|
|
Tom Cutts Staff Northern CA 5925 Posts |
Hi Rick,
I know some of your effects embrace the thinking of David Berglas to get several "effects" or magical moments out of one outcome. What is your process for finding those "add on" effects. Do you have any such releases on the horizon? Cheers, Tom |
Rick Maue V.I.P. Pittsburgh, PA 586 Posts |
Greetings Tom,
How are you my friend? You know, I was just telling my wife that I need a fix of the Bay Area soon. Man, I miss hanging around SF. As for your question, I could talk about this subject for hours. (But then again, you know me well enough to know that I could talk about almost anything for hours, so what's the big deal?) However, my time is very short this morning, so I will return to this thread later when I can spend a few extra minutes. Until then, take care my friend. Keep the change, Rick |
Tom Cutts Staff Northern CA 5925 Posts |
I completely understand, my friend. Give my regards to Broadway and Spidella (sp?), in reverse order as they appear... OK so I'm being obtuse. I hope you know the welcome mat is always out for you.
Cheers, Tom |
christiancagigal Special user SF Bay Area 625 Posts |
PLEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAASSSSSSSSSSSSSE COME VISIT SAN FRANCISCO AGAIN!!! PLLEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAASSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
especially any weekend from July 25th to Aug. 16th...wanna see a new bizarre magic show on it's 3rd return engagement =) oh and we can find many good little Cafés on Columbus where we can sit outside, sip cap's, talk about life and feel oh so European. C PS Love what I'm reading here by the way. PPS Happy Happy to you and the Mrs.!
"Besides the known and the unknown, what else is there?"-Harold Pinter
www.christiancagigal.com |
Tom Cutts Staff Northern CA 5925 Posts |
Alright Christian! Is your show coming back again, again?
|
Magical Lady Loyal user 275 Posts |
You know, I was just telling my wife that I need a fix of the Bay Area soon. Man, I miss hanging around SF.
Stop it, stop it!! This time last year I was arriving for my first ever visit to San Francisco - and spent a wonderful birthday enjoying fine wines, excellent food, and great company! This year it looks like rain, rain and more rain - hey, how did you guess I am in England this year?? |
Rick Maue V.I.P. Pittsburgh, PA 586 Posts |
Greetings everyone,
I am really sad to say that a trip to SF doesn't look good at the moment because I have a number of other bookings that I cannot move around between now and the end of the year--and some are with clients, while others are with my doctors. But back to Tom's original question... Yeah, I have a few things coming out that touch upon the idea of getting "freebies" (as Docc likes to call them) during the performance. In truth, constructing pieces that have multiple revelations that seem impressive (and yet, are truthfully disguised moments of redundancy--such as in my piece FATE) is not really that difficult, but one of the keys is to be aware of the possible problems that you may encounter. Here are the basic things that I look out for... First, each revelation must seem different. In other words, they all must be presented in their own distinctive fashion so that each one looks fresh. Next, it is important to make the revelations build properly. In other words, make sure that the climaxes continue to increase as the piece continues to move forward. Otherwise, the overall effect will begin to diminish if the best moment happens in the middle of the performance. If that is the case, it is usually wise to cut everything that occurs after the peak moment. (This would be the same as having a “kicker” ending that is not as strong as the main climax--simply put, that is usually a very bad idea. Now, I am sure that there may be exceptions, but I sure as hell cannot think of any.) So, one of my basic rules about a “freebie” is that if it adds an extra payoff, that is fine--but if that extra payoff is weaker than the ones that came before it, I cut the freebie. And finally, one of the biggest concerns when adding freebies is actually something that can be a problem with any multiple-revelation payoff piece--and that is the possibility of crossing the thin line that exists between foreshadowing and telegraphing. In fact, this is something that I have been teaching quite a bit as of late, and I usually use my piece FATE as the illustration. If you would like me to elaborate, just say the word. I hope that answers your question Tom. And whether is does or it doesn't, the next Guinness is on me. Keep the change, Rick |
handa Inner circle Pittsburgh, PA 1357 Posts |
Rick,
Is there some philosphy or psychology in your presentation that keeps Fate from becoming a series of kickers? I can easily see this presented in a way that it would suffer from the "well, duh" reaction as logic bombs explode in the heads of the audience members. To take a more neutral example, I'm sure that when Max Maven performs/performed "Overkill" his kickers have/had a definite build that made the presentation more powerful with each revealation. I have seen others attempt Overkill and bore the audience with the realization that the "I knew what the answer would be all along, and here are five ways to show you that I did so." There seems to be a very delicate balance here, and what are your experience that result in a better "sell" of the build? Chris |
