed as dull, weak songs and had great hits with them? It boils down to the same addage, it isn't the material, it IS the performer. Another fallacy is to consider that the "large" audience is there solely for the end user. It isn't. It is there to give live feedback to the performer so he can do his best. His mind is on the many different factors of the taping under which he is not used to performing. Providing as many familliar elements as possible will help put the performer at ease. The audience is also there to provide energy, the kind of energy an experienced performer is used to getting from a live audience. The audience is also there to provide aesthetic balance to the look of the video. I could go on but I hope everyone gets the point by now. Another fact the "audience detractors" avoid is that most of the hobbyists buy these products for entertainment. They want to see legends like Bill Malone, Tommy Wonder, Max Maven etc perform. Having an audience is part of that. Having people who give very expressive reactions is a reality of having an audience. I have never worked a function where at least one or two people were not "over the top" blown away and "over the top" expressive about it. It is a reality for anyone who performs in the real world as opposed to for a couple of friends and family. Do you think I "work" to those people and milk them for their reactions? Do you think that is good entertainment for the whole audience? In the end the whole thing boils down to this generality. Some hobbyists dismiss some strong reactions on videos because they are the reactions a truly experienced performer gets when he works a crowd, and the person judging has no experience in that world. Some hobbyists rave about mediocre reactions on videos because, well, they are familliar to them and they assume, therefore, they are more "real" reactions. There is the self delusion. |
|||||||||
|
kamus Veteran user Silver Spring, Md 369 Posts
|
Tom, thanks for your thoughtful response.
Quote:
On 2005-06-04 13:41, Tom Cutts wrote: Of course, I naturally defer to more experienced performers, but I think it's worth it to question everthing and everyone. I have seen more than one (OK, many) professional performers who seemed be self delusional in some form or another, including famous performers on certain L&L tapes IMO. I may not be a famous professional myself, but I am knowledgeable about magic and magicians and I've seen enough to learn to be constructively critical and to cultivate objectivity as much as that is possible. A critic doesn't have to be able to write a symphony to be able to review one. Quote:
Ever play a song from a live album which got a great reaction on the recording, but when you played it for your friends they just said, "That's nice." and went on about their conversation? Who is at fault...? ... Or maybe there is no "fault" and it simply isn't a good song for you to play in that environment. Yes, all the factors come into play: audience, conditions, performer or material. If just one of these factors is off, the house of cards comes crashing down. Quote:
If you doubt something, even if it is true, who is the cause of self-delusion? Sorry Tom, I can't figure out what you're asking here, or if it's a rhetorical question, what your point is. Quote:
Anyone with any real experience in magic will tell you, a good performer can take what others consider filler and make it a feature piece. I have done exactly that and ended up with some routines which my audiences rave about. Is it not the same way in music? ... it isn't the material, it IS the performer. Well it's both really! I would agree that the performer is the most important link in the chain here. But why would anyone waste time on filler when there are so many good effects or new ones to be discovered? Sure, a good performer can take anything and make something out of it. That doesn't mean he/she should! I'd rather see a good performer can take a great trick and make it greater or find see undiscovered possibilities in something that has too hastily been regarded as weak, than see a better version of a ho hum trick. I don't think magicians in general, pro or amateur, have challenged themselves enough. You also cannot suggest to us that there is no such thing as weak material. You've seen it, I've seen it, we've all seen it. We've all seen famous pros perform weak material, as the many reviews here on the Café will attest. So it's not just the performer- you can't simply dismiss the material. But we're off track here. Quote:
Another fallacy is to consider that the "large" audience is there solely for the end user. It isn't. It is there to give live feedback to the performer so he can do his best. .... I could go on but I hope everyone gets the point by now. All agreed to except that what you are saying should apply to audiences that aren't faking it in any way- then IMO, the plus factor of the audience is outweighed by the negative. And that's what we're talking about here- the L&L audience- they are in no way a "real" audience even if some reactions are undoubtedly genuine. There's an obvious artificiality about it all. Perhaps out of practical neccessity, but the L&L tapes are the worst examples. I personally think that they are an embarrasment to the performers. People, including performers that attended these tapings, can claim otherwise but I know fake when I see it and the L&L audience is f-a-k-e. That is just a personal observation, if you see it another way, then that's how you see it. My point is that I'm not arguing for no audience, I'm arguing for a more genuine audience- and I think that's do-able. Quote:
Having people who give very expressive reactions is a reality of having an audience. ... Do you think that is good entertainment for the whole audience? Sure, but again, only if it's not the artificial audience experience like on the L&L tapes -the subject of this thread. Quote:
In the end the whole thing boils down to this generality. Some hobbyists dismiss some strong reactions on videos because they are the reactions a truly experienced performer gets when he works a crowd, and the person judging has no experience in that world. Some hobbyists rave about mediocre reactions on videos because, well, they are familliar to them and they assume, therefore, they are more "real" reactions. There is the self delusion. Maybe that's partly true but the phrase "some hobbyists" is the operative phrase. Also,I haven't heard anyone "raving about mediocre reactions" If that's aimed at me then I haven't made my previous points clear enough: all reactions, good or bad, if genuine, constitute useful information. I'd like to conclude my, by now, long winded remark by observing that'some hobbyists happen to love their hobby and their art very much. They have studied with professionals and sought the counsel of experienced performers whenever possible.They have practiced diligently and rehearse and perform magic well and frequently at a professional level and get often get very good reactions from many different audiences, reactions that are quite familiar to them. And some of them can tell the difference between good performers, bad performers, good material, bad material, genuine audience reactions and fake overacting. It's a shame that certain hobbyists have given the word a negative connotation and that is a pain to we hobbyists who take our hobby/obsession very seriously indeed. -Dave |
|||||||||
|
Tom Cutts Staff Northern CA 5931 Posts
|
Dave,
I had written a long reply rant (don't fret it is tucked away safely where it can be gotten to at a moment's notice). Instead I will simply ask: In what way is this audience you speak of "fake"? |
|||||||||
Ron Reid Inner circle Phoenix, Arizona 2733 Posts
|
Hi:
I think the L&L studio audiences give DVD viewer unrealistic expectations concerning how a normal audience will react. Case in point: Daryl's Fooler Dooler series. I've had a chance to see Daryl perform at Caesar's Magical Empire among other places for lay people. He always gets terrific reactions, but I've NEVER seen anything close to the wild, frenetic reactions of David and company. I much prefer DVDs shot like Lonnie Chevrie's. Just him and a couple of people at a table, giving him enthusiastic but subdued responses. Still, L&L puts out some of the best materials around - you just have to know that it is very unlikely you'll ever get reactions like L&L audiences give. Ron Reid |
|||||||||
|
kamus Veteran user Silver Spring, Md 369 Posts
|
Tom- what Ron said. Cooincidentally, I've also seen Daryl in a live public show and he absolutely killed the audience, but their reactions seemed quite different (i.e genuine) compared to the L&L bunch.
