|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2 | ||||||||||
Tom Cutts Staff Northern CA 5925 Posts |
First, I agree; I have yet to see a credible, believable, stage performance of a life or death situation. That said, I don't doubt it will happen, and I don't doubt that was EXACTLY the experience at a Houdini escape performance. It's just a matter of someone with the chops and the smarts finding a credible and likable character to present such things.
ANYONE who says humans won't watch "life or death" drama for entertainment is just in denial of reality, or believes "entertainment" is only what happens on polite stages and in polite settings. Entertainment comes in many forms and many places. Take a look at reality shows and movies like Jack***. Take a look at the number of hits YouTube stunts gone wrong get. Take a look at the number of hits YouTube fatal car accidents caught on tape get. Take a look at the career of Evel Knievel. Heck, one guy on American's Who Think They Have Talent had a vehicle run over his chest as his talent. People cheered! Take a look at auto racing. Carlin wasn't joking, people tune in to see cars whizz around in a circle. It is performers and "polite and intelligent society" who have watered down throwing people to lions for entertainment. Probably for the best, but try as they might they can't get it out of the general human condition. |
|||||||||
RichardShure Veteran user 344 Posts |
As already stated...it depends on the performer and the performance. If you stick a danger piece in willy nilly, just because it will be "killer" (pun intended). Then most likely you will lose credibility and it will probably look awkward. I have seen a few "Danger" pieces that either looked silly or were not interesting because the performer had not established a reason for me to care or believe.
If a show/character is crafted properly then yes..a danger piece can create massive tension and excitement. A piece in the show will return to Hitchcock's eternal question..do you want surprise or suspense? The trouble is that most performers have much difficulty in creating "real" suspense. They also have problems creating legitimate and interesting shows. (but that is another thread). I remember a performer who was using traps in his show...at one point the performance came down to a trust issue...and he was to put his hand in one of the traps...only one was disabled... The spectator was to choose which one. It really was a tension piece and the performer was able to keep the focus on the "trust" rather than on the "hey, how cool is this" attitude. The audience gasped and the tension was released. I will tell you from being in that audience...everyone talked about it after the show. And as has been brought up..Houdini used danger constantly. He is considered the ultimate showman..Why are we not crucifying him??? And I don't believe that audiences are that much different than they were from those days. Sure attention spans are shorter and we have seen more(than the audiences of 1920)...but the same things get our blood flowing, sex, violence, and music. To offhandedly say that a danger piece is bad for a show is like saying cartoons for adults are stupid. Depends how it is done. The proof...there are plenty of audiences that have enjoyed a danger piece and plenty of adults that like "Megamind". |
|||||||||
magic4545 Inner circle Jimmy Fingers 1159 Posts |
I would strongly recommend that if you don't like danger stuff, simply don't do it. I would hate to see an act that wasn't doing inspired work. If you have disdain for something that you're doing, even if the audience responds to it, it is not a true reflection on your soul and character.
The expression of what is inside of us is just as valid, even more so, than doing the top ten most popular tricks available on the market. Jimmy |
|||||||||
Shrubsole Inner circle Kent, England 2455 Posts |
A refreshing feeling thinking that your audience would actually find you getting your throat ripped out more entertaining than anything you are doing!
:lol:
Winner of the Dumbringer Award for total incompetence. (All years)
|
|||||||||
Tom Cutts Staff Northern CA 5925 Posts |
I've seen some of those acts.
|
|||||||||
dmkraig Inner circle 1949 Posts |
Several people here have mentioned that we are actors, and I agree. What's not mentioned, however, is that if we're actors, what play are we in?
One of the reasons that great magicians excel is because they often have a series of small plays. Compare that to the beginner: I cut the rope, it's restored. The box is empty, now it's filled. Or moving that to mentalism: I predicted your "free" choice. I can see with a blindfold. To all of these I would say, so what? (AKA: BFD). I don't think that danger per se adds much to the excitement of an act. What adds to an act is TENSION AND RELEASE. This may or may not be related to danger. A good actor can build up the same tension and release with a prediction or mind reading (i.e. Tossed Out Deck) that another can get with the spike or any of its variations. Danger has a built-in element of tension and release, but unless it's played but the author/actor/performer, it will just be a minor stunt. Think in terms of ancient Greek plays with its build up of tension leading to a catharsis. If you don't know or understand this concept, listen to the last track on the Beatles Sgt. Pepper Album, "A Day in the Life." There is a long jumble of instruments slowly going up in pitch, building the intensity until it's just raw, and then instead of resolving it, there's a freakin' pause! This is followed by the catharsis of resolution, the final chord that release the tension and a long fade matching a play's falling action. Tension and release makes the difference. Danger is a "gimme" with this, but it's worthless unless played well. Other things can easily provide as much or more tension and release as danger. |
|||||||||
RichardShure Veteran user 344 Posts |
Jimmy Fingers and Dmkraig
I like your thinking and agree... |
|||||||||
DWRackley Inner circle Chattanooga, TN 1909 Posts |
I have to put myself firmly in the group of “polite” entertainment. I don’t watch reality TV; it’s generally sophomoric, and I have zero respect for the participants. I suspect I am not alone.
As a newcomer, my opinion is worth what it is, but I think the addition of obvious props moves the demonstration more into the area of “mental magic” and away from mentalism proper. That's not necessarily good or bad, just something to think about: where do you want your show to go? Also, I agree with those who say to make the risk/reward ratio seem believable. Bullet catching in a church basement would be so over-the-top that it reduces the whole program to a carney-game atmosphere. But there is more than one kind of danger. Rather than life and limb, how about putting personal valuables on the line, maybe a Bank Night where all the envelopes are burned up, except for the one containing the hundred dollar bill? The audience may not care whether you stab your own silly hand, but EVERYBODY can get into the pain of losing cash. I’ve also heard of pros putting their fee on the line, offering to only get paid IF they can find the check located somewhere in the theatre. There are ways of building tension without appearing masochistic.
...what if I could read your mind?
Chattanooga's Premier Mentalist Donatelli and Company at ChattanoogaPerformers.com also on FaceBook |
|||||||||
Shrubsole Inner circle Kent, England 2455 Posts |
Risk my fee?!!!!
I'd rather stick my hand on a spike! :lol:
Winner of the Dumbringer Award for total incompetence. (All years)
|
|||||||||
mastermindreader 1949 - 2017 Seattle, WA 12586 Posts |
For years I closed my show with my version of Russian Roulette (blindfolded and with pistols - as described in "The Art of Mentalism" and, later, in the manuscript for "The Master Mentalist's Blindfold")
It was, and is, an extremely powerful effect. Unfortunately, it actually IS dangerous if you are not meticulous in your preparation and performance. While I never had an accident performing it, many did. In the end I decided that the routine, while sensational, really didn't fit my persona, nor did it fit logically into my show. The idea kept nagging at me that it just didn't make sense that I'd be risking my life on a nightly basis without ever getting seriously injured or killed. I decided that the effect was probably much more suited to be a one off publicity stunt. But, I think this is one of those areas where it really is "each to his own." I think, though, that performers should seriously consider how such effects are seen by an audience and what effect they have on your credibility. Good thoughts, Bob |
|||||||||
David Thiel Inner circle Western Canada...where all that oil is 4005 Posts |
The whole discussion of "possible harm or death" seems to come down to risk..and the degree of risk the performer is appearing to take in order to entertain the audience.
A hypothetical bullet to the brain is a risk. So is standing in front of an audience member and saying "I am going to read your mind." The audience is going to be entertained either way, right? They are either going to watch as you read a mind...or laugh themselves silly when you fail. It's all good as far as they are concerned. I mean haven't we all pretended to have serious problems getting the thoughts read? Why is that a high point of interest for the spectators? Because on the one hand they want to see us succeed -- but on the other they can't wait to see us fail. Showmen use that. I think it's just a degree of risk (admittedly a great big honking bigger degree) when you slam your hand down on a styrofoam cup that may or may not contain a spike...or hold a gun to your head. Risk is risk. David
Whatever doesn't kill you makes you stronger. Except bears. Bears will kill you.
My books are here: www.magicpendulums.com www.MidnightMagicAndMentalism.com |
|||||||||
Rick Maue V.I.P. Pittsburgh, PA 586 Posts |
Greetings,
I agree with Bob...to each his own. However, I personally don't feel that the average mentalism performance is enhanced by such displays. (And more importantly, the art of mentalism is certainly not enhanced by such things.) In fact, I feel that the flood of "spike tricks" has been caused by so many sub-par "performers" using them (and in most cases, needing them) as gimmicks to attract attention to their shows. Sadly, too often a gawking voyeuristic mob is often mistaken for an engaged audience. And yet, many folks have pointed out to me that I open my show with my Heads & Tales piece, which includes the placement of a straight razor against my wrist. Those that do not understand what I am doing having confused my piece with the stereotypical spike trick. To me, it is the complete opposite. Let me try to explain why... Heads & Tales is actually my response to all of the spike/danger routines of today. In fact, it is my anti-danger piece. I say that because there is no real danger during the performance...and the reason is that no rational thinking adult in my audience would ever honestly believe that I would openly slash my wrist if the incorrect word was chosen. There is no real chance of that...therefore, there is no real danger. However, there is a momentary feeling of theatrical danger, which creates theatrical tension...and that's what makes it work night after night for me. And the thing that makes the piece work from the "effect" standpoint is the short script that I use after the word is revealed. At that moment, I tell the audience that I open each show with the same demonstration...that implies that I get it right every single night. That's much more impressive than merely getting it right the one time that they witnessed it. And then, I proceed to control their decisions for the rest of the performance. Basically, Heads & Tales gets their attention, and it allows me to introduce what my show is all about. After all, it lets them begin to realize that I am going to control their thoughts, decisions, and actions...and it illustrates that everything that I do is a partnership. In short, the piece is never about danger...it is only about partnership. It is symbolic of the fact that the success of my show is in the hands of my audience. And one last thought about the razor itself...in classic literature, a person slashes his/her wrist with a razor. That's why I would never use a knife, a pair of scissors, or any other type of blade/instrument. To me, that would not be artistically acceptable. But like I said, that applies only to me. Please forgive my ramblings...as I have said many times before, Heads & Tales is really the only piece that I have ever created that I honestly like. I could easily talk about it for hours and hours, because I have thought about it for years and years. Keep the change, Rick |
|||||||||
seadog93 Inner circle 3200 Posts |
My vote goes for "there are no rules."
I've seen non-mentalism performances that involve real danger, eg. a trick bicycle rider doing crazy tricks over a spectators head (not mine, no way!). It was absolutely terrifying and next to impossible to stop watching the tension was incredible and the release at the end of each stunt was amazing. That being said; I've never seen a mentalist pretending to do something dangerous who could pull off that much suspense. I would say that unless you can (like Bob) then your only hurting your show. Your destroying all the credibility you built while you where reading minds and making predictions (IMO).
"Love is the magician who pulls man out of his own hat" - Ben Hecht
"Love says 'I am everything.' Wisdom says 'I am nothing'. Between the two, my life flows." -Nisargadatta Maharaj Seadog=C-Dawg=C.ou.rtn.ey Kol.b |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Penny for your thoughts » » Does adding danger to your Act really make it more exciting? (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2 |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.04 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 < |