Rick Maue V.I.P. Pittsburgh, PA 586 Posts |
Greetings Chris,
To me, most kickers are just extra effects for the sake of having extra effects. They usually do not advance the theme of the piece, and I try to avoid adding extra effects just because I can. I want to advance the overall theme, and that is certainly what I tried to do with FATE. In short, the theme of the piece is that I can control the decisions of the participants. The signs demonstrate that in regard to exactly which poker chip each person chooses. And then the targets “raise the level” because they demonstrate that I also controlled exactly where each person actually chose to stand. Once again, for me, the key is to maintain, and to advance, the theme of the piece--not to simply add extra effects, like many kickers. In addition, FATE is also a piece that I intentionally tried to violate one of my own rules--and by doing so, I was able to increase the strength of the overall routine. And this is where I may be able to answer your question, so let me try to explain what I mean. With FATE, you have five signs that basically reveal the exact selection process of four different audience members. Each sign details precisely what has occurred with each decision of the participants. But let's break all of this down. In the routine, the first successful sign certainly gets the attention of the audience. The second sign has the audience saying "You've got to be kidding" to themselves because they now understand exactly what is going on--and so the ending of the entire piece has now been foreshadowed. The third sign is where the climax of the piece apparently peaks because that is where it not only becomes obvious what the exact ending is, but also that the routine will indeed end successfully. This is also the moment where foreshadowing morphs into telegraphing. In most cases, that is a bad thing because now the effect is basically over, and yet the performer still has to complete the remaining revelations--but hold that thought for just a moment (because this is what I think will answer your question). The fourth sign is of little interest because the audience already knows exactly what is going to happen (as you described in your post), but it is necessary to show it in order to progress to the next successful revelation. But unfortunately, the excitement level of the audience is diminishing rapidly because they are simply waiting for the performer to get everything correct. Finally, the fifth sign is revealed, and since the audience was already waiting for this exact (and yet, successful) ending, their interest level is now at its lowest point--and sadly, this is where the obvious applause cue occurs. So, the audience politely applauds. (Once again, this is what you alluded to above.) So the audience begins to applaud in lemming fashion, and I always cut them off by saying, “But hold on for a moment. That was rather interesting--but it wasn’t the cool part. Do you want to see the cool part?” Now, they were expecting the piece to end with the signs (and that is where the telegraphing led them), but now their interest is suddenly (and unexpectedly) piqued once again. So I call attention to the targets, and the audience immediately begins to respond as I ask the participants to pick up their targets and turn them over. This final revelation now causes the piece to end when the audience is most interested, as opposed to ending at its lowest point (which would happen if you did the routine without the targets). In summation, by adding the target ending, the structure of the piece resembles a roller coaster. Sign number one begins the trip upward. Sign number two continues the trip upward. Sign number three reaches the top of the track. Sign number four begins the downward plunge of audience interest. Sign number five represents the very bottom of the drop--and of their interest. And finally, the targets shoot the interest of the audience back upward at an amazing pace, and the routine ends at its highest point (and with the final moment advancing, and enhancing, the overall theme of the piece). The structure is intentional, and it was designed to create the proper beats to provide the necessary highs and lows of emotion. And yet, the routine does not simply have multiple payoffs because they are possible. Each step actually plays an important role to achieve the maximum strength. I don’t know if all of that makes sense out of context, but for those that know FATE, they hopefully were able to follow what I was saying. Keep the change, Rick |
christiancagigal Special user SF Bay Area 625 Posts |
Thanks for breaking it down even further for us. You gifted me with a set of FATE back here in SF and I LOVE IT!!! Thank you =)
Sadly I've only been able to perform it a few times because it doesn't really fit the style I'm doing right now. But, OH! how I love going over that effect in my mind and reading it and extracting what I can from it. I hope one day I'll find a way to make it fit my style. Happy to hear your real busy. Sad to hear it's partly time spent at the doctor's. Keep Rockin' Christian PS Quote:
On 2008-04-26 17:22, Tom Cutts wrote: Yes. Can't stop the MAGIC, baby! Can't stop the MAGIC!
