Criss angel--the new masked magician.

Discuss the latest news and rumors in the magic world.

Postby Guest » 06/21/06 09:43 PM

Who needs fox when you have criss angel on a&e.

What's up with exposing the ashes on the palm trick?

How do you magicians involved with this show justify exposing this trick?

What's next? Matrix, triumph, coins across....

Very disappointed in the exposure of a good trick.
Guest
 

Postby Bob Farmer » 06/22/06 07:40 AM

I agree -- the exposure of this very good trick is unacceptable. More damaging is his exposure of some basic principles of misdirection.
Bob Farmer
 
Posts: 1637
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Short card above selection.

Postby Guest » 06/22/06 07:55 AM

Originally posted by Bob Farmer:
I agree -- the exposure of this very good trick is unacceptable. More damaging is his exposure of some basic principles of misdirection.
Damaging to whom?

How many people remember ANYTHING the masked magician exposed?

Just ask some people around you now. Go on.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 06/22/06 08:00 AM

What are beginning magicians always told?

DON"T EXPOSE THE SECRETS!!!!

I guess they should be told 'Don't expose the secrets UNLESS YOU'RE GETTING PAID A BUNCH OF MONEY'.

Just because most people don't rember what the masked magician exposed DOESN"T MAKE IT RIGHT!!!
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 06/22/06 08:21 AM

There is exposure for exposure sake - Valentino & Fox.

Bad.

But isn't "The Floating Cup" as likely to lead to an explanation of Walter Blaney's Ladder Suspension as coffee is likely to lead to heroin?

What about Penn & Teller? This site?

There's exposure, and then there's teaching to generate interest - I don't know where that line is, but it is easy to distinguish between Valentino and Criss Angel.

In fairness, I would not have chosen the lipstick trick to reveal either - it is a great effect, but I'm willing to wager that we'll continue to see it astonish audiences in the hands of competent performers.

And IMHO the average television viewer has all the memory and attention span of a lighted match, so... ;)
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 06/22/06 08:22 AM

I've met several laymen who know the basics of the ashes on palm trick. However, most of them don't have the misdirection to pull it of-very obviously reaching into an ash tray and getting some ash. What concerns me more is the fact that the idea of doing this trick with lipstick was on a video by Greg Wilson a few years ago. I wonder if he was contacted. My guess is no.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 06/22/06 08:36 AM

And IMHO the average television viewer has all the memory and attention span of a lighted match, so...
What a cop out of an excuse. I am an average viewer and I remember everything I saw!!??

The 'ashes trick' albeit old is an excellent trick. He ruined the effect, misdirection, moment of astonishment and on and on. Crumpled it up and threw it out the window like it was nothing. I enjoyed the show up till then. Then I turned the channel.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 06/22/06 08:42 AM

I would like to here from the other magicians involved with the show.

How do you defend exposing a good trick like this?
Guest
 

Postby Jim Maloney_dup1 » 06/22/06 08:47 AM

I wonder why people are all upset now. I don't remember anyone complaining about exposure when he taught the viewers how to vanish a toothpick or levitate a cup. Perhaps the problem is not exposure, per se, but rather exposure of a trick in your repertoire?

-Jim
Jim Maloney_dup1
 
Posts: 1709
Joined: 07/23/01 12:00 PM
Location: Northern New Jersey

Postby Guest » 06/22/06 08:53 AM

Originally posted by mrgoat:
...Damaging to whom? ...
I guess that promise NOT to expose the methods used in magic and to respect the works of other magicians has been abandoned.

That such can happen is a testament to our wonderful free society.

Funny how the thing that made me cringe on the show was not the exposure. It was his dumbing down the handkerchief thing to tell folks that the other hanks were a product of "hanky panky". I guess the guy who sells the UFC got good product placement in the show.

Lunchtime here, will listen for muggle feedback.
Guest
 

Postby Pete Biro » 06/22/06 09:00 AM

Life (and magic) goes on.

You, as a magician, probably know a lot of secrets... does this lessen your ability to enjoy a magic show because you know how it is done? Or do you appreciate it more?
Stay tooned.
User avatar
Pete Biro
 
Posts: 7124
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Hollyweird

Postby Guest » 06/22/06 09:08 AM

Originally posted by Pete Biro:
Life (and magic) goes on.

