[Listentome]

Originally Posted by zx50

Yep! He's a complete fake! The reactions are too 'acted'. I'd be gobsmacked if I saw anyone genuinely levitating a football. I wouldn't be surprised if people were paid to act all amazed when he 'performs' his illusions. He's as bad as David Blaine.

You say that as if there are magicians who are not fakes. Of course it's fake that's part of the performance. It's just entertainment, not a con. Nobody's being ripped off. People know its a trick when they tune in. The set up street audience is no different to stage magicians pulling a plant from the theatre audience. It's part of the whole thing.

Are you expecting there to be someone who does real magic? Harry Potter doesn't exist. ;-)

[DFI]

Originally Posted by Listentome

You say that as if there are magicians who are not fakes. Of course it's fake that's part of the performance. It's just entertainment, not a con. Nobody's being ripped off. People know its a trick when they tune in. The set up street audience is no different to stage magicians pulling a plant from the theatre audience. It's part of the whole thing.

Are you expecting there to be someone who does real magic? Harry Potter doesn't exist. ;-)

You're confusing two different things.

A good magic trick makes it look like you're doing something when you aren't

A cheap magic con makes it look like you're doing a magic trick when you aren't

[Listentome]

Originally Posted by DFI

You're confusing two different things.

A good magic trick makes it look like you're doing something when you aren't

A cheap magic con makes it look like you're doing a magic trick when you aren't

Fair enough. I accept my error and apologise to zx50. I just see the word 'con' get used in these threads and think 'seriously?' Either way they are both about fooling the audience. Even Paul Daniels used camera tricks on his TV show quite blatantly, the Halloween ghost projected onto what was apparently a glass 'filter' between the camera and Anne Robinson. Technology just changes the way the trick is achieved.

Best

[Lou Kelly]

Originally Posted by Jaymitch1

Well that's ridiculous. We would all know about it if that were the case

OK then he's actually levitating

Try thinking before calling people's posts "ridiculous".

[alfster]

Originally Posted by Listentome

Even Paul Daniels used camera tricks on his TV show quite blatantly, the Halloween ghost projected onto what was apparently a glass 'filter' between the camera and Anne Robinson. Technology just changes the way the trick is achieved.

Best

Oooooo, I think Daniels would happily sue you on sayign he used camera tricks..he didn't

The Halloween ghost is an illusion from the 1800's called called Pepper's Ghost and the effect was known about centuries before that.

It is something used in theatre/ghost train rides etc all the time.

And I'll post this again:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9s9smBP04Pc

[Listentome]

Originally Posted by alfster

Oooooo, I think Daniels would happily sue you on sayign he used camera tricks..he didn't

The Halloween ghost is an illusion from the 1800's called called Pepper's Ghost and the effect was known about centuries before that.

It is something used in theatre/ghost train rides etc all the time.

And I'll post this again:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9s9smBP04Pc

Fair enough, I am getting into trouble in this thread.

[jsmith99]

Originally Posted by Orangecrab

Criss Angel - Mindfreak. His shows have been shown occasionally on 4music channel.

Thanks; I watched a couple, and I can't say I was impressed.

Originally Posted by Listentome

.............. It's part of the whole performance of magic tricks that they hide how they did it..............

Of course it is, and absoluely no-one believes it's really magic. The merit of a performance lies in how well it's done. Showmanship, style, timing, entertainment, mystification - all are important. There are magicians performing card tricks which take your breath away, some fantastic close-up magic. And dynamo falls down on them all.

He can't even persuade people that he "bumps into" celebrities, when the credits at the end of the show list a "celebrity booker". And if there's one thing a celebrity believes in, it's "he who pays the piper....".

Originally Posted by Listentome

............. the Halloween ghost projected onto what was apparently a glass 'filter' between the camera and Anne Robinson. ............

If the 'ghost' uses a glass as a mirror, or just a mirror, then physics dictates it'll work best with the viewer in a particular position. The camera is placed at that position. This isn't a camera trick. Well, not in my opinion, anyway.

[zx50]

Originally Posted by Listentome

You say that as if there are magicians who are not fakes. Of course it's fake that's part of the performance. It's just entertainment, not a con. Nobody's being ripped off. People know its a trick when they tune in. The set up street audience is no different to stage magicians pulling a plant from the theatre audience. It's part of the whole thing.

Are you expecting there to be someone who does real magic? Harry Potter doesn't exist. ;-)

And you seriously think that there'll be no-one at home who'll think it's genuine? I'll bet there are some who'll think he's actually performing magic.

