|
|
|
|||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7 | ||||||||||
The Drake Inner circle 2274 Posts 
|
Quote:
On 2011-04-29 22:16, GRMAGIC wrote: Finally a video of trouble being performed. Ryan Joyce performs Trouble here.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V59gOyuvX_M |
|||||||||
ClintonMagus Inner circle Southwestern Southeast 3997 Posts
|
Not an illusion you want viewed from the top, is it?
If I remember the book correctly, I think there's something you can do to prevent that problem...
Things are more like they are today than they've ever been before...
|
|||||||||
dahih beik Special user palestine 817 Posts
|
The prop is beautiful , the performance as well .. the illusion just left me with a desire for more ..
|
|||||||||
|
sly2272 Loyal user 256 Posts
|
Ryan's great, not in love with Trouble.
|
|||||||||
|
Sorcerer Loyal user 289 Posts
|
I've just watched the video on youtube and come to the Café to tell but The Drake overtook me
Was eager to see "trouble" live, but I must recognize it has disappointed me... Nothing to do with Ryan's performance, just the illusion seems to be less deceptive live than in the book. Sorry, just my two cents. |
|||||||||
Blair Marshall Inner circle Montreal, Canada 3669 Posts
|
It is aso not built as to the original design, not sure if it would be more deceptive.
Blair
Visit My Facebook Fan Page At
www.Facebook.com/BlairMarshallMontrealMagician www.BlairMarshall.ca www.ShaZzamShow.com www.MontrealMagicien.com |
|||||||||
M Sini Inner circle 1359 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2012-04-19 11:42, Blair Marshall wrote: You're right blair, the table and the position of the first "sliced" piece are both different from Steinmeyer's original design. While I don't have much issue with the table, I would think positioning the first sliced piece where it was suggested in Steinmeyer's book would make the illusion more deceptive. |
|||||||||
|
Sorcerer Loyal user 289 Posts
|
Blair & MSini, you are right.
The table is "Dan Summers stile" not Steinmeyer's original design. And the original position described for the first piece once sliced is not spectator hands. Maybe both differences could make it look different. |
|||||||||
magicians Inner circle Teacher and Legend 2898 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2012-04-19 10:20, Sorcerer wrote: Absolutely my feelings.
Illusionist, Illusionist consulting, product development, stage consultant, seasoned performer for over 35 years. Specializing in original effects. Highly opinionated, usually correct, and not afraid of jealous critics. I've been a puppet, a pirate, a pawn and a King. Free lance gynecologist.
|
|||||||||
|
EsnRedshirt Special user Newark, CA 895 Posts
|
I do like the illusion... but I've always had a problem with box dividers that "magically" appear out of nowhere.
Self-proclaimed Jack-of-all-trades and google expert*.
* = Take any advice from this person with a grain of salt. |
|||||||||
serg Elite user Ukraine 404 Posts
|
For my opinion this first time for Jim Steinmeyer( but in book little other design),Daniel Summers and Ryan Joyce when the result is worse than expected...Not logical illusion, no good performance ,and I think no interesting for the spectators. I very respect all Jim,Dan and Ryan...but this illusion is mistake, trouble and this sound not funny. Sergey.
|
|||||||||
Rolf Reiner Loyal user Mallorca - Spain 229 Posts
|
Nice to see that video! If I remember correctly, in the original design the loose piece goes on top of the box. There is a good reason for it, and the illusion suffered from not doing that. This is an interesting concept, think of it as a work in progress, the core idea can lead to many developments. I find it more interesting now after seeing a video.
|
|||||||||
|
Blair Marshall Inner circle Montreal, Canada 3669 Posts
|
I think by also "weighting" the bottom (legs) as in the original it pulls you away from the look/size of the box, especially when split.
Blair (Is there an original version of "Trouble" being used on-line?)
