It's Our Fault Criss Angel Is Famous

[William Draven]

The answer to Why they have a good marketing team isn't serendipity. These people have been working in the magic world for years paying their dues, making contacts, establishing them selves, etc before they appeared to make it big over night.

Very very few people become an instant sensation because they were just discovered. Criss used to perform as "Angel" a goth style rocker magician who ripped off the Crow's makeup pattern whole sale, and did magic tricks during his band's performances.

I don't know Blaine's story, but I'm sure he didn't just appear. The secret to show business isn't what you know. It's who you know. That's probably why networking is so damn important.

On top of filling an obvious niche, any largely successful performer also needs to have a "look" to them. If you blend in with the audience to the point of wearing jeans and T-shirts like every other guy out there you're not only not original, but you're not going to be worth the time it takes for an exec to look at you. Skill or not, if you don't look unique you're not getting the gig. There's a reason why I condemn Jeans and T-shirt style magicians so much. Get the heck out of Blaine's wardrobe and buy your own!

It's sad but true, I know more hobbyists and arm chair magicians who have more technical chops and raw talent than quite a number of big name pros, but they'll never get off their chair career wise because they either can't entertain to save their life, or don't present an interesting or unique look and character.

 

[Wallmott]

Great thread, this is a thing that i have been giving some thinking latley.

I think that the problem is that most magicians seems to be living in their own little world where the time seems to be standing still.

I think that i will get a lot of crap from what im going to write, but i dont care.

When i look at the magic community and some of whats considered to be the greatest magicians of our time i get depressed and you can easily see why there is no need for more famous magicians. Why? Because we are almost all the same!! There is no need for more.

We still read magic books on tricks and pressentation that is everything from a 100 to 50 years old and if you dont agree on what the old masters are saying, well then you suck and dont know what you are talking about! If you are being original and to far away from what the old masters are saying, well then you also suck! How can you do something different from what the old masters of magic are saying!

Please just think about how little has happened since the days of Dai Vernon in close up magic or for the last 50 years in general. Almost nothing, isnt that quit depressing?

What happened to being current?

Take a look on movies, tv, sitcoms, Stand up comedy, Video games, Music, Comics or whatever. Its always evolving and there are 100s of different genres and styles that makes in interesting while magic is almost the same.

Dont belive me? Just take a look at Lettermans close up magic week or just do a quick search of some of the greatest magicians we have.

 

[descartes]

The answer to Why they have a good marketing team isn't serendipity. These people have been working in the magic world for years paying their dues, making contacts, establishing them selves, etc before they appeared to make it big over night.

Very very few people become an instant sensation because they were just discovered. Criss used to perform as "Angel" a goth style rocker magician who ripped off the Crow's makeup pattern whole sale, and did magic tricks during his band's performances.

I don't know Blaine's story, but I'm sure he didn't just appear. The secret to show business isn't what you know. It's who you know. That's probably why networking is so damn important.

I would add one more thing. Timing. A good idea or a new sales pitch needs to be well timed. Blaine had the idea of turning the focus on the spectators reactions at the right time. This was when reality TV was getting popular in the late 90s and the MTV generation was used to having the focus turned around on them.

As for Criss, I think the whole goth style became popular only in the past decade, and so he happened to have the right idea at the right time.

Now imagine Copperfield starting out in the 70's and trying to perform in faded Jeans or in this goth outfit. He would have been laughed out of any performing venue.

Of course, one major problem with these kinds of fads is that when they go out of fashion, the magicians who associate with these fads will need to adapt. You can't be a hippie like Doug Henning these days and both Blaine and Angel's style might become passe in another 10 years.

 

[worldwideme]

Great thread, this is a thing that i have been giving some thinking latley.

I think that the problem is that most magicians seems to be living in their own little world where the time seems to be standing still.

I think that i will get a lot of crap from what im going to write, but i dont care.

When i look at the magic community and some of whats considered to be the greatest magicians of our time i get depressed and you can easily see why there is no need for more famous magicians. Why? Because we are almost all the same!! There is no need for more.

