Penn & Teller 'Fool Us'

[AJM]

I enjoyed the show very much - I understand there will be 6 shows in the series. The one hour show has an 8.00pm slot on ITV.

Anyone else catch it?

Andrew

[Oli Foster]

I watched this and thought it was great! Really enjoyed seeing Penn and Teller's trash bag escape. Clever, but once you've concluded he can't escape from the bag, you're left with the solution (an example of the controversial 'too perfect' theory?)

Graham Jolley fooled the duo with a slick performance of Simon Aronson's Prior Commitment, which just shows what a great and un-workoutable trick this is, although I was surprised that neither of them had come across this principle (?) Maybe they just thought he was good and wanted to put him through...

Looking forward to seeing the rest of the series, as looks like they've got some cracking shows lined up. Marc Oberon's on one and he's always very good....

[IrishMagicNews]

The most recent episode (1 of the current series) has turned up on Youtube

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Brendan

[Richard Kaufman]

I wonder how long it will be until there's a show with no winner.

[Marco Pusterla]

I think (it's just me thinking... I may have heard it read it, don't take my comment as a matter of fact!) that all shows have already been taped. It is "just" a matter of editing together a show with three (or four) performers where nobody wins and that will satisfy Richard :)

Cheerio!

[Jonathan Pendragon]

"We have met the enemy, and he is us."

When I was younger, I used to look at the elders of magic as a collection of calcified individuals who didn't keep up with current events. Now that I'm one of them, I take a dim view of such opinions.

I've always thought of Penn & Teller's work as nothing short of brilliant. Teller's miser's dream is the most beautiful piece of magic I've ever seen. In watching their British television show, I'm reminded of how amazing these guys are.

That said, I have a question which I'm asking not as a critique, but because I'm curious as to how other magicians feel about this subject: does the show put too much emphasis on method and, by doing so, reduce magic to a mere mind game?

I am one who truly believes that all things in show business are good things except boring things... and this show is anything but boring. So I feel a little guilty even contemplating this question. We all understand that if it wasn't entertaining (the Presentation) we'd flip the channel. And yet I wonder if this nuance of Presentation is lost on a lay audience? Are we setting ourselves up for an audience conditioned to see only Method?

[Marco Pusterla]

Jonathan,

Many years ago I heard Arturo de Ascanio contemplate this saying:

"90% of all magic is presentation; only 10% is technique"

(I'm trying to translate: with "technique" I mean the technical method, the "trick").

Well, Ascanio said that without that 10%, all your presentation would crumble down, you may be entertaining but not magical. As "Magicians" we should strive to present mystery. Mystery can be presented in an entertaining way, but if there is no mystery (i.e. everybody knows/understand how the "trick" works), then we would not be performing magic, but something else (juggling, comedy, anything...).

I believe that Presentation should be used as a further tool to cloack the method and as a way to help the audience to think along a different path.

My 2 cents...

[Jonathan Townsend]

Those who read and study what's been written noticed the basic story elements and structure of stories about a century ago. The hero's tale and all that. Can we get up to speed on what the rest of the world learned last century or do we need another round of "as explained by a magician to magicians" works?

Our little subset of the theatrical arts has all of the other sciences, arts and crafts to draw from as regards the story we tell and the means we have to produce our wonders. What distinguises out subset is that we get to manipulate the audience's convictions about what is real and the bargain we make (ecological componant) is all such depictions are valid only within the scope of the performance - much as in the larger theater the story happens on the other side of the proscenium arch/inside the theater and the same players return the next night for another performance of Hamlet or Romeo and Juliet, even be back at the end of the show to take a bow.

With that in mind in becomes odd to distinguish "presentation" from "method" in the magic catalog manner or copy writing when what we want is to distinguish the tale they tell from the means we use backstage to get that tale told. Audience view and view from the wings (or backstage) might be closer to correct IMHO.

two cents won't buy you a book on literary theory but add postage and you might get a bargain on ebaY.

Jon

[Jonathan Townsend]

"We have met the enemy, and he is us."

