|
|
|
|||
| Go to page 1~2~3 [Next] | ||||||||||
citizenc New user Winnipeg, Canada 80 Posts 
|
I've just spent the last several days learning how to do the 5-way cut/flourish, Cybill. As somebody who is rather fidgety (and have ADD), card flourishes are great. While they serve no useful purpose or have any sort of plot or story, they are still fun to perform and serve as a (hopefully) accurate barometer of card skill.
I propose that we stop considering The Ambitious Card to be a card effect/trick, instead classifying it as a flourish. Allow me to explain. Like a flourish, the ambitious card doesn't really have a plot that goes along with it. Yeah, some people have tried to write patter involving elevators, individuals who just keep showing up everywhere you go, but it never really works. At it's core, the ambitious card is nothing more then a series of card-control moves. Pass, DL, breaks, undercuts, palming, forces, vanishes. As such, don't consider it to be an isolated effect to slot into a routine. Rather, use ambitious card "stuff" as a garnish, like any other card flourish. Thoughts? |
|||||||||
Kaylan Special user CT 758 Posts
|
Citizenc,
unfortunately I couldn't disagree more with you. To me, flourishes are not a barometer of one's skill with cards, they're just a barometer for how good you are doing flourishes. An ACR may not work for you, and that's fine, as I'm sure it doesn't work well for others, too. However, it can have a plot to go with it, and some people can be very entertaining with an ACR. Classify the ACR as a flourish??? No way...it's a routine made up of various moves accomplishing basically the same effect...it's not a series of flourishes at all...but maybe for you it could be. Well, those are my thoughts... Kaylan |
|||||||||
molsen Special user Copenhagen 552 Posts
|
I don't know, to me the plot is quite clear: "No matter where the card is placed, it keeps jumping to the top." I can't find a similar plot for a cut or a fan.
That a trick doesn't invite or need patter is not enough to classify it as a flourish. What about all the card-to-pocket, variations of twisting the aces, out-of-this-world type of tricks etc.? I don't mean to say that these tricks shouldn't have patter, or that I prefer them without patter. What I mean is that these tricks are similar to the AC when it comes to the points raised in the original post. Ultimately (to me) card tricks establish an effect, whereas flourishes establish the skills of the performer without an effect. I'd count a card production as a card trick, not as a flourish. We have different viewpoints, so it is natural we end up with different opinions. You asked for thoughts, these are mine. Michael |
|||||||||
Vandy Grift Inner circle Milwaukee 3504 Posts
|
No, the ambitious card is not a flourish. It has a plot, the plot is the ambitious card.
Card magic is not like doing a 5 packet display from some flashy cut. You said "At it's core, the ambitious card is nothing more then a series of card-control moves. Pass, DL, breaks, undercuts, palming, forces, vanishes." Well at it's core most tricks are a series of moves. It's the skill along with misdirection and patter and plot that make the trick. Why would you want to reclassify the ACR? So that you can call it a flourish and present it as a series of cool card moves that you have cleverly mastered? The "ambitious card" is not a flourish. It is a card trick with a very simple plot. That's why Vernon put it in Stars of Magic. New thinking on an old effect. I don't think stripping a classic effect down to the sleights and presenting it as a flourish is the kind of "new thinking" I want to see. Vandy
"Get a life dude." -some guy in a magic forum
|
|||||||||
Josh the Superfluous Inner circle The man of 1881 Posts
|
Citizenc,
If you can focus on and learn card flourishes, maybe you don't have ADD. Quote:
"...there are many kids who are diagnosed as having an attention deficit disorder when all they have is a lack of motivation. Any kid who can concentrate on a video game can concentrate on a class subject. The teacher just needs to make it as attractive as the game." -Bill Palmer Also, if my ACR looks like a flourish, I'm doing something wrong. Why classify anything? Just make it your own. BTW: I think a guy like Jeff MacBride can do some pretty magical looking flourishes. -Josh
What do you want in a site? "Honesty, integrity and decency." -Mike Doogan
"I hate it, I hate my ironic lovechild. I didn't even have anything to do with it" Josh #2 |
|||||||||
|
Vandy Grift Inner circle Milwaukee 3504 Posts
|
Don't get me wrong. I like flourishes. But the idea of presenting the ACR as a flourish kind of bothers me. I like card manip acts, ones that present magic and flourishes together. So, just for the record I'm not an "anti-flourish" guy. I'm not an XCM hater. I just don't like the notion that the ACR is a flourish and not magic. That I disagree with.
Vandy
"Get a life dude." -some guy in a magic forum
|
|||||||||
|
citizenc New user Winnipeg, Canada 80 Posts
|
The first card effect that I ever learned was the Ambitious Card. I can do move, after move, after move. I've planned it out in a series of logical phases, with the card jumping further and further and further each time. I even through a force in there just for kicks.
To me, the Ambitious Card doesn't really feel like it's own stand-alone effect, like Twilight Angels, Immaculate Connection, or a TnR. It feels more like an anecdote. "Oh yeah, have you seen the one where the card jumps to the top of the deck?" Maybe my problem is a lack of a striking climax which is not truely unique in relation to the rest of the effect. And "card jumps to wallet" or "card jumps to mouth" or "card jumps into spectator's hands" isn't enough. I've played with all of them, and they all leave me feeling unsatisfied. RE: Just a display of skill Yes, all card effects use the same moves. However, in the Ambitious Card, that is the WHOLE effect. It is a constant series of moves and controls. Compare this to, say, 2CM. It's got double lifts and card control as well, but used very liberally. |
|||||||||
|
Josh the Superfluous Inner circle The man of 1881 Posts
|
Citizenc,
Cups & Balls = Just a series of moves. Maybe someone could think of a magical presentation for this old flourish. I realize you've tried every ending out there (eyes rolling); But, If you know anyone who has Darryl's AC Video, check his presentation out. He ends with every one signing the card, tying up the deck with rope, and inserting the card (the actual card) into the center. Only to make it rise.
What do you want in a site? "Honesty, integrity and decency." -Mike Doogan
"I hate it, I hate my ironic lovechild. I didn't even have anything to do with it" Josh #2 |
|||||||||
Ross W Inner circle UK 1779 Posts
|
Quote:
Umm...to *you* it may be. Your audience, of course, would probably prefer to be unaware of any moves or controls, and witness instead a spectacular and baffling magic trick. Done right, ACR is exactly that. Isn't there a simple difference that distinguishes flourishes and tricks? With a flourish, you're not hiding what you're really doing. With a magic trick, you are. |
|||||||||
|
edh Inner circle 4698 Posts
|
Ross, and that is where the skill comes in, at least in my opinion. Hiding the moves and making it appear as though nothing is being done. The card just rises to the top no matter where it is put in the deck. Card flourishes are just the opposite. The specs see the skill. There is no reason to do the flourishes other than to demonstrate the skill of the artist. If in the course of a card effect the performer does a sybil cut(I don't know what there called) where he cuts the deck in to 5 packets and holding them for all to see that would definitely make the spec wonder if that is not where the "business" took place.
This is my opinion, for what it's worth(I know, probably not much). BTW I'm in no way bad mouthing flourishes. I have seen them and some look good. Others look to flashy for me.
Magic is a vanishing art.
|
|||||||||
|
clamon86 Special user 508 Posts
|
I would very much suggest that you do some more thinking about flourishes and the ambitious card.
Ambitious card is a great routine, and saying that its just series of moves is meaningless. All card magic involves moves. A move is simply an action that you do that changes the condition of the cards. Every trick, act, routine since the beginning of magic is all moves. I like flourishes, and I do a few, as long as they don't take away from the magic. Once you start doing flourishes alot, your performance changes. The good thing about the ambitious card is that you can start and stop anywhere, and the effect is still strong. ITs up to you which moves go first, last, and in the middle. You said: To me, the Ambitious Card doesn't really feel like it's own stand-alone effect, like Twilight Angels, Immaculate Connection, or a TnR. It feels more like an anecdote. "Oh yeah, have you seen the one where the card jumps to the top of the deck?" To me, that statement makes no sense. Name another trick where you say, 'now watch the card jump to the top.' Of course in most card revalation you control the card to the top, but its different cause the spectator's shouldn't be aware of it. In fact speaking of flourishes. I use to have more flourishes in my ambitious card routine, and I found that the subject of the trick changes. When you do flourishes it appears that you know where every packet is going and skillfully you can control the deck. When you just do a pass or DL nothing changes as far as the audience is concerned and all is well. When you do a flourish every time it becomes a game, and not a trick. I suggest you think more about what you are saying. |
|||||||||
J Hanes Veteran user PDX, OR 317 Posts
|
Citizenc,
You seem to be onto some good thinking here. Early on, I diliked the Ambitious Card too; I thought that it gave up THE method to my cardmagic. I later changed my mind on this issue after working (through college) behind the counter of a magic store selling svengalli decks. My evaluation of the Ambitious Card plot turned me around and led me to the routine I to this day. It's a simple, focused effect that that can be understood right away by anyone looking on. Plus it's a fine disply of your invisible card prowess. You can find my thoughts on the composition and see the layering of my own routine here on my web site. I definately reccomend that you ask your audiences what they think... if they're honest you can't help but improve. Justin Hanes |
|||||||||
BarryFernelius Inner circle Still learning, even though I've made 2537 Posts
|
The original poster wrote:
Quote:
At it's core, the ambitious card is nothing more then a series of card-control moves. Pass, DL, breaks, undercuts, palming, forces, vanishes. If that's all there is to your ambitious card routine, then you're right; it's a rather pointless juggling routine with cards. It's possible to construct an ambitious card routine that builds impact by making each phase more impossible, by involving the audience along the way, and with the whole thing building to a strong ending. Afterword, spectators may say, "Even though the card kept coming to the top, he/she (the magician, of course) didn't do anything; the whole thing looked fair." (Tommy Wonder's routine comes to mind.) In this case, the ambitious card is an inexplicable demonstration of pure magic. Do whatever floats your boat.
"To achieve great things, two things are needed: a plan and not quite enough time."
-Leonard Bernstein |
|||||||||
Ben Train Inner circle Erdnase never had 4639 Posts
|
I disagree.
There is nothing magical about AC until the end (assuming it's been structered well) It's a great example of masturbatory magic. Why does the card come to the top? cause it looks cool. Why do XCM? Cause it looks cool. AC is an interesting segway piece between magic. It's fun to watch, fun to perform, and its a nice break between magic. If you think that your spectator's believe that their seeing real magic your either kidding yourself or performing for the mentally impared.
If you're reading this you're my favourite magician.
Check out www.TorontoMagicCompany.com for upcoming shows, and instagram.com/train.ben for god knows what! |
|||||||||
|
J Hanes Veteran user PDX, OR 317 Posts
|
Quote:
Nordatrax wrote: ...the way you do it. Are you kidding? Show some love. |
|||||||||
DNshade New user 94 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2006-03-15 09:12, citizenc wrote: While the rest of your post is completely wrong (ACR can be extremely entertaining when done well and the plot couldn't be more clear), this quote seems to be dead on. There does indeed seem to be a relationship between the amount (and type) of card flourishes one does and the actual level of true "card skill". Next time you see someone flipping and fourishing their *** off, ask them to just shuffle the cards- or do a DL, or a shift, or even control a selected card and you'll see how accurate that barometer is. Posted: Mar 15, 2006 7:59pm --------------------------------------- Quote:
On 2006-03-15 19:39, Nordatrax wrote: That's such a wrong statement I don't even know where to begin. Actually that statement tells us much more about the poster than AC.
Damian Nieman
http://www.fastcompanydvd.com |
|||||||||
|
Ben Train Inner circle Erdnase never had 4639 Posts
|
HAHAHAHA.
