talkmagic.co.uk

A_n_t wrote:I guess it depends on how you approach the show.

Yes Richards routine seemed to go on, however, from the point of view of trying to fool Penn and Teller he did a great job. I think getting them on stage is the way forward as it makes it much more difficult to see how the performer has done what they have when you are involved in the whole thing.

Was a bit surprised they did not see how he loaded the billet in to his shoe, however I of course could be mistaken in what I thought I saw!

The case was excellent mis-direction in my opinion but would have liked the effect much more if the prediction had been in the case.

I don't understand why they said it would be so difficult to write it with a swami? The prediction was set out insuch a way that he would only have to write two numbers and three words, he had all the misdirection he would need, and the paper was (I think) strategically folded so that he always wrote in the right place.

I love last nights show, but was dissapointed to see that Daniel Cramer used almost entirely off the shelf patter. Sure, he's got guts for going up there, but I would have liked to see some origionality. At first I didnt mind because I thought he was ten, but if he was fifteen then there is really no excuse for regurgitating someone elses patter.

spooneythegoon wrote:

A_n_t wrote:I guess it depends on how you approach the show.

Yes Richards routine seemed to go on, however, from the point of view of trying to fool Penn and Teller he did a great job. I think getting them on stage is the way forward as it makes it much more difficult to see how the performer has done what they have when you are involved in the whole thing.

Was a bit surprised they did not see how he loaded the billet in to his shoe, however I of course could be mistaken in what I thought I saw!.

I don't understand why they said it would be so difficult to write it with a swami? The prediction was set out insuch a way that he would only have to write two numbers and three words, he had all the misdirection he would need, and the paper was (I think) strategically folded so that he always wrote in the right place.

They were talking about pocket writing. I agree with Teller though - nobody can write that neatly.

Ant I highly doubt you're correct with the load. It is suitably ingenious.

Though Richard can never seem to win; the first show he is criticised for using an easy effect, even though it was by far the most entertaining, whereas in this one he is being criticised for the routine being too long/no substance to it...

spooneythegoon wrote:
I don't understand why they said it would be so difficult to write it with a swami? The prediction was set out insuch a way that he would only have to write two numbers and three words, he had all the misdirection he would need, and the paper was (I think) strategically folded so that he always wrote in the right place.

in a straight line, in the right place, that clearly.. No. Its not possibleto do that.

Its good to see the effect fooled you.

It didnt fool me, because the Illogical late addition of something that was not questioned by P& T on the broadcast, stuck out like a sore thumb.

daleshrimpton wrote:

spooneythegoon wrote:
I don't understand why they said it would be so difficult to write it with a swami? The prediction was set out insuch a way that he would only have to write two numbers and three words, he had all the misdirection he would need, and the paper was (I think) strategically folded so that he always wrote in the right place.

in a straight line, in the right place, that clearly.. No. Its not possibleto do that.

Its good to see the effect fooled you.

It didnt fool me, because the Illogical late addition of something that was not questioned by P& T on the broadcast, stuck out like a sore thumb.

Agreed, I was wondering where on earth that came from all of a sudden.
I thought that contestants weren't allowed to use pre-show, stooges or off-stage assistants? (I'm not saying he used any of those in particular , although he did admit it when they asked)

Seems like a lot of props for what was essentially an object to impossible location routine with a weak mental slant. Wossy seemed to be doing most of it anyway

Fair play to him though, I hope he does well in Vegas, well done Richard.

phillipnorthfield wrote:

daleshrimpton wrote:

spooneythegoon wrote:
I don't understand why they said it would be so difficult to write it with a swami? The prediction was set out insuch a way that he would only have to write two numbers and three words, he had all the misdirection he would need, and the paper was (I think) strategically folded so that he always wrote in the right place.

in a straight line, in the right place, that clearly.. No. Its not possibleto do that.

Its good to see the effect fooled you.

It didnt fool me, because the Illogical late addition of something that was not questioned by P& T on the broadcast, stuck out like a sore thumb.

Agreed, I was wondering where on earth that came from all of a sudden.
I thought that contestants weren't allowed to use pre-show, stooges or off-stage assistants? (I'm not saying he used any of those in particular , although he did admit it when they asked)

Seems like a lot of props for what was essentially an object to impossible location routine with a weak mental slant. Wossy seemed to be doing most of it anyway

Fair play to him though, I hope he does well in Vegas, well done Richard.

Originally there was no 'late addition', but he decided to add that to lead P&T down the garden path of a confab table.

Good on him!

If thats true....it was a stupid idea. it made the whole ending messy.

Lawrence wrote:Nail gun next week!
Complete tosh but SUCH a good act! (as is P&T standard I guess)

I LOVE LOVE the nail gun ... .. Tosh why ? (remember a total idiot talking)

I saw Richard Filming, it did seem to go on for SO long. Everything seemed to take far longer than it should.

daleshrimpton wrote:If thats true....it was a stupid idea. it made the whole ending messy.

Disagreed - he's off to Vegas, with one of the most baffling routines in a long time.

I can't see how it was messy. The White glove gave enormous comedy scope, which was taken advantage of.

daleshrimpton wrote:If thats true....it was a stupid idea. it made the whole ending messy.

I agree.... although I guess they did need somewhere to lay the briefcase....

(and whilst I'm thinking about the briefcase, did Richard not state at the beginning of the act that the prediction was in the briefcase? Or am I just misremembering it....?)

there was already 3 tables on stage. The two with the letters, and the tall flight case affair stage left.
Plus, you had teller standing there ,or not since he was sent back to his seat. The case could of been held.or put down elsewhere.

daleshrimpton wrote:there was already 3 tables on stage. The two with the letters, and the tall flight case affair stage left.
Plus, you had teller standing there ,or not since he was sent back to his seat. The case could of been held.or put down elsewhere.

I knew you were going to say that..... (and I agree.....)

Still, if it was just to add an extra layer of misdirection, then fair play - it certainly seemed to work

At first I didnt mind because I thought he was ten, but if he was fifteen then there is really no excuse for regurgitating someone elses patter.

My point exactly spooneythegoon! Nice to see someone thinks alike.

Klangster1971 wrote:

daleshrimpton wrote:there was already 3 tables on stage. The two with the letters, and the tall flight case affair stage left.
Plus, you had teller standing there ,or not since he was sent back to his seat. The case could of been held.or put down elsewhere.

I knew you were going to say that..... (and I agree.....)

Still, if it was just to add an extra layer of misdirection, then fair play - it certainly seemed to work

yes. But it could backfire, because they are selling the dvd for 26 quid... If people watched that and think they then have to go out and spend money on furniture, its going to make them think twice.

daleshrimpton wrote:

Klangster1971 wrote:

daleshrimpton wrote:there was already 3 tables on stage. The two with the letters, and the tall flight case affair stage left.
Plus, you had teller standing there ,or not since he was sent back to his seat. The case could of been held.or put down elsewhere.

I knew you were going to say that..... (and I agree.....)

Still, if it was just to add an extra layer of misdirection, then fair play - it certainly seemed to work

yes. But it could backfire, because they are selling the dvd for 26 quid... If people watched that and think they then have to go out and spend money on furniture, its going to make them think twice.

Are you really saying that?

This effect wasn't made to be sold. It has just "happened" to be sold. Your argument surely has no substance! First it was "messy" and now it will "backfire" because of sales?

He created an amazing routine, whereby the performance of it wasn't how every other magician would have done it. You can say the same about a lot of effects though, truth be told.

I personally thought it was brilliant, whereas it does seem that this thread is just trying to pick apart every performer.

Are magicians never happy with the magic they see on tv?

If it is Dynamo it is rubbish, if it is "magicians" it is rubbish, and if it is "fool us" then the performances are rubbish. It seems to me that the only magic show that magicians will be happy with is the one that they are on!

I went for this show back in the pilot, and yes I was one of the favourites, and yes I got booted off for reasons that shall go unnamed. But even after all this, I still appreciate the show and believe it to be one of the best modern magic shows to hit the screen, after David Blaine and Derren Brown, with a very good format.

Personally I thought this show had set a really high standard of magic until last weeks show although I thought Piff was brilliant and from this week I liked Richards act but the rest of the acts for me have not lived upto previous standards. Bar the 2 I said earlier and Soma last week and Romany this week who I thought were interesting but missing a little something the rest of the acts in my opinion have been embarassingly poor. I also think Alan Rorrisons routine was good but his character didn't seem to go with the show. Over the last two weeks the show has just seemed to fall to bits for me poor magic, poor acts, inexperienced magicians, poor personality etc I could go on. Hopefully next weeks show will pick up again and reach previous standards I believe Michael Vincent is on again so at least we know we have one superb act already without watching I just hope the rest are up to it. I feel it's a shame because this show seemed to be hitting laymen in the right places which is good for magic. I have also had a few friends say to me the acts have been sub standard to the rest of the shows aswell also I have had magic friends who have said the same so it is not only me it is magicians and lay people have noticed this aswell.