Derren Brown ?
Discussion
BrabusMog said:
The guy is a knob. I hope he fails, but he won't. Which will make him an even bigger knob. Knob!
Of course he will not fail.It's a prediction trick. That means there is no prediction.
Wether you are 'predicting' the lottery numbers, the winners of a race (like Chris Angel did) or any other thing you can predict.
There is no actual prediction.
It's a trick.
What will dictate whether it's a success or failure will be whether or not the viewers can see how he does it, given Derren Browns past performances and how good an illusionist / magician he is, in this area, he will succeed.
Edited by him_over_there on Wednesday 9th September 16:33
mouseymousey said:
I can only see 3 possibilities to this.
1 - He does it slightly behind live
2 - He writes down the numbers and puts them in an an envelope, then switches the numbers after the draw
3 - He fails miserably
I'll be watching with interest though
I would bet on a variant of 2. As you say, should be interesting though, he's a pretty good magician. 1 - He does it slightly behind live
2 - He writes down the numbers and puts them in an an envelope, then switches the numbers after the draw
3 - He fails miserably
I'll be watching with interest though
Actually, thinking about it, I'd go for 1 as it allows for a more impressive show. There's a ~90 second delay in pretty much all live broadcasts isn't there?
Edited by hairykrishna on Wednesday 9th September 17:11
hairykrishna said:
mouseymousey said:
I can only see 3 possibilities to this.
1 - He does it slightly behind live
2 - He writes down the numbers and puts them in an an envelope, then switches the numbers after the draw
3 - He fails miserably
I'll be watching with interest though
I would bet on a variant of 2. As you say, should be interesting though, he's a pretty good magician. 1 - He does it slightly behind live
2 - He writes down the numbers and puts them in an an envelope, then switches the numbers after the draw
3 - He fails miserably
I'll be watching with interest though
Actually, thinking about it, I'd go for 1 as it allows for a more impressive show. There's a ~90 second delay in pretty much all live broadcasts isn't there?
I much prefer seeing magicians doing the close up magic.
Edited by sstein on Wednesday 9th September 18:10
Republik said:
Did anyone see it? How did he do it? He kept mentioning that it'd been a year of his life up to that moment. He will reveal how he did it on Friday nights show.
Saw it, but on Sky + playback after recording E4+1, so not able to verify the 'Live' claims. Was it as 'live' as he claimed?It would have been much more impressive had we seen the numbers beforehand. That spiel about 'the BBC paying for the right to be the first to report the numbers', and not being able to show his prediction beforehand as a result was absolute twaddle for two reasons:
1. He was making a 'prediction'. I'm sure anyone could legally go on TV and 'predict' what the numbers would be wouldn't be breaking any rules, regardless of your supposed powers of 'magic'.
2. He's just made a song and dance about how 'live' his show is (no delays), therefore surely THAT is infringing the BBC's right to report the numbers, far more that any predicition beforehand.
Still don't know how he did it though....
Odie said:
I think i know how he did it. But we shall see on friday.
If its the way i think he did it, it just a bit of simple slight of hand and mis-direction. (his usual kinda thing)
The theory on the other thread is that it is a split screen, and that the LHS screen is frozen, has the numbers replaced, and then faded back in just before he reveals. If its the way i think he did it, it just a bit of simple slight of hand and mis-direction. (his usual kinda thing)
I'm thinking misdirection and camera tricks - the left hand side of the screen was showing a still image whilst he wrote the numbers down (this was so that you wouldn't see anything odd about the left hand side, as you were concentrating on him writing) whilst an assistant put the balls in the little rack.
I've never watched his programs before, but I watched that and also the "Gathering" one that was after it. Can't say I actually warmed to him as a performer, but he certainly is more engaging than that David Blayne character.
I've never watched his programs before, but I watched that and also the "Gathering" one that was after it. Can't say I actually warmed to him as a performer, but he certainly is more engaging than that David Blayne character.
Interesting. Probably just a split screen as the theorists on the other thread suggest. My first thought was gimmicked balls+stand but I don't think it's that anymore. It'll be something that's obvious in a wide shot - hence the pointing out of the other camera at the start! (in a pre recorded bit?)
maix27 said:
PhantomHumper said:
Piersman2 said:
The number on the badge. I couldn't be sure and did try and verify, but I noticed that he stuck the badge to the gramaphone at the end, meaning it was sticky or magnetic rather than pin on, which would obvioulsy make it easier to change over. So I tried to re-wind and read what was on the badge earlier in the evening. Unfortunately you never got a close up up the badge to verify the numbers before, they were always a but blurry, maybe on purpose.
He asked for people to write down the numbers before he 'collapsed' on stage and the curtains closed, then came back out and answered the 3 digit number trick hile wearing the badge.Surely he could of just got told what people wrote down while the curtains were closed?
How about this solution? They spend many many hours filming every single possible outcome of the lottery only to show the correct clip of the numbers shown. Which is why it took 1 year to do! Is this possible? ow many different combinations are there?
He has done this before, remember the coin trick where he flipped 10 heads in a row?
He has done this before, remember the coin trick where he flipped 10 heads in a row?
Republik said:
How about this solution? They spend many many hours filming every single possible outcome of the lottery only to show the correct clip of the numbers shown. Which is why it took 1 year to do! Is this possible? ow many different combinations are there?
He has done this before, remember the coin trick where he flipped 10 heads in a row?
If he's getting 5 right there'd need to film 55,491 different segments. That's not how he did it!He has done this before, remember the coin trick where he flipped 10 heads in a row?
Republik said:
How about this solution? They spend many many hours filming every single possible outcome of the lottery only to show the correct clip of the numbers shown. Which is why it took 1 year to do! Is this possible? ow many different combinations are there?
He has done this before, remember the coin trick where he flipped 10 heads in a row?
14 million different combinations?He has done this before, remember the coin trick where he flipped 10 heads in a row?
at 10 minutes per show.
140 million minutes.
= 583333 days
=1598 years.
I don't think thats how he did it.
Infact it would be far far more than that as he also got the numbers in the correct order - i have no idea what the probability of that is.
Edited by Dan_1981 on Thursday 10th September 11:05
Gassing Station | TV, Film, Video Streaming & Radio | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff