I think alot of people could say what Angel does is camera tricks, simply because there are so many cutaways. (Granted, there are plenty of really good effects done by Criss that don't cut away, either.) But that shouldn't be why you assume that he uses stooges always, etc.
There are plenty of things Criss has done that had cutaways that are very possible to do live, the cutaways are there for a couple of good reasons:
1)There is usually more than one camera there at the time, you can clearly see other cameras in the shots. Actually, that is good, because the illusions are seen from more than just one angle all the time, adding to the "impossible" factor.
2)It keeps the pace of the show moving, as the music-video style cuts are more popular, and "edgy". You may not think so, but subtely it does add a more edgy feel to the show. Keep in mind that when the more impossible illusions are done, the camera usually never cuts away.
Here are great examples: Coin in Soda can. Now, we all know it's possible, since that very effect is for sale, so we don't question it. But if it hadn't been released, I garauntee you there would be debates about that as well. I mean, just look at that performance on the show. There are many camera cutaways. But because it is in fact possible, it isn't questioned.
The garbage can. In the show, there are cutaways during that perfomance, so it could be easily cast aside as fakery, but on his tv special, he does that same effect without camera cutaways.
Now, am I biased towards one or the other? No, but I'm pointing out how a person could jump to conclusions when the need not to.
Now I know Criss uses stooges, I'm not blind, but so does David. Whoever was defending the Angel levitation footage in the bar, I'm sorry, but you sound VERY fanboy-ish. It's obvious stooges were used, at least for that side of the bar where the angles are bad. At least admit when the other guy is right, or else you'll sound like you are as blind as they are to your preferred magician.
Criss' other levitations and building walks/floats etc. Do look fishy at times, I admit that. Do I think he doesn't deserve the class of magician-hood? Of course not, he's still fantastic. Am I a fan boy for saying that? Why should I be? It's obvious to anyone who isn't biased one way or the other that both men are very good at what they do.
David Blaine is also fantastic. He got be back into magic, because his magic was more accessible, it looked more possible, it looked more real, to be frank. His card magic, and parlor-style effects really sparked my interest to an all-time high. I started into magic because I first saw Angel, but Angel does do things that are more 'out there', so that right there proves their styles are totally different.
This is how Blaine is different: He uses one camera usually, so already that gets him out of the clear of having claimes made aginst his illusions as camera tricks, and since this debate has been very Blaine-friendly, I won't bother pointing out his good points, as I am more trying to show how both men have their faults.
Examples: Self-levitation. We know Blaine used camera fakery with that, wether it required stooges or not, I'm not sure, since you only see one person's shoulder during the really high levitation footage.
Healed and Sealed. This trick only appears to be impromtu. So why is it that when he uses the beer can on the "random" couple having a picnic, they seem so suprised? Now, before you light into me about how David could have easily done this or that, I am aware, but I am simply doing what you have done toward Angel's effects as well. I am pointing out obvious oddities in the performance.
Does Criss use more "fakery" than David? I would say yes, he does. He does more fakery, because his "fakery" is more broad. He does fakery on stage, on the street, on tv, and so on.
By fake, I mean magic. I mean illusion. That's still what it comes down to. All magic is fake. I have yet to hear a good argument against that truth. It's unavoidable, that is the truth, nobody can dispute that.
Now please, don't start making claims that I am an Angel fanboy, I am not, I am trying to show both sides, here. If my post seemed biased, please point out in a calm fasion where it seemed that way, and I will try to clear it up.
All the best,