On 2008-12-14 11:44, JamesBiss wrote:
....Sorry to read of your DVD difficulties, overflow...Perhaps the DVD-Rs that we burn are misbehaving, although we do try to check every one before they ship. Yours must have snuck by when I was sipping a single malt or something. My apologies.

I too really enjoy the Q & A design duplication presentation and have been evolving it considerably for some time now. It seems to me that it just seems more "intuitive" and "psychic" and is much more theatrical for current audiences.

I can honestly say that there are only one or two performers around today who can really work information - peeked right from under audience's noses - into entertaining Mentalism.

Quote:

I can honestly say that there are only one or two performers around today who can really work information - peeked right from under audience's noses - into entertaining Mentalism.

Is that a joke? If not, you need to get out more because people find Q&A absolutely fascinating and entertaining.

Here's a partial list of top names who do have entertaining Q&A routines:

Richard Osterlind
Banachek
Docc Hilford
Cicardi
Stuart Cumberland
Craig Karges
Tim Conovor

So those are just the top names in the business.

On 2008-12-16 18:57, Stuart Cumberland wrote:

... the loudest criticism of Q&A almost always originates from those who don't perform it. Most full-time performers know better. Without question, almost every great mentalist performs a Q&A segment in their act. Some are longer, some are shorter. But without fail, most do.

On 2008-12-16 18:57, Stuart Cumberland wrote:
Take it from a full-time performer that does shows in high schools. Which is a decidedly different view than, say, a high school teacher who performs mentalism part-time.

On 2008-12-17 15:59, BlakeAdams wrote:
... He wants his audience to interact with what he does on stage, and a lot of the times makes his audience the star of the show. That's great.

So, I do agree his style is different, but Sam, you shouldn't diss him for being different. Just because hes not Max Maven enough for you doesn't make him bad. You don't have to be dark, and creep, and all serious, to present mentalism. Another one of my favorite performers is John Archer. He's hilarious, and mixes magic with mentalism which might scare you away Sam.

Also Q and A is a great routine but you do need a lot of b-lls to perform it. Therefore it's not for everyone.

On 2008-12-17 17:50, Stuart Cumberland wrote:
It's great seeing some sanity here. Refreshing to see people post who "get it".

For the record, Richard Webster simply asks his audience to hand him objects... and simply gives a 2-3 minute readings for those that want them.

Frankly, "guessing" which items belongs to which person is basic magic at it's best. Hardly entertainment, to say the least.

Doing dirty, risque material is simply tasteless.

As Milton Berle once pointed out, anyone can tell a dirty joke or use a swear word and get a laugh. But they're cheap laughs.

I can just imagine an agent booking that kind of act: "Oh yes, he embarrasses volunteers and does tricks with underwear and other rude material. He'll be perfect for your holiday party."

Nice.

I dunno. I think bookers want to hire acts that are clean and do classy material. In my experience, it's proven to be true.

SC

On 2008-12-17 18:35, tboehnlein wrote:
By the way MS why did you sell the client on Q& A if you didn't do it or was this a booking agents blunder.

On 2008-12-17 18:35, tboehnlein wrote:
... getting it is understanding you are being paid to entertain, rather that be providing readings through a Q&A or an entertaining process of determining individuals undergarments it is to each his own & to what the client requests.

On 2008-12-17 17:52, MichielTummers wrote:
[As Milton Berle once pointed out, anyone can tell a dirty joke or use a swear word and get a laugh. But they're cheap laughs.

On 2008-12-17 19:22, RSD wrote:

Bingo. Once again, to many entertainers getting wrapped up in how things are done, the history, or how they are presented. The goal is to entertain. I have seen soooooooo many mentalists and frankly I'm tired of watching the same old mentalism routine. The same thing done over and over and over and over again. No personality, with the same old one-liners thrown in here and there, that the performers qualifies as humour. That being said...I'm sure many appreciate the old fashioned way of presenting mentalism. The mysterious man who stands up there divining peoples thoughts for apparent no rhyme or reason. But that's not for me, and that's not what the next generation of audiences wants. Now here comes James, presenting these same old routines with brand new modern twists, and yes even edgey stuff. I litterally laugh out loud, when I read that people get offended watching James, and even someone's wife walked out of the TV room when he was on. GIVE ME A FREAKIN BREAK. What kind of world are you living in? Are the only forms of comedy that entertain you Disney movies? Hate to tell ya...all comedy shows on TV or movies are sexually suggestive. Move out of your shell, and don't be such a prude. Bad bad James. Tish tish, shame on you for talking about the colour of people's underware. "The devil's in that one that I tell ya!"