Hey guys heres my variation of The Queens, hope you like it. 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LvYsdA1xJyE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LvYsdA1xJyE
The Queens
- Thread starter Synth_Infusion
- Start date
have you seen Jordan Lapping's?
For the most part i thought it could have been smoother, i didnt like a lot of the sleights, but i really liked the production. Very nice but could use some work.
Take care man,
Victor Cruz
And we are all MUCH more creative and talented than the originator of this effect, not to mention the fact that we have a much greater understanding of magic in general.
Bill Goodwin- Pfft.
Oh and in case it didn't come across there- SARCASM.
Decent job on the effect FYI. It looked a little clunky and methodical at times but the production was sweet.
CL
Whilst I disagree with Jack's argument - the concept that you must be more talented than someone else to criticise them is rather silly.
I liked the production, I didn't like the sleights, they definitely could be much smoother. The very first placement of the cards back on the deck was probably the worst version I've seen of the first disappearance. Far too much obstruction, like a badly done Polaroid Change.
I liked the production, I didn't like the sleights, they definitely could be much smoother. The very first placement of the cards back on the deck was probably the worst version I've seen of the first disappearance. Far too much obstruction, like a badly done Polaroid Change.
Wait, are you referring that just because a excellent magician publishes, you automatically suggest that its perfect, whereas your opinion will instantly be inferior? That depends on your experience as a magician and the artistic choices your making.
Magic is as we all know an art form, this means whats good for you might be bad for another. 2 extremely good magicians will think differently about effects, example? I know guy who thinks that Open Travelers STINK, though he's one today's top cardmen, and knew Larry Jennings, personally, quite well.
Another example, Dr.Daley invented the Strike double, which many magicians think its great, on other hand, Nate Leipzang hated it like poison.
I happen to disagree with some of Dai Vernon's on the Pass, Marlo's thoughts on an effect of his, and many other things of world's top cardmen. My opinions, however, are NOT born of me being stubborn (and I am such person ) but are educated from my own thinking and analysis, influenced by reading theory and ideas of magicians. While I disagree with some Vernon moves I agree with 99% of them. I just "Used my Head".
Thats said, personally, I HATE this effect ( though not D&D Buck, I'm criticizing the trick, not their skill ). I think its plain show off of your clever ability of hiding cards in the deck, which is fully demonstrated when you produce the cards at the end.
The idea of vanishing cards on the deck appeared first ( to my knowledge ) an effect credited to Frank Garcia ( Apex Aces ), many cardmen devised versions of it. The routine is divided into 2 phases, the vanishes and the productions. The vanishes in D&D version are quite unique, the production simply destroys everything. I don't know Bill Goodwin's routine by if it ends with such production, then I simply think that its extremely flawed, and far superior versions are available.
However, I do like D&D H.Peak, and an R. Paul Wilson effect which is identical to a Bill Goodwin effect, though different methodology. That Goodwin effect is pure genius, as well as his other work.
So, my opinion, the vanishes are cute and work great with good showmanship ( something thats absent in all performances of the trick I've seen so far, though since none were live performances, this is understandable ), the production is, simply, flawed, due to reasons I stated above, would love if anyone corrects me.
Cheers, I'm getting ready to be flamed.
In my opinion the Queens is better suited for magicians who do flourishy type magic. I'm one of those, which is why I enjoy this trick.
Obviously magician purists will have different opinions than me.
Obviously magician purists will have different opinions than me.
I thought it was a nice performance and variation. I personally don't like this trick too much though, but that's just because its not my style.
No, but I certainly think his opinion is more improtant than somebody who can't spell 'Turd'.
As it happens, my favourite handling of the queens plot is Dave Forrests. He's developed the visuals of the queens to fit around an actual magic effect, where the queens do indeed vanish one by one, but rather than a flashy production to conclude (As, lets face it, it's fairly inconclusive), the queens are found surrounding a selection in the middle of the deck. Looks very magical.
No Flaming. I ain't down fo' that.
CL
Well Jack, since you understand that everyone have different approaches to magic, I believe that you fully comprehend the fact that everyone will have different preferences when it comes to magic. It seems to me that you are too eager to prove your point. Whether it is magical or not isn't for you to dicate. I have performed this several times, some find the vanishes magical while some don't. Try to convince everyone, and you will surely fail.
Its not about the vanishes, this is not the point here.
For me its about the final production. Some posters above mentioned that its their style. I dont think its a matter of style because a trick means that you should fool the spectator with it, in this case, it won't, simply because the end production tips the basic idea ( which for laymen, is enough to think that they figure out the trick ).
In other words, its a matter of style, its a matter of trick construction. Don't know about people's style here, but my style demands a trick that fools.
And by the way, I did perform D&D's version, the vanishes played very well, the reaction to the production was as expected "haha, thats clever, so they were hidden in the deck all this time". Good thing I did it as a standalone effect or otherwise, my whole act would be affected by this ( in my own estimation ).
Anyways ..
Cheers,
Yes, I agree with you, but what's could be a better suggestion? Unless it's your last effect, without the reproduction, the spectators are bound to figure out the queens are in the pack anyway.(unless you're hoping they would forget) Based on your perception, going into a collectors effect is plain ridiculous as well. So, any ideas?
Actually, not at all, since the effect is presented as if the cards ACTUALLY GO to the deck, rather than disappearing in mid air. That makes all the difference.
The idea is to give the vanishes something, a meaning, like collectors, cards to pocket ( right out of my heard, not a bad idea at all ). .. etc
While I do have a version, its a cards-to-impossible location mixed up with collectors.
Cheers,
I have to agree with Medifro and Jack Spades here. There can be something very magical about something, cards, coins, whatever, vanishing and reappearing, however, neither Bill Goodwin's original effect or Dan and Dave's variation really acheive this in my view. With some good, audience-involving patter, and without the final production, I think the trick can be improved immensely. As a kicker, I think the queens should be produced from some impossible location, rather than just from the deck.
