Mindfreak I and II

[Robert Allen]

All this talk reminds me why the objective should be to entertain rather than to just mystify without entertaining. If you're mystified while being entertained you enjoy the moment. If you're mystified while not being entertained you'll just sit there trying to puzzle it out.

[Guest]

Originally posted by L.Z.:

...it's not like there will be any instructional video put out by L&L Publishing stating how to:

- vanish from a Garbage Can and appear on top of a building
- use a Korn Doll and hurt people (i.e. fire and needle)
- get a Ring Into an Ice Cube within 1 min 20 secs
- turn yourself into a Human Candle and then vanish
- make yourself Levitate way up in the air and then a spectator levitate outside on the street
- make a Butterfly fly from napkin
- have a Card move and then rise off the floor without forcing, or having prior knowledge

I have very little time to post right now, so going to keep it very brief, but this here was a bit of a surprise. I mean, if Copperfield doesn't release a video on how to vanish the Statue of Liberty, then it's not magic?

I mean, by now most (all?) of us here know how that was done, and frankly, most of us will never have the resources to recreate it. Was it camera trickery? Sort of. But the same technique fooled a live audience. And we all know the statue didn't REALLY disappear.

Folks, magic is all about trickery in one form or another. Is it ok to light a stage carefully to avoid seeing the wires?

And the audience there DID see Criss Angel go under a garbage can and end up on the roof. And we still had to cut it shorter to keep the show moving.

I have the pleasure of getting to chat briefly with Mark Wilson at the Castle every now and then. He's a legend in our magic community, and how great is it that he had a TV series for as long as he did? But go ask kids nowadays who he is, and they won't have heard of him. It's sad, but it's what we're dealing with. It's ok, they don't know who Sinatra or the Beatles were, either.

As for using 1 camera and careful planning of camera angles, this is reality TV. Real people on the street. There is no blocking. There is no way to make sure one camera covers everything we need to see. If the camera misses it, we hopefully have it on the second camera. Otherwise, the moment is gone.

Sorry gotta run. Will respond more later. But there were some good insightful comments about the shows -- both pro and con -- that I really appreciate. I just hope most of you realize what Richard Kaufman said so well. This isn't meant for magicians, but it will certainly be a boost to us all.

[Richard Lane]

From this morning's issue of Cynopsis, a daily TV industry newsletter:

"A&E debuted two new series on Wednesday night - Inked (9-10p) and Criss Angel: Mindfreak (10p). Inked averaged 615,000 A18-49 impressions, and a median age of 33.6 years.
Criss Angel delivered 1.1 million A18-49 impressions, and a median age of 33.5 years - the youngest series premiere in A&E's history."

[NCMarsh]

Very nice -- thanks for posting Richard.

[Guest]

I watched the shows last night and didn't have a real problem with any of the material presented or the editing. I can see how all the material could be presented live with the use of staging and stooges etc, which is fair. My only problem was I find Criss Angel to be highly unlikable. I've heard him on the radio and found him to be an irritating angry guy and lispy. I think it is the New York accent and all that goes with it. I was raised in California and the South (Georgia) and even though my dad is from Brooklyn the NY attitudes and delivery are hard to take. beyond that I find him to be a creative guy.

As for folks who think Copperfield isn't known to the youngters (I mean real kids not just young adults) I do ask kids if they know who Copperfield is and who Blaine is. Far away Copperfield is better known.
Steve V

[Brian Marks]

Camera tricks and editing are necessary. So what if it can't be duplicated in real life. David Blaine and Criss Angel have people taliking about magic. They want to see live magic and now you are in a position to show them. Do some well performed magic for them and they will remember you.

[Robert Allen]

"Camera tricks ... are necessary"

Necessary for what? Clearly they aren't necessary for magic per se since people were doing magic since long before cameras were invented.

To me, magic is like a play. It's LIVE. How would you feel if you were watching a performance of Swan Lake or the Nutcracker on TV and an animated character or three swooped on to the stage, while the live actors stared into the air and tried to interact with them? I'd be incensed and turn the show off. Camera tricks for a magic show on TV strike me as nearly the same thing. Good, bad, or indifferent I'm paying, or spending my time, to watch a *performer* demonstrate their skill, not to see the editor/animator demonstrate *their* skill.

