Derren Brown Trick or treat

[pjh]

I see your point about saying the line,I only watched it once and misunderstood.
The edit is nothing more than misdirection for TV audience(he states he uses misdirection on his shows,maybe not in the way you would expect but misdirection nonetheless),had he edited the base effect I would object.

Well my objections are twofold:

1 - Messiah was not billed as a show where the audience was expecting to be 'tricked'.
2 - even if it was (and the same applies to his normal magic shows) I can't agree with your purist approach to TV editing. Yes he achieves the base effect without resorting to edits (Ie tricks the punter on screen) but then (as in the taxidermist taxi ride and this scene from messiah) he resorts to editing tricks/dubbing to conceal his method and trick the audience as to how the effect was achieved.

This is (I believe) dishonest in a way not in keeping with the normal 'dishonesty' of TV magicians, and the TV editing is always done to one end - making it look like some psychological technique was used to pull off the trick.

 

[DJM]

Pjh, there's no indication that those lines were something that he added later on. He could have said that after he already realised that thing she was drawing, we never got to see her. So it could have been said live there. Even if it was added later, then it was to trick both of viewers at home and psychics themselves when they get to see the show.

Right before that scene with the psychics, you hear him saying that he deals with illusions and that the viewers should question what he does. That's a very fair thing for a magician to say before an effect starts.

There's no mention there about NLP.

 

[Bob Klase]

I'm not claiming he edited to pull off the (base) trick, I believe he replicated her drawing of the boat 'fairly' using one of a number of methods mentalists use to reproduce drawings

But you don't know exactly which method? How do you know he didn't use one of a number of methods mentalists use to know ahead of time what will be drawn? Surely you're familiar with some of them or you wouldn't be claiming that you know what he'd done without knowing which method.

If he could have pulled off what we saw in messiah without overdubbing himself 'predicting' what she would draw then the trick would indeed be impressive (as would the taxidermy advert tick), but he didn't - using camera tricks/editing like this is very poor form for a TV magician.

I agree that using camera tricks/editing can be very poor form for a TV magician. I also agree that it's very poor form to make a definitive claim that a camera trick was used when you really don't know how it was done. All you can say about the method is he used "one of a number of methods"- I'd bet there's a number of methods of doing similar things that you're not familiar with.

 

[pjh]

But you don't know exactly which method? How do you know he didn't use one of a number of methods mentalists use to know ahead of time what will be drawn? Surely you're familiar with some of them or you wouldn't be claiming that you know what he'd done without knowing which method.

Fine then if he knows what they're going to draw in advance then he should include his 'psychological patter' in the original video. He didn't - it was edited in later - also while your claim that methods exist where he could know in advance, I'm not sure any are compatible with the Messiah setup. Anyway what method he used is irrelevant, the way the trick is presented he didn't use a technique that allowed him know in advance (if so we could have seen him speak the famous 'overboard' comments on the video - he added them in the edit suite.

I agree that using camera tricks/editing can be very poor form for a TV magician. I also agree that it's very poor form to make a definitive claim that a camera trick was used when you really don't know how it was done. All you can say about the method is he used "one of a number of methods"- I'd bet there's a number of methods of doing similar things that you're not familiar with.

This is what's bizarre about these threads, eventually you'll hide behind the 'no exposing magic' rule - if you've seen this scene in Messiah - and Messiah is what it claims to be there isn't a method that would work here that would allow Derren to know in advance. If on the other hand the people being 'tricked' in Messiah are the TV audience rather than the people in the film then I agree - there are methods he could use to know in advance. Any number of Dual Reality routines for example could get a boat drawn for him.

But in this case all this is moot - he added his 'psychological force' in later - in the edit suite - this is dishonest - to see how far he will take his editing re-watch the famous trick where he brings some ad-men on a taxi ride through London - where again the 'psychological force' is a complete TV special effect/editing job.

 

[Azrael 5]

I believe the edit of "trick set up" is purely for audience watching on TV.Let's face it laypeople with procrastinate over how a trick is done,or suspect camera tricks.Its just a little smoke and mirrors,get over it.He gives the audience a knowing wink,something to latch onto.
As long as the trick itself is not achieved via edits I don't care frankly.
All Derren is doing is being dishonest about the method.Magicians do this all the time anyway,less boldly than Derren but still do it.
I don't see the problem.

 

[pjh]

I believe the edit of "trick set up" is purely for audience watching on TV.Let's face it laypeople with procrastinate over how a trick is done,or suspect camera tricks.Its just a little smoke and mirrors,get over it.He gives the audience a knowing wink,something to latch onto.
As long as the trick itself is not achieved via edits I don't care frankly.
All Derren is doing is being dishonest about the method.Magicians do this all the time anyway,less boldly than Derren but still do it.
I don't see the problem.