A card coming to the top isn't magic. It may be a fooler, and keep an audience entertained, but it's not magic. No one walks away from AC saying "***! can you believe that the card kept magically coming to the top?" No. They say they can't believe it came to the top. Tomy Wonder's routine is interesting, there are some nice colour changes, but what people remember is the card ending up in the box at the end. I'm not trying to change anyones view of the ac. to be honest, I couldn't care what you guys are doing. Just giving you my two cents.
If you're reading this you're my favourite magician.
Check out www.TorontoMagicCompany.com for upcoming shows, and instagram.com/train.ben for god knows what! |
|||||||||
|
DNshade New user 94 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2006-03-15 20:35, Nordatrax wrote: Does any rational person seeing anything done with a deck of cards - or anything else for that matter - really think it is being done with "magic"? Come on. What are you trying to do? Make people think that you really have magic powers? What are you Uri Geller or John Edwards something? Who are you performing for...Scientologists? In your own words, "It may be a fooler, and keep an auidance(sic) entertained, but its not magic." What???? If only most of the magic I've seen I'm my life both fooled and entertained!
Damian Nieman
http://www.fastcompanydvd.com |
|||||||||
|
BarryFernelius Inner circle Still learning, even though I've made 2537 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2006-03-15 19:39, Nordatrax wrote: Nordatrax, There have been many great magicians who would disagree with you about the ambitious card, including guys like Dai Vernon, Harry Lorayne, Tommy Wonder, and Juan Tamariz. Heck, the ambitious card was the finale to Daryl's FISM winning act. I'm no great magician, but I've witnessed the power of a strong ambitious card routine first hand. When done well, the ambitious card creates a paradox in the spectator's mind. The spectator finds himself holding two contradictory thoughts in his head: 1. I know that there's no such thing as magic but 2. What I just saw has no explanation - except magic No, the spectator doesn't really believe in magic, but he will exclaim, "No *ing way!"
"To achieve great things, two things are needed: a plan and not quite enough time."
-Leonard Bernstein |
|||||||||
|
clamon86 Special user 508 Posts
|
Nordatrax wrote:
Quote:
I disagree. If this is what you think, you can say that about a lot of card magic. If done right, the middle of the trick can only enhance the effect, and the ending puts the finishing touch. If done right, the beginning introduces the plot, the middle builds up the impossibility of it, and then you have the final effect where the card appears folded in a box, or is wrapped with rope, or appears somewhere else. The ACR is awesome because its a good exercise of all the other sleights that you normally use in other routines(double lifts, top change pass, and no and on). Its a simple and direct effect that is easy to follow. nordatrax also said: Quote:
A card coming to the top isn't magic. It may be a fooler, and keep an audience entertained, but its not magic. You are half right in that statement, and the same applies to any trick. It may not be entertaining but that's up to you as a performer. A double lift is just a move, and can fool people, but its up to the perfomer to make a memorable change with it. You can do an entire effect just with one or two double lifts, and it can be very entertaining. And the ambitious card is that and so much more. Nordatrax also said: [quote]No one walks away from AC saying, "***! Can you believe that the card kept magically coming to the top?" You are mostly true with this statement also. Except that most people don't respond like that. Because the effect is so visual, or you have the card signed, or the get to put the card in the middle themselves, the spectators are emotionally attached to the effect. Once you have the emotional or physical hook, you can do many things, and a true entertainer can make miracles happen with that. A perfect example of a terrific entertainer who can create that type of bond between the magician, trick, and spectator would be Juan Tamariz or Tommy Wonder. And once you get to that level it becomes a lot more than just a few pointless moves. Keep on thinking though just my two centavos |
|||||||||
| The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » The workers » » New Thinking About an Old Effect (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
| Go to page 1~2~3 [Next] | ||||||||||
Posted: Mar 15, 2006 02:12 pm 
| [ Top of Page ] |
|
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.06 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
|
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < 
|