You, as a magician, probably know a lot of secrets... does this lessen your ability to enjoy a magic show because you know how it is done? Or do you appreciate it more?
Not a valid comparison in my mind. Magicians already have a built in interest in magic and most spectators do not. Most of us will watch magic good, bad or indifferent.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 06/22/06 09:14 AM

Originally posted by Jim Maloney:
I wonder why people are all upset now. I don't remember anyone complaining about exposure when he taught the viewers how to vanish a toothpick or levitate a cup. Perhaps the problem is not exposure, per se, but rather exposure of a trick in your repertoire?

-Jim
The show last night was the only one I've seen. Was commenting on what I saw.

wanna know a secret?
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 06/22/06 09:25 AM

Originally posted by EdAndres:
And IMHO the average television viewer has all the memory and attention span of a lighted match, so...
What a cop out of an excuse.
Why thank you Ed - I wish I had thought of that myself. :)

Not excusing exposure - magic is exposed in magic instructions and magicana articles - but does this cross the line?
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 06/22/06 09:35 AM

Pete:

As Magicians we no longer feel the real Magic and wonder that non-Magicians feel.

We appreciate technique, artistry, skill.

- entity
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 06/22/06 09:48 AM

Every time a trick is exposed

A fairy turns into a moth.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 06/22/06 09:49 AM

Originally posted by Big Jeff:
I would like to here from the other magicians involved with the show.

How do you defend exposing a good trick like this?
Who are any of us to define what constitutes a "good trick"?
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 06/22/06 10:09 AM

Originally posted by Adam Brooks:
...to define what constitutes a "good trick"?
Distraction.

Attempt to sidetrack the basic issue of exposing ANY magic.

Nice try, and bad trick.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 06/22/06 10:38 AM

Originally posted by EdAndres:
No.
Oh?

What does it mean to "teach" those who have not asked for the education?
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 06/22/06 10:41 AM

Originally posted by Big Jeff:

What's up with exposing the ashes on the palm trick?
You have to understand that Criss has no need for regular magic tricks like the ashes in the palm. Those are meant for us common magicians.

Criss has moved on to the real magic: a mixture of legitimate close-up, illusions and made for TV magic with the assistance of background stooges, creative editing and Spectator Point of View Cameras that are handed to a spectator of his choice who never quite tapes what I want to see (i.e., when Criss levitates from one building to the next).
Guest
 

Postby Ryan Matney » 06/22/06 10:46 AM

Originally posted by mrgoat:
Originally posted by Bob Farmer:
[b] I agree -- the exposure of this very good trick is unacceptable. More damaging is his exposure of some basic principles of misdirection.
Damaging to whom?

How many people remember ANYTHING the masked magician exposed?

Just ask some people around you now. Go on. [/b]
Much more than you think. People seem to especially remember the linking ring and zig zag girl exposure. Also, the Criss Angel programs will be released to dvd preserving them for many years for anyone to watch at anytime.

It was a bad call, there's lots of other tricks he could have taught. But the very fact he is teaching it would make it harder for kids to 'mindfreak their friends.'

To answer teh question of 'damaging to whom': The masked magician was most damaging to journeyman magicians who don't have a staff of consultants and a tv show.
Ryan Matney
 
Posts: 729
Joined: 01/18/08 01:00 PM
Location: Hurley, Va

Postby Guest » 06/22/06 10:50 AM

Originally posted by Terrence:
Not excusing exposure - magic is exposed in magic instructions and magicana articles - but does this cross the line?
No! .... butt, that's not the issue. Somehow if your audience is dim-witted match heads you can tell secrets all day long. Obviously these match heads are not going to search out magicana or the back of a box of cereal. The issue is and always is (read the old JINX, same exact arguments.) a 'famous magicians' breaking the basic magic code. Don't tell secrets to your audience. Write it, print it, hold a class give, a special web site for "those interested' to search out... butt in the middle of your show... "now look I'll show you how easy this is you stupid match-heads" haha! I have ALWAYS been in the " not for it" camp.


-ed :p
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 06/22/06 10:58 AM

Originally posted by EdAndres:
... your audience is dim-witted match heads you can tell secrets all day long....
In grade school and jr high school I learned much good magic from muggles who were passing on tricks for their amusement. From the color vision box to some card routines well beyond the 21 card trick, they knew some good magic. I guess those "dim-witted" folks can remember and do remember when they choose to.

Why force the next magician they see to work handicapped by the ideas you've put in their heads?
Guest
 

Postby Jim Maloney_dup1 » 06/22/06 11:05 AM

Originally posted by EdAndres:
butt in the middle of your show... "now look I'll show you how easy this is you stupid match-heads"
Perhaps your argument would be stronger if you weren't inaccurately describing Criss's attitude. Rather giving off a "you're stupid, here's why..." vibe, he seems to be saying "here's something special that YOU can do." That is, rather than putting the audience down, he is building them up.

-Jim
Jim Maloney_dup1
 
Posts: 1709
Joined: 07/23/01 12:00 PM
Location: Northern New Jersey

Postby Guest » 06/22/06 12:05 PM

Originally posted by Jim Maloney:
... Rather giving off a "you're stupid, here's why..." vibe, he seems to be saying "here's something special that YOU can do." ...
He also takes for granted that someone doing this will know that if a woman lets you get that close in the first place...
Guest
 

Postby Amos McCormick » 06/22/06 12:32 PM

I was taking my daughter and her nine-year-old friend to gymnastics today. Along the way, the other girl asked my daughter if she had watched the magician last night on television. She then mentioned the "lipstick trick" and asked my daughter whether she knew how he did it.

Well, we were flipping back and forth between this and "America has Talent", so my daughter saw the trick but didn't see the explanation. When she asked the other girl how he did it, the other girl said "My brother told me that I can't tell anyone, because it is a magician's secret!"

When I asked her whether her brother was interested in magic, she replied "He is NOW!" We're always looking for someone to "carry on", and maybe this is the way to recruit new blood.
Amos McCormick
 
Posts: 166
Joined: 02/01/08 01:00 PM
Location: Southwestern Southeast

Postby Guest » 06/22/06 12:33 PM

"here's something special that YOU can do." That is, rather than putting the audience down, he is building them up.

-Jim [/QB]
uh ok. He fooled at least one person with the first version. Then he exposed the moment of astonishment. Regardless of his 'motive'(building them up?) He exposed a magic secret during a performance. No different than if he floated a bill. Went to commercial. Came back and in an effort to build up the self esteem of his audience showed the tape, wax, thr.... oh wait.

Just do the show please. Not the show and tell. ;)
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 06/22/06 12:48 PM

Originally posted by EdAndres:
... Just do the show please. Not the show and tell. ;)
If he put the tell on his website it might generate the desired net result(s).

IMHO it's not about getting them in the door as much as letting know there is a door.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 06/22/06 12:58 PM

Originally posted by Jonathan Townsend:
Originally posted by EdAndres:
[b] ... Just do the show please. Not the show and tell. ;)
If he put the tell on his website it might generate the desired net result(s).

IMHO it's not about getting them in the door as much as letting know there is a door. [/b]
I think that sums it up beautifully Mr Townsend. Letting them know there is something cool that they can do. I have also seen countless muggles perform this trick. I think it could be viewed as almost public domain.

I would akin it ot the 21 trick, aside from the fact there is a little skill, a little misdirection.

I cannot see the harm this does anyone. I doubt many workers do the ash trick. They may use the same technique (The Web etc), but I bet you a pound to a penny you could do the web on someone who had just seen that and they wouldn't put the two together.

I honestly don't see what harm is done.

re: Linking rings being exposed. Little story. I am *far* from expert with this trick. However, I was doing a wedding last summer and someone was just looking at the rings, gobsmacked. He came to me afterwards and said that he had seen the masked magician explain it, but that guy had a hole in one of the rings, yours were all solid. How did you do it!
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 06/22/06 12:58 PM

Everbody who bashed the masked magician on Fox needs to apologize.

He "taught" me how those tricks were done and I wasn't a magician back then. Because he "taught" me those tricks I realized that magic isn't as hard as I thought and started to buy books and learn the secrets.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 06/22/06 01:05 PM

Originally posted by Big Jeff:
Everbody who bashed the masked magician on Fox needs to apologize.

He "taught" me how those tricks were done and I wasn't a magician back then. Because he "taught" me those tricks I realized that magic isn't as hard as I thought and started to buy books and learn the secrets.
I am happy his work served to help you into magic.

I am not so happy that his work also educated millions about ideas which only make all of our work less magical for them.

In helping you (and perhaps a few others) he has taken magic away from many.

Many fairies became moths thanks to his work.

If you believe in balance, then perhaps it's up to you to bring that much and more magic back to the rest who did not see his work as an invitation.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 06/22/06 01:55 PM

Jonathan,

Im not saying it's ok to expose magic. I started this thread.
I'm saying to all the people who bashed the masked magician for exposing magic, but who are giving criss angel a pass for "teaching a trick", that's it's NOT ok to expose the secrets no matter what.

Remember the World's Best Street Magicians specials? Ellusionist advertised during that show, that is the way to get people who might be interested in magic to take the steps necessary to learn a trick. I did buy their Street Magic video and that led me to bigger and better things.

If criss angel had directed people to his website to learn the trick that would be better than what he did.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 06/22/06 08:57 PM

I've seen magicians perform AOP and get the same reaction Criss did. "Wow, that was cool."

I've seen others tap into people's religious upbringing with a story about stigmata, and have the spectators literally freak out. Tears, screaming, the works.

Just because a particular trick is a throwaway in the hands of one person doesn't mean it's not a miracle in the hands of another.

Does exposure help or hurt magic? Especially when it involves a widely-known trick whose origin probably appeared as far back as Discoverie of Witchcraft? I don't know. But I do know that there are performers who use AOP to great effect who will now run into even MORE people who know the methodology.

Peace & Love,
Dee
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 06/23/06 12:06 AM

The point isn't the trick! You are not 'sposed to tell the secret!!

:whack:
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 06/23/06 06:21 AM

Well it kinda is the trick - I doubt we'd be having this discussion if Criss had shown an honest-to-goodness throwaway like the "Pencil Looks Like Rubber" optical illusion.

AOP is definitely not a throwaway.

Ed - I do hear you. Several of us were sitting in the Hat & Hare at MC enjoying the show, but when we got to the Lipstick AOP - we all glanced at each other with a painful look when he exposed the method.

How ironic it would've been if Criss had concluded by looking at the camera, and said, "Now remember people - don't tell anyone else how this is done."
:eek:

Jeff - quite a thread you have here!
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 06/23/06 07:56 AM

I don't think it has to do with the trick. It just seems wrong to expose a secret in the MIDDLE of the show!?

m-a-g-i-c-i-a-n... no?
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 06/24/06 12:53 AM

Originally posted by Jonathan Townsend:
Every time a trick is exposed
A fairy turns into a moth.
Excellent!

Fairy's are a useless abstraction.

Moths are a necessary part of a viable ecosystem.

:)
Guest
 

Postby Terry » 06/24/06 12:50 PM

It must be really sad to think the performance of magic is based on knowing secrets.

Sawing a Woman in Half has been exposed multiple times but it doesn't stop creators from coming up with a different look/presentation that blows people away. Same secret, effective performance.

Most spectators who watch an exposure say "A Ha" and then move on with their lives. "Magicians" are the only ones who continue the wringing of hands and gnashing of teeth.

Get a life and get on with it.
Terry
 
Posts: 1240
Joined: 01/18/08 01:00 PM
Location: Kentucky

Postby Guest » 06/24/06 03:04 PM

Originally posted by Terry Terrell:
It must be really sad to think the performance of magic is based on knowing secrets...
It can be saddening to read that some among us don't understand that without the presense of and application of those secrets, there can be no magic.

Without the secrets; there is movement, language, lighting and the rest of theatrical production though no mystery, no moments of awe or stories to tell of wonders seen.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 06/24/06 03:31 PM

The exposure aspect might be a clever ploy to implant into the minds of the viewing audience a belief that all the tricks he performs are real time and accomplished by clever methods rather than camera cut aways, stooges, and other TV special effects.
Guest
 

Next

Return to Buzz