Hey Toby,
POW? Position Of Wonder? POV, right? Am I looking at it from a magician's POV? No.
I find I am really good at pretending I don't know how it is done, and asking myself, "If I knew NOTHING about magic - how would I think this was done?" I usually end up strengthening my magic this way.
The phrase, "it will fly by people" is not where my magic is at, nor do where I want it to head. My goal is to fool 100% of the people I show magic to. When I do my work, I want people to think and think and never suspect anything. I aim for the most difficult guy to fool, you know that guy...sits in the back of the crowd...arms folded, he never laughs or blinks - he just thinks. If you get this guy - you get the rest for free (as Jami Ian Swiss says). My magic is built around this guy - and I think awkwards moments send up subliminal alarms - the kind that people don't express - but they realize it in their mind that you needed to do that "thing" to make your "trick" work.
I think the methods will work...but not for all, they are not the kind of natural and logical handlings required to fool ALL the people. Good magic looks like nothing - not a series of moves that I don't understand. REMEMBER - I look at magic like I don't know moves, as this is how they see it - and whenever I see anything unnatural that makes me go - WHY DID HE DO THAT? I realize this is a moment of weakness, and ask if it relates to method - if it does - I may have to change/ditch it.
Wow, that was a powerful paragraph - that advice was too good to post - God, I am brilliant!!
Seriously, the magic on the first three DVD's is good - it is just not good enough for me. We all have standards - some people like hamburger...some like steak - both are tasty - but one is the better meat. Hell, at least one of us isn't into BOLOGNE - haha - there is a joke there too.
Thanks Toby - good review.
Oh, see I did'nt know that or at least I dont remember that being mentioned before. Not that it matters but I just assumed that whoever presented it was also instructing it. I should have known better. We all know what happens when one assumes.but is explained in silent manner with text (like the other 80% of the effects),
I hope so, were going for disk number four now.Don't worry Morgician, best effects are yet to come, and they are working material
Oh, see I did'nt know that or at least I dont remember that being mentioned before. Not that it matters but I just assumed that whoever presented it was also instructing it. I should have known better. We all know what happens when one assumes.
I hope so, were going for disk number four now.
Cassanova Inc.
This is a sick transposition of two drawing on the back of your business card. I figured it out a few seconds after the performance, but it duped me BAD. It would have totally fooled me, if it weren’t for the “card mixing” to hand the cards out – I think a decent presentation can be hooked to it as well – this could be a nice effect to give your card out. Not that it is my mandate, but it could incidentally romance a few women if approached the right way. Some of the moments of the effect seemed unnatural, like the mixing of the two drawings, but the transpo and convincers are sick. I will replace the mixing with an in the hand turn over move, like used in a in the hands monte routine, and I think I have found one of my first sure fire winners. 8.5/10
Halfmoon Trading Co.
This effect is pretty cool – a selected card vanishes from the deck and appears in the card box, as a kicker the imaginary name they wrote on the back of the deck is written on the boxed card. I could see myself doing this. I am not sure how I feel about the motivation to show the card the way you have to, but it is a pretty powerful effect, if all goes smooth. 8.5/10
Halfmoon Voodoo
A strong effect, I think a better method could be used – again, the issue – pulling the box away after the selection looks like an unnatural way to get rid of the box – why was the box even picked up? I think the effect was strong, but the method is weak. Having the cards examined at the start is not worth the fishy add – when the card can be easily concealed in the deck and the cards shown somewhat fairly. 8/10
Pack of Lies
A vanishing deck, from someone’s pocket – at first, I thought – that is a neat idea. However, I am not sure how you would fit it into an act – as the “set up” would have to be done on approach. Also, I feel you have to prove the deck is there, before you can prove it vanished and appeared elsewhere. I am starting to feel that many of these effects ignore the too perfect theory. Just because people freak out, doesn’t mean that the effect is successful, if you are measuring long term success.
Actually, I originally thought this was great just watching it – and if I wrote this up right away, may have said – awesome – but once I thought about the logistics of actually doing it, i realized some of the weaknesses. 6.5/10
Solid
This is a good effect – it answers some of the issues that Solid Deception has – like, how do you switch in the deck, or give the illusion that a few cover cards are an entire deck (although that does work) – anyhow, not sure if I would use a girl’s name and phone number as the “signed card”, I would prefer to do pre-writing of the audience member, then asked them their name and write it on the spot – or have something on there more meaningful...if you use the magnet concept – you could easily draw a magnet on the back of a card every time. I also don’t like the switch used in the packets – I thought of using a top cover pass to switch top and bottom blocks. I think with some minor handling changes, this one is a great worker. 9/10
Looy's N.I.T.E. Story
Hilarious – I have been part of similar experiences. It is so funny what you can make people do in the name of a card trick.
Overkill - Paul Harris Performance and Explanation
This old effect reminds me where magic has gone – again – this violates the too-perfect theory. If a card is selected in an odd way, it is then shown you have predicted it – they only way that could be done is if you knew the outcome. A buddy of mine, and talented magician, Shane Campbell once said, “finding the card should be more impressive than the fact you knew it” – so this is where “Insurance Policy” fails, but effects where you chosen card appears (magic happens) to reveal it find success. Overkill is just that – overkill – the effect displays the problem with not layering your magic with barriers, but instead displaying the method. I find this true when magicians continuously force a card...you are just displaying a force – so you get a reaction – but there is no magic. This is one of the FIRST rules in learning magic – don’t display a sleight or singular method, especially by squeezing every last bit of juice (known knowledge) out of it. This topic can be a thread on itself.
Eric Mead Interview #1
Again, started off a waste – but what Eric says about new effects replacing old ones – that the new effect must be better – this is how I feel with Unshuffled and Big Tiny – too close in effect, and Unshuffled is by far the better.
Classic Napkin Rose - Taught by Chris Randall
Nice – I finally know how to make these – nice to have a cool give away that is easy to make.
Card Mucking 1 - Jason England Performance and Explanation
I have met Jason England a few times – his card work is amazing – this clip shows that he is one crazy mucker.
Well, I have officially watched 33.33333333, and so on, percent of the TA videos – I agree with Toby, so far this disc has offered some of the better magic on the DVD’s – that being said, I know I will use Solid & Cassanova Inc with some minor handling/presentational changes. Awesome – my first two effects that I feel workable...it only took to disc 3 to find TWO sure winners.
So to catch us up...
I re-fell in love with Twilight Angles, am considering using LVL$ - and found winners Cassanova and Solid – I may revisit a different handling of the Voodoo Card – (Outside of Hollignsworth, check out Nate Kranzo’s).
So far, so good – look forward to more on disc four...yep, I rhymed that on purpose. Enjoy the weekend!
Glad you liked Casanova inc.
I agree about the mixing of the cards and recomend not doing it (i don't)
In fact no move is needed at all.
Since they sign both cards and handle them freely and all the other cards are placed out of the way and it is clear my hands are empty, they know at that point that all you have are two cards and they know what they are(which is true) so i simply take one card in each hand, displaying them and then i turn them face down and assemble them is one hand, as i ask them to hold out a hand or open their wallet.
At this point everything is so fair and honest, all they knoe is you have their two signed cards(which it is) and that is all that is needed, as they have no reason to feel they need to know which is which for the simple fact that in their mind your just getting started and thats why i don't like the mixing, as in my mind, all that does is tell the specs it's important you don't know which is which, and is a prime example of running when not being chased, so all i do is hand them a face down card (which they know is theirs) and then show which one i have a couple of seconds later which tells them which one they have.
Simply put, the specs are not keeping up with which is which and simply seperating the cards with both hands is all that is needed and is natural, as both cards are theirs and you gave them one of them and thats all thats needed based on the full structure of the routine, so i take advantage of how open and fare the handling is since they don't know what the effect is yet anyway.
If you had a spectator take a deck of cards and select two and remember them and tell them to place the two card face down to the side and then asked them to hand you a certain one, they would still have to look and see themselves which card that is, and you havent even touched thecards and that handling could be used for casanova ink also, as it's only important that you know which is which, so you could simply reach over and take one and have them hold the other card and the whole thing up to this point has been completely out of your hands.
Here is a very old clip that shows how i handle the cards and is just as i described above.
Bro did a great job on the explinations, but the mixing of the cards is something i would not do and think the way i do it is much better, as it's a non move while the mixing only forces the spec to wonder which is which, when it's not an issue to begin with.
Here is the link with another link that will give you some other ideas as well.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1y30u6PB4tA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHy-p66kAXA
Hope you find it useful,
Steve
Randy - you don't get it - your inexperience is shining through with your half backed opinions. I am not OVERLY concerned with being dirty, as much as the unnatural add on that happens in Dr. Fun.
The rest of you post is as far off as thinking that you saying, "Ladies - I am Randy for you" is a great pick up line.
Bugjack - thanks - you get it, and I am glad the set is treating you well. If I were new to magic, perhaps this would be a gem - but so far, I am a bit disappointed. A quality set, with a little above average effects on it...but, time will tell.
Also with Dr. Fun the emotional hook is that you KNEW what they're happiest moment was. As for the clean-up. You can simply do it when they are looking at the other cards like "*&^%". Then palm the card into your pocket and viola, you are clean.
Name Dropper seems more like something that you do it, because it's fun and just weird. Al tho the set up is a one time thing unless you happen to carry around 6-20 decks on you. Cuz I don't see any reason after the effect to keep the cards with the letters.
I am sure you could come up with SOME sort of reason or story for most of the other effects. The problem with effects that have you put the cards in there hand is that unless you are doing an hour show for a private party. They take too much time and sort of slow down your presentation. They do add to the deception "how did he deal a perfect poker hand when I shuffled the deck!" but like I said, unless you're doing a longer show and have the time. A lot of this stuff isn't for table hoppers. Cept maybe a select few like twilight Angles which is a quick one on one effect.
The problem with effects that have you put the cards in there hand is that unless you are doing an hour show for a private party. They take too much time and sort of slow down your presentation. They do add to the deception "how did he deal a perfect poker hand when I shuffled the deck!" but like I said, unless you're doing a longer show and have the time. A lot of this stuff isn't for table hoppers.