Not the Best Review for Penn & Teller

[Richard Kaufman]

Penn & Teller are performing in the UK right now, but the Guardian newspaper critic wasn't thrilled:
http://www.theguardian.com/stage/2014/j ... new-tricks

[Chris Aguilar]

I share the reviewer's respect for Teller and impatience with Penn.

[mrgoat]

I share the reviewer's respect for Teller and impatience with Penn.

Oh god so do I, so do I.

Also, after reading that, I'm pleased I didn't pay to see this show.

[Tom Pilling]

Well, I would beg to differ with The Grauniad [sic] on this occasion. Incidentally, it is ironic that this particular newspaper offers accusations of 'windbaggery'.

I saw the show on Sunday, and along with three thousand or so other people, was very much much entertained. With the notable exception of Paul Daniels, I struggle to think of a working magician, or magicians, who are so capable of thoroughly entertaining a theatre with precisely what the Guardian complains about: showmanship.

People bang on about Mamet's production with Ricky Jay, and yet the show I watched on Sunday was quite simply superb theatre. The scripting, pacing, staging and shape of P&T's show were outstanding, in my view.

I was dreading how I might react to spending an evening listening to Penn Jillette. I suffered a bad reaction watching episodes of their show, 'Bulls**t', in the same way that I often suffer a bad reaction when reading The Guardian newspaper. It is like having a teenager explain the very basics of an argument you have been making for years with considerably more sophistication. I am a choir who doesn't like being preached at.

However, I was pleasingly engaged by Penn Jillette the showman, the hustler, the comedian, the magician, the entertainer. I suppose we could all consider when we last played the Hammersmith Apollo, and consider how much buzz each one of us attracts amongst the general public. We could reflect on what performing magic means to an audience, and what is our ultimate measure of success. I myself will be reflecting over the next few days on Paul Daniels' assessment of Dai Vernon and Billy McComb, in an interview I watched this morning.

I think Maskelyne and Devant would have been proud.

[mrgoat]

Have you seen them before?

If it was your first time, I'd entirely agree with you. However, I've seen them three times in Vegas and twice in London, so the lack of new material would have made it an expensive repeat for me.

And, suggesting that if we're not performing at the Apollo we can't say anything bad about someone that is, is the sort of comment more suited for the tragic cafe than here.

[Ian Kendall]

I am a choir who doesn't like being preached at.

I'm having fun trying to figure out how to say that without ending with the preposition...

Maybe "I am a choir at whom one doesn't like being preached"?

Or, more classically, "I am a choir who doesn't like being preached at, assh0le".

[Tom Pilling]

It's just a viewpoint. The Grauniad critic took another view. What I was driving at, poor grammar and all and without expecting any agreement necessarily, is that they were hugely entertaining. I cannot think of many magicians who come anywhere near. The fact that they sell out such a big venue reflects that, I believe. It's a facile point, perhaps.

Yes, it was the first time I've watched their live show. I have of course watched them many times on the box, and had seen most of the routines before. What is one man's drink is another man's poison. I happen to have seen the same show, albeit on a different night, at the same venue, and I didn't feel the same as the Grauniad's reviewer.

Of course, due to their evil exposure of magic tricks, I should never have bought a ticket.

[mrgoat]

Yes, it was the first time I've watched their live show.

That explains your POV. And why you disagree with people who have seen it before.

The Guardian and I are both saying we like them, but as the show is 90% the same as 4 years ago, it could have done with some new tricks. And that Penn is a windbag.

But if it was your first time seeing them live, I now know why you enjoyed it and would agree with you. First time you see it's great. But Penn is still an arse.

[mrgoat]

I am a choir who doesn't like being preached at.

I'm having fun trying to figure out how to say that without ending with the preposition...

Maybe "I am a choir at whom one doesn't like being preached"?

Or, more classically, "I am a choir who doesn't like being preached at, assh0le".

I am a choir that doesn't like being the subject of preaching?

