Contradicting effects.

[WitchDocIsIn]

The penultimate bgt semi-final just aired recently and a kid named Jasper Cherry did this performance:

Sorry, @MohanaMisra but I much prefer this performance, plus the card to pocket where he doesn't even touch him? That's fooled me hard, in which case does anyone know any teachings of this online as most card to spectators pocket require the opposite of pickpocketing (there is a word I just don't know it off the top of my head) - (unless it was pre set-up in that case I am severely disappointed).

In my eyes the whole performance was better, especially for someone at 14; the presentation especially at the phone call was clever, and the trick threw in some unexpected things for me while following a pattern, use of phone for one part, use that phone - use the card, back to phone, then a kicker ending that suited the effect imo. (I expected the video to show the card in his lanyard but not on the screen, plus the card to pocket which I already spoke about).

Just wanted to see whether you guys agree and for you guys to watch it as BGT performances don't always get that much recognition (and to find that card to pocket effect.)

Oof. That kid needs a director.

Couple points I notice -

1) *GT shows are extremely contrived. Always keep that in mind. The actual contract signed by the performers states that the producers can edit the footage in any way they see fit. Meaning they can make it look like things happened that never did - example: There was one guy on AGT who was a comedy magician, and he did just fine in the live performances. But the producers wanted him to not make it, so they edited the footage with a reaction from a completely different day/performance/performer to make it look like the guy bombed.

Always remember that of all the shows currently, *GT is the least authentic. There is absolutely nothing guaranteeing that what you see on screen even happened as they are showing it, let alone is there any guarantee that you're seeing even the majority of what happened. In other words - you have no idea if Jasper got near Ashley Banjo to place that card.

2) Personally, I think this performance is a mess of standard effects tacked together.

The first trick has nothing to do with the rest of the routine. He introduces a premise (we're all increasingly connected via technology) which he abandons as soon as the phone is in play. The part where he walks off to answer the phone is a stock phrase/response. I assume this is the most basic presentation of Cyber since it's what is described in the ad copy.

The instant deck is presented as shown in the demo and that scripting adds nothing to the presentation or premise.

The video reveal is overkill. At first I thought it was simply redundant because magicians always seem to think more is always better, but thinking about how it was done I realized he probably has the big video screen reveal as a backup in case the method for the lanyard reveal didn't 'hit' correctly. If my thinking there is correct, then the lanyard should have been dropped as it adds nothing.

The card to pocket reveal got the biggest reaction of all - which tells me he probably could have largely ditched the entire video reveal and gotten the same response in a much more clear and concise presentation. Anything that does not definitely add to the routine, subtracts from it and thus should be excised regardless of how much the performer likes it. Kill your darlings.

3) His scripting is all over the place. What is this demonstrating? Connection via technology, then the ability to produce matter at will, then time travel, then transportation of a card. All over the place, no consistent theme or message.

Side note - they never verified the selected card actually vanished from the deck.

Now, just so you don't think I'm just crapping all over this kid - He has a remarkably calm demeanor for someone so young. His voice isn't super strong, but he delivers the script confidently and without stuttering or filler words, so that's good. He understands (or was guided) the concept of staging and blocking as he makes a point of positioning himself on stage in the optimal places. He doesn't fidget too much (I think he did start to get nervous near the end, though) and has a pretty decent 'rest stance' when not directly interacting with his volunteers. I think with a good director and guidance this kid could really do well as a professional performer.

 

[Arconik]

To back up some things and ask some more questions as I am actually interested in getting started in stage magic:
Out of interest does a layman think the same way?

you have no idea if Jasper got near Ashley Banjo to place that card.

I was also thinking along the lines of corona-virus but I get your point.

He introduces a premise (we're all increasingly connected via technology) which he abandons as soon as the phone is in play

In my opinion a layman wouldn't fully care but the effect may be hurt by the lack of one focus points. Bones performance springs to mind (sorry to bombard with more videos)

In this the comments are most controversial, some say its an over-done effect while some compliment the story, either way he got through to the semi's while Jasper didn't, showing that Jaspers random assortment of effects wasn't needed (as you stated).

The instant deck is presented as shown in the demo and that scripting adds nothing to the presentation or premise.

I can't speak for the kid nor am I trying to disagree but I think this was more to present his level of sleight of hand (as to laymen they rarely expect a gimmick nor know the ease of the trick he actually performs, so making this feat extraordinary for a kid that can't have put more than 8 years into magic (if the youngest are starting around 6 but some are probably younger)).

