talkmagic.co.uk

what i dont understand is, why they talked about a deck switch in the first place , when the probable method used, is equaly well known and more likely..

Agreed that the M&W effect was tarred with a dirty brush—and sadly that's probably how it will always be seen.

I agree also that there was much more to this than met the eye, and it was totally unfair to focus on the presumed 'deck switch'. I think I am right in presuming that most people here with enough experience know exactly what occurred during that moment.

It didn't, however, dampen their spirits too much. Which was nice.

And after catching the nail gun routine again, I still think that was my personal 'clanger of the night', as watching the second time it was even more obvious—perhaps even to a layperson—as to how the effect was achieved.

Saying that though, it was a thoroughly enjoyable routine—even though my personal favourite of the pair, Mr Teller, was stood there like a spare one, only to facilitate an attempt at demonstrating the precursory stages to a Prince Albert.

daleshrimpton wrote:what i dont understand is, why they talked about a deck switch in the first place , when the probable method used, is equaly well known and more likely..

I suspect that once they'd decided the deck had been switched, they felt they didn't need to think about the effect any more.

I think the premise for the show is flawed. Why not just have a panel of judges and the best act wins. Simple

This constructing tricks to fool TWO magicians is not what i think most here would have thought up as entertainment for Joe Public . . Its hard enought to fool one expert let alone two plus the bad exposure of methods.

Its good banter of course for a forum but bad news otherwise

Overpaid , Overated and Over here

Magical_Trevor wrote:Its a shame because the effort and chat with P&T seemed to have been edited into it so that the whole trick lost all focus and the main thing people remember is the "little fight" with Penn about the REALLY REALLY obvious move ... even if it was put their to look fake :S

I also didnt like the cocky attitude of "would we be able to do THIS" and show a really odd looking book thing and a crazily large bag ... Penn didnt seem impressed AT ALL (he said something like "Do what?" and looked seriously confused ...)

That's why I think people are still discussing it. There was a feeling of dishonesty with M&W when asked if they faked switching the deck.

The comparison further back in the thread with Mathieu Bich's act I think is very different. He had a small box on a table, removed the cards from the box and did his act. It was the only item on the table. That's all. M&W had cards in a box, took out the cards, held the box for a while, made an awkward move with the box and then put the box it in an empty bin. Why not put the box away as soon as the cards are produced (like Bich did)? Why did it need to go into an empty bin? I think the reactions from Penn & Teller with the "no, nothing in here" reveals shows how different the two were. With Bich, Teller jumped to his feet to applaud, with M&W, Penn got a little bit angry.

I understand the art of misdirection but if Penn & Teller asked them if that's why they did it, they should have said yes. Which from the way everything unfolded is how it looked. Although I'm not them, don't know them so could be wrong but as the viewer, that's how it looked. And as I've mentioned before, I thought it was weird Penn & Teller weren't seen to be going up and congratulating them afterwards.

And if what everyone has said of the process previously, Penn & Teller get one shot at guessing the method and they took a gamble and lost.

me_simon wrote:And if what everyone has said of the process previously, Penn & Teller get one shot at guessing the method and they took a gamble and lost.

Exactly. The rules of the show permit P & T a stab at getting it. They took one, and failed. It was a trick that could have been done a number of ways (playing cards instead of silhouettes) and with a number of methods (13 Steps will probably give you more than enough).

They went for the deck switch and got it wrong. Regardless of what M & W said, did, or the way they acted in an effort to disprove P & T's theory, them's the rules of the show.

I've created my own effect that's similar to this using playing cards, and I use one deck that can be riffle shuffled a number of times before I divine the order of the cards. If people explain it away with a deck switch then okay, good for them. They're wrong, but if that's the way they want to see it, fine. Its just a shame there's just not a trip to Vegas resting on it.

Grimshaw wrote:Its just a shame there's just not a trip to Vegas resting on it.

Its a shame that a LOT of people (variety of forums, reviews etc) could very easily come across as jealous because of this very point :/

Dan

Mr_Grue wrote:

daleshrimpton wrote:what i dont understand is, why they talked about a deck switch in the first place , when the probable method used, is equaly well known and more likely..

I suspect that once they'd decided the deck had been switched, they felt they didn't need to think about the effect any more.

True. Thats what you get when magicians try to work out a bit of mentalism.

The methods good enough, I was only watching Ali Bongo use it on a dvd the other day....
I feel that they need to redesign the book though, as real Silhouette
albums dont look anything like that.
it would probably make the "move" cleaner too.

Just wanted to pick up on this point, because I believe it to be wrong.

Arkesus wrote:Have to say, I wasn't a fan of Morgan and West deliberately avoiding Penn's question, by giving the answer to one he hadn't asked.

Penn asked
"So there was nothing done between the time Johnathon shuffled the cards, and he sat down?"

Answer,
"we did not switch the deck."

That's not what he asked, and they know it.

If I watched someone do an ambitious card and they asked me how did they do it I could not reply with, "Well you did something funny after I picked the card." That is not an explanation. It is an obvious presumption.

At that point in time they were wrong.

And as seige said, Mr. Ross cuts the deck later on in the routine. More methods in play.

Well anyway, I enjoyed it.

me_simon wrote:The comparison further back in the thread with Mathieu Bich's act I think is very different. He had a small box on a table, removed the cards from the box and did his act. It was the only item on the table. That's all. M&W had cards in a box, took out the cards, held the box for a while, made an awkward move with the box and then put the box it in an empty bin. Why not put the box away as soon as the cards are produced (like Bich did)? Why did it need to go into an empty bin? I think the reactions from Penn & Teller with the "no, nothing in here" reveals shows how different the two were. With Bich, Teller jumped to his feet to applaud, with M&W, Penn got a little bit angry.

I disagree.

If I understand the effect correctly, a move was executed at the moment that P&T thought they saw a deck switch. But it wasn't a deck switch. So there was no deliberate attempt on their part to throw in red herrings.

West's enthusiasm in showing the empty book and bag is, I think, a reaction to the fact that P&T were following the wrong path, and that they were so close to a win. If I were in that situation, I'd be peeing myself with excitement.

On the other hand. Mathieu Bich very deliberately chose an over-large, proppy-looking box, and removed his deck from it in an unnatural tipping motion - implying that there was some mechanism at play within. This was a very deliberate move to throw P&T off the scent - to the extent that he pasted the word 'NO' inside his ungimmicked box, in full anticipation of Penn calling him on it. Bich very blatently did exactly what M&W are (incorrectly) accused of doing. But Bich got applauded for it, while M&W are being slagged off.

How odd.

Pete

Is it just me, or did Cubic Act (which I thought was beautiful) go on just a little bit too long?

Interestingly, Paul Daniels tweeted that it was an old Ali Bongo illusion that he and Debbie performed some years back. Wonder if it's available to see on You Tube (and is it post- or during the wig years?).

The version Paul & Debbie did, featured in one of his Christmas specials. The box was wrapped with a large red bow.
Paul picked it up with one finger to show it empty, then as soon as it was put back on the table, Debbie stood up.
I seem to remember seeing it on secrets too.
Method wise, its a slight variation on the vanishing feet which Doug Henning did in Merlin on broadway, which in turn is a variation on a number of suspension levetations.

daleshrimpton wrote:The version Paul & Debbie did, featured in one of his Christmas specials. The box was wrapped with a large red bow.
Paul picked it up with one finger to show it empty, then as soon as it was put back on the table, Debbie stood up.
I seem to remember seeing it on secrets too.
Method wise, its a slight variation on the vanishing feet which Doug Henning did in Merlin on broadway, which in turn is a variation on a number of suspension levetations.

An expert sir! I am humbled. Might have a look on You Tube tonight. Watched PD recently a bit - he really was a slick performer and (in my humble opinion) doesn't deserve the ribbing he gets from the popular press these days!

Not to stray off topic, but saw Mr Daniels performing in Edinburgh a few weeks ago - I thought the was fantastic! So much so, we're off to see his Fringe show in a few weeks.

Arkesus wrote:Have to say, I wasn't a fan of Morgan and West deliberately avoiding Penn's question, by giving the answer to one he hadn't asked.

Penn asked
"So there was nothing done between the time Johnathon shuffled the cards, and he sat down?"

Answer,
"we did not switch the deck."

That's not what he asked, and they know it.

Regarless of how much they may going to claim a victory over Penn and Teller, the routine didn't hold my attention (or from reading reviews, nor did it particularly grab many laypeople) and it seems everybody and their mum saw them do the sneaky little move as Johnathon sat down. If there was no conversation afterwards with Penn, pretty much every spectator would have walked away thinking, "well he just swapped the deck for another one, I saw him." and they would be happy with themselves with that, and wouldn't feel fooled or that they had just witnessed anything particularly magical.

To start off, I just want to say I am a complete layman, though at the time Jonathan Ross was taking a seat, I saw something happening which was presumed to be the "deck switch". To me this seemed the likely trick, and as noted would have walked away thinking that is what happened. I do have to commend though the fact that even after Ross split the deck though, they were able to correctly guess the remaining cards.

However, when they were asked this by Penn, the look on West's face showed embarrasment as though he had been caught out, which made me take an even closer look at the act. Slowing the footage to about 20%, I could clearly see a deck in both hands of West just as Jonathan Ross no longer obscures him.

It could possibly be some other form of manipulation that people have speculated at, but I did find it a tad sloppy to have this so visible. Looking that closely is not something I would normally do, though in this case, I needed to see for myself if something had been done - both because it was so obvious, and because of the reaction when asked if that is what happpened.