This one requires some careful audience management imo.
I do a casual "walk through" of the handling with the spec.
As I do this, I mention " ..and, keep them all in this orientation, facing up towards heven"
It reads rough, but flies in performance in my experience.
I also think the death nail in this effect, could be any "hurry" in presentation.
This is a spook story. I approach it more as a story teller, its different.

I also found that its an easy one to get confused on, if you don't perform (or run through) it enough(?)
But, I do love this effect. I don't do it often at all, because it's mood specific imo.
Of the times I've performed it though...sheesh. It stays with people.
Strong little effect, worth the effort.


PM me if I can help of course

252Here

I've spent a lot of time on this, 'cause I was really disappointed in the presentation & "magic," but I like the idea & love the props. So I worked on trying to make the effect worthy of the conception and the props. I think I've succeeded for myself, but only barely. And I would not want to have to work this hard on a purchased effect again. Here's my more detailed opinion:

This has two components: a potentially spooky story and the magic that supercharges the spookiness. Both aspects of the effect as presented are problematic. The props and the basic ideas are good, though, and if you put in enough of your own work, it could be a very fun and spooky trick. It’s just a shame that the creator didn’t do this himself.

As for the first, unfortunately, Jamie Daws hardly tries to tell a story on the DVD, which is a discussion w/ Dave Loosely rather than a full performance -- he essentially only indicates the kind of thing that should happen (the written description of the effect is much better, but not detailed enough). If you're good at it, you can fix this yourself (but at this price, a full, well-written script would be appropriate).

As for the magic, it has 3 problems. First, this is a variation on a do-as-I-do card trick, but not as good because here the magician is clearly responsible for fulfilling half of the two-part prediction. Second, the effect has a couple of other inconsistencies that attentive spectators could notice. Finally, spectator management is critical, and even the best efforts might fail occasionally. That being said, the inconsistencies can be minimized with a sufficiently spooky presentation and the spec management risk is likely worth the payoff. To solve the first problem, you should find a way to “prove” the magician cannot “cheat.” There are ways to do this (I’ve found one that I like), but, again, I thought I was paying for someone else to do this.

In conclusion, if I had to do it over again, I would spend my money on a fully finished effect.