Anything that does not definitely add to the routine, subtracts from it and thus should be excised regardless of how much the performer likes it

Do laymen think like this though? Some laymen must enjoy every hit so the more hits and 'wow' moments the better. (I don't know personally this is more an assumption)

3) His scripting is all over the place. What is this demonstrating? Connection via technology, then the ability to produce matter at will, then time travel, then transportation of a card. All over the place, no consistent theme or message.

Back to earlier point how much do laymen follow the script.

he makes a point of positioning himself on stage in the optimal places.

I believe the production team tell him where to stand for the shots as I saw a few bgts live, but still props for following it and remembering that as well as his set.

I mostly think this kid is trying to play to his age strength - past 16 meh - past 18 you might as well be a 50 year old magician who has spent 40 years in his craft.
So just jam in effect after effect that look sleight heavy (to try and present his skill) and try and hope they hit. In my opinion the learning curve at the start of magic is the largest from then it is a steady increase, I knew a few years ago when I started I was getting better day after day, nowadays I struggle to find free effects that I can use and learn (I'm so desperate I even dabbled in cardistry). So therefore this kid may not be as good as that 50 year old magician but he also isn't miles away, especially seeing as alot of his tricks used modern gimmicks (which he did not design himself).
For some reason if I'm watching dynamo or someone alike and I see them use an effect I saw on the market I'm disappointed and I'm not sure why - its almost like they are ripping off someone else's work, though that person has literally put in on the market (I'm confused at my own thinking) Moreover, for some reason I don't really like gimmicks (mostly probably to save money) so I may try save up and try out more of them (or try make them if I'm really adventurous).
Finally, I remembered this performance:

But I couldn't really fit it in anywhere, but this is a good performance (that I recommend everyone watching if they haven't), that shows how one basic effect can have such a impact.
(I do understand it didn't fool penn and teller, but it did fool the sherlocks in the comments which surprised me as surely its a simple invisible deck?)
Anyway I really like the performance and thought I better share it.
(Also as a 15 year old any advice on finding stage bookings (I know there are plenty threads on this but...) as I only really do barbeques but my name is known a bit more around town than a year ago - though I find it tricky getting my name in there as I feel a bit self-conscious whipping out a business card - I do end with a trick with my insta on the back of a playing card which they keep but that normally ends in a bin probably or at the back of a junk draw).
Also just because I know I'll regret it if I don't even try, any ideas on the amount of people that audition online for bgt and get through (some of you guys may know people who have got through as I at least want to try). It may be a long shot as most people they get are already well known online etc. and bgt get in contact with them rather than the reversal, plus I don't have a sad sob story but I might as well try audition, yeah?

 

[WitchDocIsIn]

Do laymen think like this though? Some laymen must enjoy every hit so the more hits and 'wow' moments the better. (I don't know personally this is more an assumption)

They don't necessarily use my wording to explain it, but audiences do have a greater appreciation for a presentation they can follow.

Same thing with any story-based performance (and magic is absolutely a story). When the plot is overly convoluted, the audience may appreciate each individual bit at the time, but ask them about the show a week or a month later and they go, "Oh yeah, it was good. He did that ... thing .. with the card? Remember it showed up in some dude's pocket?" And forget all the stuff that didn't stick out to them. In this case, "The stuff that didn't stick out" ends up being most of the routine.

A good routine will have people remembering what happened, and more importantly what they felt about what happened, for years to come.

That means it has to be simple, straight forward.

Which is why anything that doesn't actively add to the routine should be trimmed out. Cut it down, make it lean and mean. Silence is better than filler.

Also just because I know I'll regret it if I don't even try, any ideas on the amount of people that audition online for bgt and get through (some of you guys may know people who have got through as I at least want to try). It may be a long shot as most people they get are already well known online etc. and bgt get in contact with them rather than the reversal, plus I don't have a sad sob story but I might as well try audition, yeah?

I don't recommend anyone try out for *GT, personally. I don't think it's nearly as beneficial for most people as they'd like to think it will be. And that contract is an absolute monster. According to the guy I know who did AGT, it's literally a stack of paper over an inch thick of legalese. He had his lawyer look it over and the lawyer basically told him, "I would not advise you to sign that contract."

So here's what I think anyone that wants to audition for a *GT show should know/do (I'm just some guy on the internet, though, so feel free to take or leave my advice):

Have a plan first. I don't mean a plan for your audition - have a plan for exactly how you will leverage any publicity you get from the appearance. This plan should have significant parts for each step - meaning if you make it to an audition, if you get put onto the reel in the beginning of the show, if you pass one round, two rounds, etc. This is the true value of an appearance on these shows - if someone by chance wins the whole thing, they're locked into *GT's terms as far as where they can perform for a set period of time. It's actually better to make it decently far and then get eliminated so you can just use the publicity to leverage your own appearances.

