Hi Everyone. Long time no post...

So I'v gotten the 'bug' back again (hadn't realised I'd lost it, but I had) and I'm starting to think more about magic. I am starting to put together a spellbound routine, and thinking of a plot, which I have a nice Idea for, and (I think) a pretty nice idea for a start and finish.

The thing that I am having thinking issues with is the content. not the method, but more the reasons for any changes, so the central reason of the plot, and also how long it should be, how many phases I should make?

My initial thought is Five. Short Phases.
Three seems too short, and four is an awkward number.

1. An Intro - production of a coin
2.A Follow on from the intro, focussing on the one coin
3. A change from one coin to another
4. A change Sequence to go back to the original coin
5. A Final Vanish and then reveal in an impossible location, lining me back almost to the start.

that's as far as I have gotten. Any of you Spellbound geniuses have any thoughts on my thoughts so far?

Thanks

Liam

One of the problems with the guys doing spellbound nowadays, is that the emphasis is on the quantity of changes, and an attempt to make them look as acrobatic as possible. However, a routine should have a beginning, middle, and end. The changes are only the middle, and after a few times of the coin changing, the routine becomes boring. You are overproving that you can change the coin from copper to silver, and it becomes an exercise in digital manipuation, not magic. The beginning can be a change or production, the middle the changes (but not more than a few), and the end a vanish or another change. I have two examples. One in My first Penguin lecture, the other in my second Penguin lecture, as examples of this philosophy.

I've always loved Spellbound as a personal creative tool. I often use it to kind of "warm up" before I rehearse something else.

What's fun about it is you could design it purposely to use just about every palm and most sleights.

But as far as presenting it, I agree with what Michael has said. I have a couple ideas I have played with as far as taking it into a different direction and also finding a conclusion.

An early idea is here: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_s0q-NiXfJw

And a more recent idea here: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BeZNC_92LYE

What's the plot? The story you'd like them to interpret as you do your routine.

That story (including the magic and how the magician relates to that magic) drives the audience visible part of the routine - which may determine what sleight of hand will work for that routine.

It's okay look at "just so stories"

I have A whole Lot of work On the plot In my 1 St hardbound Book! And a five way spellbound!;)

Hi Guys,

Thanks for the responses so far.

My idea is to present a cheese coin (production - phase 1) and some history about it, how it came about, why the Chinese used it, why there is even a hole in the middle (phase 2)... and its uses. But also how the design of a coin has changed, and why modern coins don't have holes, and the pros and cons of the hole (Phase 3 and 4), finally thing the whole thing back to the start and finishing with a nice ending that's been set up since the very opening phase.)

I Agree with what you said Michael, I don't want there to be too many changes, a few, perhaps 4, max. I don't want it to be about "look how fast I can change the coin and fool you.... idiot" but more about a visual display to run along side the patter that I will eventually use. The first one may even be a surprise to me, Like the coin is trying to help me to make my point, as opposed to me showing off my skill and dexterity.

David, that's great.

Ive had a good look over Bobo, Kaufman and Roth, and there is a lot of very usable material there, but Im wondering if there are any other good resources for usable stuff?

Encyclopedia of Coin sleights has around 10-15 spellbound moves. The lectures mentioned have my routines. The NYCMS dvd series has stuff from Roth, Gallo, and Latta

Welcome back Liam...

I don't know whether this will meet all your criteria, but my SPE'L has a lot of good stuff to it as to the spellbound effect, plus a little more... And creatively put, maybe even a few things on your list. So, as my grandpa use to say, "I can show you better than I can tell'ya."



www.vinnymarini.com/download/doubletrouble.html

Https://www.vanishingincmagic.com/magic-......llbound/

Maybe this recent offering from Vanishing Inc will get your juices flowing (or add a few ideas). A little too hardcore for me though.

Giacomo Bertini's Spellbound routine is a great example of a take that has a beginning, middle, and end with a logical story.

Jeff, the routine you reference is exactly what I think is the wrong approach. The guy takes a coin, and does like, 15 changes, and the routine is done. No beginning, no end, and too many changes. Just my opinion, but he shows not magic, but clever manipulation.

How many changes did Vernon have in his original routine in The Stars of Magic?

When you have a question, look at the bible.

Thanks WKM ,

so What are we talking About Here ??? I can think of 2 two things! 1. One coin That changes back and forth ( Say From silver to copper! ) and 2. And a Coin That changes To FIVE Diffidence Coins ! When I said A five way Spellbound I was talk about th 2th one!!! On no.1 I would Think After The 2 th. Or 3 th. Change ANY LAYMAN !!! Would Know You are Just Switching Coins!!! No Matter How Nice And clean The Changes Are!!!
Now If You put It Out Just as Moves that You mite put into A Say Wild coin Routine Or Something like that mite be cool ! But change one Coin back and Forth 15 times Sorry Man I don't thank it will fly for layman!!! I would Thank they would think WOW he is Good, But It is NOT MAGIC!!!