It wasn't accurate for me to say the audience was "fake" but rather, their reactions were exaggerated and lent an aura of artificiality to the proceedings that I (and apparently several others) find off putting. I know that instructional magic videos are, by nature, artificial situations. I have seen and own a lot of videos and some are good and some are bad when it comes to the audience aspect of the productions. To my mind, L&L are among the worst offenders in this area. I hope that the comments on this by myself and others will help them modify their approach to choosing and pre-conditioning their audiences in the future. BTW, I hope I never cross that invisible line that will cause you to release that tucked away rant. of yours. 
Thanks for the discussion. Dave |
|||||||||
|
Tom Cutts Staff Northern CA 5931 Posts
|
OK, now we have something to work with here.
You contradict your very own purpose: Quote:
I hope that the comments on this by myself and others will help them modify their approach to choosing and pre-conditioning their audiences in the future. modifying an approach to choosing and pre-conditioning would be conditions for what kind of audience? F-A-... Are you assuming that the audiences are "pre-conditioned"? I can tell you from personal experience there is no preconditioning. Unless you consider a valid introduction, as any pro should get, to be conditioning. My concern with this, getting way too old, rant about audiences is many fold. First and foremost it ignores the reason for its being. Every other production value has been taken care of so well that those who are looking for imperfection (and I am not exempt from this group  ) find it in the audience. I believe that should be a required statement for every post which complains about the audience, for it is the true subtext of the message. To your credit, Dave, you did make a general attempt at this.
Second, any audience which knows they are being filmed can be considered "fake", or likely to over or under react. To remove this factor one would have to hide the cameras and choose a venue which is arranged as a "real" venue. The audience would probably have to pay for their seats and they would probably not be allowed to see more than an hours worth of magic because anything more would seem "unreal". So now we need two audiences for the shoot and a "real venue". The realities of this would make it difficult or impossible to get the proper shots and sound to capture the performer doing his material. At the very least it would incure greater cost to do so. How much more would you be willing to pay for a DVD which uses this technique to film a "real" audience? Third, and now we get into experiencial knowledge, the personal, expressive reactions on the DVDs in question are very much in line with the reactions I get when I perform, allowing for the reality that I am not performing at the frantic energy levels of Bill Malone, Daryl, or Sankey of course. Granted, I don't often have the luxury to perform for such an expressive person for my whole show, but when I do I am thankful for it. These are real people, folks. This is exactly how they react when the cameras are off and they are just among friends. There is nothing fake, staged, or artificial about their reactions. If they were in your audience and you were a good performer you would get similar reactions. Most people who do this work on a regular basis will tell you it is a reality to run into these people. Just because you don't and therefore you feel such reactions are "unreal" does not make it so. Are we to discount every performer's best audience reactions as phony because there are no simlar reactions to validate them. Heck no! Performers accept their reactions, good or bad, learn from them and move on. If a performer decided he was God's gift based on one audience's reaction, well, he might be delusioned. Mostly they just think, "Wow, I had a great audience. They were right there with me." Hopefully they look at the performance to see how they might get their audience there on a more regular basis. Since such reactions are not YET within your language as a performer, I'm not sure the following will be as useful. I say this in the hopes that it opens a door for you in this mansion of magic. There is a gold mine of knowledge in studying how experienced performers handle these more expressive types. To the "T" they don't ignore them. Each performer reacts to them differently and each performer gets something a little different from them. Being able to see the same audience enjoying different performers is an invaluable, almost unthinkable, learning oportunity. We are truly blessed to have such a resource. Open your minds to the lessons! Cheers, Tom |
|||||||||
| The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Dvd, Video tape, Audio tape & Compact discs. » » L and L Pub DVD's and Videos (2 Likes) | ||||||||||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7 [Next] | ||||||||||
Posted: Mar 10, 2005 07:29 am 
X
| [ Top of Page ] |
|
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.11 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 < 
|