|
|
Vlad_77 Inner circle The Netherlands 5829 Posts |
Hey all, I am working my way through Peter Duffie's Best of Peter Duffie 5 and will be offering a review soon in the E-book section of The Café. In short, if you love subtlety ala Nick Trost, get the download.
In the meantime I thought it would be fun to offer some random thoughts that are "semi-review" concerning three effects that are, well, similar in effect! Unlike the usual review I thought it might be cool to garner some other opinions in this section as opposed to using Secret Sessions. The reason being that someone who has not made the requisite fifty posts may still want to contribute. I also believe this could be an interesting way to look at these three approaches dispassionately and look at the respective pros and cons of each. I will assume that you know the m.o. of each effect and use the asterisk bit when needed. (BTW I am aware of pure sleight of hand methods for accomplishing this effect, so for the sake of this thread perhaps we could leave those out?) As you know the effect of these three is basically that a spectator arrives at/names a card. and THAT card is the only PRINTED card in an otherwise BLANK deck. It's a pretty cool premise and one that has at least for me played quite well. But let's get into the nuts and bolts of each and see if we can come to a consensus as to which effect merits that precious pocket space. Perhaps we can also explore the possibility of whether or not each of the three effects "fit" better into certain performing situations. I thought I would start with White Bikes as it was my first go at this plot. White Bikes is an Elmwood Magic product created by Paul Richards. Here is the effect description from the website: Often copied WHITE BIKES is the original trick that started everyone is talking! Marketed since 1995, it has received great reviews from the Linking Ring, Dean Dill, Paul Green, and Mike Close....just to name a few! You begin by laying a blue backed prediction card face down on the table. Then you display a red backed deck back and front. You ask the spectator to give a number of their own choosing. They now use that number to select a card. The remainder of the deck is placed off to the side and the prediction is now turned over to reveal that it matches the spectator's card! But it's not perfect match because the selection has a red back and the prediction is blue. You respond, "No problem!" and with a snap of your fingers both cards now have blue backs! The audience is certainly impressed, but you explain that the prediction you can understand, where all the other cards went is another matter... and with that you turn over the remainder of the deck to reveal all the faces are blank! A real triple whammy! WHITE BIKES is a very easy effect to perform and the audience response is always strong! There is no rough and smooth, no complicated moves, no switching of the deck, and it can be a different selection each time you perform! Manufactured by in quality Bicycle card stock. Then Blizzard came along from Dean Dill: Effect: The effect sounds too incredible to be true: A spectator freely names any card, and a deck which has been in full view is spread to reveal that every card is blank...except for the spectator’s named card! No rough and smooth, no long and short, no double sided cards Everything may be immediately examined! Finally Colossal Blizzard by Anthony Miller: A spectator selects a color, a suit, and a number... The selected card is the only card with a FACE in a blank-faced deck of cards! Self-contained. Only 52 cards are used. No deck switches! No gimmicked cards! No difficult sleights! Just great magic! 1. The selection method: From the effect descriptions one can read that the selection process seems cleanest with Blizzard at least in my assessment. Indeed there is no dealer hyperbole; the selection IS that clean. So I would opine that Blizzard gets a nod there in terms of directness. But, let's consider the other two as well. White Bikes asks the spectator for a number to arrive at a card. Presentationally this also works - numerology of course comes to mind. In Colossal Blizzard, the spectator names a color, suit, then number. Handled properly this process also works and is quite transparent. I should note that many have stated that Blizzard should NOT be presented as card MAGIC. I think that given the similarity of effect among the three it is safe to proceed upon that same notion for all. Of the three I DO like the more direct process in Blizzard. 2. Impact(?): This one is hard to judge because White Bikes has a triple climax and Blizzard has a sort of monte approach built in to introduce the blanks that really seems to work very well. Colossal Blizzard has neither of these and thus the effect is in a sense more streamlined. I suppose one could ask here whether the spectator will remember anything but the finale. Recently there was a discussion about B'Wave in which I argued FOR the notion that the three climaxes worked very well. I did this in response to a poster who initially felt that the three climaxes were not necessary. However in this plot, I wonder if a valid argument can be made that there might be a bit of gilding the lily - at least in the case of White Bikes. I DO like the matching prediction addition to the effect but does it really lend itself to strengthening the finale ala B'Wave? I leave this one for debate as I am unsure. From field experience, I DO know that for ME it does work, but, the finale kills them and when I would ask later what their favorite was they would mention, "that one where all the cards were blank except mine." Could be that my presentation was off and that is why the matching prediction phase was forgotten. The other argument of course is that it is the penultimate climax and thus would not be remembered as readily by audiences. The monte bit in Blizzard seems to straddle that line however between magic and mentalism or mental magic. Indulge my thinking like a magician for a moment please? While I DO think it is a very cool way to lead to the finale, AND you get a penultimate climax that works well given the parameters of the routine, does the monte bit steer the effect more toward magic and away from mentalism/mental magic? To me at least, there seems to be an incongruity in that it makes little sense to remove the mates of the named card. It DOES work however and so this may be just magician "overthink." 3. Methodology: This category requires that I be quite vague. I HAVE to assume that readers are familiar with each effect's m.o. Blizzard has the most direct selection process but there IS that "move" that has scared some people. In fact in the manuscript, Dean Dill writes encouraging words about it, thus anticipating the worry some may have over it. Strictly speaking there are no sleights in Blizzard which would initially seem to make it the most user-friendly. But, OF the three, I would argue that with Blizzard, the performer needs to be extremely confident in her/himself and possess honed audience management skills. Colossal Blizzard has one sleight but it is a very simple one. But there are different skills that come into play here that again the performer really needs to understand the process else she/he is doomed. White Bikes has one sleight and of the three, the sleight in White Bikes would arguably be called the most advanced sleight. Think Aaron Fisher here folks. The sleight is not difficult but Aaron Fisher thought enough of it to write rather extensively about it and his approach in The Paper Engine. Perhaps discussion could center on what methodology feels "right" for each performer. Yes I realize we make that decision with every effect we do but I am fascinated at the moment by these three because the main effect IS the same to an audience point of view. Perhaps - and I hate to cop out - but this might be a case of YMMV? 4. Reset: This is one of the biggies for the walkaround performer. Blizzard and Colossal Blizzard both reset quickly - Colossal Blizzard perhaps a LITTLE more quickly but not that big of a difference. White Bikes DOES reset easily but unlike the other two, you really cannot repeat it at a nearby table after having just performed it. (Yes, the ad states the selection CAN be, but, it is not as easily accomplished as the other two). Many of you know that in non-restaurant walkaround situations we tend to get hangers on. This might be a minus for White Bikes. Which leads to ... 5. Pocket management: This is THE biggie for many - including myself. If one works strictly out of pocket then real estate is precious. Blizzard IMHO scores lowest in this area and those of you that know all three effects should understand why I make this assertion. But I will add a caveat: if Blizzard is one of few or perhaps ONLY thing you do with cards in your set, then pocket management is no longer an issue. White Bikes and Colossal Blizzard score more strongly - again IMHO. 6. Final Display: From a performer's perspective Blizzard wins hands down; you are completely and utterly "clean" at the denouement. The punters can examine the cards until warp drive is invented (HA! You thought I was going to mention bovines!!) and there is NOTHING but their card and a blank deck. The same cannot be said of the other two. But, how important is it to end clean especially if the effect is the finale to your set? I have never been called out on White Bikes OR Colossal Blizzard. Some may argue that spectators are simply too polite but the gasps of astonishment I get with ANY of these three seems to rule out that there is anything else going on in their precious crania except the ever lovely, "WTF??!!" So this was a rather long comparison from a hack's point of view. I wrote this long post because I wanted to encourage dialog, but I ALSO wanted to get some feedback because I love the effect and I cannot decide which one I want to "do." Yes I could switch around in my repertoire but it seems a redundant thing. I was reading the remarks about Colossal Blizzard and some had mentioned that ID is still a "better" effect. It IS a great effect and there are MANY great routines devoted to it other than the out of the box approach. Doug Edwards for instance has a BEAUTIFUL routine with it to name just one. But I confess that there is something really tasty about this effect that attracts me more than ID or BW. I think that the final work at least as much as I am aware is not completed on this rather cool idea. I would love to create a routine that addresses the challenges of each. In the end, I DO think that Dean Dill's Blizzard DOES come closest but is it the last word on methodology of this plot? I don't think so. Thanks all!! Ahimsa, Vlad |
motown Inner circle Atlanta by way of Detroit 6127 Posts |
Very insightful as always Vlad.
"If you ever write anything about me after I'm gone, I will come back and haunt you."
– Karl Germain |
Cameron Francis V.I.P. 7025 Posts |
I love all of these effects. Incidentally, in my opinion, the three climaxes of B'Wave are not necessary logically speaking... logically speaking. However, if we are talking about theatre and impact, they are 100% necessary and play GREAT. It's like Paul Harris' Overkill. Magicians say that it's, well, overkill. Yes, logically, they are right. After the first revelation, why bother with the others...? Because they play HUGE, that's why! This is the kind of stuff lay people eat up. It makes everything seem just that much more impossible.
I remember the first time I saw Twisted Sisters. I was essentially a lay person. I had been out of magic a long time and didn't really know much about close up. Twisted Sisters totally blew me away. Each revelation was like a whack in the head with a frying pan, even though, technically, they weren't necessary. I never thought about that, though, when I was watching it. Anyway, getting back to the three tricks, I have to say, from a lay person point of view, I think White Bikes is killer. Of course, Blizzard slays lay people too. It's a great effect. But it's one of those things that magicians love because of how clean it is. The only issue I have with it is pocket space. Frankly, I don't care about how clean I end. Since I am in control of my show, it doesn't matter if the props are examinable or not (examination slows the pace down of performances). I don't know. They are all great effects. I think I just see myself using White Bikes because I know how well those multiple climax endings play to lay folk.
MOMENT'S NOTICE LIVE 3 - Six impromptu card tricks! Out now! http://cameronfrancismagic.com/moments-notice-live-3.html
|
Doomo Inner circle 2365 Posts |
I put a lot of work into Colossal Blizzard. I wanted it to be an "In one package" effect, I used it quite a bit. Is it perfect? No... I have yet to find an effect that does not have trade offs. But in all fairness Vlad, a very fair review and comparison. I tried to pm youabout something, but your box is full...
Tony
If you ever get to a point where words have no meaning, you're probably talking to a dog.
Remember! More Bang For LESS Bucks! It is the right way! www.rfaproductions.com |
Cameron Francis V.I.P. 7025 Posts |
Tony, to be fair, I have seen the demo of Colossal Blizzard but I don't own it so I don't know how it works. Looks killer, though! And "selection processes" never bother me. A laymen thinks it's a free choice no matter what. Just ask one of my good friends who has been Riffle F***ed more times that I care to admit. To this day she still thinks she could have stopped me anywhere in the deck.
MOMENT'S NOTICE LIVE 3 - Six impromptu card tricks! Out now! http://cameronfrancismagic.com/moments-notice-live-3.html
|
Vlad_77 Inner circle The Netherlands 5829 Posts |
Quote:
On 2011-11-09 04:03, Doomo wrote: Tony, I DO think Colossal Blizzard is excellent actually. It is very well structured and packs one helluva punch. While there are other methods out there to do the same effect from heavily gaffed to heavy sleight of hand, I really am drawn to these three and as I wrote at the end of my ramble, I have all three and cannot decide which I want to do regularly. At the moment I switch each of the three in and out but I want to get to a decision and I felt that this along with the fact that each effect presents wonderfully different methodology would make for some interesting discussion from others familiar with at least one of the effects. I am VERY happy that I bought it. I will clean up the Inbox Ahimsa, Vlad |
Doomo Inner circle 2365 Posts |
Thank yo Vlad... I just wanted to send ya a couple of somethings... To get yer opinion...
Perhaps you could PM me yer e mail addy... Tony
If you ever get to a point where words have no meaning, you're probably talking to a dog.
Remember! More Bang For LESS Bucks! It is the right way! www.rfaproductions.com |
myrealsphinx New user Brazil 79 Posts |
I DO think Colossal Blizzard is excellent actually. It is very well structured and packs one helluva punch. While there are other methods out there to do the same effect from heavily gaffed to heavy sleight of hand, I really am drawn to these three and as I wrote at the end of my ramble, I have all three and cannot decide which I want to do regularly. At the moment I switch each of the three in and out but I want to get to a decision and I felt that this along with the fact that each effect presents wonderfully different methodology would make for some interesting discussion from others familiar with at least one of the effects.
I am VERY happy that I bought it. Me too... A great and strong effect. great for an opening act |
BlackZ Veteran user 316 Posts |
Thanks for the descriptions
|
Dollarbill Inner circle Colorado 1005 Posts |
I realize that this is an old post, however I wanted to chime in here. First a thank you to Vlad for the reviews on these effects. I can only speak for Blizzard. I performed this effect one time for about 6-8 people. I thought I was going to die when it was time to do "the move". The move itself is easy as mentioned but It has to be one of the boldest things you can do for a close up effect in my opinion. That said, I made "the move" and it flew right by everyone. I could not believe it! I battard and fried those peoples minds completely. I think I had the same look on my face hiding behind my smile, realizing that it worked. . The boldness of the move is why I never performed it again. I still have the effect, maybe I should take it back out. I absolutely Love to end clean. . $.02
Great effect. |
virtualwizard Regular user Bailey Island, Maine 167 Posts |
Yes it's old thread, but still relevant as these effects are classic. Recently I came across Whitewash by Auke Van Dokkum on the Phoenix Deck site by Card Shark.
Here is the effect : A spectator is asked to mentally choose a random playing card from a fanned deck. The magician explains he will find the spectator's card from a new deck using a few narrowing questions. With the cards facing the magician, the questions begin. "Is your card a red card or a black card?" Discarding what seems to be the non-chosen color, the magician continues, "Was your card a Heart or Diamond?" (or Spade or Club?) After a few more questions, and discarding the cards not chosen, the magician reveals the remaining card to be the one thought of by the spectator. This appears to be a VERY lame trick, relying on specific "fishing" questions. Now for the Kicker!! The magician turns over all the discarded cards: They are ALL BLANK!! The spectator's card is the only one with a printed face! ---- I don't know how long this effect has been around but would have to put this one on the list as it is quite a worthy addition. My 2 cents
Mike the Magician
|
Jon Allen V.I.P. England 1771 Posts |
Here's my addition to the genre. Bet you can't guess the ending!
What I particularly like about the routine is the rationale behind the naming of the card. It isn't just random and makes the ending that bit more logical. Enjoy this one camera: non-edited; performed for real people performance: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9CytuXsCbL0
Creator of iconic magic that you will want to perform.
The Silent Treatment, The Pain Game, Paragon 3D, Double Back, Destination Box and more. Available at www.onlinemagicshop.co.uk |
pegasus Eternal Order United Kingdom 10537 Posts |
Brilliant effect Jon. I prefer them to name the least popular card, no 52 but great effect though.
|
Sealegs Inner circle The UK, Portsmouth 2596 Posts |
This thread contains some of my thoughts on certain aspects of the procedure in Blizzard.
You might want to also add Stephen Bargatze's, 'I Hate Card Tricks' and Joshua Jay's, 'Out of Sight', into the mix of effects that follow this plot.
Neal Austin
"The golden rule is that there are no golden rules." G.B. Shaw |
MitchC Elite user Can't believe I only have 415 Posts |
Also check out 'Observation Test' by Nick Einhorn on the Penguin Live DVD - VERY nice. Goes over great in performances.
|
Rob_magician New user 76 Posts |
Quote:
On Dec 27, 2016, Sealegs wrote: you should definitely check out Joshua Jay's out of sight, it goes down so great. out of sight is the only one I've used however but it works for me! |
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Tricks & Effects » » Blizzard, Colossal Blizzard, White Bikes ... (4 Likes) |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.08 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |