Oi! Derren Brown! NO!
Discussion
Derren Browns flavour of woo is peppered with just enough plausible sounding pseudo-science that people could believe he does what he does through pyschology, body language etc. In some ways he's worse than Geller, Poppov etc because his schtik (sp?) is far less absurd than theirs. Yet at the end of the day he is still spreading misinformation.
When Penn and Teller catch a bullet or Copperfield cuts a woman in half they know that we know it's a trick and they don't try to persuade us it isn't just a trick.
With Derren Brown, you're not so sure if the audience do actually believe it's a trick and I think he's happy with that.
When Penn and Teller catch a bullet or Copperfield cuts a woman in half they know that we know it's a trick and they don't try to persuade us it isn't just a trick.
With Derren Brown, you're not so sure if the audience do actually believe it's a trick and I think he's happy with that.
Melvin Udall said:
Surely that is just another form of misdirection?
I think it goes beyond misdirection.Would Derren Brown sell so many tickets to his live shows if people were sure what he was doing was conventional magic, and that the pseudo-psychology stuff was just for show ?
I'm not sure.
LandR said:
I think it goes beyond misdirection.
Would Derren Brown sell so many tickets to his live shows if people were sure what he was doing was conventional magic, and that the pseudo-psychology stuff was just for show ?
I'm not sure.
I've been to one of his shows. He says it is illusion, sleight of hand, etc. it IS just a magic show, just like all others. He IS an illusionist. Would Derren Brown sell so many tickets to his live shows if people were sure what he was doing was conventional magic, and that the pseudo-psychology stuff was just for show ?
I'm not sure.
Melvin Udall said:
I've been to one of his shows. He says it is illusion, sleight of hand, etc. it IS just a magic show, just like all others. He IS an illusionist.
Quite. He is clear on that matter.I don't believe the evidence points to him using stooges though, as some above suggest. Is that the only magic aspect he doesn't use?
But he's not clear on the matter. He doesn't say he uses camera tricks, yet the evidence is irrefutable. The evidence for stooges, or at least people willing to 'go along with it', is admittedly not so clear cut but I'd bet a great deal of my own money for this being so. There's no way that the people he used on his past two shows were unaware of what was going on, to some greater or lesser degree, and IMO it's unlikely to the point of absurdity to say otherwise.
So now, when you see Derren Brown pick an audience member and perform an illusion, how do we know the audience member is genuine? Indeed, many of his 'illusions' point to them not being so. Either that or being in on some prespecified script. He once picked out a member of the audience and told them straight out what they'd been dreaming of the night before. Now there are two choices there, that they told him, or he is psychic. There's no such thing as a psychic so they told him. It's not even a case of me not knowing how it's done and grasping at straws, it's a case of there only being these two explanations. Things like that I can overlook if the bulk of his stuff is kosher, so to speak, but there's no evidence that it is any more geniune than his split-screen camera trick. I have my doubts whether he uses any psychology, body language or hypnotism techniques whatsoever. Certainly he doesn't use them in the way he makes out, and without those techniques he loses everything that makes him stand out above the thousands of other showmen and stage conjurers.
So now, when you see Derren Brown pick an audience member and perform an illusion, how do we know the audience member is genuine? Indeed, many of his 'illusions' point to them not being so. Either that or being in on some prespecified script. He once picked out a member of the audience and told them straight out what they'd been dreaming of the night before. Now there are two choices there, that they told him, or he is psychic. There's no such thing as a psychic so they told him. It's not even a case of me not knowing how it's done and grasping at straws, it's a case of there only being these two explanations. Things like that I can overlook if the bulk of his stuff is kosher, so to speak, but there's no evidence that it is any more geniune than his split-screen camera trick. I have my doubts whether he uses any psychology, body language or hypnotism techniques whatsoever. Certainly he doesn't use them in the way he makes out, and without those techniques he loses everything that makes him stand out above the thousands of other showmen and stage conjurers.
carmonk said:
But he's not clear on the matter. He doesn't say he uses camera tricks, yet the evidence is irrefutable. The evidence for stooges, or at least people willing to 'go along with it', is admittedly not so clear cut but I'd bet a great deal of my own money for this being so. There's no way that the people he used on his past two shows were unaware of what was going on, to some greater or lesser degree, and IMO it's unlikely to the point of absurdity to say otherwise.