[MaxNY]

There is no sex in his violence. Sex tells a story, most can relate to. Violence doesn't always do that. Blaine burnt ashes extinguished on his arm to reveal a loved one's name, very sexy. Hanging by meathooks , just plain violent. The storyline behind "The Burn" was that it was for his Mom...I guess we bought into that huh? I don't think there was one viewer that said, "Gee, I guess he really loves his Mom..." Maybe the disfunctional family was the story. Disfunctional violence ties in with The Gottis, and Dawg.

[Guest]

Originally posted by pierredan:
Mindfreak was very entertaining but lacked magical integrity.

David Blaine and apparently Criss Angel have developed a new style of magic: ?Magical Special Effects?. Prestidigitation and genuine illusions are being replaced by ?made for TV magic?.

What?s next, computer generated magical effects?

I could not agree more, no talent to have a special effects team in your corner..

[Guest]

Just ran into some lay types who watched the Criss Angel show and they loved it. They loved every bit of it and didn't question camera tricks or editing or anything.... there ya go.
Steve V

[Michael Kamen]

Mark Wilson had Alan Wakeling in his corner, and Criss Angel has his creative geniuses. Let's face it -- its not a one-man show no matter what the public sees on the front end.

(corrected spelling)

[Dustin Stinett]

You are thinking of Alan Wakeling. Mark Wilson also had John Gaughan, Bev Bergeron, and several others over the years. Criss Angel also has a very impressive list of names working with him, but the artistic vision is his.

Dustin

[Guest]

I think Criss Angel is very entertaining and does add a new feel to magic. While some people are going to sit here and rip on because of his style or what he does isn't what you consider magic.

Lets really think how magic started, it started in a way to mystify people leaving them in awe and kind of freaked out.

Now with people making comments on his stunts. Remember Houdini did these off the wall stunts also but now because someone is taking it too another level, is it too much for you to handle. Hanging by hooks is a test of endurance and the battle to overcome pain as was the samething as being punched in the stomach. Also Criss accomplished one more thing doing that, he got you to remember him. One more thing, in all of these feats if its Criss or anyone else, they all have people on the sides lines just in case - you would be stupid not too.

Also who cares if he talks with a lisp or if he has a New York attitude. People always perceive things differently and people have bad days. For example, I have heard many people say how nice David Copperfield is, but my experience with him - I thought he was a major jerk.

Why is it for most people in todays society they can not be happy for others and instead end up saying negative things about each other. Maybe its a little jealousy.

Well all I have to say is: Criss congrats on making a name for yourself and getting that series on A&E. Keep up the good work. To the rest of you: Hope to see your specials on TV also.

Now about my thoughts so far about his new series. I seen the Levitation and Fire burning ones. I just wish each episode didn't keep featuring the samething over and over. Its too themed but I think its great, finally a weekly magic show.

[Bob Klase]

Earlier (before seeing the shows) I wrote "From the comments posted here I suspect that there's very little in the TV shows that will ever be seen in a live show."

Now that I've been able to see the show I'll retract that statement. I saw very little that couldn't be done live. It might have limiting angles (much like things done on stage by Copperfield, Burton, etc). A few things might have used a stooge (much like things done by other big names).

I've seen a lot of comments on the internet that it was all stooges and editing. I think most of those comments only show limited knowledge of what's possible without stooges and editing.

Personally I liked the show. I liked most of Copperfield's TV specials better, but then I'm older than the target age for Angel's audience. I look forward to seeing the rest of the series.

[Guest]

Originally posted by Richard Kaufman:

The coda by which Criss lives, and which you will read in our interview in the August issue of Genii, is that he can perform live ANY trick he performs in Mindfreak.

I would sure like to see him do the disappearance from the garbage can on a concrete sidewalk and appear on top of a building LIVE, is that possible ?
Rennie

[Brian Marks]

Would you be blame him him if appeared on the building DEAD? I mean he is going inside a garbage can, the stench is horrific.

[Guest]

The major point of the shows has been made by Richard Kaufman.

The shows are for those of an audience who see "magic" as an outdated medium of performance in the styles of Copperfeild and Burton, or just presented as an arcane parlor politeness for kids.