[Ross Welford]

I saw the show for the second time and the Guardian's reviewer has it spot on. Frankly, I felt rather cheated. For £45 a ticket, and a four year gap, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a largely new show, rather than largely recycled one.

(That said, I could watch Teller's coins and goldfish trick any number of times.)

And what is it with Penn and his fire-eating? To close the show? We know it's not dangerous, because he yaks on for about 20 minutes explaining why it isn't dangerous...

And the atheism? Oh, FFS, give it a rest. At times, the show felt like an atheistic version of a Billy Graham revival. Yes, I know and understand that scepticism and atheism are part of Penn's schtick, and one or two references in the show would probably be fine, and relevant, and funny, but he doesn't half overdo it. The friend I went with is a committed Christian and was mildly, Englishly, offended. What offended me was not his atheism, but his assumption that I wouldn't find his banging on about it just as tedious as I find "gospel magic".

[Brad Henderson]

I think p and t have a specific audience and for them they are perfect.

have a layman magic buddy (he was my partner in crime through high school and college. helped me put on shows, built stuff - loves magic but is not a magician) who excitedly went to the p and t show in Vegas and HATED it for many of the reasons explained here. In was flabbergasted. I think it's a great show and thought he would too.

But - it just did NOT work for him. have met others who feel the same way

I don't think that's a critique of p and t but praise - they have such a clear vision of their work that it is perfect for a certain type of audiece and holds no interest for others.

so much better than watering down to appeal to the lowest common denominators.

[Tom Moore]

In their (sort of) defence - Derren Brown is the only "touring" magician i can think of who puts together a complete new show every year. Daniels recycled the same touring production for 20 years (and even his show now is basically that show but with the illusion sequences replaced with smaller material), Copperfield - though very good at mixing things up in reality did essentially the same show every time he performed in Europe over a 10 year period and even his USA tours whilst having some variation weren't massively different to eachother from year to year. Lance Burton (on his rare gigs outside of the monte carlo) did the same few sequences. Hans Klok & Dani Lary tour every year all across Europe's theatres but in reality only have 2 shows each and just repaint their props to suit whatever the theme of this year's tour.

As a ticket buyer it annoys me, as a writer/designer it annoys me even more (I'd be a millionaire if every one of my clients needed an hour or more of new material each year) but it's really just how the touring industry works.

[Bill Mullins]

Thirty or so years ago, when I used to go to rock concerts, I saw the Doobie Brothers twice separated by 4 or 5 years. Three-quarters of their set was the same each time. I'd guess that is the case with most touring "classic" rock acts today -- people want to see that which they are familiar with.

P&T are long enough in the tooth that they are almost a "classic" magic act. If I were to see them, I'd be pleased to see many of the same routines that I saw 10 years ago -- the shadow cutting, the bullet catch, Teller demonstrating ditches and steals with Penn narrating, etc.

OTOH, if I saw them only four years ago, and this show was more or less the same, I might feel different.

[Tom Pilling]

I saw the show for the second time and the Guardian's reviewer has it spot on. Frankly, I felt rather cheated. For £45 a ticket, and a four year gap, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a largely new show, rather than largely recycled one.

(That said, I could watch Teller's coins and goldfish trick any number of times.)

And what is it with Penn and his fire-eating? To close the show? We know it's not dangerous, because he yaks on for about 20 minutes explaining why it isn't dangerous...

And the atheism? Oh, FFS, give it a rest. At times, the show felt like an atheistic version of a Billy Graham revival. Yes, I know and understand that scepticism and atheism are part of Penn's schtick, and one or two references in the show would probably be fine, and relevant, and funny, but he doesn't half overdo it. The friend I went with is a committed Christian and was mildly, Englishly, offended. What offended me was not his atheism, but his assumption that I wouldn't find his banging on about it just as tedious as I find "gospel magic".

We'll have to agree to differ, Ross.

