The Magic Cafť
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index Ľ Ľ Latest and Greatest? Ľ Ľ Metal Phone by Calen Morelli and Joao Miranda (109 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4..8..11..14..17..20..21~22~23 [Next]
Joao Miranda
View Profile
Veteran user
Portugal
389 Posts

Profile of Joao Miranda
Quote:
On Feb 13, 2020, magicinsight wrote:
Don't lose the external unlocking tool otherwise you will be left with a very expensive block of metal. While I like the updated, modern look of the phone, it is WAY expensive especially with the add-ons as compared to IR. Since IR is not currently being manufactured, this might be an alternative, albeit and expensive one, for those who want to do this type of routine.


Your comment is based on what exactly?

You donít even know what the tool is.

It is simple a small L hex key easily available anywhere if case you loose the one provided
elimagic
View Profile
Inner circle
Is the number you're thinking of...
1514 Posts

Profile of elimagic
I donít think the cost is terribly high as between the raw material cost, engineering, etc. Seems reasonable. Of course I wish it was cheaper just like I wish everything in life was but it doesnít seem unreasonable to me. What I struggle with is that it being a metal iphone clearly says itís a prop, specially made thing, instead of just a raw block of steel. It being in the shape of a phone, to me, seems to scream special prop. Now of course, this is magician thinking and I donít think 99% of spectators will be anything other than floored if presented properly. The locking mechanism is really interesting and if it does what joao says it does (which iím inclined to believe him obviously) then thatís a huge leap forward in the effect.

Nice joao. Iím in the fence but leaning towards placing the order.
Jared
View Profile
Inner circle
Rhode Island, USA
1331 Posts

Profile of Jared
I agree that this looks terrific (nice work by Joao and creative concept by Calen), but penetration effects (in general) never seem to garner the reactions that I hope for. It seems like most spectators view these type of effects more as a puzzle instead of an amazing demonstration performed by a skillful magician. As much as I enjoyed Jamie Grant's technical marvel "Industrial Revelation" it never cracked my starting line-up of 'go-to' effects for strolling because I got better reactions from effects which are easier (less heavy) to carry around while working. If I eventually buy this it will be to satisfy my own curiosity as a hobbyist and magic collector.
Joe Roberts
View Profile
Special user
704 Posts

Profile of Joe Roberts
I'm a little confused by this trick. The original brass block penetration had you pushing a match through a matchbox, then revealing there was a brass block inside, making what happened impossible.

Industrial Revelation scaled the trick up in size, so you were pushing a coin through a (potentially empty) card box, and then revealing the block.

Here you're pushing something through your phone and then revealing it wasn't your phone it was something ELSE solid. Why exactly? I think I'd be more impressed if it was the phone.

Another potential issue I see is that the object isn't completely encased so they might think the block was simply levered downward from the case, allowing the card to pass through.
magicinsight
View Profile
Inner circle
3763 Posts

Profile of magicinsight
Quote:
On Feb 13, 2020, Joao Miranda wrote:
Quote:
On Feb 13, 2020, magicinsight wrote:
Don't lose the external unlocking tool otherwise you will be left with a very expensive block of metal. While I like the updated, modern look of the phone, it is WAY expensive especially with the add-ons as compared to IR. Since IR is not currently being manufactured, this might be an alternative, albeit and expensive one, for those who want to do this type of routine.


Your comment is based on what exactly?

You donít even know what the tool is.

It is simple a small L hex key easily available anywhere if case you loose the one provided


My comment was based upon the ad that states the locking mechanism is patent pending so I assumed that the tool to unlock the special locking mechanism was specially made. Since the tool is common, that certainly makes it convenient if it is misplaced. Good luck with your new product.
ďBelief matters more than truth. Every moment, belief in imaginary things alters lives while truth sits unnoticed and waits.Ē
óHakim, Loreweaver
cardbiker
View Profile
Inner circle
1279 Posts

Profile of cardbiker
Very disappointed that itís not something more original this has been done to death over the years
michael640
View Profile
Regular user
163 Posts

Profile of michael640
Quote:
On Feb 13, 2020, pegasus wrote:
The one thing thatís going to completely f@@@ this up is if someone types in metal phone into google and the advert appears, or a youtube secret revealed video.

I hope this has been considered.


