(Close Window)
Topic: Nemo Jumbo Rising Cards
Message: Posted by: Bill Hegbli (Oct 1, 2011 07:21PM)
For a very limited time, I have uploaded a video to YouTube for a rare glimps for the members of the Café to see the famous Roy Johnson perform the Nemo Jumbo Rising Cards. For those that do not know, Roy Johnson is the creative genius of many of the tricks sold buy the late great Ken Brooke of London, England.

There is little footage of this trick being performed, and not much of it being performed by the person who worked out most of the kinks in the effect when it was introduced to the magic community.

This is not a demo, but an actual live performance at a gathering of magicians in Germany.

Enjoy!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q-sA6QqtYPo
Message: Posted by: billappleton (Oct 1, 2011 07:43PM)
Awesome.

Thanks Bill

Can you tell us more about the history of this?
Message: Posted by: shpf100 (Oct 1, 2011 07:49PM)
Yes thanks for posting
Message: Posted by: Harry Murphy (Oct 1, 2011 08:12PM)
I liked Roy’s presentation very much! Very smooth! Thank you for posting it!
Message: Posted by: Pete Biro (Oct 2, 2011 01:27AM)
Having been involved with this from he beginning, I can fill you in.

Jim Hooper, who was "Nemo" (he was Ken Brooke's back room genius) came up with the basic concept. Roy Johnson and Bunny Neil worked out the routine.

One of the most entertaining routines was Paul Daniels', which you can see by going here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XlAcU56AZnQ&feature=related

This was on Shirley Bassey's show and Paul refused to rehearse with her as he wanted her first reactions on TV to be spontaneous. I really like his simpler handling. When I was doing parlour parties I used the basic routine.

The trick is still available from http://www.stevensmagic.com The current "deluxe" versions are all made by your humble correspondent.
Message: Posted by: Bill Hegbli (Oct 2, 2011 07:38AM)
Pete, I am surprised you said that, as the reason I posted this video of Roy Johnson is because I do not think Paul Daniels clip does justice to this great trick. Paul chose to do a basic card rise. I guess we all have our favorites and I believe Roy's is superior and more true to the Nemo Rising Jumbo Cards manuscript.

What is so much fun to watch if you know the working, is Roy is handling the gimmick at different times during the routine, and no one knows when or how.

See all that moving around on stage of Roy Johnson, well he is in total control. It is a real lesson in prop handling on stage.
Message: Posted by: illusions & reality (Oct 2, 2011 07:54AM)
Bill,

I have to agree with you. Roy's handling is amazing and a real fooler - even for those of us who know how it works!

Thanks again for posting!

Lou
Message: Posted by: Harry Murphy (Oct 2, 2011 08:13AM)
Yep, I just watched Paul's version a second time and Roy's a fifth (or eight) time. Paul looks like he just learned the trick that week whereas Roy is smooth and polished!
Message: Posted by: Pete Biro (Oct 2, 2011 10:10AM)
I look at it as ENTERTAINMENT. Paul wins there. Roy's is wonderful, I wasn't knocking his way of handling the trick, but I didn't like the going into the audience and some of the moving around.

It's just my taste I guess.

Roy certainly has no fear of the method and his handling is superb. Both are well worth study.
Message: Posted by: Harry Murphy (Oct 2, 2011 10:42AM)
Even on entertainment points I give it to Roy. Then as you say it is all about taste. Horses for courses and all that. Both a very good study in how a difficult to perform prop should be handled and blocked.
Message: Posted by: Bill Hegbli (Oct 2, 2011 10:52AM)
Yes, Harry, I am very surprised at Pete Biro comments. You really do not need that expensive outfit he is selling through Stevens Magic to do the Paul Daniels card rise.

Roy Johnson did tell me he asked the stage manager to put on the house lights, but they did not. Maybe it was a language barrier thing, don't know.

Just one of those mishaps that happen in live performances.
Message: Posted by: Rainboguy (Oct 2, 2011 07:22PM)
That's a great clip, wmhegbli, thank you for posting it. I'm a sucker for the rising cards, it's a classic of Magic for a reason and I have many versions for close-up, platform and stage, including the Nemo Rising Cards.

When seeing Paul Daniels' performance, I see VIVACIOUS.

When seeing Roy Johnson's peformance, I see SMOOTH.

That's the thing aboug good magic performances, though....differenct magicians lend their own little personal touches to the performance of a given trick, and over time, we, as magicians, tend to absorb "a little bit of everything from any good magician's performance, file that away in our heads, then lend the trick our own persona and "shtick" as we perform it and smoother the performance out over time.

Martin Lewis is a favorite of mine, and uses a Hathaway Rising Cards, and his performance too is just terfiffic, and yet with a different ending.

Martin Lewis also points to the "three variations" in each rising card revelation for building the trick and an ending which is just a bit different.

Having said all of this, it's my belief that the Nemo Rising Cards, due to the structure of the routine, and to the fact that the spectator is holding the cards and houlette in their own hands while the magic is happening in front of their eyes in their own hands makes this version the strongest version out there for stage.

I would have loved to see either Martin Lewis or the late Billy McComb perform this trick to get their take on it, but, alas I have no knowledge that eather of them have featured the trick in their performances.

And one last thing in respect to what wmhegbli posted about Paul Daniels' performance being "a basic card rise"...having spent a career in the Broadcast TV Business, as I'm sure you're well aware, there are a number of specific technical requirements for doing Magic for Television, not the least of which is time.

In regards to "You really do not need that expensive outfit he is selling through Stevens Magic to do the Paul Daniels card rise....

