Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by darosa.justin, May 27, 2008.

  1. You're assuming every new person who "gets into" magic from watching Celebracadabra or seeing Ellusionist advertisements is going to have no respect for the art. I'll tell you how I got into magic...

    I collected cards. I knew that there were people out there that could do a few cool cards tricks, but I had no idea about all the great card magicians and street performers. One day I was in my local Books-A-Million and saw a deck of Black Tiger cards. "What an awesome addition to my collection" was what was running through my mind.

    After I opened the cards, I noticed on the bottom of the box it said "For more Black Tiger gear visit" Interesting. More cool cards. When I first went to the site my only intent was to see what other sweet-looking cards I could add to my collection. It was about a month later when I purchased Crash Course 1. I knew even before I ordered the DVD that I would have to practice to pull off the stuff that was going beyond the "Uncle Jim" card tricks that I had seen people do.

    Am I a bad magician because my first learning source was Ellusionist? In my eyes, no. Did I get into magic because I wanted to be the next Criss Angel? No. I can't even really explain what drew me into it, it just kind of happened. I know that there are magicians who are better than me. I know that a ton of them are out there. That doesn't bother me. As long as I can be sure that I have respect for magic, that's really all that matters to me.

    I don't think it's correct to assume that anybody who starts to practice magic by discovering it through a commercial isn't going to respect the art. How did all of us get into magic? I think it would be safe to say in this day and age that it was an advertisement of some kind that brought us to a magic website. This might not be the case for everybody, but I think it is for the majority.
  2. *sigh* Looks like another thread that's about to be closed.

  3. I'm not trying to get into a fight here if it looks like it, but I don't really agree with what you said. If I don't go to the Magic Castle am I not a magician?
  4. Wow, this has been the most epic thread to date. I dont see why we cant all forget about this and just move on. Start a fresh eh?.

    I vote for this thread to be close, as it isnt getting any where.

    Cheers, Tom
  5. Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

    Then how do you account for the fact that Dai Vernon was fooled by his own students using his own methods at one point?

    A strong presentation makes all the difference.

    I get it. I just don't believe the argument.

    I don't go to the theater if I don't want to pay to see the movie.

    My retort was meant to illustrate that no one is twisting my arm to buy stuff I don't want.

    I know I speak only for myself, but I never throw a method out. If it doesn't seem practical, I put it on the backburner to work on it for later.

    A lot of people complained that the Skywalker levitation was a waste of money because it wasn't practical for walk-around. I shrugged, bought it anyway, and am now incorporating it into a parlor show. I took it as a personal challenge.

    I'm just pointing out the irony of marking me the villain and then acting even worse than me.

    No. I have several friends here whose company I value more than your comfort.

    Peace, and all that jazz.
  6. Whatever Steerpike. I think it's obvious that a lot of people here don't enjoy your company (i.e. the major amounts of hate mail you have received). That would clear up a lot of the problems and these long pointless threads about peoples opinions.

  7. Or, you know, all the E-haters could start listening to the other side of Theory 11's goal. Unity in magic. But then they'd be acting mature. Sorry to tell you guys but a lot of you have a grudge against E that gets in the way of rational thinking. I can see where you guys are coming from, and I fully accept that maybe my opinion is slightly biased, but not by much. And I find Steerpike is more level-headed and presents better arguments then nearly everyone else who posts in these "argument threads".

    My suggestion? Stop making the damn things. Practice your magic. If you want to complain about E, go start a forum dedicated to that. Don't post it here. Everyone is tired of it.
  8. Acting mature?

    God! Please no! Anything but that!
  9. That's a first.

    Quickly, before my rampaging ego tries to stampede through what's left of the thread, let me just say it's good to see another face around here who appreciates the goals the founders of the site aspire to.
  10. Have all but a few completely ignored this...

    Treat others within the forum respectfully, courteously, and professionally. Criticism should be kept constructive at all times. Do it, to it.

    Magic is a product, simply one with more of a history and need for respect than an ab-thingy.

    Again in this whole thread, most people ignore the fact that once 'sucked into E's dark world' by it's vicious and obscene advertising, the newbie is confronted with practice, practice, practice.

    Some people need to go back and re-watch the DVD's they 'once bought' and re-discover the above.

    So in answer to your original post, I think there's nothing wrong with how it's being advertised at the moment, to me it's all fine. I'm continually coming across new things and new paths specifically because someone is advertising it. I will continue to set aside worrying over whether magic is dying or being ruined by advertising and continue to practice the thing I love and find out as much about its history as I can. And I will continue to frequent both E and here (along with any other forum i choose) to further my knowledge and my acquisition of the magic I desire to have.

  11. #71 darosa.justin, May 28, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: May 28, 2008
    Honestly...can you not read my initial question?

    I never asked for anyone to comment of their company at all.

    How about I clarify my question further: What would be the 'ideal' way to advertise magic products (mainly tricks)?

    About 80% of the people who have responded this thread have commented on Ellusionist's money-making schemes, hate for Ellusionist, etc. Then we people criticizing anything someone else says, and others who sensibly backs them up.

    I never intended for this to be another one of those threads with E-bashing, and I'm sorry if it was inevitable.
    I just want a discussion about "What would be the 'ideal' way to advertise magic products (mainly tricks)?"

    Thank you, and again sorry.
    (P.S. I love you Tyler)
  12. Is that commercial on tv in america? it was really bad and i didnt like it at all.
  13. I did answer your initial post.
    + I answered the point raised in your post that I quoted.

    I also responded to your post:

    "What would be the 'ideal' way to advertise magic products (mainly tricks)?"

    before you amended it, but for some reason my reply of "What do you think is the ideal way?" has been deleted...which is odd.

  14. Thank you.

    My post wasn't aimed directly at you- no need to be so self-consious :p
  15. Not self-conscious mate. The last time I was self-conscious was 1984.

    So then, what about that question?

    What do you think is the ideal way to advertise magic products?

  16. I beleive the ideal way magic products should be advertised are the ways most magic companies do now- previews.

    The content of the preview should bascially have very brief history of the effect, a whole performance of the trick, some testimonials, and that's basically it.

    Adding that 90-day money back guarantee, bonus dvds, discounts etc, which was done by Ellusionist, in my opinino is not good. It simply devalues the secrets in the dvds.
  17. I think the 'ideal' way to present a trick in a trailer/article/or by word of mouth. Would be to not blow the trick out of proportion. I know the objective of magic companies is to make money, but they should have a respect for magic and magicians.


    Trailers should show several things and give some information. Things it should show:

    - The name of the creator of the trick
    - An actual live performance either for the camera or people
    - Some background information on the origins of the trick
    - Whether it involves gimmicks, is impromptu, etc
    - Distributor of the effect


    Articles should show several things and give some information as well. The things it should say are:

    - The name of the creator of the trick
    - Actual comments or responses from spectators
    - Some background information on the origins of the trick
    - Whether it involves gimmicks, is impromptu, etc
    - Distributor of the effect
    - A good reliable/truthful review

    I know there are reviews for tricks to inform people, but some are misleading. Such as I saw a review for "The Ultimate Card Through Window", a trick that is completely impractical, that praised it saying it was one of the best tricks that the person owned. Those of you who bought it will know what I mean when I say it's unusable, even with amazing presentation.

    That is the way a trick should be presented in an advertisement. Phrases such as: "You will get explosive audience reactions", "It's a miracle in your hands", "You can perform it flawlessly in two minutes", "It will make you an amazing street magician", etc. Should be omitted.

    If magic companies did that, I would truly be impressed. Theory11 is very close to presenting tricks in this manner, but not perfectly. Dan & Dave are good at presenting things truthfully as well. Anyway, I've splurged with my thoughts on this matter, so I should stop now. Peace!

    (p.s. I love you too darosa.justin, I think, lol)
  18. Some of you are no doubt unhappy to see me again, but there are a couple questions on my mind that I think are perfectly reasonable to ask.

    Here's something we need to inject a little nuance into.

    First is the issue of the full performance. The simple truth is that some methods are ballsy and they're particularly ill-suited to a recorded performance because the camera picks up everything. What do you do about that?

    Second, the background information is something I would expect to learn in the actual source material. Let me give a quick illustration. In the trailer for Silver Dream, it's pretty concise. A few graphics, some title cards, and a performance video of Justin being Justin. That'll do for me.

    There's plenty of time on the DVD to go into the origins of Silver Dream. Why take up more time showing it all in the trailer? Isn't that just a little superfluous?

    Ah, therein lies the rub. Who writes the reviews? Do we go by name recognition? Preferred venue? Or is it a committee handpicked by the distributor(s)?

    A bizarrist is going to have a different perspective on, for example, Distortion than a children's magician or a corporate entertainer would. Isn't it up to the buyer himself to decide? And are not reviews individually meant to be taken with a grain of salt?
  19. Steerpike - Is there a need to criticize EVERYTHING people say?

    Now, for the actual discussion.

    I agree with pretty much everything you said Tyler, and you basically spilled out everything I wanted to say.

    Do you think length of previews should be thought about so much? i.e. should a company spend the time giving information in the preview that some people may not really care about, such as the history of the effect? Should previews be kept short and sweet, or detailed?
  20. I'm just asking a few questions. No need to get so paranoid and hostile about it.

Share This Page

{[{ searchResultsCount }]} Results