View Cart | View Account | Help
Order by phone: 800-880-2592
Check out our favorite NEW ARRIVALS
Need it fast? Order before 4pm Eastern and your order ships SAME DAY.

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 87 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 22, 2008 9:49 pm 
Offline
born to perform.

Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Posts: 2610
Location: Canada
bucky310 wrote:
I must clarify. When I agreed with maloney's statement about blaine, copperfield, etc. I was under the impression that his tone was indicating he meant in the current age of magic. As you said, the last decade or so. Within the media, I believe they have helped. I believe maloney's statement was a little simplified. He should probably have put it, "with the foundation of magic started by the earliest performers; Angel, Copperfield, Burton, Blaine, Sigfried and Roy, etc. have put magic where it is today". That statement is a little more complete, but could also probably be argued.


THANK YOU! I did mean the current age of magic. Finally, someone understands what I mean, instead of just writing it off as "BS".


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 22, 2008 10:14 pm 
Offline
born to perform.

Joined: 11 Feb 2005
Posts: 565
Location: Orange County, California
well then state that. Bucky put it down into writing why can't you ? If you want us to understand what you mean then you have to explain yourself. We are on a forum. So many things can be miscommunicated. Hence why you must explain yourslef to the fullest extent. And to respond. I think that in the current age it may have helped a littl ebut it still has to do with th emarketing tactics of the performer and how uch publicty that performer gets. MAgicians being on tv may allow laymen to become more familiar wiht magic but i don't think it makes them want to rush off and go see a magician live. Maybe that magician on tv but not others.AS in maybe it is good publicity for the performer who is on the tv and maybe it gets people to want to see them live but not others.

Sean.McQuaid


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 22, 2008 10:25 pm 
User avatar
Offline
born to perform.

Joined: 27 Sep 2006
Posts: 3120
Location: Everywhere, but no where
bucky310 wrote:
I must clarify. When I agreed with maloney's statement about blaine, copperfield, etc. I was under the impression that his tone was indicating he meant in the current age of magic. As you said, the last decade or so. Within the media, I believe they have helped. I believe maloney's statement was a little simplified. He should probably have put it, "with the foundation of magic started by the earliest performers; Angel, Copperfield, Burton, Blaine, Sigfried and Roy, etc. have put magic where it is today". That statement is a little more complete, but could also probably be argued.


Angel has nothing to do with the "current state of magic" and frankly, neigther do most of the modern stars. Magic IS, and WAS and shall continue to be no matter who's it's current headliner.

Who could best be shouldered with the credit for magic's popularity over the last decade? The answer is Mac King. His series of TV specials featuring the greatest performers the art has to offer provided a huge boost in the art's popularity.

1: Mac King - A series of TV specials aimed at displaying magic's greatest performers for the world to see.

2: David Copperfield - He simply became a legend, the modern Merlin. Copperfield reminded audiences that magicians can make anything possible.

3: Sigfried and Roy - If only for the sake of the tiger attack of a few years ago, Sigfried and Roy have helped keep magic in the spotlight for over a decade.

4: Lance Burton - One of the real workers. Lance has performed in Vegas for years - PERSONALLY keeping magic in the public eye.

5: David Blaine - for the last few years David has been the face of magic - mysterious and a bit creepy. His specials reignited a shallowing public interest in magic.

6: Angel - Criss rode Blaine's coat tails into fame. While TLC was airing and re-airing Blaine's specials (and maintaining GREAT ratings) A&E picked up Mindfreak in an attempt to level the playing field. Mindfreak's ratings started high, dropped, and only recovered when TLC stopped airing the Blaine specials - Angel became the only game in town.

It's not that Angel has brought people to magic, it's actually the opposite; magic has brought audiences to Angel. Audiences want to see magic, and since Angel is the only one on TV right now - they'll accept his brand if they must.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 22, 2008 10:46 pm 
Offline
born to perform.

Joined: 11 Feb 2005
Posts: 565
Location: Orange County, California
dbaker_creator wrote:
bucky310 wrote:
I must clarify. When I agreed with maloney's statement about blaine, copperfield, etc. I was under the impression that his tone was indicating he meant in the current age of magic. As you said, the last decade or so. Within the media, I believe they have helped. I believe maloney's statement was a little simplified. He should probably have put it, "with the foundation of magic started by the earliest performers; Angel, Copperfield, Burton, Blaine, Sigfried and Roy, etc. have put magic where it is today". That statement is a little more complete, but could also probably be argued.


