NJM - Hypodermia (HGT2011)
 

Act for Holland's Got Talent 2011 (didn't get broadcasted on TV though :():

All i can say is wow!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I thought the other guy wasn't suppose to be there :D

Hot damn, Mark and his friend got some booty-shaking talent right there! :D

I really like this mix, though :)

damn that was awesome, but if you choose to do music for the show, wouldn't you have to stick to it the whole time?( my point, isn't magic a slightly better choice? or do you have more confidence in your music?)

Very cool stuff Mark. There's nothing like a good bit of piano.

Thanks y'all!! Very glad you like it! :D

:thinking:

Actually, analyzing Got Talent shows, there is much more future in music acts than in magic ones, especially in the Dutch version of the show (boy, would I have loved to live in Sweden). The idea for our piano/surprise act was already 1.5 years old. Last year we couldn't join because Joris (the other guy) had his finals, so we decided to do it this year instead.

Unfortunatly, in case of magic, it's not so much about talent. This year, the only magic act that went through to the liveshows was a group of girls, coached by the most famous Dutch female illusionist Sittah. I can't say that there was much talent in their act (nor in the acts of other magicians/illusionists that were broadcasted and got three yeses from the jury, to be honest) but those girls only got through because of their image: "The Angels: The Pussycat Dolls of Magic".

I was actually thinking of joining with a magic act next year, but seeing the way those acts are judged there just isn't much future in it. I don't feel like doing an on-the-table, gambler kind of thing (to actually show off talent) and I respect Charlie Caper too much to rip off his act or style too.

Our jury consists of a professional dancer/cheographer and two singers, one who is great at judging instrumental music. No magic or circus experts whatsoever. Plus, I already got a piano act ready (ask Albert, it rocks ;)) so I'll probably be doing that one.

Mark's performance does really rock people's socks' off. I like how Mark 'knows' his own act rocks xD

In the UK it is very clear that the Britains Got Talent, X-Factor etc are built heavily towards ending with a SINGER/MUSICIAN as the winner, because the whole point is to have a RECORD CONTRACT at the end that the tv bosses can make loads of money from. I saw an interview recently with a magician talking about his experience with those shows and he said at the start all of the contestants basically had to sign a... you guessed it.... record contract. So it is in fact known ahead of time that the winner is going to be one of the singers. This may not be the case with all talent shows but I'm pretty sure it is with at least one or two of them.

A magician who wins a show like that wont earn the makers of the show much money after the fact. It's not so easy to sign a magician up to some sort of contract unless you own a big casino in Vegas, or something similar (see Fool Us). So in the UK at least it simply would make no sense to award the main prize to a magician, because the money flow would end there. Sure the magician would go on to make LOADS for himself, but the tv talent show bosses (Simon Cowell) would get none of it. It's actually about business first, not talent, unfortunately.

Well, of course X-factor is heavily built towards singers.. because.. it's a singing competition. :grin:

But you are right, the production team is all for the money. Got Talent shows started off as one big singing fest for the reason there is extra money in the mass CD sales.

However, the producers will be getting money for whoever wins no matter what kind of act it is.. because they will be in charge of the agency that will be managing the winner (who signed for that, not exactly like a record contract but more like a promise contract that if you win, you may not deny the prizes you are getting, including but not limited to a management agency). So it really doesn't matter what kind of act wins.

Lately, those shows try to bring a more variation as for the kinds of entertainment. Less singing, more dance and other acts (acrobatics, etc). The production quality of all the Got Talent shows got worse over the years though, which is exactly what I define as 'commercial rushing' as can be seen in the art of magic. Less money into the production, bigger profits in the end. :thinking:

Ah yeah I see what you mean. They will get some money whatever happens, but I think they will still make more money from a good singer than a good magician, unless that magician is so good that they can launch a tv show off the success but even then the media interest just isn't as lucrative with magic as it is with music. I may be wrong. I just think that a singer who can do regular gigs, release multiple CD's, AND go on tv appearances, is a much better guarantee of lots of earnings for the producers, than a magician who in comparison can only really offer stage shows and occasional TV appearances. No CD sales, nowhere near the amount of TV interest, and so less chance of TV interviews/coverage. From a business perspective theres alot more money to be made by going with the Singer; so that's unfortunately what happens. It's the nature of "the entertainment industry", at least in the UK, that music makes alot more money than magic, and this will be driving the producers decisions in many cases. :(

After the first seasons, they aren't thát much into singers anymore, especially for the reason that it'd be kind of odd if singers keep winning all round talent shows. In Britain's case there were George Sampson, Diversity, Spelbound. Sure, every now and then a singer wins but definitely not always. And people would still pay to see each of those artists or groups perform. The only thing that is required by the producers of each Got Talent-show is that it's a solid and marketable act.

In case you would have the most amazing acrobatics group in the world that has only been together for a month, there would be no way that they would win the show because they have not shown to be solid enough on the long term. Even if they would be the public favorites, they wouldn't win. Same thing for surprise acts, stand-up comedy and such things. Singers on the other hand are as solid as can get (the chance of losing your voice is a lot less than the chance a stuntman breaks a bone or a comedian gets less funny).

And let's not forget that usually the people that get the furthest, were actually invited by the producers to take part of the show. And the producers always have some professionals (who really don't need the show anymore) join too, to boost the viewing rates and popularity of both the show and those artists. Welcome to the world of television, lol.

But enough Got Talent-talking. This thread was merely on Joris' and my act and me answering la0o9's questions. ;)

Now do it with one person!

after all that discussion, i can see the reason why you would want to choose music over magic( and thinking back... it's also more fun to play music since there are so many beautiful melodies and rhythms to be played on one instrument and people can always gets more, more than seeing act after act after act( with the reactions i myself have and i see people do, after 3 effects they'll get bored and try to see how you do things)

Well, since you only got two minutes to perform your act, you don't have to worry about boring the jury or audience. ;)

This question however remains: how much talent is needed to do those tricks? If the only talent the jury sees is an outstanding presentation, every other act that is very well presented and clearly includes an other talent too is better than yours. :(

I play an instrument (guitar for about 2 and a half years) but I kind of like magic more at the moment but I guess thats because guitar is much harder to learn something knew (unless you are very skilled) but my intrest in guitar had been coming back lately and if I get better I may soon enjoy it than magic.