by seige » Oct 7th, '03, 11:34
OK, narrowminded soapbox session about to commence...
I think what we're suggesting here is that the show was not everyone's cup of tea - and that in fact, some people may be quite offended by it if they thought they were going to be entertained by 'magic' - which is usually an art which has general family appeal.
The shock tactics used by the guys in the programme were, as I previously commented, and attempt at contemporary shock/dark culture meets magic - which is fine as far as it goes - but almost every 'effect' I watched in the show was portrayed as being either macabre, taboo or just plain bad taste.
The African child, the 'using magic to steal a car', the drug references, the asylum patient, the knife through arm horror...
Yes, it has it's audience. Yes, in a sense it was art. But in my opinion, it was a textbook display of 'the wrong thing at the wrong time' - i.e. sandwiched between two higher quality shows.
If this is the face of contemporary magic, then I'm afraid I'm not alone in being fairly disappointed.
Yes, Penn & Teller are sick - but it's done with humour. Indeed, Simon Drake has a dark side - but there's a deeper sense of showmanship and respect for the art.
What the show Magick did was dress some not too bad effects up into quite distasteful routines.
And before you comment that 'if you don't like it, switch it off'... that's exactly what myself and I imagine a good deal of others did.
If this is your cup of tea, then fine. And obviously, my opinion is my own - and I can't condemn this programme, as it would seem it must have it's 'niche' - but I'm sorry, I think I missed the point somewhere...
Last edited by
seige on Oct 7th, '03, 11:36, edited 1 time in total.