See it here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWBTlbgc8SA&feature=related

I like this routine but I'm not sure why.

For my taste it needs bigger loads

I hadn't seen that in awhile Tom but liked it then and still like it now! The spec reminds me of John Candy! LOL

That all you can say? Small loads?
Size is not the only thing that matters!

I thought this was classic.
You don't have to wring five-minutes from your C&B routine.

He was fast, charming, and made use of all the cups and all the balls.
I liked his personality, his work was pretty clean,
nothing fancy or suspicious just fine magical stuff going on.

Thanks for sharing this, I think it is a little gem.

And, if you're working on a C&B lots to observe and learn from too.
Nice dude, nice work, nice plot, nice magic,
what more can you ask for entertainment?

Magically,
Walt

This is basically a version of the Vernon routine. The ONE part in this that I cannot stand is the false placement under the second cup, PARTICULARLY when he says, "One under here, Two under here, and three under here." That "Two under here" is as bad as doing a count when doing the hand to pocket.

Thanks for posting that one, Tom. I thought it was excellent. Maybe a bit fast at the end for the big reveal - it sort of whizzed by.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8mHI_PNWkk&NR=1

check his one

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EIeyAAzWhs&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94ZhGXj7M8E&feature=related

Posted: Jan 26, 2008 7:24pm
Latimer NOT CUPS AND BALLS... BUT....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQ9NDOaYX-U&feature=related

I especially liked the Mandrake performance (1939) with the Charlie Miller move (when did Miller publish his routine?). The tea-cup routine is similar to the one that is attributed to Miller in Elliott's "Classic Secrets of Magic" (teacups and rolled up dollar bills). I especially liked the roll across move giving the illusion that more than one ball was being rolled under the cup.

The only problem with the routine is that it really had no end (maybe edited out?). Still, in all it was beautiful for what it was.

The Mandrake video was really cool, I thought it was funny when the masked bandits fired off some shots at the cabinet.

Latimer's show was fun to watch as well.

-Vinny

Hi Pete,
On the "Tradeshow Cups & Balls - opening sequence" video,
if the sound was off it made for a nice sequence.
However, with sound on, I did not feel a meld in routine and message.

I could either listen to the client's message, or watch the magic.
I found it almost impossible to hear and watch both at once,
because there was such thin logic between the moves and the text.

This is actually the sort of trade-show "customization"
that I find surface and flat, and serves neither the business or effect.

He had the lines down and the work with the cups down,
but that said, I felt the whole sequence was shallow and unfulfilled.

It also felt he was on auto-pilot, as if he could do this in his sleep,
and I'll bet doing maybe a show each hour that's how it played live.
and I did not believe he was fully engaged in either the magic or speech.

I know I'm being tough, but having done tons of tailored shows over the years,
I feel this is almost a textbook example of how to not mix magic and message.

The magic and moves must inherently connect with the message's script,
the connection between magic plot and pitch must be seamless,
the whole thing must not seem scripted though it is,
and the performer must be engaged and charmed by the product he represents,
and the seemingly inevitable magic that the client's message produces!

My two-cents,
Walt

Walt.... you hit it. I hate "by rote" kind of performing.

SADLY, in Mike Skinner's later years, on medications, etc., he was like on auto pilot totally automatic and sadly boring, but his handling skills were still there.

Egads! Especially when the message is about a drug for cervical cancer--I mean come on. Chattering on about that while banging the inside of his cup with a wand is just gross!

I totally agree that, most of the time, trying to lay a message over a cups and balls routine takes away from the magic. For example, Rafael Benatar's "Elegant Cups and Balls" routine is simply magical. It's a fantastic routine that's absolutely spellbinding. But his "eCups" presentation of the same routine falls flat (for me.) Trying to follow the patter about e-mail is just a distraction and makes it hard for me to follow the great magic being performed.

My 2 cents.

I did not say that size is the only thing that matters. IMHO looks MUCH better when the final load fills the cup, small loads look better on small cups.

The Mandrake in the movie was much less serious than the one in the comics, and not once did he "gesture hypnotically." Still it was good to see. Brought back old memories of when the comics were actually worth reading.

That Mandrake-clip was frustrating!
The sequences with the small balls
were good, but then:
If my eyes were not decieving me,
I saw him do the final loads.
Then POOF! over to the escape...

I'm still traumatized...

Bjørn

Posted: Feb 4, 2008 2:55pm
[/quote]
I did not say that size is the only thing that matters. IMHO looks MUCH better when the final load fills the cup, small loads look better on small cups.
[/quote]

As Pete loves to point out:

According to Ken Brooke, "It's not the size, it's the Change!

Bjørn

When you work trade shows and you have to customize your material to fit the product, naturally you need to use a certain amount of common sense and taste to make the material work with the product.

Sometimes the best source for inspiration is the advertising literature that the company provides. However, in some cases it may not be good at all.

I once did a trade show presentation for a company that wrote a special piece of software that integrated all the software on your computer so that if you took an autocad drawing of a factory, the software would order all the supplies, schedule the deliveries and put the factory on line when it was finished. The brochure was so heavily laden with jargon that even engineers couldn't understand it. I really didn't understand exactly what it did until I watched one of the people with doctorates who had written the software explain what it did to an audience of potential buyers.

Then I had it, and I was able to do a pitch with the material I always used.

I did not say that size is the only thing that matters. IMHO looks MUCH better when the final load fills the cup, small loads look better on small cups.
[/quote]

As Pete loves to point out:

According to Ken Brooke, "It's not the size, it's the Change!

Bjørn
[/quote]
isn't a big final load a big change??

I actually enjoyed watching this... sure it went at a fast pace but thought it flowed. The spectator seemed to really enjoy it and that is what sells me.

Of course it is! What Ken Brooke meant (I think) was that you can get just as great reactions with (relatively) small final loads.

Bjørn

I understand your point, however I do belive size matters.