The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Dvd, Video tape, Audio tape & Compact discs. » » Worst Effects on True Astonishments set? (0 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3..9~10~11
niva
View Profile
Inner circle
Malta (Europe)
2963 Posts

Profile of niva
Dunn's Deal gets my vote for the stupidest trick on the set. And the only stupid one too. And it's not because I compared it to toher effects out there, but it just does not make any sense.

I couldn't believe how the specs where fooled. If you think just alittle bit it does not amke sense or else may lead to the method.

SO at first the spectator is supposedly seperating the colors into black and reds. Then the spec mixes them in a zipper shuffle in which case you would end up with alternating colors rather than seperated ones. What the... it's completely illogical. I kept waiting for Paul to say something about it, maybe I had missed something. But no.

I don't get it. Anyone cares enlightening me?
Yours,

Ivan
kissdadookie
View Profile
Inner circle
3960 Posts

Profile of kissdadookie
Niva, even though the method looks completely visible, the spectators do not see it. First of all, they are not familiar with a b***** s**** especially in the context of Dunn's Deal (it's motivated). Secondly, after that little bit of business, the rest of the effect is done completely by the spectator, this alone is disarming (this along with the patter to have them attach a emotion to their actions, is very strong). Finally, think about this Niva, the spectator does NOT know where the trick is going thus there's no suspicion to raise in their minds. It's completely illogical because as the performer, you already know how the trick is going to end, thus the process is illogical to you because you're also adding the ending into your equation. Your advantage here is that you know where the whole thing is going but they don't, this is something that is often not acknowledged by performers but is very important.
Magicsquared
View Profile
Inner circle
1262 Posts

Profile of Magicsquared
Niva,

I've performed Dunn's Deal a few times since getting the set and have performed OOTW for 20 years. Although they're almost identical, I don't see them as completely analogous effects. But I would say the reaction I've gotten with Dunn's Deal is as good or just a touch better than what I get with OOTW, which is saying a lot because OOTW is something I've worked on for years and always gets an incredible reaction.

About reverse engineering: a magician might be able to but I don't think even an intelligent spectator would be able to because the first thing you do is have them shuffle the deck which throws the idea of any arrangement out the window.

My tips: I won't go into my whole presentation, but I don't talk about separating reds from blacks until the very end of the effect (once the deck has been reassembled and is in front of them waiting for the climax). During the dealing phase I ask them to deal cards into two piles, not to just deal back and forth, but rather just to let their instincts guide them while they think this particular thought (as per the DVD presentation).

Here's the point I make: "Don't worry too much about what cards go where, just concentrate on your memory and try to keep the piles relatively even because we're going to shuffle them together at the end." So the spectator knows before they even deal the cards that the piles will be mixed at the end.

It's not until the very end, before the climax, that I mention color again and talk about how we went through the deck at the beginning and observed the pattern of the deck and so on. There's obviously more to the presentation than that, but the implication becomes not that they separated the deck into reds and blacks during the dealing procedure, but that --knowing the two piles would be mixed at the end-- they separated the deck in such a way that a shuffle at the end would produce a "balanced" deck of reds and blacks.

I can understand if this effect doesn't click with everyone, but I've had really good success with it so far. I love that it seems so hands-off once the effect starts for the person.

One final tip: I don't ask them to think of a negative thought midway through. I have them concentrate very hard on that positive thought. What I do is that I ask them some kind of non-sequitur question in the middle of the procedure. Nothing too odd, but something they'll remember, perhaps, "Where should we go for breakfast tomorrow?" (which is what I asked the person I performed it for this weekend), or something that makes it seem like maybe MY mind is wandering. After they start to answer and deal through a few more cards I say, "I'm sorry, I'm distracting you." And I get them to pause for a second, get back into that positive frame of mind and then deal until the end. During that end reveal I remind them of the question I asked them and tell them that I really wasn't curious about what we were going to do for breakfast (or whatever) I just wanted to show them what would happen when they got distracted. As we go through the pile the "mistakes" almost seem to prove to them that they really were using some untapped part of their mind to arrange the deck that way.
lumberjohn
View Profile
Special user
Memphis, TN
619 Posts

Profile of lumberjohn
I'm not surprised that Dunn's Deal is a polarizing effect. At heart, it is simply a re-framing of the traditional OOTW plot that justifies some mixed cards in the middle, which is something that various OOTW methods have arisen to eliminate. I see the B* S* at the beginning as simply one way to get into the effect and not necessarily an integral part of DD. It is equally applicable to any OOTW presentation and can be used or not depending on one's preference.

So is the DD presentation better? I think it just depends on your performing style. Both tap into our inherent desire for order, which is why "order from chaos" plots are so popular. DD gives up some perfection in the final display, which may be perfectly acceptable to those with more "mentalism" or "bizarre" style of performance but not to those with more of a traditional magic style in which the magician is always 100% successful. DD also allows a completely hands off approach, which will be appealing to some, but not to others who like to take credit for all the magic.

As for internal logic and consistency in an effect, I think that above a certain threshold, this is also a matter of style. A performer such a Bill Malone, for instance, takes his audience on a ride in which they are spellbound by one miracle after another happening in rapid fire action accompanied by a constant stream of well scripted humor. It is a foreign experience for most and so they just surrender to the moment. He is free to employ contrived procedures and moves that are necessitated only by method because no one really knows what is expected in such a performance. There is no opportunity or desire to question the logic of his procedures. They are just accepted at face value.

I, on the other hand, perform fewer effects during a performance and without Malone's more theatrical presentation. Without Malone's razzle dazzle, I require a bit more internal consistency and motivation for what I am doing. Effects such as Backlash 2 do not fit my style, though I'm sure they fit others. I see many of the arguments on this thread running right past each other, and I wonder if they might simply be reconciled by admitting that there are simply different strokes for different folks.

Posted: Mar 2, 2009 10:59am
By the way, I am not saying that critiquing the motivation or internal consistency of an effect is not valid. All other things being equal, an effect that is high in these areas will almost always be better than one that is not. But some styles of performance simply diminish the importance of such things -- not completely, but enough that the loss of a few motivation points is negligible.
kissdadookie
View Profile
Inner circle
3960 Posts

Profile of kissdadookie
Excellent explanation Magicsquared and John, applause after applause for you very honest and direct observation of the differences between the Dunn's Deal and standard OOTW effects. I absolutely loved your observation and acknowledgement on performance styles as well John.
Douglas Lippert
View Profile
Inner circle
E Pluribus Unum
2339 Posts

Profile of Douglas Lippert
Now that I have re-watched all 9 dvds, I kinda agree that the tricks are cool but need lots of work. Maybe if I spend some time streamlining some of the handling the material may be more useful to me. I enjoyed watching some of the material from the books that weren't in his 80's tapes or the Art of Astonishment dvd like Tensegrity and Orange. (it really helps in the orange carving, LOL) I don't see myself performing anything besides "Pack of Lies" right out of the box. (Cassanova Concept, Reality Twister, etc. do not count because they are commercial effects and Cheng's stuff are moves and not tricks)

TA is worth the money to me due to the fact that I collect Paul Harris material. My box was #9 and came autographed by Paul. This may sound sad but I would have paid extra for his autograph. I REALLY like his books. My favorite trick is "Whack Your Pack," it is so simple but can be a lot of fun for the spectator.

Best,

Doug Lippert
Douglas Lippert
Former I.B.M. Ring #8 Secretary
http://www.facebook.com/Doug.Lippert
PatrickGregoire
View Profile
Inner circle
1624 Posts

Profile of PatrickGregoire
You have to streamline the handling?!?! The handling for each effect is already as streamlined as it will ever be! Not trying to be rude, I'm just trying to wrap my head around that comment. I don't get what you're trying to do.
animation
View Profile
Regular user
120 Posts

Profile of animation
Probably to fit his own personal style
Roland78
View Profile
Special user
Torino, Italy
565 Posts

Profile of Roland78
Quote:
On 2009-03-02 19:06, Doug Lippert wrote:

dvd like Tensegrity and Orange. (it really helps in the orange carving, LOL)


I totally agree, I tried many times to figure out Orange while reading AoA books but it really was difficult to understand. Now it all makes sense and I have not done it yet, only because I don't have time in this period to play with it.
Have you tried it?

Dave
Tom G
View Profile
Inner circle
2668 Posts

Profile of Tom G
Jason might be posting the origins of orange from when Paul found it in an old book at my house....
rochaz
View Profile
Veteran user
I'm TORN.........
378 Posts

Profile of rochaz
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


On 2009-02-28 20:10, vinsmagic wrote:
This is a complete rip off........enough said


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Why is it a complete rip off?
fridoliina89


Vinsmagic,
I was hoping that you would address the aforementioned question.....
I am interested in your thoughts and/or opinions on why you feel this way.

rochaz
- We do not want them to suspend disbelief in the way they would in theater and story. We want them to think critically and observe carefully. Our job is to force them to believe in magic even against their better judgment.”
Whit Hayden

:Juan R Rocha:
kissdadookie
View Profile
Inner circle
3960 Posts

Profile of kissdadookie
It may be a personal thing I reckon.
J.Warrens
View Profile
Inner circle
Canada
1098 Posts

Profile of J.Warrens
There are a few neat ideas here on this set, and some that are kinda not-so-great as well.
I don't think that (for me) the price was worth the material, considering that most of the material was taught silently without any conversation - so there isn't much in terms of lessons here - just material.
The production value was most definitely of highest quality, though the style of the explanations etc, kinda rubbed me the wrong way.
Interestingly enough, the best material and wisdom was offered up by Andrew Gerard, whom IMHO is really the star of this set.
Anyways, sure I've bought some things in the last 28 yrs. that were definite wastes of money, but in the end, I chalk it up as part of the on-going cost of a well-rounded education in magic.
The set was pretty much what I expected, and that being said, it's not overly expensive considering the sum total of it's parts - it all depends on what you're looking for.
I was only looking for a momentary diversion for a little break - I still say nothing beats the value of a good book in this industry, especially if you're looking for "bang for the buck".
I will go back to burying my nose in the books now that this "monumental" release is over.
Cheers!
Thales
View Profile
Elite user
You may have read one of my
415 Posts

Profile of Thales
Quote:
On 2009-03-02 09:59, Magicsquared wrote:
Niva,

I've performed Dunn's Deal a few times since getting the set and have performed OOTW for 20 years. Although they're almost identical, I don't see them as completely analogous effects. But I would say the reaction I've gotten with Dunn's Deal is as good or just a touch better than what I get with OOTW, which is saying a lot because OOTW is something I've worked on for years and always gets an incredible reaction.

About reverse engineering: a magician might be able to but I don't think even an intelligent spectator would be able to because the first thing you do is have them shuffle the deck which throws the idea of any arrangement out the window.

My tips: I won't go into my whole presentation, but I don't talk about separating reds from blacks until the very end of the effect (once the deck has been reassembled and is in front of them waiting for the climax). During the dealing phase I ask them to deal cards into two piles, not to just deal back and forth, but rather just to let their instincts guide them while they think this particular thought (as per the DVD presentation).

Here's the point I make: "Don't worry too much about what cards go where, just concentrate on your memory and try to keep the piles relatively even because we're going to shuffle them together at the end." So the spectator knows before they even deal the cards that the piles will be mixed at the end.

It's not until the very end, before the climax, that I mention color again and talk about how we went through the deck at the beginning and observed the pattern of the deck and so on. There's obviously more to the presentation than that, but the implication becomes not that they separated the deck into reds and blacks during the dealing procedure, but that --knowing the two piles would be mixed at the end-- they separated the deck in such a way that a shuffle at the end would produce a "balanced" deck of reds and blacks.

I can understand if this effect doesn't click with everyone, but I've had really good success with it so far. I love that it seems so hands-off once the effect starts for the person.

One final tip: I don't ask them to think of a negative thought midway through. I have them concentrate very hard on that positive thought. What I do is that I ask them some kind of non-sequitur question in the middle of the procedure. Nothing too odd, but something they'll remember, perhaps, "Where should we go for breakfast tomorrow?" (which is what I asked the person I performed it for this weekend), or something that makes it seem like maybe MY mind is wandering. After they start to answer and deal through a few more cards I say, "I'm sorry, I'm distracting you." And I get them to pause for a second, get back into that positive frame of mind and then deal until the end. During that end reveal I remind them of the question I asked them and tell them that I really wasn't curious about what we were going to do for breakfast (or whatever) I just wanted to show them what would happen when they got distracted. As we go through the pile the "mistakes" almost seem to prove to them that they really were using some untapped part of their mind to arrange the deck that way.


Excellent presentation idea. Made reading this thread worth while.
Thanks
"If you can't change the method, change the moment." Vernon
Zachary
View Profile
Loyal user
275 Posts

Profile of Zachary
Agreed, that is a much more suitable justification IMO, I hope you don't mind if I borrow that from you.... If it is, I already have the check made out magicsquared, just need the address. Great thinking buddy!
Twitter:@Zachary_Heath
Instagram: @zachheathmagic
RogueMD
View Profile
Regular user
129 Posts

Profile of RogueMD
OK...I'm in.
"New Leaf" is terrible....
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Dvd, Video tape, Audio tape & Compact discs. » » Worst Effects on True Astonishments set? (0 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3..9~10~11
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2020 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.2 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 <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL