I thought that the DVD’s were poor all of them, so as not to have anyone question my reasoning I will explain why I feel the way I do.

First off Production quality I felt that it was lacking, now I am not attempting to say that production quality makes a magic DVD good or bad but it can help when it comes to keeping the audiences’ attention. Some of the camera work was nice and I will say that for the most part I can see that Magic Makers is coming along nicely with the production of DVD’s and videos but I felt that anyone with a digital camera could have produced the same thing. But as we all know L&L was not built in a day.

Secondly the teaching: To anyone on this thread that says that Gerry Griffin’s teaching style is good I ask how good is a teacher who does not credit the material that is being taught when it is not his in the first place. I would suggest that those that liked his teaching style go out and by the Vernon DVD’s and look at the difference in teaching style. Vernon credited everyone because he understood that part of the teaching process was making sure that the student had an appreciation of the history behind the effect. Most of the effects on all of the DVD’s were not credited and this I feel is a shame.

Thirdly the repetitive nature of the material involved. I felt like I was watching the same trick over and over with very dry differing plot lines. I really feel that if you took all of this material and cut it down you may end up with 2-3 DVD’s of useful magic.

Forth: The Personality of the Teacher and Performer. (I will say that this is personal in nature and I understand that not everyone will have the same opinion that I do on this topic but I am expressing how I feel regarding what came across to me on these DVD’s and in no way am I attempting to say anything negative about Gerry on a personal level).
Part of the reason that some magic teachers have become as well liked as they have is because of the personality that they have, it may be an engaging personality such as Ammar or even a sometimes wild and crazy manner or wit about them like Sankey or Lovell, or even a grandfatherly wisdom about them like Vernon or Burger but the one thing that they all have in common is that there is something about them that we as magic students are drawn to and that is why they have become respected teachers. Gerry in my opinion has none of the above. His manner is very dry and mundane even when he is attempting to create and excitement in what it was that he was doing it did not come across as natural and fluid. I felt that he was forcing out the little bit of personality that did come across. I am sure that in person or in the real world Gerry is a great guy but it did not come across in his performance or teaching.

With all of that said I will add that Gerry did seem to have a good knowledge of the slights that he used in the nature of performance and instruction of the slights I just wish that he would have given more attention to the crediting of those whose work he used to create his routines. I will also say that the DVD’s are not badly priced as a matter of fact the price is the only thing that did not really bother me that badly. If asked would I recommend any of the DVD’s in either of the series I would have to say no not even to the beginner or intermediate who may only looking for the work behind the effects. I think that if in the future that Gerry was to pursue creating more instructional material that gave credit and was not so repetitive in nature I may be interested in buying them even with all of the things that I have said.

If you are thinking of getting any of these DVD’s I would recommend saving you money and get some of the Ammar stuff or other material that is available on the market.

Cheers
Kris

Thank you pikard for bringing up what I mentioned earlier. No credits!!!

I personally was happy with the production values. I thought his skills were competent. The effects were good. (I don't care that they were all 'similar'.) I actually think this was a smart marketing move. Focusing in on one type of effect and then giving lots of variations on it can't be beat.

(Please study 'Focus' by Al Reis for more information about this.)

But the lack of credits was inexscusable! As magicians we don't have many traditions and even less ethics. What we do have is a sense of history that we carefully preserve through crediting. This is how we fulfill our obligations to those that came before us. If you publish anything you need to give credit where credit is due.

When I teach I always tell my students where something came from and whose it is. I do not what to give them the impression that I came up with something that isn't mine. This is called plagarism.

'Capitulating Cards' is a great effect. It is found in 'Don't Blink' by James Swain.

It is simply criminal that the various effects were not credited at the beginning of each explanation. If the credits are on the DVD's I couldn't find them. (Maybe they are in some easter eggs.)

That is all.


Randy

No problem Randy. I think that it is very important as well to make sure that the history is being passed along as well as making sure that we do not take credit for that which is not ours.

Gerry's material if that's what youd like to call it is less than appealing to any magician with the right mind who understands where credit is due. Gerry doesn't do a good job at giving credit to anyone.

I almost got the set of dvd's, especially after obtaining Jerry's "Queens Out of Control", which I give a 10/10, even though I wish it came in Bikes, but still an awesome, examinable effect......

Queens out of control was a good effect that Jerry put out. I enjoyed it as well. I wish that he had done more material like this on his DVD Sets.

I own most of Gerry's stuff including Lucky 7's, Complete Card Magic and Queens Out Of Control. I've noticed that Gerry's work does seem to produce polarised opinions. Some, myself included, very much like his lagubrious, understated style. There is something very likeable about him, the DVD's contain many quality effects, his card handling is professional and yet the methods are easily accessible to the beginner and low intermediate card student. Also, he has produced one of the few DVD card magic courses that is progressive. In addition, find him to be an excellent teacher. On the other hand, some may find his style too flat and slow in a way that irrtiates, embarrasses or simply has the person losing interest.

Oddly enough, one advantage of Gerry's unintrusive style is that it allows you to concentrate on the actual card effects without getting distracted by the flamboyant antics of the performer. To me, this enhances the learning experience of the mechanics of the trick. Its worth noting that the camara burns Gerry's hands fairly relentlessly and yet he continues, for the most part, to manipulate the cards in a deceptive way. Another advantage is that it leaves the viewer to construct there own stylistic presentation of the trick without feeling the need to emulate a wonderfully deft and witty performance.

Perhaps the difference in views is related partly to the experience of the student. To those just beginning, or refreshing their skills after years away, Gerry's efforts may find favour. After all he is teaching what used to be called palour magic. For those inermediate card workers and/or those wishing to hit the streets with novel, cool and jazzy presentations, then Gerry is definitely going to be a disappointment.

Perhaps the lesson here is, try before you buy if you can.

Regards,

Paul H

No. The real issue here is he put his name on a project that makes him look like a thief.

Randy

But he never said he invented anything, as far as I know.

Gerry put me to sleep. Every time I watched his videos I fell asleep. Granted some of the tricks are pretty good, his style is so bland it is kind of funny. He seems like the little kid who tried to be cool but everybody picked on. Sorry just was disappointed for what the price is. Plus magic makers are kind of SHADEY

Sounds like his unobtrusive style is putting people to sleep to me! I am not saying that every instructional tape or book has to be exciting to watch or even that it should be entertaining but it should keep your attention and these DVD's do not do that.

Hi Pickacard,

I have watched sections of his performances with a variety of people (family and friends) and we have all enjoyed the card magic finding it mystifying and entertaining. This includes Gerry's tongue in cheek, laid back and at times clumsey style. As I said earilier, Gerry's work does seem to produce somewhat polarised responses and your definite opinions on the subject seems to fit with this observation. I still maintain that Lucky 7's and The Complete Card Magic offer a great way into learning and building up card magic skills. Maybe this yet another example of one mans meat being another mans poison.

Regards,

Paul H

Well said Paul,

How about 50.oo?
WR

WR,
The people at MM must love you. I have noticed that you push a lot of there stuff.

Good luck with that.
Kris

I thought that card dvd's where abut learning stuff not about jim carreys making you laugh whatsoever-_- gerry griffin is a brilliant teacher and I appreciate his work.

I mean if I want to laugh ill buy dumb and dumbr or sumthing:):)

Sir:

If you don't know whether he had permission or not, don't you think
it's a bit rude to accuse someone of unethical behaviour?

Twice in this thread you've accused a friend of mine of a crime.
In fact, you have absolutely no factual basis whatsoever on which
to base this accusation.

People like you who try and damage a man's character without having
any facts whatsoever are nothing more than jealous rumour-mongerers.

Tell you what-- why don't you point out some things you've published
or produced and we'll take a look at how well YOU'VE done....

Steven Youell

Dear Mr. Youell,

I lost my original reply so here is the succint version.

If an artist copied the Mona Lisa and sold it with his own name on it would you consider that stealing? If not...why?

Is not plagarism considered unethical? You may change the names of the charactes in a story but it would still be plaragism.

The effects ARE quite good on this series. No doubt about it. But without any crediting for the sources of the various effects it gives the impression that these are Gerry's creations. I've noticed that you didn't mention where I can find any credits on these DVDs nor if he did have permission for Swain's effect.

In reading Swain's books and Ortiz's for that matter you I'm sure have noticed that they very carefully credit the sources of their effects. Maybe because this was a DVD project it was difficult to include credits.

I haven't published anything. How does that have anything to do with the point at hand. (If I do publish something in the future you can bet your bottom dollar that I will at least credit the sources and ask permission as needed.)

Having said that I do agree that I was overly harsh. (However I'm certainly not jealous of him.) But I do see that my actions have acted as rumor-mongering and as such apologize for that.

Sincerely,

Randy Naviaux

First, it's clear that you do not have enough knowledge of the law to understand
the difference between stealing (which is a crime) and unethical behaviour (which
is not always a crime). In terms of performing material and legal rights, you
should really review the Supreme Court Case in which Charlie Chaplin was the
plantiff. THAT'S what determines what is legal in terms of performing material
in this country.

Secondly, your Mona Lisa question is spurious because the actual facts are that
no, in this particular case that is not a crime. (Although, in my opinion, it is
unethical).

Finally, it was not that you have a problem with crediting that bothered me--
it's that you accused someone of stealing (a crime) when you have absolutely
no facts that would back that up. And even if the person you accused did not
credit some people, it's still not a crime in the United States.

"Unethical Behaviour" is a violation of a code that is agreed upon by a group
unified by a particular interest or profession. Can you point to something
we've all signed that closely defines unethical behaviour in this instance?

No. You can't, because there isn't any.

Now, you may have problems with someone not crediting properly or using
material without permission, but passing judgement on them as felons is
way out of line. And doing so without any facts is just plain wrong.

I have no idea of where you're from but in the United States of America, we
have a guideline known as "Innocent Until Proven Guilty".

Damaging somneone's character on the internet without knowing the person,
situation or any other facts is just as unethical as not crediting someone
properly in a published work, in my opinion.

Steven Youell