Couldnít agree more - this looks fantastic but why not simply apply common sense and not name it exactly as someone would describe it?
TuneHV
View Profile
Inner circle
New York
1797 Posts

Profile of TuneHV
Quote:
On Feb 13, 2020, Joe Roberts wrote:
I'm a little confused by this trick. The original brass block penetration had you pushing a match through a matchbox, then revealing there was a brass block inside, making what happened impossible.

Industrial Revelation scaled the trick up in size, so you were pushing a coin through a (potentially empty) card box, and then revealing the block.

Here you're pushing something through your phone and then revealing it wasn't your phone it was something ELSE solid. Why exactly? I think I'd be more impressed if it was the phone.

Another potential issue I see is that the object isn't completely encased so they might think the block was simply levered downward from the case, allowing the card to pass through.


Not sure I follow this. You would expect matches to be in a match box, then realize it is a brass block. You would expect cards inside a card box, then reveal it is a steel block. You would expect a phone inside a phone case, then reveal it is a metal phone. Every previous example you are revealing it was something else solid. I can understand the concern with this being an object that doesnít exist, but not that it was something different than expected.
David Jonathan
- - - - - - - - - -
With The Band | SNAPS | You Know | CAANWICH | Fourtunate | Destined | Wrong Turn | Fortuity | Arbitrium | Sovereign Sandwich | RudiMental

More Info: www.davidjonathanmagic.com
Joe Roberts
View Profile
Special user
704 Posts

Profile of Joe Roberts
Quote:
On Feb 13, 2020, TuneHV wrote:
Not sure I follow this. You would expect matches to be in a match box, then realize it is a brass block. You would expect cards inside a card box, then reveal it is a steel block. You would expect a phone inside a phone case, then reveal it is a metal phone. Every previous example you are revealing it was something else solid. I can understand the concern with this being an object that doesnít exist, but not that it was something different than expected.



What don't you follow? When you push a pin through a matchbox, that's not a trick. You can push a pin through any matchbox. The trick is when the block is revealed.

When you put a coin through a card box, that's not a trick either. The card box might be empty. Or maybe there's a hole in the deck. The trick is when the block revealed.

When you push a card through a phone, that's ALREADY a trick. So saying "Actually it wasn't a phone, it was a block of metal" is a climax that isn't a climax. It doesn't up the stakes at all.
TuneHV
View Profile
Inner circle
New York
1797 Posts

Profile of TuneHV
Quote:
On Feb 13, 2020, Joe Roberts wrote:
Quote:
On Feb 13, 2020, TuneHV wrote:
Not sure I follow this. You would expect matches to be in a match box, then realize it is a brass block. You would expect cards inside a card box, then reveal it is a steel block. You would expect a phone inside a phone case, then reveal it is a metal phone. Every previous example you are revealing it was something else solid. I can understand the concern with this being an object that doesnít exist, but not that it was something different than expected.



What don't you follow? When you push a pin through a matchbox, that's not a trick. You can push a pin through any matchbox. The trick is when the block is revealed.

When you put a coin through a card box, that's not a trick either. The card box might be empty. Or maybe there's a hole in the deck. The trick is when the block revealed.

When you push a card through a phone, that's ALREADY a trick. So saying "Actually it wasn't a phone, it was a block of metal" is a climax that isn't a climax. It doesn't up the stakes at all.


I see what you mean now... assuming those other boxes are implied to be empty, then yes. I donít present IR by hinting the box is empty, I say that the only way this is possible is if the cards all have a slit in them - which would make sense if there were cards in the box (as I tip out the steel block). But youíre right that the climax is not the same climax as in the other versions, it just takes it in a different direction.
David Jonathan
- - - - - - - - - -
With The Band | SNAPS | You Know | CAANWICH | Fourtunate | Destined | Wrong Turn | Fortuity | Arbitrium | Sovereign Sandwich | RudiMental

More Info: www.davidjonathanmagic.com
Joe Roberts
View Profile
Special user
704 Posts

Profile of Joe Roberts
Quote:
On Feb 13, 2020, TuneHV wrote:
I see what you mean now... assuming those other boxes are implied to be empty, then yes. I donít present IR by hinting the box is empty, I say that the only way this is possible is if the cards all have a slit in them - which would make sense if there were cards in the box (as I tip out the steel block). But youíre right that the climax is not the same climax as in the other versions, it just takes it in a different direction.