"Besides the known and the unknown, what else is there?"-Harold Pinter
www.christiancagigal.com |
Tom Cutts Staff Northern CA 5925 Posts |
Aw Rick, that is unfortunate for all involved.
If Maue-hammad can't come to the beach, maybe I'll bring the beach to Maue-hammad. See you at MindVention this year? Cheers, Tom |
handa Inner circle Pittsburgh, PA 1357 Posts |
I can think of other places in which this applies. Magic squares have that inherent property unless Jon Stetson is your performer and classic pieces like Knight's Tour and Out of this World also can either grind down to a slow finish or take the audience on a roller coaster ride, depending upon the performer and the finish.
In the case of Knight's Tour, the kicker ending is really what saves/justifies the piece in many cases. Now to derail the thread a bit, because you mentioned a definite creative trend among your original works in your reply above: What is is that makes you "turn something inside out" either by deliberately violating a "magic rule" (or one of your own for that matter), or by sending the audience down one path that most magicians wouldn't dream of doing (such as steer them toward one thought process related to other methods to hide the real one used, the whole "ending dirty to end clean" aspect of Ashes from Palm, etc.) For that matter, you don't do what I call "demonstrative magic" in the sense of "this is the name of the effect and I call it that because it describes exactly what happens" a la many illusion pieces, yet you tell the audience the outcome of many of your pieces in your introduction and the overall performance is still very strong. How does this relate to character, pacing, and some of the things already brought up in others' questions this week? Chris |
Rick Maue V.I.P. Pittsburgh, PA 586 Posts |
Chris,
I will start with your first question about "turning something inside out." I love to break rules, whether they are general rules, or my own. To me, by turning over those types of rocks, a number of unusual things crawl out of my mind--and that is one of the keys to creativity for me. And there are times that I certainly steer the audience to another method to hide the one that I am using--but there are also times that I steer them to the exact method that I am using so that they disregard it completely. To use a generic example, if I wanted to use marked playing cards, I would probably talk about marked cards in the script--after all, the audience will certainly think that a person that uses marked cards would never talk about them, or would he? (For an example of running directly at a method, refer to Turning The Tables in HauntedMagick.) As for telling the audience exactly what I am going to do, that is actually one of my favorite things. Some may think that it ruins the surprise, but I feel that surprise is not only overrated, but also overused in much of the magic that I see. But more importantly, I love to tell the audience what is going to occur because I believe that, by doing so, you dramatically increase the conviction of the piece. In short, the audience never has the feeling of "if I knew that was going to happen in advance, you would have never fooled me." To me, eliminating that possible feeling is very important. And, telling them in advance is important to my character because I am taking the audience through a collection of unusual demonstrations, and not telling them what is going to occur would seen unnatural--and therefore, suspicious. And you are right, by telling them what is going to happen in advance, the pacing is also affected. Think about it, the things that I do often have the feel of experiments. And, it makes sense to take a bit of time to set up those experiments properly. By letting the audience in on what is going to happen, the set-up process can actually be intriguing--and that certainly affects the pacing of the show. There is a lot more to it than what I have written here, but hopefully I have at least scratched the surface for you. Keep the change, Rick |
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » The April 2008 entrée: Rick Maue » » Berglasian Moments » » TOPIC IS LOCKED (0 Likes) |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.06 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |