theory11 — Magic Tricks & the World's Finest Playing Cards
David Blaine?
- Thread starter spade57
- Start date
- Status
Dude you really need to start reading books. I get that English is a second language for you (possibly a third, I don't know what it's like in Egypt right now), but reading books in a foreign language on subjects that interest you is one of the most effective ways to learn that language.
David does have a lot of original material that was developed between him and his consultants specifically for his specials, yes. On the other hand, a lot of it is rooted in pretty timeless fundamental principles. Watch clips of his original special Street Magic. It's loaded with material that most of us know by heart just by reading books like Mark Wilson's Tarbell, Royal Road, Modern Coin Magic, Self-Working Mental Magic, etc.
David does have a lot of original material that was developed between him and his consultants specifically for his specials, yes. On the other hand, a lot of it is rooted in pretty timeless fundamental principles. Watch clips of his original special Street Magic. It's loaded with material that most of us know by heart just by reading books like Mark Wilson's Tarbell, Royal Road, Modern Coin Magic, Self-Working Mental Magic, etc.
i appreciate your help and yes english is my third language after arabic and french
but of course blaine uses stooges during some performances
You'd be surprised. The mechanics behind a lot of mental magic and mentalism are actually deceptively simple even by the standards of magic. I have several books sitting on my shelf right now that most people here would read and think they got ripped off but are in fact filled with material that I use in the real world all the time. It's mostly about having the experience to perform it with a straight face and the sheer stones to just do it at all. A real working mentalist should ideally have balls so huge they collect their own atmosphere. But I'm getting off on a tangent.
Point is, David does use the occasional piece of stoogery or editing, but only if he believes it makes the effect look better on TV. He understands how the medium works better than almost anyone else. When you just go ahead and assume a stooge is used, you're thinking like a layman, not like a magician.
Point is, David does use the occasional piece of stoogery or editing, but only if he believes it makes the effect look better on TV. He understands how the medium works better than almost anyone else. When you just go ahead and assume a stooge is used, you're thinking like a layman, not like a magician.
Or maybe He has multiple outs on the wall. Maybe just maybe what we don't see is the 20 or 30 minutes he spent with these people getting a read on them. Then had one of his production team prep the wall with his five or six out. When while working them he keeps moving hem down the road to the wall. That is the difference between a creative magician with years under his belt and a new magician who still needs to learn the basics.
so can any one recommend any books to learn easy mentalism but with great reaction i think that the more simple the effect the more bigger the reaction when i classic force a card and reveal it slowly colour suit number they think that i can read their minds :d
btw i need something totally impromptu i never use gimmicks that not my style
btw i need something totally impromptu i never use gimmicks that not my style
i have been performing for 5 years
i dont own books
i started on youtube then i started buying dvds like trilogy dnd surfaced chad nelson mystique d+m tricks volume and volume 6 daniel garcia + some dan and dave on demands like twizinser by helder guimareas and some more
i dont own books
i started on youtube then i started buying dvds like trilogy dnd surfaced chad nelson mystique d+m tricks volume and volume 6 daniel garcia + some dan and dave on demands like twizinser by helder guimareas and some more
Your original request to be pointed in a direction that would culminate in understanding and being able to perform Blaine-esque effects is in direct conflict with your desire to apparently spend as little time as possible learning the basics (both of magic and presentation.)
Your desire for simple effects is an admirable one. Building a beautiful presentation around an otherwise "mundane", straight-forward effect is a wonderful thing. However, I believe you may be coupling "simple effect with a great reaction" and "easy to learn" when, in fact, the inverse is true. The more pure the effect, the more effort one often has to put in. It takes time. Let's take a simple (and I use the term "simple" tongue-in-cheek) psychological card force. It's hardly enough to, say, parrot one of Derren Brown's in order to elicit the correct card. Rather, one must learn to read their audience (is this even someone with the type of personality that will be receptive to the force?) learn how to present the force with the right cantor, cadence, and emphasis (what words will you include and stress to drive them towards the desired card?) not to mention your body position and every purposeful movement to reenforce the desired card.
That all takes time. Plenty of it. The effect is simple, and it has a huge reaction. The price one must pay is years of study and gaining experience by performing, failing, learning, and trudging onward.
A poster above noted that a key item to have in one's arsenal for the kind of straight-forward mentalism you seek is a set of balls like the King of Bayonne. Those are very wise words. I remember grabbing a copy of Building Blocks some years back at the beginning of a Luke Jermay lecture. Thumbing through, I was baffled at some of the things purported to work. Most of the effects I glanced over had me scoffing and shaking my head. Then, I saw him perform. The effects worked because everything about his performance and every single word out of his mouth wove a tapestry of confidence that *made* them work. I still had a lot to learn (and it's worth noting that that never ceases to be the case.)
Finally, I do want to answer your question honestly, even if I suspect you're not ready for the material: You want a recommendation of a book you definitely don't already have that contains a straight-forward, impromptu mentalism effect that involves cards and uses no gimmicks? The Mental Mysteries of Hector Chadwick has a color sense effect so bafflingly fantastic that I stopped using the one from Card Fictions that's been one of my go-to effects for ten years. However, I'd strongly suggest giving 13 Steps and Practical Mental Magic both a read first, if you haven't already.
Last edited by a moderator:
Well there's your problem, none of the basics. Here is a list of books that will give you the basics that you need.
Original Tarbell Course in Magic by Tarbell.
Royal Road to Card Magic, by Hugard & Braue.
Modern Coin Magic by Bobo.
Abbott's Encyclopedia of Rope Tricks by James.
Mark Wilson's Complete Course in Magic
Amateur Magician's Handbook by Hay
Magic and Showmanship by Nelms
It's everything a growing magicians needs. And yes you have to has a large set to pull off some things. I'm not a skinny man but I still levitate that takes a set.
Last edited by a moderator:
here is my mentalism list
classic force reveal
pk touch
calendar (knowing each day )
out of this world blaine's version
prediction classic force then reveal
caan my version 90 % misdirection
i want something ungimmicked with or without cards
Why yes, yes i do. Forcing a card and then telling them what it is is just a card trick. Out of this world is a color separation.
Mentalism is more. It's something that takes years of practice and most of the time use a few props. It takes a very special skill set. It is heavy in showmanship and stage presence. It having the ability of cold reading people. It takes on many forms from TV psychics like John Edwards to the TV faith healers to guys like Max Maven. What it's not is a guy with a deck of cards doing forces. Also if you want gimmick free then maybe menatlism is not for you. There are some pretty basic gimmicks used.
Mentalism is more. It's something that takes years of practice and most of the time use a few props. It takes a very special skill set. It is heavy in showmanship and stage presence. It having the ability of cold reading people. It takes on many forms from TV psychics like John Edwards to the TV faith healers to guys like Max Maven. What it's not is a guy with a deck of cards doing forces. Also if you want gimmick free then maybe menatlism is not for you. There are some pretty basic gimmicks used.
Just a point on that. Wouldn't you say that, possibly, the dividing line between magic and mentalism is more down to approach to performance than to effect selection? For example, I'd say that when Uri Geller bends a spoon, it's mentalism, when David Williamson does it, it's magic, and when Neo does it, it's neither. The same effect can be presented in different ways to fit a particular aesthetic. Given that, would you perhaps agree that a performer could present a simple card force or, indeed, Out of this World in a way which would still fall withing the parameters of mentalism?
A magic trick would be having the card selecred. A mentalism effect would be just having them think of the card and having said card be written down from the outset. Out of this world could be but you would ha e to set it up properly. Maybe as an impromptu demistration of the power of suggestion like the Dan Harlan handling.
so spell by shin lim is just a card trick and not a mentalism how ?
i think that it is all about the presentation when david blaine asks stephen hawking to think of a card and it is in bottom of the deck if he snaps his fingers and say your card will be now in bottom so this is magic but if he says i predicted that and i did it from begining this is mentalism right ?
i think that it is all about the presentation when david blaine asks stephen hawking to think of a card and it is in bottom of the deck if he snaps his fingers and say your card will be now in bottom so this is magic but if he says i predicted that and i did it from begining this is mentalism right ?
Why would a mind reader need a deck of cards. You are trying to convince them you can read minds not do card tricks. Look up Craig Browning books on mentalism. Look at his post here on the forum. Look at steerpike's post on mentalism. It's not something you pick up quickly.
Although I agree with a lot of what your are saying, I don't fully agree with this. You mentioned Max Maven in a previous post and I have seen him use a deck of cards many times to perform an effect. At an EMC he even gave a talk, using a hindu shuffle force (which is a force I hate mind you) as his primary example of what he was explaining. I myself use a force and mental reveal as a opening phase of a longer routine using cards and close the routine with a card/mentalism effect from Maven's PRISM book, I would class this as a mentalism routine and not card trick routine. I do agree that its a fine line when using cards to whether you are doing a card trick or a mentalism effect, it comes down to how your present it and even how the deck is used in context with the effect.
No such thing. Mentalism is not a sub-genre of magic, it is its own genre of the performance arts. Magic is about the suspension of disbelief. Mentalism encourages belief. It's a subtle difference but an important one.
- Status