This is a method that I have been working on for a while. Tell me what you think.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxdcYszDoFo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxdcYszDoFo
New Sandwich Method!
- Thread starter skeryliuk14
- Start date
Very hard to tell with all the different angles and camera cut. Could you please record on continuous shot so we can see the full idea, thanks.
ehhh... I don't know...maybe it's just because I've seen so many other sandwich routines and I know so many that this one didn't seem very impressive. The thing about sandwich routines is you have to have something that makes it pop and that is unique in its presentation. Without that it's just white noise. This one seemed too reminiscent of other popular sandwich routines and didn't really pop.
Whilst I can appreciate the method, and whilst it is not new it is not the normal approach to the sandwich plot.
if you wasn't me to be brutally honest I hated the routine. Please don't take this personally but sometimes you need to look at what you don't like about an effect to make it better. And everything I hate about sandwich routines was present within your routine.
the first thing is that you remove the sandwich cards from the deck only to replace them after the card is selected. I personally believe revealing the card within the deck is the weakest possible place for a card to appear. Couple this with the face the sandwich plot makes very little sense as is, it makes your particular framing if the effect a little off. Whilst there are ways to justify sandwich cards and the plot as a whole (simple sandwich by Aaron Fisher is very good)
The second point if that your effect looks like a demonstration of skill rather than magic. whilst this is fine it wasn't an impressive demonstration of skill. I looks like you riffled one card between the jokers. If you want to demonstrate skill in the context of a sandwich routine maybe look at something like riffle shuffling the selection between the jokers or catching the selection with the jokers as you dribble.
Finally the reveal is terrible, there is a card between 2 face up jokers it is perfectly framed at this point. However, you still need to switch the card for the selection. Whilst there are ways to do this it is not the best idea this is when there is the most heat on you.
I know it may sound harsh but you have made the methodology harder than it needs to be and inturn made the magic less direct. Look at Eric Jones`sandwich routine, it is fairly standard in method however it has a nice visual aspect.
if you wasn't me to be brutally honest I hated the routine. Please don't take this personally but sometimes you need to look at what you don't like about an effect to make it better. And everything I hate about sandwich routines was present within your routine.
the first thing is that you remove the sandwich cards from the deck only to replace them after the card is selected. I personally believe revealing the card within the deck is the weakest possible place for a card to appear. Couple this with the face the sandwich plot makes very little sense as is, it makes your particular framing if the effect a little off. Whilst there are ways to justify sandwich cards and the plot as a whole (simple sandwich by Aaron Fisher is very good)
The second point if that your effect looks like a demonstration of skill rather than magic. whilst this is fine it wasn't an impressive demonstration of skill. I looks like you riffled one card between the jokers. If you want to demonstrate skill in the context of a sandwich routine maybe look at something like riffle shuffling the selection between the jokers or catching the selection with the jokers as you dribble.
Finally the reveal is terrible, there is a card between 2 face up jokers it is perfectly framed at this point. However, you still need to switch the card for the selection. Whilst there are ways to do this it is not the best idea this is when there is the most heat on you.
I know it may sound harsh but you have made the methodology harder than it needs to be and inturn made the magic less direct. Look at Eric Jones`sandwich routine, it is fairly standard in method however it has a nice visual aspect.
haha I'm currently reading "The Importance of Being Earnest" by Oscar Wilde and one of the more famous lines is "...oh no, I believe that if one has something unpleasant to say one must always speak candidly..." and what DICER said, while unpleasant was true. When looking for a method try to make things easy on yourself. Just because it is hard does NOT mean that it is more impressive. I still hold that the sloppy shuffle triumph is one of the most powerful versions of triumph yet it is one of the simplest and most direct. Food for thought that just popped into my head, why don't you try using a table spread to show the card in between the jokers and maybe have the audience place the jokers in the deck. I realize a drastic change in method will be required to accomplish said actions, but it might improve the trick by having it more fair and put the magic in the spectators hands more.
If I were to release a video on the wire teaching some different things to use with the method that I call the Anti-Cull which is a variation of the cull. Would that be good?
