Derren Brown Trick or treat
- Thread starter oglommi
- Start date
-
- Tags
- derren brown
JonWhite
Muse
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2006
- Messages
- 691
As I've mentioned before, Chan Canasta took risks and usually got away with them, so Derren could also do so occasionally. Anyway, there would still be some possibility that the spectator would open a trick lock, so that course wouldn't have been risk-free either, just less risky. It's not that difficult to devise a suitable way of continuing if the spectator opens the lock.
I'll believe that DB did use a gimmicked lock, since you claim to have confirmation, but I suspect the gimmicked lock is not all that much better than a real Yale lock anyway. It remains unobvious why Derren didn't give proper opening instructions to the spectator when she finally opened the lock.
Since Steve Cook sells the trick lock, it's very much in his interest to say that Derren did use such a lock, even if he didn't! In fact, there's little reason why he shouldn't advertise them using a phrase such as "as seen on television"!
I'll believe that DB did use a gimmicked lock, since you claim to have confirmation, but I suspect the gimmicked lock is not all that much better than a real Yale lock anyway. It remains unobvious why Derren didn't give proper opening instructions to the spectator when she finally opened the lock.
Since Steve Cook sells the trick lock, it's very much in his interest to say that Derren did use such a lock, even if he didn't! In fact, there's little reason why he shouldn't advertise them using a phrase such as "as seen on television"!
Last edited:
Azrael 5
Philosopher
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2003
- Messages
- 6,106
Skipjack, how can you know there's a possibilty that the spectator could open a trick lock? Most props are 100% risk-free, and there's no reason this one won't be as well. That's the whole point of buying it in the first place, not to screw up.. Do you ever think before posting? 
Well, DJM, regardless of the principle employed, there is always the possibility that a suspicious spectator will tug on the lock's staple after the magician has unlocked the lock, but before "entering" the combination. Only an electronically controlled lock (which is hardly likely) would avoid that possibility.
Azrael 5
Philosopher
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2003
- Messages
- 6,106
There's always a possibilty the spectatot will grab the suspicious pack of cards/rope etc.Or say "that box is a bit big turn it round." But they don't and won't.
You're wrong skipjack live with it.
Since the spectator has had the lock for a long while, they may feel rather frustrated that they couldn't open it, and therefore be tempted to have one last try. They still have possession of the lock, so why not? The magician can't easily tell them not to, since that would give the game away. This is a quite different situation from being suspicious of a prop that they've merely seen, but which the magician is in charge of.
NeilC
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2005
- Messages
- 1,347
You mean apart from maybe an agreement not to do so? Or just old fashioned professional ethics given his trade?
DB can afford to get all manner of props built. Items that have been suggested in various blogs include: minature cameras hidden in torches, radio clipboards capable of sending drawings/words, pocket printers, banner printers in locked boxes, special black paper that can be made seen through, table with digital scales set into it and so on. Some might be true some might be speculation.
Quite why you are so set on proving he used a normal lock when you have no idea is beyond me. Afterall it doesn't matter. A trick lock would produce the effect and such things exist. If he used another method then more fool him.
I don't have proof. I am saying (a) that it's quite possible that he took the risk of using a real lock, and (b) that if he used a trick lock, he probably still took some risk of it being opened too soon.
If Steve Cook happens to know that Derren used a trick lock (and especially if he sold it to him) how is it ethical to reveal that, even to another magician?
Regarding the various blogs you refer to, I expect that much simpler alternative props have also been suggested than some of the almost bizarre ideas you mention. For example, why use an expensive camera hidden in a prop when an assistant nearby (or at a distance, but with binoculars) could do the job quite adequately? I gather that Derren has occasionally "failed" in the theatre, just not in a televised show.
If Steve Cook happens to know that Derren used a trick lock (and especially if he sold it to him) how is it ethical to reveal that, even to another magician?
Regarding the various blogs you refer to, I expect that much simpler alternative props have also been suggested than some of the almost bizarre ideas you mention. For example, why use an expensive camera hidden in a prop when an assistant nearby (or at a distance, but with binoculars) could do the job quite adequately? I gather that Derren has occasionally "failed" in the theatre, just not in a televised show.
