Criss Angel vs David Copperfield: The roots of the implosion trick

When somebody asked me earlier today why people seem to respond to Criss Angel's Mindfreak stuff so strongly, I suggested it was because perhaps they weren't familiar with classic illusionists such as Doug Henning and David Copperfield.

So here's two clips -- one of Angel's escape from an imploding building in Clearwater Wednesday, and another of Copperfield doing a very similar gag nearly 20 years ago, in 1989.

You tell me which one looks cooler:

COPPERFIELD:

CRISS ANGEL

Comments

[Patrick]

Copperfield will always have that creepy "pick me a girl from the audience" vibe.

Give me Penn and Teller any day. They make these chumps look like birthday clowns.

[Mike]

Look at the Angel one again. At 2:37 he has the handcuffs dangling from his right leg. Every shot after that...no handcuffs. Which would mean that most likely that is where it switched from live to tape. Also there was probably a mirror in the room to make it look like he turned left to go down the hall way when instead he went right. Some of the stuff he's done in the past was really impressive but this was a total sham. Edge to Copperfield, atleast his outfit was consistent.

[Amanda]

Based on the end result, I give Copperfield the edge. Both could have been GREATLY improved, however, with better acting; the cops and demolition guys with Copperfield, the lame announcer with Angel. I mean, come on. He was totally non-plussed when we were supposed to believe that Criss Angel was dead.

[pparker]

I don't think this is a very fair comparison - of course the David Copperfield version looks a lot better because it the entire illusion was pre-taped; he never went in the building in the first place. The entire stunt was performed during rehearsal - if you notice you don't see the crowd at the end until there's a CUT.

Criss Angel's was actually on live television and he actually went inside the building, so he didn't have as many luxuries as Copperfield did.

I will say that Criss could've improved some things, such as using night-vision cameras for the pre-tape (since the electricity was out!) and shaking the cameras before they went to static. Overall though, David Copperfield may had had a better "look" but Criss Angel had more guts.

[Kay]

I saw Angel's version first "live" and thought it was lame. My thoughts on improving it: the explosives should have been on a timer, for one thing, and he should have either "appeared" inside the helicopter or just done the trick as it was explained and made it in time to the helicopter and been flying away (clutching onto the hanging ladder) as the building imploded.
Having now seen Copperfield's version, wow, it was impressive. The timer, the seamless "glidecam", the uninterupted camera on the safe (with his hand coming out with little time to spare) and the finish with him growing under the X all just really made the whole illusion incredible.
Angel has done some other illusions that blew my mind but this was not one of them. Too many of his tricks are too easy to debunk. I think much of his success is based on his looks and personal style. Maybe he just needs more professional support staff to take him to the next level.
Copperfield has never failed to amaze me and I have enjoyed some of the awesome demonstrations by David Blaine.
Kay

[Holly]

Didn't David Copperfield's escape take place in 1989? I remember watching it as a kid, so I couldn't understand all of the excitement over Chris Angel's escape.

[Jay]

VERY lame presentation by Angel. I guess he saw the movie--was it Ocean's Eleven where they replaced the surveillance video with pre-recorded stuff? And why take the time to pick the handcuff off the other hand once he was free? Duh. It would have been a better trick if he'd just done what he had planned.

[There Can Be Only One Houdini...]

Criss Angel vs David Copperfield. None of them impress me. Now, Houdini that's a different story...

[Robin 'Roblimo' Miller]

What "made" the Copperfield version was the single, amazingly long Glidecam shot, which made it obvious (even if UNTRUE) that there were no cinematic tricks used in his escape.

With all the cameras and cuts in the Angel stunt, no one really knows what happened. I could easily produce a similar piece with my own camcorders and editing software.

Pre-shooting all lock encounters except the first one, on the balcony, would have been trivial. And in the time between the window kick-in and his reappearance, Angel had plenty of opportunity to run downstairs by another route and slip out to a blast shelter of some sort, where he reappeared after the implosion.

Magic *must* be shot with a single camera, as a single scene with no cuts or fades, if it is going to be credible. Copperfield knows this. Angel does not. This is a major showmanship difference between them.

I say this as someone who is pretty decent at video work and has also been a magic junkie since early childhood (one of the highlights of my teen years was seeing Harry Blackstone, Jr. on his last tour, and I have been to the Magic Castle in Hollywood many times).

Still, the most astounding thing I saw in either illusion was the *excellent*, amazingly long Glidecam shot in the Copperfield piece. I bought a Flycam (similar stabilizer rig) a few months ago, and have been practicing furiously with it ever since, but there is no way I could do such a long run, especially down those staircases, without a fair amount of camera jiggle. Indeed, I doubt that I will ever be as good as the person who did that shot.

Big-time illusions are a team effort, and all great magicians have great assistants. Angel's people -- and Angel -- are simply not in the same class as Copperfield and his people.