talkmagic.co.uk

I'm putting together a parlor mentalism show for a few people at my college, around 25-30. It will last about half an hour. So far the effects which i have managed to link together are.

-Carrot and the Schtick - Selects person to hold end prediction for duration of show
-Plunge of Death - Spike under cup
-Radar Deck
-Phonebook Prediction

The finale is what bugs me however. I was initially going to do a simplified Berglas newspaper effect, but now an not too sure, I am looking for a strong prediction effect that will be clean as it will need to be locked away in a case for the duration of the show. The lock will be gimmicked and opened by the spec at the end. Any ideas?

Carlyle's buttertub prediction is very good - it is a multiple prediction, ending with a headline prediction. This does mean that if you wanted to predict something other than headlines you'd have to do a little more work with your routining, but it's very possible.

Devin Knight's glass box prediction is apparently pretty similar in effect, if not workings. I imagine it will have similar limitations.

I have heard good things about the buttertub prediction as recomended above.

However, I believe the best way is to do something of your own, and I don't mean in methodology (although that is equally recomendable) but in how you 'frame' the performance; that is, how you wish to present it, the subtleties and details and the spin you put on the effect- for example, rather than having a simple 'add a number swi**h pad' effect, you could have it so that the total of the numbers is the phone number of a friend who will do telephone effect with you or something (just an example) e.t.c. So, keep your eyes peeled for inspiration and be prepared to spend a lot of time thinking and refining.

On the subject of finales there are several things they should do-
-tie any loose ends up from the performance
-bring everything together
-maybe relate to an underlying theme throughout the performance
-be theatrical
-be 'big'
-subtly remind the audience of the other parts of the show
-leave the audience buzzing
Naturally predictions tend to be very usefull for ticking all those boxes and they can be introduced in the start of the show and evoke curiousity throughout. For example in Derren Brown's stage finales they tend to start off in the opener (for example the newspaper prediction). And if you look into his finales they also have reminders of the show (the 'subliminals' for the newspaper prediction reminding them about certain parts of the show and his predictions about what would happen in the show for an evening of wonders was all about reminiscing about the show). Finales are supposed to be the culmination of the show not just an effect although it is very important to have a strong finale. But most importantly is to leave the audience buzzing. In Corinda, Fogel says that one must treat it like a barometre chart- to just build and build and build until it reaches saturation point and then end. That is why subtly recaping the show is very powerful, it brings all of the strength of the show to the fore and lets them bubble.
Finales are a difficult thing, and the thing which will determine the mood your audience leaves the show in and consequently how they reflect on the experience. So, whatever you perform, it doesn't really matter, just ensure that artistically it is engineered to the best of your abilities.

So, the effect is not particularly the most difficult thing to consider, as long as it's strong the effect isn't anywhere as near as important as the performance. I really believe the finale is the most important thing. If I could be as rude as to go back to my Derren Brown example (I use him as an accesable and fine example) he got me obsessed with his work after I saw his stage show 'something wicked this way comes'. Other than his brilliant (and, at the time, convincing) presentation of stopping his heart, the material in the show, I think, is not incredible. But the finale was spectacular- I believed it and it left me and everyone I was watching it with goosepimples and absoluley buzzing and that is why it was so good. That show symbolises, for me, the way that presentation sells it more than anything else- I watch his tv shows and I think 'what wonderful effects'- I watch his stage shows and I think 'what a depressingly skilled performer'.
And so I end on the rather predictable note (That is a very coincidental pun and so I will take credit for how clever it looks) that it is the presentation that sells it- strong effects are helpful, but the presentation is the key.

I am making a seperate addition here, because otherwise... well, the other post was just getting rediculously big.
Anyway, if you are performing osterlind's radar deck I think a better way of performing it is as the tossed out deck, except the spectators look at a card they see in the deck (you call out all the possiblilities). Ted Lesley had a wonderful subtlety in performing this variation- he called out all of the possibilities minus one- which means that there may be one person left standing after you say sit- in which case you know their card and it can add a nice finish the the effect and also means you can do it with one less audience member. I just think that looks a little cleaner than all the fishing.
If I was doing it I would do the radar deck (Derren Brown- oops, there I go again, has a wonderful approach to fishing in his book 'pure effect) as an introduction to the hoy variation. But, I don't want to stifle any creativity, just saying how I'd approach it.
Thanks and good luck

Thanks for the ideas guys, i'll take them on board. I have been looking at the butter tub prediction but to be honest i am not entirely sure what happens, from the description it sounds like postmentalism, can anyone just give me an overview of what happens?

It's a headline prediction, with a number of other predictions, some from the show, which come out of a sealed envelope that has been in someone's possession for weeks or months prior.

You never touch or switch the envelope, they empty the envelope out themselves, and read the predictions.

Can those envelopes just be on stage during the entire show? ...and does he ship to the UK?

Thanks, Phil

Personally I'd recommend that you end with the Plunge of Death as it's a strong enough effect to close with if performed well. That would leave you needing another filler whih should be easier to find.

phillipnorthfield wrote:Can those envelopes just be on stage during the entire show? ...and does he ship to the UK?

The envelope is in sight the entire time - in fact it is never in your possession. The CEO/Event organiser/etc. has had control of the envelope and its contents for weeks or months, and does so right up until they open it themselves and tip out the contents.

It's on the Carlyle Touch, vol.2, or I believe he sells it as a pdf download by itself. The DVD is available from UK sellers, which I imagine is cheaper than buying it direct.

Make no mistake here, it's a headline prediction, with all of the strengths and weaknesses of such things. It doesn't strictly need to be performed as such, but it's going to require more thought if you wanted to do something else with it.

If you want something a little more detailed, feel free to PM me - I won't tip the method or anything, but I was in the same position as you, so I know how little information there is about this effect. It really is worth it, even if it won't suit this performance.

Those who saw Banacheck's show spot and lecture at Blackpool will recall his routine whereby a spec freely chooses a page in a phone directory, a member of the audience choses which colum, another one calls stop as a business card is slowly drawn down that column and the spec calls out the phone number chosen. At that point a pad which has been in full view all the time is turned round and the number written on matches the one just chosen. Easy peasy as well!

Sounds Luverley Mandrake.

Could you point me in the direction of where it's published?

Ta very much.

Sounds exactly like something in Theatre of the Mind by Barrie Richardson.

i'd just like to point out that the "derren brown thing with the newspaper" - is actually david berglas' "thing" originally...

Lenoir wrote:Sounds exactly like something in Theatre of the Mind by Barrie Richardson.

Yep

i'd just like to point out that the "derren brown thing with the newspaper" - is actually david berglas' "thing" originally

oui, je sais merci.