We still read magic books on tricks and pressentation that is everything from a 100 to 50 years old and if you dont agree on what the old masters are saying, well then you suck and dont know what you are talking about! If you are being original and to far away from what the old masters are saying, well then you also suck! How can you do something different from what the old masters of magic are saying!

Please just think about how little has happened since the days of Dai Vernon in close up magic or for the last 50 years in general. Almost nothing, isnt that quit depressing?

What happened to being current?

Take a look on movies, tv, sitcoms, Stand up comedy, Video games, Music, Comics or whatever. Its always evolving and there are 100s of different genres and styles that makes in interesting while magic is almost the same.

Dont belive me? Just take a look at Lettermans close up magic week or just do a quick search of some of the greatest magicians we have.

so you want pop culture magic?

 

[Wallmott]

No sorry i forgot. We magicians are so way above all other art forms. Film makers, musicians and people in the fashionindustry are working their asses of to be current, heck even the greatest music legends and directors do.

But we? Magicians? Nah we dont need that. We are happy where we are, that people think most magicians are lame and cheesy does not matter, what do they know anyways.

 

[descartes]

We still read magic books on tricks and pressentation that is everything from a 100 to 50 years old and if you dont agree on what the old masters are saying, well then you suck and dont know what you are talking about! If you are being original and to far away from what the old masters are saying, well then you also suck! How can you do something different from what the old masters of magic are saying!

I hope you are not suggesting that we simply discard the stuff in older books simply because it came more than 50 years ago. You will be surprised how often the recently released stuff is actually just regurgitated material from the old classics. My advice: don't throw away the lessons from the old masters, but don't blindly follow everything without thinking things through for yourself.

Please just think about how little has happened since the days of Dai Vernon in close up magic or for the last 50 years in general. Almost nothing, isnt that quit depressing?

I would disagree that there hasn't been anything new in magic in the last 50 years. The literature has expanded hugely in these years and that is indisputable.

Take a look on movies, tv, sitcoms, Stand up comedy, Video games, Music, Comics or whatever. Its always evolving and there are 100s of different genres and styles that makes in interesting while magic is almost the same.

Dont belive me? Just take a look at Lettermans close up magic week or just do a quick search of some of the greatest magicians we have.

The close up week on Letterman had a good mix of different types of close up, not all cards. I felt the magicians did a good job (especially John Carney). I don't think it reflected badly on magic at all.

 

[b_08]

Daniel Garcia talked about something very similar to this once. And he explained the answer, more or less.

The reason is because there is nothing new for a magician to do( that we know of)

Example: You go up to a company and they ask, "What can you do?" You tell them, "I perform close up magic on the streets." They say, "Oh well, we've got David Blaine to do that"

You go to another company, they ask, "What can you do?" You say, "I perform close up street magic BUT I ALSO perform BIG stage illusions on the street!" They say, "Oh well we got Criss Angel to do that."


So the question is, what else can we do if we got people that are already got everything covered.

That's an interesting take, James. But I don't know if that can be used as an excuse because that reasoning can be used for anything.

MySpace was dominant when Facebook came along. Circuit City was dominant when Best Buys came along. David Blaine was famous when Angel came along.

There is always room for those who have the drive, talent, and ability to make people want to watch. The million dollar question is; in a community that has talented magicians, why so few make it to the other side to represent us well?

 

[Wallmott]

I would disagree that there hasn't been anything new in magic in the last 50 years. The literature has expanded hugely in these years and that is indisputable.

And how much of that is known by the public? I dont think they read much of our litrature and as long as what they see almost looks the same i dont think it really matters.

Also another problem is that most magicians even some of the best are pretty crappy performers if you compare them with say a great actor, musician or whatever.

 

[b_08]

It's sad but true, I know more hobbyists and arm chair magicians who have more technical chops and raw talent than quite a number of big name pros, but they'll never get off their chair career wise because they either can't entertain to save their life, or don't present an interesting or unique look and character.

Exactly. Why are we as a community so fearful of those who connect with the general audience? It seems we automatically want to find the negatives instead of looking at WHY they were able to succeed where so many other raw talented magicians couldn't.

I think somewhere in that bad attitude in our culture is what is ultimately keeping our art from becoming respected as music or movies.

 

[b_08]

Great thread, this is a thing that i have been giving some thinking latley.

I think that the problem is that most magicians seems to be living in their own little world where the time seems to be standing still.

I think that i will get a lot of crap from what im going to write, but i dont care.

When i look at the magic community and some of whats considered to be the greatest magicians of our time i get depressed and you can easily see why there is no need for more famous magicians. Why? Because we are almost all the same!! There is no need for more.

We still read magic books on tricks and pressentation that is everything from a 100 to 50 years old and if you dont agree on what the old masters are saying, well then you suck and dont know what you are talking about! If you are being original and to far away from what the old masters are saying, well then you also suck! How can you do something different from what the old masters of magic are saying!

Please just think about how little has happened since the days of Dai Vernon in close up magic or for the last 50 years in general. Almost nothing, isnt that quit depressing?

What happened to being current?

Take a look on movies, tv, sitcoms, Stand up comedy, Video games, Music, Comics or whatever. Its always evolving and there are 100s of different genres and styles that makes in interesting while magic is almost the same.

Dont belive me? Just take a look at Lettermans close up magic week or just do a quick search of some of the greatest magicians we have.

I couldn't agree with you more, Wallmott. That's exactly the points I was trying to convey with my OP, but you said it more clear. Look guys, don't get me wrong....I highly respect the masters that came before us and I think their lessons should always be our foundation.

But like Wallmott said, in other generas of entertainment and sports, they pay their respects to the past greats but they continue to move on. That's why the NBA has had Magic, Bird, Jordan, Kobe, now Lebron and Wade. They move on, they create new things.

Guys like Wayne, Daniel Madison, Aaron Fisher and the like help move magic forward but it's SOOOO slow and considering how old our profession is...that's not very encouraging.

To put it bluntly....the Mask Magician did more for the public's awareness of magic than most magicians. How can that be? How did HE get a TV show whereas other magicians couldn't?

 

[b_08]

No sorry i forgot. We magicians are so way above all other art forms. Film makers, musicians and people in the fashionindustry are working their asses of to be current, heck even the greatest music legends and directors do.

But we? Magicians? Nah we dont need that. We are happy where we are, that people think most magicians are lame and cheesy does not matter, what do they know anyways.

Right. Why are we so afraid of being current?

 

[b_08]

The close up week on Letterman had a good mix of different types of close up, not all cards. I felt the magicians did a good job (especially John Carney). I don't think it reflected badly on magic at all.

Descartes, they might have done a good job and it didn't reflect badly on magic...but did it highly increase the public's perception of magic? Did they walk away thinking that magic was awesome, cool, relevent, current?

I didn't get the sense that the audience walked out of the studio talking about the magicians anymore than they would have if they brought out exotic animals.

But when Justin Timberlake or Beyonce performs, I'll bet you a $5 that on the way home people rave about it and tell their co-workers the next day what they saw.

 

[Wallmott]

Descartes, they might have done a good job and it didn't reflect badly on magic...but did it highly increase the public's perception of magic? Did they walk away thinking that magic was awesome, cool, relevent, current?

I didn't get the sense that the audience walked out of the studio talking about the magicians anymore than they would have if they brought out exotic animals.

But when Justin Timberlake or Beyonce performs, I'll bet you a $5 that on the way home people rave about it and tell their co-workers the next day what they saw.

Magicians have a hard time understanding that you have to be cool,relevant and current and at the very cutting edge if your going to be worth peoples time. For some reason magicians seems to be setle for average and be happy with it.

For 15 - 25 years ago a computer or a video game could be made in a few months by a small company with a team of only a few people with a relatively small budget. Now the same companys has a staff of 100s of people and are spending YEARS on the games they are making with gigantic budgets to make the game look better and more exciting then anything the costumer have every played before. Its moving forward all the time and keeps their audience excited. How excited would their audience be if they just stopped moving forward and setled for average? Why would they spent so much more money now then before if art does not have to move forward? Same thing with movies. People want to see new exciting things.

James Cameron could have made Avatat an ordinary action movie, but he made it the biggest ever because he really wanted to blow people away. If things like that did not matter, why would he do it?

I had a friend who was in the construction crew for the band U2s latest tour U2:360. U2 is the band that probably sells most tickets and the world right now and can easily fill an arena with 125.000 people every night of the tour. The tour costs millions of dollars EVERY DAY to keep on the road and the stage is the biggest and most revolutionary stage ever seen with the biggest sound system and video screen ever used in concert and takes days just to build in every city they come to. When the band were asked why they do such an expensive thing when they easily could have just go where ever they wanted and play they said, Why do it if you dont have anything new and exciting to show to people? If people are going to pay lots of money to see you, you really need to have something to deliver.

Well i could go on, every other art form keeps pushing it but magic is standing still.

 

[descartes]

And how much of that is known by the public? I dont think they read much of our litrature and as long as what they see almost looks the same i dont think it really matters.

The public don't need to know any of this. That is irrelevant to what you said. You said there was nothing new in magic. Maybe you want to say that the perception of magic in the eyes of the public has not changed (which is a completely different thing).

Also another problem is that most magicians even some of the best are pretty crappy performers if you compare them with say a great actor, musician or whatever.

This is unfortunately true, but how many laymen ever get to see a good magician in their lifetime? The same laymen are much more likely to see a good musician or actor. I guess unless laymen get a chance to see the performers who are really at the top in both entertainment value and artistic expression, magic will continue to get a bad rep.

 

[descartes]

Descartes, they might have done a good job and it didn't reflect badly on magic...but did it highly increase the public's perception of magic? Did they walk away thinking that magic was awesome, cool, relevent, current?

I didn't get the sense that the audience walked out of the studio talking about the magicians anymore than they would have if they brought out exotic animals.

But when Justin Timberlake or Beyonce performs, I'll bet you a $5 that on the way home people rave about it and tell their co-workers the next day what they saw.

I don't have a definite answer, but think about how the magicians made their entry in these shows. The magician enters when letterman announces their name. No one in the audience knows anything about these guys, there is no background, no introduction, no setting the stage. Letterman simply starts by saying "OK, magic boy!! Show me what you've got!!".

When someone like Justin Timberlake makes an appearance, it's not his first time in the spotlight. People already know the back story and his die hard fans have already made up their minds that they will like him irrespective of what he does in 10 minutes on the show.

It is always much harder to make a good first impression in 10 minutes than to built upon a public image that is carefully constructed over the past few years.

I guess magicians have to figure out how to get into the spotlight and stay there for an extended period of time before they get people to rave about them next day at the water cooler. Just my 2 cents.

 

[worldwideme]

so what do you want to become more current? the effects? or the magicians? you two just keep saying that magic needs to move forward. magic needs to be more current. that magic needs to move forward like other art forms.


WHAT IS IT THAT IS SO OLD?! what do you guys see that makes you think magicians are just sitting in the past?

i see michael ammar using an i-touch on national television.

i see guys like Mike Hankins releasing effects with an iphone for free for the magic community.

i see curveball by oz pearlman

i see ringtone by adam grace

but heres the problem. in 20 years. i touches are gonna be old news. iphones are gonna be long gone. heck ringtone is already practically outdated. effects like these dont last forever. but coin magic? last forever. that leaf trick that i cant remember the name of, will last forever. some effects are timeless. then there are utility devices like TKO and Tarantula. that can keep up with time. we can use those devices to do stuff to laptops when they only weigh .002 ounces in 30 years.

that and magic is always going to be one step behind. because. we cant create effects with technology until somebody else creates the technology.

 

[b_08]

This is unfortunately true, but how many laymen ever get to see a good magician in their lifetime? The same laymen are much more likely to see a good musician or actor. I guess unless laymen get a chance to see the performers who are really at the top in both entertainment value and artistic expression, magic will continue to get a bad rep.

Right..back to the very core of my OP. Why are there SO FEW great magicians in the public eye that the general laymen are exposed so rarely to them?

Why do they have their pick in musicians and actors...even sports stars, but in magic they get maybe two or three chances and that makes up the sum of the representation of the art of magic?

I think Wallmott's point (and Steerpike made the same point at the E forums) is dead on. We refuse to be current and relevent. We avoid "cool" and "cutting edge" like snowballs avoid fire. I don't get that.

 

[b_08]

so what do you want to become more current? the effects? or the magicians? you two just keep saying that magic needs to move forward. magic needs to be more current. that magic needs to move forward like other art forms.


WHAT IS IT THAT IS SO OLD?! what do you guys see that makes you think magicians are just sitting in the past?

i see michael ammar using an i-touch on national television.

i see guys like Mike Hankins releasing effects with an iphone for free for the magic community.

i see curveball by oz pearlman

i see ringtone by adam grace

but heres the problem. in 20 years. i touches are gonna be old news. iphones are gonna be long gone. heck ringtone is already practically outdated. effects like these dont last forever. but coin magic? last forever. that leaf trick that i cant remember the name of, will last forever. some effects are timeless. then there are utility devices like TKO and Tarantula. that can keep up with time. we can use those devices to do stuff to laptops when they only weigh .002 ounces in 30 years.

that and magic is always going to be one step behind. because. we cant create effects with technology until somebody else creates the technology.

To answer your question; I think it's the magician and the persona.

You've listed some current props but thats the problem with that type of thinking I believe; it's always about the slight or the prop. We don't focus on the performance, attitude, and persona. That's what is old.

The one thing that Copperfield constantly teaches me every time I rewatch his specials is how he can evoke common feelings in the general public. There was one illusion he did where the girl wrote down a phone number on a piece of paper and his assistant burned it. He then had her close her eyes and he wrote down each of her numbers and then he revealed it one at a time. The whole process was funny, sexy, and extremely entertaining.

The method is nothing. It's so simple a child could do it, but the entertainment factor was off the charts. That's what is missing in our culture, I believe. It was an old effect but HE made it current.

An Invisible Deck is old technology, but in the hands of the person with the right persona and presentation, the audience will think it's cool and relevent.


You asked, "what do you guys see that makes you think magicians are just sitting in the past?" That's easy...look at the position of magic in popular culture. We're a sideshow at best. Don't think about how you or the community thinks about magic...look at the cold hard results out in the real world.

 

[Randy]

derren brown is actually much better than criss angel.

They're two completely different performers and people.

Derren Brown is a Mentalist. Criss Angel is a Stage magician.

 

[Wallmott]

so what do you want to become more current? the effects? or the magicians? you two just keep saying that magic needs to move forward. magic needs to be more current. that magic needs to move forward like other art forms.


WHAT IS IT THAT IS SO OLD?! what do you guys see that makes you think magicians are just sitting in the past?

i see michael ammar using an i-touch on national television.

i see guys like Mike Hankins releasing effects with an iphone for free for the magic community.

i see curveball by oz pearlman

i see ringtone by adam grace

but heres the problem. in 20 years. i touches are gonna be old news. iphones are gonna be long gone. heck ringtone is already practically outdated. effects like these dont last forever. but coin magic? last forever. that leaf trick that i cant remember the name of, will last forever. some effects are timeless. then there are utility devices like TKO and Tarantula. that can keep up with time. we can use those devices to do stuff to laptops when they only weigh .002 ounces in 30 years.

that and magic is always going to be one step behind. because. we cant create effects with technology until somebody else creates the technology.

Im not talking about the tricks.

YOU have the be current, i just dont think that the kind of magician we see most of the time works anymore and i think a modern audience has problems connecting with them.