...
That said, I have a question which I'm asking not as a critique, but because I'm curious as to how other magicians feel about this subject: does the show put too much emphasis on method and, by doing so, reduce magic to a mere mind game? ...

IMHO this series has a different tone than the special from last year. The novelty was an additional dimension/focus of watching P&T react to the magic. Whether decieved or not they were genial and when conveying their findings they were clever about it - another nod to the audience about how our little world is different from just "tricks with methods" but modes of behavior as well.

I agree that the first show this series put a stress on the viewer and the methodology discussions were more direct. Though I can still recall Archer's eyes as P&T mulled the method to his trick with the envelopes - and marvelled at their approach to shifting focus back to the entertainment. IMHO they "get it" right on that basic level.

Jonathan, you might like Alan Moore's take on Pogo (Issue 34 of Swamp Thing - Pog)

JonT

[Oli Foster]

Jonathan's question is interesting about whether it's good for magic to put an emphasis on the method over the effect and how distinguishable those two things really are from each other.

I think the suspension of disbelief that goes on in a theatre is different to that in taking part in, say, close up magic but maybe almost similar to watching, say, copperfield present an illusion show that's tied together with stories. Going back to a previous conversation, I believe Houdin's spiel applied to Houdin's type of show, which was closer to the latter and isn't something that can be effectively squeezed into more modern performing conditions. (I know it's heretical, but, for all this, Secrets of Conjuring and Magic is still my favourite)

Alot of very eloquent things have subsequently been said about presentation and I would agree that the bulk of magic is the bluff and bits of business to cover the usually fairly transient and often almost unimportant method (think about directions like, execute 'your favourite' force/control etc). It is the sum of all the parts that go together like the set and lighting and lines and casting and acting of Romeo and Juliet and these individually unimportant elements collectively make us respond. People will say, "oh he was a great magician" and are unlikely to find the tricks impressive unless they are impressed by the man.

However, if we were particularly pretentious, we could say that magic is a 'postmodern' form of theatre, because one of the things that alot of these essays seem to skip over is that the audience are stepping through that proscenium arch, seeing the boards that stand as walls, the lighting scaffold and general poxiness of the backstage arena - and still responding - not in spite but BECAUSE of this. Because they are a part of it and precisely because they know that there is a method that they have been unable to detect for all their veiled cynicism. In reality, they are as interested in the method as we are and they are in on it from the get go.

It's probably controversial but I would say that the method is therefore the elephant in the room that alot of people gloss over and hope rather than believe people won't care about. We're conditioned to think that people shouldn't care about it apart from the magician - but think about your best reactions "How the hell did you do that!" Obviously they don't want you to actually say "look, I fooled you into looking over there while I was hiding it over here. How silly you are!" But that is, in reality what they are thinking on some level and, at that critical moment, when their mind goes blank, method is the only thing that fills it - and once that's out the way, it's just oblivion.

Interestingly, there is an opposite approach and funnily enough David Berglas springs to mind, as old school as he may seem. If he's doing what would otherwise be a card trick where you or I might lie about ambitious cards or libidinous jacks (?) and don't mention anything to do with the fact it's a trick, he plainly labours exactly what ISN'T happening so that the audience can fully appreciate exactly what IS happening.

If you think about it, this is what we're told not to do - not to state the obvious, not to say, look at this empty bag, even if it is legitimitely empty. It's the negative space, trying to make something that in reality works only because of very specific conditions, try to seem broad and universal - and the only way we can do this is, ironically, to address the fact it's a trick.

Finally, Penn and Teller are the prime examples of people who take this approach with their combination of mock up tricks and artistically stunning surprises. They treat their audience's cleverly by caring about and thereby anticipating what they think, so they make the perfect judges here and I think the concept's great - just not sure about Jonathan Ross. I think he thinks of magic as a grungy extension of his facial hair, something to give him cult appeal after his bizarrely mainstream appeal died with his BBC contract (somehow, the opposite seems to be happening for Russell Brand after 'sachsgate'!) My tuppence worth and probably enough pretentious b******s for all of us put together. Glad we got that out of the way, back on topic... ;)

[Jonathan Townsend]

Please, I have a special room for b***s**t but like the postmodern thinking.

