My take on the Copperfield Show

[Guest]

Okay, youse guys don't want to hear my take on the tropical island illusion. Fine. Like I said, I'm not out here to upset the applecart.

I really enjoyed this show. Was it worth nintey seven dollars? Yes and no. Yes because lay people and this magician were fooled bigtime.

No because stooges were involved . I hate when that happens.

Regards: Stefan. . .

[Jonathan Levey]

Stooges are just a method.... :whack:

Why weren't you upset when you saw him doing 'misled' because that used a gimmick?
Or when he performed the torn and restored baseball card because that used a duplicate (maybe??)...

[Gary Freed]

Stooges are just a method, but in general a poor one. Used judiciously, they can help create a miracle, but used as Copperfield does, it becomes the new "it's up his sleeve"! Ie, the answer to "everything" in the spectators mind.

But audience members surrounded the plane, but he borrowed the purse, but he borrowed the coin, etc.. Don't get me wrong, I am a huge DC fan. But once even the possibilty ofstooges exist, they can be the answer to almost any effect, whether or not they are used..

Why should the audience be impressed by a truly cool mental effect with a certified "non-stooge" when just using your paid asssitant would make that trick simple to perform?

[Jonathan Levey]

Well probably for the same reason why they should be impressed when you make a coin vanish using the raven instead of 'really' making it vanish....

[Guest]

Most of the spectators/volunteers in DC's current shows are selected with a frisbee or beach balls that are thrown out in the audience. As seen from the spectators' point of view, this IMHO is a pretty convincing way to select "random" spectators, not stooges.

Seb.

[Richard Kaufman]

I'm sure the methods of selecting spectators with the frisbees and beachballs are a reaction to the rumors, even in the general press, about stooges being used. David does react to that kind of thing: witness the almost total lack of wedge bases in his illusions! The wedge base was becoming too conspicuous in magic acts, and either it has already been exposed, or he expects it to be exposed, and so he has eliminated it from all of his illusions save one.
When spectators are chosen by having beach balls tossed through the audience, not only is it fun, but I can attest to the random nature of it since I caught one. I was weeded out at the edge of the stage and was only allowed to be a witness to "13," not one of the people inside the cabinet.

[Jim Maloney_dup1]

Originally posted by Richard Kaufman:
David does react to that kind of thing: witness the almost total lack of wedge bases in his illusions! The wedge base was becoming too conspicuous in magic acts, and either it has already been exposed, or he expects it to be exposed, and so he has eliminated it from all of his illusions save one.

Not only that, but I've noticed he's eliminating "boxes" as much as possible. Look at his last special: "One", "Laser", "Voyeur", "Portal". Instead of boxes, he's opted for curtains or large sheets as cover. It really changes the feel of it from "oh, it's a trick box" to "holy crap!". That, combined with what Richard said above gives a very open feel to a lot of his illusions.

-Jim

[Dustin Stinett]

I suppose that I am ignorant of some modern illusion techniques, and I will happily stay that way. But even then, David Copperfield is the only illusionist who consistently mystifies me: and I love every minute of it.

Dustin

[Guest]

DC's use of 'stooges' makes perfect sense. One use is in an illusion where, obviously, a stooge must be used. What makes that illusion sell is the emotional hook. This emotion pushes people beyond mearly muttering "bull sh!t" and into enjoying the experience. The second is one that has a risk of a spectator hurting themself and thus it's not worth the financial loss that would occur should a person be hurt and sue DC and company. That illusion could be done with a spec so I've no problem with stooges during that one.

What next? Folks going to complain that the use of short assistants to make DC appear taller on stage misrepresenting his height?
Steve V

[Guest]

Hi all. . .

This thread is probably dead but I've been away
for a while and I wanted to come back and reply
to some of the replys I've seen tonight.

As a reminder, I saw D. Copperfield live for the
first time on Sept. 1 at the MGM in Las Vegas and
though praising the show in general I levelled
some criticism about the use of stooges.

