Derren Brown’s latest show is titled “Unbelievable” … and a peculiar one as Derren doesn’t star in it. Instead, Unbelievable is “created, written and directed by UK stage and screen phenomenon Derren Brown” along with Andy Nyman and Andrew O’Connor.

The show promises “the best of theatre” with “jaw dropping illusions” and a “company of multi-talented performers who will bring to life, live on stage, an evening of bewildering trickery, from the imagination of Derren Brown.”

The poster promises “to have your mind blown” …

I’m unsure what Derren and Andy have been imagining – or what theatre they have seen recently, but Unbelievable is certainly not.

It is mundane at best and banal at worst.

What Derren has attempted to do is produce a magic show without magicians ( with the exception of one, Simon Lipkin, who is the only performer in the cast who can present an effect ) Or rather hire some interchangeable actors and musicians – attempt to teach them some magic – spending the least amount of money possible, in the naïve hope that the show can tour the world whilst the royalty cheques come flowing in.

The result is a predictable low budget mess that should have never reached fruition. Unless a miracle happens – I will be amazed if the London press don’t crucify this show ahead of its arrival in the West End.

The very basis of any good piece of theatre are the characters, the performers, the people … Nothing is more critical in magic. A truly good performer understands it is not just what you do, but who you are that truly counts. Your personality and persona are half the battle.

Audiences go see Derren Brown not just to be amazed, but because they develop a connection with the performer on stage. Audiences may not know the lead in Les Misérables – but they certainly fall in love with the character and develop an emotional connection to what they are seeing.

Strip that away and I am presented with a handful of nameless ensemble members – mere actors and musicians – with ( for the most part ) non-existent magic abilities presenting mediocre presentations. Add to that the audience’s subtext that the magic they are about to see cannot possibly require ‘much skill’ if a musician/actor learnt this mere weeks ago. And why exactly would I as an audience member want to see a musician perform magic? I don’t ask the opera singer to paint or have a band member play Hamlet.

The very concept of the show itself is fatally flawed and what is truly unbelievable is that neither Andy nor Derren foresaw this … or knew exactly what they were doing and didn’t care. I don’t know which is the lesser of two evils. Just a few weeks of rehearsal is all you need – and you, too, West End musician can be a magician. We get the two confused so often, anyway.

On with the show. And for those who prefer to avoid spoilers – read no further.

Act 1 – The Promise of the Impossible

The performance begins with a mobile “New York Subway” band on stage – trumpet, drums, saxophone – with an excruciatingly long 6 minute piece. Yes … the first 6 minutes of the show is nothing but a music jazz number. Eventually the curtains part to reveal a lone theatre chair on stage – with a ‘neon’ sign inviting someone from the audience to take ‘the best seat in the house’ … after a nervous wait, the sign proclaims “the show cannot start until someone comes up” … eventually a brave soul takes to the stage, straps on their seat belt and off we go!

The flimsiest of threads that run through the show is the ideal that everyone is performing a magic trick. The parts they want you to see is the ‘effect’ – and the parts they wish to keep hidden is the ‘method’.

Cabinet Appearance

A giant cabinet is wheeled on stage with the effect performed for the ‘benefit’ of the seated spectator. Doors are opened – cabinet is shown empty – and one of the band members is produced. Magic!

The secret of the illusion is then revealed showing how the cast member was hanging onto the side of the door all along – effectively out of view as the doors opened and closed. As the method is explained further - more cast members are produced – quite literally walking on stage into the cabinet out of view of the spectator.

As the cast members are ‘produced’ – they take a seat on the side of the stage. For the grand finale – the chairs on which they have been seated vanish – only to reappear inside the empty cabinet. The vanishing chairs are a nice touch but the only problem with the minor miracle of their reappearance is the very obvious arrival of a strange “frame” carried from the wings to the cabinet of mystery by what I can only assume are meant to be invisible backstage crew. Audiences are not blind and suspicious activity behind the cabinet mere moments before an appearance is not exactly magic.

And so ends the first piece in ‘Unbelievable’.

“Jaw dropping illusions never before seen in the West End”
Not yet.