Angel has nothing to do with the "current state of magic" and frankly, neigther do most of the modern stars. Magic IS, and WAS and shall continue to be no matter who's it's current headliner.

Who could best be shouldered with the credit for magic's popularity over the last decade? The answer is Mac King. His series of TV specials featuring the greatest performers the art has to offer provided a huge boost in the art's popularity.

1: Mac King - A series of TV specials aimed at displaying magic's greatest performers for the world to see.

2: David Copperfield - He simply became a legend, the modern Merlin. Copperfield reminded audiences that magicians can make anything possible.

3: Sigfried and Roy - If only for the sake of the tiger attack of a few years ago, Sigfried and Roy have helped keep magic in the spotlight for over a decade.

4: Lance Burton - One of the real workers. Lance has performed in Vegas for years - PERSONALLY keeping magic in the public eye.

5: David Blaine - for the last few years David has been the face of magic - mysterious and a bit creepy. His specials reignited a shallowing public interest in magic.

6: Angel - Criss rode Blaine's coat tails into fame. While TLC was airing and re-airing Blaine's specials (and maintaining GREAT ratings) A&E picked up Mindfreak in an attempt to level the playing field. Mindfreak's ratings started high, dropped, and only recovered when TLC stopped airing the Blaine specials - Angel became the only game in town.

It's not that Angel has brought people to magic, it's actually the opposite; magic has brought audiences to Angel. Audiences want to see magic, and since Angel is the only one on TV right now - they'll accept his brand if they must.


The man makes a great point.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 22, 2008 10:49 pm 
User avatar
Offline
born to perform.

Joined: 26 Jun 2006
Posts: 1435
Magic didn't bring audiences to Angel...SparkArt did. :wink:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 22, 2008 10:55 pm 
User avatar
Offline
born to perform.

Joined: 18 Jun 2006
Posts: 1738
Location: The John Hughes movie fan club.
I fail to see your point. How can criss stir up magical interest if he constantly puts other magicians down. If I was a layman and knew nothing of magicians and saw a guy on TV who said he was the best and the king of magic, Why search for more. You have "The best" and he comes at the price of a TV channel. How is that helping? People don't go to shows that cost $100 a see a show that is "Not as good as angel" when you can see him for next to free or see his live show (someday), so cheap that it draws family's wanting to see the one they know of. criss puts better magicians on his show sometimes but they are often used as filler. Magicians help each other out. It is give and take, criss has only taken. He has stole effects took, credit for them, and implanted false images about what magic should be (salting the earth). He wants respect, then he needs to pull his own weight.


Juliegel


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:03 pm 
User avatar
Offline
born to perform.

Joined: 26 Jun 2006
Posts: 1435
juliegel wrote:
I fail to see your point. How can criss stir up magical interest if he constantly puts other magicians down. If I was a layman and knew nothing of magicians and saw a guy on TV who said he was the best and the king of magic, Why search for more. You have "The best" and he comes at the price of a TV channel. How is that helping? People don't go to shows that cost $100 a see a show that is "Not as good as angel" when you can see him for next to free or see his live show (someday), so cheap that it draws family's wanting to see the one they know of. criss puts better magicians on his show sometimes but they are often used as filler. Magicians help each other out. It is give and take, criss has only taken. He has stole effects took, credit for them, and implanted false images about what magic should be (salting the earth). He wants respect, then he needs to pull his own weight.

Juliegel



That is somewhat true. He got to the "top" by climbing over everyone else that had intentions of "helping" him out. Kind of reminds me of the story of the scorpion and the frog. He stings because it's what he does.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Aug 23, 2008 8:31 am 
Offline
born to perform.

Joined: 10 Dec 2005
Posts: 1394
Location: Newmarket, ON, Canada
see? I told you you guys could argue it. I shouldn't have said I agreed with him. As in my first post I didn't. What I really was doing was making sure he acknowledges the prior magicians to Angel. Anyways, I'm going to say I don't agree 100% with his opinion, I was just trying to correct his statement.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Aug 23, 2008 5:50 pm 
Offline
Penguin

Joined: 22 Dec 2007
Posts: 253
dbaker_creator wrote:
bucky310 wrote:
I must clarify. When I agreed with maloney's statement about blaine, copperfield, etc. I was under the impression that his tone was indicating he meant in the current age of magic. As you said, the last decade or so. Within the media, I believe they have helped. I believe maloney's statement was a little simplified. He should probably have put it, "with the foundation of magic started by the earliest performers; Angel, Copperfield, Burton, Blaine, Sigfried and Roy, etc. have put magic where it is today". That statement is a little more complete, but could also probably be argued.


Angel has nothing to do with the "current state of magic" and frankly, neigther do most of the modern stars. Magic IS, and WAS and shall continue to be no matter who's it's current headliner.

Who could best be shouldered with the credit for magic's popularity over the last decade? The answer is Mac King. His series of TV specials featuring the greatest performers the art has to offer provided a huge boost in the art's popularity.

1: Mac King - A series of TV specials aimed at displaying magic's greatest performers for the world to see.

2: David Copperfield - He simply became a legend, the modern Merlin. Copperfield reminded audiences that magicians can make anything possible.

3: Sigfried and Roy - If only for the sake of the tiger attack of a few years ago, Sigfried and Roy have helped keep magic in the spotlight for over a decade.

4: Lance Burton - One of the real workers. Lance has performed in Vegas for years - PERSONALLY keeping magic in the public eye.

5: David Blaine - for the last few years David has been the face of magic - mysterious and a bit creepy. His specials reignited a shallowing public interest in magic.

6: Angel - Criss rode Blaine's coat tails into fame. While TLC was airing and re-airing Blaine's specials (and maintaining GREAT ratings) A&E picked up Mindfreak in an attempt to level the playing field. Mindfreak's ratings started high, dropped, and only recovered when TLC stopped airing the Blaine specials - Angel became the only game in town.

It's not that Angel has brought people to magic, it's actually the opposite; magic has brought audiences to Angel. Audiences want to see magic, and since Angel is the only one on TV right now - they'll accept his brand if they must.


You start off by saying that none of these performers made magic what it is yet you then proceed to list everyone that made magic popular?

I hate Criss Angel as much as possible but I think your saying that Criss Angel isn't helping with magic is just wrong as wrong can be.

Most people have heard of him, even if they don't watch his show.

Anything that keeps magic as a topic of discussion is good, not bad like you claim. When a certain subject matter is "alive" people start to accept it and seek it out. That means more business for everyone. Everyone wins.

Don't act like magics secrets are really that secret. Anyone can find the answer to a trick if they look hard enough. And some higher intellect people can even solve the tricks themselves. But it doesn't matter because if someone is spending time trying to figure you out then you've done your job well, you stuck in their mind enough for them to continue even after you've left.

You couldn't be more wrong.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Aug 23, 2008 6:32 pm 
Offline
born to perform.

Joined: 10 Dec 2005
Posts: 1394
Location: Newmarket, ON, Canada
He actually starts off by discrediting Criss himself, then says "neither do most of the modern stars". It is the wording here that is key. From there he gives the examples of their fame. So no, he's not wrong, he's just being selective in his opinion, and has properly covered his bases.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Aug 24, 2008 4:12 pm 
User avatar
Offline
born to perform.

Joined: 27 Sep 2006
Posts: 3120
Location: Everywhere, but no where
bucky310 wrote:
He actually starts off by discrediting Criss himself, then says "neither do most of the modern stars". It is the wording here that is key. From there he gives the examples of their fame. So no, he's not wrong, he's just being selective in his opinion, and has properly covered his bases.


Well, at least Bucky got it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Aug 24, 2008 11:25 pm 
Offline
born to perform.

Joined: 18 May 2006
Posts: 1784
Angel is an insult to magic and is absolutely in NO WAY NOT helping magic.

My job as a demonstrator in a magic shop is made harder by Angel, which means LOTS of other demonstrators in magic shops have harder jobs thanks to him due to things such as camera tricks, insults to magicians, exposure of magic, stooges, etc.

ANY magic on television makes more people want to learn magic. Angel is not special there.

However....

Why do we need more people in magic? Seriously? Are there not enough magicians out there? I want the magicians out there to do well and keep creating, but I really don't think it matters if more people become magicians or not. Most magicians out there have families so the magic will stay in their families through their children and friends and stuff anyway, but its not like magic will die off if we don't get more people to become magicians. Thats just odd thinking that we need more magicians. I mean why would we need that?

Also what Angel brings to magic is not good, which is a bunch of celebrity/star obsessed teenagers, more people acting like magic is a bunch of puzzles that simply want to heckle magicians, and people that "think" they're magicians because they find as many illusions as possible that they can buy, which they then fail at and therefore resort to exposing on youtube.