Visit My Facebook Fan Page At
www.Facebook.com/BlairMarshallMontrealMagician www.BlairMarshall.ca www.ShaZzamShow.com www.MontrealMagicien.com |
|||||||||
|
videokideo Special user 895 Posts
|
In my opinion, this illusion should have stayed on paper. Makes no sense and is quite meaningless. Even the audience members on stage are about to go to sleep. Maybe after five pages of buildup ive expected a lot more. Ive seen it on paper and it does seem interesting, but now that Ive seen it performed, it makes no sense at all. We've regressed from cutting a box into 4 pieces in which all of the pieces are moved around, to a box that is cut into pieces and just slightly shifted. Almost another version of Girl In Puzzle, without proving the girl has vanished or is in pieces. If you were to lay out Girl In Puzzle and Trouble in front of me, I would have said Trouble came first and the idea of shifting pieces was transfered to Girl In Puzzle, which makes more sense completed.
Seems like what I saw on paper did make more sense...but cant remember. Could be the builder changed a few things that made the illusion lacking. Also, I agree, the piece taken away needs to be stacked on top. Not that it matters, because the illusion to me is just plain boring. |
|||||||||
|
Rolf Reiner Loyal user Mallorca - Spain 229 Posts
|
You would argue that the first versions of sawing a lady in half should have remained on paper... and we know they deserved that fate. However, this would have destroyed the possibility for evolution of the concept, and we would not have the great renditions of that classic that came later.
Besides, you seem to miss the point that illusions are rarely created in their full, finished form "on paper". They have to be built, performed, sent back to shop, a back-and-forth process that culminates in an optimized solution, eventually. Sawing a lady in half took decades to start looking good. In the case of Trouble, the fact is that the magic community has been given a new illusion concept to work with, who knows what will come of it in time? |
|||||||||
mvmagic Inner circle Has written 1323 Posts
|
I don't think in this case the "improved" version is an improvement. The base just looks too big. And the other problem-no matter which version-is that there is just a too massive surface when the box is all opened up-visually the box becomes even larger.
Sent from my Typewriter
|
|||||||||
w_s_anderson Inner circle The United States 1227 Posts
|
While my opinion reflects many of yours, I think that after hitting countless homeruns out of the park...an occasional foul ball should be expected. This prop/presentation would not fit my performance style, but like Rolf said, this could spawn something great.
So..... The guy that gave us Star Wars.........also gave us Howard the Duck. The guy that gave us the Mustang.......also gave us the Pinto. The guy that gave us the Apprentice....also gave us the Celebrity Apprentice. The couple that gave the world Ron Howard.....Also gave us Clint Howard. ....And so the guy that gave us Origami, Girl in a Puzzle, Modern Art, Windshear, Osmosis, Elevator, Interlude, Op-Art, and more than 100 other knock out illusions........also gave us Trouble. (which apparently in the case of this prop isn't exactly how he intended it) This particular prop may not be for me......but I would kill to have a Steinmeyer Collection! |
|||||||||
Aaron Smith Magic Inner circle Portland, OR 1452 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2012-04-21 11:49, w_s_anderson wrote: Hahahaha!! Brilliant!  Actually, I think Howard the Duck is an awesome movie.
|
|||||||||
|
M Sini Inner circle 1359 Posts
|
Hey! I liked Howard the Duck!
In all seriousness, you make a great point. When I read about this and saw the drawings I really liked it. However, after seeing a couple of videos of it, it's definitely not as good as I expected it to be. |
|||||||||
|
Rudy Sanchez Special user 908 Posts
|
Quote:
On Apr 18, 2012, ClintonMagus wrote: I just saw this topic and I thought I would chime in. I own the original Trouble made by Craig Dickens so I’m very familiar with it. Ryan’s major flaw I believe is he opened up the blocks too far. You should not see that huge gap/opening at the top, anyone watching this from above normally wouldn’t see anything. That in my opinion ruined the illusion the most. There are other smaller things like placing the original block on top of the prop as originally instructed and I prefer the original table leg design.
www.cesaral.com
Sales Manager for Cesaral Magic |
|||||||||
| The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Grand illusion » » Dan Summers offering Steinmeyer's "Trouble" illusion (2 Likes) | ||||||||||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7 | ||||||||||
Posted: Apr 19, 2012 12:52 am 
| [ Top of Page ] |
|
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2026 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.03 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 <
|