Here's the link to it, I think it looks terriffic, complete and not expensive at all for a working pro who wants a commercial signature performance piece, complete with all the fixin's:

http://www.stevensmagic.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=88_90_13&products_id=111598
Message: Posted by: hugmagic (Oct 2, 2011 09:16PM)
Peter Scarlet did a nice job with it several years ago at Abbott's.

Richard
Message: Posted by: Pete Biro (Oct 2, 2011 11:23PM)
Wmhegbli: Just to set the record straight. I do not sell the Nemo Card Rise. Stevens does. He couldn't find anyone to make them up and asked me to do so. They are really a pain in the you know what to make, requiring a ton of hand work. Just making the envelopes for a set of four takes me a full day plus.
Message: Posted by: Bill Hegbli (Oct 2, 2011 11:51PM)
Time is up on viewing this piece of history. Hope you all enjoyed this experience!
Message: Posted by: John (Oct 3, 2011 12:12AM)
Bill,

I must have missed it by minutes. Could you post it again for a day? There was no suggestion it would just be up for 48 hours or so. Many, Many Thanks
Message: Posted by: Bill Hegbli (Oct 3, 2011 08:29AM)
[quote]
On 2011-10-03 01:12, John wrote:
Bill,

I must have missed it by minutes. Could you post it again for a day? There was no suggestion it would just be up for 48 hours or so. Many, Many Thanks
[/quote]
The part where it says, for a very limited time. That means minutes and if you are lucky, hours; to my way of thinking. Well I gave you hours and only about 40 people were really interested, so I took that as members are not interested in seeing how the creator performed this classic trick.

Roy Johnson also entrusted another performance of this trick, that is even more of a fooler, for those in the know, then this version. If this 1st version showed interest, I was going to post a 2nd and dream up some kind of contest, for the person that had the correct answer.

I see no one is interested, so I will not bother.
Message: Posted by: Harry Murphy (Oct 3, 2011 09:51AM)
Whoa Bill! There are many of us interested in the classic handling of a classic trick. Unfortunately some of us don’t get on the Café more than a couple of times a week and it is easy to miss a thread. I often miss items of interest because I don’t hit every topic on the Café. In fact there are topic headings that I NEVER read because I have absolutely no interest in them. Even topics of interest will see me checking on them infrequently.

Further, I suspect that there aren’t a lot of magicians on the Café that even know the old school, history, and strength of the classics.

Thank you for posting the clip even if only a dozen or so of us watched it.
Message: Posted by: Bill Hegbli (Oct 3, 2011 10:04AM)
Harry, I posted the link in 3 areas of the Café, The Big and Small, and Tricks and Rffects, and this forum.
Message: Posted by: Harry Murphy (Oct 3, 2011 10:26AM)
Yep you did. The Big and Small thread dates back to 09 with maybe 1200 views and only 4 current or new responses three of those are yours.

The Tricks and Effects goes back to '05 with only two current responses (both yours).

And the biggie, Boxes, Tubes, and Bags that you opened garnering 215 views and 18 responses.

I would say that about 500 (give or take) members saw your current posts. If 40 actually viewed the clip that is an OK showing. Figure that not everyone that read the posts even knows who Roy Johnson is. Probably the same people who know about the Nemo Rising Cards.
Message: Posted by: tristanmagic (Oct 3, 2011 05:17PM)
Where can I see Roy Johnsons version - video is removed from youtube :-(
Message: Posted by: Harry Murphy (Oct 3, 2011 05:24PM)
As mentioned above, Bill only put it up for a limited time. That time period has run out.
Message: Posted by: tristanmagic (Oct 3, 2011 05:55PM)
Only 3 days for viewing..., what about an extra day - please
Message: Posted by: Bill Hegbli (Oct 3, 2011 06:07PM)
If there is some interest, I will consider posting again for a few hours. What would be a good time for the most viewing for those interested?
Message: Posted by: tristanmagic (Oct 3, 2011 06:50PM)
Now ;-)
Message: Posted by: MuleePete (Oct 3, 2011 06:52PM)
I did watch it,and thank you for the opportunity.

As a matter of interest, why the strick time limit for posting the video?

Pete
Message: Posted by: Levent (Oct 3, 2011 07:34PM)
WMhegbli:

I watched it a few days ago and I loved it.

I bought the Nemo Card Rise many years ago and played with it for a long time.

I have a couple of observations. Mr. Daniels is a great performer, but my gut tells me it is not a trick that was part of his regular act. I could be wrong, but to my eyes it seems like a trick that he performed for a short time in preparation of a television appearance. That said, he is a superb entertainer and he got a lot out the TV spot with Ms. Bassey.

The Roy Johnson, clip is educational. His handling is very conservative and it does a fine job at protecting the method.

Thanks for posting it!
Message: Posted by: Bill Hegbli (Oct 3, 2011 08:00PM)
Roy Johnson was kind enough to provide me with his private video file. He is still alive in England, retired. We all know the Internet cannot be trusted. This video may be the only video besides Peter Scarlett's performance that is a performance of this trick. If you read the instructions for the trick, Roy Johnson was one of the principle creators of the effect.

Roy also has a very funny Linking Finger Ring effect that is very good. He of course has a special Koran 'type' finger ring made that Geoffrey Durham had one made for him and explained it his book. This type of ring allows for a more open presentation over all the others on the market.

Other presentations cover some of his material from 5 published books, proving the his material is very practical for professional work.

