talkmagic.co.uk

Ed Wood wrote:Best magic show on prime time tv for years, loved it. My only complaint, and this comes from a magicians point of view, was Ben Earl getting through. I found that slightly contrived, it's pretty obvious that P & T knew what they were talking about and by false shuffle they were implying the cards were retained in place throughout and the remainder of the deck could be shuffled any old way. I get the feeling they wanted to create a little controversy, a rescinded decision to make better tv. Then again maybe I'm just saying this because I find Ben Earl and his card magic extraordinarily tedious. No matter how clever his moves may be it was still a finding the aces routine and his finale with the palmed ace was pretty bloody obvious.
Every other element of this show was superlative and very pleased for John Archer, good to see a seemingly simple mentalism routine fool the experts. It takes real balls to perform mentalism in front of magicians and then to fool them, hats off to you sir.

If Ben does what Ive been told he does... then there was no false shuffles.

daleshrimpton wrote:

Ed Wood wrote:Best magic show on prime time tv for years, loved it. My only complaint, and this comes from a magicians point of view, was Ben Earl getting through. I found that slightly contrived, it's pretty obvious that P & T knew what they were talking about and by false shuffle they were implying the cards were retained in place throughout and the remainder of the deck could be shuffled any old way. I get the feeling they wanted to create a little controversy, a rescinded decision to make better tv. Then again maybe I'm just saying this because I find Ben Earl and his card magic extraordinarily tedious. No matter how clever his moves may be it was still a finding the aces routine and his finale with the palmed ace was pretty bloody obvious.
Every other element of this show was superlative and very pleased for John Archer, good to see a seemingly simple mentalism routine fool the experts. It takes real balls to perform mentalism in front of magicians and then to fool them, hats off to you sir.

If Ben does what Ive been told he does... then there was no false shuffles.

Yeah, kinda. The aces are culled and retained, the remainder of the deck is then shuffled. Only false in the sense that the aces need to be retained in place. Suppose it could be a matter of semantics. My opinion, generally quite worthless, is that P & T knew full well what was going on but wanted Ben for an appearance on their show. Let's be honest he is one of the most talented card magicians in the UK at the moment. I just dislike the way he comes across as a person. Anyone ever see what Jerry Sadowitz wrote about him? Needless to say it's not repeatable on here!

Absolutely no culling or retentions either! Trust me, with the method he uses, he was definitely a worthy winner!

Beardy wrote:Absolutely no culling or retentions either! Trust me, with the method he uses, he was definitely a worthy winner!

It reminded me somewhat of Lennart Green.

I have to say that Bens performance persona, is a bit cold and clinical, which is a shame, since it detracts from his undoubted skill. Interestingly enough, the lovely Lenart went through a phase in his career, where he had this problem too. I totaly went off him for a while. Then he stopped taking himself seriously.. and the green returned.
Ben should lighten up a bit.

Archer will go down a storm in Vegas. Earl won't.

Very good show.My only gripe is P&T talking about false shuffles.Had me cringing while I was sitting there watching it with my girlfriend.Lay people shouldn't know what false shuffles are.Even when Penn told jonathan they were false shuffles,JR said ''Yes they were full shuffles''

Lenoir wrote:Archer will go down a storm in Vegas. Earl won't.

I guess this is what I have been trying to say.

Flood wrote:Very good show.My only gripe is P&T talking about false shuffles.Had me cringing while I was sitting there watching it with my girlfriend.Lay people shouldn't know what false shuffles are.Even when Penn told jonathan they were false shuffles,JR said ''Yes they were full shuffles''

With Ross' accent it's impossible to know whether he said "full" or "false". The subtitles said "full", but that's the subtitler's decision. (The subtitles also consistently misspelled James More as "Moore", despite it being shown correctly in his intro.)

All laypeople know there are such things as false shuffles, so simply saying the phrase wasn't revealing anything. There was nothing to hint at how one could have been done.

P&T were very good at indicating they knew how tricks were done without actually revealing anything. The only time they slipped up in this was discussing Archer's routine, when they described outright a way in which "Just Chance" can be done. (Not the way Archer did it, as it happened, but one of the other possible techniques, and one that wouldn't easily be guessed by laymen.)

Maybe it's just us, but in our house we felt Michael Vincent's performance was obviously technically excellent but a little pedestrian and not very entertaining. Mrs Erwin felt his patter made him come across as condescending.
As for Ben Earl, by the time his intro video was over we hated him, but we thought his performance was electric. I don't understand why you guys think this style won't go over in Vegas?

I have spoken before about Ben Earl and his Past Midnight DVD but to be honest I didnt rate him last night. He is extremely talented, of that there is no doubt, but for entertainment purposes John Archer was in a different class.

I have now seen the entire show and I found it very amusing.

But Penn & Teller were not looking for the best magician or the best magic act. They were simply looking for something they could not explain on the spot. And I agree with Flood:

Flood wrote:My only gripe is P&T talking about false shuffles. Had me cringing while I was sitting there watching it with my girlfriend. Lay people shouldn't know what false shuffles are. Even when Penn told jonathan they were false shuffles,JR said ''Yes they were full shuffles''

They should not reveal to the general public what ”false shuffles“ are. But on the other hand, they have revealed a lot of magic the last years and still they have not been condemned by other magicians like Val Valentino, aka The Masked Magician.

I thought John Archer is well worth the trip to Vegas, as well as Benjamin Earl.

On the night Ben was given a very warm deck of cards to work with which made the routine a little less 'pretty' than it normally is. Have a look at his blog for more info.

After staying up in the hotel bar with him into the wee hours of the morning the night before filming watching the (first half of the) routine over and over again I can say, hand on heart, that it is probably the most impressive pieces of card work I have ever seen.

Michael Vincent described Ben as possibly the greatest card magician he'd ever seen, which is a pretty hefty compliment when you know the people that Vincent has sessioned with.

I like Michael Vincent's style as a lot of savvy or, indeed, rational, spectators will appreciate that lots of magic is pure sleight of hand, and so as a bench mark magicians have to doff their hats to him. His technical skills are admirable and the call to arms of Penn and Teller's show to state that a pack of cards and a pair of hands are all you need to create amazement is very inspirational. In one sense although the vague explanation is "sleight of hand", you are still fooled. Even if you aren't it is evident much practice goes into these effects, and that command of a pack of cards is, like flourishing, that quality that elevates us into someone who is not just someone doing a trick, but have a craft. I can understand opinions here, however, where it seems he is just implicitly saying look what I can do. But so what: why downplay your skills if you have them. Vincent clearly has the skills to pay the bills!

Ben Earle seems equally technical, although I actually prefer the contemporary style. The show was great in showing most styles (except for maybe bizarre magick: I'd love to have seen some gore or eeriness!),and as a showcase to the public I only hope it generates more intrigue than the cringe display by the BBC!