talkmagic.co.uk

Totally agree with Pierre. If someone really thinks this trick is worth the money, then they got too much of it.

Pierre - I'm not going to comment on your opinions. In some regards, I agree with you.

However, Melt and Gone were not produced by Ellusionist. They were originally marketed and sold by expertmagic.com.

rcarlsen wrote:For some reason, this trick doesn't apply to me. I have a strong feeling that it is, as mentioned earlier in this thread, a hype. It's like taking one of those old Donald Duck tricks, and hype it and woho, it's awesome as a marketing trick, but when you get to the real stuff, it's all about a hype. Am I wrong ? I would like to be, but I know Ellusionist too well....

I wouldn't say anything bad for E from now on but I really should add something to this post. When I showed Banachek's stigmata to my sister, she yelled at me: "Hey I know how to do that, I saw in Donald Duck Magazine!".

I bought stigmata. After discussing the Banachek method with a local mentalist, and reviewed the Stigmata DVD, my conclusion is that the method and effect is very similar.

Wayne takes up a notch by incorporating other mentalist methods to get names, numbers, and cards, but if you already know how to obtain those details and know Banachek's stigmata, well....

If you're a noobe, and do not own or know how to do these mentalist methods, then Stigmata is money well spent to do an impressive trick that has real impact. If you have dabbled in mentalist circles and own the Banachek's PSI series, then don't waste your time with this.

Archimage

"Same s*h*i*t, new wrapping" ?

I was considering purchasing this, but after what archimage stated, I will save my money for another trick. I posess both the Banachek PSi series and the Annemann/Cordina pair of texts, so...

Thanks for the advance intel. archimage

-James

rcarlsen wrote:"Same s*h*i*t, new wrapping" ?

The Donald Duck line was funny - but this was gold.

Does the effect involve any pre-show work. I just find it hard to believe they never say the initials and it shows up on your arm. That is probably wny they never show the full effect on the ellusionist website.

No, there is no set up. The spectator need not say anything. Written words are another matter. Again, I refer to the previous post in which if you can obtain details such as names etc using other mentalist methods which the spectator writes something, it will be similar in stigmata.

Again I have two minds on this matter. If you don't have previous knowledge of how these mentalist methods work, Stigmata is a great improptu trick with some clever patter/routine.

If you have done mentalism, this will not be a good investment in my opinion.

Archimage

I don't think that this one technique is enough for an entier DVD. I didn't listen to the hype on this one and I got it coz I was bored. Yeah it's alrite but you'll probably find out what it's about sooner or later. This is the kind of secret that will be revealed all over the place, in a year or two it will be just a bit of a gag. But for now it remains quite powerful.

Banachek was actually inspired by Houchin on this one, i believe, and then Houchin took Banachek's own 'Stigmata' (which in it's own right is impressive) and added some finishing touches.

Personally, I'd rather spend my money on the Banachek DVD from which Stigmata origated from... which I already own. And therefore, I have no fears that I'm missing out with Houchin's Stigmata.

It is indeed a lot of hype, but E is good at that. And their marketing strategy is unquestionably good.

Quite frankly, I believe it will be a legend in it's own lunchour, but saying that, most stuff out on the market at the moment is following the same path.

Sad, but true.

seige wrote:It is indeed a lot of hype, but E is good at that. And their marketing strategy is unquestionably good.

3 understatements in a row. Is that a new record for E?

Edited by Mods...

A little too close to the line, I'm afraid!

Here's something that I've touched upon before in a PM conversation (for a different effect though).

I was quite interested in Stigmata and the mechanics of how the letters 'gradually' appear on your arm. Just thinking it over, I’ve worked out a method for creating this effect. Now I’ve either:

a) invented a new method – (very very unlikely) or
b) Guessed the Wayne / Banachek method (very likely).

I can now get letters / words to 'gradually appear on my arm' and be written in what appears to be blood under my skin - as in the demo. I could therefore add a section where I choose a method of peeking / obtaining a spectators chosen word and then apply it to the arm writing finale. However, could I perform this with a clear conscience? I have taken the idea from someone else’s creation – ok fitted my own method to it, but I’ve not paid them for the idea.

On the one hand I'm not directly copying and using their method (as I've not actually seen it - especially given the lack of detail in the Ellusionist trailer!) - but on the other hand, I would be directly lifting the idea.

Any thoughts?

To be honest - I doubt I will ever use this effect – it was just a case of a mental exercise, trying to figure out methods. However, it just made me wonder where I would stand ethically?

Cheers!

rvoice100 wrote:Edited by Mods...

A little too close to the line, I'm afraid!

ok, no probs, just thought it should be known as if i bought it and couldnt do it i would be very peeved.