How many of the over 35 crowd have been to a rave? How many of the under 35 crowd watch TV without critical judgement of what they see? And how many people believe that Picasso is not art?

Each generation of artistic interpretation of life reflects new aspects of the MEDIUM as perceived by several generations. Picasso's use of brushes was disciplined by first learning the old styles -- even rehearsing them early in his work -- but then he started pushing the techniques and styles in a new direction. MANY art critics and teachers, keepers of old styles - thought his work was rot.

Entertainment and magic are subject to style change in the same way. Criss's vision encompasses more than just tricks. For this I applaud him and his crew.

Television also has another problem, though, one that artists of the past rarely faced in the magnitude of the problem. Television is a COLLABORATIVE art -- on a grander and less controllable scale than motion pictures. The common magician must become a wizard with the powers to direct dozens or more people before, during AND after performance...many of who have the artistic vision of a slug, and many of whom have their own vision of what is supposed to be happening.

This pallet of people can in no way be compared to the brushes a single artist uses on a single canvas -- so the magical artist who is not yet a wizard (or is young in his/her talent) may have to make a lot of error corrections along the way.

Houdini did NOT become the "King of Cards." The time frame of a one hour special on TV is very different -- and based on the old variety show idea that was prevelant in the early days of television. The demise of the Carol Burnet Show seems to have been the demise of variety television as a regularly scheduled presentation.

Having met Criss briefly only once -- I can tell you that my impression is that he is a thoughtful artist, learned in the crafts of theater and magic for a growing audience of those "tired of the SOS" and who are looking for challenge in crossing the line between what is physical reality and limit -- and into the mists of a world of belief in the "impossible."

In the long run -- traditonal magic only has some of the tools that will allow any artist to breach that wall of impossibility. Theater is limited in its approach but can evoke magic by its greater intimacy. Television for even the selected masses (A&E) has NEVER been properly developed for this task.

I applaud Criss and his team for trying -- and even succeeding some of the 22 minutes of each episode. Their artistry is better than any TV evangelist I have seen -- and those folks do not use props to evoke mystery, do they?

[Dustin Stinett]

Heres something else for the naysayers to mull over: In the August Genii is an interview of Dave Baram. I think that its fair to say that the COO of The Firm, one of the largest and most successful talent management firms in the industry, will have a better grasp of what makes for a commercially successful production than a lot of us piddling around on an Internet message board.

Dustin

[MaxNY]

Dustin take back the "piddling around" line... There is a group of us that want to see a correct time line used during televised magic, or else no future magician will be commercially successful.
---There is a problem with appearing on a roof-top as fast as he did... logic comes into the spectator"s mind, and they may not watch next week, because unconsciously, they write him off as a "Benny Hill." Magician's need the laws of Physics. We rely on the break down of the traditional paths of brain synapse. In the ever faster editing world, magic needs a better time line of continuity. If you are capable of moving between time and space that fast, then your cameramen, and editors must do a better job, convincing me. I'm seeing too many cut-aways to the faces of spectators, with zoom outs back to establishing three shots, with what I am claiming to be a missing piece of the time line. This is all done to be a "Commercially Successful Production". The art then suffers, at the expense of the next guy who comes along, and attemps an even faster transposition, until this genre too gets laughed at as "Cheesy". I like this genre of magic, I want it to be around for awhile. Magicians have always tried to be on the cutting edge of technology, we can't relinquish those reins to television editors smacked up on adult Ridalin.

[Dustin Stinett]

Okay Max, Ill change what we do here to screwing around if that will make you happy, because compared to what Dave Baram does, running a multimillion dollar company, thats what this is, and thats my only point.

I honestly do not understand your idea for continuity in a magic show. How do you explain Jingers vanish from inside the Fire Spiker Illusion and her instantaneous reappearance at the back of the theater? (A feat which is done live four times a week, by the way.) The Trashcan vanish/reappearance is very possible to do live, under the same conditions. (And NO, not everyone in the audience is a stooge. Are assistants hidden in the crowd? You bet there are, and theres nothing wrong with that.) If my feeble brain can come up with a very viable solution, then Angel and his group of talented consultants certainly canand all without camera edits and resulting in his immediate reappearance (and it really isnt all that hard to do, actually.) Do not mistake the style of filming with methodology.