It takes over 2 hours for the Card video to be uploaded, don't know if I have that much time available currently.
Message: Posted by: RVH Magic (Oct 4, 2011 07:10PM)
I was away for the week-end and would love to see Roy Johnson performing the Nemo Jumbo Rising Cards.
Any chance for a new upload of the clip?
Thank you!
Message: Posted by: Bill Hegbli (Oct 8, 2011 09:24AM)
I have decided to offer a limited viewing of the video, for those that have the Nemo Jumbo Rising Cards and would like to view one of the creators perform this routine, Let me know and I will make it available to you for viewing. If you do not have own the trick, there is really no reason for viewing this video. This is more of a learn by watching an expert work learnign experience.
Message: Posted by: rowland (Oct 8, 2011 09:44AM)
I also missed it but do not have the nemo card rise, I appreciate why you only put it up for a limited time but would love to see one of the greats perform this, any chance of a rerun?
Message: Posted by: Magic Researcher (Oct 8, 2011 11:29AM)
The biggest problem with the Nemo Card Rise is that the gimmick lights up like a neon sign under certain lighting. This is a very real problem with this method of card rise. I am surprised that this concern has not been mentioned. I would never use the Nemo Card Rise for this very reason. You simply can not use it under all conditions. When the lighting is right, it is great but who can count on this for every show?
MR
Message: Posted by: Bill Hegbli (Oct 8, 2011 11:44AM)
[quote]
On 2011-10-08 12:29, Magic Researcher wrote:
The biggest problem with the Nemo Card Rise is that the gimmick lights up like a neon sign under certain lighting. This is a very real problem with this method of card rise. I am surprised that this concern has not been mentioned. I would never use the Nemo Card Rise for this very reason. You simply can not use it under all conditions. When the lighting is right, it is great but who can count on this for every show?
MR
[/quote]
Well of course you have to use your head and knowledgeable common sense, when doing any trick. I venture to say there is not many tricks that can be used in all situations. Many performers use this effect very successfully in the right setting. Even Roy Johnson has an alternative to difficult performance settings.

I do hope you are making your comments from a perspective of being an actual owner of the trick, and have used the equipment, as I find your comments as not speaking from a position of knowledge of the whole working effect.
Message: Posted by: Harry Murphy (Oct 8, 2011 12:16PM)
Unfortunately I tend to have set acts. I build acts that can play pretty much anywhere. I have the Nemo Rising Cards and bought it directly from Ken Brooke at his shop. He actually walked me through the handling several times before boxing it up and sending me on my merry way. I’ve performed it a few times over the decades. But have never gotten really proficient and always worried about the perfect setting. So I have stuck to the Hathaway rising cards (been performing that since the 60s). I can perform it anywhere, in almost any condition (surrounded, close-up, etc.) and in any light condition (except total darkness).

I love the Nemo set-up, it is elegant and when performed correctly it is a killer! It is a brilliant stage piece. I could watch Roy Johnson perform it daily (and did until the link shut down).
Message: Posted by: Lester (Oct 8, 2011 03:50PM)
I thoroughly agree with every point that Harry and Magic Researcher have raised regarding the Nemo Rising Cards. It is, indeed, a superbly, elegant effect when one can virtually guarantee the performance conditions but otherwise it really is a case of playing Russian Roulette in terms of the venue's performance environment and it being able to be condusive to one where the effect can be performed to its full potential without worry or concern.

I owned a Nemo Rising Cards for a considerable number of years and could never quite come to terms with the gimmick, in spite of innumerable attempts to master it, and so the effect tended to just gather dust in my prop cupboard! This I regard to be an awful admission on my part but in my defence, I must say that, I now tend to evaluate effects in terms of, not only their suitability to my personality etc. but also to their ability to withstand any potentially adverse lighting and performance conditions.

In an attempt to find a Jumbo Rising Card effect that fitted all my requirements, I embarked on an exhaustive search of the various methods available for this effect and am so pleased and relieved that I finally plumped for the Hathaway Rising Cards. I purchased my outfit from Martin Lewis and have never regretted it.

If, like myself at one time, you are in something of a quandary as to which version of the Jumbo Rising Cards to use that will enable you to perform the effect in virtually any performance situation and any lighting condition then look no further than the Hathaway. It is an investment on a considerable number of levels and one that I am sure will repay dividends and one that you will not regret.

Best wishes,
Lester
Message: Posted by: Harry Murphy (Oct 8, 2011 04:03PM)
Ditto that Lester! I've been performing the Hathaway rising cards since the mid to late 60's (bridge size back in the day), and have a custom made from wood (by Café' member Gerald) jumbo size. My routine has been posted here on the Café'. It is a signature piece for me.

If interested it is on the following thread:
http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewtopic.php?topic=382177&forum=8&0

In fact I dug the old bridge size out for a party gig at a Frat house at the local college last night. I had the audience right within a few feet and pretty much 180 degrees or a bit more around me. It didn’t fail me and I wasn’t busted using it in the living room bright lights. This is a very low-teck worker!

Still, I’d love to be able to perform the Nemo as well and as polished as Roy! I guess it is Jumbo rising card envy! LOL!! Or maybe just wishful thinking.
Message: Posted by: Bill Hegbli (Oct 8, 2011 04:21PM)
Harry, I bet that doing the Nemo in the Frat house would have worked very well. It does take a lot of work to present, that is what I like about the Nemo. It involves stage movement and a knowledge of IT as used in magic. If this is not experienced, but just thought about, all kinds of mental nightmares will creep into your thinking. Remember, it is just thinking and not actual doing.

Opinions without actual experience is kind of narrow thinking.

There at least 2 principles involved with the Nemo, as to why it works just fine in most natural and stage settings. There is no reason to explain things to none believers.
Message: Posted by: JNeal (Oct 8, 2011 05:58PM)
For what it is worth, here's my two cents:

Having just watched the two clips (Daniels and Johnson) they are quite interesting and educational as well.
I thankw Wm.Hegbli for his considerable efforts and generosity in sharing this with us!

On some level it is unfair to compare performers; each takes full advantage of their natural gifts and each manages to make a delightful deception. As mentioned earlier (by Levent I believe), Daniels is extraordinarily gifted as an adlib comedian and takes full advantage of it during his TV spot.
He produces laughs before, during and outside of the effect.

Roy Johnson's style is more avuncular and equally pleasant in it's own way, but if laughter produced is the measure of 'entertainment' , then Daniels delivers on that count. Lovers of Magic often find a well performed, inexplicable mystery to be equally entertaining, but laymen might not judge it the same way.

Prior to viewing these clips I had no idea of the method, having only seen it performed only once about 25 years ago. I saw the Daniels clip first and still didn't catch the method! Watching Mr. Johnson, it gave me sufficient insight as to all the 'what, when, and how'. It became particularly evident in the business of the houlette being repositioned in the spectator's hands.

Now knowing the method, I revisited both clips and I was intrigued by the casual handling of Mr. Johnson that only hundreds, if not thousands of performances can give you. His preparation prior to doing the 'work' is quite refined and subtle. Of course, in this Daniels is less subtle , but takes full advantage of using the camera to 'frame' the mystery.

I realize that the elegant simplicity of this method requires considerable preparation, an attention to detail, and the confidence born of many rehearsals and performances. For the occasional performer these might be intimidating factors. I can also see why many would opt for the Hathaway method. In the eyes of the laymen I suspect it is nearly (if not equally) deceptive and the preparation and onstage handling are easier.

What I find uniquely interesting in both performances is the display of the chosen cards prior to the rising aspect of the revelation. In other words, that the chosen cards are NOT revealed by the 'rising action'. We already know all three cards identities before the cards are inserted in the deck (In Johnson's case) or before the houlette is seen (in Daniels case). It's almost as if they are saying: "here's three (or two) cards, watch what they can do when I put them in this clear box". As opposed to: "We have a selection of three unknown cards and by isolating them from any undue influence...they will reveal themselves".

This may be an artistic choice in both cases,but I wonder if something is not lost by not having the identity of the card remaining an unknown factor to increase suspense?

Thanks once again William!
Regards-
JNeal
Message: Posted by: John (Oct 8, 2011 08:08PM)
Café Members,

I was able to see the clip of Roy Johnson performing the Nemo Jumbo rising cards.. Roy Johnson is amazing. His stage management and selling of the effect is a lesson in style which is both understanded and energizing at the same time. Just watching Johnson dance over the stage - create a stage picture of his total and complete distance from the cards when he asks the specator to say "card rise" and then his collegail back of shoulder retreat when the spectator says "envolpe rise" and it does rise. His offering the first card rise to the down stage right area - in which direction he moves - with one fluid sweep is beautiful. If he is doing the "dirty work" during these movements which he must be - it is amazing to watch. I can guess what must be involved in the effect - perhaps I'm wrong - but if I'm right I still can't see him deploying it so artfully is his "method" mixed into his movements. I'm quite take by Johnson's stage management. His hand gestures, his placing the spectator's hands on the houlette - putting the box under his arm, for example. It is just beautiful - almost dancing. His clapping, his quick hand movements up on the card "rise" description, his sweet hugging the spectator, and to suspect -as I do - that all or most of it is critical to the effect and the method just leaves me spell bound. He is able to inject interest, innocense, intrigue, charm, energy, and simplicity all at the same time. It is absolutely beautiful to behold.

Thank you,Bill, for letting us see this performance!




Again, many thanks for putting this back up and letting me see it
Message: Posted by: hugmagic (Oct 9, 2011 07:42AM)
Wm,
I would like to look at this video also. I have a set of Nemo sitting in a case and just never took the time to work on it.

Seems like I miss out on this all together as my laptop will not handle Youtube and I am not on the desktops on weekends.

You should have my email address.

Thanks

Richard
Message: Posted by: Harry Murphy (Oct 9, 2011 08:06AM)
JNeal you are spot on in your analysis of the two performers differences. It is truly horses for courses. It also demonstrates that the same trick/prop can turn into a different presentation based on personality and performance style and both work well! Thank goodness for that or we would all be more clones (more than we already are that is!!!).

I have watched both performers several times and liked each (for different reasons) and admired the skills shown by each. If nothing else it has shown me to not let the trick get in the way of the performer’s personality and style. After all it is about the performer not the trick!
Message: Posted by: Levent (Oct 9, 2011 10:17AM)
I always liked the exposure proof method of the Hathaway, but to me the envelope finale of the Nemo was stronger, but the method of the Nemo worried me.

Although I never built it, long ago I had an idea to combine the hathaway method with the Nemo finale.

The method I thought of involved building a special Hathaway houlette, that had a hidden compartment in the back for a duplicate envelope. This way the second card (a "switched in" 50/50 force deck in my method) would come out of the envelope at the end like the Nemo.
Message: Posted by: Harry Murphy (Oct 9, 2011 10:55AM)
I've played with the Nemo envelope finale' a few times. I even tried a full houlette switch once (houlette for set-up houlette). Nothing has really jelled for me (yet). I like your thinking (as usual).
Message: Posted by: JNeal (Oct 9, 2011 02:18PM)
My only problem with the Nemo envelope ending overall, is that it doesn't seem germane or intrinsic to the plot.
Why is one card put in an envelope and not the other one (or two)?
Of the performers I have seen, no one seems to motivate or justify which card is enveloped.

Why is the envelope introduced?
I can think of several ideas off the top of my heard that would logically introduce an envelope:
It could contain instructions for a spectator's actions, or it could be a 'insurance policy against failure, etc;

No pun intended... but when working on a routine... I just hate 'loose ends'!

In the words of Dai Vernon: "Most magicians stop thinking too soon"
Regards-
JNeal
Message: Posted by: Bill Hegbli (Oct 9, 2011 03:16PM)
One idea would be to put the spectator's card in the envelope. Then the patter could draw attention to that person's card. It is special because the his card will e of a special nature. Just a thought, but through good patter and action a reason can be established.

It seems to me that the envelope was created to facilitate the trick and it's working, but it is more served in the presentation to get a spectator that can react to the magic of the envelope rising. Hopefully, through widened eyes or wondrous comment, thus conveying to the audience further that he is not in on the working of the cards rising.

There is so much to the envelope rising and the card being able to rise while the envelope is suspended in mid air, that increased the puzzlement in the entire working of the effect.

For some reason, the assistants I have seen participating in this trick are usually men. It is well known that women are more expressive in many ways and make excellent participants on stage. Maybe utilizing a woman would convey the feeling of what is being witnessed.

Something has to be left for the purchaser to discover on his own thus creating a unique effect for themselves.

If we move into justification for everything, I think it better to analyze why a guy is walking out on a stage holding, say, a metal tube and start pulling out yards of cloth. Makes no sense and has no reason to be there at all, I guess you could announce that you were hired to show magic tricks and this is all you could find that looked like magic.
Message: Posted by: Harry Murphy (Oct 9, 2011 03:16PM)
Good points Bill.

JNeal, I think that is why it never stuck in my little routine. I couldn't motivate it. It seemed out of place somehow.
Message: Posted by: JNeal (Oct 9, 2011 04:46PM)
Wmhegbli wrote:

"There is so much to the envelope rising and the card being able to rise while the envelope is suspended in mid air, that increased the puzzlement in the entire working of the effect. "

Agreed William, without a doubt, the envelope rising, followed by the flap opening, and finally... the card rising from WITHIN the envelope is baffling. Rather like the Orange, Lemon, Egg, and Canary plot of something being found within internally nested objects.

Additionally, it isolates / removes the final card from your apparent manipulation. But in order to get MAXIMUM impact out of this series of events, it would serve to performer better to find a reason to introduce the envelope in some offhand but related manner that doesn't 'tip' the final climax. In other words, to keep the revelation a surprise rather than an anticipated conclusion.

Later, Wm. wrote:
"If we move into justification for everything, I think it better to analyze why a guy is walking out on a stage holding, say, a metal tube and start pulling out yards of cloth. Makes no sense and has no reason to be there at all, I guess you could announce that you were hired to show magic tricks and this is all you could find that looked like magic."

While I don't think every article used needs justification, those elements that are introduced into the action but not of apparent importance...need a reason for being there

Harry, I forgot to mention this earlier, but your cogent analysis of the sequence for your Hathaway cards (in another thread) is a fine model of rational plot development. Every reader doesn't need to copy your fine example to benefit from the thinking behind your choices. Accordingly, your writing inspired me to work on the plot myself and come up with my own version. My many thanks!

This kind of discussion and level of thinking on this thread is what I was hoping to find when I joined Magic Café'.

Regards-
JNeal
Message: Posted by: Bill Hegbli (Oct 9, 2011 05:22PM)
For those puzzled by what Harry and JNeal are referring to when they mention Harry's routine, here is the forum reference address:

http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewtopic.php?topic=382177&forum=8&0
---------------------------------------------

I really do not see how putting a card in an envelope would tip anything from a audience point of view.

I believe this performance of the Jumbo Rising Cards is more of down to earth real world magic experience. Having a selected card all of sudden appear in an envelope is distracting from the plot of the Rising cards.

I guess you could make a whole extended magic trick out of the rising cards. An example would be: 3 freely selected jumbo cards are placed in a jumbo card box, caused to vanish from the box and then they appear rising from a deck of jumbo cards that were shown to be all free of trickery.

I think that in the end an effect like that would weaken the rising cards effect.

One think that sells the Nemo Jumbo Rising Cards is that the spectators handle the deck, select a card of their liking. The houlette is inspected and handled by the spectator before, during the effect, and if wished, after. You could even have the cards marked or signed by the spectators.

The Hathaway is a good effect, but I never liked tricks where you have the cards selected from one deck and then use another deck for the effect. It really becomes more of a mentalist trick the a magic trick. As in, look, the card you selected from that deck is rising from this deck. Now I know you would not want to present it that way, but that is the way I see it.
Message: Posted by: JNeal (Oct 9, 2011 05:56PM)
Wmhegbli wrote:
"I really do not see how putting a card in an envelope would tip anything from a audience point of view. "

Well. it depends on how you build the plot:
I would like see two or three cards rise from the deck..each in an interesting manner. Using an envelope might be a good possibility. But I would prefer to see three cards returned to the deck and put in the houlette before the envelope is introduced into the action. Then the envelope is put into the deck and the card might rise from within. This kind of a plot would not have a surprise element, but would instead offer a challenge aspect to the climax. This version does not require the performer to explain why one card in particular is put into an envelope at the beginning when the others just go intot he deck.

Alternately, the 'instructions' for the trick (which are in an envelope) are given to a spectator to hold. He reads copy from the sheet and this becomes the course of action that is followed. At some point the instructions tell him to give you back the envelope and to have it put in with the cards. Now the card rises from the envelope, it is both surprising and gives the traditional climax.

Either of these versions requires altering methods of sequences, but each is more fulfilling in a theatrical form.