Thats your idea of helping the art?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 25, 2008 12:08 am 
User avatar
Offline
Penguin

Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Posts: 147
Location: Far Far Away, coming back in November
Hmmm... I don't think it will be apreciated, or at least I'm pretty sure you won't agree. But here's a quote from Criss' book to this context:

"There are so few leaders in magic. Most magicians working today are followers. They're doing the same tricks that have been done for decades. (...)
Magic is a business of longevity, but given the number of magicians in the world, it's also an art that hasn't produced a lot of superstars over the years, especially compared to other areas in the world of entertainment. Think about this: How many magicians can you name off the top of your head?"
(Annotation, especially for the last sentence don't forget that it's adressed to laymen.) "The art of magic is precious. Magicians have never really garnered the kind of respect that actors or musicians get."


And here's a quote from Lance Burton, which I guess most of you love and respect:

"Magic has traditionally had throughout the years more of a family audience, where you have kids and adults and senior citizens, but you tend to lose the audience there when they get to be teenagers or in their twenties. Criss, because of the way he presents magic and his sensibility, has been able to tap into that market."


Don't get me into an argument, I'm only quoting. Criss obviously sees it as a good thing if magicians become superstars, and thinks it pushes the art of magic forward to a new level in the eye of the public.
And for Lance Burton, does anybody know how he stands to Criss today? Because since recently on the Loyal site there's a new video of him, and it's displayed as if he's still a good friend of Criss, while I think I've heard different statements here but I don't quite remember.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 25, 2008 12:30 am 
Offline
born to perform.

Joined: 18 May 2006
Posts: 1784
LoyalAnanya wrote:
Hmmm... I don't think it will be apreciated, or at least I'm pretty sure you won't agree. But here's a quote from Criss' book to this context:

"There are so few leaders in magic. Most magicians working today are followers. They're doing the same tricks that have been done for decades. (...)
Magic is a business of longevity, but given the number of magicians in the world, it's also an art that hasn't produced a lot of superstars over the years, especially compared to other areas in the world of entertainment. Think about this: How many magicians can you name off the top of your head?"
(Annotation, especially for the last sentence don't forget that it's adressed to laymen.) "The art of magic is precious. Magicians have never really garnered the kind of respect that actors or musicians get."


And here's a quote from Lance Burton, which I guess most of you love and respect:

"Magic has traditionally had throughout the years more of a family audience, where you have kids and adults and senior citizens, but you tend to lose the audience there when they get to be teenagers or in their twenties. Criss, because of the way he presents magic and his sensibility, has been able to tap into that market."


Don't get me into an argument, I'm only quoting. Criss obviously sees it as a good thing if magicians become superstars, and thinks it pushes the art of magic forward to a new level in the eye of the public.
And for Lance Burton, does anybody know how he stands to Criss today? Because since recently on the Loyal site there's a new video of him, and it's displayed as if he's still a good friend of Criss, while I think I've heard different statements here but I don't quite remember.


None of that relates to the points I brought up that this discussion is about.... but yes I do appreciate your discussion why else would I be on here lol? I'm here to discuss magic with people, including people that don't do that much magic that have different opinions than I do as a result.

And I'm sure Angel does want magic to get the same respect music and other arts get, most magicians do want that for magic. However, Angel is not the only magician that has appeal to teenagers and young adults, Blaine appeals to them just fine. Copperfield does in his live performance style but not his television performance style. I'm sure other magicians of the past appealed to those groups too. Its all about what kind of show you do, that is what determines who will like it. For example, Angel does not appeal to Christians that go to church a lot, and why? Because he has walked on water, so some of them probably dislike that a lot. However, Burton may still appeal to them just fine. Who likes your show just depends on what you're showing.

But anyway back on topic, this thread isn't about why we should respect Angel or something, its about the points I brought up about him.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 25, 2008 12:39 am 
User avatar
Offline
Penguin

Joined: 03 Nov 2007
Posts: 119
Ummm....I am a Christian who goes to church alot...(youth pastor) I do not have a problem with Criss walking on water. He admits all is illusion. Who cares? There is no insult here for me. But then again, I do not find Harry Potter dangerous either. Most grounded Christians who have a strong faith will feel the same way, and going to church alot makes you a christian as much a eating at mcDonalds makes you a hamburger. It is not a level or measure of anything.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 87 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2009 Penguin Magic, Inc.