I rather liked the echoes of a Revivalist preacher, even though I was the choir being preached to [there I go again]. There seems to me to be something rather quaint about his bombastic approach, which fits with the carnival type presentation. Of course, four years on and you saw the same show again, that's annoying; but as mentioned above, Derren Brown is the exception rather than the rule in producing a new show every two years. He talks on the subject here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0-z8MoGs8k

(Not sure which part it's in, but the whole interview is fun.)

Anyway, as a first time viewer of their live show, I thought it was excellent, but I take the points made above regarding repeat viewings. Interesting though, to consider how many great performers have made their careers from one or two very good shows.

Now, I'm off to provocatively split a couple of infinitives...

[mrgoat]

We'll have to agree to differ, Ross.

...

Of course, four years on and you saw the same show again, that's annoying

Sounds like you are agreeing, essentially.

[Tom Pilling]

We'll have to agree to differ, Ross.

...

Of course, four years on and you saw the same show again, that's annoying

Sounds like you are agreeing, essentially.

Shucks, you may be right..

[mrgoat]

[Tom Pilling]

[Brad Jeffers]

What I was driving at, poor grammar and all ...

Tom, Regarding your line "I am a choir who doesn't like to be preached at".

Some will declare - This is the sort of English up with which I will not put!

It is however, perfectly alright to end a sentence with a preposition. Your sentence structure is better than the proposed solutions.

One modification I would suggest, is to end the sentence with the preposition to, rather than the preposition at. This correlates better with the common expression - You're preaching to the choir.

I think the optimum phrasing would be - I am the choir who doesn't need to be preached to.

[Rick Ruhl]

Everyone is harping on Penn for this review... We all know Penn, we know his schtick.

Teller is a genius, but we all know that too. And the review praised him.

We have to look at the times. A new touring show every year? David doesn't do that anymore either. Would it be profitable?

I think since magic has taken a backseat to reality TV on the toob, live performance is where it's at. And remember the magicians of old, they'd do the same show for 3-5 years on tour.

We arent getting any younger and we all gave up our youth in the 80', when David and Doug and Lance etc, were making new magic faster than we could say Box Office receipt.

[Richard Kaufman]

I find it strange that the show would be essentially the same as it was, I think the number given was 4 or 5 years ago.

Penn and Teller have a deep repertoire--their shows have changed constantly over the years. Maybe a lot of their new stuff just doesn't "travel." Or they're lazy. I don't know. Since I hired Uri Geller for the Genii Bash, they don't talk to me anymore.

When you see a singer in concert, you know (everyone knows) that they're going to get essentially a greatest hits thing with a few songs off the new album (which are inevitably inferior) thrown in.

I don't think people feel that way about magicians because for the almost two decades when David Copperfield was touring and doing a new TV show every year, his show was almost completely different every time. (I'm not talking about what he was doing in his show after he stopped doing TV specials every year.) But 17 years of having David come through your city with a new show creates expectations of seeing new material.

[Ian Kendall]

It is however, perfectly alright to end a sentence with a preposition. Your sentence structure is better than the proposed solutions

You do realise I was being deliberately facetious, don't you? The obvious clunkiness of the 'solutions' should have been a bit of a give away...

[AJM]

So, to summarise, it's Geller v. Teller.

Maybe they could do a show as a double act, but at what venue?

I'd suggest somewhere in the Magic Castle - the Peller perhaps?

Good night and God bless, you've been a great audience.

[Tom Pilling]

I dunno. You post something provocative about Penn & Teller and you get told off for grammatical errors. Who knew?

Everybody professes to have actually read Our Magic, but so many condemn the very substance of it, when identified contemporaneously.

I guess there's a bottom line for every eejit. Penn & Teller have an enviable bottom line, others less so. But we're all of us eejits, when all is said. Thank goodness they *do*, rather than just talk about *doing it*.

[jermar]

Well, I have read every word of Our Magic. So there. As for Penn and Teller I quite like Teller but can't bear Penn. Alas loud mouthed performers don't appeal to me. Especially when they use profanity as I understand that Penn does. I did hear that he is a very nice and kind man but he quite horrified me with his onstage persona. I expect that is what was bothering the Guardian.