Linking Finger Rings

Next up, we are told that our pianist is remarkably an engineer. How lucky for us as three finger rings from the audience impossibly link. A cookie-cutter performance delivered with limited flair by the next ensemble member in our anonymous rotating cast. Yes, the rings linked. But we’re given no reason to care. And why should we?

Think-a-Drink

Fear not – singing magician, Simon Lipkin, will rescue all in our homage to “Prohibition”. Picture Hugh Jackman in Music Man as a singing snake-oil salesman ( complete with cart and backdrop ) doing think-a-drink. It’s as cringeworthy as it sounds. And goes on forever. And ever. And ever. It’s also not particularly mystifying to an audience when the performer is utilizing multiple steel cocktail shakers which are never inspected post-performance. The very power of think-a-drink is when the container can be handed out at the end or in the box carton version, ripped to shreds to show that all is ‘fair’.

Color Vision Box

If Hugh Jackman didn’t do it – an overweight James Corden lookalike complete with local grating accent, lisp and such eloquent sayings as “alright mate” and “I’ll tell ya what” will surely lift the spirits with a 5 spectator color vision box on stage. Yes – that color vision box … which is available for sale in the interval (!) Our Corden lookalike happily proclaims that “Derren Brown taught me how to do this” as a giant prediction is revealed with printed photos of the spectators and their chosen colours. I don’t know what’s more mystifying. That someone thought that five tiny color vision boxes on stage was a good idea … or that the audience now knows you have a giant A2 color printer backstage.

“Jaw dropping illusions never before seen in the West End”
Not quite.

Squeezer
To end the first half – our singing female assistant in sequins laments the plight of the magician’s assistant – and in recognition of “150 years of extraordinary magicians assistants” she is covered in cardboard boxes by our two newly promoted ‘magicians’ ( ‘Jackman’ and ‘Corden’ ) and visibly squashed leaving just her head visible as the curtains bring to a close Act 1.

Bizarre and disjointed. Absolutely.

What is most telling though is that a 14 year old seated across from me – left the show during interval – electing to rather wait in the car for his parents than watch the second half of the show. Ouch!

Act 2 – Holding out for a Hero

Cups & Balls x 6

Our musicians are back – this time with a 6 person line-up of “percussion meets cups & balls” all happening simultaneously. Picture Gaston’s cup banging sequence from Beauty & the Beast and you get the idea. Cups are banged, balls vanish, balls reappear – ending with an explosion of sponge balls. It’s a nice sequence but a little too confusing to follow exactly what’s happening.

Balloon on Thread

The next hint of Derren comes in our message of ‘stop comparing ourselves to others’ and rather ‘focus on gratitude’ The messaging is somewhat forced as our next anonymous ‘magician’ blows up a balloon by mouth and then mysteriously causes it to float around the stage. However, if you are going to make something float – you do need to disprove the use of threads. Which no one thought to do in Unbelievable ( Audiences are intelligent beings after all ) So rather than a magical floating balloon we must logically ( rightly or wrongly ) have a balloon on thread.

“Jaw dropping illusions never before seen in the West End”
Still searching.

Musical Telepathy

Our pianist turned linking finger ring engineer is back with James Corden at the helm (“there ya go mate” ) with another incredible skill. She not only links finger rings but has the gift of musical telepathy.

A number of audience members have been asked to think of a song – but rather than just have them do so in front of the audience – they all mysteriously had to leave the theatre only to be brought back later as they lined up to have their ‘musical minds read’

Am I the only one who thinks this is suspicious? No … the entire audience does.

Ms Finger Ring Engineer-cum-pianist magically picks up the vibrations and begins to play their “thought” of song. Each. And. Every. Song. The routine goes on for absolute ages. A recurring theme.

Panto Séance

For our grand finale – the Davenport Spirit Cabinet complete with cheesy garden set and illuminated moon meets British comedy pantomime ( intentionally it would seem )… as Davenport’s man servant ( the irritating Corden lookalike ) attempts to travel the astral planes causing a yellow ball to jump into a wine glass, incorrectly reading the name of a spectators loved one and flying through the atmosphere – counting the change in an audience’s members pocket ( thanks swami ) If it sounds ridiculous, it is.

And then after this bizarre comedy by play – the most incongruent moment of all – the spectator on stage is asked to think of their loved one, tell them how much they love them … and in a poor nod to Derek Delgaudio ( or Copperfield depending which way you lean ) – the spectators daughter magically appears in the Davenport Spirit Cabinet.

To recap - we’ve effectively had a goofball clown on stage for the last 10 minutes dressed in top hat and tails doing panto – making woowoo sounds whilst swimming in the astral plains - pretending to be Davenport’s actual man servant … and now we are supposed to incredibly switch gears and reach the inner recesses of our emotions – feeling the love ( and impossibility ) of this heartwarming reunion.

It's just not happening.

And if you are still not sure – our Subway band is back to close us out. Complete with the show theme song imploring us to sing the lyrics ‘that’s Unbelievable’

Sadly nothing could be further from the truth.

Thank you for writing this long review. You have absolutely nothing remotely positive to say about it, which surprises me, knowing most of Derren's and the Andrew's line of work. I hope for Derren that it is not as bad as you think, but I respect your opinions.

Enjoyed your detailed review and appreciated all the thought you obviously put into it. Thanks, a bunch!

Im going to see it tomorrow,I have already posted here previously that I thought it was a dumb idea ,so we shall see if my prediction (ironically)comes true.

Im sure some people think Derren is taking part,even though press advertising states he isn't,also without his name attached would it be in the West End or even in large theatres? No.

Caveat everything below with the fact that this show is in very early days so I'd expect things to be improved over time. Also, don't read if you don't want spoilers.

I saw it last night in Manchester. While I might not agree with all your points, I do share your overall feeling about the show. It wasn't terrible but it wasn't amazing either.

I've recently read Notes From A Fellow Traveller and so I went into this show with a lot of appreciation for what it takes to write, structure and perform a show. On the flip side of that, I was probably therefore more intune with what needed improving at the same time.

My wife's assessment afterwards (before I offered an opinion) was "I didn't know what I was watching, what was it meant to be?". And it's true, is it a display of magic? A musical extravaganza? A comedy act? Perhaps a variety show? Or all of the above? It's hard to tell. Maybe it is what it says it is: Magic Reimagined. Unfortunately, just because something is unique, it doesn't make it good.

I heard mixed reviews in the foyer. Loads of people loved it and magicians are clearly not the target market for this so whatever I think likely isn't that important anyway. But I'm really interested in performance structure and why things do and don't work. So with that in mind:

The main issues I noticed as I was watching were (and some you already touched on):

- The music went on far too long. Completely agree. The music was great, but 6 or 7 minutes of it at the beginning was just crazy. My wife turned to me half way through and said "Imagine if this is the whole show". Probably not the reaction you'd want.
- The pacing was way too slow a lot of the time. Too much talking, too much explaining, and doing all that at the wrong times, often to the detriment of the climax. For instance, right before the grand finale's reveal, I heard people gasp as they began to realise what was about to happen (which was brilliant), only to have the release of that tension undercut by more monologue: "please don't reveal what happens in the show". Seems to me that that could have been said a lot earlier in the routine to then have the climax be the big end to the show, and straight into the outro music. And that's the same feeling I got throughout, too much process, too many lines, no clarity of plot. Which is the complete opposite of what we'd get from a Derren show. Not that this should be directly compared, but knowing Derren's involvement, just felt odd.
- Too much "stuff" happened off stage. I didn't realise until half way through think-a-drink, that audience members had "examined" and "filled" the cocktail shakers. When did this even happen and why wasn't this signposted? Same with the linking finger rings and the pianist piece. Too many things happened out of sight or slightly off stage and, most importantly, weren't conveyed back to the audience properly. Do all the pre**** or !@#$*ing you want off stage, I don't mind, but make sure we understand how things have come to be, otherwise it's just jarring. Goes back to the same point about clarity.
- No connection with the performers. You nailed this one I think; imagine teaching a non-magician friend a trick to then have them perform this to the rest of your friend group. You'll probably encounter a blend of cliched magician phrases picked up from telly, paired with the evident unease that comes from too much concentration on executing the method flawlessly. And that's what we got here; some great performers, musicians, actors, performing magic tricks without much experience performing magic tricks. But one of the promotional images for the show is of Derren "puppeteering" the cast so maybe that was the point?

There were some technical issues too (which may just be due to our theatre):

- The house lights kept coming up every time an audience member went on or off the stage, which was distracting
- The circle didn't have any sound coming from the speakers, which led to muffled speaking and singing (I couldn't hear a single word of the think-a-drink song)
- The video projection onto their choice of curtains doesn't work in my opinion (it was really difficult to see important things on the screen, such as the finger rings on the table). Maybe this was an angle issue though.
- Lighting on the camera was off. They focused the camera on members in the audience a lot and it was far too dark to even see their expressions, even with the house lights up

There were a lot of pros though:

- The initial act involving the cabinet was masterfully executed. From the "Best seat in the house" to the unveiling of the chairs, its choreography was splendid, evoking strong Penn & Teller vibes. Thoroughly enjoyed it.
- The finale trick (with the exception of some of the character choices) was a great trick and the big reveal (although I saw it coming) was not expected by the audience at large. It seemed like too big of a thing to achieve to even be considered from what I could tell.
- There were some wonderful themes throughout. The Pianist piece was lovely, and one of those things we wish we could all perform I'm sure
- The set was well put together, lovely set design, especially in think-a-drink
- All the performers came across as nice lovely people; no bad eggs, and all really enjoying themselves on stage, which was beautiful to see
- The ode to magician assistants was really nice to see too (although, I think the climax should have shown them flatten the last box too (so she fully disappeared) to put a nice full stop on the end of the routine
- Quite a few real gasp moments in there too; the finale as mentioned, the water to wine visual change was great. Seeing the finger rings linked and verified by the owner also shocked a lot of people from what I could tell too.

Everything I say, I say with a lot of love for magic and a big appreciation for this show trying something new and different. It's at the beginning of a long run so I expect changes and improvements are made throughout. I may even look to see it again in the new year to see how it differs from my experience last night.

And I'd say it's well worth seeing, even just to look at the structure, writing and performance to inform your own work.

To add to all the above I saw it tonight in Manchester and mostly I enjoyed it. Echoing what Kroots said the musical prelude went on forever and no-one was quite sure what the hell was going on. With the exception of Simon Lipkin and James Cordon lookalike ,most performers lacked much charisma or personality and sounded like they were reading from autocue, Not sure they all even spoke maybe that's my bad memory or they just were too bland.

To the effects ,Backstage with the Magician enjoyable and the payoff I never saw coming; linking rings, if you're going to "prove" the effect to one of the owners of the rings and not the others,it's pointless.Think a drink nice routine Greatest Showman did it better,agreed it went on forever.
Obviously you could see and hear Derren all over it, the deep meaningful monologues(that weren't tonight), the balloon on a string that didn't seem to hit home; the spectators lining up to write down things "sorry we can't use you ,please return to your seat".
However the "think a song" was achieved,no doubt involved writing things down,despite "James Cordon" saying"You haven't told anyone your choices", the former engineer turned pianist either had help cueing the songs or a good memory. But that aside, to know how to play any song is impressive! Were the rest of the band telepathic too when they arrived onstage to add backing? Whether coincidence a gag was made that those who played "Wonderwall" should sit down,yet that very song became one of the choices!
To the finale again something I've not seen before,and as others have said switching up from comedy to playing heartstrings through one illusion doesn't work,and I guessed the ending,I also thought "No it can't be",the work that had to go in to making that work must have been immense. But then again the emotional moment wont linger past the car park when Dad(as it was tonight)tells all. Maybe it's too on the nose,and suffers from too perfect theory?? Copperfield can get away with stuff,schmaltzy OTT Americans love it; but bunch of nobodies(talented musicians all same)onstage in Manchester cannot.
It went down well with crowd,some people gave it a standing ovation,whilst 3 of the cast were left playing,as people stood wondering if they should leave or what the hell was going on just like at the beginning.
Was it unlike anything ever seen? No,I'm not sure Derren and Andy's thinking,it was a bog standard magic show with musicians that bar one effect added nothing.

Going back to my review point about "think a song" I can't see how spectators could feasibly have a free choice.

When giving instructions to the audience members Simon mentions that "it's hard to think of something on the spot so we have some lists you can take inspiration from too" or something to that effect. That largely went unnoticed but I caught it, and I'm sure was for their benefit rather than the wider audience as they then immediately left the auditorium with an "usher".

I didn't mention the end in my comments, but we experienced exactly the same as you; no one knew whether they should leave or not as the music went on. But as one or two dominoes fell the rest went with it and I found myself still sat in my seat with my view blocked by the rows in front all piling out, music still going strong.

One unhappy customer on twitter said of the piano effect "A stage hand put the song in my hand,such rubbish"

More word of mouth:

https://twitter.com/annaberu/status/1695......afm0kADw

“ Massive disappointment Derren. I was up on the stage pretending to be ‘astounded’ at a pianist reading my mind. ( I was given the song by a stage hand )
Five pretty lame magic tricks for a two hour show and lots of music.
Unbelievable is right.”

https://www.facebook.com/RobChapmanHypno......17396792

"...It was entertaining, did not really deliver on its promises. The people in front agreed that if it had been a show at butlins you would have been happy with it following the bingo. Which tells you all you need to know.
Definitely not magic like you have never seen before. Definitely nothing new, more like new dressing on the usual.
Unbelievable not at all.
Average, Definitely
Had some great food though."

"Sarah Donnelly: I agree. We were at Manchester tonight. We were very disappointed. An average show at best"

Another one with expletives:

https://www.facebook.com/violetbrator/po......62135413

"Majority of the show has cheap parlour tricks... Seen better "Magic" on BGT by children Shame!
Wait for the reviews from the West End critics... Better still wait for it's West End run to be cut short x"

There was a positive post:

https://www.facebook.com/kellilouise.bon......95442357

"I’m going to be bold and say THE best production value I’ve experienced in recent years. "

But turns out the person is connected to a cast member ( and can't have seen much theatre if they were raving about the production value which is minimal relative to what is happening in the industry in 2023 )


Audience feedback in Manchester ( with the show now being up and running for close on 6 weeks ) - and its not looking pretty.

https://www.facebook.com/stephen.smithom......35914884

Stphn Smth: "if you’ve got tickets for Derren Brown’ Unbelievable show. It isn’t. It’s awful.You’d see better at the end of Blackpool pier."

"Helen Brearley: Just seen Vee, she was equally scathing. "

Top ticket prices for London are 81 GBP ( a similar stalls seat for Back to the Future is available for 88 GBP as a point of reference. Harry Potter Part 1 for 75 GBP. There is zero comparison in production value )

The run is optimistically scheduled to play from 19th Sept to 7 April 2024 at the Criterion. If the current trend continues - word of mouth will certainly sink this show and cause it to close early ( almost guaranteed if the London critics pan it )

Unless something drastic happens, Derren will sadly have damaged his brand with this experiment ... and will certainly see ticket buyers not rush for presales for his next solo tour - having been burnt with Unbelievable.

I think some of those comments are unduly harsh,maybe due to misleading promotion that it was going to be something never seen before? I cant figure out what Derren thought he was achieving with the idea.

An eagle-eyed viewer points out that Unbelievable shares an amazing visual similarity to American Utopia which played Broadway at the exact same time as Derren was there. An uncanny coincidence ;-)

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/wj6757p1k......7hw&dl=0

Wow. This story gets worse and worse.

Curiously no reviews from West End run yet ,its been on 4 days so far.

In an interview today he states Press night is tomorrow Tuesday so reviews will no doubt surface then.