IMHO the old quote about quibbles, street magicians and how tricks are done remains valid and perhaps even demonstrated by JJAbrams work in leading the audience. Try watching one where you keep thinking to yourself "okay now what vague thing is this person going to say as a reason why that person can't have what they want" to check that hypothesis. Much more useful to focus on the ecology of enjoying a mystery for a few minutes - forgetting all but the specious assertions, contrived situations and obviously prepared props to enjoy some nonsense about what can't work in the real world but amuses at parties.

BTW that bit with the trash bag and helium did not alert my "too obvious" detector thanks to the focus being on the camera and volunteer with the inner focus being on what the picture would show when seen.

[Jonathan Pendragon]

Jon
I love the helium bag trick for all the reasons that would never in work anyone else's show. There is a line in the film "Inside Man" where Clive Owen in a casual fait accompli voice tells the viewing audience, "Because I can." They can and we can't and I love it.

[AJM]

25th June
- Mathieu Bich fooled P&T
- Teller performed a card stab, through Penn's hand.

2nd July
- No-one managed to fool the guys this week.
- Teller performed his goldfish production - I've seen Teller perform this a few times now and never fail to be impressed at this exquisitely crafted routine.

Cheers

Andrew

[Richard Kaufman]

Andrew, I think you mean 25th JUNE. Otherwise it would be a real trick!

[AJM]

Duly amended!

(BTW, Richard, I'm liking your new hairstyle)

Andrew

[Richard Kaufman]

Yeah, it's the "Madame Leota Look."

[Jonathan Pendragon]

JT,
West and I recently attended an interview and reading by Neil Gaiman. West is a friend of Neil's and so I got to meet him. I asked him why he seems to handle other people's interpretation of his work better than Alan Moore does? He said he chooses his collaborators by considering their enthusiasm for the source piece. Off topic, I know, however he did talk about his friendship with Teller which made me wonder about what kind of conversation they might have in the rarefied air of their imaginations.

[erdnasephile]

Here's the episode of P & T: Fool Us with "Piff the Magic Dragon" (I think it's episode 3 of this season), which is hilarious:

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xjpouy ... shortfilms

[mrgoat]

Here's the episode of P & T: Fool Us with "Piff the Magic Dragon" (I think it's episode 3 of this season), which is hilarious:

Hilarious, but pirated.

[Tom Stone]

Hilarious, but pirated.

Are you sure? Doesn't sound right, but I can be wrong.
From whom did he steal the act?

[IrishMagicNews]

Tom I think he means the programme, not the ACT.

[mrgoat]

Hilarious, but pirated.

Are you sure? Doesn't sound right, but I can be wrong.
From whom did he steal the act?

Not the act, the pirated TV show.

[Tom Stone]

Oops, sorry.

[mrgoat]

Well that was [censored] on Saturday, wasn't it?

What's happened since the pilot?

There, we had really good magicians trying to do stuff that might fool Penn and Teller.

Now, we have a 13 year old kid doing 6 card repeat with patter written for him by a 58 year old magician that wears playing card bow ties and thinks "hold out your hand, no the clean one" is funny. Then bloody Romany. How I hate her. She did an appallingly bad variation on a seance rope tie. The tying of knots took ages and she did nothing at all to make it entertaining, except make crude sexual innuendos.

And Penn is being cringingly nice to EVERYONE?

It's not a competition, it's just a showcase. Which would be no bad thing in and of itself, but the acts are just not very good.

Michael Vincent is back on next week, so at least we'll get one good act.

[Brad Henderson]

Romany was the winner of the wms contest. Of the 8 or so competitors, she was the only person on stage who displayed any sense of humanity. So as bad as this performance may have been, it could have been worse - it could have been a dozen people multiplying objects between their fingers the way magicians used to do with billiard balls, hiding objects behind their arm pretending they had vanished, and confetti - lots and lots of confetti.

[El Mystico]

I'm enjoying it.

