I have now watched two episodes of this new TV programme and while I am usually of the opinion that any magic on TV is generally a good thing I am not convinced about this show. If I was a lay person watching this the first thing I would be thinking is that the whole show is a set up, most of the effects seem to far fetched to be possible and the odds on achieving the results just too high to make the show believable. What makes it worse is that it's not just one effect that does it but nearly all of them. She does hint at methods sometimes but I don't think that many lay people would believe the so called possible explanations.
Interested to know what other people think of this new show.

Recorded it but not watched yet I am planning to watch it tonight (wife dependant variable may mean I don't) .... ill let you know.....

Just watched the first episode. Didn't like it.

1. It's a bit too close to a female version of Derren Brown for my taste. The pop psychology explanations, the apparent reading of micro signals, etc. If she was apparently doing these things in a way that was different or even better than Derren, I'd be okay with it. But really, she just comes across as a female TV presenter who is going through a script. Her demeanor doesn't change, she doesn't ramp up her energy to put people in certain states of mind. Unlike Derren, she isn't a good actor. She doesn't actually seem to be acting at all. Every effect appears to be achieved effortlessly, with zero mistakes (fake ones, that is), no uncertainty. Just like it's the easiest thing in the world. There's no charisma or variation. I found it really plodding and boring to watch.

2. Her pseudo-explanations are ludicrous. Simply too far fetched in my opinion to be believable to a layperson. Derren caused some controversy with his first few specials because he hinted a bit too strongly that he was achieving his effects using pure psychology. He later admitted that he possibly pushed that angle a bit too hard and added a disclaimer to the start of the show. Katherine says there are no stooges or actors, but also mentions psychology and sociology a lot. Too much in my opinion. Again, I'd forgive the BS a bit more if she actually was able to sell the explanations convincingly. But she doesn't have a character. Derren's early character in his Mind Control and Trick of the Mind specials was a somewhat gothic, Sherlock Holmes type figure. And you could imagine him crafting his art (of reading and influencing minds using the methods he pretended to use) over many years. I don't think you could say the same about Katherine. Her appearance and personality, to me, don't believably justify her apparent skills.

3. A certain amount of editing is to be expected in magic shows on TV. Arguably it's even more necessary with mentalism to hide how information is acquired so that later claims can be made as to how it was arrived at. But the editing on this show was just ridiculous. The book test she did for example--massive portions were cut out. This wouldn't bother the average viewer, mainly because they wouldn't know just how impossible the effects are to achieve, but to a mentalist or magician, I think it's quite annoying. It doesn't strike a respectable balance between showing you what actually happened and preserving the mystery of the methods.

In summary, my biggest criticism is that she doesn't have a character and therefore lacks charisma. The fact that she's doing many of the same plots as Derren did in 2001-2004 doesn't help either. It's so blandly produced too. Last mention of Derren here (her copying of him invites the comparison!), but his original shows had excellent music, lighting, shooting locations, etc. Everything was fully justified and felt real.

Http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p027h10n

I haven't seen the show but, if the clip above is anything to go by, she doesn't seem to be particularly good at presenting mentalism.

Yeah, that was pretty bad. She didn't do anything to imply how it was supposedly being done, except a brief and half-hearted exploration of something the host mentioned earlier. Shame.

What channel is this on ? Not sure if I can get it here.

It was dire. Let's get some posh eye candy, teach her a few tricks and parade her round London for a bit...

The plebs will love it.

Thanks for that Tom. Can't put my finger on it but it doesn't do it for me. She hasn't really got a strong personality . The effects are OK but for some reason it just doesn't hold my attention. The fake explanations were a bit daft as well.

It's interesting that she's dating/married to Matt Crook, who is the owner of Crook Productions, the company that has made her programme. He's also Head of Entertainment at Objective, who make a lot of other magic shows, including Derren Brown's. I'm wondering how long she's actually been into magic. The only live performances I've seen of hers have been the egg/silk routine (Lance Burton's), a bank note change, and several drawing dupes using the same method and sparse/non-existent presentations.

The consultants have run out of ideas. it's the same guys consulting for same new magic shows. They need new and fresh creative consultants.... Cough cough!!

Honestly, she's not that bad and she will get better I'm sure.

Myke
X

They seem to be going for the beautiful, smart, sassy psychologist archetype -which she is a good fit for physically but her performing chops don't quite seem up to it at the moment. Maybe she'll settle down into it, though.

Well I'm glad it wasn't just me that thought it was really poor.

In my opinion, she isn't bad at all, but it´s locally bad placed. Derren is monster showman and be compared with him is unfair to her but a needed factor to consider.

Maybe this show in USA or in other location (not in the UK) plus some different angles in terms of performance can upgrade the quality.


Best

To me its like she's not really been doing it very long, more like she'sbeen given a script to follow. She ddoesn't come across as a natural performer.

I agree George. She seems like a generic afternoon TV presenter. She could be doing a show about renovating houses, or transforming your wardrobe, or re-organising your life.

Both Brown and Blaine had an air of something "other" about them, that made them compelling to watch. Mind you, this rather bland "TV presenter" archetype seems to be becoming more prevalent in mentalism if the AGT contestants and strolling mentalists I've seen are anything to go by.

All pretty fair comments I reckon - but! at least she's a positive role model, female, and at least its not a dodgy rip-off (cos its the same production company as derren)...and its quite well shot, liked the little "borrowing" from how the revamped Sherlock was filmed, seeing the little text/infographics pop up along the way...

we don't have to mention her looks though do we? we don't talk about derren or dynamo in the same way...or do we? her look is current, as in, the way she's dressed - suits her persona...

Like it or not, looks are a selling point. For better or worse, it is the nature of the world in which we live.

Best wishes,


Scott

Yeah- agreed...but WE don't have to judge her on that element, surely?

and yes, I know, don't call you shirley...

Agreed.