The Genii Forum

I fail to understand the argument Mr Marsh, and others make. Namely, unless you have been on TV you cannot criticise someone on TV.

Odd, I've heard that argument in the past and agree with you about it. I certainly don't think you need to be on TV to criticize what you see; and have no idea why my name is being attached to it here.

N.

Nathan,
I suspect it came from this comment of yours:

(I can feel the condescension drip from some of the posts above, and I would be very interested to see their sets for Letterman...Good for Jason to get the gig, and to be invited back over and over again...props)

-Jim

Dodd, is the intro all they cut? When I watched the CBS clip, I only saw the WOW routine and not the other one people are mentioning.

A point worth mentioning here...performing magic in this context is tough. Randall and Carney both walked out, shook hands, sat down and "ok, magic boy, do a trick." Neither of them engaged Letterman on any level before awkwardly segueing into magic. Carney certainly scored higher than Randall but both had to charge into the magic part without establishing a character.

I have heard from some people that the some punters seemed to like Jason better than John. That is astounding to me but that fact pretty much shouts out that "It's certainly not all about the magic." unfortunately the amount of time allotted and the format doesn't really lend itself to "Hi what's your name and where are you from' kind of interaction.

So unfortunately magic (and how it is perceived) suffers as a consequence.

BTW, Letterman is not the bad guy here. He is an astute observer who asks obvious questions that are probably in the minds of most of our more polite spectators. He hasn't been combative or rude at all so far this week. "Can I ask a question? Can you do it without the sleeve?" " Do you want me to help or should I just sit back?" He is funny and extremely quick with comments. And he is the king of his domain.. so stepping into the ring with him requires quick responses.

It ain't about the magic, friends.

Just saw John's segment. He was great. I thought he and Dave had a good rapport. John's reactions, in my opinion, were funny and perfectly in keeping with his character.
I thought it was wonderful that he chose to perform a routine, as opposed to a series of disconnected tricks; the mark of a true magician and a real pro.

The camera angles were unfortunate a couple of times but, that said, the friend I watched it with didn't see the orange or coconut load, even on the second viewing, which just goes to show how powerful proper misdirection can be, even through the lens of the unblinking camera.

Kudos, John!

Just saw the Carney clip. I know of John's work only through his writing and very old performance footage, and was interested to see how it would translate into the micro attention span world of late night TV.

I was impressed!

He was genuine, charming, on-the-ball...he actually talked to Letterman instead of at Letterman....he gave Letterman the slack to play, while still keeping the show moving (with Randall, it was like a kid learning to drive a stick shift, the show would start and stop...start and stop...every time Letterman made a comment)

My one thought, is that there are some beautiful "moments" (the bits with the tips of the wand), that are fantastic and play very well...but could have been cut for this venue...the whole piece felt a little long in the context of the medium...and I think a tighter set may have had more impact

On a magic level: what a great lesson in construction! The distance between the load of the Orange, and the production of the Orange (even with the flash, I wouldn't be surprised if the load took in a lot of folks at home...because of the elapsed time before the production)...

and how cool to see Bob Read ideas live on and continue to grow!

N.

P.S. Jim, I see where a casual reading of the quoted sentence could lead you to think that. Being interested in seeing the critic perform in the situation he is discussing, however, is different from saying that you can't be a critic without being on TV.

I agree with Nathan's assessment of Carney's performance (you can see it on YouTube). He was much more engaged with Letterman than Randal was. It seemed that John handled the back and forth banter much better than Jason did. And yes, excellent magic.

The orange thing was regrettable because I'm fairly certain it wasn't apparent to the studio audience or Letterman. Had they not been using the overhead camera at that point, I don't think anybody would have seen anything.

-Jim

I've seen Jason do his stuff on Letterman and was interested to see John Carney.

Frankly, given the circumstances, I thought John did a good job. Understand that when close-up magicians were on the Carson show Johnny had a table in front of the curtain and he and his guests left the desk and sofa and went over and sat in the magician's performing area. John was both a magician and a fan of good magic and no performer ever had to worry about him butting into the act or making untoward comments. You could shine on the The Tonight Show with Johnny Carson

Working Letterman you dont have that surety. At heart he is a horses behind and loves scoring points off people who come out. Carney came out and had to perform sort of side saddle turning to the side to work off of Lettermans desk. Letterman had to clear away stuff before John could perform which made it look like the performance was an afterthought and that no one had prepared for it which I see as a form of disrespect to the performer. How difficult would it have been to bring out a table, a table cloth, and a few chairs, inviting Miss USA to join Dave and John at the table?

John also had to bite his tongue and tread lightly when Letterman started making comments as he moved through his routine. Letterman well knows the need for rhythm and pace in delivery and seemed happy to interrupt John as he tried to establish a smooth pace.

Cher nails Letterman with the truth at about 3:30 the first time she was on the show. See: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBgDHhmSrAo

NCMarsh wrote:P.S. Jim, I see where a casual reading of the quoted sentence could lead you to think that. Being interested in seeing the critic perform in the situation he is discussing, however, is different from saying that you can't be a critic without being on TV.

Jim totally guessed correctly. And to be honest, seems like you are saying the same thing here. Unless I have a set on Letterman then anything I say is invalid?

"I'd like to see you try..."

Seems like you are just being a tad more polite about it, is all...

But if I am wrong, I can only apologise. (and yes, it is giSe ;))

Just started watching the clip and the thing I noticed immediately is that Letterman is seated at a much higher level than the guest, immediately putting the guest at a disadvantage from the point of the viewer at home simply because Letterman ALWAYS dominates the frame.

Well, Carney was great. He didn't seem nervous to me at all: same John as usual. And what a damn great routine! How many people are there who could take something of Bob Read's and make it better? One, two? Maybe only Carney.

I was surprised by Letterman--he was a great audience and John handled him well. Sitting beside the desk seemed to work fine for John. I remember the appearances by Roth and Mullica years ago where they indeed worked at a separate table center stage with Letterman beside them, and he was just an idiot. The guy has aged well.

Now what about that damn fruity flash? You really just want to punch the director in the face for the idiotic live switching in the control room at that moment. Certainly rehearsal, and sticking to what was discussed at rehearsal, would have prevented this. However, given that the production of the orange was not the real climax of the routine (after that the glass went, and after THAT the coconut appeared), it wasn't a routine killer. In fact, laymen who noticed it might even have viewed it as an unspoken sucker effect because of the two more important climaxes that followed.

John--when you read this--congrats on the idea of using the rubber band. And the wand.

I didnt mean to criticize Randall I was just more like looking to see why his peformance didnt go over well with me and learning from it at the same time. I'm gonna construct everthing I do from now on like I'm gonna be performing for
Letterman on his show. I was also rootin for Randall to do well once I got a sense David was going into one of his predator modes lol. And no I wouldn't have done as well as Randall did monday night for sure. Nerves woulda effected everything from my timing to patter like a first paid stand-up gig.

Randall the previous six times he was on had around ten minutes each time out to do his stuff so I think he did all his polished bread and butter effects in those appearances and it shows in his confidence performing with his firt three times he was on. Some of his other effects he may have thought Letterman's seen them all so he tried out new stuff he hadn't fine tuned yet.

John did a much, much better than good job. He was bleeping great!

John Killed! He rolled with Letterman's comments, seemed perfectly at ease, did a truckload of magic, ended on time, and his choice of material was spot on. Based on past experience, Letterman was going to be an active participant, so it only makes sense to do something that's an interactive game. The plot was simple enough to allow for jokes and such without losing the premise. I've always loved that routine, and as Richard notes, the addition of the wand business (featured in one of Bob Read's other routines) added just the right touch of chaos.

Kudos to Carney, now a little nervous about how Johnny Ace Palmer will fare, since Dave's already seen the coconut under the hat. Fingers crossed...

Jim totally guessed correctly. And to be honest, seems like you are saying the same thing here. Unless I have a set on Letterman then anything I say is invalid?

"I'd like to see you try..."

Nope. And I'm honestly a touch disappointed -- I thought you English guys were good at the whole clear thinking and careful reading thing...Newton, Russell...you guys did this stuff at a darn high level once upon a time...

If I felt that not being on Letterman disqualified one from writing about guys on Letterman, I would not have written several hundred words about the guys on Letterman.

Let me take a stab at making the distinction clearer (I'll try to keep it brief as I'm sure it is of interest two less than two people):

One view -- mine -- is that the perceived expertise and experience of the reviewer is one of the things to balance in evaluating the helpfulness of the critique.

"How would this person do in a similar situation?", then, strikes me as a very fair question.

The (different) view you peg me with -- "shut up if you haven't been on TV" -- takes one arbitrary career event, and makes it the only factor.

I don't know if Doc Eason has been on Letterman, I do know that he has a wealth of experience dealing with unpredictable, human behavior -- and that makes me listen close when he talks about it...and, even if I didn't know that about Doc, that depth of experience can be felt in what he writes...and that's why asking myself "how is this person likely to do in the situation" makes sense

N.

Just watched the John Carney clip on Youtube and all I can say is wow. It is simply the best guest spot I have ever seen on a chat show.

Kudos to you John.

Carney did a beautiful job last night. He is a great ambassador of magic and watching his presentation on Letterman made me/all of us, proud of him. That director should stop doing those overhead shots without at least discussing it with the performer beforehand.

I thought Jason Randall did a fine job, but I was also confused during his presentation of Bannon's effect. It's a trick where a lot is happening and you have to pay attention to clarity. If anyone missed it, he started with the shrinking cardcase after he pulled the deck out. The case was blue yet the deck was red. I wonder if he did that to make the effect stand out a bit more?

I was fortunate to watch John perform this beautiful routine numerous times during his recent run at the Houston Museum of Natural Science, and three things struck me as remarkable about his performance of it on Letterman: He had to adapt the routine to perform it seated (he performed it standing at the Museum), he had to transpose his handling of many moves from right to left due to his position relative to Letterman, and he had to allow for Letterman's interactions potentially disrupting the flow of the routine. None of these changes are trivial and John handled the whole thing masterfully. Bravo, Maestro!

For the record, no, I have never been asked to Letterman. It's not a walk in the park, that's for sure.

Knowing the work that Carney did to prepare for this, I have tremendous respect for my pal. Reworking that trick to be able to do it left handed and seated was a behemoth effort on his part. Big Kudos for that. and the two things ya couldn't rehearse is that wild card on the other side of the table and the line editor who made the call to use camera two at exactly the wrong time. Aaargh.

See, getting great video is TOUGH!. So many elements need to go correctly that it is easy to see something might go wrong. Still and all, with a little edit .. Carney now has a GREAT and VALUABLE chunk of video.

RK makes a good point .. the orange was not the climax .. in fact someone today asked me if the orange was exposed on purpose so as to take the punters off point so he could dump the glass and load the coconut. I doubt that was the case but the point is, the orange was NOT deal breaker.

I think the larger problem here is that there is so little time to establish character. And in my mind, a successful performance is so much more than the trick. John was great last night, don't get me wrong, and he connected better than Jason did.. but it was still "walk out, shake hands and show me what you got". That is a tough situation for even the best performer.

Note to self: bring a pillow to sit on. That'll fix that situation. ;<)

John Carney is a stud. Period. He presented delightful, assured, and masterful magic from start to finish under circumstances that would have crippled lesser performers. And he did so while allowing his personality to shine through and illuminate his work.
It was a textbook example of how to handle this sort of performance situation.

Richard Kaufman wrote:Letterman is always a pain in the ass to magicians--he never just shuts up and lets you do your act. He's constantly interrupting because he becomes insecure if he's suddenly no longer the center of attention for more than five seconds.

Richard Kaufman wrote:I remember the appearances by Roth and Mullica years ago where they indeed worked at a separate table center stage with Letterman beside them, and he was just an idiot.

Here's David Roth's performance.

Here's Mullica's performance.

I must be crazy because this is exactly the type of person I like to perform for. Someone who is engaged and lively and genuinely surprised by the magic. Yes he's a little chatty at points but they got to perform their routines and he was suitably impressed (or in Mullica's case, disgusted).

We often say that close-up magic should be about the interaction between people, but apparently unless that reaction is, "You're a total delight!" then the person is a jerk.

That may be the type of person you like to perform for, but you're not doing that on television. Working for the camera and the home audience is an entirely different thing than working for the guy next to you.

Richard Hatch wrote:I was fortunate to watch John perform this beautiful routine numerous times during his recent run at the Houston Museum of Natural Science, and three things struck me as remarkable about his performance of it on Letterman: He had to adapt the routine to perform it seated (he performed it standing at the Museum), he had to transpose his handling of many moves from right to left due to his position relative to Letterman, and he had to allow for Letterman's interactions potentially disrupting the flow of the routine. None of these changes are trivial and John handled the whole thing masterfully. Bravo, Maestro!

I've seen John perform this routine several times live-and-in-the-flesh, and I concur with each of your observations.

John's performance was great. He's a natural -- I think Letterman was surprised that a guy this smooth and funny could be a magician.

Andrew Charles wrote:Here's Mullica's performance.

I just recently saw this clip of Mullica & Letterman for the first time.

I loved the way Tom took control of Letterman from the start. When Tom said "To save time, we'll use these." after asking Dave to open the cig pack, the look on Dave's face was priceless. Nothing Letterman did phased Tom at all. A true master of spectator control.

JMD

Did anyone happen to notice in Jason Randal's spot on the show that, after having a card "freely" selected, he said to Dave "Sign your name on the card, and maybe a little bit on the white part so we can see it", thereby telegraphing that he already knew the card was a court card?

Travis wrote:Did anyone happen to notice in Jason Randal's spot on the show that, after having a card "freely" selected, he said to Dave "Sign your name on the card, and maybe a little bit on the white part so we can see it", thereby telegraphing that he already knew the card was a court card?

No, but I did notice that you could see the face of the bottom card of the deck that was supposed to be inside its box when Jason shook hands with Dave at the start.

Not really important, I'm sure it went completely by laymen.

JMD

Night one. How do you prepare for national television, and not match the color of your deck to the color of your Shrinking Card Case?

Night two: John picked material that would survive flashes, bad camera angles, and rewinding without making him look bad. The effect is about sneaking stuff under the hat he couldnt fail. And every time he fooled em he got better. Add to that the fact that he seemed more at ease with Dave than Paul Shafer does, and it amounts to the best performance of magic on TV in years.

Brilliant choices, and even better execution. Last night Vernon, Ross, and Read watched Letterman, and smiled. A lot.

Reading the comments regarding how John Carney had to work hard to adapt and rework his routine to make it work for the situation, and still it was difficult (flash of the orange), I can only think "So why didn't he do something else? Something that didn't need to be severely reworked?"

Just wondering.

Richard Hatch wrote:I was fortunate to watch John perform this beautiful routine numerous times during his recent run at the Houston Museum of Natural Science, and three things struck me as remarkable about his performance of it on Letterman: He had to adapt the routine to perform it seated (he performed it standing at the Museum), he had to transpose his handling of many moves from right to left due to his position relative to Letterman, and he had to allow for Letterman's interactions potentially disrupting the flow of the routine. None of these changes are trivial and John handled the whole thing masterfully. Bravo, Maestro!

Richard,
also, when I asked for a table, they said no. When I asked if I could put my load bag on the floor or chair.....no. When I asked if I could lay down a mat, or a board to cover the 6" square indention in the table.....no. Had to sit sideways, halfway off the chair, with loads in different places then normal....awkward angles for steals.

There were 5 different cameras, filming from 5 different angles. Letterman's hands were one inch from the props which would expose everything, several times over. Then I had to interact to interruptions, and stay on track. Millions of viewers. Ten minutes "rehearsal". If you are demanding to the director or crew, you are out. Live audience, tons of crew. Tons of pressure. Trying to do something impressive and not play it safe. Trying to be entertaining. Trying to relax.

Easy...from an armchair at home.

Thanks for appreciating how difficult it was Richard.

John,

You have nerves of steal. Given the stress, and complete lack of control of the situation, would you do it again?

Ray

Wait a minute. I meant steel, not steal. It's late. Good night.

Ray

Congrats on the performance, John!

From a media exposure perspective - have you seen a significant increase in enquiries / hits to your website ?

Obviously an appearance on Letterman creates instant 'credibility' in the eyes of an audience - but was curious whether it had translated into tangible increase in business ... or whether that impact would only be felt in time.

Well done - that's a serious high pressure environment.

NCMarsh wrote:

Jim totally guessed correctly. And to be honest, seems like you are saying the same thing here. Unless I have a set on Letterman then anything I say is invalid?

"I'd like to see you try..."

Nope. And I'm honestly a touch disappointed --

Well I apologise unreservedly for disappointing you. As at least ONE other person read your post the same way as I did, perchance it was ambiguous writing from the author, as opposed to low-quality reading comprehension skills at fault for the miscommunication.

Either way, it's all cleared up now and I apologise for thinking badly of you.

Damian

Mr Carney's performance was wonderful. Just watched it on YouTube. Having read this thread before watching, and understanding the horrible conditions Mr C had to put up with makes the clip even more impressive.

I knew, obv, the second the class was wrapped in paper it was gonna go. But I still totally missed it. I love being fooled as well as entertained. Thank you!

David Lettermans Late Show is always structured and controlled, so it's not surprising that they had such a short rehearsal window and refused to provide a table. When you go to see it live youre subjected to incessant pep talks encouraging you to laugh, applaud and have fun. Its annoying if youve been there more than once. I guess the out-of-towners get into it since its a rare chance for them to see the show in person.

Guests are interviewed before the taping and if youve seen the show enough you can see how Mr. Lettermans questions lead right into some seemingly off-the-cuff anecdote.

Nevertheless, Im still a fan.

Yes, David Letterman was more forgiving and a better audience than in the past.

Jason Randal to me didnt seem in any way nervous; he seemed to do as well as in past appearances. He handled Mr. Lettermans distractions well. I, too, was curious about the red cards in the blue case. Also, it was funny (magician funny) when after Jason performed Wow, David Letterman said, Wow!

I seem to recall a story that Jason was booked at a birthday party for David and since then has performed on the Late Show usually on Davids birthday in April.

I think Jason did a fine job.

John Carney? Wow! He handled Davids interruptions with aplomb. Its very impressive the changes he had to make to his set as other posters mentioned. That information makes his performance so much more splendid. He came across as quite at ease through his performance.

Well done, John.

Since Jason Randals and Michael Ammars sets were recorded on Monday (the Friday show is usually taped after the Monday taping), I wonder if they got a chance to call the other three performers and say, Watch out!

As mentioned earlier, Johnny Carson never allowed magicians to fail. He let them shine. Even if he could see the gaff or the sleight because of his angle to the magicians side, he never let on. Jeepers, he is missed!

Amazing, John. Your performance, your routine, your skill... amazing.

John Carney[/quote wrote:

...when I asked for a table, they said no. When I asked if I could put my load bag on the floor or chair.....no. When I asked if I could lay down a mat, or a board to cover the 6" square indention in the table.....no. Had to sit sideways, halfway off the chair, with loads in different places then normal....awkward angles for steals.

There were 5 different cameras, filming from 5 different angles. Letterman's hands were one inch from the props which would expose everything, several times over. Then I had to interact to interruptions, and stay on track. Millions of viewers. Ten minutes "rehearsal". If you are demanding to the director or crew, you are out. Live audience, tons of crew. Tons of pressure. Trying to do something impressive and not play it safe. Trying to be entertaining. Trying to relax.

Easy...from an armchair at home.

Thanks for appreciating how difficult it was Richard.

Letterman's arrogance and disdain filters down to the production staff who apparently see "lesser mortals" who come on the show as props for Letterman to play with rather than as other show business professionals. No wonder Kreskin wouldn't do the show for years. John should feel good about beating the jerks who set him up to fail.

Johnny Palmer did a good set after starting with material the cameras couldn't follow. Letterman didn't think to move the unneeded microphone on the desk. Having Letterman lift and examine the cups was a good ploy which made the chicks at the end even more stunning.

Doug Brewer wrote:Hey Frank - actually the cake out of the shoe can be quite funny. I think even Carney does some version. I would have preferred that . . .

To be completely honest, I think prop magic (like WOW, or Hot Rod) are nice effects if the crowd already knows you and knows you aren't a hack. I have tons of repeat customers at the bar and this kind of thing is perfect. Unusual props, kind of fun eye candy, but jeez, not on national TV (IMO).

Although Bernard Bilis kicked ass with it on French TV. Admittedly, though, he is an institution over there and they tend to respect magic. It's on Youtube.

I also think John Carney's bit was a bravura effort. Man, you made magic cool.

As to some of the comments in the thread about Letterman, I am sure that Mr.Carney knew full well going in it was not going to be a cakewalk. That's why he worked his ass off to be prepared rather than buying WOW.

We all know that Letterman has a set persona and it is unreasonable, unrealistic and frankly amateurish to expect he would drop his comedic persona (as much as some dislike it) to assist a magician.

Again, fantastic job, John.