I think the big weakness of this routine is placing the jokers on top of the deck for no ostensible reason. If there was even a weak motivation to put the jokers on top of the deck, that may make it better.
That being said, it may serve you well to look into some of the other sandwich routines out there, and see how they address the issues.
That being said, it may serve you well to look into some of the other sandwich routines out there, and see how they address the issues.
Sammuel:
I can tell that you have put a lot of thought and practice into this. I'd like to give you some feedback on your performance and your thinking.
First off, you seem to be over-proving a lot of things including that there are only two jokers at the beginning and that the queen is a single card and that there are only two jokers when you take them out of the pocket. From what I suspect is the method, you are proving things that really aren't an issue. I think part of that is that you are viewing the effect as a magician and wanting to stump your fellow magicians. However, the problem with doing that for lay audiences is that is just makes them more suspicious.
Second, your turnovers of the jokers and the queen (including turning the queen face down) seem unnatural. I know a lot of people give advice to make your single turnovers look like double turnovers, but that is assuming the single turnovers are being done from the top of the deck, not from the middle of the deck.
The cuts you use to lose the card in the deck are not fluid enough and, in my opinion, are too much. The audience is thinking he must be doing something. I would go for something more simple here such as a diagonal insertion or a double undercut. Probably the best sleight to use is Lee Asher's Losing Control followed by an overhand shuffle -- that way it looks like the card was inserted into the middle of the deck and then shuffled.
I do like how you got the queen into position for the final reveal, but the problem is doing the reveal on the top of the deck where you move both jokers above the queen. As an initial matter, you are handling the deck too much by even squaring it up -- anything you do at this point looks suspicious because the heat is on you. Further, the reveal doesn't work. If the card was between the jokers you would reveal it between the jokers. I like the thinking on the move behind the final reveal, but I think the move doesn't work in that situation and seems to have bad angles.
Now some advice about the thinking. How about this for an effect: Put two jokers in your jacket pocket, have the spectator pick a card and put it into the deck. Hand the deck to the spectator. Waive the jokers over the deck and show that a card has appeared between the jokers, reveal that it is the spectators card. Can be done with some set-up and single slight. It would look more magical to your audience. Sometimes simple is better.
I can tell that you have put a lot of thought and practice into this. I'd like to give you some feedback on your performance and your thinking.
First off, you seem to be over-proving a lot of things including that there are only two jokers at the beginning and that the queen is a single card and that there are only two jokers when you take them out of the pocket. From what I suspect is the method, you are proving things that really aren't an issue. I think part of that is that you are viewing the effect as a magician and wanting to stump your fellow magicians. However, the problem with doing that for lay audiences is that is just makes them more suspicious.
Second, your turnovers of the jokers and the queen (including turning the queen face down) seem unnatural. I know a lot of people give advice to make your single turnovers look like double turnovers, but that is assuming the single turnovers are being done from the top of the deck, not from the middle of the deck.
The cuts you use to lose the card in the deck are not fluid enough and, in my opinion, are too much. The audience is thinking he must be doing something. I would go for something more simple here such as a diagonal insertion or a double undercut. Probably the best sleight to use is Lee Asher's Losing Control followed by an overhand shuffle -- that way it looks like the card was inserted into the middle of the deck and then shuffled.
I do like how you got the queen into position for the final reveal, but the problem is doing the reveal on the top of the deck where you move both jokers above the queen. As an initial matter, you are handling the deck too much by even squaring it up -- anything you do at this point looks suspicious because the heat is on you. Further, the reveal doesn't work. If the card was between the jokers you would reveal it between the jokers. I like the thinking on the move behind the final reveal, but I think the move doesn't work in that situation and seems to have bad angles.
Now some advice about the thinking. How about this for an effect: Put two jokers in your jacket pocket, have the spectator pick a card and put it into the deck. Hand the deck to the spectator. Waive the jokers over the deck and show that a card has appeared between the jokers, reveal that it is the spectators card. Can be done with some set-up and single slight. It would look more magical to your audience. Sometimes simple is better.