Dustin

[MaxNY]

I just want to clear my name from the "stooge" crew. I am very careful not to point stooge fingers. (Because when you point the stooge finger, three stooge fingers are pointing back at you!)

[Brian Marks]

quick someone put their hand between their eyes

[Arnie Fuoco]

I went back to the tape of the "Trash Barrel" illusion and timed it from Angel's shoes covered with barrel to his appearance on the balcony. It is 20 seconds. Copperfield moves 12 people from being vanished in a raised cage on stage. to appearing at the back of the stage in 35 seconds. So Angel's Barrel illusion doesn't seem to me to be unrealistic and need much time shaving. I counted about 12 to 15 assistants (I won't use the word stooges) and there were about 40 people watching this illusion so I don't think everyone was in on it. Bottom line for me--great illusion, on a par with Jingers vanish and Copperfield's illusion of 12 people in a cage.

[Steve Snediker]

I hope that Johnny Thompson is going play a greater role in the series than just walking around the salt-flats and looking like Grandpa from the Munsters.

Joking aside... I am not a big fan of goth magic. But I'm also too old to really get into body piercing, tattoos, and self-mutilation. Yet, I CAN relate to an artistic vision that is clearly reaching a new audience. Video editing is part of that artistic vision.

I respect the art, even if it's not my style.

(As an aside, I know there are people that don't like me, my performance style, my subject matter, etc. But that doesn't stop me from expressing my magical art my way. I don't particularly like Criss' personality -- but if he and his creative/production team are truly forging new magical art on TV -- God bless him!)

Now, back to my one-handed Elmsley Count while doing the needle thru arm at kids birthday parties. The moms love it!

[Dustin Stinett]

Originally posted by MaxNY:
(Because when you point the stooge finger, three stooge fingers are pointing back at you!)

Oh...a wise guy!

Nyuk, nyuk, nyuk.......

[Guest]

So does a person with natural long black hair and a show that is a little bizarre compared to most. Does that constitute being labeled as GOTH magic? Why do we have to label everything by appearance? The stuff he is doing is pretty much the same as we are used to but with a theatrical touch.

[Robert Allen]

For better or worse, when a person wears black clothes, an extra long belt, and eye shadow they are almost certainly going to be labled as "Goth". When they add to that mainstays of Goth culture such as piercing it's not going to make them less Goth :) .

You know there are are two kinds of people: those who divide people up into different types, and those who don't :) .

What does that joke tell you about people's natural propensity to pigeonhole other people?

[Guest]

The affinity between Thomsoni and Angel is clear to me. The act that made the Com pany Famous is a comedy send up of magical styles of the past -- the overimpressed count from Poland and a bowler as an assistant.

This marked the notice of the end of that serious overly formal style with satire and humor..... as did the frenetic Ballantyne........

Criss has now moved beyond satire into trying to match magic with an audience that is jaded against the "charm" of the victorian era parlor magician.

However -- I honestly believe he is trying to express true magic feelings in a medium that has not been properly framed (in its commercial sense) to allow magic to occur magically.

MHO is more plot -- more mystery. While some may be into the technical and preparation -- I seem to remeber Vampira and Zacharly (sp?) getting better ratings than Mr. Wizard......and scaring the pants off some people......

[Frank Valenti]

I have not seen the shows yet but I really would like to. I hope to tape this weeks episodes. I have watched his prior specials and enjoyed them.

With that said I have seen Criss live and his show was great, one of the best I have seen and I have seen a bunch. To pull of Illusions with people sitting on 3 side and only a few feet away from you really takes skill.

It was mostly classic effects with his own spin on them. Sub-trunk, dove productions, razor blades, transformations. The only thing in the live show that I thought could have been better was the levitation of an audience member. The set-up was way too long in the dark, but he did levitate a spectator.

I spoke to Criss after the show and found him to be totally committed to bringing the Art of Magic back to the masses. I think he is doing it.

I think we should celebrate his success and give him a hand for putting Magic back on TV on a weekly basis.

Just my thoughts,
Frank

[Brian Marks]

The thing about Criss Angel and even more so with Blaine because he had a bigger audience is that televsion viewer is entertained by being fooled. Isn't that the point?

[Guest]

Robert, not sure what you meant by the long belt but I just think your just generalizing. So by your standards is Max Maven a mentalist or Goth-Mentalist? I guess I just hate the labels and knowing that the Goth's have been labeled as a group of demented and evil seeking people which is false but in turn is feared by most. I wouldn't want to see another person, who is doing a very good job at entertaining the masses and adding something different to the magic world, getting labeled in any form of negative view points because someone just couldn't look at him like another person.

Just remember many magicians, even in the past wore black clothes and wore some type of make up whether it was on their face or eyes.

I guess if was to be labeled his style of magic would be more classified as Bizarre Magic.

I give another salute to Criss for his accomplishments and success in magic. I hope the rest of us can have the same.

[Robert Allen]

Re: belt - well I thought I'd seen a photo of Chriss Angel wearing a belt with the typical proto-goth knights knot in the end but perhaps I'm mistaken.

As for Max Maven being Goth, uh no I don't think so. Judging from your comments I can't help but wonder if you're offended because you're a Goth :) .

Maybe Goth is like what that famous supreme court justice (was it Warren Burger?) said about pornography: I'll know it when I see it. Please, please, don't try to tell me that just because magicians have worn black in the past that Chriss isn't currently affecting at least partialy a look that's known today as "Goth". Arguing about the degree of gothness is like arguing about the subtle differences between the different between named sub-tongues of heavy metal music :) .

Regards,

[Richard Kaufman]

MaxNY wrote, "Magicians have always tried to be on the cutting edge of technology, we can't relinquish those reins to television editors smacked up on adult Ridalin."

Max, it has nothing to do with TV editors with the jitters--Criss supervises all his own cutting. Nothing is cut without his full approval. What you are seeing is HIS vision of how magic should be edited for TV broadcast.

[Bizzaro]

I like the fact "weirder" magic is becoming into the public eye. Might make my job easier.

As for the "No camera tricks etc etc" disclaimer.. the reason they don't use that stuff on shows like Blaine and Angel is simple. They would be lying.

[Ken Trombly]

The "I know it when I see it" quote was from Justice Black.

While I am not big on magic that at least seems to be dependent on camera angles, I do agree that a magician who gets on TV and has a contemporary slant is basically good for magic. That said,
I wish A & E would not keep rebroadcasting the first two shows so soon after initially showing them. The surprise element of the effects is totally lost when someone sees them a second and third time.Also, the audience can start to more readily come up with theories as to how this stuff is done - I was fooled by the trash barrel trick, but having seen it a second time, I have a method........I wonder if it is the same as Dustin's?? Hmmm.

[Richard Kaufman]

When I was watching the filming of Mindfreak I didn't see anything that was dependent on "camera tricks."
There are various ways to define that phrase, but I don't consider judicious editing to fall into that area.
I also didn't see anything that was dependent on "camera angles," though I can think of many tricks that are done live (both stage and close up) that are dependent upon the spectators not seeing things from a certain angle. TV is a dead eye and cannot be misdirected, so you MUST compensate in the performance of certain tricks. That's an inescapable fact that would be self evident to anyone who's ever performed more than a few tricks for television.
Also, I curious if anyone has any clues as to how the Voodoo Doll trick on the Burned Alive episode was performed?

[Richard Hatch]

Originally posted in another thread by Richard Kaufman:
Two new episodes of Mindfreak tonight: Wine Barrel and SUV.
I believe my sorry face will appear in the first, and in the second one an SUV rolls over Criss's chest while he's lying on a bed of nails.

The first episode sounds scarier. ;)

[Guest]

I think the spec could see themself on a monitor and were reacting to what they saw. Other than that I've not a clue how that lil' fellow did the thing with the voodoo doll.
Steve V

[NCMarsh]

The "I know it when I see it" quote was from Justice Black.

It's actually from Potter Stewart's concurring opinion in Jacobellis v. Ohio. Stewart's so-called "Casablanca Test" enjoys more fame, but less charm, than his colleague's (Byron White's) "Limp D**k Test" (so-called by his clerks)...

I don't know if there's an analogue to the White test for determining whether or not something is "goth"...

Best,

N.

[Robert Allen]

You're such a card.
... You need to be dealt with :) .