talkmagic.co.uk

I really liked tonight's episode.

I understand what the producers were trying to do with the kid but as someone with not a gram of paternal urges, I'd rather have had a real contender. Does that make me heartless? Probably. Sorry.

But Richard Bellars came back with a kick and a half. Loved it. Worth it for the reactions of Penn & Teller alone.

Piff aside, I thought this week was much stronger than last week.

I agree with you me_simon.

I myself am 16 years old and could not believe that he was 15, I thought he was 10! I also agree that the producers put him on for the novelty value, surely they knew he wasn't going to fool Penn, or more Teller?

Don't get me wrong, I thought the kid did a brilliant job and getting up and doing that at 15 with the confidence he had is not easy. I'd much rather see young magicians in another show - perhaps "Penn & Teller's Apprentice". I enjoy watching young magicians too but it was a little like Soma from last week - an enjoyable performance but didn't seem to fit in with the idea of baffling Penn & Teller.

I have to concur. It annoys me a little that the kid took up a spot when there were some seriously strong contenders declined by the producers. Just another example of the production team making decisions that the magic branch of the show should make.

On a much brighter note Richard did not disappoint even slightly. A very deserving win and one of my favourite effects so far!

This is the first one ive seen of this series, thought it was ok. Im constantly surprised at some of the effects that are chosen though . Nice effect from Richard Bellars, well done to him

Looking forward to seeing Morgan and West and Michael Vincent on next weeks show

jim

Makes me wonder if we truly know what laymen like.

http://www.metro.co.uk/tv/reviews/86881 ... -magicians

Have a read of that, they said bellers was boring And couldnt wait for it to end yet we all thought it was good.

Alan rorrinson I thought was pretty average but I might be bias as I think he is a horrible person lol.

Wasn't impressed tonight.


I keep hearing people raving about dynamo when we all say he isn't that great, I'll put a question to us all, are we out of touch with what our audiences want?

Im just watching it now, as Ive been busy at the seance.

young lad.. ok for his age. A bit old school.shame he did , word for word Paul Daniels 6n card repeat routine. ( which they must of seen before)

rvoice100 wrote:Makes me wonder if we truly know what laymen like.

http://www.metro.co.uk/tv/reviews/86881 ... -magicians

Have a read of that, they said bellers was boring And couldnt wait for it to end yet we all thought it was good.

Alan rorrinson I thought was pretty average but I might be bias as I think he is a horrible person lol.

Wasn't impressed tonight.


I keep hearing people raving about dynamo when we all say he isn't that great, I'll put a question to us all, are we out of touch with what our audiences want?

I think you may well be on to something here - it's almost impossible for us, as magicians, to approach any of these shows objectively. To call back to a previous post on this thread, I was discussing last week's show with a colleague at work (whose opinions I respect greatly) and he commented "Isn't it strange how all the volunteers appear to already be wearing microphones"!!!! I couldn't believe that someone who is so usually 'switched on' had been sidetracked into thinking stooges were used.

So my point is this: we may know what our audiences during our gigs like but when it comes to trying to entertain ten million people on a Saturday night, I think we'd all find it an impossible task to try and please everyone! We should be grateful that viewers don't get the almost obligatory option to vote on the best act... if they did, then the kid would have absolutely walked away with the winning spot!!

Also, I've been thinking about the name of the show and the comments some have made about the ability of some of the acts to 'fool' P&T. I don't think we should ready much into the 'fooling' aspect - I think that's purely a hook upon which to hang the concept of a primetime magic show. After all, if we're going to get hung up on the names of shows, I'm going to call the Office of Fair Trading to instigate an investigation in just where is that 'talent' in "Britain's Got Talent"!!!

All in all, I enjoyed the show last night. Loved the Bellars Confabulation routine (and was surprised to see an email from Alakazam appear in my inbox, selling the routine, as the credits rolled!). Looks like there's a couple of acts from my recording on next week according to the trailer; Michael Vincent and Cubic Act - who were terrific!!


Sean

rvoice100 wrote:Makes me wonder if we truly know what laymen like.

http://www.metro.co.uk/tv/reviews/86881 ... -magicians

Have a read of that, they said bellers was boring And couldnt wait for it to end yet we all thought it was good.

Alan rorrinson I thought was pretty average but I might be bias as I think he is a horrible person lol.

Wasn't impressed tonight.


I keep hearing people raving about dynamo when we all say he isn't that great, I'll put a question to us all, are we out of touch with what our audiences want?

But it's the same ol' quandry - the general public make Britain's Got Talent and The X Factor ratings hits. The general public make orange, plastic-faced girls band very famous. The general public make Transformers 3 a commercial success. The general public buy Dan Brown books by the pallet-load. The general public buy immoral, law-breaking newspapers but if such a newspaper closes down, they will still buy the same garbage run by the same people but with a different name and see no problem with that (me being topical there!).

So, I don't think the issue is whether we're are out of touch, I think it's more the questions of do you want to pander to the masses or stimulate your audience? To be a little bit snobby, if my favourite film, book, TV show, play or musical was the same as voted by the ITV core audience, I would be a little concerned. And that's mainly because I always like to see and experience new things, things that challenge and things that make me think in a different way and I think it's fair to say anyone who is passionate about a craft would feel the same.

Nail gun next week!
Complete tosh but SUCH a good act! (as is P&T standard I guess)

Missed it "live" as I was talking to guilty witchfinders and drowned Edwardian children with Dale, so i watched in on the ITV player when I got in (I don't have Sky+ as money wasted on football, atrocious Hollywood films and awful US TV shows is put to better use) and I found it an enjoyable show with good performances all round.
Even the over-cocky child didn't grate too much. The only thing I don't like about the is the exposure but maybe, although we understand what they are getting at, the public may not get the references to rings etc.

Congrats to Richard with a routine which has got many magical chins being scratched and Alan put in a good performance though I know he has better material than that.

I'd concur with the Metro article. Bellars' act just kept on going. I think it became apparent to everyone what was going to happen, not least because he said there was a prediction before the trick started. So then instead of wondering what was happening and wow-ing at the end, I just became impatient for him to get it over with. Yes, you're going to predict everything. No I don't know how its done though I know how I'd do it. Obviously a huge part of magic is the surprise-at-the-end-of-the-trick factor. Take that away and you're not left with much else.

Womany provided the show's entire quota of wink-wink-nudge-nudge in one act. I think she came across well but I was left wondering what her entire act looks like. Does she break out the cards after that?

The Cramer kid had balls the size of watermelons, but the trick was so weak I really don't believe he should have been allowed on. Wasn't it something you get in those magic sets for kids in Toys R Us? I do think the TV cameras should return to his house though, and shoot a documentary a la The Osbournes. His Dad looked like an 80's Dr. Who, it was amazing. His brother too, can't even show encouragement with a camera pointed at him? They'll miss a trick themselves if they let that lot go.

Now was it me, or did Rorrison get more reaction from performing his trick on the mat? The very mat he then threw away claiming it would be more difficult without it. He's obviously there trying to fool magicians as well as the public, but its an interesting point that relates to what rvoice100 was saying.

Grimshaw wrote:Romany provided the show's entire quota of wink-wink-nudge-nudge in one act. I think she came across well but I was left wondering what her entire act looks like. Does she break out the cards after that?

Never seen her do a card trick, but her version of Devant's Coins Across is a stunner...

Check out her YouTube videos for a better idea of why she won Stage Magician of the Year.

Barry

Grimshaw wrote:Now was it me, or did Rorrison get more reaction from performing his trick on the mat? The very mat he then threw away claiming it would be more difficult without it.

He did with me. I felt like he was just doing some more explaining but no, that was the finale.

I guess it depends on how you approach the show.

Yes Richards routine seemed to go on, however, from the point of view of trying to fool Penn and Teller he did a great job. I think getting them on stage is the way forward as it makes it much more difficult to see how the performer has done what they have when you are involved in the whole thing.

Was a bit surprised they did not see how he loaded the billet in to his shoe, however I of course could be mistaken in what I thought I saw!

The case was excellent mis-direction in my opinion but would have liked the effect much more if the prediction had been in the case.