[Mr Teacake]

Video edited magic is pathetic, and to then hire astonished onlookers is even more pathetic.

[miss buzzybee]

http://youtu.be/qEc_jeGBVxs

answer in the comments

[Richardcoulter]

I've read somewhere that he is doing a 2013 calendar, different poses, whilst doing a trick for each month of the year.

If this is true, will any of you be buying it?

[Charles II]

..I've never understood why people post the word ''FAKE''

What part of the word ''Magician'' do people not understand?

[Richardcoulter]

I asked admin to merge all the Dynamo threads if they thought it was a good idea, but they musn't do.

[000Mark000]

Originally Posted by Richardcoulter

I asked admin to merge all the Dynamo threads if they thought it was a good idea, but they musn't do.

... and then posted the same thing in all three of them bringing them all back to the top of the board.

I don't suppose the idea of just using the most popular thread, or the most recent thread had crossed your mind then the other two might just fade away and disappear. It's not like there's been a huge discussion about his allegedly "fantastic" show.

And in answer to your other post...
No I won't be buying his calendar!

[Listentome]

Originally Posted by zx50

And you seriously think that there'll be no-one at home who'll think it's genuine? I'll bet there are some who'll think he's actually performing magic.

The sad thing is you are probably right.

[Sambda]

Originally Posted by Mr Teacake

Video edited magic is pathetic, and to then hire astonished onlookers is even more pathetic.

Yes, I think most people (from my experiences) think 3 things go beyond what they consider acceptable for a magician:

1) Editing
2) Camera tricks
3) Stooges

However, sadly, most of the big magicians (David Blaine, David Copperfield, Derren Brown etc.) have been caught using these.

I think the Magic Circle should outlaw those three things and discipline any magician caught using them. The art isn't going to be pushed forward if there are quick and easy methods to produce an illusion and, to be honest, with the above techniques you can make almost anything happen very easily.

[egghead1]

WHy does OP want to know? Just to find out the method? If so can we expect hundreds of how to threads? If not whats the point?

Here''s something to consider,when he levitated at Jesus Statue in Rio how many people were filming it on mobile phones etc? Yet on YouTube where is the amateur footgae of that levitation? Nowhere.

[egghead1]

Originally Posted by Sambda

Yes, I think most people (from my experiences) think 3 things go beyond what they consider acceptable for a magician:

1) Editing
2) Camera tricks
3) Stooges

However, sadly, most of the big magicians (David Blaine, David Copperfield, Derren Brown etc.) have been caught using these.

I think the Magic Circle should outlaw those three things and discipline any magician caught using them. The art isn't going to be pushed forward if there are quick and easy methods to produce an illusion and, to be honest, with the above techniques you can make almost anything happen very easily.

BIB has he? Care to enlighten us with proof.

[Sambda]

Originally Posted by egghead1

BIB has he? Care to enlighten us with proof.

Lottery Prediction - split screen effect.

[DFI]

Originally Posted by Charles II

..I've never understood why people post the word ''FAKE''

What part of the word ''Magician'' do people not understand?

What part of "fake magician" do you not understand? Pretending to do a magic trick when you aren't isn't magic.

[egghead1]

Originally Posted by Sambda

Lottery Prediction - split screen effect.

I said proof.I ve heard this theory for sure not seen any proof.

[Sambda]

Originally Posted by egghead1

I said proof.I ve heard this theory for sure not seen any proof.

You're obviously not going to get any positive proof.

It seems by far the most likely way to me (and most other people, looking at the huge number of posts, video, newspaper articles coming to, more or less, the same conclusions).

Brown is free to sue anybody claiming it, of course.

What are you proposing as an alternative method that seems as likely?

[Puddleduck]

[QUOTE

I went to see Eric Clapton last week and now I want someone to tell me how he played a chord of 'G', yet I have no interest in ever playing the guitar, so there is no need for me to know. I just sit back and enjoy the music.[/quote]


OK getting WAY off topic here, but you did? Where?

[egghead1]

Originally Posted by Sambda

You're obviously not going to get any positive proof.

Stop claiming your theory as proof then.

It seems by far the most likely way to me (and most other people, looking at the huge number of posts, video, newspaper articles coming to, more or less, the same conclusions).

It only takes one person to start the theory ball rolling for everyone to adopt same thing

Brown is free to sue anybody claiming it, of course.

You cannot sue someone for revealing the secret to a trick-genuine or not.

What are you proposing as an alternative method that seems as likely?

Im not interested in offering a method.

[Sambda]

Originally Posted by egghead1

Im not interested in offering a method.

Can't offer one equally as plausible or likely you mean.

Fail.