talkmagic.co.uk

DB has offically posted on FB saying tickets are on say in Edinurburgh, Northampton and Dartford (UK tour), the Northampton tour I'm going to is in April. But what I want to ask mentalists (and magicians of course) does Derren Brown deserve the credit that he gets? By that I mean is he truely one of the greatest psychologicial illusionists/magicians/mentalist or whatever he calls himself?... Or did he just get lucky and there are just as many equally if not more talented mentalists/performers out there?

Johnny

Hate to sit on the fence here, but it would be down to personal preference. I consider Derren an excellent performer, seeing him live is always a good time, and he handles his participants superbly. As to whether he could be considered one of the 'greatest', only time will reveal such a thing.

As with anything, musician, actor, psychological illusionist, being successful in any field requires a degree of good fortune. Its seldom what you know, and regularly who you know. Wasn't Andy Nyman originally picked to do the shows, but put Derren forward instead? Choosing to work behind the scenes with him? Or did I just read that in the Sunday Sport?

My opinion is (and this is going to be controversial) as follows:

Derren Brown is a genius, not because of what he does, but because he realised something very important that few others have realised. He realised that...... (lights blue touch paper, stands well back, hides under pillow)...... mentalism is boring.

Deren Brown was not born a mentalist. He was really a stage hypnotist/magician. He worked restaurants and corporate gigs doing strolling magic. He was an accomplished magician but realised that his potential was being overlooked. If you have his elusive book 'pure effect' as I do, he touches on this revelation. Two events happened to him that fundamentally changed his view of magic. One involved a magic convention in London with Eugene Burger which I won't go into. The second involved a converstaion with a spec whilst table hopping. He realised that he wasn't creating a sense of wonder. He was more concerned with being funny and getting around all the tables. He realised that he wasn't giving his magic the respect it deserved and he needed to change his presentation. He realised that presentation is more important than method, as that is what the audience are ultimately left with - your presentation.

DB states categorically - "I DO NOT CONSIDER MYSELF A MENTALIST!" He can't really be any clearer on the subject. In all the interviews I've seen of him he refuses to label himself. He also states that he dislikes watching mentalism and that (and I quote from DB) "it's entertainment value is inherently quite low." Again, you can't get any clearer than that - and this is a man revered by mentalists, myself included!

DB wants to create routines that involve conjuring, hypnosis, NLP and psychic effects that are psycholgically engaging and visually entertaining. For years menalists, hypnotists, illusionists and magicians have all argued over who had the greatest art-form - then DB came along and combined them all. That is what makes him great. He was way way way ahead of his time, and continues to be so, because he refuses to be shackled by outdated puritanical views of what magic/mentalism should be.

Asking a spec to think of a word and then revealing that word is, in itself, quite dull. What happens in between the thought and the reveal is where the real magic happens. That is the presentation. That is why DB is an absloute legend because he turns simple methods into visually stunning, engaging pieces of theatrical story telling. He didn't get lucky, he just did what no-one else was doing.

My final thought would be that in order to become an amazing mentalist/magician, one has to dedicate an incredible amount of solo time. This is the same with any closed-skill such as snooker or learning a musical instrument. The natural result is that many great sleight of hand artists are quite introverted and don't have great personalities - Dynamo / Blaine to name just two. Look at youtube to see what 'characters' are posting their attempts at magic. To have a great conjurer with a great personality is rarer than it's opposite. Just my humble opinion.

Now, I've got a bottle of wine, some tinned food and I'm off to my bunker to await the first silos!!!

Pip-Pip

Kevmundo (Richard Osterlind is my dad so don't mess with me or I'll get him to beat you up!)

mentalism is boring.

I'd change that slightly to mentalism can be very boring unless the performer is extremely skilled .

Derren's chief talent is to entertain, he uses very clever stuff, he has some very talented advisers/assistants, he also uses bog standard dealer items which we can all buy and use, he also incorporates stuff which we can find in many basic magic books costing diddly squat.

As there's no real detail about the new show it's hard to say go or not go but I'm certainly not going to miss it as it's always been a darned good evening's entertainment.

I wouldn't consider Mr Brown one of the greatest mentalists of all time, there have been many many great performers going back through the years. I do however consider him to be a very proficient entertainer and showman. While it may also be true that he did receive a number of very lucky opportunities to be where his is today you must not forget that it also required a great amount of work and dedication on his part. He was a very skilled and entertaining magician before he turned down the path that he now follows and it was that skill that originally got him noticed.