Understand that you are 100% putting your public image in the hands of people who do -not- care if you succeed or not. The producers are not your friends, they are not your hype men. They will do whatever they want to make the show that generates the best ratings. That means if making you look like a fool will guarantee them a ratings boost, you will be made to look a fool.

If you're already well established, like the comedy magician I mentioned before, then you're fine. You can recover from that. But if you're a newbie performer with little to no reputation - then what people see on the show is your reputation and it's much harder to recover from that. Also, it will be on the internet forever. You will not be able to get it taken down, because you agreed to let them do that when you signed the contract.

Also - the audition process. There's two ways. Well, probably 3.
1) You get in the massive line(s) and hope you get accepted. If you do this, be aware that there's very little chance you'll make it on the show. They've probably already decided 80% of who's going to be on that season, and probably already know who's going to win. Another thing is that at least one of the lines of auditions are all auto-reject just to thin the numbers.

2) You get invited to audition. This is how my acquaintance got in. If this happens you still have to do the full audition process, you just skip the line. You start with bottom rung producers and work your way up to the people who actually call the shots.

3) If you're the right kind of big name and they really want you, they'll contact you to just put you on the show.

Another thing to keep in mind - you don't get paid by *GT to be on the show. Performers foot the bill for hotel and such while they are filming.

So, all that together is why I don't recommend anyone try for *GT. For most performers it won't help them at all. For some it could be actively detrimental to their careers as performers.

Fool Us is a much better show to try for. As far as performance goes, what you see on P&T FU is what actually happened. They do a little bit of editing, such as cutting down the amount of time P&T discuss their theories (it's closer to 5-10 minutes as they talk to each other and confer with producers through a headset), but basically what you see on TV is what happened. It also gives you nearly as much leverage as far as advertising materials and doesn't run the risk of them deciding to tank your career for funsies.

 

[Arconik]

They will do whatever they want to make the show that generates the best ratings. That means if making you look like a fool will guarantee them a ratings boost, you will be made to look a fool.

Would they do that to a teen tho? (They probably would but it won't be that beneficial)

Most of why I want to do it is for the experience rather than the publicity.

Fool Us is a much better show to try for.

The level of magic on the show is largely different to bgt though and tbh my most original effect is still a slight rip off of another effect just used differently with a different kicker and with big names like Chris Ramsey etc. Trying to get in I don't fancy my chances.

I'm still not fully sure if I want to pursue a career in magic, as I have heard far too many stories of people who left collage etc. to pursue magic and ended up not in a good way.

Imma have a think about it, not that it'll matter much due to the low chance. I may try and track some past young performers down on Instagram (depending on how much publicity they are getting already)

 

[WitchDocIsIn]

Would they do that to a teen tho? (They probably would but it won't be that beneficial)

Most of why I want to do it is for the experience rather than the publicity.

Yes, they would. If they thought they could get a gag out of it, or if they could spin in a way that gave them ratings, they absolutely would.

And *GT isn't a place to get experience. It's a place you go when you have experience. If you're not going to leverage the publicity, don't go. It will absolutely not be worth it and you will get exponentially better returns if you just focus on building a local reputation and client list.

I'm still not fully sure if I want to pursue a career in magic, as I have heard far too many stories of people who left collage etc. to pursue magic and ended up not in a good way.

Performance as a career is very difficult. People like to pretend it's all bohemian fun but in reality it's probably more of a grind when you're starting than most normal 9-5 jobs. Once you get established it can be much easier to 'coast' on the existing client list but it's still a very demanding career.

That is why I never recommend someone dive into it with both feet. Doing that will usually mean one's quality of life will suffer, and the quality of the performances will suffer.

We're going off on a tangent here so I'll just summarize my thoughts real quick - When someone drops everything to become a professional performer they have to take every gig that comes their way. So you see guys offering corporate shows, kid shows, parlour shows, stage shows, close up, walk around, busking, etc. Spreading yourself that thin means no one show will ever be all that good. A show gets good when it's done over and over. So the smart thing to do is to have a day job and save money. Any performance you do, just put that money straight into a savings account with an interest rate. Don't touch it. Once you have enough to survive comfortably for a year on savings alone - and you still have regular gigs coming in that provide a decent percentage of your yearly needs - that's when you consider switching over to professional performing. It's best if you also have no debt before going pro as a performer as well.

 

[RealityOne]

I think this performance is a mess of standard effects tacked together.

If you can't describe the effect in a single sentence without taking a breath... you've got a problem.

His scripting is all over the place.

It really seemed like he "tried" to make his magic more than say-do-see but the effect just doesn't relate to the theme. Honestly, his whole demeanor came across as the magician everyone thinks is annoying.... telling people what to do so that they can be amazing.