Did this a long-time back now...Sometimes simple is all you need.

I was "surfing", and saw Marion's post (10:17 -- May 6) so I read the whole thread. --Interesting!

I don't do much coin stuff anymore, but, I "usta"! (5 coin star, both hands, Down's palm, three coin toss up and catch the three individually, ETC.) coins across (I liked Futagawas, best) Spellbound, ETC.

AT 85, the hands are a bit stiff, but, I still do a little, and, enjoy seeing a good coin man.

So! Michael Rubenstein, Richard Kaufman, Marion b217, AND, VERNON, have IMO, said it BEST!

KISMIF! (Keep It Simple Make It Fun) Just because ya know a dozen methods/sleights/moves. ya don't need to do them all !!!!!!

Thank you for your feedback mr. Rubinstein. Really something to think about spellbound. Nowadays the most spellbounds looks amazing: Its indeed a lot of acrobatic and difficult moves. You can ask by doing 'an amazing' spellbound with 'normal skills' and also making good changes, whats make the differents? A easy spellbound looks maybe better becouse the quality is a lot better by doing. that's's all about! Everybody have their own niveau. So discover and know your own niveau. We want all to be a Ponta Smith, but the true is there are a just few. So are you like him?

No,my style is very different. I have not met Ponta in person, although I think he was at my lecture the last time I was in Japan. Ponta is a very gifted performer. Not many people can do some of the acrobatic moves that Ponta can do with ease. When I started out, some of my own coin magic was also very difficult. I remember doing a lecture in the 80's, when I was gaining a reputation as an up and coming coin artist. The review painted me as a coin technician, precise with my moves and my ability. But the review basically said that my presentation was crap. The review went on to praise the presentation of my co-lecturer, Rocco. Tbis review upset me greatly. I had worked hard to present my magic flawlessly, and this reviewer implied that it didn't matter how good I was technically, because basically I wasn't a good magician. I took this criticism very personally, and discounted it as a review from someone who wasn't qualified to judge me.
However, as time went one I came to realize that the reviewer was right. It didn't matter how difficult the moves were, or even how magical it looked. The most important part of magic is the ability to entertain your audiences. They don't care how hard it is to do your trick, they just want to be amazed and have fun.
So over time my philosophy changed. The difficult moves impressed magicians, but the public had no idea what was difficult and what wasn't. So I began to focus on presentation, and making my magic look as magicial as possible. However, I began to use less difficult moves and substitute moves that had less and more natural fi ger movement. Sometimes the more difficult move was the most magical way to do it, and other times it was not. By focusing on presentation over difficulty, I became a better magician. In fact, my lecture now consists of commercial coin magic with fun presentations, and moves that look very magical but aren't about finger flinging, knuckle crunching, and palm busting. I hope that answers your question.

I basically agree with you here Doc, and that you came to better realize this later on after that reviewer didn't praise you as would've been better accepted, it to show the same growth. spoken about when Bernard Shaw(?) once said something like, "It's a a shame that youth is wasted on the young," or something like that.

I've come to basically believe that "Less is more," and that specs truly don't care how difficult a move is, only magicians respect you for all that. If you can get things done with the least amount of effort, then that's the way to do it...especially since it don't make much difference to specs. You get no greater applause because you used The Sylvester Pitch, when a simple Change-Over Palm could achieve basically achieve the same difference.

And I agree, people like what they like and can't be told what is best to like. I used to think this when I used to say here, though Mickey Silver was not well known, but I just thought that if people saw him they would know well enough what they like in his great magic. And that amidst showing it amongst some of the best in the world.

Good talk!

Bad idea from a late Sunday afternoon: Spellbound as a film continuity error. Look up film continuity errors in YouTube for examples. Can that be played as intentional? 😊

What if someone making a film wanted a magician doing coin magic in the background of a dialog scene? The director just told the magician to hold up the coin, move it around some but not abruptly to move audience focus. Weeks later, the magician gets called back for more filming. Got back into costume...but the prop guy hands him a different coin? Anyway the film wraps, gets released and after a few weeks goes to DVD. Then some magicians notice the magician in the background and try to reconstruct the routine.

Cut! 😉

One more bad idea before calling it a night tonight. David Roth has some tricks using coin blanks. Changing coin blanks to coins...reminded me of the sci-fi cold war classics Invaders From Mars and Invasion of the Body Snatchers. So, with a nod to Peter Samulson....how about a coin cloning routine? The blanks are introduced from a flying saucer coinbox. The victims are pocket change. After each duplication the newly formed coin goes into circulation while the victim coon gets stuck in the coin box.

Plenty of room for coin changes...

What do you think?