I'll add that I believe Derren's presentation & patter are second to none. That's what sets him apart from others.

Mentalism generally bores me. The patter is usually old & stale. Derren (& his consultants) do a wonderful job of wrapping his effects in some kind of plausible story as to how it all works. All in all, he suspends belief in the audience & leaves them wondering.

Not sure I would give Derren a 'living legend' or a 'God like' status.
He is a certainly a very good entertainer and his stage shows are, in my opinion, better than his TV appearances.

What Derren has done is to popularise magic. He sets a high standard which raises the game for amateur magicians like myself.

The thing I admire about Derren is that he is not trying to massage his ego by attempting bigger and more impossible stunts in the way that Blain and others have tried.
I think the online reactions to the Lottery prediction was perhaps a turning a point. Now he seems to be concentrating more on stage shows and his other artistic talents.

This is going to sound controversial, but it's actually not.

I've watched a lot of mentalism of all levels over the years and the one thing I have noticed repeatedly is that a person standing on stage unconvincingly lying about their methods is not entertaining. No one cares! No one believes you! Just say "I lie" and get to the tricks already!

The very best mentalism I've ever seen burns through material. If you're planning to do a half hour set with just three effects, then you're going to take an average of TEN MINUTES to get to the revelation. This is FAR too long. Unless you've worked out some exquisite patter that will actually hold people's attention, you're boring them. You really are. Try four effects. Try five. Try anything, but keep it coming until your time is done.

Brown's geek stuff (walking on glass, blockhead, pulse stop) was boring. There, I said it. It was too long and it was not entertaining for a large part of the audience, who realised that his feet weren't cut to ribbons, blood wasn't gushing from his nose and he hadn't had a fatal heart attack. There was no expectation made of them; they had no role. His very best stuff engages the whole audience in a mystery. when they're engaged, the reconciling reality with what's happening is their natural role. It's a meaty, satisfying role.

Too much coffee...

Tomo wrote:Brown's geek stuff (walking on glass, blockhead, pulse stop) was boring. There, I said it. It was too long and it was not entertaining for a large part of the audience, who realised that his feet weren't cut to ribbons, blood wasn't gushing from his nose and he hadn't had a fatal heart attack. There was no expectation made of them; they had no role. His very best stuff engages the whole audience in a mystery. when they're engaged, the reconciling reality with what's happening is their natural role. It's a meaty, satisfying role.

I definitely agree with this, it struck a really discordant note amongst his other material.

Tomo wrote:This is going to sound controversial, but it's actually not.

I've watched a lot of mentalism of all levels over the years and the one thing I have noticed repeatedly is that a person standing on stage unconvincingly lying about their methods is not entertaining. No one cares! No one believes you! Just say "I lie" and get to the tricks already!

The very best mentalism I've ever seen burns through material. If you're planning to do a half hour set with just three effects, then you're going to take an average of TEN MINUTES to get to the revelation. This is FAR too long. Unless you've worked out some exquisite patter that will actually hold people's attention, you're boring them. You really are. Try four effects. Try five. Try anything, but keep it coming until your time is done.

Brown's geek stuff (walking on glass, blockhead, pulse stop) was boring. There, I said it. It was too long and it was not entertaining for a large part of the audience, who realised that his feet weren't cut to ribbons, blood wasn't gushing from his nose and he hadn't had a fatal heart attack. There was no expectation made of them; they had no role. His very best stuff engages the whole audience in a mystery. when they're engaged, the reconciling reality with what's happening is their natural role. It's a meaty, satisfying role.

Too much coffee...

Have to say I agree. The best way I can put it is that the second halve's, (Minus the finale) seems too self indulgent for me. I'm talking about the Geek stuff in Something Wicked, and Seance Stuff in Evening and Enigma.

The first halves are truly spectacular though, it is, in my opinion near perfect mentalism. If the presentations are entertaining in their own right, (Minus the effect), then the 10 mins thing is less of a worry. But in most cases, with other performers, it's just talking, and as Tomo points out... boring.

As for the living legend thing... How can you deny that! , this is a thread and promotion for tickets for a show that hasn't even been written yet!

Mandrake wrote:

mentalism is boring.

I'd change that slightly to mentalism can be very boring unless the performer is extremely skilled .

