|
|
|
|||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2 | ||||||||||
DocBenWiz Special user Meridian, Idaho 991 Posts 
|
Quote:
On Nov 3, 2014, Tony Iacoviello wrote: Agree with that premise, Tony....and, otherwise, I would have to adapt my "H@nt€d Ke¥ routine to a levitation effect! 
"Pay no attention to that strange man behind the curtain" (it's only "Doc Benjamin from the Amazing Wizardelia Wagon")
|
|||||||||
Slim King Eternal Order Orlando 18028 Posts
|
Here is my question ... It seems to me that when a magician does a series of card flourishes, shuffles them on his knee (Who does that in real life?) then performs a card trick .. That's all it is. He's obviously a card master, and good for him, but if the card walked on water I wouldn't be surprised.
The more you touch those cards the less confidence I have in my own ability to spot the move, scam or gaff... Is that anyone else's feelings?
THE MAN THE SKEPTICS REFUSE TO TEST FOR ONE MILLION DOLLARS.. The Worlds Foremost Authority on Houdini's Life after Death.....
|
|||||||||
Kroots New user Manchester, UK 62 Posts
|
I'd agree with you slim, but now we are talking about cards, they carry their own connotations already which becomes a whole topic in itself.
But the same logic should be applied to cards as any other mentalist prop - if you treat them like a magic prop then they become a magic prop (the magicians mentality once again). |
|||||||||
|
Slim King Eternal Order Orlando 18028 Posts
|
I've introduced a new prop into the show ... The Mystic Seer. He sends out a prediction via a little card. I can take the card out or They can take the card out. But there are certainly a lot more things that can be done if I do it....
 So I do both. In the end I always say ..You took out the card. And almost all the time they did.
THE MAN THE SKEPTICS REFUSE TO TEST FOR ONE MILLION DOLLARS.. The Worlds Foremost Authority on Houdini's Life after Death.....
|
|||||||||
|
Mr_Grue New user London, UK 74 Posts
|
Quote:
On Nov 3, 2014, Kroots wrote: This. Mind-reading should involve a process that the audience can, in some sense, see happening. That should be the focus of your presentation because, after all, that is the skill you are claiming to have. Throw a big old spotlight onto your false process, and keep the real method in the dark - it should be no more important than a bit of tedious admin before you get down to business. I personally feel that mind-reading should not appear to be easy, either.
"Yes, I have tricks in my pocket, I have things up my sleeve.
But I am the opposite of a stage magician. He gives you illusion that has the appearance of truth. I give you truth in the pleasant disguise of illusion." Tennessee Williams http://tiny.cc/Grue |
|||||||||
|
bdekolta Inner circle Texas 1636 Posts
|
Quote:
there are almost always ways to accomplish the same result while eliminating the sleight completely. I disagree with this to the extent that eliminating the SOH leads to more procedure or audience management in my experience. If you focus on what you want the audience to remember at the end of you performance and tailor your procedure to achieve that I fully support it. But in my experience SOH is the most direct and invisible procedure available. I will conceded that my skill set helps in that regard but I stand by the statement. Quote:
If a sleight has to be used, it should be a very close facsimile to what appears to be the natural and incidental handling of objects, ideally done at a time and in a well justified context in which no one has a reason to be suspicious in the first place. Ben - I respect your contributions and have enjoyed what you have shared. What you have written here, to me, is a description of well executed sleight-of-hand. If it doesn't meet this criteria then I would just call it bad magic. And thank you for spelling sleight correctly! That one thing scores major point in my book. General comments not specific to Ben: On the whole I find many similarities with well executed SOH and mentalism. The difference being presentation. In the big scheme of things my criteria is "what does the audience think" at the end. What they think is separate from method. If your performance left them thinking something you didn't intend then you need a better method/presentation. There really isn't another path. Make what you do/show fit the narrative/result you want at the end. Don't leave it up the spectator to decide if you got there or not. ~ Dan |
|||||||||
TonyB2009 Inner circle 5006 Posts
|
Quote:
On Nov 3, 2014, genius wrote: There is no 'if'. If you use a phone they will know you are using an app - whether you are or not.
Check out Tony's new thriller Dead or Alive http://www.amazon.co.uk/Alive-Varrick-Bo......n+carson
http://www.PartyMagic.ie |
|||||||||
mastermindreader 1949 - 2017 Seattle, WA 12586 Posts
|
Any overt use of an electronic device, smart phone, etc. will create immediate suspicion.
On occasion I DO use electronic devices, but their use is always well concealed and there is no apparent technology involved in my shows. And virtually every effect can be closely replicated with traditional methods if the need arises. But I don't consider those who rely exclusively on self working electronic methods to be true "mentalists" in the sense that I use the word. |
|||||||||
Rocketeer Special user Westchester, NY 965 Posts
|
Quote:
On Nov 5, 2014, mastermindreader wrote: Amen Brother Bob. That's why I call Chris Angles a special effects technician.
I'm selling my hardcover autographed limited edition copy of Jerome Finley's "Thought Veil"
PM me for info. |
|||||||||
|
MVoss Veteran user Boston, MA 372 Posts
|
Maybe this is so called “Magician” thinking as well, but one of the problems I see with hands off stuff is that, while powerful, I think it can sometimes seem a little flat. Part of entertaining is to create a memorable visual image. As Mentalists that can be difficult. No white tigers are going to pop out of a pay envelope. But its those same little envelopes that make Name/Place, Fourth Dimensional, etc. feel different visually then Tossed Out Deck or Russian Roulette. I think even if it was the best Mentalism, even real mind reading, I'd find myself getting bored watching a guy on stage talk his way through visualizing a card. The closest thing would be stand up comedy, but comedians have to compensate by creating really vivid images in their words in order to make it watchable. That being said, hands off stuff can be really cool, and to me, I think it makes a great closer. Spend the show using these various things to build up the connection, then for the final bit, or the second to last bit, depending on if you had a cool down effect, frying them by going hands off.
|
|||||||||
| The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Penny for your thoughts » » Importance of hands-off! (5 Likes) | ||||||||||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2 | ||||||||||
Posted: Nov 4, 2014 06:41 am 
| [ Top of Page ] |
|
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.03 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 < 
|