The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Latest and Greatest? » » Second Coming by Fraser Parker and Ross Tayler (17 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4 [Next]
Adrien L.
View Profile
Elite user
477 Posts

Profile of Adrien L.
Its amazing to see how far Fraser and Ross's ideas have grown. When Ouija came out it felt to me that it was perfect and could not be improved. I'm glad Fraser and Ross didn't feel the same way!

Second Coming is such an inspiring book to read and I agree with Alex that the effects are briliantly streamlined. The name guess is pure genious, the card work is brilliant, the zodiac stuff is beautiful and everything else is great. I can't recomend this enough!!! Smile
kissdadookie
View Profile
Inner circle
3941 Posts

Profile of kissdadookie
So I've been working my way through this latest Fraser and Ross, Second Coming and...

...
...
...
...

I'm floored. Thus far I've made my way through the forewords, intro, part of the card work, basic star sign routine, the name guess, and the billet peek (which worked very well today at the office). That billet peek by the way, whoa. It's one of those things where you read it and you go "that's stupid" but what you're doing there is not thinking and acting like a spec would think and act. Something so obvious is only obvious to you because after you have learned it, your opinions have been formed after the fact rather than you having experienced it as a spectator.

This brings me to a very important point in regards to Fraser's and Ross' work which Kenton touches on in his foreword. Kenton states that in modern times, performers have begun to take less chances and what would have been considered normal and obvious/logical approaches to achieving an effect are now considered to be "bold" or "daring." Personally I view it as the curse of aging and maturity in a very general sense. When one gets older they lose perspective because they have accumulated more commonly understood and learned knowledge. Due to this, there's a built in self-limiting mindset which grows more and more as time goes by. This limits our perception of what can and can not be achieved in our performances with XYZ method. This is what makes Second Coming and to be perfectly honest, each release from Fraser and Ross (dare I start calling the duo Frosser from now on? They are essentially joined at the hips when it comes to the work they put out after all) amazing to both learn as well as witness the progression of ideas and methods. The furious pace they put out new work on the surface may look like a money grab but when you actually read the material you fully understand why it had to be released and why certain releases are priced so high.

For example, some of the ideas which started in Ouija were later refined to incredibly lengths in False Messiah. A certain idea used in My Pin in False Messiah has been repurposed here in Second Coming to genius effect (and it's only incorporated into the effect I'm think about in a relatively seemingly small way but makes a huge impact on the effect). One of the main methods used in False Messiah is now used here for cards to great effect. I literally have all of the published works from Fraser and it's a joy to see how much further he has pushed ideas he introduced in older works. Each iteration stripping away more and more of the overt process which were already quite streamlined and infinitely workable (kind of cool how one can go further than infinitely eh?).

I personally can't wait to read the Hellstromism material as well as working through the various alternate routines for the main plots.

Lastly I would like to leave off this initial impression of my partial reading of Second Coming with this: I recall some folks having not read Fraser's work assuming that this was material with incredibly confusing process and/or suggestion or, dare I say, NLP style methods. This is far far far from the fact here. The work Frosser (there, I did it) puts out are in actuality "mechanical" in design. The difference is that the mechanics are all done verbally. Much of it are very direct and clear instructions which your participant will follow very closely but the genius is how they have all been designed in such a way that they will later on believe the instructions to be something completely different after the fact and thus erasing any and all evidence which they could have used to lead back to a method. It's quite brilliant really.

Side note, I've also read MOOL today, I know exactly what I'm going to use that for. A variation of Chandau's take on Memoria with a name guess kicker ending using the DMC Elites Smile Oh it's going to be soooooooo good.
magiclarsen
View Profile
New user
Orlando
29 Posts

Profile of magiclarsen
Quote:
On Jan 11, 2017, kissdadookie wrote:
So I've been working my way through this latest Fraser and Ross, Second Coming and...

...
...
...
...

I'm floored. Thus far I've made my way through the forewords, intro, part of the card work, basic star sign routine, the name guess, and the billet peek (which worked very well today at the office). That billet peek by the way, whoa. It's one of those things where you read it and you go "that's stupid" but what you're doing there is not thinking and acting like a spec would think and act. Something so obvious is only obvious to you because after you have learned it, your opinions have been formed after the fact rather than you having experienced it as a spectator.

This brings me to a very important point in regards to Fraser's and Ross' work which Kenton touches on in his foreword. Kenton states that in modern times, performers have begun to take less chances and what would have been considered normal and obvious/logical approaches to achieving an effect are now considered to be "bold" or "daring." Personally I view it as the curse of aging and maturity in a very general sense. When one gets older they lose perspective because they have accumulated more commonly understood and learned knowledge. Due to this, there's a built in self-limiting mindset which grows more and more as time goes by. This limits our perception of what can and can not be achieved in our performances with XYZ method. This is what makes Second Coming and to be perfectly honest, each release from Fraser and Ross (dare I start calling the duo Frosser from now on? They are essentially joined at the hips when it comes to the work they put out after all) amazing to both learn as well as witness the progression of ideas and methods. The furious pace they put out new work on the surface may look like a money grab but when you actually read the material you fully understand why it had to be released and why certain releases are priced so high.

For example, some of the ideas which started in Ouija were later refined to incredibly lengths in False Messiah. A certain idea used in My Pin in False Messiah has been repurposed here in Second Coming to genius effect (and it's only incorporated into the effect I'm think about in a relatively seemingly small way but makes a huge impact on the effect). One of the main methods used in False Messiah is now used here for cards to great effect. I literally have all of the published works from Fraser and it's a joy to see how much further he has pushed ideas he introduced in older works. Each iteration stripping away more and more of the overt process which were already quite streamlined and infinitely workable (kind of cool how one can go further than infinitely eh?).

I personally can't wait to read the Hellstromism material as well as working through the various alternate routines for the main plots.

Lastly I would like to leave off this initial impression of my partial reading of Second Coming with this: I recall some folks having not read Fraser's work assuming that this was material with incredibly confusing process and/or suggestion or, dare I say, NLP style methods. This is far far far from the fact here. The work Frosser (there, I did it) puts out are in actuality "mechanical" in design. The difference is that the mechanics are all done verbally. Much of it are very direct and clear instructions which your participant will follow very closely but the genius is how they have all been designed in such a way that they will later on believe the instructions to be something completely different after the fact and thus erasing any and all evidence which they could have used to lead back to a method. It's quite brilliant really.

Side note, I've also read MOOL today, I know exactly what I'm going to use that for. A variation of Chandau's take on Memoria with a name guess kicker ending using the DMC Elites Smile Oh it's going to be soooooooo good.



Thanks so much for this review, I was already going to pick up a copy, but you have cemented as to why!
MatthewSims
View Profile
Special user
770 Posts

Profile of MatthewSims
Just out of curiosity, how many books has Frasier put out now?
kissdadookie
View Profile
Inner circle
3941 Posts

Profile of kissdadookie
Quote:
On Jan 12, 2017, MatthewSims wrote:
Just out of curiosity, how many books has Frasier put out now?


4 (True Mysteries 1 & 2, False Messiah, Second Coming). Everything else were basically single item manuscripts.

True Mystery 1 being wholly a solo publication. True Mysteries being a collaborative effort with Gavin O'Rourke-Soccorso. False Messiah and Second Coming being a collaborative effort with Ross.
kissdadookie
View Profile
Inner circle
3941 Posts

Profile of kissdadookie
Quote:
On Jan 12, 2017, kissdadookie wrote:
Quote:
On Jan 12, 2017, MatthewSims wrote:
Just out of curiosity, how many books has Frasier put out now?




4 (True Mysteries 1 & 2, False Messiah, Second Coming). Everything else were basically single item manuscripts.

True Mysteries 1 being wholly a solo publication. True Mysteries 2 being a collaborative effort with Gavin O'Rourke-Soccorso. False Messiah and Second Coming being a collaborative effort with Ross.
kissdadookie
View Profile
Inner circle
3941 Posts

Profile of kissdadookie
Worked the star sign routine twice so far today. I love it. It's another one of those where you read it and go "meh" but then you try it and it's actually really good.

For those that have Second Coming, I take the miss for when they guess my sign (but there's obviously the occasional hit). I write down my sign first and put it face down on the table before I start the routine. I could use the ploy taught in the book by Peter but I don't want to risk them looking me up later and finding out my real star sign Smile
watkins13
View Profile
New user
71 Posts

Profile of watkins13
Going to start reading tonight! I have to say I am very excited and have been looking forward to this one for a while now. Will give a full review once I am finished.
MadisonH
View Profile
Inner circle
1371 Posts

Profile of MadisonH
Hi guys,

Alex posted a great review of his initial thoughts above, however I thought I'd chime in here and share my thoughts on "Second Coming" by Ross Taylor and Fraser Parker.

Part 1: Playing Cards
This brief section introduces a few card effects. They provide a GREAT justification for using cards in Mentalism. It's an idea I wasn't familiar with before this, but I really love the way it changes the perception of the cards and what you do with them from tricks to readings.

-Card Prediction: "An unseen card is placed openly in the center of the table. A participant then changes their mind through multiple cards, before settling on one. The card on the table is revealed to be the very card they have in mind."

This is really great. It is definitely a step forward from Ross and Fraser's previous work. It is more deceptive, and also easier for the spectator to follow. This is also virtually 100%. They provide two ways to handle the suit of the card. The first way is sheer genius. It's a little less accurate than the second method, but a little cleaner as well. But honestly, if done the way it is written, I would say it will work 95% of the time. The second method is bolder, and will end 100% correct every time. Honestly, the two methods are very similar and the differences are mot even going to be noticeable to a spectator. I really like this and can see myself using it. I tried it out on the girlfriend and it passed with flying colors. At the end she was really dumbfounded and kept asking about how I got the card. Anything that impresses the misses is always a keeper.

-Think Of A Card: "A spectator thinks of any card freely. The performer is able to divine the card they are thinking of."

This is perhaps the best propless way to know what card someone is just thinking of that I've ever seen. It's very similar to the previous effect, but in reverse. There are some very nice moments which really solidify the impossible nature of the effect. The way they deal with the suits is quite brilliant and practically comes for free.

-Kings Force: "A spectator spreads a shuffled deck of cards towards themselves and remember any card in the middle. The performer is able to divine the card(s) they thought of."

Okay... this is SHEER GENIUS. It comes from their "Kings never die" tapes which I do not have. Boy oh boy I was missing out on a GREAT routine. It is literally the best way to know someone's thought of card that I've ever seen. It's not propless, but it is very natural, essentially nothing ambiguous for the spectator, and EXTREMELY hard hitting. I will be using this a LOT. I performed this for my girlfriend as well and again, it passed with flying colors. She loved it. So do I. It really is great, forward thinking which I've never seen anything like. This one method is worth the price of the book. It's easy, and it's 100%. BRILLIANT.



Part 2: Star Signs, Peeks, Name/Word guesses

-Knowing Stars: "In a casual conversation with your spectator, you know their star sign."

I'm not big in star signs, however, this will be the only method
I use from now on. The spectator appears to guess your star sign. In this process, you narrow theirs down to just 2 signs to pump between. It is great thinking again. It is very simple and is literally over in about 15 seconds. It seems like they give you absolutely no information that would benefit you. I will say though, this is really most effective with a time delay between getting their star sign and telling them their star sign. There is an idea presented later in the book (a peek) which elevates this to a whole new level. It makes it impossible to backtrack. Again, this is the best star sign divination I've seen and this is the only one I'll ever use. It's THAT good. Oh and the best part is that the spectator doesn't need to anything besides their star signs.

-Your Lucky Star: This is Peter Turner's force of a star sign. It is a great way to have your spectator be able to accurately guess your star sign. It works great in the last routine (which is why it is presented in this book.) There's no process here. You simply tell them a little about yourself and have the spectator try to intuit what star sign you are. The downside here is the spectator must be pretty familiar with star signs in order for it to work.

-Folded Paper Peek: "What follows is a way to under very natural circumstances get a full peek of multiple pieces of information using nothing but an ordinary piece of paper and a marker."

Again, this is brilliant (I'm sounding very redundant today.) It is a very natural peek which allows you all the time you need to get your peek. That said, this is a peek which must not be presented under a challenge setting. It is best if used in a reading in order to tel them specific information about themselves. (Star sign, birthday, etc.) The peek is very deceptive under these circumstances though and all appears above board throughout.

-Original Peek: "This is the peek the previous peek was based off of."

This is a super bold peek which will not be right for everything. I don't think it really works for writing down their information for you to guess later, however, this is the perfect peek for the knowing signs routine mentioned earlier. It is so natural and creates such a massive disconnect that even the most astute spectators wouldn't be able to know how you got to their starsign.

-Name Guess Reverse (Written): "This is a very quick and elegant solution to the 'spectator as mindreader' plot where the spectator guessing the name the performer is thinking of.

This is so very very good. This is really a piece which shows how much Ross and Fraser have grown as creators. This is very nicely layered so that each piece of the puzzle makes the other piece seem irrelevant. So much of this is genius. The performer writes down a name on a piece of paper and the spectator is able to guess it. It's that clean. It's that simple. And it's a quick process. Gave this the girlfriend test and it passed. I don't really have the space here to discuss each and ever piece of this effect because it is many things working together to create a masterpiece. This is the best spectator as mindreading plot I've seen using a name guess. It really feels impossible and the spectator will walk away genuinely clueless as to how they were able to get the name. It feels as close to the real deal as you can get. I love this one. I'll use it.

-Object (any word):

Essentially, this briefly explains how you can use the method from the previous effect to have the spectator guess any object or word you wrote down rather than a name.

-Name Guess: "The spectator thinks of the name of someone. You are able to divine it."

This is the best propless name guess ever. Easily. Again, it is nicely layered with deception which will make it very difficult for the spectator to back track. Ross and Fraser have come up with a new reframe which is more natural and allows the spectator to make the mental jump rather than the performer having to explicitly state it. What is REALLY cool about this is that in the process of getting the first letter of the name their thinking of, you also get the second letter for free. It's really great thinking. There's also something really brilliant here in that when you actually get the first letter, it seems as if the process was unsuccessful so you use a different method to get the name. This means the process will be canceled out as the method because they believe it didn't work. They will remember the mind reading process as them simply thinking of their word and saying it silently in their head. This makes the effect seem even grander. Again, this is fabulous. The best propless name guess I've ever come across. I love it and will use it.

-Reverse Name Guess: "This section describes how to use the previous method as a 'spectator as mindreader' effect."

This is the same method used in the previous name guess but frames as the spectator reading the performers mind and guessing the name he is thinking of. It works very well in this way also. Again, it has some very nice moments which make this into a very interesting, and clean, take on the spectator as mind reader plot. I still prefer the previous reverse name guess (written.) However, this is just as valid. Good thinking again.

-Objects, Star Signs, Memories (Any Word):

This brief section explains how to use any of the previous name guess routines to reveal any word, object, or star sign.

-Two Way Verbal Deductive Out: "This is Peter Turner's method for guessing between two star signs."

This is a very natural way to tell the spectator their star sign when down to two options. This obviously works great in conjunction with "Knowing Stars" from before. It is the best way to pump between two options without it feeling like a pump and without using the "repeat it" ploy.


Part 3: Bonuses

-Pseudo Hellstromism: "A 100% accurate muscle reading demonstration."

This is very creative thinking by Ross. It is a clever way to have a spectator cue you the object they are thinking of when no one else thinks they are cueing you. The spectator themselves may not even know they are doing it. It uses a reframe Ross and Fraser are known for. I actually really like this. It's simple, it's bold, but it is very effective. If you've ever wanted to perform a muscle reading routine with 100% accuracy, then you'll love this. It doesn't take any practice unlike traditional methods.

-Date of Birth: "The performer knows the spectators date of birth before he even meets them, and he can prove it."

This is way to make it look like you've written a spectator's birthday down on your phone before knowing them. This is the only piece in the book I dislike. It's a decent idea, but I think there are a lot of flaws in it which will make it be very lack luster. I wanted to like it, but after playing with it a little, I just found it to be a little less deceptive than I hoped.

-Deeper Readings: "This is a way to give readings with cards and end with a powerful moment if you so desire."

This is a decent idea. It is very simple, but could prove to be quite effective. It doesn't really fit in this book to me, but the idea is there and if you feel like giving a reading where you can tell them their future card before they look at it, then this is an effective way to do that. It also nicely forgets up a force with a presentation which makes the force make sense. It may be the best use of this particular force that I've seen.




So that's all the contents of Second Coming! As you'll see, I was VERY impressed with this release. By far Ross and Fraser's best work on mind reading to date. It's going to be very hard for them to top this one. The only pieces I didn't like were considered bonuses anyway so it is fine that I didn't like them. It is rare to find a book on propless mind reading that makes me want to perform every effect in it. I'm not a big fan of propless Mentalism, but this book has changed my mind. I want to use all of these. My favorite piece is definitely Kings Force; I will use it frequently. I will keep all of the other methods outlined in this book in my mind as well for some very impactful mind reading in impromptu scenarios.


All in all: I love this release. I highly suggest it. I think it is one of the best Mentalism books to come out in a long time.

Madison
Adrien L.
View Profile
Elite user
477 Posts

Profile of Adrien L.
Fraser performed Knowing Stars (the zodiac divination) on me, on Skype, yesterday. I already knew the method, but being on the otherside of this routine really helps to see why the reactions you get are so good. It's one of those effects that will never look as good on paper as it does in performance. The choreography is beautiful, motivated and just makes sense. I don't know if it's THE best propless zodiac divination ever... But it might be pretty close Smile
Jeff Wassom
View Profile
Elite user
491 Posts

Profile of Jeff Wassom
Thanks for the in depth reviews guys!

Out of curiosity how well do you think this material stands up to repeat viewings?

I like the re-framing ideas in theory, but what I actually USE for star sign divination is the classic, battle hardened an*gram.
MadisonH
View Profile
Inner circle
1371 Posts

Profile of MadisonH
Quote:
On Jan 16, 2017, Jeff Wassom wrote:
Thanks for the in depth reviews guys!

Out of curiosity how well do you think this material stands up to repeat viewings?

I like the re-framing ideas in theory, but what I actually USE for star sign divination is the classic, battle hardened an*gram.



None of it really works for repeat viewings. But why should it? You shouldn't perform any of these multiple times.

I don't have anything against anagrams. But this technique gets you to the same place you end up with anagrams but without the process. Plus it doesn't feel like a guessing game which anagrams can sometimes feel like. I mainly like this technique because you get their star sign without them knowing that you are even trying to get their star sign. It is information you store away and then use later on after a couple of other effects to really hit them out of the blue. You can't really do that effectively with an anagram.
Jeff Wassom
View Profile
Elite user
491 Posts

Profile of Jeff Wassom
Thanks for the reply Madison.

I train at a martial arts school so probably have a larger sized, more revolving audience than the average hobbyist, but people can sometimes still see an effect 2-3 times.

The idea of getting and storing information definitely works in this context though, so the star sign divination might be something to consider...

Cheers and thanks again for your thoughts.
MadisonH
View Profile
Inner circle
1371 Posts

Profile of MadisonH
Quote:
On Jan 16, 2017, Jeff Wassom wrote:
Thanks for the reply Madison.

I train at a martial arts school so probably have a larger sized, more revolving audience than the average hobbyist, but people can sometimes still see an effect 2-3 times.

The idea of getting and storing information definitely works in this context though, so the star sign divination might be something to consider...

Cheers and thanks again for your thoughts.



No problem! Glad I could help.

Madison
kissdadookie
View Profile
Inner circle
3941 Posts

Profile of kissdadookie
Quote:
On Jan 16, 2017, Jeff Wassom wrote:
Thanks for the in depth reviews guys!

Out of curiosity how well do you think this material stands up to repeat viewings?

I like the re-framing ideas in theory, but what I actually USE for star sign divination is the classic, battle hardened an*gram.


1) Repeat viewings by the same audience is not a wise idea for some of this stuff. This is due to them being very heavily script dependent and thus you are opening yourself up for the audience picking up on the secrets in the scripting.

2) The re-frame for the star sign divination in Second Coming is not heavily reliant on the re-frame. It's more reliant on contextual framing from the beginning of the effect + built in time misdirection.
MadisonH
View Profile
Inner circle
1371 Posts

Profile of MadisonH
That's a great point about the star sign divination which I hadn't really thought about until you pointed it out.

There really is no reframe in the star sign divination. Rather, a conceptual shift which takes the focus away from the true reason the performer does the things he/she does.
kissdadookie
View Profile
Inner circle
3941 Posts

Profile of kissdadookie
I gave the name guess a go today. Wow. It's so clean. Wow.
Raum
View Profile
Loyal user
228 Posts

Profile of Raum
I think most of the effects will only work in English, yes?
kissdadookie
View Profile
Inner circle
3941 Posts

Profile of kissdadookie
Quote:
On Jan 17, 2017, Raum wrote:
I think most of the effects will only work in English, yes?


If the language has a alphabet type system it would work. There's quite a bit in here that isn't language dependent but you would have to translate the scripting to your language. There's a lot more in this book than simply effects. It's filled with a plethora of utility tools/techniques that you could apply to other things after you understand what they are and what they can apply to. Much of this options are actually explicitly explained in the book.
Adrien L.
View Profile
Elite user
477 Posts

Profile of Adrien L.
Besides the name guess and reverse name guess, nothing in this book is language dependent (and even those are not really language dependent: as kissdadookie said, as long as you have an alphabet to work with, you're good).
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Latest and Greatest? » » Second Coming by Fraser Parker and Ross Tayler (17 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4 [Next]
X
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2020 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.34 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 <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL