Sorry, I've left parts out of my description for obvious reasons.![]()
Yes, you left out the part where you sell it as an instant download at Elusionist (just kidding).
Sorry, I've left parts out of my description for obvious reasons.![]()
Agree with all but the OOTW bit (not that I doubt your experience; I simply have experienced the opposite).That used to bother me until I realized the puzzle aspects were what drew me to magic in the first place. The spectator you mentioned probably got more out of it than the spectator that just oohed and awed. I still kind of "collect" puzzles for that reason and I really enjoy back-engineering effects from demos.
As far as OOTW, I can't seem to keep the interest up through all the dealing. And what you said about Tommy Wonder, the essential ingredient for me is how he justifies what he's doing. Too often, I go for an unmotivated "wow factor" instead of the "little bit of theater" that makes for really good magic. What really sold me on his Wild Card is the story he tells.
That last is why box-style stage magic puts me off. "Why are we cutting this woman in half again?"
One other thing about TW. Unlike the modern trend of "simple and clean" to drive an effect, he starts with what he want's the audience to feel and then constructs the most intricate "backstage" to achieve it. He was not afraid of complex when it served the performance.
(Anyone who doesn't know his work can see a performance of Wild Card here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q5kxUuO5JZo)
Objectively I have nothing against the spate of effects using electronic devices, but on a personal level I have never been able to get into them, either as performer or spectator. And I'm not even a Luddite.Me too. There's nothing worse than going to see a magic show and while everyone else is saying "how did he do that?" I'm thinking "Why did he do that?"
As for card tricks. As soon as I bought my iTouch I developed a card trick, where the spectator picks a random card, signs it and puts it in the deck. I shuffle the deck and hold the iTouch over the top of the deck explaining that Apple have added a secret scanner. Then the picture of a playing card appears on the screen, Then I explain it also has a mini printer too, at which point I swipe the picture off the screen and the players signed card is in the hand I swiped across the screen... It gets a really good reaction.
Sorry, I've left parts out of my description for obvious reasons.![]()
Heh. An ellusionist reference would have been more appropriate in my response to Trickster's trick. Sort of the epitome of You know the technique; now you can be awesome!! aren't they?Yes, you left out the part where you sell it as an instant download at Elusionist (just kidding).
Heh. An ellusionist reference would have been more appropriate in my response to Trickster's trick. Sort of the epitome of You know the technique; now you can be awesome!! aren't they?
Trickster's trick is fine, but the author's claim to have invented it is specious. It's like someone claiming to have invented meatloaf because he puts an extra teaspoon of brown sugar in the sauce. It is also described as if the method is sufficient for creation of a good effect; it is not.
Perhaps I did come across as a bit snarky; for that I apologize. I do not intend to imply that you are stealing the method, but I stand by my meatloaf analogy. I believe that you developed the presentation independent of conscious outside input, but you are not a "wittle kid" now and so presumably are aware that the idea of Peek, Control, Force, Apparent Befuddlement, Control, Reveal is hardly inspirational in itself. I could as well say that I invented the French Drop followed by an across-the-room revelation when I amused my friends with toy dinosaurs. My point is made the stronger by what the gist of my postings have been about: your description spends nearly all it's time on the mechanics of each step and virtually none on anything presentational.Now now, when I say I invented it, I mean, about 8 years ago, when I was a wittle kid, without any knowledge of any similar card tricks, I put together a couple ingredients (as you would like to apply it to food) that I learned about and baked it, coming up with something at least I had never seen before. The trick, is the finished product, not the ingredients used (which by the way were simple card controlling methods that probably every card handler knows). I would be happy if you would show me/us a similar 'finished product'. No offense, just seems like your looking to nitpick, and I don't see anything worth or able to nitpick at...
Ahoy there! It's quite an effect you've tossed out for discussion.My favorite card trick.....currently, it is one by Jean-Pierre Parent.
He takes a deck of cards, shows them to someone in the audience to show it is a normal deck of cards. He ties a rubber band around the deck, then tosses it into the audience; the audience member files through the deck and picks a card (but does not remove it), then tosses it to someone else who does the same thing - in the end there are 5 audience members who have picked a card...from a deck that JP has not touched since throwing it initially into the audience.
He gets all 5 cards, in order.
Just to clarify, the trick I describe doesn't use technology in place of good card handling skills.Objectively I have nothing against the spate of effects using electronic devices, but on a personal level I have never been able to get into them, either as performer or spectator. And I'm not even a Luddite.
Have you learned nothing? You should spend more time on ellusionist.Just to clarify, the trick I describe doesn't use technology in place of good card handling skills.
And I don't sell it either.![]()
What sold the trick this day was my audience looked out the window and felt no sane person would have scaled the building to plant the card.
Dammit! Now I have to drop this from my act.My favorite card trick is the one where the magician takes two decks of cards and shuffles them all together. Then he lets the audience shuffle them some more. This part takes quite a while, especially if there are more than 30-40 in the crowd.
Now while the audience is shuffling up the cards real good, the concession girl can sell some pop corn and soda. I really like the pop corn when it is popped real fresh and it has lots of real butter with sea salt. I'm not sure why, but sea salt just seals the deal for me.
I remember this one club down on Bleeker street that had the best popped corn in Manhattan. I'm pretty sure they could have just had a homeless wino sleeping on the stage and they still would have sold out, just for their fresh pop corn.
I miss New York.
They were probably right. Their only mistake would have been underestimating the level of insane magicians are capable of in order to achieve an effect.
Perhaps I did come across as a bit snarky; for that I apologize. I do not intend to imply that you are stealing the method, but I stand by my meatloaf analogy. I believe that you developed the presentation independent of conscious outside input, but you are not a "wittle kid" now and so presumably are aware that the idea of Peek, Control, Force, Apparent Befuddlement, Control, Reveal is hardly inspirational in itself. I could as well say that I invented the French Drop followed by an across-the-room revelation when I amused my friends with toy dinosaurs. My point is made the stronger by what the gist of my postings have been about: your description spends nearly all it's time on the mechanics of each step and virtually none on anything presentational.
I'm not nitpicking you, nor am I really even criticizing you. It's a very nice independently developed routine for a little kid. For an adult it is only the barest of bones for a very nice routine.
Oooooh, lol, thank you. I never meant to say I had developed peeking and forcing and all, simply the combination of those methods that I learned to form a trickLol, thank you.