Do the Bucks have good magic?

Do the Buck twins create good magic effects?

  • Yes

    Votes: 70 41.2%
  • No

    Votes: 25 14.7%
  • Some good and some not so good

    Votes: 75 44.1%

  • Total voters
    170
Feb 27, 2008
2,354
1
30
Grand prairie TX
That's who they cater to and that's who tends to buy their DVD's.

I think it would be possible to perform their stuff for lay people. You'd just have to cut out all the fancy Sybil cuts and leave in the transpo's and other effects they do.

When I do perform the bucks magic.I do it in a gambling sort of aspect.
If they ever ask me if I can cheat at cards I find a way to use their tricks as examples.
 
Sep 3, 2007
1,255
0
I bought their first DVD set. But passed on the new one. They have some very good stuff but I just don't dig the style. I was actually unimpressed with the queens when I first saw it. It was too fishy in so many ways that I never planned on learning it.
 

D21400

Banned
Dec 16, 2008
200
0
31
Antwerp, Belgium
But where's the mystery? Where's the sublime aspect of wonder?

What the Bucks do is card manipulation, not magic. And it boggles my mind that everyone insists that it must be labeled magic to validate its quality.

For me they aren't magicians: there like pioneers. they perfect and invent sleights. It isn't their job to present but to invent.


D21400
 
Sep 1, 2007
3,818
15
For me they aren't magicians: there like pioneers.

They trudge through long stretches of wilderness and catch dysentery?

Joking aside, I didn't buy the whole Isaac Newton thing the first time because they're not revolutionizing magic, but card manipulation. That is the fundamental flaw of your argument that people seem to be ignoring. Why does it need to be labeled magic? You don't hear me insisting that every band I like has to be called metal in order to be good.
 
Unless i'm wrong, I don't recall anyone naming names (Well except maybe The Queens... but does anyone even consider that a trick, let alone magic?). Do you think that all their tricks are simply nothing more than Flashy Eye Candy? Or do you have specifics you'd like to point out and make special note of? (Deja Vu, Subway, Hofzzy Osbourne, Portal, etc.) Maybe explain a little. I'm just curious. Do you feel that their tricks are capable of being turned into magic through heavy modification and scripting? Or are they simply to far gone to ever be considered magic, no matter what? (Please keep in mind, what was said is refering to the tricks themselves. Not The Bucks.)

I've thought about it for a while now, and I really don't think that The Bucks perform magic. However, I believe that the same ideas, moves, concepts, tricks, ect., put into someone elses hands and mind, can make magic.

(In no relation to the two previous lines.) Right now i'm trying to have some fun with The Ishkabibble Sandwich. I was lookin for a different and unusual way to show the two Sandwich cards. So i'm trying to use the reveal for Headbergs Peak. A quick little illusion. Maybe it'll work, maybe it won't, but dammit, i'm making an effort. Either way, i'll chalk it up to Trial & Error.

For me, i'm fine using them as they are. They're good for the people that come up to you and say "Hey, can you like do something cool with those?" "Sure, watch this...". And you go into something like Tivo or whatever. Those are the people that don't really care much for scripted material. They just wanna see something cool real quick. And it tends to go over pretty good. No harm no foul ya know. Maybe that's just how I see it though.
 

D21400

Banned
Dec 16, 2008
200
0
31
Antwerp, Belgium
If you have to rework something to turn it into magic, then it is not magic.

That is not true. The Bottom deal is a usefull and alone-standing sleight. But you can't use it at is own as a trick you have to build something around it.

Talk hand to mouth, there are hunderd version of it but the bucks reworked it to their style. It's normal you have to rework something to fit your idea, personality, show...

D21400
 

D21400

Banned
Dec 16, 2008
200
0
31
Antwerp, Belgium
Right the bottom deal is a slieght not a magic trick. You have to rework it to become a magic trick. So in a sense the bottom deal is a utility move and not magic.

Yep that's true, but every magic trick is build of slieghts so not a single trick is magic.
So the magic steerpike was talking about is the Harry Potter and Gandalf one. Because all tricks are build out of sleights.

D21400
 
Nov 8, 2008
80
0
U.S.
Okay, look. The bucks are not performers, they're creators. They create material that appeals to them.

On BIG point. I have nothing against people who do D&D's magic for a hobby, but it is not entertaining when performed for a laymen. Their tricks are more like a utility move. They're not magic. They are a starting point that needs to be built upon. And then some of their tricks just aren't good and can't be built on.


ex. Currently, I'm working to take all the flash and flare out of the Queens, and work it into a larger routine.
I'm also reworking portal to make it more practical.

-Dmagic
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sep 1, 2007
3,818
15
That is not true. The Bottom deal is a usefull and alone-standing sleight. But you can't use it at is own as a trick you have to build something around it.

Splitting hairs. If you have to rework a flourish to become magic, it wasn't magic in the first place

It's normal you have to rework something to fit your idea, personality, show...

I wasn't talking about reworking it to fit your style.

Yep that's true, but every magic trick is build of slieghts so not a single trick is magic.

That was a weird leap of logic that assumes a lot of things.

So the magic steerpike was talking about is the Harry Potter and Gandalf one.

Oh spare me. If you can't argue a point without resorting to asinine cop-outs like that, you shouldn't have opened your mouth in the first place.

My whole point has been that Dan and Dave do not have good magic because they don't do magic. They do card manipulation. Card manipulation is not the same as magic. How many times do I have to repeat that before you rabble get it?
 

D21400

Banned
Dec 16, 2008
200
0
31
Antwerp, Belgium
Splitting hairs. If you have to rework a flourish to become magic, it wasn't magic in the first place



I wasn't talking about reworking it to fit your style.



That was a weird leap of logic that assumes a lot of things.



Oh spare me. If you can't argue a point without resorting to asinine cop-outs like that, you shouldn't have opened your mouth in the first place.

My whole point has been that Dan and Dave do not have good magic because they don't do magic. They do card manipulation. Card manipulation is not the same as magic. How many times do I have to repeat that before you rabble get it?

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOH, now i get it.
Sorry dude, i didn't really get it.


D21400
 
Apr 28, 2008
598
0
I'd agree that what Dan and Dave do is really stretching the term magic and card manipulation is a more accurate description of it. I'd say some of their effects are effective with a magical presentation (I find Hoffzy Osbourne comes across as very magical when presented properly) although it certainly isn't inherently magical.

I find that their material is very effective in the right situations, when presented as a demonstration of sleight of hand audiences seem to enjoy it, it's very pleasing to the eye, puzzling and also does provide some moments of astonishment. Although if presented as, or alongside 'proper' magic I can't see it being particularly effective. I do love the work of the Bucks but I keep it seperate for the rest of my magic and perform it seperately, usually with some flourishes.
 
Jan 1, 2009
2,249
3
Back in Time
That is not true. The Bottom deal is a usefull and alone-standing sleight. But you can't use it at is own as a trick you have to build something around it.

Talk hand to mouth, there are hunderd version of it but the bucks reworked it to their style. It's normal you have to rework something to fit your idea, personality, show...

D21400

The Bottom Deal or any other false deal aren't meant to be magical. They are meant to show skill and has a demonstration.

Card to Mouth has been around for decades and really their routine is no different than most others.

Having to rework a script or presentation to fit your style is completely different than having to completely rework an effect that involves 3 versions of the sybil cut and any other XCM move.
 
Feb 1, 2009
980
0
Manchester, UK.
The Bottom Deal or any other false deal aren't meant to be magical. They are meant to show skill and has a demonstration.

You're right they aren't magical, but they help create magical effects. For instance if the spectator thinks your dealing from the top (While executing a bottom deal) and they say stop at any time and they stop at their card.
 
Jul 13, 2014
176
27
Their tricks are great for standup work like parties, restraints, and when someone says to show them a trick, but might not want to sit through a big long routine. Their tricks are kind of flashy, but unless you deliberately act clumsy that's not a bad thing. The reason they seem dull is because most aren't long enough to build a climax and draw attention. So for an actual show, most of them aren't that good. But for strolling, they're perfect.
 
Jul 13, 2014
176
27
Okay, look. The bucks are not performers, they're creators. They create material that appeals to them.

On BIG point. I have nothing against people who do D&D's magic for a hobby, but it is not entertaining when performed for a laymen. Their tricks are more like a utility move. They're not magic. They are a starting point that needs to be built upon. And then some of their tricks just aren't good and can't be built on.

-Dmagic

Actually that's incorrect. The tricks are good and can be magical, but like all magic it's situational. They're perfect for strolling, when a longer trick might not work. I've performed these for laymen and gotten some very good reactions.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Searching...
{[{ searchResultsCount }]} Results