Last time I checked magicians altered or demonstrated powers that bend reality. Magic defies natural laws and physics that ever laymen comes in contact with from day to day life. I have not bought the dvd from Jay, but from what I've observed this probably isn't supposed to be taken for face value or just for the methods behind the tricks. The "gimmickiness" of a trick is simply the collision of your style of performance, to his. But the pitch of the theory behind the effects he is presenting is still very much so valid.
Magicians who watch the video should understand the concept then apply that to their magic so that it becomes less of a pull out my deck of cards trick, to situational magic. SURE, some of the effects will not work out of context or make logical sense. It's not supposed to be taken fully at face value, it's making you think as a performer instead of spoonfeeding you like a baby every fricking detail about the trick and methodology and the theory behind it. What ever happened to people actually thinking about their magic? If you aren't a beginner in magic and using dvds you should be taking notes not only on methodolgy but, asking yourself how can I make this better? Where could I use this? What would I change about this? Who is my target audience with this? There is a wealth of knowledge available to you all out there, everyone who has had any longstanding experience performing has something of worth to learn from.
My mistake, I accidentally switched those names up in my last post.
@Keo - I completely agree with what you are saying, minus the presumptions. I do that for all tricks, I make it my own by modifying it to match my performance style. Sure, you could definitely try to do that to any one of Jay's effects, which is why I stated that I appreciate his work multiple times. They are valid effects and methods.
My critique of his performance style and the low quality of the production doesn't automatically mean that I expect every detail to be spoon-fed to me. I have two separate opinions about (1) the magic tricks he is releasing (particularly in this DVD) and (2) the production quality and style; they are both sub-par. I hope that is clear. One good be strong while the other is weak. I have seen some great effects on VHS tapes that look terrible, and I have seen T11 release some beautifully produced tutorials for effects that I find weak in and of themselves. Jay just happened to fail on both of them this time in my opinion. Here is a great example: The old Penguin Magic videos that Oz Pearlman did were really cheesy, but the contents were amazing.
The method has almost nothing to do with how spectators remember an effect, unless it is highly suspicious to begin with. Like a "magical box from Houdini's grave" or a "mysterious wand from a world beyond." I don't like the idea of promoting magic that relies on using awful explanations and excuses that have to be concealed by equally bad patter. These effects are not flexible and dynamic, the methods are often impractical, and they are relatively weak for my performance style. The cheesy performances and video editing is just icing on the cake for me - that is less important than the actual effects.
Lastly there is a difference between leaving a trick open for people to think about and become creative with and an artist not giving much thought to an effect. I am not accusing Jay of this, because I'm confident he does work these effects to death, but I want to make that distinction clear. At the end of the day, the tricks themselves and how we can make the spectators experience and remember them are what matter; it just so happens that the tricks on this DVD aren't that good, even if you do work them for months. I would loved to be proven wrong on that. If someone could take these effects and make them look cool, I would rethink some of the effects I got in the past and dismissed because I felt they couldn't match a modern close-up performance style.