I think you're making my point. The trick only makes sense if the first phase feels explainable in some way. Then the reveal of the metal block heightens the impossibility. I don't think you get that effect if the spectators thinks there's a phone in the case. It you had a trick where something penetrated a block of silver and then you revealed it to be a block of gold, that would still be impossible but wouldn't necessarily make much sense as a reveal.

Similarly, if you did the Tenyo trick from a few years ago where a silk penetrates a phone, would it be stronger to say "Actually it wasn't a phone. It was a block of steel that I made look like a phone." I don't think so.
JCheng
View Profile
Veteran user
311 Posts

Profile of JCheng
Quote:
On Feb 13, 2020, Joe Roberts wrote:
I'm a little confused by this trick. The original brass block penetration had you pushing a match through a matchbox, then revealing there was a brass block inside, making what happened impossible.

Industrial Revelation scaled the trick up in size, so you were pushing a coin through a (potentially empty) card box, and then revealing the block.

Here you're pushing something through your phone and then revealing it wasn't your phone it was something ELSE solid. Why exactly? I think I'd be more impressed if it was the phone.

Another potential issue I see is that the object isn't completely encased so they might think the block was simply levered downward from the case, allowing the card to pass through.


I agree.
tomd
View Profile
Special user
729 Posts

Profile of tomd
Quote:
On Feb 13, 2020, Joe Roberts wrote:
Quote:
On Feb 13, 2020, TuneHV wrote:
I see what you mean now... assuming those other boxes are implied to be empty, then yes. I donít present IR by hinting the box is empty, I say that the only way this is possible is if the cards all have a slit in them - which would make sense if there were cards in the box (as I tip out the steel block). But youíre right that the climax is not the same climax as in the other versions, it just takes it in a different direction.


I think you're making my point. The trick only makes sense if the first phase feels explainable in some way. Then the reveal of the metal block heightens the impossibility. I don't think you get that effect if the spectators thinks there's a phone in the case. It you had a trick where something penetrated a block of silver and then you revealed it to be a block of gold, that would still be impossible but wouldn't necessarily make much sense as a reveal.

Similarly, if you did the Tenyo trick from a few years ago where a silk penetrates a phone, would it be stronger to say "Actually it wasn't a phone. It was a block of steel that I made look like a phone." I don't think so.


Although I get what youíre saying, my perspective is that any rational spectator will almost immediately assume that there is no phone under that case, and that it is actually just a phone case shell with a slit in it. Itís this rational assumption that you must use to your advantage, in order for the metal block reveal to have an impact.

When performing the penetration, call out the fact that they probably think there isnít actually a phone in the case (whether a spectator thought this or not is irrelevant, make them think this).... because obviously itís not possible to push a credit card right through a mobile phone. Then admit that if thatís what they thought, they were correct, there isnít a phone. Point towards the camera, and reveal that itís just a sticker. The spectators at this point will be following the path you want them to, and The reveal will no longer feel like:
ďHa you thought I was penetrating gold, but it was actually silverĒ,
but more like:
ďSee you fell for it just for a second, you thought I was doing the impossibleĒ - only to reveal the Ďimpossibleí actually happened.

previous iterations relied on this concept as well... at first the spectators assume the deck is full, then they see the penetration and rationally change their assumption; deck is empty or the cards have a slit in them. The magician will play with this line of thinking, thatís why the metal block reveal works.

If the spectators assume the phone is being penetrated, then yes the metal block is pointless... but equally, if spectators think you are actually penetrating a deck of cards with a coin, then the metal block reveal is also pointless..

I donít see a difference fundamentally.
tomd
View Profile
Special user
729 Posts

Profile of tomd
Just adding: Iíve rewatched the full performance, and Calen letís the spectator hold the metal block while in the case, which does make the metal block reveal a tad redundant. Though it does still get a good reaction.


Personally I wouldnít let them hold it... I would want to build upon the idea that there isnít anything under the case. That way, the reveal has serious weight to it.:. Pun intended.
Joe Roberts
View Profile
Special user
704 Posts

Profile of Joe Roberts
Quote:
On Feb 13, 2020, tomd wrote:

If the spectators assume the phone is being penetrated, then yes the metal block is pointless... but equally, if spectators think you are actually penetrating a deck of cards with a coin, then the metal block reveal is also pointless..

I donít see a difference fundamentally.


yes, with Industrial Revelation, IF they think you are actually penetrating a normal, ungimmicked deck of cards, then the metal block reveal is somewhat pointless as well. (But most people will come up with their own conclusion, because the box does go out of site if you use a real deck. So it easy to assume the box was switched or there was something funny about the cards.)

Doing THIS trick (metal phone) without showing the phone first may seem like a solution, but then you have different issue. You'll push the card through and people will assume the case is empty. Then you'll tell them it's actually not empty and they'll think "No way is his phone in there." And they'll be right, it's not your phone, it's a metal block. Why? Especially since the phone would have been equally impressive and much more logical. The only answer must be that there's something special about the metal block.

With all that in mind, I'm sure the trick still gets a nice reaction and would be fun to perform. It just doesn't seem like an effect where all the pieces fall perfectly into place which is what I need if I'm going to spend a few hundred dollars on something.
TuneHV
View Profile
Inner circle
New York
1797 Posts

Profile of TuneHV
I think they missed a big opportunity here with the case.


They are offering these fake "covers" for the front of the phone to show the penetration 360 degrees:
https://www.joaomiranda.com/store/index.......t_id=131

I cannot begin to understand the point of these as it looks so fake and you can clearly a piece of paper in the video. If anything, it immediately raises suspicion as to why that is there and detracts from the magic. But showing the penetration 360 does add to the mystery much like its predecessors (which could be viewed at all angles) and elimates the idea of you just angling the phone out of the way like a form of sleight of hand.


Instead, it would have been MUCH better if the silicone case was a flip case with a slit on both sides, like these:

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B075STDS9B/ref......bN1NAAFX

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01FM1HUVS/ref......bMMV6F64

This way you can clearly show the penetration 360 degrees with no suspicion and it builds up the mystery of what is inside the case. It also opens up some interesting presentations such as "You're probably thinking to yourself there is no phone inside this case as that would be the only explanation, right? Though if you look here, you can see the camera, so it must be inside... that leaves only one last way this is possible... that it was all just an illusion. See, there is no phone inside the case - this is just a sticker, and this... is not a phone, but a solid piece of metal."

To the point above, the climax is shifting to an impossible oddity, and being able to show the case from both sides builds up this mystery. I also like the idea of slowly opening the flip case to reveal the metal phone as it just makes the reveal that much more impactful.

I hope Joao considers making a flip case as an accessory option for this.
David Jonathan
- - - - - - - - - -
With The Band | SNAPS | You Know | CAANWICH | Fourtunate | Destined | Wrong Turn | Fortuity | Arbitrium | Sovereign Sandwich | RudiMental

More Info: www.davidjonathanmagic.com
tomd
View Profile
Special user
729 Posts

Profile of tomd
Quote:
On Feb 13, 2020, Joe Roberts wrote:
Quote:
On Feb 13, 2020, tomd wrote:

If the spectators assume the phone is being penetrated, then yes the metal block is pointless... but equally, if spectators think you are actually penetrating a deck of cards with a coin, then the metal block reveal is also pointless..

I donít see a difference fundamentally.


yes, with Industrial Revelation, IF they think you are actually penetrating a normal, ungimmicked deck of cards, then the metal block reveal is somewhat pointless as well. (But most people will come up with their own conclusion, because the box does go out of site if you use a real deck. So it easy to assume the box was switched or there was something funny about the cards.)

Doing THIS trick (metal phone) without showing the phone first may seem like a solution, but then you have different issue. You'll push the card through and people will assume the case is empty. Then you'll tell them it's actually not empty and they'll think "No way is his phone in there." And they'll be right, it's not your phone, it's a metal block. Why? Especially since the phone would have been equally impressive and much more logical. The only answer must be that there's something special about the metal block.

With all that in mind, I'm sure the trick still gets a nice reaction and would be fun to perform. It just doesn't seem like an effect where all the pieces fall perfectly into place which is what I need if I'm going to spend a few hundred dollars on something.


I donít disagree with most of that. ďWhy the metal block? It must be specialĒ is a valid point. But what I donít understand is why you think there is a difference between this and IR.

Revealing a metal block in this trick may lead the spectators to feel like itís part of the method, but equally the spectators would come to the same conclusion with IR (if the same presentation was used).
Sure, actually revealing the phone at the end would make more sense in Calens performance, but so would revealing a full un-gimmicked deck of cards in IR (again, if it was the same presentation) . whatís the difference?

The only difference I can see is in the performance videos for each trick (on their respective webpages):

Calen implies there is a phone in the case the entire routine. He invites them to try the penetration themselves, and it doesnít work for them (implying the phone is there), he has them hold the phone and case (and implies the phone is there), and finally tells them to feel the weight (which all but confirms the phone is there)... so when he reveals the metal block, it catches them off guard but it doesnít make sense.

In John Archers performance of IR (on IRís official webpage) he spends the entire routine playing with the spectators assumptions. At first they assume the deck is full, but when he uses the coin to penetrate the box their assumption changes and he plays with it. He starts saying itís possible the cards have a cut in them, or that maybe there are no cards in the box. This makes sense of the metal block reveal, because he can use a spectators correct assumption against them... there are right to assume that there are no cards. I think thatís why it hits so hard.

I donít mean to trample on Calenís performance, I enjoyed how he interacted with the spectators... However, I agree with you Joe when you say that the most logical ending with that presentation is for a phone to be revealed... not a metal block. Which leads to the conclusion that the metal block must be special.

However, if you used a John archer style of performance with metal phone, you would end up in same theatrical place as he does with IR...
tomd
View Profile
Special user
729 Posts

Profile of tomd
Quote:
On Feb 13, 2020, TuneHV wrote:
I think they missed a big opportunity here with the case.


They are offering these fake "covers" for the front of the phone to show the penetration 360 degrees:
https://www.joaomiranda.com/store/index.......t_id=131

I cannot begin to understand the point of these as it looks so fake and you can clearly a piece of paper in the video. If anything, it immediately raises suspicion as to why that is there and detracts from the magic. But showing the penetration 360 does add to the mystery much like its predecessors (which could be viewed at all angles) and elimates the idea of you just angling the phone out of the way like a form of sleight of hand.


Instead, it would have been MUCH better if the silicone case was a flip case with a slit on both sides, like these:

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B075STDS9B/ref......bN1NAAFX

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01FM1HUVS/ref......bMMV6F64

This way you can clearly show the penetration 360 degrees with no suspicion and it builds up the mystery of what is inside the case. It also opens up some interesting presentations such as "You're probably thinking to yourself there is no phone inside this case as that would be the only explanation, right? Though if you look here, you can see the camera, so it must be inside... that leaves only one last way this is possible... that it was all just an illusion. See, there is no phone inside the case - this is just a sticker, and this... is not a phone, but a solid piece of metal."

To the point above, the climax is shifting to an impossible oddity, and being able to show the case from both sides builds up this mystery. I also like the idea of slowly opening the flip case to reveal the metal phone as it just makes the reveal that much more impactful.

I hope Joao considers making a flip case as an accessory option for this.

Couldnít agree more, a flip case is so much better. I donít understand why you want to sell the idea that you are actually penetrating the phone, because the metal block becomes redundant.

You end up the in place joe has pointed out: you are exchanging a penetration of a logical metal object, to an illogical metal object. You want them to assume there is no phone, and a flip case would do the job.
zachwyman
View Profile
New user
Maryland
53 Posts

Profile of zachwyman
This looks really cool, however, the price tag is deterring. Style of phones change over time drastically - even this metal phone does not match up with the latest iPhone camera. Great idea, however not long lasting considering the world of technology we live in.
pegasus
View Profile
Inner circle
United Kingdom
8588 Posts

Profile of pegasus
Quote:
On Feb 14, 2020, zachwyman wrote:
This looks really cool, however, the price tag is deterring. Style of phones change over time drastically - even this metal phone does not match up with the latest iPhone camera. Great idea, however not long lasting considering the world of technology we live in.


Thatís certainly not the case (pun intended) nowadays. I can guarantee you that I will keep my iPhone X until it completely dies on me, probably in 10 years time. Lots of iPhone owners have older models and are content with them. Why? Because people do not want to spend over a Grand on a new phone that only takes nicer photos. Those days are over. You NEVER see a queue outside Apple stores when new models are released nowadays.
The Magic Cafe Forum Index Ľ Ľ Latest and Greatest? Ľ Ľ Metal Phone by Calen Morelli and Joao Miranda (109 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4..8..11..14..17..20..21~22~23 [Next]
X
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2020 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.49 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