I give him credit for doing this, but as @WitchDocIsIn said, he needs a director.

Do laymen think like this though? Some laymen must enjoy every hit so the more hits and 'wow' moments the better. (I don't know personally this is more an assumption)

They really don't. I saw a magic show in Hawaii where the magician did ten large scale illusions in ten minutes. The audience was just overwhelmed and, somewhat confused. There wasn't enough focus given to them to make the effects seem magical.

The idea on those shows is that the more things you cram in, the better you must be. A real audience doesn't get that, they just get confused. At the end, the reaction is that the magician did a lot of stuff, but they can't remember much of it.

Back to earlier point how much do laymen follow the script.

I've had people come up to me after shows and ask me, "what was that line you said about....?" Most laymen don't follow the script of most magic because most magic doesn't have a script.

I was performing a bunch of card tricks for my in-laws a couple of weeks ago. Their favorite effect (among stuff by Bannon, Gustaferro, Ong and Walton)? Color Monte... yes, the $5.00 Emerson and West three-card packet trick with a script that just makes people laugh at the end.

A good routine will have people remembering what happened, and more importantly what they felt about what happened, for years to come.

Wrong. That is the definition of a great routine.

Also as a 15 year old any advice on finding stage bookings

Differentiate. Have a character that stands out. Don't imitate the videos you learn from. Don't wear a t-shirt, hoodie and jeans. Perform material that you get from books so that you don't look like every other kid learning magic.

Be Professional. Dress nicely. Have nice props. Be businesslike in your dealings with people. Have everything about you and your show exude quality.

Have a show. Select the effects, script them, rehearse them, perfect them. Perform the show for people you know and get feedback. Change the show based on criticism.

 

[WitchDocIsIn]

Oh! I've been meaning to talk about the peaks and valleys thing and kept getting distracted. This is more on subject -

The reason kicker endings tend to fall flat, or end up being confusing, is because humans can only react to so much within a given period of time. Two things are at play that need to be factored in.

1) Our minds can only react to so many things within a given period of time, before they simply get tired and overwhelmed. I think this might be part of ego depletion but really, all you have to know is that if there are too many peaks without time to recover, the peaks start blending into each other and having less and less impact.

An easy comparison is weight lifting. The most effective way to build strength is by doing sets with rest in between. Doing 5 sets of 5 reps at a high weight will build strength much faster than trying to crank out 25 reps of a moderate weight (in order to make it to that number of reps). Having rest days in the week allows the muscles to recover and build, rather than constantly hammering on those muscles by training every day as well.

2) Our minds are also extremely adaptable and will get used to things very quickly. This is sometimes called Spectacle Creep. What it means is that if the performer tries to just build and build the energy upwards, the audience will just expect bigger and bigger things. Juggling is a great example of this - Juggle three balls, and someone goes, "Can you do 4?" "Can you do 5?" "Can you juggle clubs?" "Can you do a flip while juggling?" etc.

If the routine or show doesn't have texture, the mind just kind of expects that upward burst every time, and gets used to it. So it gets numb to it. Having a variety of emotions is how you stop that from happening - funny, somber, serious, mysterious, etc. A variety of feelings will give a sort of rest moment and let the mind prepare for the next moment properly.

The long and short of this is that if you structure a show properly to allow time for reactions and recovery you end up doing far fewer routines in a show.

 

[WitchDocIsIn]

Be Professional. Dress nicely. Have nice props.

Instead of "dress nicely" I prefer to think of it as "dress stylishly".

It's not necessarily about wearing a suit and tie, but dressing to the audience/venue's expectations. I personally think a performer should just look stylish and a little odd to stand out. For example, I wear nice slacks, button up shirts, and a hade-made waistcoast from Ireland, with nice boots, and a slightly flashy belt buckle. But I also have tattoos on my arms/hands, piercings in my ears, a mohawk (braided back Viking style), and wear a couple rings/bracelets/necklace that have a primitive and/or occult feel to them. This suits my performance style and the venues I tend to work.

Be businesslike in your dealings with people. Have everything about you and your show exude quality.

Words of wisdom.

Everything I've managed to achieve in my performance career is largely due to following these guidelines.

Yes, the Show comes first and it has to be good. But that's just the beginning. The truth of the matter is that when one is performing for pay, the Business side of things will take up far more time and energy than the Show.

That includes the little things like building relationships with the bookers and clients. Making sure to show up early to venues and rub elbows with the service staff. Following up with clients/bookers after a gig. Periodically touching base with clients that haven't booked in a while. Updating marketing material periodically. That sort of stuff.