There was no audience member in the trick!!
There were about 400 video applications - I think the aim of the video was for people to convince the magician how good they’d be as an assistant and to be hypnotized and levitate. He narrowed it down to four and then chose one. (Maybe he knew before hand which one it would be to get a body double?) He also talked with them with a video phone call (facetime?) before he met them.
So the pool of people would not contain skeptics…
How do you know any of this is true?
And she portrayed those things very believably. I think it is easier to just use a person that was in a trance to act naturally than to find an actor that is able to fool people they feel that way. I mean in many TV shows and movies the actors aren’t convincing. I doubt they hired a professional actor for that trick.
If it is fairly straight forward to use a genuinely hypnotized person and therefore make that search for an assistant legitimate then I think the magician would do that out of pride. Why bother doing cheap tricks that an amateur would need to rely on. So I’m just taking it for granted since I know how it could have been achieved. I think the levitation is amazing but the lack of immediate recall about the “teleportation” and how she reacted in time to the gestures can be easily explained. (i.e. someone was pulling/releasing the wires).
I think getting a decent actor and making the search for an assistant a scam is more unbelievable than the alternative.
I can’t remember that movie exactly but I think it involved hypnotism and that is also what happened in this trick.
So it says “lucky fan”. Which is more likely - there is a huge conspiracy and it was actually a decent actor? Also the magician rarely does hypnotism… why would he bother using standard hypnosis techniques (e.g. tests for suggestibility) when he could have just said “1… 2… 3… sleep!” and not bother learning all about proper hypnosis? I’m sure the media would love to report that an actor was involved and that his “search” was a big scam.
If they actually did take video submissions how do you know the people who were “picked” were actually people who submitted videos?
I was speaking of stage hypnotism in general since I haven’t seen the video. But yes, unless the person was an outright plant (always a possibility), then it’s almost guaranteed that the magician used the selection process to figure out who was most likely to play along.
It’s exactly the same way if you’ve ever seen a stage magician in person. The first thing they do is get a bunch of volunteers from the audience–obviously, people who are already the type to get up on stage and act the part (or if they were goaded into going up, then these people are easily spotted). The second thing is that they do a “preliminary hypnosis” to select out the people unwilling to play along. And last, they pick the most weak-willed and peer-pressured of the remaining ones. It usually makes for a good show.
He used the standard long-winded hypnosis methods. Why bother learning and doing proper hypnosis when he could just do what they do on TV? (e.g. “1… 2… 3… sleep!”) I think that he made someone have trouble recall certain things that happened while they were hypnotized. She was told to relax and that is why her body parts would have easily risen and fallen. To use a stooge doesn’t just require them to follow from a script… they also need to act convincingly! It is easier for a person that was in a trance to just genuinely appear disorientated.
BTW I’ve heard about stage hypnotists to get people to appear to see certain things such as the hypnotists as being invisible. I think about 10% of people can be hypnotized like that. So in the act they appear completely amazed if the hypnotist carries an object - they think it is flying! This happened to big brother contestants. They aren’t decent actors but they were hypnotized in a way to act as if they believed that. So anyway compared to some types of hypnotism the magician’s feat isn’t very amazing.
I think the reactions in time to the gestures was achieved very simply (by reacting to the wires) even though some people here said it could be practicing the timing or using an earpiece (I initially thought that)
Uh oh! My eyes just rolled right out of my head. 
BTW about people who are “in on it” - if the magician asks for a member of the audience to volunteer and someone in on it volunteers it is misleading but not a lie. On the other hand if the magician asks them “have you ever met me before?” (like some do) then it is a lie. On TV shows people would assume that there are no plants - it is misleading if there are but not a lie - unless the TV show explicitly says that they aren’t in on it.
If I am right about the hypnosis then maybe she might recall what happened during the hypnosis later on… but maybe she signed a confidentiality agreement.
Actor is reliable. Hypnotized member of the public isn’t. The long-winded hypnotism technique was for show. The assistant had a script and followed it.
Simplest explanation is that the magician lied about everything. The video submission process was all just an easy way to convince everyone that the assistant wasnt a stooge. Apparently it worked.
But I don’t think the magician explicitly lied in his other tricks so why do it there when it isn’t even necessary.
e.g. when he did a trick where he switched places with an assistant that was in a box he asked an audience member to check the box and asked him if it seemed solid. i.e. the magician didn’t assert that the box was solid. Another magician doing the same trick might bang on the box implying that the box is solid but not saying “this box is completely solid”.
