(Close Window)
Topic: Oz born question
Message: Posted by: Otis Day (May 8, 2005 11:55PM)
In the preview for "Born To Perform Card Magic" is says there are 4 full length performances. Then it lists them and shows a brief clip. In it, two card monte is listed, but both cards are shown face down. Tell me he's not performing a version of "Be Honest" and misnaming it with two card monte. Anyone know?
Message: Posted by: JohnLamberti (May 9, 2005 12:19AM)
Well, David Blaine performed Eddie Fechter's "Be Honest With Me" in one of his specials, and he called it Two Card Monte also....Haven't seen the Oz video, so I can't comment on that, but I wouldn't be surprised.
Message: Posted by: Ben Train (May 9, 2005 12:20AM)
I'm a little tired, so I be be off here, but I believe Two Card Monte is Blaine's (is it?) version of Be Honest.

so, theyre you go.
ca-ching!
Message: Posted by: LobowolfXXX (May 9, 2005 01:13AM)
Twisting the Aces is my version of Reset.
Message: Posted by: Roger Kelly (May 9, 2005 01:31AM)
Sorry to go off-topic slightly, but David Williamson does a nice version of "Be Honest What Is It?" on his DVD "Magic Farm" and calls it "The Memory Test." He does 'try' to give credit to the originator (Fechter) but still mis-titles it!! Lousy research for an otherwise excellent DVD.

Why do people have such problems with this masterpiece of card magic?

When I do this for folk, I actually say, "Be honest, what is it?" (I know, sad!)

By the way - there's a few threads on the Be Hones / Two Card Monte issue.

RK
Message: Posted by: irishguy (May 9, 2005 02:13AM)
[quote]
On 2005-05-09 00:55, Otis Day wrote:
In the preview for "Born To Perform Card Magic" is says there are 4 full length performances. Then it lists them and shows a brief clip. In it, two card monte is listed, but both cards are shown face down. Tell me he's not performing a version of "Be Honest" and misnaming it with two card monte. Anyone know?
[/quote]

He is performing like Blaine and misnaming it. Of course, it isn't credited either.
Message: Posted by: Fresh (May 9, 2005 04:41PM)
It's his own version of it. Not much is changed, though. I think the PM mixed up the Biddle Trick and "Ultimate Transpo" (a.k.a Here Then There) in the demo. Heh.
Message: Posted by: Jaz (May 9, 2005 04:51PM)
I don't have the book handy, and I may be wrong, but believe the difference is this:

In the book "Fechter", there is no set up and whatever cards are on top at the time are used.

The 2 card monte versions I've seen use contrasting pairs.
Message: Posted by: irishguy (May 9, 2005 05:00PM)
Yes. Fechter's routine is impromptu, but it also has a kicker ending that is left out of all the Blaine-style versions.
Message: Posted by: Jaz (May 9, 2005 05:15PM)
Oh yea, I forgot about the kicker.
I'll have to dig out the book.

By the way, in John Carney's "Carneycopia" there is a trick called "Sanverted".
I can see this being used instead of 2 card monte.
Message: Posted by: irishguy (May 9, 2005 05:31PM)
Fechter is a great book. There are quite a few routines I regularly perform from that book. Good stuff.

I have never read Carneycopia. I might have to look into that. Thanks.
Message: Posted by: Jaz (May 9, 2005 06:10PM)
Carneycopia is one of my favorites.

Actually I loved reading Fechter's unique style and humor.
I see it as rough and ready magic and ideal for the bar scene.
Type of guy I would have liked to sit down with and have a few brews.
Message: Posted by: irishguy (May 9, 2005 06:25PM)
I would have loved to have had the pleasure of meeting Eddie Fechter. I don't know if he would have like me, but I think I would have liked him. :)
Message: Posted by: Chris Berry (May 10, 2005 01:09AM)
The Fechter trick is also taught on the video Secret Sessions.

Paul Gertner teaches it and YES he uses contrasting pairs. He credits Fechter and even goes over how in the book, you use whatever cards are on top of the deck but it is preferred to use contrasting cards.
Message: Posted by: irishguy (May 10, 2005 02:28AM)
Paul Gertner is very good and a very good teacher. I have no doubt that he properly credited. It doesn't take but a few seconds to cull contrasting colors, but with the totally impromptu version, you can even have the spectator shuffle and take it from there.
Message: Posted by: Adam Keisner (May 11, 2005 11:42AM)
So whats Dr Jacob Daileys last trick then?
Message: Posted by: Ben Train (May 11, 2005 12:08PM)
You show a packet of four of a kind and place the 2 red cards in the spectators hands.

BLAMO!

they have the black cards and you have the red.

2 card monte is essentially a combination of be honest and daleys last trick.
Message: Posted by: Nik_Mikas (May 11, 2005 03:00PM)
No it isn't. "Two Card Monte" is exactly the Fechter routine. Nothing big has been changed. In the original Fechter handling, the two queens change to two random cards. If you consider an extra little setup a variation, then you need to recheck the meaning of the word.

However, a few things were changed when Blaine did it. Firstly, the presentation is different. Unless my interpretation of the Fechter routine is way off, I think he used the switch bit almost secretly. And, as mentioned earlier, the kicker was left out of the Blaine handling.

There is no tranposition, just a change of two cards. It in no way resembles "The Last Trick".
Message: Posted by: Ben Train (May 11, 2005 03:06PM)
I thought only one card changes in be honest!

spectatore holds a queen (lets say) and you show an ace. you mention if you switch the queen for the ace thier holding what do they have?
they say ace.
you say right, then the queen in your hand changes to the ace.
you say if I know hold the ace, what do you have?
they say queen, and you say take a look, and it ends up being a joker.

am I thinking of a variant?
I might be.

wow, I'm off today!
Ive given wronge information on like three forums today!
and I'm wearing my shoes on the wronge feet.
Oh My!
Message: Posted by: irishguy (May 11, 2005 03:16PM)
Fechter's routine is completely impromptu. You don't need to use a certain pair like Queens or Aces. Obviously, you could...but as written, it isn't necessary.

Whereas Blaine quite openly switched his card for the one being held at fingertips by the spectator, Fechter did it boldly and quickly so that the spectator was aware the cards touched, but not that they switched.

The ending had the two cards in the spectator's hand changed, and the originals were found in the magician's pocket. Blaine didn't perform this aspect.

As Nik_Mikas pointed out, using specific cards as opposed to doing it impromptu doesn't make it a different trick, nor is it a legitimate variation. It would be like me "creating" Twisting The Kings.
Message: Posted by: Ben Train (May 11, 2005 03:26PM)
NO NO!

I WIN!

the trick I describe above has a visual transposition and then the card (single) held in the spectatores hand changes to a card that was never in play (heck it can be a blank card with your contact information. I don't care)

I may be wrong, but it wont stop me from dancing.

I shouldnt post when I'm like this...
jewish.
Message: Posted by: Whit Haydn (May 11, 2005 03:50PM)
Nordatrax: You are wrong. In Be Honest!, the spectator's card and the card in the magician's hand both change to two completely different cards. The first two cards appear in the magician's pocket. Blaine changed the handling slightly, so that the magcian's card is also placed into the spectator's other hand before the revelation--so that the spectator is turning over both cards for the revelation. This weakens the trick in many ways that have been examined before on this board.

Doc Daley's Last Trick is primarily a transposition, Be Honest! is basically a transformation.

I think Blaine said something about liking to do this trick for Three-Card Monte guys, but I don't think he called it Two-Card Monte.

That was a title given to Eddie's trick by internet magic dealers who wanted to sell Eddie's famous routine without any credit, using Blaine's popularity to draw sales.

Anyone that uses the name Two-Card Monte for Eddie's trick is disrespectful and wrong. It marks you as a rank beginner.

For info on the history of the trick and how David Blaine learned it, as well as a discussion of some of the finer points of the trick, check out this thread:

http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewtopic.php?topic=97243&forum=2
Message: Posted by: Ben Train (May 11, 2005 04:39PM)
I knew both cards didn't change in the spectators hands, one changed in yours and one in theirs.

I guess this makes me right.
and by right, I mean very very wrong.

The I win comment was directed at someone else, and he knows who he is.

as stated above, I may be wrong but it wont stop me from dancing.
A-CHA-CHA-CHA!
Message: Posted by: Whit Haydn (May 11, 2005 06:06PM)
Nordatrax:

Sorry, I didn't mean to involve myself in your private conversation with "He Who Knows Who He Is." ;)
Message: Posted by: LobowolfXXX (May 11, 2005 07:30PM)
Since I saw the attribution of Blaine's teaching to Steve Cohen (on the other thread), I was going to leave off my understanding of that history, but since Cohen disavowed any credit (?), I heard that it was Bill Joslin who sent the effect Blaine's way.


[quote]
On 2005-05-11 16:50, Whit Haydn wrote:

For info on the history of the trick and how David Blaine learned it, as well as a discussion of some of the finer points of the trick, check out this thread:

http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewtopic.php?topic=97243&forum=2
[/quote]