Bullet

Sep 9, 2007
512
0
Justin Miller clearly can pull it off.

If it's not your style, it's not your style. Don't make bad excuses for yourself saying that the method sucks.

You can try all you want, but you're not going to convince me that "method' (and i use that term lightly) is any good. Even the signed coin part looked sort of cheesy.

Actually they get to see most of the bottle. Only the bottom of the bottle is covered.

However, the bottom is the point where the coin penetrates. To me, it would look better if the hand is not covering the point of penetration.

There are other CTBs, where you can hold the top of the bottle, show that the bottle is empty (including the bottom), and still penetrate the coin through the bottom. Yes the coin flies through the bottom like in Bullet.

Although you revealed alot more than I would have, you've explained my issue with thev trick beautifully. you never get to give them a reasonable view of the bottom. there's tons of effects out there that have more natural handling and show a clear view of the bottom (even FS, for instance)
 
Sep 1, 2007
3,786
15
You can try all you want, but you're not going to convince me that "method' (and i use that term lightly) is any good. Even the signed coin part looked sort of cheesy.

In other words, you just want to be right.

Obviously, there are a lot of other magicians out there who can use this effect just fine. In my experience, the method is seldom more of a problem than the magician, but naturally nobody wants to hear that.
 
Sep 9, 2007
512
0
in my experience, people will defend things with that excuse solely to irritate others.

clearly we have differing opinions.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sep 1, 2007
3,786
15
I think it goes a little beyond differing opinions at this point. To put it another way, I make it a point not to trust people who feel the need to say, "You'll never convince me."
 
Sep 1, 2007
1,356
2
Los Angeles, California
I kind of agree with Phrozunsun... I don't see how this will work on a lot of people... but I guess it does from the trailer.

Also, I find it stupid to have both FS and Bullet on seperate DVDs when they are basically the same trick but the other one is filled with water and the other is empty. I also find it too expensive for the method... it's really common sense and I don't see how this is so "revolutionary" as people and E say.
 
Sep 1, 2007
3,786
15
I kind of agree with Phrozunsun... I don't see how this will work on a lot of people... but I guess it does from the trailer.

Also, I find it stupid to have both FS and Bullet on seperate DVDs when they are basically the same trick but the other one is filled with water and the other is empty. I also find it too expensive for the method... it's really common sense and I don't see how this is so "revolutionary" as people and E say.

You do realize that when I first started out, I said similar things about the Hindu force. Then I saw Paul Green perform it.
 
I kind of agree with Phrozunsun... I don't see how this will work on a lot of people... but I guess it does from the trailer.

Also, I find it stupid to have both FS and Bullet on seperate DVDs when they are basically the same trick but the other one is filled with water and the other is empty. I also find it too expensive for the method... it's really common sense and I don't see how this is so "revolutionary" as people and E say.

Who said it was revolutionary? I just searched the Product page and I didn't see the word revolutionary anywhere.
 
Sep 1, 2007
1,356
2
Los Angeles, California
Who said it was revolutionary? I just searched the Product page and I didn't see the word revolutionary anywhere.

I remember when I use to go to E and people in E heard the E staff saying it was going to be revolutionary. I don't really recommend you try to find it in the posts since it's like a billion pages. But that's what I heard.

You do realize that when I first started out, I said similar things about the Hindu force. Then I saw Paul Green perform it.
I don't get how I'm suppose to REALIZE that when I don't even know you.
 
Sep 1, 2007
3,786
15
I remember when I use to go to E and people in E heard the E staff saying it was going to be revolutionary. I don't really recommend you try to find it in the posts since it's like a billion pages. But that's what I heard.

So rather than check the actual copy, you went by word of mouth.

I hope you learned something from this.

I don't get how I'm suppose to REALIZE that when I don't even know you.

My sentence changed in my mind half-way through typing it and I didn't realize it until just now.

Anyway, my point stands. Everything you've said about Bullet, I used to say about the Hindu force. Think about it. That's a sleight you would not expect to fool anybody. But obviously it works. I've used it effectively myself.

Just because the method is obvious to a magician doesn't mean everyone else is going to figure it out.
 
Sep 9, 2007
512
0
generalizing is a bad idea - because you felt one way about something, it doesn't mean you should feel the same about something else. not every trick you first thought sucked is going to end up being gold.

face it, alot of people think bullet is well...bull...not everyone is going to like every trick.

I'm not knocking E or the guys that created it, but the actual effect. I'll flat out say it, it sucks, and I don't think it would fool most people.If I explained how basic it was, alot more people would agree how ridiculous it is. All I'm going to say is for them to read the post by the other dude who practically exposed it. That's more than enough to figure it out.

There's at least 10 other MUCH better CIB/CTB routines out there. Routines that allow better and fuller inspection of the bottle, a less finicky handling, and overall a better effect.
 
Sep 1, 2007
3,786
15
not everyone is going to like every trick.

No they won't. But stop making lame excuses for yourself. Again I reference the Hindu force. When most newbies learn what it is, they wonder how the hell that could fool anybody. But it does.

All I'm going to say is for them to read the post by the other dude who practically exposed it. That's more than enough to figure it out.

Classy.
 
Oct 10, 2007
224
0
36
All I'm going to say is for them to read the post by the other dude who practically exposed it. That's more than enough to figure it out.

Now that's what I call ethical behavior. Go ahead support exposure or go expose it yourselves. It's people like you who mess up the magic community.

No one is exposing anything here.

Some people said they don't get a clear view of the whole bottle. I said "actually they get to see most of the bottle, only the bottom is covered"

How can that expose anything? People with eyes can see that Justin hold the bottom of the bottle for the demo video.

I think we should not mess up this thread with false accusations.

I remember when I use to go to E and people in E heard the E staff saying it was going to be revolutionary. I don't really recommend you try to find it in the posts since it's like a billion pages. But that's what I heard.

Actually I was one of the people who said Bullet is going to be revolutionary. That is when the creator said Bullet is 1) Totally Impromptu 2) Can be done with a coin that is bigger than the neck of the bottle.

An impromptu CTB done with a big coin has never been done before, hence I thought it was revolutionary.

Turns out that Bullet cannot be done with a big coin if you want to do it the impromptu way. Moreover the big coin method was not taught in the DVD. I felt that I was cheated.

The creator did not lied. He said it can be (1), (2). He did not said it is (1) and (2). He merely presented the facts in a way that would mislead people.

Before Bullet was released, people were saying it was revolutionary. I don't think anyone would say the same thing after it was released.

For people who complained that the method is too simple, or "sucky", we have to remember that Bullet was designed in such a way that beginners can learn them easily. Young beginner magicians are one of the target consummer groups of the Ellusionist. The effects have to be streamlined and simplified so that they can learn them with ease.

Again I reference the Hindu force. When most newbies learn what it is, they wonder how the hell that could fool anybody. But it does.

Good point.

The hindu force is so simple that we thought it would never fool anyone. And we are surprised that it could actually work.

Of course, if you don't like the hindu force, or if you think that it is too simple to fool anyone, try other forces like the classic force Yes, it may require greater skills and more practice, but if you like it just learn it and use it.

Same for Bullet. It might not fool magicians like you, but it is capable of fooling most laypeople. If you think that it is too simple to fool anyone, try other CTBs.

The good thing about magic is there are so many different ways to achieve an effect. You can always find something that would suit you.

There's at least 10 other MUCH better CIB/CTB routines out there. Routines that allow better and fuller inspection of the bottle, a less finicky handling, and overall a better effect.

If you prefer other CTBs go get them. Every CTBs have their own pros and cons.

The con of Bullet might be the fact that the point of penetration was covered. The pro is that it is very easy to perform, and beginners can learn them easily.

Other CTBs might be stronger, but they need a bit more skill or longer set up time.

Look at your own performance style and decide which CTB is the best for you.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sep 9, 2007
512
0
No they won't. But stop making lame excuses for yourself. Again I reference the Hindu force. When most newbies learn what it is, they wonder how the hell that could fool anybody. But it does.

To be honest, I never thought the hindu shuffle was lame. I thought it was kind of clever actually. Simple, yet clever.

Can you guys stop? You've both stated your opinions on the matter, so why keep arguing if you clearly aren't going to change each others minds?

good point. i will if he will.

but he's the one who started by saying i was "making excuses" for myself. I have a legitimate reason for not liking the trick, and was simply saying that - until he came on with a personal attack.

I recognize the fact he may think it's great, but I don't. I'm cool with that, but apparently he isn't and persists on making snide little comments trying to undermine people's abilities.

Now that's what I call ethical behavior. Go ahead support exposure or go expose it yourselves. It's people like you who mess up the magic community.

i don't support it, but it's already there, anyone reading this thread can see it in plain view. I didn't point to some obscure URL, and in all of my posts I've mentioned how I couldn't explain it's major flaw because it would expose the trick.

No one is exposing anything here.

Some people said they don't get a clear view of the whole bottle. I said "actually they get to see most of the bottle, only the bottom is covered"

How can that expose anything? People with eyes can see that Justin hold the bottom of the bottle for the demo video.

I think we should not mess up this thread with false accusations.

you mentioned a little more than that when pointing out the other cons. i didn't say you directly exposed the method, but some of the info could be used to figure it out. To be fair, though, I can't say for sure considering I already have it, so maybe someone who doesn't won't get exactly what you meant.

The good thing about magic is there are so many different ways to achieve an effect. You can always find something that would suit you.

true. totally agree

If you prefer other CTBs go get them. Every CTBs have their own pros and cons.

The con of Bullet might be the fact that the point of penetration was covered. The pro is that it is very easy to perform, and beginners can learn them easily.

Other CTBs might be stronger, but they need a bit more skill or longer set up time.

Look at your own performance style and decide which CTB is the best for you.

true. totally agree
 
Sep 1, 2007
1,572
2
32
Leicester, UK
www.youtube.com
The creator did not lied. He said it can be (1), (2). He did not said it is (1) and (2). He merely presented the facts in a way that would mislead people.

I disagree actually, he presented the facts in a way that could mislead people if they understood it that way. It's like most things in magic, how we perceive the information our eyes receive.

- Sean
 
Oct 10, 2007
224
0
36
I disagree actually, he presented the facts in a way that could mislead people if they understood it that way. It's like most things in magic, how we perceive the information our eyes receive.

People asked for facts about Bullet, and that is what he said 1) Totally Impromptu 2) Can be done with a coin that is bigger than the neck of the bottle.

I asked "Can it be done impromptu with a coin that is bigger than the neck of the bottle?", he did not gave me a straight answer.

When people made assumptions that Bullet can be done with impromptu with a bigger coin, he did not came out and correct it.

When the product was released, it turns out that it cannot be done impromptu with a bigger coin.

This story tells us that it is better to wait for reviews by neutral parties before making assumptions about an effect. Don't get blinded by all the hype.
 
Searching...
{[{ searchResultsCount }]} Results