It's risky in a different sense even if it doesn't fail, since short of use of a stooge, the only explanation most of the audience can think of would be use of a trick lock. Derren didn't even tell the spectator in which direction to turn the dial on the lock, making it very obvious that the dialling process was immaterial to the opening of the lock. How do you account for Derren missing that point?
JonWhite
Muse
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2006
- Messages
- 691
In mentalism, having the occasional "failure" is usually just as much part of the act. It serves to show the performer as an (occasionally) fallable human and highlights how miraculous all the other successes have been.
Even an unlikely but genuine failure can be turned to this effect. There's always an "out"...
Regarding DB and the lock, I'm sure that the gimmick is secure enough for that to be a non-issue. The audience is concentrating on all his supposed "embedded commands" anyway and not burning the lock itself once the gimmick released.
Last edited:
JonWhite
Muse
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2006
- Messages
- 691
About the only people who would think trick lock would be other magicians.
The audience doesn't deeply question the rest of the act in this way so why should they on this one aspect. There are other parts of the "Something Wicked.." show that are even more apparently questionable, but still sail past courtesy of his skills in wrapping them up within excellent presentation.
Azrael 5
Philosopher
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2003
- Messages
- 6,106
Of course,just like the audience think trick clipboard,or envelope switch or equivoque! Its so obvious,can't believe you figured it out.Every night after Derren's show punters are coming out saying "Oh did you see that center tear? And that cheeky envelope switch whilst he misdirected us"
Second point of your ludicrous post,he mimed turning the dial,and most people will turn it clockwise anyhow.Very likely the dialling process is irrelevant,so what? It's a tiny point in a two hour show that no-one is going to even remember.
Here's a shovel..dig yourself a bigger hole.
The lock effect was concluded towards the end of the show; I hardly think the audience was thinking much about it during the intervening performance; they didn't know what would happen. When the spectator was called up to the stage at the end, she was very soon asked for three numbers. There was little opportunity for "embedded commands". There were really very few even remotely plausible explanations.
Azrael 5' s comment regarding the direction of rotation misses my point. Anyone who's used a real lock of that type would know that the dial has to be rotated alternately anticlockwise and clockwise (or vice versa, but the first two numbers of the combination are then different). Few members of the live audience would know that, but the much larger TV audience would contain many people who do. Also, when dialling a real combination, one needs to stop at the 3rd occurrence of the first number, the second occurrence of the 2nd number, and the first occurrence of the third number. Derren's instructions omitted those details as well.
For anyone familiar with the real lock, therefore, the correct combination definitely wasn't entered, so any explanation must lie with the lock itself. For anyone unfamiliar with the real lock, the possibility of a stooge being used, or some amazing last minute suggestion process would perhaps be considered, but both were rather implausible. Hence, once again, the lock itself is the only thing left to suspect.
Azrael 5' s comment regarding the direction of rotation misses my point. Anyone who's used a real lock of that type would know that the dial has to be rotated alternately anticlockwise and clockwise (or vice versa, but the first two numbers of the combination are then different). Few members of the live audience would know that, but the much larger TV audience would contain many people who do. Also, when dialling a real combination, one needs to stop at the 3rd occurrence of the first number, the second occurrence of the 2nd number, and the first occurrence of the third number. Derren's instructions omitted those details as well.
For anyone familiar with the real lock, therefore, the correct combination definitely wasn't entered, so any explanation must lie with the lock itself. For anyone unfamiliar with the real lock, the possibility of a stooge being used, or some amazing last minute suggestion process would perhaps be considered, but both were rather implausible. Hence, once again, the lock itself is the only thing left to suspect.
Last edited:
Azrael 5
Philosopher
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2003
- Messages
- 6,106
I'm confused...
It was a gimmicked lock and it's use went right past every non magically inclined person I know.
What's being debated here now?
Ask skipjack.I don't even think he knows anymore.
I'm goping to find my copy of Something Wicked and put this part up on YouTube see how many people know the answer.
Indeed some audience members or TV watchers may well think "trick lock" just like many automatically assume mirrors/trap doors or that"its up his sleeve".Just because they have no idea how it works and clutch at straws.
Last edited:
JonWhite
Muse
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2006
- Messages
- 691
Was it "The Gathering" or "Something Wicked.."?
Now I'm really confused beyond the normal!
