talkmagic.co.uk

I posted my view on Trick exposure some days ago here

http://escamoteur.de/wordpress/index.ph ... -exposure/

Btw. Is it still unknown who is behind the mask??

Best
Tom

Sigh. I haven't watched any of the new Masked Magician 'specials', but I've heard some of the effects revealed include Copperfield's Death Saw.
Now, I know the method may be fathomed out by most of us in the know, but look at it from Copperfield's point of view - the guy creates these amazing illusions to amaze and entertain.
Is there not a danger that people like him are eventually going to think 'why should I bother?'
It's not always a question of money, but if I spent years developing an amazing effect only for some loser to reveal it I'd probably question the value of developing more new effects?
Anyway, this is a massive can of worms and I am sure there are many many points of view on here, but I was wondering about legal protection? Take the Death Saw for example - once the patent is filed is there not anything further that can be done to PROTECT the secret? I know nothing about law, but surely there's something out there that magicians and illusionists can apply to their effects to protect them from copying and/or exposure?
I'd love to see Val's stocking-clad face trying to make a lawsuit disappear!

escamoteur_blog wrote:I posted my view on Trick exposure some days ago here

http://escamoteur.de/wordpress/index.ph ... -exposure/

Btw. Is it still unknown who is behind the mask??

Best
Tom

There are a number of theorys flying about, regarding who is physicaly behind the mask on this series. My own pet theory is one of the assistants, who has a background in dance, and... was an assistant on several major magic shows in vegas, and on television. The name escapes me.
but Vals there too. you can tell. He's the guy who has a bit of grace and showmanship.

who ever the other mask weraers are.. and there are at least 3, have absolutly no artistic qualities what so ever.. making me wonder if teh camera guys take turns.

escamoteur_blog wrote:I posted my view on Trick exposure some days ago here

http://escamoteur.de/wordpress/index.ph ... -exposure/

Btw. Is it still unknown who is behind the mask??

Best
Tom

No, it's not unknown... for the most part.

The original Masked Magician (the one that was never aired and only sold as a video) was Hal Marquat... I know this as fact because several of the props he used were once mine and I know who he rented them off of for the project.

The most famous of the three in the suit was Valentino who has actually toured throughout South America with a Masked Magician stage show that's done exceptionally well. He and a team (as I mentioned earlier) created a brand new production that now exposes more and arguably "only" legit methods and not just contrived or material that's generally out of date as in, no longer practical to use as we saw in the first broadcast series.

There is one that fit the suit for a very short season or two... the guy that was "tipping" street magic. He wasn't nearly as appealing to the public and the content of what he was "exposing" was proven to be more than bogus in many an instant... Banacheck is still looking for one of those mechanical watches this guy used for PK Time explanations.

This is the only of the three players (that I'm aware of) no one has positively identified.

I can't see any harm in exposure. After all, we all have to begin somewhere. If a kid watches the Masked Magician and believes that he can do what magicians do, then we have a new convert to the art. One up for us.
And anyway most people forget what they saw very quickly.

ITV 4 has been repeating the last series. I must admit to watching the odd episode when nothing else is on.

I see it's on tonight at 8 and again at 12:20. I'll probably end up seeing it at one of these times, since the choice of channels is somewhat limited here (but does include ITV 4).

I Don't think that exposure like this is a bad thing at all, it moves our art forward. Think about it, the public know how we do something so we change how we do it, new methods new slights even new tricks. Do the old tricks in a new way, what you're doing shouldn't be seen or even thought about anyway if you're doing it right.

its just annoying that we invest so much time and effort perfecting the sleights to our tricks what could take us a split second to do in a sleight or trick that we take many many hours to learn can be blown apart in minutes

the essence of magic is giving people hope and giving dreams to let people believe anythin is possible and also taking peoples worries away from there pain

some people might agree and some might disagree thats down to them but

lets keep most secrets to ourselves

i thought the rule "never to reveal" was put there for a reason it sure puts doubt on the phrase now

magicmentalist wrote:its just annoying that we invest so much time and effort perfecting the sleights to our tricks what could take us a split second to do in a sleight or trick that we take many many hours to learn can be blown apart in minutes

eh?

look, the guy isnt giving away sleights.
he spends an hour showing people a false bottom exists,or a bit of string makes that happen.

and the thing that takes the time to learn, is not the method..its how to present that method.And that, is the one thing that none of the exposers in history have ever been able to expose.