The evidence for the camera trick is the lotto one? I can't recall the details show but I can see if he used a camera technique for that one. The stooges is something else, it appears to be a question of faith whether you think he uses them or not.carmonk said:
So now, when you see Derren Brown pick an audience member and perform an illusion, how do we know the audience member is genuine? Indeed, many of his 'illusions' point to them not being so. Either that or being in on some prespecified script. He once picked out a member of the audience and told them straight out what they'd been dreaming of the night before. Now there are two choices there, that they told him, or he is psychic. There's no such thing as a psychic so they told him. It's not even a case of me not knowing how it's done and grasping at straws, it's a case of there only being these two explanations. Things like that I can overlook if the bulk of his stuff is kosher, so to speak, but there's no evidence that it is any more geniune than his split-screen camera trick. I have my doubts whether he uses any psychology, body language or hypnotism techniques whatsoever. Certainly he doesn't use them in the way he makes out, and without those techniques he loses everything that makes him stand out above the thousands of other showmen and stage conjurers.
Well you cannot say whether psychics are real or not. But I do not think that this argument needs to rely on that anyway, I do not think DB is one. Some on here have commented on knowing people in the shows? Maybe he influenced them, the same kind of stuff we see on Penn and Teller. P&T have made comments on influencing in their fool me show. There may be more explanations that you can think off etc.editing.
Edited by Halb on Sunday 6th November 20:28
Derren Brown in his stage shows doesn't use psychology or influencing techniques etc.
It's all just tricks. Sleights, gimmicks and other conventional magic / conjuring techniques.
His pseudo-psychology stuff is his patter.
As much as I don't like his patter, I don't believe he uses stooges. He just doesn't have to. The stuff he does on stage you can do with conventional magic and it's guaranteed to work pretty much 100% of the time if he pulls it off correctly. Magicians have been doing sealed envelope predications etc for years.
Also, if a magician pulls someone on stage and whispers to them "play along" they won't count that as a stooge.
Derren also uses dual reality tricks quite a bit... which if pulled off requires no psychology stuff but can look incredible.
It's all just tricks. Sleights, gimmicks and other conventional magic / conjuring techniques.
His pseudo-psychology stuff is his patter.
As much as I don't like his patter, I don't believe he uses stooges. He just doesn't have to. The stuff he does on stage you can do with conventional magic and it's guaranteed to work pretty much 100% of the time if he pulls it off correctly. Magicians have been doing sealed envelope predications etc for years.
Also, if a magician pulls someone on stage and whispers to them "play along" they won't count that as a stooge.
Derren also uses dual reality tricks quite a bit... which if pulled off requires no psychology stuff but can look incredible.
Edited by LandR on Sunday 6th November 20:38
Edited by LandR on Sunday 6th November 20:43
LandR said:
Derren Brown in his stage shows doesn't use psychology, influencing etc. It's tricks. Sleights, gimmicks and other conventional magic techniques.
His psychology stuff is his patter.
As much as I don't like his patter, I don't believe he uses stooges. He just doesn't have to. The stuff he does on stage you can do with conventional magic and it's guaranteed to work pretty much 100% of the time if he pulls it off correctly.
Influencing is traditional magic?His psychology stuff is his patter.
As much as I don't like his patter, I don't believe he uses stooges. He just doesn't have to. The stuff he does on stage you can do with conventional magic and it's guaranteed to work pretty much 100% of the time if he pulls it off correctly.
Halb said:
Influencing is traditional magic?
That's not what I said. Was my post not clear ?Derren on stage won't use any psychology stuff to influence people to choose a card, or draw something. He might make it look like that's what he is doing but he isn't. He is performing conventional magic tricks, he's just performing them very well with a very believable patter.
For example, you can pull someone on stage. Hand them a coin and ask them to put it in one hand behind their back. You can then tell them your reading their body language and determining what hand the coin is in and get it right every time. In reality though it doesn't need any body language reading, it just needs a gimmick.
Edited by LandR on Sunday 6th November 20:47
LandR said:
Derren Brown in his stage shows doesn't use psychology, influencing etc. It's tricks. Sleights, gimmicks and other conventional magic techniques.
