I suspect you are correct. The spectators' reactions to his approach, etc., didn't ring true to me and the magic seemed to defy many of the principles I know about magic. But are you sure? How do you KNOW it uses camera cuts and stooges?

I like Andrew's effects so I couldn't wait to see the show.
Set up a series recording for it on my DVR.
Watched the first episode, watched the second, deleted the series recording, watched no more.

I'm on the fence with this one. I do like the "magic meets Candid Camera" element, but find some of the situations uncomfortable and having too much of a "Punk'd" feel for my taste. The funny thing is I'm not against "Punk'd," I'm just more interested in the magic here, and not so much watching people's reactions when Andrew runs off with their wallet.

I really like the show and find it very entertaining. Big fan!

Well, the show is over. I have doubts as to whether it will return. In its current form, I hope not.

It's a new spin on magic on tv. Entertaining, yes. But I saw a lot of the same effect, an object to impossible location over and over. In a newspaper stand, in a vending machine, in a fire hydrant glass case, in a ranch dipping sauce? Lol, that one was stupidly kinda funny.

I found it unwatchable.

I liked the show in general. You can´t avoid the comparison between his show and Angel´s. I like Mayne much more than Angel, though. However I see some trends repeated, like whenever the "trick" is done, he just walks away leaving the "victim" stuck in whatever situation they were put in. What´s the object of this? I really don´t get it. Just the same in the MF series with Angel. At least you don´t see his "Troupe" parising him in interviews like Angel´s. That was really annoying.

Another thing that I dodn´t like was the supposed "revenge" on some of these people. As somebody wrote before, I hardly think that if someone loves his bike and you "vanish" it, or "melts" your car, you would just be fine with it.

Still I liked it. I was entertained and hada couple of good laughs.