talkmagic.co.uk

The Effect
Nevermind is a eBook of five mentalism effects from Mat L’Anoire published through David Forrest’s Full 52 Productions.

Cost- $12 from http://www.lybrary.com

Difficulty
3=Some sleights used

Review

Stranger- This is Mat’s approach to performing the Ultra Mental or Brainwave Deck with a regular pack of cards. While this effect is included in a book of mentalism, the routine requires the use of a gimmick, a spread cull, and a DL. While there’s nothing wrong with these techniques, some mentalists may not like the brute force approach to the plot. Others may argue that if the routine can’t be done with a straight deck, then why not just use the standard gimmicked pack. I certainly feel this way. However, if this fact doesn’t bother you, I think you will find Mat’s method to be adequate.

Coin Con- The magician introduces a small envelope which he says contains a prediction. He also introduces four different coins. The spectator selects one. The envelope is opened to reveal a duplicate coin to the spectator’s selection inside. There is no equivoque; the spectator really can choose any of the four coins. However, even though the choice is free, I would suggest using a procedure to slowly narrow their choice down to one coin. Since you are really just predicting something with a one in four chance, a little added drama is probably necessary. The method involved has been applied to playing cards in other prediction routines in the past. It seems like a logical progression to apply the technique to coins. Having said that, I’ve never actually seen it in print. The routine is easy to do and is suitable for the complete beginner. If you like pocket tricks, this is a great one to carry around.

CAANIBAL- ACAAN (Any Card At Any Number) variations are everywhere these days. Enter Mat L’Anoire with his version of the plot. Purists looking for the ultimate version of the classic effect will be disappointed with this approach. There is nothing wrong with it methodologically, but it’s certainly not the Holy Grail many are looking for. Looking at the effect on it’s own, however, I think you will find its workings to be pretty clever.

Scribble- This is my favorite effect in the collection. The spectator writes down the name of a card on the advertising card. The magician isolates the card in the center of the deck, even leaving it sticking out. Amazingly, he is able to reveal the card the spectator is thinking of. This is super clever. There are a few subtleties that really make this convincing for a lay audience. It’s easy to do, practical, and seemingly impromptu. In truth, there’s a small bit of preparation (although the author describes some alternatives), but there’s no major setup. I can see a lot of guys using this.

Isolation- This is a serial number divination effect using a special gimmick built into the card box. For this effect to be convincing, it is absolutely critical that the audience does not assume a switch. I’m not sure that condition is satisfied with Mat’s method. While the special gimmick does it’s job well, here’s how it will look to the audience. First, you show them that you cut a hole in the bottom of a card box. Pulling down the cellophane, you create an “isolation box” for the borrowed bill. You drop the folded bill inside and it falls down through the box and into the cellophone. Everything appears to be very fair, but some will feel that this is a strange procedure. Others won’t feel the need to justify the procedure and will be very happy with the method employed. You will have to decide that for yourself.

Overall
I think the eBook is a good value. It’s avaiable for only $12, so if you find even one effect that you think you’ll use, it will be worth the price. If you’re looking for some interesting close up mentalism pieces, this may be right up your alley.

Recommended.

For more reviews and information on my magic, visit http://www.CalebWilesMagic.com

I bought this. I thought Scribble was incredibly overwrought, and most of the moves were totally unjustified. There's a much cleaner way of creating the same effect using a gimmicked deck.

Dave Forrest has just released the Nevermore dvd/download and all of these effects are taught on it. It's funny, because I think a lot of people will re-consider a lot of the material from the PDF after seeing it performed. It's all very fooling stuff! CAANABLE blew me away! I had forgotten the method from the PDF and was totally fooled by it!

And let's just examine this sentence:

"There's a much cleaner way of creating the same effect using a gimmicked deck."

No offense intended here, but I think the method is clean. Second, why in the world would you use a gimmicked deck when you don't have to?

To eliminate pointless counts and displays to make the effect more direct. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure the effect as described satisfies the requirements of most card magicians, but if you're using cards in mentalism, it's best to avoid anything that requires too much handling.

Here's how Scribble is initially described in the manuscript:

Your participant writes down the name of any card. The performer proceeds to ask a series of questions about the thought of card but the participant is told that he may either lie or tell the truth when answering. The performer then runs through the deck and removes a single card which is placed on the table. The participants thought of card is read aloud and it is revealed that the card on the table is a perfect match.

Here's what happens:

Your participant thinks of any card other than the aces as these will be needed later. As you turn away, you ask the spectator to write their thought of card on an advertising card. You explain that you will be using the four aces. You push them off the deck, turn them over and leave them face up on the deck. You pick up their advertising card and place it in the middle of the deck, stuck out so it remains visible. You put the deck down, then remove the four aces from the top of the deck again, and explain that you will use the four pips as visual aids to help you determine the thought of card. You hold each ace aloft in turn asking the spectator if the suit matches their thought of card; they can lie or tell the truth at this point. Having run through the four aces, you get the spectator to recite the ranks ace to king. You now claim to know what their thought of card is.

You remove the advertising card from the deck and table it. Then you place the packet of aces on top of the advertising card at an angle. You remove a single card from the deck and table it face down. You lift the packet of aces and the adveritising card and read the name of the card written on the advertising card. You count the aces off one at a time into your left hand, ending with the advertising card which is tabled next to the facedown card. You reveal that the facedown card matches the spectator's selection.

This is a busy effect for something that ought to be simple and direct. Here's how I would do it, using an established method from Docc Hilford.

I size up the participant, and ask him a few questions. I remove the spare joker from the deck, write something on its back and leave it in plain view. I ribbon spread the deck, and ask them to look through the cards. One of these, I tell them, will seem more significant to them than the others. I ask them to name this card. It is pushed out of the spread and left with the prediction. The rest of the spread is collected and tabled. The prediction is turned over and is shown to match the chosen card.

If I had to choose between these two presentations, I'm going to go with the second. It has less business, a far more efficient method, and is internally much more logical. There's a lot of flim-flam going on in the first presentation; the need for visual aids for the suits but not for ranks, the ruling out of the aces as choices for a reason that doesn't make sense to the effect, but does facilitate the method; leaving the advertising card sticking out of the deck rather than on the table or (heaven forbid) in the sweaty clutches of the spectator; using the advertising card to write on in the first place; the dealing through of the four aces at the end, which again serves no purpose to the effect, but does serve a purpose to the method.

Scribble does have in its favour the use of a standard deck of cards (with an extra added something) but if I were to routine such an effect and wanted to use cards elsewhere in the set, I'd still go with Hilford's method.

The Hilford effect sounds very good, I must say. However, at the end of the day, it is kind of difficult to compare them as they are different effects. Dave's is a mind reading effect. Hilford's is a prediction.

I just watched Scribble again. It doesn't feel over handled when you watch it. But this is just my opinion.