William also wrote:
" Having a selected card all of sudden appear in an envelope is distracting from the plot of the Rising cards."

Agreed...but using an envelope without any comment is possibly equally distracting .

William wrote here:
"One thin(g) that sells the Nemo Jumbo Rising Cards is that the spectators handle the deck, select a card of their liking. The houlette is inspected and handled by the spectator before, during the effect, and if wished, after. You could even have the cards marked or signed by the spectators. "

Without a doubt those are very strong points and if you use the Nemo method, a smart performer will get maximum impact out of emphasizing them! In my efforts to think about various ways to incorporate the envelope more intrinsically, I'm not trying to reduce the impact of those points but rather I want to eliminate any mental confusion about what the envelope might mean to 'the casually disinterested audience member' .

Finally in our rather long discussion William wrote:
"The Hathaway is a good effect, but I never liked tricks where you have the cards selected from one deck and then use another deck for the effect. It really becomes more of a mentalist trick the a magic trick. As in, look, the card you selected from that deck is rising from this deck. Now I know you would not want to present it that way, but that is the way I see it."

this is quite true and I absolutely agree! I was just speaking to our mutual friend Levent this morning about that same point. I know various routines for various reasons have cards selected from a small deck or a second forcing pack and then proceed with the Hathaway.

Of course, this is entirely unnecessary! A Jumbo deck can be used to force the three cards, they can be shuffled into the deck and used immediately in the Hathaway apparatus. I know because that is exactly what I do!

Harry said " different horses for different courses" and this applies to methods as well. Without question Nemo is an impossibly good mystery. Hathaway has strong advantages as well. Each performer should choose effects and methods that best function in the performing conditions they operate in. As performers we should try to maximize the strengths of whatever effects we do and minimize the weaknesses. This will inevitably result in different choices because each of us brings different gifts to the stage.

All too often I see threads on these Fora with names like: "Best linking Ring Routine" or "What is the best method for a Newspaper tear" and (in my opinion) these academic exercises are fun for a short period of time, but ultimately fruitless, because unless the reader can factor in the relative performing strengths and conditions of all the writers...it is entirely subjective.

I am quite pleased to see that this particular discussion did NOT devolve that way.
Bravo to all!

JNeal
Message: Posted by: hugmagic (Oct 9, 2011 06:43PM)
Wm,
thank you for sending me the link.. I will look at the video tomorrow when I get to the shop.

I have been enjoying (?) this nice weather by trying to finish painting a 2 1/2 story house. I said I was getting too old for this the last time six years ago. Anyway magic is taking a brief backseat while I climb ladders.

Richard
Message: Posted by: Bill Hegbli (Oct 9, 2011 07:20PM)
JNeal, I can only assume your comments are from viewing the Johnson video and the Daniels video. I would like to say that this is not the routine in it entirety. The trick actually uses 3 cards that rise, the 1st just rises from the houlette the spectator is holding, the 2nd is covered with a scarf and rises while covered, and the 3rd of course rises from the envelope.

Now, this adds a bit more to the plot, and may help make the envelope involvement add to the impossible nature of the cards rising.

The original plot of the trick is as follows: this changes the effect slightly to the 1st card rises visibly from the middle of the deck within the houlette. The 2nd card rises after being covered by a scarf, showing what they have just witnessed previously was in fact a card rising with nothing connected to it from above. Thus, showing the audience that in fact a card can rise from the middle of the deck even while covered. 3rd, the envelope rises and the spectator can see there is nothing pushing or pulling it up from his perspective. The flap opens and the card rises with it fully encased inside of an envelope on all sides. How could that be, as all logical solutions are dismissed and disproven from thought.

That is how I see the strengths of this effect. There are weaknesses, but not in the structure of the routine, as I see it.
Message: Posted by: JNeal (Oct 9, 2011 07:39PM)
I agree William!

The version you describe is much better, although in my preferred handling, I would use the scarf covered rise as the first option, and the uncovered version in the middle spot.
This somehow strikes me as stronger as it did Martin Lewis in his Hathaway version and Goshman in his Devano pack routine.

Of course, as your example illustrates, either version can be played as 'stronger' given the proper set up and context. That in essence... is my point as well.

Again, big thanks fro me!

JNeal
Message: Posted by: Harry Murphy (Oct 9, 2011 08:42PM)
Bill, It is not necessary to use two decks of cards with the Hathaway. I don't and never have. I use one deck, cards are "selected" from that deck, returned to that deck, and shuffled by the spectator to there hearts content. I never saw any value added to using a two deck bit of business. There simply was no reason.

The using the scarf covering for the second card in the Nemo does cancell the thought that something might be a modus and maybe with the Nemo structure it plays stronger in that spot.

I like it up front for all the reasons I've explained on the other thread. The problem inherent to all of the routines it the anticlamatic nature of the next card raising (or next two cards raising). The problem is keeping the dramatic tension to the proper release point.

I am partial to the raising card effect. I actually got to see Don Allen perform the Devano deck at the Playboy club in Chicago (remember the old Key Club?). Yep I was a young Naval officer (stationed at Great Lakes) and a member of the club. I'd like to say I went mainly to see Don but that was just frosting on the cake.

I've tried many and still one many. I've the wind-up blocks of wood that are supposed to look like a deck of cards, a remote control version, the Devano (even a jumbo Devano), Al Baker's, Val Evan's slotted tray, the Nemo, and the Hathaway. So far, the Hathaway has stood the test of time with me. Honestly, I have liked them all and I really like watching a polished presentation by a person that has put the time in to make is theirs (like Allen, Johnson, Daniels, Brooke, etc.).