Maybe this is our fundamental difference of opinion, you see it as a knowing wink, yet the fact remains that a substantial proportion of Derren's viewers/fans genuinely believe they're viewing primarily a demonstration of psychological techniques (with a little bit of stage magic thrown in).

"I surveyed sixteen people leaving Derren's recent stage show. Eleven people believed that the entire show was based on psychology, as opposed to magic tricks. They had been deceived, because it was nearly all magic. When asked how they would feel if, say, the synchronising minds demonstration turned out to be a trivial trick rather than deep psychology, they all said that they would be annoyed."
http://www.simonsingh.net/Derren_Brown_Article.html

I know the response to this is some hand waving that Derren can't be responsible for what these dumb folks believe - after all there is that "knowing wink" - however I feel he is responsible - and the constant TV fakery used solely to reinforce this belief in his fans just convinces me more. What you see as a magician cleverly concealing his techniques I see as blatant manipulation of the audience to pretend he's not a magician (in the Paul Daniels sense).

As an aside A5 - I'm sure that your tune has changed on this - if I had the time I could go back and find our last arguments with you being one of the most vehement defenders of the fact that Derren wasn't using magic tricks - much of what we saw was genuine psychological manipulation? Is this correct or am I confusing you with another poster?

 

[Azrael 5]

Maybe this is our fundamental difference of opinion, you see it as a knowing wink, yet the fact remains that a substantial proportion of Derren's viewers/fans genuinely believe they're viewing primarily a demonstration of psychological techniques (with a little bit of stage magic thrown in).

"I surveyed sixteen people leaving Derren's recent stage show. Eleven people believed that the entire show was based on psychology, as opposed to magic tricks. They had been deceived, because it was nearly all magic. When asked how they would feel if, say, the synchronising minds demonstration turned out to be a trivial trick rather than deep psychology, they all said that they would be annoyed."
http://www.simonsingh.net/Derren_Brown_Article.html

I know the response to this is some hand waving that Derren can't be responsible for what these dumb folks believe - after all there is that "knowing wink" - however I feel he is responsible - and the constant TV fakery used solely to reinforce this belief in his fans just convinces me more. What you see as a magician cleverly concealing his techniques I see as blatant manipulation of the audience to pretend he's not a magician (in the Paul Daniels sense).

As an aside A5 - I'm sure that your tune has changed on this - if I had the time I could go back and find our last arguments with you being one of the most vehement defenders of the fact that Derren wasn't using magic tricks - much of what we saw was genuine psychological manipulation? Is this correct or am I confusing you with another poster?

The Simon Singh article relates to the fact Channel 4 were listing clips of Derrens shows under "science" on their website,plus it's a years old interview.Derren admitted a mistake and added the now standard disclaimer.
As you said if people want to believe crap that's their lookout.He clearly states he is a magician at the start of every programme.There are people who believe actors in a SOAP are real people,should such proogrammes carry disclaimers?
Some people are dumb,that's life.I see no harm in Derren's act.He clearly states he is lying to "us",people's gullibility(mainly teenage girls)isn't his fault.
I have always known him to be a magician so likely you have me confused with another poster.

 

[Big Les]

Well, he wouldn't be the first to have used editing to enhance a finished (televised) effect. This is TV we're talking about. Even documentaries are guilty of this level of deception. Considering Derren's shows are not only billed as entertainment, but also disclaimed to an extent that other magicians and the like on TV don't bother with, I find it hard to be more than mildly disappointed that he's apparently resorted to a bit of cheating. He keeps up some of the borderline woo stuff with his fake methods that he gives, sure, but no more than any of his forebears or contempories. And he actively debunks a lot of the older, already discredited woo stuff that's been associated with mentalism etc over the years. Which gives him extra brownie points in my book.

In other words, as TV magicians go, I still think he's one of the best, and by and large succeeds in treading the difficult line between woo and mentalism. The nature of the job requires deception, and he keeps it to a relative minimum by my estimation (witness the embarrassing antics of Jim Callahan and even the camera-trickery and woo-flirting methods of his arch adversary Criss Angel).

I'm reading Tricks of the Mind at the moment, it's really good.

 

[Azrael 5]

Say hello to Aunt Elicia.

 

[Nucular]

I'm reading Tricks of the Mind at the moment, it's really good.

Me too - can't help but think that if certain posters in this thread had read it and/or Pure Effect as well there'd be a lot less to disagree about, but hey ho.

 

[Azrael 5]

Nucular,see you may have gone and woken the sleeping troll....

 

[Nucular]

Yes, that's what comes of following a link to a thread and not checking to see whether it'd been a couple of weeks since the last post or not

Unless you meant 'wake the sleeping troll' as some sort of euphemism...

 

[Senex]

Derren Brown is a brilliant performer - no doubt - he is a wonderful entertainer. The problem I have with him is he is a victim of his own success. He explains some of his illusions with balloney concerning NLP. I remember myself as a thirteen year old person who was looking for direction. If I was 13 today every book about NLP at the local libraries would be in my bedroom. I would be reading BS because NLP is BS.

I have in my possession "Seven Deceptions" by Luke Jeremy. The affects are over the top brilliant. However, some of the patter he suggests are NLP and are BS. I believe that if you believe something will work it just might work, but it works like homeopathic medicine.

Isn't it more fun to be a believer?

 

[Nucular]

Brown tends not to mention NLP by name, though some of his patter is as you say informed by it. I don't see much wrong with this, since it amounts pretty much to a conceit as part of the effect, in much the same way as saying "you see, I'm using the power of my mind" during the trick that you introduced as being decidedly unpsychic.

Indeed, his discussion of NLP in Trick of the Mind is fairly down-to-earth and sceptical, whilst being more in-depth than "it's all stoopid" - so your 13 year old self (which sounds very similar to my 13 year old self) would probably stop his NLP consumption as soon as he read that chapter.

I'm less familiar with Jermay, but it sounds from what you said that his suggested patter is similar.

 

[DJM]

Derren Brown is a brilliant performer - no doubt - he is a wonderful entertainer. The problem I have with him is he is a victim of his own success. He explains some of his illusions with balloney concerning NLP. I remember myself as a thirteen year old person who was looking for direction. If I was 13 today every book about NLP at the local libraries would be in my bedroom. I would be reading BS because NLP is BS.

Of course that kind of NLP is BS. Derren admits that NLP is mostly BS in his books and inteviews. In fact he never said the word NLP even once during his shows.

That sort of psychogical mentalism is part of showmanship, just like the supernatural and mind reading is part of showmanship of other mentalists.

Once Derren mentions in his disclaimers that he combines NLP, start complaining then.

 

[Bob Klase]

Of course that kind of NLP is BS. Derren admits that NLP is mostly BS in his books and inteviews. In fact he never said the word NLP even once during his shows.

That sort of psychogical mentalism is part of showmanship, just like the supernatural and mind reading is part of showmanship of other mentalists.

Once Derren mentions in his disclaimers that he combines NLP, start complaining then.

Yes. Otherwise the next thing we'll be complaining about is a 13 years old thinking the magic wand really does something because the magician said that the handkerchief would vanish when he waved the magic wand.

 

[JonWhite]

I'm less familiar with Jermay, but it sounds from what you said that his suggested patter is similar.

I believe that Jermay was an occasional collaborator with DB in creating some of the "Tricks Of The Mind" shows effects.

Much as I like DB, I find Jermay's 7 Deceptions and the tie-in DVD Skullduggery somewhat underwhelming.

 

[Senex]

I love this website. I believe I have an obscure text only to find out I can't spell the guy's name right nor do I know there is a video tie-in.

OK, this I know. The Jermay text explains a very simple card trick that is all presentation, just one little slight. You sell the trick by confusing the spectator in the same manner that i saw Brown on a Youtube video. Brown acts like he can confuse people with hand gestures to forgetting where they are supposed to get off the train. I've watched other videos where he passes off paper as currency and losing track betting slips as winning slips. He states that if you speak with enough conviction and emphasize your words correctly you can make most people your slaves. That's not true. Brown states he uses a combination of psychology, suggestion and trickery. As far as I can tell he uses 100 percent trickery.

I usually would think this is fine -- but Brown is so good I believe some people believe his "explanations" of how his effects work. Again, if I was thirteen I would be chatting up girls with cryptic emphasis on certain words (NLP). I probably would have done better with the homeopathic effect than I did with the realistic effect.

 

[Bob Klase]

He states that if you speak with enough conviction and emphasize your words correctly you can make most people your slaves. That's not true. Brown states he uses a combination of psychology, suggestion and trickery. As far as I can tell he uses 100 percent trickery.

But making that statement is part of the trickery.

 

[Senex]

But making that statement is part of the trickery.

There's the rub. At this point in my life if I am fooled it is shame on me. However, I wasn't always the sophisticated man I am today. I went through a period in my early teens where I could have been convinced in NLP woo. Derren Brown would have been my hero in a different age.