talkmagic.co.uk

Heckler wrote:Or instead of trying to work out how he did it, work out how you would do it?

Then try and work out how to do it better.

Mandrake wrote:

Heckler wrote:Or instead of trying to work out how he did it, work out how you would do it?

Then try and work out how to do it better.

Ah yes ... the old "gotta be one up" mentality Im re-reading some REALLY old books, and have just read a self working poker assembly ... pretty much identical final outcome to a recently released trick, but it uses a gaff deck - you'd never know, but oh its so much nicer (but the new release would argue it's "better" because its a new method)

Dan

Heckler wrote:

Lord Freddie wrote:Now instead of analysing someone else's act, why not spend time working on your own?

Or instead of trying to work out how he did it, work out how you would do it?

Or try and think of doing something original rather than copying someone who has been on telly....

Lord Freddie wrote:

Heckler wrote:

Lord Freddie wrote:Now instead of analysing someone else's act, why not spend time working on your own?

Or instead of trying to work out how he did it, work out how you would do it?

Or try and think of doing something original rather than copying someone who has been on telly....

Oh dear, I've obviously caused some offence. Just genuinely curious and it seems natural to me to think about how someone created (and effected) a routine I've really enjoyed. Not for the purposes of trying to copy it and certainly not to present magic as a puzzle (to the general public at least). I love mentalism and the astonishing effects it produces - I simply admired the man. However, I shall keep my head down in future and my opinions to myself. Apologies.

It's not that, it's the fact there seems to be far too little congratulating someone for doing something they have worked hard on and far too much pulling it apart so the keyboard magicians can prove how 'clever' they are.

As previously stated this guessing game (which is obviously inspired by Fool Us itself - and who says magicians are beyond being influenced?) is just as bad as an annoying specatator throwing incorrect guesses at you whilst performing (if you are one of the minority here who actually perform).

Lord Freddie wrote: (if you are one of the minority here who actually perform).

Behold the magic forum equivilent of Godwin's law.

Heckler wrote:

Lord Freddie wrote: (if you are one of the minority here who actually perform).

Behold the magic forum equivilent of Godwin's law.

Clever boy, have a peanut.

So who's winning the "I'm the cleverest competition"?

Surely it would be easier to purchase the book this effect is if people really, really want to know the correct method!

It would be nice to see magi congratulating those that appear on television for a change rather than tearing them apart and picking holes...

Lord Freddie wrote:It would be nice to see magi congratulating those that appear on television for a change rather than tearing them apart and picking holes...

Couldn't agree more, and as we've seen on the P&T thread and on the Dynamo threads on various forums that just isn't happening. Personally I think any magic on TV is good and anyone prepared to put themselves up to be on the TV certainly earns my respect.

I think going back to the topic at hand, we all (and by all that is a fully inclusive statement that covers all magi whether you earn money at this or not) need to watch magic as a lay observer for a change, for a moment put aside that magician's mind and just enjoy the show.

Just the opinion of one voice, the validity or otherwise I leave to others to decide.

Heckler wrote:

Lord Freddie wrote:It would be nice to see magi congratulating those that appear on television for a change rather than tearing them apart and picking holes...

Couldn't agree more, and as we've seen on the P&T thread and on the Dynamo threads on various forums that just isn't happening. Personally I think any magic on TV is good and anyone prepared to put themselves up to be on the TV certainly earns my respect.

I think going back to the topic at hand, we all (and by all that is a fully inclusive statement that covers all magi whether you earn money at this or not) need to watch magic as a lay observer for a change, for a moment put aside that magician's mind and just enjoy the show.

Just the opinion of one voice, the validity or otherwise I leave to others to decide.

Very fair comment (in my humble opinion). Had I the courage to attempt to fool P&T on national TV (which - I freely admit, I never would) - I think I would be greatly flattered to think that other magicians (of all levels of ability and experience) were actually trying to work out how I'd done it!

I think the greater problem with the programme is the fact that Penn is forced to reveal just enough information to allow the general public to go and look things up. Just saying!

I think that in the grand scheme of things, we can "argue" as much as we want; magicians will have a 90% idea on how a trick is done and 90% of lay people WONT.

Here though, we are trying to encourage an active discussion (which we have suceeded in?) about the show, its prospects for magic / performers etc.

In HIGH contrast, their twitter / facebook accounts are coming under HUGE scrutiny from self confessed keyboard warriors (who fall under the same category as webcam magicians, who do not perform yet feel that they have the right to reveal tricks and over-inflate their ego).

I think that the guy is amazing, I've met him before at lectures and he is (like a worryingly large number of magicians) VERY humble about what he does - even in the P&T promo, he said he was fortunate that his books were selling really well.

I think that what he did was amazing, it had the Edwards family (Me, my Dad, my Mum and my sister and her boyfriend) all screaming and freaking out when we watched it; my Dad claiming that he must have paid the audience, my Mum freaking out and asking me if I could do that, my sister just shocked as hell and her boyfriend trying to work it out in his head (and failing).
THAT is what magic should be - a group of people left baffled and entertained - Nick did that and the show (bar maybe a few of the acts ) are doing that REALLY REALLY well, which makes a change for Saturday night tv

As for Dynamo, I've said before- his style isn't particularly favorable to me, but the show is great to watch - its done wonders for how many people talk to me about magic (which I LOVE, its my hobby after all), where I learned my stuff, how I got into it - I think that as magicians / entertainers / mentalists (whatever title you wanna give yourself) we seem to forget that the story behind how he got to where he is is equally as interesting as the tricks he does, a lot of people have now started asking where I get my stuff from, who I learn it off, why I do it etc.

As for reaction, most people I've spoken to have said things like "That guys face was a picture; he freaked out when he moved the cards ... I remember when you got my card in your mouth, I know just how that guy feels" ... Its a SHARED feeling of enjoyment

Personally, I love the show ... but it is just that A SHOW (edited for tv, so its never going to be perfect, but its pretty damn close)

Dan

*Rant Over*

What did everyone think of tonights show?

I thought it was average for the series to be honest. Strange how a cups and balls and quick change went on, obviously just for pure publicity.
There's a lot of fuss on the cafe about how Colin used something he has sold and got it nearly exposed. Of course he has the right to do what he want's but I won't be using it anymore. Not after the sudden rise in people doing bank night with written envelopes

Maybe I'm seeing conspiracies here all over the place , but wasn't a little odd how the randomly chosen spectator by Penn happened to be with Iain Sharkey?

I quite enjoyed the show. I really like Colin's stuff and thought the presentation was strong, I do not know the effect but might be interested in it if someone wants to PM me the name of it.

I really liked the quick change under the glitter, I had not seen that ending before.

Gazzo is famous for C&B and just clearly defined the two lines the participants fall in to: Those who want the publicity and those who want to fool them.

I liked the Swedish guys too although it seemed to lose pace a little in the middle it picked it back up again. I assumed card switch too so was pleasantly surprised it wasn't.

It certainly wasn't the best of the series. I enjoyed Gazzo as a performance though obviously it wasn't going to full them. Colin McLeod baffled me. The quick-change act was a little too cabaret for my liking and I found myself wondering why it was actually on the show. Entertaining for those who like that kind of thing but not really my cup of tea. And I loved the Swedish guys. Made me laugh.

I actually thought Penn & Teller's performance was the weakest of the night.

Have really enjoyed the series but thought tonight's was pretty lame.

I too can't understand why they put in standard routines like cups and balls/quick change. Has the emphasis changed? What happened to "fool us"? What's next week - sawing a lady in half and three card monte?

Liked the last routine. I shouted "b****cks" when they said it wasn't a switch but can see now how else it could be done. This time I really think they put the fake switch in to mislead P&T. They could have so easily unfolded the card straight away to rule out that possibility.

Tim

And, yes, that was P&T's weakest yet. Basically a standard rope routine but with different, larger material?