We got Teller's great Miser's Dream this week.

And I'll bet you were fooled by the shoe prediction?

[mrgoat]

I'm enjoying it.

We got Teller's great Miser's Dream this week.

And I'll bet you were fooled by the shoe prediction?

Weird. You must be getting different order to me. I had miser's dream last week.

I'm enjoying the good acts. I just don't understand what Romany and a 14 year old doing 6 card repeat where on the show.

It is weird having Penn be nice to people though. Shows you he can do it if he tried.

[mrgoat]

Romany was the winner of the wms contest. Of the 8 or so competitors, she was the only person on stage who displayed any sense of humanity. So as bad as this performance may have been, it could have been worse - it could have been a dozen people multiplying objects between their fingers the way magicians used to do with billiard balls, hiding objects behind their arm pretending they had vanished, and confetti - lots and lots of confetti.

Yeah, she won the Magic Circle stage magician of the year too.

I've got no idea what is going on in the world.

[El Mystico]

Oh yes, I thought it was Misers Dream because I forced my daughter to watch the recording last night.
Still - it was the glasses in block thing. And isn't that their show opener? P&T are doing their best material.

[Jonathan Townsend]

Keeping my fingers crossed that they will perform the red ball routine.

[mrgoat]

Oh yes, I thought it was Misers Dream because I forced my daughter to watch the recording last night.
Still - it was the glasses in block thing. And isn't that their show opener? P&T are doing their best material.

P&T are doing brilliant material. No doubt. But they are also putting on Romany and kids doing the 6 card repeat. And that disappoints me.

But I agree with Mr Townsend, not seen the red ball trick and would love to. I was chatting with Teller last time I saw him about the development of that, he was just about to slot it into the Vegas show.

The glasses thing is, imho, one of their weakest bits. Watching twitter, everyone worked it out instantly. Gimme the Miser's Dream any day of the week over that.

[erdnasephile]

I actually think it's good that Penn is being civil and constructive to the contestants. So many of these reality contest shows these days seem designed to publically humiliate the contestants. Magicians are generally held in pretty low esteeem by the public already so more public degradation wouldn't seem to help matters. I agree it's more of a "showcase", but I'm cool with it because it presents magic in a positive light.

While I agree the quality of performances has been rather uneven at times, I do think the percentage of quality acts overall has been pretty darn good--certainly some of the best close up sleight of hand I've seen on television in a long time--and no overly exaggerated, screaming street magic reactions either! :)

[mrgoat]

I actually think it's good that Penn is being civil

I can't remember saying it was bad?

[erdnasephile]

Point taken... I interpreted the word "cringingly" as having a somewhat negative connotation in this context.

[mrgoat]

Point taken... I interpreted the word "cringingly" as having a somewhat negative connotation in this context.

No, just totally out of character!

I think it's refreshing seeming him be polite, but it just seems so very very odd!

[Jon Allen]

He wasn't polite to everyone...

[El Harvey Oswald]

"think about directions like, execute 'your favourite' force/control"

for about 30 years now people have been making this quip -- as if the tendency to direct readers to "use our favorite control/force" is rampant. but no one just leaves it at that any longer, at least not in good books, lecture notes, DVDs. if they do happen to not specify a force or control, it's invariably in a book for people who know several, and that's expressly addressed. the hackneyed idea that there's a pervasive, oblivious tendency to just be instructed "use your favorite force" is essentially the same as jokes premised on the post office constantly losing mail. even if it were true, it wouldn't be particularly amusing or insightful.

[mrgoat]

Well, what a change last night was. Everything was wonderful, I thought.

The most amazing stage illusion with a box I have ever seen. Ever. Charming Victorian magic double act, a great chair prediction and the ever wonderful Michael Vincent. (Although I swear Mr Vincent looked actually nervous and I thought I saw a little hand shaking).

More like that please!

[Richard Hatch]

Here's Nicholas Einhorn fooling Penn & Teller:
http://tinyurl.com/455rf5c

[Matthew Field]

Congratulations to a realy great and creative magician for fooling P&T. Very deserved.