|
|
parsimagic New user 97 Posts |
I am trying to determine the best ending for a version of "Bumps in the Night" illusion I am planning on performing. Here is the set up: I am using a standard crystal casket base with a metal frame box top and the back side is partially covered with a cloth (think fire cage) The base is used to produce the first two "Bumps" (ie. while I stand on the box two individual cloth covered moving bumps come off the box and move onto the stage left and right to the box. The 3rd assistant (who was hidden as in fire cage) and I make the switch and I end up as the 3rd "Bump" moving center stage under cloth. The 3rd assistant dressed as me covers the metal frame box. The bump to my left and then to my right remove their cloths then I remove my cover. The box is moved front and center and the cloth is removed showing empty frame.
Now I could stop here. My other option is to once again cover the frame top with a cloth and make the 3rd assistant appear with a costume change. I would appreciate feedback, which ending would be more dramatic? Is the 3rd apearance anticlimatic? Kia Parsi |
Chris Stolz Inner circle Mississauga, Ontario 1958 Posts |
It sounds great so far! As for whether or not it is anticlimatic, I would venture a yes. The switch in the end if far more powerful than the productions. I wouldn't add another production after you've done a great appearance as the midle bump.
I would end with the person dressed as you entering the box and then the first two bumps take off their cloths. The first two would then walk over and reveal that you are GONE from the box only to appear as the middle bump. Just my 2 cents....Canadian...so that's about a penny American. You do the math.. -Chris.
Chris Stolz
BLACK ART BOOK: Hiding In The Shadows. |
parsimagic New user 97 Posts |
Thanks Chris
Those were exactly my thoughts as well. Its just so tempting to produce that 3rd assistant. Another option is when the first two remove the cover the 3rd assistant appears, then I appear from under the cloth. So a transformation occurs instead of a disappearance and reappearance. |
gulamerian Special user 581 Posts |
I like the idea of a transformation. It is a little different than the regular Bump.
|
magicjohn2278 Special user Isle of Man UK 544 Posts |
Don't like it... I think it tips the audience as to the method if they "discover" that another person is involved. I'd stick to the original.
|
PaxMentis Loyal user Long Beach, CA 239 Posts |
It's certainly within your creative environment to end up, "bumping" down the aisle, from the back of the venue, thus allowing you to produce your third assistant which would not be anti-climatic. I can't recall seeing this version done before. Hope this helps to keep your creative juices flowing.
Best regards, Pax Mentis
Do not go where the path may lead, but go instead where there is no path and leave a trail.
|
Chris Stolz Inner circle Mississauga, Ontario 1958 Posts |
Hmmm Just had a thought....with the person dressed as you already covered how about another kind of vanish.
I'm thinking something along a similar line as the dekolta chair...Perhaps there's a chair as part of the set? Built into some other prop or piece? Could have some real potential there to change things up. Might be a good way to take attention from the box which so far, has been doing all the work. -Chris
Chris Stolz
BLACK ART BOOK: Hiding In The Shadows. |
Father Photius Grammar Host El Paso, TX (Formerly Amarillo) 17161 Posts |
Why produce an assistant that has no reason for being in the illusion? Producing the third assistant after showing that what was apparently you vanished from the box makes no sense. The illusion has to have a logical sequence for the audience, you take away from the exhcange effect with the production of the 3rd assistant. I'd leave that out.
"Now here's the man with the 25 cent hands, that two bit magician..."
|
parsimagic New user 97 Posts |
Thanks everyone for your comments and suggestions. Chris, I like the idea of taking the "heat" away from the box. I got to think about that a little more. I have always loved the Dakota chair illusion, but it wouldn't work in this performance. It is true there is no logical reason to produce the 3rd assistant. Just because it can be done doesn't mean it should be done. Thanks again.
Kia |
Tony S Special user New York 582 Posts |
Quote:
On 2005-06-15 07:54, magicjohn2278 wrote: I agree completely. Not only does this tip off the audience, but it is anticlimatic. |
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Grand illusion » » Illusion finale problem (0 Likes) |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.01 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 < |