JNeal, thank you for the kind words.
Message: Posted by: Bill Hegbli (Oct 9, 2011 08:57PM)
JNeal, it seems I cannot have anything to myself, that is exactly how I do it, cover the 1st, as I feel that is a better way to present it. I had it typed out and then deleted it as I wanted to keep it myself. Oh well.

Harry, I have seen both Don Alan and Albert Goshman present their Devano deck presentations, in their close-up acts. The rising cards is a classic and a good trick.
Message: Posted by: Harry Murphy (Oct 10, 2011 02:31AM)
I never got to see Goshman work except on video. He clear was a master of his craft! By the way this discussion made me dig out my Devano decks and start playing with them again (not to hijack the thread).

Bill, I figured you had adapted your own handling of the routine. You have too much experience to not to do so.

The beauty of the Rising Card genre is that it is truly one of the few card tricks that is clearly visible, easily followed, and very magical that can be performed on a stage/platform as well as close-up. It lends itself to following a dramatic arch with a clear beginning and (hopefully for the performers personal routine) ending/climax.

It also transcends language. I have played Rising Cards on the streets of Amsterdam (in the late 70s) and basically mimed the instructions. It played and was clearly understood and appreciated by the audience.
Message: Posted by: Pete Biro (Oct 10, 2011 12:38PM)
My Nemo sequence: First card under silk with flute played by spedtator. (Here's my line, "The flute has been sanitized, I dipped in alcohol and licked it clean." Second card egg beater gag. Final card from envelope.

If you wanted to see a CLASSIC that would be Al Flosso with a Martin mechanical poker size deck. He gave me one of the glassed to hold the cards in but SADLY I SOLD THE DECK.
Message: Posted by: Bill Hegbli (Oct 10, 2011 02:32PM)
I found Flutes/Recorders available at the dollar store and Walmart that work very well with the Nemo Jumbo Rising Card. I let them keep the Flute as a souvenir.
Message: Posted by: hugmagic (Oct 10, 2011 08:29PM)
Well I finally got around to seeing the Johnson video. Thank you Wm! I am still digesting some thoughts on it but a few quick ones.

I have been fortunate to see many rising cards over the years. Don Alan, Goshman, Del Ray, Peter Scarlet , Hooker and many others. The one thing that is hardest about the effect is sustaining interest from the first card to the third card. After all when one card rises, then a second, can the third one be far behind? The pacing and sleight variation in the manner of rising on each card helps to sustain the interest. Goshmand would set the card case in the glass, one under a slik and one with the specator gently swinging the flap on the card case. Del Ray would have the card rise and start and stop as the spectator comanded. It would lean to the left or right as commanded. It would go back into the card and get the correct card after an error. Feinchel made a unit with a flip around card that came up backward and then flipped around. In all these cases, the variety of method helped to sustain the interest.

The Nemo Rising Cards has built into the basic routine three very unique methods of causing the card to rise. I like the light hearted approach to the first two revelations in conrast to the final revelation which seems impossible because the spectator is holding the cards. As for the Nemo method, I have never seen problem with the the light on the T****. I stood in the wings and watch Peter Scarlet do it and saw nothing. I think it is all in blocking and type of th**** used.

I remember seeing the Hooker card rise and Mike Caveney telling how the Hooker Family just did not understand the significance of the Hooker methods. They could have seen a Devano deck and been just as impressed. Which leads us back to the method used is not nearly as important as the actual presentation and effect.

Paul Daniels, because of his great skill as an entertainer, actually made several mistakes in the presentation on you tube. But it did not matter in the end because only magicians would notice. Roy Johnson presentation was very nice and polished though a much different style than Paul's. But still very entertaining. As Levent said, there were so many little touches that showed the genius of the inventor and many performances of it. You can not teach that type of poise and movement of what can be a complicated blocking.

I guess that is main reason I have never done the Nemo Rising Cards. I just do not work enough to feel that I can develop a comfortable and entertaining routine. Writing it all down may help but until you can work it over and over with a live audience, you will never get a routine of your own.

Thanks again Bill for sharing this me.

Richard
Message: Posted by: Bill Hegbli (Jun 10, 2012 12:37AM)
I neglected to mention that the playing card placed in the envelope is special in nature to the routine, that is why it is placed in an envelope initially. It is the selected card of the spectator that comes up on stage to help with trick. It his/her card that they see rise from the envelope.

I guess it could be even more meaningful to the spectator for them to recognize their cars as it peeks over the envelope flap. And this could draw more interest for the audience to "stay tuned" as to what the spectator is reacting to. I have not tried this yet, but it may work.
Message: Posted by: Pete Biro (Jun 10, 2012 10:41AM)
When I first saw Ken Brooke demonstrate this it literally blew me away.
[b]Method and presentation by Ken could not be beat.[/b]
Message: Posted by: Rainboguy (Jun 12, 2012 01:54PM)
I bought my Nemo Rising Cards from Joe Stevens in Las Vegas.

For what it's worth, Joe Stevens used to do a very nice version of this trick, too!

But I certainly would have LOVED to have Met Ken Brooke and see him do this trick. I'm convinced that the man was a genius...his instructions, I think, are the best I've ever seen in the business.

Having said that, I took a tip from Del Ray's performance when I used my Anverdi Jumbo Card rise by having the spectator to command the card to rise, stop, lean to the left, etc., and also from Martin Lewis' performances by having the last card rise as the wrong card, then visibly change it to the right one.

I think the "kicker" at the end helps a lot.

Audiences LOVE watching the rising cards!
Message: Posted by: Bill Hegbli (Jun 12, 2012 02:15PM)
Just for an interesting note, Roy Johnson also uses the Anverdi Jumbo Rising Cards for when he performed to his groups at very close proximity to them. Roy designed the routine to look exactly like his handling of the Nemo Rising Cards. (Note: See original instructions.) It was so identical that I was totally "fooled", until he told me. The houlette he used was different, to add to the puzzlement for me.
Message: Posted by: Tonga (Mar 7, 2018 04:09AM)
[quote]On Oct 2, 2011, Bill Hegbli wrote:
Yes, Harry, I am very surprised at Pete Biro comments. You really do not need that expensive outfit he is selling through Stevens Magic to do the Paul Daniels card rise.

Roy Johnson did tell me he asked the stage manager to put on the house lights, but they did not. Maybe it was a language barrier thing, don't know.

Just one of those mishaps that happen in live performances. [/quote]

I Think, it was the language barrier. To this time the most germans didn't understand english! They learned it at scool, but don't need it later. The English books and DVDs came later to germany, so that, they have to learn the language better. I think, it was only the language barrier.
Message: Posted by: Tonga (Mar 7, 2018 05:49AM)
[quote]On Jun 12, 2012, Bill Hegbli wrote:
Just for an interesting note, Roy Johnson also uses the Anverdi Jumbo Rising Cards for when he performed to his groups at very close proximity to them. Roy designed the routine to look exactly like his handling of the Nemo Rising Cards. (Note: See original instructions.) It was so identical that I was totally "fooled", until he told me. The houlette he used was different, to add to the puzzlement for me. [/quote]
How he did the part with the envelope on the Anverdi Rising Card? The Anverdi CR was motorised and used a rubberwheel!
:worry:
Message: Posted by: ARNOMAGIE (Mar 8, 2018 02:31PM)
Gene Anderson demonstrate and explains his NEMO routine in his Pinguin Live lecture. Worth checking...
Message: Posted by: rowland (Jun 29, 2020 05:20PM)
I have just purchased an original Nero rising card but unfortunately the instructions have long been lost. Does anybody have a set they could possibly copy for me.
I know it’s a long shot but would be great to find a set
Thanks Rowland
Message: Posted by: JNeal (Jun 29, 2020 09:36PM)
Rowland-

Do yourself a favor... BUY Gene Anderson's book !

Not only is the Nemo Rising cards explained in greater detail tan anywhere else, but he has another 20 or so routines that are definitive versions of classic effects.

This book has my highest endorsement
Message: Posted by: Bill Hegbli (Jun 29, 2020 11:26PM)
[quote]On Jun 29, 2020, rowland wrote:
I have just purchased an original Nero rising card but unfortunately the instructions have long been lost. Does anybody have a set they could possibly copy for me.
I know it’s a long shot but would be great to find a set
Thanks Rowland [/quote]

You have your PM's shout off, so no one can contact you directly. I will sell you a copy of the original instructions of the NEMO rising cards, but sorry, I cannot give a stranger the instructions for free.
Message: Posted by: thomasR (Jun 30, 2020 12:55AM)
[quote]On Jun 29, 2020, JNeal wrote:
Rowland-

Do yourself a favor... BUY Gene Anderson's book !

Not only is the Nemo Rising cards explained in greater detail tan anywhere else, but he has another 20 or so routines that are definitive versions of classic effects.

This book has my highest endorsement [/quote]

This. Genes book is one of the best you’ll ever buy!

Gene also demonstrates it and teaches it on his penguin lecture.
Message: Posted by: rowland (Jun 30, 2020 03:42AM)
Thanks to everyone who has replied here. Your help is greatly appreciated.
Message: Posted by: Bill Hegbli (Jun 30, 2020 01:13PM)
[quote]On Jun 30, 2020, Bill Hegbli wrote:
You have your PM's shout off, so no one can contact you directly. I will sell you a copy of the original instructions of the NEMO rising cards, but sorry, I cannot give a stranger the instructions for free. [/quote]


Sorry for the typo, shout off, should have been shut off. The PM choice did not appear on my screen.
Message: Posted by: FrankFindley (Jul 1, 2020 10:22PM)
[quote]On Jun 29, 2020, JNeal wrote:
Do yourself a favor... BUY Gene Anderson's book !

Not only is the Nemo Rising cards explained in greater detail tan anywhere else[/quote]

This is on my list to acquire. Quick question, does it explain the "something" he uses to keep the gimmick sorted? Very inventive and greatly reduces the chance of things going wrong.
Message: Posted by: JNeal (Jul 1, 2020 10:51PM)
EVERYTHING is explained!

Gene was a scientist in his real life and takes the same exacting pains to take ALL with exact precision.
Message: Posted by: algebraic (Jul 2, 2020 07:30AM)
A thank you to all for recommending Gene's book. My book order has been placed.
Message: Posted by: rowland (Jul 5, 2020 02:37AM)
I contacted Gene last week. What a thoroughly nice man. He was so helpful. I am trying to find the book in the uk but it seems nobody has it. Can’t even find a second hand copy so it looks like I will have to buy it from him. I have no problem paying for the the book it’s just the $45 shipping cost that is painful, and then on top of that there is the possible customs charge.
Message: Posted by: Bill Hegbli (Jul 5, 2020 03:59PM)
Rowland, the book is only purchased from Gene Anderson's website, it is not wholesaled to magic dealers anywhere to my knowledge.
Message: Posted by: rowland (Jul 6, 2020 12:29AM)
[quote]On Jul 5, 2020, Bill Hegbli wrote:
Rowland, the book is only purchased from Gene Anderson's website, it is not wholesaled to magic dealers anywhere to my knowledge. [/quote]
Hi Bill yes you’re right and I have ordered it. Gene is a top man.