If you think that a decent magician is allowed to explicitly lie what do you think about this “trick”:
Say he got someone from the audience and asked them “have you ever seen me before in your life?” “no” “Will you swear on your life that you’ve never met me?” “ok” “Will you sign this legal document that says that?” “ok” “Think of a number… is it 19293210213?” “yes it is wow! you are amazing!” (assume the actor is very convincing…)
So is that a good trick? After all the actor convincingly might have fooled the audience (well if
it wasn’t so overboard)
So I think that explicitly lying is a sign of a bad magician. Maybe many do it but I don’t respect them if they do. Instead they can just very strongly imply things in a misleading way.
You, Sir, are the ideal spectator. Not everyone is this gullible, and without those, there would be no magicians. You are up against an expert in the art of fooling people.
You said it was semi-transparent, but how have you verified this? Because you thought you saw something through it?
Anytime a cloth is draped over something or a screen is inserted between the object and the audience, you can be purty dern sure there is a reason for it. Without such a screen, the trick would be glaringly obvious. Why do you think they use a screen?
They could be tracked down though. BTW the application videos are on vimeo and youtube. The person might be on facebook. I’ll see if I can track them down.
They are from a pool of 400 fans who want to be assistant. Also he did many tests on them and he mentioned that he checks their eyes/eye-lids to see how suggestable they are. Maybe they act a bit like REM sleep. If they are genuinely hypnotized then they should be reliable. They also love the magician (they’re fans) so why would they do something problematic? Besides the youtube video he also screened them using a video call. He is an expert at mentalism (and hypnotism) so he should be able to see if there is a problem… when he does mentalism he might check for subconscious body language to check if they have rapport with him.
So he would have learnt genuine hypnotic techniques but not really used them? It would have saved the magician weeks or months of studying to not learn proper hypnosis. If he had just did it quickly e.g. “1,2,3,sleep” most of the audience probably would have thought that was ok. But he kept on reminding people about the signs that the person is genuinely hypnotized. And eye movement is difficult to fake.
The “script” was basically do what I command you to do during the hypnosis - e.g. make you fingers feel close together, try to lift your arm, etc. Then just relax for the levitation. (I don’t think anything more than that is required on the part of the person for the levitation) Then when it is time to go outside follow some directions and lose recall of the trick and break out of the trance when the magician taps you on the shoulder. Are you disputing that hypnotism can cause people to have temporary memory problems?
But he didn’t need to! He didn’t seem to lie about his other tricks - he was just misleading. Besides just lying “about everything” he had to find a good actor - that isn’t really necessary at all. And the media/social media would love to find out that the “fan” was just an actor. It isn’t very hard to prove - they just need to have a past of acting or being an assistant.
Notice the link to the news article about it. They’re meant to report the truth. Not be in some kind of conspiracy. I think the simplest explanation is that a genuine hypnosis (i.e. one that involves reliable behavior) is what took place.
For this particular trick, it wouldn’t have had the same effect if he told the truth.
Consider this hypothetical; the assistant goes on television tomorrow and tells you that she was a plant. She reveals that she has a degree in acting, and performs in her local theater productions. Would you be disappointed, and consider that some of the “magic” in the trick was lost?
That’s why she’s a plant. The trick only works with a plant, which means the whole trick is about doing 200 year old techniques while using an ingenious method to convince you the assistant is legitimate.
Maybe a plant, maybe not. If the trick depends on the box being hollow, then you can bet your bottom dollar the audience member wasn’t chosen randomly.
Of course they’re allowed to explicitly lie. What’s stopping them? All they care about is whether their efforts are working. They want to entertain you by leaving you in wonder. The better the effect, the more they get paid! Lying convincingly is just one tool in the box.
That would be a terrible trick. I think we both agree on this point.
Wandering out of gq territory here, but that’s just a silly opinion to have. If the magician gets away with lying by very cleverly manipulating you, you’ve gotten your money’s worth. Deceit is their whole gig! I’m going to guess he never even explicitly stated, “this assistant is not working with a script,” and that you just assumed he said it because it was so obviously implied by the process he used to select her.
No conspiracy necessary.
Step 1: pick your stooge.
Step 2: invite fans to apply
Step 3: announce the winner
The reporting outlets do not need to be in on the secret at all.
Exactly. Thousands of people could have sent in videos but that doesn’t mean that the person “picked” to participate was someone who submitted a video and not a plant for the trick.
Anything other than a stooge in this scenario introduced uncontrolled variables into the performance and increases the risk that the performance will fail.
It’s preposterous to dismiss the notion of a stooge in favour of a hypnotised stranger.
-And if he had a stooge, he would have to lie about it. I’m not sure why anyone would imagine otherwise, or imagine that anyone putting on such a performance would feel compelled to tell the truth about what he was doing. Lying is part of the act (and I mean that in a good way).