From a performance standpoint, I would argue that telekinesis is most powerful when very, very little is done with it. To use a cliche, less is more. For instance, with the M5 System, you can make borrowed coins somersault in the air and paper matches stand on end. I feel this is a flaw in the performance of the system. I think it's too much. Because the idea of moving something with your mind is so implausible for logical thinking, the possibility of it must be inherently very, very difficult. So in my opinion, instead of executing a full-blown animation of a self-folding bill, I think that making it flicker just subtly enough to make it believeable would hold much more impact.
Here is how I present a telekinesis stunt. I present three pens, all of which may be examined. I balance them on three different drinking glasses or goblets, and ask the spectator to think about which pen they want to see fall. Nothing is said out loud. I hold my hand out and ask the spectator to take my hand at the precise moment they want to see their mentally chosen pen fall off its glass. Silence. I'm staring at the pens and waiting for the spectator to take my hand. Extreme concentration on my face. When she does, two things happen. Her chosen pen falls to the table, and she feels a deliberate static shock when she touches me. I'm slightly incoherent and confused until I sip the water from the glass without a pen balanced on its rim.
I feel there's just enough drama to make the spectator believe in the capability but not too much to make it look like Hollywood. From my experience, finding out what feels legitimate is a very tricky balance to find.
RS.
