(Close Window)
Topic: Prohibition - Bottle Production question
Message: Posted by: close-up (Mar 3, 2007 01:12PM)
I've decided to replace my "Coin in Bottle" routine for "Prohibition" as a opener for my restaurant work. However, I would like to add one more element to the routine. Rather than just reach into one of my pockets and remove my bottle, I would like to magically produce the bottle. I will be using a Corona Beer bottle for the routine. Keeping in mind the following:

1. The bottle to be produced is a Corona Bottle.
2. Must be able to be conceled until needed without being detected.
3. Must be able to be reset without vanishing somewhere private.

I would appreciate any feed back as to what would be the best bottle production for my needs.

Thanks
Message: Posted by: MagicSanta (Mar 3, 2007 01:19PM)
Less is more. By producing the bottle magically you have removed the magical aspect of the penitration. Do so if you wish but do so knowing you have taken an excellent effect and reduced its power. Have fun.
Message: Posted by: close-up (Mar 3, 2007 02:20PM)
OOPS, I just realized that I had another post pertaining to Prohibition a while ago. My mistake. Sorry.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Mar 3, 2007 02:52PM)
In general when you take 2 mediocre tricks and combine them, you end up with one horrid trick.

Why we feel we have to do things like this I will never know. I know all the arguements for it, but really it is sad to see a magician who can't just take out a bottle.

I mean do we HAVE to produce the deck, do tricks with it, vanish it, produce a bottle then a coin, and yada yada yada. I think we need to take ourselvs less seriously.
Message: Posted by: MagicSanta (Mar 3, 2007 03:03PM)
Danny is correct. Also flourishes often lessen the impact of an effect. I realize some name magicians make statements like "would a real magician pull out a deck of cards or would he produce them magically?". Well, I say a real magician puts his pants on the same way I do and I think a magician would pull a regular deck out of his pocket.
Message: Posted by: close-up (Mar 3, 2007 03:18PM)
Perhaps your right Dannydoyle. Just asking because it seemed like a good idea. I saw a clip of Johnny "Ace" Palmer produce a bottle as an opener. It was very magical. The clip stopped there and not sure where he went with it. But the production of the bottle was very good. Did he just produce the bottle and set it aside or did he continue on and use it in another routine? I find it somewhat hard to believe that the bottle was produced and simply set aside. I wonder if Johnny "Ace" Palmer takes himself very seriously when he produces his bottle. I would like to reach his level of excellence regardless of how serious he takes himself. People I believe watch Magicians to see Magic and when a bottle or anything for that matter is produced, its a Magical moment. Just my opinion. Right or wrong.

Thanks
Message: Posted by: jprace (Mar 3, 2007 08:23PM)
If you do decide to produce a bottle, use a Topit. Michael Ammar has a great and easy bottle production using a Topit. Here's the link to his Topit pattern: http://ammarmagic.com/cart/index.php?act=viewProd&productId=45. He showed the production to us at a lecture, it was great.

Jeff
Message: Posted by: Paul D (Mar 3, 2007 08:25PM)
Splash Bottle gimmick should do the job.
Check here its where I got mine. http://www.themagicwarehouse.com

-Pauly
Message: Posted by: That Magic Guy (Mar 3, 2007 09:13PM)
I use the Splash Bottle gimmick along with Troy Hoosers bottle production. Bottle is hidden behind the close-up pad. I retreive the bottle and roll the pad around it then pull the bottle out. If people are paying attention the appearence is quite startling. Need to be wearing a jacket. Pretty soon it will be hot here in Orlando and I'll be back to wearing a vest.
Message: Posted by: close-up (Mar 3, 2007 09:17PM)
Thanks for the info. Where can I find troy Hoosers bottle production?
Message: Posted by: ttorres (Mar 3, 2007 09:37PM)
Hi Close-up,

You can find Troy Hooser’s bottle production in his book “Destroyers”. It is located on page 151 under the title “Nectar of the Cards”.

If you don’t already have this book, it is well worth the price of admission (as they say).

Sincerely,

Tony
Message: Posted by: MagicSanta (Mar 3, 2007 09:44PM)
So you are going to combine them eh? I look forward to hearing your answer.
Message: Posted by: close-up (Mar 3, 2007 10:23PM)
Yes, I think so.
Message: Posted by: MagicSanta (Mar 3, 2007 11:07PM)
Good job....I think you are a brilliant performer.
Message: Posted by: michaelrice (Mar 4, 2007 08:24AM)
I use the splash gimmick to produce the bottle. I do the routine on David Stone's DVD - Real secrets of magic.
Message: Posted by: That Magic Guy (Mar 4, 2007 08:44AM)
You can also see it on one of Troys DVD. Think it is #2. Called bottle production.
Message: Posted by: ttorres (Mar 4, 2007 11:15AM)
I forgot nobody reads books anymore. Silly me.
Message: Posted by: Richard Evans (Mar 4, 2007 11:52AM)
Bob Read's bottle production doesn't require any gimmicks. It's written-up in his booklet 'Thanks to Pepys'.

You can't do it if you're working in a naturist resort (or maybe you can, but best not go into that any further :))

I don't think it would be a good idea to combine with Prohibition, which is strongest when used 'impromptu'.
Message: Posted by: close-up (Mar 4, 2007 12:27PM)
Well, I don't believe I'm a brilliant performer. But thanks for the comment. Richard, I also believe that Prohibition is strongest when performed impromptu. But the vast majority of my performances are done in restaurants. I would say at least 90%. I would guess to say that Coin in Bottle is no more impromptu than Prohibition. After all who carries are a bottle for any purpose, especially to place a coin inside or a bottle cap.!
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Mar 4, 2007 04:18PM)
When you combine 2 effects inevetably (regardless of how it is spelled), the audience will remember one trick far more than the other. Thus taking away impact from one effect. Much the same way in which 3rd party canditates often take votes from one or the other mainstream candidates.

Why lessen the impact of either trick?

Like I said we need to take ourselvs less seriously at times. The idea that everything we do has to be magical in some way can really make us look idiotic. I mean the silly discussions about how to present business cards. You end up looking like a guy starved for attention who takes himself far too seriously.

Never forget that magic is done for people, not for yourself. At least when it is done right that is the way it is.

If they see you believing every move is magic, they really start to back away.
Message: Posted by: close-up (Mar 4, 2007 06:54PM)
I admit that you have a good point.
Message: Posted by: patrick flanagan (Mar 4, 2007 07:21PM)
I"m not sure I understand the problem with producing a bottle to do Prohibition. Yes, they are both great effects that could stand alone quite well. Do you think it would be inappropriate to combine the production of 4 coins and then follow that with a matrix routine? Both, again, are great effects that could stand alone, but the continuity of props and effects, I think, is effective routining. Does this have to be the case all of the time? I think, NO! I don't produce a deck of cards to go into a card trick. I just take them out of my pocket. But, I don't see the fault, theatrically, if someone choses to go that route. Ammar produces the bottle and continues with "coin in the bottle". I've seen him perform this at his lecture, and I thought it was a nice, logical segue from effect to effect.
I don't think this practice needs to be constant for each presentation (produce a cigarette, produce a lighter, vanish the cigarette, vanish the lighter). I think then things would become confusing for the spectators....too much stimuli. However, done properly, giving the spectators enough time to digest each effect, I think it is completely fine.
I could be wrong....I"ve been wrong before.
Patrick
Message: Posted by: MagicSanta (Mar 4, 2007 08:19PM)
Ammar in a lecture situation is showing, and selling, two different routines. One is the production of the bottle and the segway into then using that bottle to show his coin through bottle makes sense. That is different than a magician working a bar full of laymen. If you produce the beer bottle and use it then you have given an out....that being you used your own bottle. Also one logically doesn't lead to the other. If I wanted to do a bottle production then also do the penitration I would simply produce a full bottle, open it, and give it to a spectator in exhange for their empty bottle and use that bottle for the penitration. Makes better sense doing it that way from a theatrical standpoint as the full bottle is given out and no one is thinking "gee, I bet that wasn't really a regular bottle" and you are using a different bottle for the cap through bottle so that stands some what alone.
Message: Posted by: close-up (Mar 4, 2007 08:29PM)
Ok full story. I was asked by the owner of a restaurant where I perform if it would be possible to give the bottle to each table I perform at. His idea was If I could produce the bottle, perform the Cap in Bottle, then insert one of the restaurants business cards inside the bottle and give it to the table as a keepsake. He advised me that he could provide me with as many bottles and caps I needed each evening for my performances.
Message: Posted by: Kaliix (Mar 4, 2007 09:04PM)
I don't know Danny (Santa too). I usually agree with you Danny and too some extent I do here but not completely. There are times when combining two great effects does lessen each. An example that comes to mind is finishing an ACR with Card to Wallet. That never made any sense to me.

But in this instance, I think you can make a case for following up a bottle production with Prohibition. Just because you magically produce the bottle doesn't automatically make the bottle suspect, at least not any more than pulling it out of your back pocket. The production itself is magical, not necessarily the bottle.

Kevin James marketed an effect called Perrier with a Twist that started with a bottle production, followed with a coin in bottle, the removal of the bottom and ended with the bottle vanishing.

The fact that you can hand the sealed bottle out, cap inside, for the spectators to inspect at the end of Prohibition alleviates the concerns about the bottle somehow being gimmicked.

Imho, your mileage may vary...
Message: Posted by: MagicSanta (Mar 4, 2007 09:45PM)
Good to see you around again Kaliix. I think that doing both causes dilution. Same reason why I wouldn't saw a woman in two and then when opening the box she vanished. Now that Close Up explained the situation then I guess if his boss wants it done that way it will be done that way. I just am interested to see how he hides a dozen bottles on himself!
Message: Posted by: BCaldwell (Mar 4, 2007 10:34PM)
[quote]
On 2007-03-04 21:29, close-up wrote:
Ok full story. I was asked by the owner of a restaurant where I perform if it would be possible to give the bottle to each table I perform at. His idea was If I could produce the bottle, perform the Cap in Bottle, then insert one of the restaurants business cards inside the bottle and give it to the table as a keepsake. He advised me that he could provide me with as many bottles and caps I needed each evening for my performances.
[/quote]

Are you going to reset after each table or, like MagicSanta said, find a way to carry around multiple bottles? And if you can magically put the cap in the bottle why don't you magically insert the card in the bottle? You mentioned he "asked if it would be possible...", my answer would be possible yes, practical no. Just my input on the matter.
Message: Posted by: patrick flanagan (Mar 5, 2007 12:55AM)
I must be doing something wrong...lol. When working restaurants, I produce the bottle, do prohibition, and offer to leave the bottle if they want it. This eliminates the "must be a special bottle" explaination. When working in bars, I use their bottle. Also, my ACR ends with the signed card in my wallet...lol. At the end, my drivers license ends up in the deck, cut to by the spec (license works like a side short card...easy to cut to) and the signed card is in my wallet where my drivers licence should be. Oh well, guess it would be a boring world if we all did things the same way.
Santa, have you had the chance to see Ammar work for laymen? Just wondering if he doesn't combine the two effects for laymen.
Patrick
Message: Posted by: MagicSanta (Mar 5, 2007 01:44AM)
Yes! I think Ammar is a great magician, very entertaining. He didn't do the bottle production or coin through bottle. He very well may sir. If the combination works for you then I defer to your experience.
Message: Posted by: Kaliix (Mar 5, 2007 05:32AM)
It just figures you would end your ACR with a card to wallet, right! (lol)

The reason I never liked that is because both tricks are excellent hard hitters by themselves and because there never seemed to be any logical reason for the AC to end up in the wallet.

I give you props though, having your license end up in the deck and the card now is found in the wallet at least gives some purpose to the finale. I kind of like it actually. It makes sense. Part of me says that one could get more mileage out of the ACR and CTW as stand alone effects, but I don't know what you working repertoire consists of. You may not need the two alone and your routine works for you so....who the hell am I to tell you don't do it.

As far as the reset goes on the bottles, yes you would have to load up each time you did the routine, but that might be once for every three tables. It would require a little forethought, but I could see placing a few bottles in a strategic place or two for a simple drive by reset when moving from table to table. If it makes the guy who pays you happy and you can make it work, then it sounds like a winner to me.


[quote]
On 2007-03-05 01:55, patrick flanagan wrote:
I must be doing something wrong...lol. When working restaurants, I produce the bottle, do prohibition, and offer to leave the bottle if they want it. This eliminates the "must be a special bottle" explaination. When working in bars, I use their bottle. Also, my ACR ends with the signed card in my wallet...lol. At the end, my drivers license ends up in the deck, cut to by the spec (license works like a side short card...easy to cut to) and the signed card is in my wallet where my drivers licence should be. Oh well, guess it would be a boring world if we all did things the same way.
Santa, have you had the chance to see Ammar work for laymen? Just wondering if he doesn't combine the two effects for laymen.
Patrick
[/quote]
Message: Posted by: patrick flanagan (Mar 5, 2007 10:23AM)
Kaliix,
I do agree about card in the wallet. Until, I figured out to add the driver's license part, I never much cared for that ending either. I never understood why the card would be in the wallet. But, since adding the license to the deck AFTER they have handled the cards, the card in the wallet is now motivated and makes sense. Not that it HAS to make sense. I mean, what is sensible about, say, a candle being produced from a silk or fruit coming out of cups.
Happy thoughts!!
Patrick
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Mar 5, 2007 11:05AM)
OHHH I sense another banning comming soon in my future.

Guys here is my point. Kalix your right the mileage will vary.

ACR to wallet is not too bright. It totally dillutes at least one effect, and the other gets forgotten. For example usually it becomes the card to wallet to them, and generally they forget the ambitious bit.

Kind of the way magicians for years do costume changes after a sub trunk. NOBODY cares or remembers! Why is it done? Because magicians are sheep that is why.

We think we have to add our "own kicker ending" so we put a drivers license in the deck. Great. Take a card to impossible location and try to explain that! The whole idea is taht the card is in AN IMPOSSIBLE LOCATION. Not to figure out how many things you can switch from your wallet to the deck.

We follow these logical threads, people break them down to one sentence when they are describing them to their friends. KISS is really good advice ESPECIALLY if a few drinks are involved.

Funny thing is when you are done with the drivers license bit and Eugene Burger is done with his card to wallet bit, guess what? To them it is the same, only his effect is far more clear. Your ACR gets lost, your card to wallet may very well be lost and you are left with the license in the deck. Heck why have them sign the card in that case?

Magicians overthink some times. Some times they under think. It reminds me of an idiotic quote I read by a 'magic great' who mentioned how it is always a nice ending to produce the 4 aces after a card trick.

There are times guys when the trick is good enough. A long winded post to say simply that.

I direct the comments at NOBODY IN PARTICULAR, and NOBODOY I HAVE BEEN TALKING WITH IN THIS THREAD. This is simply observations. So please nobody take offense.
Message: Posted by: Kaliix (Mar 5, 2007 11:47AM)
Yeah, I can see your point Danny. I've personally stuck with the Ammar ACR off of the ETM series, mostly because I don't have the card chops to take it to the next level yet. But for a routine done with just DL's, it works for me. What is amazing is the mileage you can get out of the pop up move. Such a simple sleight really, but the look on their faces when they believe they can "see" the card rising up to the top. Very magical...

I wouldn't want to take the ending further with by ending it in my wallet, but that's just me.

I'm still thinking about a bottle production before Prohibition... hummmmm....?

Oh, and I don't feel any kind of ban coming for you. Lucid, well thought out good advice. Nothing wrong with that...
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Mar 5, 2007 11:56AM)
What do you mean by that? LOL
Message: Posted by: patrick flanagan (Mar 5, 2007 12:12PM)
Danny,
No offense taken here. You know I respect your views, look forward to reading them, and usually agree with you. This has worked well for me for a number of years. I'm not going to convince you that it is something you should do, nor would I want to. Different approaches is all....noone dies either way. How's the weather in Mexico? I'm so jealous.
Patrick
Message: Posted by: MagicSanta (Mar 5, 2007 12:55PM)
A Chicago based magician in Mexico during Winter? Danny, you are brilliant!
Message: Posted by: gdw (Mar 5, 2007 01:56PM)
If you are presenting them as one effect, then absolutely, they tend to disappear.

Think about the cups and balls. Even routines you've watched, what do you remember? Do you really remember a single effect done with the little balls?

No, just that they moved around, or maybe a unique appearane.

So, if using a continuous set with a single chosen card, sure, I think it CAN work to some extent.

But you should present them with it in mind that one effect may be diminished.

For example, If I were to do and ACR to wallt, I would make the ACR a much shorter routine, in fact, I wouldn't even call it a routine, I would simply r-structure it as PART of my Card to Wallet.

As for the licnese bit, I love it, but perhaps only with the CTW, and NO ACR before it.

THEN it would be a VERY memorable piece. Also easily summed up by a spec. He put my card in the deck and when he tried to find it he found his drivers license, and my card was in his wallet.

But this would certainly become convolueted with in an ACR.

Realise that it certainly can diminish the affect of one effect, but you have to realise that that one effect is no longer that, it is part of a routine, and should be treated as such in your performance.

It will not have the same impact as it would as a stand alone, but as long as you realise ths and work it accordingly, it CAN be done.

I personally prefer to separate them somewhat to gain more affect out of each effect.

You can basically "end" the ACR with it's own natural climax. THEN proceeding like it is a new trick, offer to do something else with their card. Have them shuffle the deck or what ever, and procede to CiWallet,

As for the Bottle, I think it can also work, if you consider the question, why did the magician produce a bottle?

I would produce the bottle perhaps in an off hand way. Act as though you are looking for some things you will be using in your performance, and happen to produce the bottle, but just set it down like it's normal for you.

The audience will be flabergasted. Proceed with smething and then com back to the bottle perhaps.

Relally, why would you produce a bttle and then just set it aside. Especially an empty one.

Personally, I would produce a full one as either something for the audience (in a more formal show, not table hopping) or as something for my self to drink, and later on use it in another effect when it's empty.

Of course that wouldn't work for table hopping.
Message: Posted by: patrick flanagan (Mar 5, 2007 04:05PM)
For the sake of science, Tues. and Weds. night this week, I will put a non-card effect between the ACR and Card to Wallet just to see if there is any difference in reaction. My guess is that there won't be. As for how the specs reconstruct the performance the next day to their friends, my guess is that if 4 effects were performed, they will remember 2 of them, and probably only parts of 2 of them. They would recognize those effects if you were to start performing them again, but only pick out certain features of an effect. I'm the same way when I see a lecture, performance at conventions, or the rare opportunities to actually see close-up magic in person. If I didn't take notes at a lecture, I would have a hard time reconstructing entire routines the next day. My guess is that the spec will remember a few highlites of the performance. They may have had the time of their life and remember that experience forever. But to get into specifics of what followed what or how many times the card rose to the top or how often the rope restored itself, nah.... They will remember whatever it was that appealed to them the most....could be the cap in the bottle, could be the production of the bottle, could be the card rising to the top, could be the card in the wallet, could just be making that simple coin vanish. Hell, it could even be something as simple as remembering the names of all 8 people at the table. Think about some of the performances that you've seen. What can you remember?
Random thoughts
Patrick