First, the positive. I agree that the absence of
wedge bases was very good, very impressive, though
the one trick where he used one it was pretty
thick.

I also agree that using curtains and large bolts
of cloth as cover rather than boxes was very, very
good, a nice advance in stage magic.

And he fooled me badly whenever small amounts
of people, large amounts of people, and large
objects, either vanished from or appeared onto the
stage. Impressive.

But back to the stooge problem. When he threw
frisbees out to randomly select volunteers, those
volunteers were essentialy irrelevant. Committes
for the stage, just like Thurston or the Pendragons. But there were at least 5 or 6 times
when he didn't throw frisbees; he wandered through
the audience and grabbed people to come up to the
stage, and they were painfully obviously stooges;
and the layman at my table were cackling their
suspicions about that.

Not good magic if you asked me. What if Dunninger
had an audience of half laymen and half stooges?
Not good magic.

Just my 02.5 Pardon my spelling.

[Guest]

The resources required to support Copperfield's show are tremendous. The use of stooges, when and wherever they can be used, makes good magic show production sense. Any laymen that senses stooges got that idea more from exposure than from any Copperfield show.

(And I can think of some really great magic if half the audience were on my side.)

[Pete Biro]

Think of it as a "play" and all those on stage are actors... don't sweat it... sit back and enjoy the show... :genii:

[Guest]

I recently saw the show.I personally don't like the use of stooges. But, I consider them the same as any method. My dad was talking years ago about someone who coned people, he said "If they get the Money, they deserve it". This is a little harsh, because DC gives his best without stealing. Just because I don't like the method, I can still like the show. And I did! The audiences love the Show!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Terry]

don't sweat it... sit back and enjoy the show...

Pete hit it on the head.

Copperfield uses stooges the same way a card man uses a pass or classic force. They are both tools used to present an effect.

When I pay good money to see a show, I don't waste the experience or time trying to figure it out. I am paying to be entertained.

This string of the thread falls into the "if they didn't have something to b*tch about, they wouldn't be happy".

[Rob Signs]

I don't think all of the "stooges" are completely "stooged." I saw the show twice at the MGM in about a month and got there early both times. A couple of the "stooges" were actual people who had simply been talked to ahead of time by his staff, not employees of DC & Co. It appears to me that they just want to have the best show possible and cover all the angles so there are no surprises.
And when I'm paying $97.00 for a ticket, I kind of appreciate that attention to every detail.
And I was on stage both times (and like Richard was weeded out of '13' and just sat and observed from on stage, not actuall in the box) and I wasn't a stooge either time. There might be a few stooges on stage, but there are also quite a few legitimate spectators up there as well.

I thought it was a great show and thoroughly enjoyed it both times. The only person that was the same both times was the "Portal" guy.

[Guest]

I was told from a source I think is reliable that when David does the Floating Sofa effect with two people from the audience he has to use stooges for insurance purposes. This makes sense to me. In this case, you could probably stage it without stooges, but the use of stooges has little to do with the method. Oftentimes for his television specials David uses stooges to ensure that he gets cooperative and attractive people on stage, not to aid the methodology.

Yes, David fools me quite a bit, too. And I respect him as a performer, director, producer and businessman. Not to mention that he's a good looking guy. This combination doesn't happen often. We're lucky he's on the magic scene. His live shows and television specials have generated a lot of work for the rest of us.

Dennis Loomis
www.loomismagic.com

[Richard Kaufman]

David doesn't do the Floating Couch routine anymore. Hasn't for some time.

[Dave Egleston]

Mark Yeager wrote:

"My dad was talking years ago about someone who coned people"

Does that mean Dan Ackroyd is a stooge? :rolleyes:

If I pay a "C" note for a magic show - I want to see perfection - Stooges allow for that.

Mr Biro was right once again, Take a deep breath and enjoy the show - There's a lot there to enjoy without thinking about whether you could do it better or not

Dave

[Pete Biro]

Anybody want my "floating Laz-E-boy" chair? It is one man, uses same method as Zombie... but... you gotta be really big and strong. :help:

[Guest]

"David C. Is a Magic God"
Now, with that said...
;)

I have watched him (as I am sure many on here have) for many years - pretty much his whole career. He has done so much for this artform, it is hard to say ANYTHING negative....

So, may I critique him?
(or at least ask if anyone else sees what I have seen...)

David seems to me, to be heading more towards a "dirty" side of entertainment. He seems to swear more in the shows, some of his newer tricks are a little on the "risque" side of things (compared to what he has done in the past) His style of dress seems to not be as classy as his earlier days...( a little more on the "casual" side of dress)

All of this seems to have started to change when Blaine came on the scene. (at least this is what it looked like to me...) Do you think Blaine has affected David's thinking of what the audience wants to see? Do you think this has affected his thinking towards developing new illusions?
(Panties transposition, a peeing clown running gag, getting an audience member pregnant and giving birth in 70 minutes time...)

Now, with that said, I also understand that "Artist" have to grow and expand - and sometimes that means changing what the public is used to seeing that performer do.

I personally spent 23 years working Amusement Park shows - now, I am doing drag in a Topless Las Vegas Revue! (Go figure...)

My question...
Do you think David has been affected/influenced by Blaine?

:confused:
Tiny

[Terry]

Tiny,

If you have really been observing DC through his career, you would have noticed him changing his "costuming" just about every year. He has either worn what was in fashion at the time or bucked the trend and stepped out there.

His costuming and show reflect the current trend. I noticed while living in Jax, FL, that people stopped wearing dressier clothing to shows and wore jeans, etc.

[Steve Bryant]

It's hard to view the Tornado of Fire as anything but a response to Blaine's ice stunt. And just as dopy. But -- David C puts on a terrific live magic show, an area David B hasn't ventured into yet. Nor do I see anything in David C's more adult themes stemming from observing David B. (As to fashion, I love Copperfield's joke that he isn't gay because no self-respecting gay man would have made some of his fashion choices.)

[Guest]

OK, so I really didn't mean to get into a "fashion" thing about David...

Yeah, he has kept up with the times in costuming choices - it just seemed to me like he suddenly went from a "together" look to this really casual look...
(like someone tapped him on the shoulder and said "Hey, you go on in 3 minutes!" )
Blaine walks about like he just rolled outta bed and said "hey... follow me and we'll do some stuff to some people on the street..."
It's a different angle from what magicians had done up to that point, and it just seemed to me like David C. hopped on that Band wagon.

Maybe DAVID B. was "influenced" by David C.'s style of dress? (Kinda like "what came first, the Egg or the Chicken?")

The audience, on the other hand, has REALLY become "casual"... 15 years ago - poeple dressed up to go out for a night on the town in Las Vegas. Now, they wear shorts and an athletic T-Shirt! (infact, I will go out of my way to shake the hand of a couple who actually DRESSED UP for the show! That really impresses me!)

But hey, we still have their money and they seem to be more comfortable to enjoy the show, so what the hell, right?

I think Blaine influenced Copperfeild's "Risque Illusions" by trying to be more "in your face", "bold", "raw", and "contraversal".

I don't mean David is walking about a 3rd world country doing cheezy magic shop close-up tricks
(and on a side note, I say THANK YOU BLAINE for the DOZENS of "Folding Quarters" I have been able to move thanks to his T.V. demo!)
It just seems like David B. was giving David C. a real run for his "Network Money" there for awhile...

Tiny

[Guest]

DC's current look is suburban soccer mom. Him and Martha Stewart wear the same sorta outfits (open oxford on top of a t-shirt).

David Blaine is wearing what hip 20 somethings are wearing, DC is not.

Both are good magicians, but do a poll of who is hipper and Blaine would win.

HR

[Steve Bryant]

And hey -- they both get GREAT dates. Something is working.

[Guest]

Originally posted by Steve Bryant:
And hey -- they both get GREAT dates. Something is working.

It's called their money and fame.

[Randy]

You have to believe that DC is WAY too smart to just become complacent and wear what he "feels like". I get the feeling that everything is thoroughly thought out including his dress. As far as the "Tornado of Fire" effect....did I miss something. I remember watching this on TV and thinking that something didn't go the way it was intended as they just cut to a commercial and there didn't seen to be any "pay-off" to the effect? Again, did I miss something on this?

[Randy]

Also just a thought on the stage dress of DC, as I stated before, I am sure everything is thought out and some dress has to do more with method than look, i.e., the loose sweatshirt for "Flying" etc.

[Guest]

I was rather disapointed with the last Copperfield TV specilal. Aside from the extent to which he took advantage of the camera he gave in way to much to influence of Blaine, with the stunt and the 'taking it to the streets" approach (SP)

Copperfield should have just done what he always used to. Which is to take thing to another level in his own way.

He always made magic cool yet classy. The same way as he kept his attire casual. Which he did NOT get from Blane.

As for Blaine, he has started to make magic cool aswell for a new generation. His exposure has done a lot for the art. It is the copy cats who are doing the harm as they are not putting in the work and in some cases, not, are cheapening our art.

David has some compatition in the modernising department, but then again he also did with Penn and Tellar, but their work was very different and it set them both apart.

[Robert Allen]

Robert stares at an imaginary image of Copperfield and makes the sign of the 'L' on his forehead....

[Ruben Padilla]

Like it or not (and from this thread, some of you don't) Copperfield is THE standard for magic in the world today. With S&R out of commission, and Blaine a huge question mark with regards to longevity, laymen measure us by the DC yardstick (and have been for over twenty years!). That's reality.

[Guest]

I still like to just see the show to be entertained. Yes Copperfield is getting a little "campy" but it is nice for a short diversion now and again. I was lucky enough as well to catch a beachball at one of the shows and it was quite an experience to be in the illusion. There are no stooges used in the 13. The crew are very professional as the illusion progresses, but dont fall or get in the way as they will pick you up if necessary to stay on their timing. Afterwards DC came by and signed photos and of course swore everone to secrecy. It was fun!

[Robert Allen]

Ruben: Well that certainly explains a lot about the general quality of stage magic in America at least. (/rimshot)

I don't mean to relentlessly slam David Copperfield. I've read that he's a very hard worker, and that he's helped out several important magic charity/benefits. You have to respect that. But I have never found him to be entertaining, and this latest story of him trying to cop some tepid 'street magic' persona, if true, is just absurd. Maybe the gate is down for him and this was an agents attempt to ride the Blaine wave.

I would humbly suggest that perhaps the reason people use David Copperfield as the yardstick is the same reason that places like Home Depot and Walmart are successful: quantity, not quality. DC becomes famous in America because he's got marketing ins and/or was in just the right place at the right time. Then he's famous in the world because he's American, and (especially 15+ years ago) American entertainment was da bomb. But when I compare his act to that of Sigfried & Roy, or Penn & Teller, I don't see it as being a higher quality product.

If the average magician is trying to model DC for his success, I question how sucessful that's going to be for them. Of course the same might be said for any lowbie magician trying to model themselves after any famous one.

[mrgoat]

Originally posted by Steve Bryant:
And hey -- they both get GREAT dates. Something is working.

In the UK at least there is a rumour that Claudia was/is his beard* and he infact is gay.

I wouldn't give two hoots either way. Gay, straight, black, white, he's still a bit of a cheeser! But a very well paid one. ;)


*http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=beard&r=f

[Robert Allen]

A particular magicians alleged or professed sexual preference really doesn't matter to me - their entertainment value does. But, given mainstream America, I could see that it would matter in a marketing sense. In any case it seems a bit of a non sequitor in this discussion.