talkmagic.co.uk

Hi All

I've done a clip especially for TM, constructive critism would be greayt, and very much appreciated

Its not ready for showing to the audiences yet, thats why I'm showing you all, but if it fools anyone, then all the better If it entertains then even more, the better

Its so hard performing in front of camera, I normally absorb the energy from my audience and work with them, I seem so flat on this

Anyway, hope you like
http://www.putfile.com/media.php?n=magic74

Mark[/url]

Oh, its a decent size file too, so a little patience will be needed, but 2 mins in all

Mark

It's pretty good!

I would work on Starry Eyed Surprise if you were to perform it in actual life. It needs to be a little bit more speedy because at that rate, you can see where everything is coming from!

The actions in the main trick needs to be smoother and more fluid. At times, I could easily figure out what was happening.

But overall, it's a great trick! Practice, practice, practice!!!

StEvEbO!

That was nice but did you use a gimmick or is asking that giving to much away, if you didnt im mad at you and rcarlsen... i watch it so closely but i cant figure out what y'all are doing

good job though it does need to be speed up a bit but it was nice

Spot on stevebo about starry eyed. I probably wouldnt do it, its angle sensitive too, but its just a rough vid as I said

The main trick your right too, its gotta be sharpened up for real performance for sure, but could you really see what I was doing so bad in the main trick???

Hi Andyroo, I will tell you if there is a gimmick or not, and it wont give too much away.

There is not a gimmick

It really is just a sleight of hand trick.

Thanks for your comments
Mark

The only real criticism I can give - is in one section on the handling, and the patter.

I won't comment on Starry Eyed Surprise - since I can't do it and any comments would be like telling a MLB pitcher how to throw a curveball. It looked good to me!!!

The handling on the effect is solid - nice, confident handling of the cards and the finish was strong.

My only problem with the handling I've pm'd you about - exposure reasons.

The patter, however, killed the effect. On the first effect - when the first king turns over, you miscalled it as an ace - which immediately reveals what the finish will be. Also, the reveal of the aces was a bit anti-climactic. Maybe act surprised by it? Either way, HIT them with it. The cards turning over will kill, but you really driving home the "kings? I meant ACES" concept will bring more reactions out of your audience.

Great job, keep up the good work!

hi Demitri

I didnt read this post before you Pm'd me

I noticed the miscalled Ace too. When I learn a trick, I tend to get the moves down, then work on the patter. I only had the dvd's the day before I filmed it, and as I was concentrating so much on the trick, rather than the patter.

Its probably a bad thing to do, I guess I should learn the patter and trick together.

Thanks for all the comments anyways, at least I know what to improve on

See you soon
Mark

Very well performed, to a magician there were a few things you said and did which we can tell you’re hiding something, but to the audience they wouldn’t know this and would think you are just verifying. However I thought the beginning middle and end were very good and overall I would rate the trick 8/10, the performance 8/10. Good going mate and I like the magic you do.

Thanks for the nice comment Hawk

Its nice to hear, just gotta keep practisin, and I should get it bang on.

Cheers
Mark

thats really cool
where did you learn that, is there a video to learn that?How does it relate to math though?

That was a nice vid

Mark,

As requested, here is my feedback.

You have two tricks which you join, or are considering joining, together. To me, they don't go together.

The first is a lovely production of 4 cards, I can appreciate the skill involved in that and thought it was great. However, it would be of no use to me in a pub or table hopping situation because I suspect you have very little angle to play with.

The second trick is based on numerous older effects swapping one set of cards for another, again, I'm not going to fault you on its performance.

Now, down to the critisism

I accept that you haven't practiced the patter and that is why you miss-called a couple of times and also why you stuttered a bit on what to say, however, I'd have run through my patter a few times before I ran the video recorder just to make sure it looked better than it did.

My main critisism is down to the miss-match of the two tricks. They don't go together. The production of the first 4 cards was excellent but the follow-on should have used the same 4 cards only.

Look at what you did. AND look at it from the eyes of a spectator. You made 4 kings mysteriously appear, then each of the kings turned face down one at a time. Excellent, but why the hell did you pick up the deck. You had no need to pick up the deck to change the kings to the aces !!

Now, yes, I know that you did, for obvious reasons. But to the spectator, there was no reason for it. That is why I think that the two tricks don't go together.

To me, the second trick would have worked so much better if you had taken the kings out of the deck, placed them on the top as you did so, copped the whole bunch and then discarded the deck and completed the trick.

That's a natural process of events. But to produce 4 cards from thin air, and change them to different ones, why pick up the deck and put it back down again, its not a natural process.

Hope this helps. In no way am I criticising your handling of both effects. They would stun Joe Public every time. But they don't naturally fit together as a routine.

One idea to solve this problem would be to produce the four kings with SES, then replace them on top of the deck and perform your most convincing false cuts and shuffles, maintaining all needed top stock. Then, show the four kings back on top, and now you have an excuse for picking up the deck (to do the lose-find kings effect) so you can make the aces.

Another possibility would be to do a version of Spectator Cuts the Aces (I know Greg Wilson's works) where you can clean-up leaving the topstock on the deck.

Kat

Hi Tenko

Thanks for your review, and I'm not offended. I need criticism to get better.

I know what you mean about the link between the two tricks. I am definatley bringing unwanted attention on the deck. As for discarding the deck completley, I need it in front of me to complete the effect, otherwise it wont finish clean.

What I will probably do, is either just pull them from the deck, or do the automatic aces, but with the kings so I handle the deck from the beginning.

I don't however need to do a deck switch, there is an easy solution to this, so I could use the deck all night, then do the trick whenever I feel and its ready to go

I also had great help from the circle I joined, and a few members gave me likewise good advice, the patters a bit different now, and the handling I think very crisp.

Thanks again Tenko and Katriel for great advice, its why I like th site so much

Silver Trickster wrote:
How does it relate to math though?

Who said it does? Sorry, maybe I missed the point??