[Shazzbatt]

FWIW I saw the show in London a few years ago and the recent show. Whilst I enjoyed the show on the whole my view of it was that the classic pieces were the most enjoyable for me. The newer pieces didn't quite work for me. They were OK but were clearly in need of more stage time.

I think on reflection I'd have rather seen the complete "greatest hits" as opposed to the smattering of hits plus "stuff from the new album" (to continue the musical analogy).

To agree with some of the posts above I think they're definitely better if it's the first time you've seen them.

BTW, on the subject of Derren Brown, IMO his shows are consistently superb!

[P.T.Widdle]

[quote="Richard Kaufman "Since I hired Uri Geller for the Genii Bash, they don't talk to me anymore."
[/quote]

Good for them.

[P.T.Widdle]

Nice of Richard to point out a semi-bad review of their show in England (maybe because they don't talk to him anymore?), but there seem to be plenty of great reviews of the show coming out of the UK.

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/arts/stag ... 120676.ece

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/ ... re-7268046

http://www.standard.co.uk/goingout/come ... 48006.html

Also, it's pretty cool that they performed for Prince Charles:

http://www.reviewjournal.com/entertainm ... sor-castle

PS - Is that someone wearing Google Glass? Interesting potential discussion about that device being used by spectators and magicians.

[Richard Kaufman]

The Guardian is a prominent newspaper, and since I sometimes read it, that's the review I saw. I didn't go hunting for others.

I was very pleased to have Uri Geller at the Genii Bash, and so were 99.9% of the people who attended.

[AJM]

C'mon Teller - I'm sure you follow the chat on the Genii Forum.

Forget about Geller, he ain't worth bothering about - come along to the Genii Convention and you will delight 100% of those in attendance.

I'll even buy your registration...

Andrew

[P.T.Widdle]

"99.9%" of the attendees loved Geller? Is that supposed to be some sort of validation against the fact that P&T won't speak to you anymore since that booking?

Even if that ridiculous statistic were true (did you do some sort of survey?), I value the opinion of Penn & Teller more than the starry-eyed attendees of a magic convention any day.

Furthermore, no matter what your opinion of P&T's act is, to intimate that they were possibly "lazy" when it came to putting together their current tour is really un-classy and cheap. With the possible exception of Copperfield, P&T are the hardest working professional magicians today.

But for one who believes that Uri Geller is the greatest living magician of the 20th century, I guess calling Penn & Teller lazy is not so hard.

PS - Still waiting for an answer if there is to be any Genii coverage/interview with the Amazing Randi (a good friend of P&T) to coincide with the release of the new movie about him. Or is he not speaking to you either?

[Rick Ruhl]

when you sit down with Teller, you almost can't get a word in edgewise... Not a bad thing, the man can out talk Penn. and he knows his magic...

[Richard Kaufman]

I'm sure Randi will have a nice article in MAGIC magazine.

How do I know how the people at the Genii convention felt about Geller's talk? The two or three cheering standing ovations told me. And then lots of people told me afterward.

And that's the end of my comments on the matter.

[Tom Pilling]

I still think that the charge of 'windbaggery', coming from The Guardian [nee The Manchester Guardian], is hilarious.

It is the least well edited of all our serious newspapers; it is also the most prone to pomposity. I happen to be slightly to the left of it on many issues, but not on all. Still, I more often buy newspapers that are to the right of The Guardian, as they are better to read. I get my news from multiple sources, political bias being what it is, including The New York Times.

By the way, on an unrelated note, well done USA for progressing in the World Cup! Apparently, when they beat England many years ago, the news was telegraphed from abroad. Our press believed it to be a mistake, and reported it as such. Hahaha. I like the way the USA play football [soccer], it is positive and attacking, with great skill on show and exemplary team spirit. Go USA.