Reviews are starting to filter in ... ignoring some of the usual PR fluff - some interesting comments:

All that Dazzles - 3 stars
"Where the show falters somewhat is in its structure. One segment follows another with seemingly no correlation. While they are decent enough as standalone scenes, you would expect a common thread to tie them all together. There are repeated references to comparing your insides to other people’s outsides but this repeated usage of the phrase doesn’t appear naturally and doesn’t always relate to the show itself. Perhaps I expected something else due to the overwhelming and emotional payoff the true purpose of Derren Brown’s Showman revealed in its closing moments, but the lack of this cohesive structure let the production down slightly ... However, it did seem like a more powerful theme was being attempted but sadly didn’t translate as effectively as had been anticipated.

The direction from Derren Brown, Andy Nyman and Andrew O’Connor was a bit of a mixed affair. While it led to some great moments, there was a bit of a pacing problem throughout others and a real overwhelming lack of consistency across the entire show ... However, at times not all of these ideas paid off as seamlessly as hoped, leaving a show that can be wildly inconsistent. That’s not to say any element of Unbelievable isn’t enjoyable, it’s just underwhelming in certain moments."

BroadwayWorld - 3 stars

"Does it work? Mainly yes and sometimes no.

Sam Creasey channels a cheeky James Corden persona and is hugely likeable. However, there is a lingering feeling that something, or someone, is missing.

Perhaps the issue is that Derren Brown has set his own bar so high that expectations of his new material are unachievable. Brown and his team have painstakingly trained up this talented cast and the show provides some jaw-dropping moments, but the absense of Brown himself makes the production feel a bit disjointed and therefore lacks some of the wow-factor of his previous shows."

WhatsonStage - 3 stars

"Unbelievable lacks any conceivable structure and half-heartedly peddles the running theme that our collective downfall is comparing our internal lives with other people’s carefully curated outer ones ...

That audience participation is one of its greatest USPs but also, unfortunately, one of its biggest drawbacks. Presumably to prove that these members of the public aren’t ‘plants’, five or six of them have to be involved almost every time someone from the crowd is hauled up onstage to take part in a trick. This inevitably leads to a certain amount of repetition, boredom even, as the same ground is covered time and time again; one’s heart sinks a bit as the overlong evening draws on and somebody is picked from the middle of a row or one of the upper levels and it’s clear it’ll take them quite some time to even get to the stage. Similarly, the problem with a plethora of mind-reading gags, even the fairly gargantuan one that closes out the show, is that after a certain point, it’s only really that fascinating or astonishing if it’s YOUR mind being read, or your personal business being alluded to.

The lack of real substance would perhaps be less obvious if the whole thing was shorter and sharper, or if it wasn’t performed in a traditional proscenium arch theatre. However, there’s probably enough humour, glitz and moments of sheer wonder here to make audiences feel like they’ve got their money’s worth. "

The Stage - 3 stars

"mildy diverting but bland"

"But it was conceived by O’Connor, and Brown doesn’t appear. It feels as if he is there in spirit, at times – you hear the cadences of his speech in the performers’ patter, a hint of his blend of gentleness, teasing wit and mesmeric authority. Yet without him, the evening lacks unity, personality and tension.

It is all reasonably diverting; it’s also aimless, largely sidestepping the existential and emotional subtext of Brown’s best work, the acting forced and artificial, with little sense of mystique ...

But the stakes never feel high enough; less unbelievable, more underwhelming."

The Times - 3 stars

"Derren Brown goes missing in his own magic show ... as a troupe of actors and musicians lead us through a series of routines that are agreeable enough but ultimately leave you feeling you have just watched a cruise show entertainment rather than a fully fledged West End spectacle.

As with much of the material, 99 per cent of your brain told you there was a perfectly simple explanation; the other 1 per cent still sat back and gawped. (From my seat, I didn’t have a clear view of what happened to the volunteers before they were led onto the stage.) There was, too, a clever finale involving a punter that presumably relies on the superhuman power of search engines rather than the supernatural.

Other routines were more run of the mill, and the sets and costumes were unremarkable. The music is a little ragged too. There’s a street band energy to the way the performers pick up a baritone sax or trumpet and begin jamming, but the randomness of the material was a little perplexing. "