You've hit the nail on the head Dale kinda what I was getting at. Look at mentalism for the main it hasn't changed alot in what we do for a really long time. Just up dating how we present it.
I used to be a card man and I might not be perfect on my slights but my presentation and mis-direction is what let me do alot of what I did.

The Masked Magician doesn't really hurt anybody but himself, but then I can bet you that he doesn't get hired for many gigs either. I remember when Val was in it and he said was doing it so people could focus more on the presentation and that we SHOULD expose how we do everything because it supposedly brings them into more. (which is a load of c*** (not the best) and well the guys presentations for everything sucked a stiff one.)

Randy wrote:The Masked Magician doesn't really hurt anybody but himself, but then I can bet you that he doesn't get hired for many gigs either. I remember when Val was in it and he said was doing it so people could focus more on the presentation and that we SHOULD expose how we do everything because it supposedly brings them into more. (which is a load of c*** (not the best) and well the guys presentations for everything sucked a stiff one.)

I think you missed what I said above... Val works a touring road show as the Masked Marvel all through the South American countries and is doing quite good for himself financially... an easy 7 digit income plus what he's seeing from FOX. Not bad for a supposed "has been"

As has been pointed out "exposure" has it's pros & cons. I'd be rather bent to see Val tip how Shadow Vision works but at the same time, we've come so far from even the major advance seen through the Thin Model Sawing design that exposure of those older techniques, especially in the more masked (as in "vague" and even "misleading") ways much of it was tipped in the original series... it really doesn't hurt a great deal and did in fact do exactly what Val wanted to see done... get magic designers off their butts and into a much deeper thought process. The innovations we've seen come onto the grand stage since the original Masked Mage shows are just breathtaking!

As Tristan has pointed out PRESENTATION is the real key! It is the ultimate secret behind what makes Magic... I'm not talking about the tricks we do but MAGICK! How we invoke the imagination and evoke reaction at the psychological, emotional and even intellectual levels simply by way of our words, our character and the setting in which we frame the effect.

I've shared numerous times how Tom Ogden and I did some really fast thinking one weekend, as the L.A. Times did a seriously in-depth feature of Johnson's Products, the leader in gimmicked coins for years and the primary source for the Cigarette thru Quarter gimmick 95% of us all relied on... which was exposed in all it's ugliness in a 4 x 4 color photo.

The gist of my tale is that after I did a solid 10 minute bit with a borrowed coin that I shoved a borrowed cigarette through, leaving it with a hole and ending with it visibly sealing itself back up, I turned over that very article and asked, "How the hell could anyone do what you just saw, using something that clumsy looking?"

Not only did people thank me for the routine, many agreed that the Times in no way tipped the real workings to that "trick"

Truth is, I used three different kinds of Cig thru coins along with some special other odds & ends in order to make it all happen. The advantage being that Tom knew how to write it all and pull things out of my presentation while I had the resources and know with all on alternate methods. The end product was nothing less than delivery of an even greater mystery in the minds of laity and mage alike... the aforementioned bit happening at the Magic Castle during a Sunday brunch.

But then there is another wonderful example of a very similar thing; how Penn & Teller tip everything about the traditional Cups & Balls and still manage to blow your mind with their translucent collection.

Another point to weigh is how we can likewise use what's been "exposed" to our advantage. Rick Maue touches on this idea in his Book of Haunted Magick and I know of others that have exploited a similar approach to things; using the exact same methods that had been tipped but placing the "heat" as it were, where it wouldn't normally be found.

The bottom line is, it can (for those with the bullocks to do so) make us superior technicians as well as entertainers. The question is, are we going to whine about some jerk making life a bit more challenging for us because we don't want to evolve, or are we going to step up to the plate and shine even brighter, regardless?

I can't agree more!

Actually the thought of having inferior methos exposed strengthens the methods not exposed is an interesting point, that I will (with your permission) include in my blog article

Best
Tom

you know, last night i finaly saw King Of comedy.( excelent film, they talk about De Nero's role in it, but Sandra Bernhard was clearly the better actor in this movie)

Anyway, This morning it srtikes me that what Val did, is almost on a par with Pupkin. Effectivly , he's put his magical carrear on the line, but financialy he has ended up smelling of roses.

Lenoir writes, of me, in part: " . . . You add nothing to the forum whatsoever. Why are you a member? . . ."

Well, that can EASILY be solved!