I can't argue with that!! Unfortunately, most magicians/mentalists do appear to be rather dull. Dynamo has the personality of a squashed pignut. Maybe that's where I'm going wrong. Maybe if I focus more on being void of anything even boardering on a personaility, I might be catapulted to fame!

Very good thread coming along guys .. Yes I agree it's about being interesting and engaging and not showing off your skills but more stunning your audience with effects in which they feel they are involved in (which derren done a lot in svengali - without giving too much away there was decent audience participation). In my opinion I think he is a modern saint to at least british magic making it mainstream and not geeky but thought provoking and at the least entertaining (which is what he's there to do)!

Johnny

phillipnorthfield wrote:

Tomo wrote:This is going to sound controversial, but it's actually not.

I've watched a lot of mentalism of all levels over the years and the one thing I have noticed repeatedly is that a person standing on stage unconvincingly lying about their methods is not entertaining. No one cares! No one believes you! Just say "I lie" and get to the tricks already!

The very best mentalism I've ever seen burns through material. If you're planning to do a half hour set with just three effects, then you're going to take an average of TEN MINUTES to get to the revelation. This is FAR too long. Unless you've worked out some exquisite patter that will actually hold people's attention, you're boring them. You really are. Try four effects. Try five. Try anything, but keep it coming until your time is done.

Brown's geek stuff (walking on glass, blockhead, pulse stop) was boring. There, I said it. It was too long and it was not entertaining for a large part of the audience, who realised that his feet weren't cut to ribbons, blood wasn't gushing from his nose and he hadn't had a fatal heart attack. There was no expectation made of them; they had no role. His very best stuff engages the whole audience in a mystery. when they're engaged, the reconciling reality with what's happening is their natural role. It's a meaty, satisfying role.

Too much coffee...

Have to say I agree. The best way I can put it is that the second halve's, (Minus the finale) seems too self indulgent for me. I'm talking about the Geek stuff in Something Wicked, and Seance Stuff in Evening and Enigma.

The first halves are truly spectacular though, it is, in my opinion near perfect mentalism. If the presentations are entertaining in their own right, (Minus the effect), then the 10 mins thing is less of a worry. But in most cases, with other performers, it's just talking, and as Tomo points out... boring.

As for the living legend thing... How can you deny that! , this is a thread and promotion for tickets for a show that hasn't even been written yet!

Personally, I like how the second halves of the live shows relate back to Victorian spiritualism and such things. The elegance and romanticism of Victorian and old vaudeville performances is something that, if it wasn't for Derren, probably wouldn't be seen in modern performances (Morgan & West are perhaps an exception).

So, in effect, different parts of his shows appeal to different people. Quite a neat accomplishment!

Hi all,

As a long time Derren fan, I am somewhat biased in favour of the "Derren is a God" argument! I think it's great that all the discussion so far in this thread has been, in my opinion, fair and well balanced.

I agree with those that felt the physical effects such as glass walk and nail in head didn't seem to quite fit into the context of the live shows. I found it a little jarring myself, but I think it's fair to say that his presentation was excellent and it did generate a lot of tension in the audience. In hindsight I think it was fine to include them in the shows as they perhaps appealed to a different section of the audience - those not so familiar with Derren's work or those not so into magic in general whose expectations may have been slightly different.

All his shows so far have followed the structure of - quickfire first half, slower, darker second half and ingenious finale. I think this works well to keep the audience engaged and satisfied but some criticisms of the more recent tours I think probably stemmed from the fact that if you have seen all the previous shows, you might feel that it is starting to become a bit "samey." Personally I would like to see him really shake things up and play around with the format a bit more but then again, why fix something that isn't broken?

The most interesting aspect of the next tour for me is that Andy Nyman has said he will return as co-writer and director. Some people have said that his absence was noticeable in Svengali and in fairness, Svengali was the show that changed the most over the course of its run. I do believe however, that Svengali contained some of Derren's best work and while some of the effects were perhaps not used to their fullest potential, it did have some great moments and let's not forget the awards! I for one felt a pang of sadness on the last night of the tour and am looking forward to the TV broadcast and impending DVD release.

All in all, it's hard to judge Derren's legacy at this point in his career. He could carry on touring and putting out TV shows until nobody cares anymore but I like to think he will continue to evolve, push boundaries and surprise us with new projects. In his own words he's a borderline national treasure and I think the next few years will be the most important in determining whether that statement can be made without irony.

JS