have you watched derren browns "the experiment"

[Jack by the hedge]

...Well I cannot find where I read this; it was on a magic forum and people were discussing watching his live shows and seeing the same volunteers at different shows. But, it would be a weak source anyway, and its not actually relevant in that the method could be anything.

Was it here: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=5641545#post5641545

"...seemingly at random he managed to pick the same people to volunteer for a trick that he'd had volunteer the year before"

 

[Pup]

Derren Brown is an "edgy" TV entertainer. He's kind of known for treading the line of controversy in the way he presents his tricks.

^This. I think there was a time when "magicians" (for lack of a better word) were all more like Derren Brown, in the days of alchemy when people believed maybe you could turn lead into gold, or the days of witch trials or the height of voodoo, when people believed maybe you could cast spells to kill people or raise the dead.

It was all mysterious and scary and real, to the point that a "magician" could ingratiate himself into a powerful position because people thought he really did have awesome abilities.

Then it sort of devolved into sawing women in half or making someone disappear and reappear on stage, which nobody believed were real.

The genre of presenting "real" powers retreated to trivial things like bending spoons, contacting dead loved ones whose name might start with M or maybe R, or crystals that aligned something or other but sure couldn't raise the dead, like in the good old days.

Derren Brown takes the saw-a-woman-in-half kind of tricks, and presents them the same way as the people who claim their tricks are "real," like the spoon benders.

But he still makes the tricks big and flashy, like stage magic. So instead of audience members saying "omg! he bent a spoon," you have people saying "ZOMG!!!!11!!!!!!!!!!!! he made that person rob a bank," or "assassinate somebody," or whatever. Much bigger reaction.

It's what things were like back when people believed that a witch actually could turn someone into a newt.

 

[dlorde]

I read one of Derren's books, 'Trick of the Mind', in which he devotes a chapter to an open and skeptical examination of hypnosis and suggestibility, describing its history, how it varies between people and circumstances, concluding that - in his opinion - it is probably a combination of various forms of compliance (wanting to follow the hypnotist's instructions, especially in front of an audience), and suggestibility. He says, "It is certainly possible to explain what happens in ordinary terms without recourse to a 'special state' ". He describes in detail how to hypnotise someone, but also says:

Personally, I have dispensed with formal hypnosis and come to use the communication techniques I feel lie behind its effectiveness. I use people's capacity for compliance and imaginative engagement to achieve certain aims when I perform.

He's always at pains to make clear that performances are entertainment, and anything he says or does during a performance should be taken as part of the entertainment.

ISTM it might be possible to get an exceptionally compliant and suggestible person to perform an assassination, but I doubt it would be possible if the required actions were explicitly homicidal. IOW, you might be able to fool persuade hypnotise someone into poisoning, e.g, a drink, in the belief they were playing a prank (e.g. making it bitter), or medicating. It might be possible to cause a homicidal assassination in the context of a performance, i.e. on stage, with an audience, where the hypnotee believes that it is all a staged illusion.

 

[Lucian]

^This. I think there was a time when "magicians" (for lack of a better word) were all more like Derren Brown, in the days of alchemy when people believed maybe you could turn lead into gold, or the days of witch trials or the height of voodoo, when people believed maybe you could cast spells to kill people or raise the dead.

It was all mysterious and scary and real, to the point that a "magician" could ingratiate himself into a powerful position because people thought he really did have awesome abilities.

Then it sort of devolved into sawing women in half or making someone disappear and reappear on stage, which nobody believed were real.

The genre of presenting "real" powers retreated to trivial things like bending spoons, contacting dead loved ones whose name might start with M or maybe R, or crystals that aligned something or other but sure couldn't raise the dead, like in the good old days.

Derren Brown takes the saw-a-woman-in-half kind of tricks, and presents them the same way as the people who claim their tricks are "real," like the spoon benders.

But he still makes the tricks big and flashy, like stage magic. So instead of audience members saying "omg! he bent a spoon," you have people saying "ZOMG!!!!11!!!!!!!!!!!! he made that person rob a bank," or "assassinate somebody," or whatever. Much bigger reaction.

It's what things were like back when people believed that a witch actually could turn someone into a newt.

Magic-as-entertainment has been around for a long time too, though. See the definitions of "tregetour" in the Middle English Dictionary. The first definition is "An entertainer, a sleight-of-hand artist, a juggler, an illusionist, etc.," though "sorcerer" and "charlatan" are also possible definitions, and sometimes it's difficult to know which meaning is intended.

 

[Luzz]

It is well known by now that Derren Brown uses actors and stooges, so I am not surprised about this stunt.
Aren´t we suppuse to be in a skeptic forum?? come on people.

 

[GrandMasterFox]

Still watching the show, only half way through and I already have a major headache. For example, at one point he said that he checks to see if you can train an assassin by telling people to toss acid in someone's face and a person faking it wouldn't do it because that would put people in danger.

Really? There are no real people who throw acid on other people? Not to mention we don't see him telling them it's really acid in the first place and over all... quite frankly... what sane person would think that Derren Brown a known celebrity with a camera crew will let them actually throw acid in someone's face?!? Even if I were there I would have automatically assume it's fake and participate.

He's always at pains to make clear that performances are entertainment, and anything he says or does during a performance should be taken as part of the entertainment.

Really? He says that on his shows? Hardly. He mostly does that in his books and such and his skeptical show he went after extremely the most common woos such as cold reading.

I said it in the other thread, DB seems to try and have it both ways.
By peddling to the woos when it suits him and peddling to the skeptics when it suits him.

To be quite honest I do find him to be incredibly iresponsible and the whole disclaimer of "it's just entertaiment" is not better than psychics who the same crap or the old "I'm just asking questions".

 

[GrandMasterFox]

It is well known by now that Derren Brown uses actors and stooges, so I am not surprised about this stunt.
Aren´t we suppuse to be in a skeptic forum?? come on people.

Skeptic means following the evidence. Do you have any to support he is using stooges? Cause I'm not aware of any.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the stuff he does is "real" (it's not), it's just that in most cases I'm aware of (haven't seen everything the guy did), there are other decent explanations that don't cover stooges as part of the schtick.

Although if he was ever caught as such, I'd be more than happy to know.

 

[dlorde]

Really? He says that on his shows? Hardly.

No, I meant when he talks about his performances. As I said, his position is that what he says during his shows is part of the entertainment.

To be quite honest I do find him to be incredibly iresponsible and the whole disclaimer of "it's just entertaiment" is not better than psychics who the same crap or the old "I'm just asking questions".

I dunno. It seems like a fine line to me - when is an illusionist being an entertainer by pretending to be psychic or to do magic, and when is he being 'irresponsible'. ISTM illusionists are in the deception game - the difference between them and frauds & scammers is that they admit it is fake.

 

[Lamuella]

People keep saying "it is well known" that he uses stooges. Apart from one link to another thread on this forum, can someone show some evidence of this claim?

 

[citizenzen]

... while he slept everything was put back as it was before he fired shots and they woke him back up he had no recollection of what he had done even when the showed the video back to him

This seems simply too far-fetched to me. Totally forgot weeks of their life? Or just forgot the shooting? Either seems pretty hard to believe.

This should be pretty easy to test. Hypnotize subjects, have hem to do something, then test their ability to recollect it.

 

[Luzz]

He was caught twice, one with the russian roulette show, the police had to issue a statement saying that it was fake, they would have never allowed it to take place.
The other one was the lottery game ticket, which he swore was real, but people noticed he was using TV trickery.
This is what I don´t like about Derren, he claims what he does is real, when in fact it is not.

 

[John Albert]

People keep saying "it is well known" that he uses stooges. Apart from one link to another thread on this forum, can someone show some evidence of this claim?

Maybe we should also be looking for evidence that John Edward is using cold reading techniques, instead of actually contacting the spirits of the dead?

He was caught twice, one with the russian roulette show, the police had to issue a statement saying that it was fake, they would have never allowed it to take place.
The other one was the lottery game ticket, which he swore was real, but people noticed he was using TV trickery.
This is what I don´t like about Derren, he claims what he does is real, when in fact it is not.

Using stooges is an age-old and very common practice among mentalists. There is abundant evidence of this.

On the other hand, being able to hypnotize somebody into doing something like committing murder outside their own control, causing them to have no recollection of several days of their lives? Do I even need to mention that is an extraordinary claim?

And what is that old saying about extraordinary claims?

 

[GrandMasterFox]

Just finished watched the show. What a load of crap... Sorry, but the entire thing is so pathetic it's not even funny. A guy supposably shoots into a crowed and people didn't scream and started running around or anything?
None of the people near him seemed to care anything what so ever and quite frankly, you don't even see the guy shooting and the rest of the theatre in the same shot!

I'm calling editing schtick here.

No, I meant when he talks about his performances. As I said, his position is that what he says during his shows is part of the entertainment.

But when does he talk about his performances? That's my point. He is knowingly talking BS when he knows the woos are listening and starts talking about it only when they are out of the earsight.

I dunno. It seems like a fine line to me - when is an illusionist being an entertainer by pretending to be psychic or to do magic, and when is he being 'irresponsible'. ISTM illusionists are in the deception game - the difference between them and frauds & scammers is that they admit it is fake.

Except he doesn't admit it's fake. Did he tell you at the end of the show "this is fake"? No he didn't. It's basically the same as if Sylvia Browne and John Edward would meet in a convention and tell each other they are fakes.

He was caught twice, one with the russian roulette show, the police had to issue a statement saying that it was fake, they would have never allowed it to take place.
The other one was the lottery game ticket, which he swore was real, but people noticed he was using TV trickery.
This is what I don´t like about Derren, he claims what he does is real, when in fact it is not.

When people talk about stooges, they refer to when the person used for the trick is part of the production.

If a psychic goes the usual cold reading crap he is not using stooges.
If a psychic goes and does a reading after investigating the person in front of him, he is not using stooges.

If the psychic brings an accomplice, pretends not to know him and gives him a reading of information the accomplice supplied, then he is using a stooge.

 

[GrandMasterFox]

Maybe we should also be looking for evidence that John Edward is using cold reading techniques, instead of actually contacting the spirits of the dead?

The opposite of "using a particular trick" is "not using that particular trick" not that "it's real". John Edward could be using cold reading, or hot reading or supply his own stooges and what not or a mixture of course.

Using stooges is an age-old and very common practice among mentalists. There is abundant evidence of this.

But is it one that Derren Brown uses? Not a single person here things Derren Brown really hypnotized the guy. The question is what did happen.
To claim the guy was a stooge, you need to supply any form of evidence that the guy was in on the whole thing or had any previous relations to Derren Brown or the production.

I personally thing trickery by camera tricks and editing to be a far more likely explanation and that the guy wasn't in the studio. Heck, I think the guy not realizing he shot fry is because he never did shoot fry and was probably never in the theatre at the same time.

 

[John Albert]

I personally thing trickery by camera tricks and editing to be a far more likely explanation and that the guy wasn't in the studio. Heck, I think the guy not realizing he shot fry is because he never did shoot fry and was probably never in the theatre at the same time.

Sure he might have done it that way, but using a stooge would have been simpler, more expedient, probably cheaper and far less trouble. In the past, Derren Brown has admitted to using trickery and deception, but has also insisted he does not to use stooges or TV editing tricks.

Despite what he says, he has of course been caught doing both (using the same audience plants in multiple performances, using actors, and using editing to alter the outcome of his performances). That's why I'm leaning toward stooges in this one.

Either way, he's a clever manipulator and a great performer and showman, and that's mostly what counts in his line of work.

 

[GrandMasterFox]

Sure he might have done it that way, but using a stooge would have been simpler, more expedient, probably cheaper and far less trouble.

Less trouble? Really? When the guy can easily spill the bean?
Any family member\friend of the person he talks to in a while can say something? When any single person in the production can easily sell the story out?

Sorry, not agreeing with you there. Using non stooges seems to me like the safest bet to go. Since I went to film school I can tell you that editing is so much easier than you think.

Either way, some magicians use stooges (I think though not sure that Chris Angel admitted to such) while others don't.

Either way, to a set a positive claim, burden of proof is on you.

In the past, Derren Brown has admitted to using trickery and deception, but has also insisted he does not to use stooges or TV editing tricks.

Sure and we know he lied about the latter because the lottery trick has been exposed with evidence that he is using tv editing tricks, for example.

Do you have evidence that he used stooges?

Despite what he says, he has of course been caught doing both (using the same audience plants in multiple performances, using actors, and using editing to alter the outcome of his performances). That's why I'm leaning toward stooges in this one.

I hope you don't think this as rude, but I would very much like to see any evidence of him using stooges. I heard that line about multiple actors but have never seen real evidence to support it.

Either way, he's a clever manipulator and a great performer and showman, and that's mostly what counts in his line of work.

Sure, as I said, nobody here thinks he really did what he claimed to do.
We're arguing over the "how" actually and specifically the claim that is made that it is known for a fact he is using stooges.

 

[Kuko 4000]

He was caught twice, one with the russian roulette show, the police had to issue a statement saying that it was fake, they would have never allowed it to take place.
The other one was the lottery game ticket, which he swore was real, but people noticed he was using TV trickery.
This is what I don´t like about Derren, he claims what he does is real, when in fact it is not.

That's not what we mean when talking about actors and stooges and plants.

I don't think Derren needs to explain that these are magic tricks

 

[Kuko 4000]

On the other hand, being able to hypnotize somebody into doing something like committing murder outside their own control, causing them to have no recollection of several days of their lives? Do I even need to mention that is an extraordinary claim?

And what is that old saying about extraordinary claims?

Everything we saw in that show is very much doable with the usual "play along" hypnotism and ordinary magic tricks.

 

[Kuko 4000]

Just finished watched the show. What a load of crap... Sorry, but the entire thing is so pathetic it's not even funny. A guy supposably shoots into a crowed and people didn't scream and started running around or anything?
None of the people near him seemed to care anything what so ever and quite frankly, you don't even see the guy shooting and the rest of the theatre in the same shot!

I'm calling editing schtick here.

You weren't paying attention, it was clearly said in the show that the people around the guy were in on the plan, they were named as being fire arm experts, and such, probably just normal actors for all I know. For obvious reasons, this is also not what we mean when we ask evidence for stooges, or plants, etc. (this last point not directed at you GMF).

The reaction of the audience was what turned me off a bit, entertainment-wise. Even Derren and his crew would probably not go as far as to actually have someone shooting blanks in a full theatre and faking Steve's blood, too risky, injuries from panic, etc. they could've just added gun sounds in post, or just faked the whole thing, of course there are many explanations.

 

[Senex]

Understanding suggestion is my hobby. Hypnosis falls under this . You can't hypnotize someone to kill another person. It's been studied. Derren Brown is good at making you ask questions and if you have the energy to follow up like I did when I wondered about Kreskin he can be beneficial to your understanding of the world, but if you accept his explanations you are left to believe in woo.