talkmagic.co.uk

Wishmaster wrote:but unless he's uses a stooge

I'd certainly not bet my life that he doesn't use stooges or confederates.

I've heard people say, "But he says he doesn't use stooges!" True, he does say that. But when do you expect a magician to tell the truth?

This is a perfectly ordinary pack of cards...
The pen has penetrated the handkerchief without leaving a hole!
I just bent that fork with my mind.

Ted wrote:I'd certainly not bet my life that he doesn't use stooges or confederates.

I've heard people say, "But he says he doesn't use stooges!" True, he does say that. But when do you expect a magician to tell the truth?

This is a perfectly ordinary pack of cards...
The pen has penetrated the handkerchief without leaving a hole!
I just bent that fork with my mind.

Good point - which I obviously missed. Sorry.

The greatest trick Mr Brown has performed is convincing the nation he is not a magician!

Nuff Said?

I remember seeing a post a while back that read something along the lines of "Derren Brown wouldn't use a one way force deck, he doesn't have to"; I think that summed it up pretty well!

I wonder if I can continue to juggle and somehow convince everyone I'm not a juggler... hm...

Lawrence wrote:I remember seeing a post a while back that read something along the lines of "Derren Brown wouldn't use a one way force deck, he doesn't have to"

And anyone who has seen The Devil's Picturebook will be particularly amused by that view

Ted wrote:
And anyone who has seen The Devil's Picturebook will be particularly amused by that view

Lol. I'm also of the view, after studying every last second of it for a very long time, that the "Seance" special was a veritable stooge fest!

EDIT: I should add that this in no way affects the quality of its magic, drama and entertainment. Stooging is just another technique at the disposal of the magical performer.

I've never understood why magicians alway poopoo the use of a stooge, I know I've been known to use one every now and then.

Who is that strange man who seems to be at an awful lot of my gigs and always manages to find that vanished ring magically appear on a cord around his neck?

Wishmaster: it was not my intention to get your back up. I suggested the RIP thread as a genuine attempt at finding a happy medium. While the majority of that thread is about RIP, there are posts about people's experiences, using the inductions in routines and other hypnosis books.

I was trying to be helpful, not combative. Apologies if it didn't come accross that way.

With regards to DB and hypnosis, as I said I'm not a hypnotist and I'm quite prepared to accept that he is genuinely using hypnosis but I have seen him put people under while saying 'I'm not putting you into a trance.....'.

Kenton Knepper has some stuff on the illusion of trance states.

Gary Dickson wrote:Wishmaster: it was not my intention to get your back up. I suggested the RIP thread as a genuine attempt at finding a happy medium. While the majority of that thread is about RIP, there are posts about people's experiences, using the inductions in routines and other hypnosis books.

I was trying to be helpful, not combative. Apologies if it didn't come accross that way.

With regards to DB and hypnosis, as I said I'm not a hypnotist and I'm quite prepared to accept that he is genuinely using hypnosis but I have seen him put people under while saying 'I'm not putting you into a trance.....'.

Kenton Knepper has some stuff on the illusion of trance states.

Gary, I didn't take it that way. I just thought that discussing things like that in the wrong thread would probably warrant a ticking off. Sorry if I looked like I took umbrage. I didn't.

I'm in two minds about DB and hypnosis. I have seen him do it, for definite (unless we're back to the use of stooges). But, I'm also really interested in whether he's done something that looks like hypnosis, but is something else, if that makes sense.

Derren always says he doesn't believe hypnosis works, then goes ahead and either does it or appears to do it. He's a right little tinker at times....

Yeah we can kill this thread

It was a, "Was it worth it?" apparently not. So I officially dedicate this thread to DB and his obscene tensity to tease not only laymen but magicians as well.

I did watch him mess up once tho... I'll see if I can find the special. He was doing a I know what your phone # is and also what blanks you have in it!

He said, "7" and just as quickly said, "Blank." as the card was pulled up. Indicating he knew the whole series of numbers long before that point in the trick.

Ted wrote:He is a very naughty boy and likes to tease magicians with little hints that are complete red herrings. For example, he did an effect with an athlete and said that she likes to stay "one ahead", and exclaimed that his dead and alive photo trick was "out of this world". These are not real hints but are designed to wind up magicians who try to work out his techniques after watching the telly.

Are you sure about that? His version of OOTW is very clever and is certainly how that dead or alive was achieved. I can't comment on the one ahead, however. I can well believe that he does drop false hints occasionally!

nickj wrote:Are you sure about that? His version of OOTW is very clever and is certainly how that dead or alive was achieved.

No, I'm not 100 per cent sure. However, when I think about how OOTW works I can't imagine that it's the same effect. You have someone deal two sets of cards/whatever into two piles and the trick works because they can't see the faces of those cards until you reveal them.

In the DB D&A trick to which I think we both refer, the photos (equivalent of playing card backs) were all visible while the 'Dead' and 'Alive' labels (the 'faces' of the cards - black or red) were not.

I don't want to describe how the classic effect works, but remember that the point is that the participant sees unmemorable cards and is then shown that they have been dealt in a meaningful way.

In the DB version, the participant will remember the faces in the photos, while he would not remember the backs of the playing cards as they all look the same. The participant is even asked to explain why he chose certain photos, and there are only a few photos to begin with, so this is quite a different effect in my genuinely humble opinion.

In short: OOTW involves dealing unknown cards into two miraculously sorted piles. DB's D&A effect involves dealing known cards into two miraculously sorted piles. Do I know how it works? No. But I'm fairly confident that it's not OOTW, if for no other reason that the fine gentleman in question hints that it is (And the idea that it is the same makes no sense to me.)

Furthermore, to labour the point, he does a very nice version of OOTW that cuts out the usual step where you have to stop and restart the dealing. Even this quite sophisticated twist does not help with the undertaker D&A effect. But, of course, I could be wrong. Which is why this whole thing is so much fun.

Ted wrote:

nickj wrote:Are you sure about that? His version of OOTW is very clever and is certainly how that dead or alive was achieved.

I don't want to describe how the classic effect works, but remember that the point is that the participant sees unmemorable cards and is then shown that they have been dealt in a meaningful way.

I think your giving spectators memories a bit too much credit. They don't remember which way they placed the photos, even when asked why they chose a particular way.

Anyway back to the discussion on stooges. Make sure you get a professional.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6wut0ujvVI

Jobasha wrote:I think your giving spectators memories a bit too much credit. They don't remember which way they placed the photos, even when asked why they chose a particular way.

In the performance we are discussing, the participant was shown the faces again after selecting them and was asked about a number of them e.g. why did you pick this one?

It may be that the participant didn't remember any of them and came to believe that he'd made a choice that he didn't, but that leaves more to chance than I reckon DB would. He's sneakier than that.

I might be wrong here, but after watching the Dead or Alive trick and comparing it to his version of OOTW on devils picturebook, asking the participant why he chose a particular photo appears to be central to the working of the trick. Whether or not they remember why they put it on either pile or even which pile they chose is irrelevant as it's serving as a cover to the actual method.

Seeing as he did 'smoke' on one his shows, there's no reason to think he wouldn't use anything else of off his video just because the magical fraternity might guess at how it's done. I was always under the imprssion that his mention of OOTW was a little nod of the head to all his magician fans who would get a kick out of him directly naming the trick it was based on on national TV knowing full well that the majority of the viewers wouldn't have a clue.