You don't think he uses hypnosis or suggestion?I think the issue here is that many people seem to think that psychological tricks are more difficult to achieve than conventional, "mechanical" magic but that's just not true. Learning how to use suggestion and hypnosis requires no more or less training and skill than conventional magic so let me ask you: why wouldn't he use them when they are perfectly suited to his act?
As for having plants in the audience, he usually gets the crowd to chuck something around to select the people who do things. There's no absolutely way they could be plants unless he filled the audience with them, which would be a rather bad business plan.
He won't use them because they aren't reliable enough to make a stage show.
Derren uses gimmicks, props, sleights of hand and off-stage helpers just like every other magician.
For example, this trick http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5FwAqi9vJc
Do you think he is doing that with suggestion.. or do you think there is maybe a more conventional trick going on ?
Derren uses gimmicks, props, sleights of hand and off-stage helpers just like every other magician.
For example, this trick http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5FwAqi9vJc
Do you think he is doing that with suggestion.. or do you think there is maybe a more conventional trick going on ?
Edited by LandR on Sunday 6th November 21:01
LandR said:
That's not what I said. Was my post not clear ?
Derren on stage won't use any psychology stuff to influence people to choose a card, or draw something. He might make it look like that's what he is doing but he isn't. He is performing conventional magic tricks, he's just performing them very well with a very believable patter.
For example, you can pull someone on stage. Hand them a coin and ask them to put it in one hand behind their back. You can then tell them your reading their body language and determining what hand the coin is in and get it right every time. In reality though it doesn't need any body language reading, it just needs a gimmick.
I think your post was clear. What I am saying is that influencing (using psychology/headology) is traditional/conventional magic. DB has just updated the patter.Derren on stage won't use any psychology stuff to influence people to choose a card, or draw something. He might make it look like that's what he is doing but he isn't. He is performing conventional magic tricks, he's just performing them very well with a very believable patter.
For example, you can pull someone on stage. Hand them a coin and ask them to put it in one hand behind their back. You can then tell them your reading their body language and determining what hand the coin is in and get it right every time. In reality though it doesn't need any body language reading, it just needs a gimmick.
Halb said:
carmonk said:
But he's not clear on the matter. He doesn't say he uses camera tricks, yet the evidence is irrefutable. The evidence for stooges, or at least people willing to 'go along with it', is admittedly not so clear cut but I'd bet a great deal of my own money for this being so. There's no way that the people he used on his past two shows were unaware of what was going on, to some greater or lesser degree, and IMO it's unlikely to the point of absurdity to say otherwise.
The evidence for the camera trick is the lotto one? I can't recall the details show but I can see if he used a camera technique for that one. The stooges is something else, it appears to be a question of faith whether you think he uses them or not.Halb said:
Well you cannot say whether psychics are real or not.
Oh, I can, but let's not get into that one Halb said:
But I do not think that this argument needs to rely on that anyway, I do not think DB is one. Some on here have commented on knowing people in the shows? Maybe he influenced them, the same kind of stuff we see on Penn and Teller.
I used to think that, but now I think it's all staged. Certainly there's no evidence against everything he does but there doesn't need to be. That's the same criterion I'd apply to psychics so I think it would be disengenuous to fail to apply it to DB. For example, if proof came out that a certain psychic faked a show, I would take that as evidence that all their shows were fake, and indeed that they themselves were fake. I wouldn't say, "OK, that show was fake but I can't make judgement until I prove that their other 943 shows are fake to." A reasoned judgement should be applied and bias should not be granted to DB just because he's a nice guy. Of course, he doesn't claim to be psychic, but he does claim to use psychology, hypnosis and the like to achieve his results. AFAIK those claims are largely or totally bogus.Halb said:
P&T have made comments on influencing in their fool me show. There may be more explanations that you can think off etc.
Sure, but within reason. If someone does an amazing magic trick most people can offer up a few ideas as to what went on. They may well be wrong but they'll give it a go. In the example I stated, where DB spontaneously and precisely describes someone's dream in front of a live audience, even naming the person they dreamed about, there is only one explanation. He was told that information. Now if it wasn't live there'd be another possibility, that he guessed at 10,000 people's dreams and when he got one right, put that on his show. But in front of a live audience, what are the options? OK, there's chance as well, but come on, which do you believe?carmonk said:
Fraid I don't agree with you there. If you watch even just his last two shows the evidence for the 'targets' knowing what's going on is overwhelming. There are so many variables which had to be exactly right, and failure of any one would have resulted in disaster. Bear in mind that each situation must have taken months of planning and required a huge amount of expenditure, so it wasn't the case that he could record a few dozen eventualities then just play back the one that worked (like he did in the racing prediction show, which was an interesting and valid topic).
I may need to watch these shows with more attention. I tend to watch them over my laptop. I prefer his other shows where he chases psychics.carmonk said:
Oh, I can, but let's not get into that one
Well you can as a statement, just as I can claim I am the God of Thunder.carmonk said:
I used to think that, but now I think it's all staged. Certainly there's no evidence against everything he does but there doesn't need to be. That's the same criterion I'd apply to psychics so I think it would be disengenuous to fail to apply it to DB. For example, if proof came out that a certain psychic faked a show, I would take that as evidence that all their shows were fake, and indeed that they themselves were fake. I wouldn't say, "OK, that show was fake but I can't make judgement until I prove that their other 943 shows are fake to." A reasoned judgement should be applied and bias should not be granted to DB just because he's a nice guy. Of course, he doesn't claim to be psychic, but he does claim to use psychology, hypnosis and the like to achieve his results. AFAIK those claims are largely or totally bogus.
He also claims misdirection. I think he has updated magic and had a right laugh about it. I like him but I am not a fanatic. I also think the rules he lays down for one show shouldn't be automatically assumed for another.carmonk said:
Sure, but within reason. If someone does an amazing magic trick most people can offer up a few ideas as to what went on. They may well be wrong but they'll give it a go. In the example I stated, where DB spontaneously and precisely describes someone's dream in front of a live audience, even naming the person they dreamed about, there is only one explanation. He was told that information. Now if it wasn't live there'd be another possibility, that he guessed at 10,000 people's dreams and when he got one right, put that on his show. But in front of a live audience, what are the options? OK, there's chance as well, but come on, which do you believe?
Is this on youtube?I don't rigidly believe he doesn't use stooges, but I would be disappointed if he did...then again, that is an old and trusted magic method and DB may feel like it's valid. Hope not though.
carmonk said:
Sure, but within reason. If someone does an amazing magic trick most people can offer up a few ideas as to what went on. They may well be wrong but they'll give it a go. In the example I stated, where DB spontaneously and precisely describes someone's dream in front of a live audience, even naming the person they dreamed about, there is only one explanation. He was told that information. Now if it wasn't live there'd be another possibility, that he guessed at 10,000 people's dreams and when he got one right, put that on his show. But in front of a live audience, what are the options? OK, there's chance as well, but come on, which do you believe?
It's a trick. This is entirely possible without a stooge, It uses the concept of dual reality. Essentially the magician is doing two tricks at once. One trick for the audience member and another trick for the audience, control both well and you can make it look like you have done the impossible.You might even make people scream "stooge"
Edited by LandR on Sunday 6th November 21:12
LandR said:
carmonk said:
Sure, but within reason. If someone does an amazing magic trick most people can offer up a few ideas as to what went on. They may well be wrong but they'll give it a go. In the example I stated, where DB spontaneously and precisely describes someone's dream in front of a live audience, even naming the person they dreamed about, there is only one explanation. He was told that information. Now if it wasn't live there'd be another possibility, that he guessed at 10,000 people's dreams and when he got one right, put that on his show. But in front of a live audience, what are the options? OK, there's chance as well, but come on, which do you believe?
It's a trick. This is entirely possible without a stooge, It uses the concept of dual reality. Essentially the magician is doing two tricks at once. One trick for the audience member and another trick for the audience, control both well and you can make it look like you have done the impossible.You might even make people scream "stooge"
Edited by LandR on Sunday 6th November 21:12
You're right he does use that trick, I've seen quite a few of them, but in this particular instance it couldn't have applied. He just pointed to someone and told them right out, and he did a few like that. Maybe they edited it massively (e.g. discussing a list of possible dreams) but I can't imagine it would have been impressive for the audience in that case.Gassing Station | TV, Film, Video Streaming & Radio | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff