(Close Window)
Topic: Borrowed Ring in Bottle
Message: Posted by: lesterkirad (Jun 25, 2003 07:55PM)
I saw an ad for this in Magic magazine and it got my attention. Here is the description from http://www.hocus-pocus.com .

Anton Corradin's "borrowed ring in Bottle" is perhaps one of the most amazing, impossible effects of all time. Read on, True Believers:

A borrowed ring from an audience member magically disappears in front of everyone´s eyes. An apparent failure does not allow the ring to get to its announced destination, an empty glass.

To make up for this unfortunate situation due to the loss of the ring, the magician offers the injured party a drink of soda and opens a soda bottle that has been in full view for everyone to see.

When the liquid has been poured into the glass... Oh my goodness!!!! Inside the bottle the ring can be seen, but it is impossible to get out! The performer breaks the bottle with a hammer, retrieves the borrowed ring, and hands it back to the STUNNED spectator!

The The borrowed ring in Bottle includes:
A 237cc Coca Cola bottle
A glass
A wedding ring, plated with 14 karat gold
A magician´s table, neatly made, chrome-plated and easy to fold.
A thick cloth 60X60 cm handkerchief
A 50X50 cm handkercief specially made.
A hammer

I am assuming that this works as long as the borrowed ring is a wedding ring, plated with 14k gold. It still sounds interesting though, but with a price tag of $299 I was wondering if anyone out there could give a little more information on it before I thought about buying it. Thanks in advance for the help/review.
Message: Posted by: Larry Davidson (Jun 25, 2003 08:06PM)
I'm interested as well, but I can't imagine performing this no matter how ingenious it is because I don't think it's wise to make a spectator think that you made his/her valuable piece of jewelry appear in Coca Cola. If someone did that to my ring, I wouldn't be happy.
Message: Posted by: DJ Trix (Jun 25, 2003 09:21PM)
can this effect be done with a borrowed ring?i know the table must be used for the effect....
Message: Posted by: Larry Davidson (Jun 26, 2003 07:13AM)
Yes, see lesterkirad's posting, "...A borrowed ring from an audience member magically disappears in front of everyone´s eyes...."
Message: Posted by: Turk (Jun 26, 2003 12:26PM)
Larry,

As part of this effect, is a Coke bottel really destroyed each performance? If so, is there a ready source of supply for replacement bottles--or--can you use any glass soda bottle (in a pinch)?

The other thing that "issue" I might have is the mess of having broken glass all over the place (even if relatively contained during the breaking and the clean-up).

I agree that the effect is VERY strong can be a reputation maker and should probably be a "signature" piece. Perhap's my opinion of the effect is somewhat colored because I cannot envision the effect as "being me". That said, within reason, price is no object if the effect is so strong.

Mike

P.S. This thought just occured to me:

From an audience's perspective, if the magician can magically get the ring into the bottle without breaking the bottle, why can't he get it out of the bottle without breaking the bottle? This is just a "logic" thing, and to some people, the necessity of breaking the glass bottle might weaken the overall effect.

The same general logic applies to the criticism of the original T&R card effect(s) where the magician is able to restore 3/4 of the torn card but can only then "prove" that the remaining 1/4 card piece in the spectator's hand matches (or is part of) the "restored" 3/4 card. The criticism voiced by many in this regard is: If the magician can restore 3/4 of the card, why can't he take the remaining 1/4 card piece from the spectator and "merely" complete the magic by restoring that last piece back onto the card. This "inconsistency" has led to many many complete card restoration effects.

I know the breaking the Coke bottle is dramatic, but is it logical? If not logical, does the "illogicness" weaken the effect? Put another way, is the impact of the effect the actual breaking of the bottle to remove the ring (thereby "proving"that the ring is(was) in the bottle), or, is the impact the fact that a borrowed ring can actually end up inside a Coke bottle?

IMHO, I believe that the latter is the stronger magic. And, if that is the case, can the spectator actually be given the bottle to examine so that she can actually verify that it is her actual ring in the bottle? If that can be done, and the spectator can then verify that she cannot get her actual ring out of the bottle, the "validation" (proving) has been accomplished and there is no need to break the bottle, All the magician has to do is to magically remove the ring back out from within the Coke bottle without harming the Coke bottle.
Message: Posted by: lesterkirad (Jun 26, 2003 03:44PM)
I was thinking that the bottle is "broken" just like the snifter is broken on borrowed ring to brandy snifter. My real problem with the ad for this effect is that it never says you can show their ring to them in the bottle after you pour the liquid out, that is what led me to believe that this trick can only be done with certain rings.
Message: Posted by: Larry Davidson (Jun 27, 2003 07:17AM)
Mike (Turk),

I'm not intimately familiar with all of the workings of this effect so I'm not sure, but I assume that a bottle is really destroyed each performance. I'm also not sure if any glass soda bottle can be used or if you have to buy a bunch of gimmicked ones (I assume the former).

I agree with your concern re. having broken glass around. If the glass doesn't stay entirely on the table, that would limit where you can perform the effect. I perform an effect with a glass breaking table as well as an effect with Mesika's exploding lightbulb, and I'm limited as to where I can perform these effects for the exact reason that broken glass is left behind.

Your other comments on the logic and strength of this effect show great thinking and analysis, just like you've shown in other posts! The way I'd present this is after I made the ring appear in the bottle, I'd ask the spectator to remove it, and when he sees that it won't come out, I'd hand him a hammer and ask HIM to break the bottle, which would convey to the audience that that's the only way a "normal" person could get the ring out. When the person hesitates, which I'm sure he would, I'd just grab the hammer and quickly break the glass as I say, "Here, I'll do it." I'd break the glass even if the spectator could do it (I don't know if that's possible because I don't know the exact way this effect is designed) because I wouldn't want to be sued by someone who claimed he hurt himself. Last, I think the breaking speaks more to emotion than logic. Even though it might not be logical for a magician to have to break the bottle to get the ring out instead of being able to get it out magically (since he got it in there magically), I think the sight and sound of the breaking add drama and impact and speak to the spectators' emotional versus analytical side.

Regards, Larry D.
Message: Posted by: Turk (Jun 27, 2003 12:10PM)
[quote]
On 2003-06-27 08:17, Larry Davidson wrote:
Mike (Turk),

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

Your other comments on the logic and strength of this effect show great thinking and analysis, just like you've shown in other posts! The way I'd present this is after I made the ring appear in the bottle, I'd ask the spectator to remove it, and when he sees that it won't come out, I'd hand him a hammer and ask HIM to break the bottle, which would convey to the audience that that's the only way a "normal" person could get the ring out. When the person hesitates, which I'm sure he would, I'd just grab the hammer and quickly break the glass as I say, "Here, I'll do it." I'd break the glass even if the spectator could do it (I don't know if that's possible because I don't know the exact way this effect is designed) because I wouldn't want to be sued by someone who claimed he hurt himself. Last, I think the breaking speaks more to emotion than logic. Even though it might not be logical for a magician to have to break the bottle to get the ring out instead of being able to get it out magically (since he got it in there magically), I think the sight and sound of the breaking add drama and impact and speak to the spectators' emotional versus analytical side.

Regards, Larry D.
[/quote]

Larry,

Thank you for the kind words. When doing magic or routining an effect, I always try to be guided by the principles "How would this be done 'normally'or 'naturally'" and "If you could do real magic, how would it look".

IMHO, breaking something to remove an object, while dramatic, has a tendency to lessen (or possibly substitute) the magic in the effect.

Dramatic Magic = Yes!!
Drama in place of Magic = No!!

Mike
Message: Posted by: Larry Davidson (Jun 28, 2003 08:39AM)
Mike,

I'm not sure if breaking the glass would make the overall effect less magical or if, instead, it would serve to actually strengthen the effect because it would serve as contrast which highlights how impossible it was to get the ring in there in the first place.

I'm a big believer in "contrast" as a way of enhancing the effectiveness of magic. For example, I rarely perform flourishes and purposely appear klutzy at times. In my opinion, that makes the magic I perform even more astonishing because of the contrast between my character and the impossible effects I perform.

Others use contrast to good effect. For example, Bob Sheets appears at times like he couldn't walk and chew gum at the same time. That makes his magic even more effective because of the contrast between the killer effects he performs and his persona. Mac King is another example. He looks like a dork who just fell off of a turnip truck, which IMO is one of the reasons his magic is so great -- contrast!

Specifically on topic, the real test on the effectiveness of breaking the bottle to remove the ring is to perform it that way and to perform it other ways (magically removing the ring) to see which way plays best for audiences.

Regards, Larry D.
Message: Posted by: highmagic (Jun 30, 2003 06:59AM)
For an original approach of the issue (mainly for parlor and stage), you can also check out the ring in bottle routine of Barrie Richardson (included in his Theater of the Mind)
Message: Posted by: myshadow (Jun 30, 2003 07:02AM)
Surely it all comes down to presentation. By breaking the bottle you are "proving" that the ring was in there. If you remove it magically then perhaps it was never there at all! Theres always the danger that we try to second guess what the audience is thinking and therefore either over complicate an effect or miss-out on developing it to its full potential. For me I would think it best to break the bottle every time.
Message: Posted by: Larry Davidson (Jun 30, 2003 08:24AM)
IMO the ONLY way to know what's best is to perform it different ways and judge the audiences' reactions.

We can analyze, theorize, and pontificate all day, but at the bottom line, what's best is what audiences "tell" us is best. That's true of all of the magic we perform.

Regards, Larry D.
Message: Posted by: Michaels (Jul 1, 2003 01:15PM)
Larry,
Couldn't agree more.
Hence my quote:
"We learn magic from magicians and gain insight from our audiences"

Our society is so sensationalistic who knows which routine would have the greatest impact (probably breaking the bottle). Maybe breaking the bottle is required to hide the workings of the gimmick. If not, I don't see the purpose of destroying the bottle. A magical experience was created by making the ring appear in the bottle only to end with the magician breaking the bottle and reducing the impact of the original magical effect. IMO it would be much more magical to have the magician make the ring magically appear from an intact bottle.
Top of the day,
Michaels
Message: Posted by: JoJo41 (Jul 2, 2003 01:25AM)
I remember years ago some performer I saw in a club do a ring vanish with what appeared to be a pretty standard pull.
For some reason the thing just had too MUCH pull, and the ring went flying somewhere. It was a REALLY valuable ring, and the owner--and the owner's HUSBAND--was really bent!
Anyway, the thing I have enjoyed with the B.R.I.B is the versatility of the table. Sometimes it's all I use.
Message: Posted by: Goutama (Nov 13, 2004 01:57PM)
David Blaine do this trick, "Borrowed Ring in Bottle", in his special Frozen in Time...

Just one question about this trick intrigue me:

1. How put the "fake ring" in the bottle (of glass) without mash (crash, break) that?
Message: Posted by: Kent Wong (Mar 17, 2005 02:11PM)
This original thread was posted in 2003. Since then, has anyone purchase or used this product? I am quite curious to see if it lives up to its hype. Thanks.

Kent
Message: Posted by: Pete Biro (Mar 17, 2005 04:03PM)
Sounds like a very commercial routine. Will have to check it out.
Message: Posted by: Nick Wait (Mar 19, 2005 07:47AM)
Does anyone have this, it sounds very good.
Nick
Message: Posted by: Jay Elf (Mar 20, 2005 05:08AM)
Hello,
Is a borrowed ring REALLY put into the bottle? Can the owner check her/his ring in the bottle?

Or is it the included fake ring which is put into the bottle? Therefore can't you closely show a ring in the bottle to its owner?