Closed Thread
Thread Tools Display Modes
#1051
Old 09-09-2016, 06:03 AM
Guest
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 8,995
Quote:
Originally Posted by cluck View Post
Yeah, I'm surprised P&T didn't ask to examine the blindfold. But Penn seemed so sure he knew what it was (without disclosing anything) that I guess it doesn't matter. I wasn't impressed with the trick much either; it was too "theatrical" for my taste. I remember seeing a Penn & Teller: Bullsh!t episode where they exposed a lot of mentalist frauds too, so I'm surprised Penn seemed so keen on them (I got the impression he hated mentalism).

I still don't know about the 100 dollar bill though. How Teller produced it so readily, nor why he gave it to the woman at the end. And how she would know what the serial numbers are (if it's otherwise not a planted bill).
I dislike metalists because most of them want you to believe, on some level, that they possess a mysterious power. These two, while their tricks were impressive, were not worthy of performing in front of P & T because of their ridiculous presentation. The woman had no stage presence nor personality, and the guy's manner would be a better fit on a 3 am infomercial.

As for the 100 dollar bill, I think editing allowed Teller to, er, whip it out so quickly. And I was under the impression that Penn and Teller autographed the bill and gave it back as a souvenir.


mmm
#1052
Old 09-09-2016, 06:53 AM
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 5,140
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheHYPO View Post
I feel like I'm missing some context/history here. Care to elaborate?
Me too. In his videos he gives some very plausible explanations of how he secretly fooled Penn and Teller. The only real mystery is why he felt the need to disclose all this after the fact on YouTube. (He claims that he didn't want to be be impolite by claiming during the TV show that he fooled them, but I don't see how it's much less polite to do so on YouTube.)
#1053
Old 09-09-2016, 07:00 AM
Guest
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 23,419
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheHYPO View Post
I feel like I'm missing some context/history here. Care to elaborate?
Sankey is a guy who made a name for himself years ago developing and selling some really good, innovative tricks. He then went on Fool Us and did some competently-executed tricks which were fine but not innovative or new, and which P&T had no problem figuring out. Months later, Sankey then posted a video in which he claimed his whole Fool Us act was a giant con, and he was actually doing his routine in a completely different way than P&T said, but using various moves to trick them into thinking he was doing it another way.

Except in the episode he claimed that he had not fooled them for...reasons.

And Johnny Thompson and the producers of the show, and the show's lawyers, who know how every act is done before it is performed, allowed this to happen, for...other reasons.

None of it makes any sense, other magicians have called him on it, and Sankey now simply deletes unflattering comments from his YouTube videos.

Penn ranted a bit about the whole episode on his podcast, where he revealed that Teller was also really pissed off about the whole act, having to deconstruct a whole routine of separate, unrelated tricks rather than a single thing.
#1054
Old 09-09-2016, 08:57 AM
Charter Member
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: 地球
Posts: 27,255
Quote:
Originally Posted by cluck View Post
I remember seeing a Penn & Teller: Bullsh!t episode where they exposed a lot of mentalist frauds too, so I'm surprised Penn seemed so keen on them (I got the impression he hated mentalism).
If you go on Fool Us, you are obviously saying that it is a trick, not a magic ability. Penn and Teller respect good quality magic tricks and I think their mentalism-routine was well done. If they go around the country/world charging for a genuine magical ability, they are scammers and should be exposed. If they sell tickets as an illiusion show, it's a lot of fun.

Again, if you go on Fool Us, you are openly admitting there is a trick. The two of them even acknowledge Penn and Teller know the trick, otherwise they would insist they fooled them

I liked their routine.
#1055
Old 09-09-2016, 12:17 PM
Member
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 4,890
Quote:
Originally Posted by cluck View Post
I still don't know about the 100 dollar bill though. How Teller produced it so readily, nor why he gave it to the woman at the end. And how she would know what the serial numbers are (if it's otherwise not a planted bill).
Well, the dude kept chiming in with quick comments during her naming the digits. So my guess was that she was just silently counting between his comments to get each digit.
#1056
Old 09-09-2016, 12:45 PM
Guest
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: rhode island
Posts: 37,358
Quote:
Originally Posted by xizor View Post
Well, the dude kept chiming in with quick comments during her naming the digits. So my guess was that she was just silently counting between his comments to get each digit.
That could be it. They do what they do well, and I don't know that they've ever tried to con people into believing they have psychic powers. It's just entertainment.

Someone asked how they got the information about names, and a watch, and I'm sure they had found the names of these people before hand. With just a name you can find out a lot about people on the internet, including their mother's name. He may even have a FB page that they could look at and see the story about his mother giving him the watch. And they certainly could have confederates that strike up conversations with these people during breaks. It's the same techniques the con artists use.

ETA: I don't know why a big deal is made about Sankey. We've talked about the problems with show where a magician just misdirects P&T with extraneous actions, but that's the way the show works, and Sankey didn't even claim to fool them. Magicians do dish dirt about each other, I don't think it's smart of him to be talking about P&T because he's small time and they're in a position to say whatever they want about him.

Last edited by TriPolar; 09-09-2016 at 12:49 PM.
#1057
Old 09-09-2016, 01:02 PM
Guest
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: France
Posts: 2,081
NM

Last edited by The Great Unwashed; 09-09-2016 at 01:06 PM.
#1058
Old 09-09-2016, 01:23 PM
Guest
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 23,419
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriPolar View Post

ETA: I don't know why a big deal is made about Sankey. We've talked about the problems with show where a magician just misdirects P&T with extraneous actions, but that's the way the show works, and Sankey didn't even claim to fool them. Magicians do dish dirt about each other, I don't think it's smart of him to be talking about P&T because he's small time and they're in a position to say whatever they want about him.
He claimed, months after his show aired, that he DID in fact fool them, because he was really running a con within a con, for reasons that are only clear to him. See the video I linked above. That's why I say he's full of shit. There was nothing wrong with his routine; he didn't fool P&T despite his attempts at duplicity, and now he's claiming that he really did use different methods, but didn't take home a trophy, because he's an amazing Mission Impossible-level con man, or something.
#1059
Old 09-09-2016, 01:44 PM
Guest
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: France
Posts: 2,081
Quote:
Originally Posted by friedo View Post
Except in the episode he claimed that he had not fooled them for...reasons.
...
Penn ranted a bit about the whole episode on his podcast...
Yeah, that claim was ridiculous, and a little bit sad.

In the podcast Penn seems to say that if a trick can be done by more than one method, that a contestant cannot win just by having P&T unable to make a call between which method. I mention this because that question has been brought up several times in this thread.
#1060
Old 09-09-2016, 01:46 PM
Guest
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: rhode island
Posts: 37,358
Quote:
Originally Posted by friedo View Post
He claimed, months after his show aired, that he DID in fact fool them, because he was really running a con within a con, for reasons that are only clear to him. See the video I linked above. That's why I say he's full of shit. There was nothing wrong with his routine; he didn't fool P&T despite his attempts at duplicity, and now he's claiming that he really did use different methods, but didn't take home a trophy, because he's an amazing Mission Impossible-level con man, or something.
Well, yeah. But who cares what he says? He doesn't have an FU trophy, he's just saying that they didn't guess exactly how he did some simple things that have multiple ways to work, and he sounds stupid saying it. It was a lame act and he's just making it more lame with his feeble excuse for not winning.
#1061
Old 09-10-2016, 01:49 AM
Guest
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 82
On tonight's episode of Masters of Illusion, Jen Kramer did a version of the Shawn Farquhar book trick from the beginning of this season, except this time she uses The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes. She wasn't wearing glasses, so there goes that theory. I kept my eye on the book the entire time, and I couldn't see her make a switch even though she kept it very close to her hip before the reveal that it was blank.
#1062
Old 09-10-2016, 02:08 AM
Guest
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by cluck View Post
except this time she uses The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes.
Wait a minute. I just watched the original trick over and I see that he too used Sherlock Holmes (I thought it was something different for some reason). Not only that, but I looked at the two videos side by side and it's the exact same book. Same cover, same color and everything. I think the key must lie in that book. However, in both tricks the assistants pick different page numbers containing different lines of text. Both magicians hold the book very strangely to their hips before revealing that their book is blank. I wonder if they're sliding out a dummy pair of pages into the book cover. There's got to be some kind of switch happening.

I'm upset that this trick still eludes me.

Last edited by cluck; 09-10-2016 at 02:09 AM.
#1063
Old 09-10-2016, 04:26 AM
Guest
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 82
S03E11

Christopher Tracy and Jim Leach: aka Hal & Kellar. An iPad in a prediction envelope is not exactly impressive, but I guess the real trick lies in the way the cards were shuffled. A quick search on Simon Aronson pulled up this result.

Neil Croswell: Girl in the red and blue dress. Penn mentions Jim Steinmeyer in reference to how he made the girl disappear (even with 360 camera view), but if she wasn't wearing the striped dress underneath her clothes, what exactly was the alternative that Teller drew?

Ben Young: Predicting the eggshell. I think Ben fidgeting with the phone ahead of time (and miming the selfie) telegraphed what he was doing. I looked up Teller's "toxic" hint and came across this iteration of the trick (+ 0 x). The egg was a nice touch.

Henok: The exotic ethnic guy. I'm getting tired of tricks with a "prediction envelope" punchline because it seems like there's only one or two methods and it's always done the same way. That being said, I don't know exactly how confabulation works, but I agree with Penn that its presentation was well done.

Last edited by cluck; 09-10-2016 at 04:30 AM.
#1064
Old 09-10-2016, 06:18 AM
Guest
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: France
Posts: 2,081
Quote:
Originally Posted by cluck View Post
Wait a minute. I just watched the original trick over and I see that he too used Sherlock Holmes (I thought it was something different for some reason). Not only that, but I looked at the two videos side by side and it's the exact same book. Same cover, same color and everything. I think the key must lie in that book. However, in both tricks the assistants pick different page numbers containing different lines of text. Both magicians hold the book very strangely to their hips before revealing that their book is blank. I wonder if they're sliding out a dummy pair of pages into the book cover. There's got to be some kind of switch happening.

I'm upset that this trick still eludes me.
A) I think what may be telling is that Farquhar's glasses can be seen in some shots to be not lens-free -- is there the same glasses gag in Kramer's version?

B) Otherwise, you know "the blank deck" effect? It's possible his book is just a version of that trick.
#1065
Old 09-10-2016, 06:45 AM
Guest
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Great Unwashed View Post
A) I think what may be telling is that Farquhar's glasses can be seen in some shots to be not lens-free -- is there the same glasses gag in Kramer's version?
She doesn't use glasses at all. I think Shawn's joke ("This was a lot easier when I was younger") may be more truthful than we realize and he actually did need the glasses to read whatever small print he may have been reading off of. (He then pops out the lenses at the end in order to make another joke/gigantic misdirect.)

The following was posted earlier in the thread and I think it's the best lead we have. It's entirely possible there may have been a small notecard hidden in there with code. I still think there's also something very particular about that book (such as repeated pages or passages) since they always pick different areas of the page to read from.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SenorBeef View Post
I think we're way overcomplicating Farquhar's trick.

He doesn't have a full copy of the book to work with. It's not like he says to the audience member "pick a paragraph, and I'll read the first sentence" - he has facts about each page that are meant to look random but are actually an exact pattern. "There are 7 paragraphs. The fourth paragraph starts with the words ___, right?"

So all he needs is a small amount of information like

134: 7p. p3="The clues of the case"

for each page. Then whatever page she turns to, he can consult the little fact he has about that page. If he uses a coded shorthand system, and writes in small print, you could easily fit a bunch of facts about the entire book on something smaller than a notecard. The glasses may actually be relevant in that they're magnifying glasses to read such a note.

So the book is legitimately blank and can be examined. At some point he pulls some sort of card or something like that out of somewhere, places it in the book (so he can read it while he pretends to be reading the book), and then make it disappear at some later point. Boom, you have little factoids you can read out about every page, anyone can examine the books, and all you have to do is some very basic sleight of hand with a little notecard.
#1066
Old 09-10-2016, 07:03 AM
Guest
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: France
Posts: 2,081
Quote:
Originally Posted by cluck View Post
The following was posted earlier in the thread and I think it's the best lead we have. It's entirely possible there may have been a small notecard hidden in there with code. I still think there's also something very particular about that book (such as repeated pages or passages) since they always pick different areas of the page to read from.
Sure, and he obliges Alyson to advance in the book and his last "read" was "the longest word in the first line of the second paragraph is WINDOW" (or some such lameness).

It seems possible he has remembered a small number of facts for the last few pages, and the first several reads are simply read from a cue card (which is dumped along with the real glasses for the last read).

None of that needs a particular book though.
#1067
Old 09-10-2016, 07:25 AM
Guest
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Great Unwashed View Post
It seems possible he has remembered a small number of facts for the last few pages, and the first several reads are simply read from a cue card (which is dumped along with the real glasses for the last read).

None of that needs a particular book though.
Yeah, that's why I found it strange that both acts were using the exact same book. That's the one that Farquhar sells, apparently. (There are a couple of other videos of the same technique on that site.)

Farquhar denies there was any memory technique used in it either ("I can't remember my phone number") which is the technicality on which he fooled them. So I don't know.

Last edited by cluck; 09-10-2016 at 07:28 AM.
#1068
Old 09-10-2016, 07:44 AM
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 14,499
Quote:
Originally Posted by cluck View Post
Ben Young: Predicting the eggshell. I think Ben fidgeting with the phone ahead of time (and miming the selfie) telegraphed what he was doing. I looked up Teller's "toxic" hint and came across this iteration of the trick (+ 0 x).
Also, even without knowing how he's doing it, it's obvious that he's doing it. After all, we see that Penn's number ended in '6'; and we see that Teller's number ended in '6', so multiplying them together gets you a big number that ends in '6'; and we don't get to see Alyson's number, but there are only ten options:

* it ends in '1', so the final number should end in '6';
* it ends in '2', so the final number should end in '2';
* it ends in '3', so the final number should end in '8';
* it ends in '4', so the final number should end in '4';
* it ends in '5', so the final number should end in '0';
* it ends in '6', so the final number should end in '6';
* it ends in '7', so the final number should end in '2';
* it ends in '8', so the final number should end in '8';
* it ends in '9', so the final number should end in '4';
* it ends in '0', so the final number should end in '0'.

Unless my math is off, what he's doing is clear once we get a number ending in '3'.
#1069
Old 09-10-2016, 07:53 AM
Guest
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: France
Posts: 2,081
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Other Waldo Pepper View Post
Also, even without knowing how he's doing it, it's obvious that he's doing it. After all, we see that Penn's number ended in '6'; and we see that Teller's number ended in '6', so multiplying them together gets you a big number that ends in '6'; and we don't get to see Alyson's number, but there are only ten options:

* it ends in '1', so the final number should end in '6';
* it ends in '2', so the final number should end in '2';
* it ends in '3', so the final number should end in '8';
* it ends in '4', so the final number should end in '4';
* it ends in '5', so the final number should end in '0';
* it ends in '6', so the final number should end in '6';
* it ends in '7', so the final number should end in '2';
* it ends in '8', so the final number should end in '8';
* it ends in '9', so the final number should end in '4';
* it ends in '0', so the final number should end in '0'.

Unless my math is off, what he's doing is clear once we get a number ending in '3'.
Wow, that's a long way of saying that the product of an even number and any other number is always even.
#1070
Old 09-10-2016, 08:36 AM
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 14,499
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Great Unwashed View Post
Wow, that's a long way of saying that the product of an even number and any other number is always even.
Well, yeah, granted. But (a) I'm not wrong, and (b) as it happens, I did simply run through all ten possibilities before he moved to the next step in the trick.
#1071
Old 09-10-2016, 10:50 PM
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,898
Quote:
Originally Posted by cluck View Post
Henok: The exotic ethnic guy. I'm getting tired of tricks with a "prediction envelope" punchline because it seems like there's only one or two methods and it's always done the same way. That being said, I don't know exactly how confabulation works, but I agree with Penn that its presentation was well done.
You can see that all the predictions (ethnicity, restaurant, nickname) were confined to the bottom right quarter of the letter - he had it folded up on his board the whole time and wrote them down as they were given out, then through a bit of sleight of hand made it look like he removed it from the envelope, and let Alyson unfold and read it.
#1072
Old 09-10-2016, 10:52 PM
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,898
Quote:
Originally Posted by cluck View Post
Neil Croswell: Girl in the red and blue dress. Penn mentions Jim Steinmeyer in reference to how he made the girl disappear (even with 360 camera view), but if she wasn't wearing the striped dress underneath her clothes, what exactly was the alternative that Teller drew?
My guess is that the dress is prepositioned so that she slips into it as she slips into her hiding place?
#1073
Old 09-11-2016, 12:47 AM
Guest
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: rhode island
Posts: 37,358
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombywoof View Post
My guess is that the dress is prepositioned so that she slips into it as she slips into her hiding place?
Maybe. She could have had it on under her shirt when they started. Another example of why I hate stage magic. It was boring, and what was the magic supposed to be?
#1074
Old 09-11-2016, 12:57 AM
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,898
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriPolar View Post
Maybe. She could have had it on under her shirt when they started.
Penn's explanation seemed to indicate she did not start out wearing the dress under her clothes - I *think* the impressive part of the trick was supposed to be how she got changed with so little room to work with.
#1075
Old 09-11-2016, 01:05 AM
Guest
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: rhode island
Posts: 37,358
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombywoof View Post
Penn's explanation seemed to indicate she did not start out wearing the dress under her clothes - I *think* the impressive part of the trick was supposed to be how she got changed with so little room to work with.
There was room for a herd of miniature donkeys inside that table. And there was plenty of time while she was still in the box.
#1076
Old 09-11-2016, 03:10 PM
Guest
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 4
Anybody seen this Penn and Teller parody? It's not Second City quality but I thought it was pretty funny.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=0yyTt4_p5gs
#1077
Old 09-12-2016, 08:00 AM
Guest
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke Sweden View Post
Anybody seen this Penn and Teller parody? It's not Second City quality but I thought it was pretty funny.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=0yyTt4_p5gs
What the fuck did I just watch?

Speaking of which, did anyone see Penn's cameo on The Eric Andre Show this week? I couldn't find a video, but here's a gif.
#1078
Old 09-14-2016, 06:48 AM
Guest
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 64
Calculator trick bothers me because I had a background in math. Any number times an even number is always even yet his number is odd. Too easy to work out it is preplanned. However the punchline doesnt work otherwise. But glad to see writing words with numbers is still a thing. I remember there was some rhyme you did to get 55378008 as a kid.

Earlier I said I liked stage magic, but this act was just dull. I enjoy the spectacle, dramatic lighting, and theatrics. This just didn't do it for me. Although I did like the 360 view.

The Penn and Teller parody guys were great. P&T would be a completely different act if Teller were the speaker and Penn was silent. Nifty trick though.

The hunter bit is a bit I've never quite understood. It's on the P&T Don't Try This At Home special but I never quite got it. Penn has talked a lot about art and stuff but this one I just don't quite get. However the ending here is way better.

Last edited by numeroussyrup; 09-14-2016 at 06:48 AM.
#1079
Old 09-14-2016, 08:28 PM
Guest
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Gardner MA USA
Posts: 2,389
Brent Braun - Ouch! Even I saw the deck fall out of his pants! Still not a bad trick, though.
#1080
Old 09-14-2016, 09:30 PM
Guest
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 1
Calculator trick... the note Teller showed him at the end said "toxic", or something like that. Emphasis on the "tox" (+0x).
#1081
Old 09-14-2016, 11:29 PM
Guest
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 23,419
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephe96 View Post
Brent Braun - Ouch! Even I saw the deck fall out of his pants! Still not a bad trick, though.
Yeah, I wasn't even paying very close attention and that seemed like a really obvious force (of the deck) right away. Still a good trick, and would have been just fine without the deck-toss, but pretty obvious if you know some card techniques.
#1082
Old 09-15-2016, 05:37 AM
Guest
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 82
S03E12

Joseph Reohm: Colorful wine glasses. Fun to watch, but Penn nailed him on all counts. I couldn't tell you how any of it was done. How did he keep the glass levitated? (It showed it from side-view and I didn't see anything holding it.)

Brent Braun: I watched the deck toss several times and still couldn't catch him dropping the deck. Even so, I don't see how he arrived at the right card at the end. Couldn't the guy have named any number?

Chris Rose: Simon says. I found this really entertaining because of Teller and Alyson's reactions. I went back after Penn declared he had "fooled" them and saw Chris sneak another cookie in his mouth via the napkin. Really obvious once you know what to look for. I don't know how Teller could have thought it was the same cookie because he had doused the first one in milk and the second one was almost completely dry (except for saliva).

Charles Bach: Popping balloons. I thought he might have had a bike pump under his sleeve or something, but that doesn't explain how the balloon floated in the end. I'm curious what Teller said to him after Charles said "There is no helium tank."

Last edited by cluck; 09-15-2016 at 05:40 AM.
#1083
Old 09-15-2016, 07:00 AM
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 14,499
Quote:
Originally Posted by cluck View Post
Chris Rose: Simon says. I found this really entertaining because of Teller and Alyson's reactions. I went back after Penn declared he had "fooled" them and saw Chris sneak another cookie in his mouth via the napkin. Really obvious once you know what to look for.
The hilarious part is, Penn apparently figured, I see that Teller can almost pocket the cookie in his mouth, and you've got a bigger mouth than he does, so, yeah; I guess you're just doing something that other people can do, because you've practiced it and have a big mouth. And the reply was, nope, fooled you!

Can you imagine that happening every week? Someone performs a mundane feat that a juggler or contortionist or whatever can duplicate with ordinary skill -- and Penn of course mentions it, only to be told, nope, I used a trick!

"I liked the bit where you flipped the bottle around, like Tom Cruise in COCKTAIL."
"He was good at that! I'm not! [jazz hands] MAGIC! [/jazz hands]"
#1084
Old 09-15-2016, 10:31 AM
Guest
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 64
Wine glasses guy was good even if you know the moves. The glasses had tops of them and were divided into halves for the colour changes. Still I liked it. Very theatric.

Deck guy has the really obvious dropped deck. There must be a better way to do that? So it's a rigged deck in some way but I have no clue how he gets to the right number.

The cookie guy was really neat. I liked the routine although I dunno how P&T missed the napkin. Probably just over thinking it.

I loved the popping balloon guy. Not a clue on how he did it. Looking at how he rips the box, it looks like it has no back but how he gets the balloon inflated I haven't the foggiest.

P&T do the classic newspaper rip. Mostly just an excuse for Penn to probably comment on the news of the day.

Last edited by numeroussyrup; 09-15-2016 at 10:34 AM.
#1085
Old 09-15-2016, 10:46 AM
Guest
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: rhode island
Posts: 37,358
I liked seeing the wine glasses, once upon a time commonly done, not seem much anymore. The balloons have me stumped at the moment, but even P&T had to guess to get it. The card guy did his thing well but it was rather obvious that it was a force. Still, as P&T said he really did get to the audience with it.
#1086
Old 09-15-2016, 11:19 AM
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 14,499
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriPolar View Post
The balloons have me stumped at the moment, but even P&T had to guess to get it.
I'm just guessing, but -- there's no obvious reason not to give the balloon to Teller, right? Sure, he cuts it loose so it can float up to the ceiling and show that it is in fact a float-up-to-the-ceiling balloon, but handing it over would've done that too. So he presumably didn't want them inspecting that balloon, or what trails from it.

Here's where I maybe go wrong: if the box had various balloons, which got remotely deflated one-by-one during the trick, then it's the work of a moment to, like, fasten the sticky end of the 'leash' to the one balloon left -- and show it from a distance before snipping to send the balloon and part of the 'leash' away.

We know he can remotely deflate balloons; we see him do it, during the trick. If the deflated ones are stuck to the inside of one of the box's flat pieces at the end, would we see them? If he palmed the empties when reaching in for the inflated one, would we see that? (If he had a hidden helium tank like P&T first assumed, wouldn't he still have to palm the right empty one in, or palm the wrong empty one out -- or have the empty ones hidden by an uninspected flat piece, at the end?)

Like I said, I'm not sure about the rest -- but why else snip the 'leash'? If you didn't need to snip the leash, then why the heck would you do it?
#1087
Old 09-15-2016, 11:47 AM
Guest
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: rhode island
Posts: 37,358
Yes, I'm sure cutting the string was important, or not. I began to think there were multiple concentric balloons and he pops the outer ones until he gets to the right color somehow, have to logic it out when I'm not busy. Reminds of P&T trick with Teller in a big bag they fill with helium and he steps out of the bag without bursting it. Of course there are two bags, the inner one gets filled with helium, Teller only has to step out from the outer one and it still looks inflated. Anyway, clever trick, and there aren't many P&T have never seen before.

Also baffled by cookie guy, how could they miss the napkin? I guess they stopped looking after he spit out the milk, they thought the act was over.
#1088
Old 09-15-2016, 09:29 PM
Guest
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by cluck View Post
S03E12
Chris Rose: Simon says. I found this really entertaining because of Teller and Alyson's reactions. I went back after Penn declared he had "fooled" them and saw Chris sneak another cookie in his mouth via the napkin. Really obvious once you know what to look for. I don't know how Teller could have thought it was the same cookie because he had doused the first one in milk and the second one was almost completely dry (except for saliva).
I watched the napkin part again and I think you are right about the napkin, but Teller was looking right at him, there is no way he would've not see him put the cookie in his mouth.
#1089
Old 09-15-2016, 09:32 PM
Charter Member
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: 地球
Posts: 27,255
Quote:
Originally Posted by HammerJoe View Post
I watched the napkin part again and I think you are right about the napkin, but Teller was looking right at him, there is no way he would've not see him put the cookie in his mouth.
Rewatched. He just popped it in with the napkin. They just missed it.
#1090
Old 09-15-2016, 09:56 PM
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,898
I guess the guy had the nail up in there the whole time?
#1091
Old 09-15-2016, 10:19 PM
Charter Member
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: 地球
Posts: 27,255
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombywoof View Post
I guess the guy had the nail up in there the whole time?
Yeah, I guess. Just a sinus thing.
#1092
Old 09-16-2016, 02:05 AM
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Great Unwashed View Post
A) I think what may be telling is that Farquhar's glasses can be seen in some shots to be not lens-free -- is there the same glasses gag in Kramer's version?

B) Otherwise, you know "the blank deck" effect? It's possible his book is just a version of that trick.
We talked about Farquhar's trick at length earlier. #1, he sells the trick which is how she and others have the same Holmes book. #2, my recollection is that the multi-page thread on a magic site about the trick indicates that you require nothing more than the book to perform the trick.
#1093
Old 09-16-2016, 02:13 AM
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by cluck View Post
S03E11

Christopher Tracy and Jim Leach: aka Hal & Kellar. An iPad in a prediction envelope is not exactly impressive, but I guess the real trick lies in the way the cards were shuffled. A quick search on Simon Aronson pulled up this result.
Yep, just another seemingly amazing trick that just comes down to math/a certain permutations of moves.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cluck View Post
Neil Croswell: Girl in the red and blue dress. Penn mentions Jim Steinmeyer in reference to how he made the girl disappear (even with 360 camera view), but if she wasn't wearing the striped dress underneath her clothes, what exactly was the alternative that Teller drew?
Penn said some word ("under-dressed") that suggested to me that the assistant was wearing the blue and red dress under her original outfit. I assume the drawing has to do with where the assistant went during the trick (was she once again under the floor, or is there something else to this particular trick?)

Quote:
Originally Posted by cluck View Post
Ben Young: Predicting the eggshell. I think Ben fidgeting with the phone ahead of time (and miming the selfie) telegraphed what he was doing. I looked up Teller's "toxic" hint and came across this iteration of the trick (+ 0 x). The egg was a nice touch.
He worked too hard to prep Penn's phone. Particularly the selfie that didn't come into play. Not sure why he had to go landscape (the scientific calculator shouldn't be any more useful than the regular one for this trick). Since the final number is "eggshells" (577345663) every time, the fix is clearly in. P&Ts fixation on non-random numbers (when he asked for random to obviously make his manipulation less obvious) makes it easier to spot since the number he ends up with isn't divisible by 666 or 6666. As you point out, via one method or another, he pre-programmed the calculator so that their inputs wouldn't matter.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cluck View Post
Henok: The exotic ethnic guy. I'm getting tired of tricks with a "prediction envelope" punchline because it seems like there's only one or two methods and it's always done the same way. That being said, I don't know exactly how confabulation works, but I agree with Penn that its presentation was well done.
I hear you on prediction people, but he was good. He was pretty good at hiding it, but he held his clipboard very close to his waist and himself at all times which was suspicious. The final paper clearly had the responses penciled in in a messier handwriting afterwards (obviously because he was writing them down while standing on his clipboard. I didn't see the move to slip the prediction into the envelope, but that's a minor triviality.
#1094
Old 09-16-2016, 02:29 AM
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by cluck View Post
S03E12

Joseph Reohm: Colorful wine glasses. Fun to watch, but Penn nailed him on all counts. I couldn't tell you how any of it was done. How did he keep the glass levitated? (It showed it from side-view and I didn't see anything holding it.)
I was very impressed. I love this kind of stuff because I know there are moves and I can often see some of them (see him holding the rim of a glass under his napkin, but still impresses what ends up coming out from underneath. I can't tell you much on technique but I don't care. Impressive physical skill. Penn referenced a turntable as at least one relevant method. I'm sure the various techniques involved here are well decorated.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cluck View Post
Brent Braun: I watched the deck toss several times and still couldn't catch him dropping the deck. Even so, I don't see how he arrived at the right card at the end. Couldn't the guy have named any number?
The deck toss was an obvious ploy to suggest free choice, but to really succeed, he'd have had to ask Penn to select a deck from the stage. One does not go through all that effort to distribute dozens of decks that the audience randomizes unless you're overcompensating to try to prove that a non-random deck is a random deck. Penn references "in decks" i.e. an index, so the suggestion is that after she mentioned the name of the card, he planted the correct card out of an index? I'm not sure why he needed a planted deck for this trick or an index. She had him re-cut the cards, so it doesn't seem like a force (unless he had multiple outs), so I'm a touch confused.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cluck View Post
Chris Rose: Simon says. I found this really entertaining because of Teller and Alyson's reactions. I went back after Penn declared he had "fooled" them and saw Chris sneak another cookie in his mouth via the napkin. Really obvious once you know what to look for. I don't know how Teller could have thought it was the same cookie because he had doused the first one in milk and the second one was almost completely dry (except for saliva).
This one was most disappointing. A truly obvious method that P&T just missed because they weren't expecting there to be another move. Had they known there'd be a trick there, they've have caught it without a doubt.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cluck View Post
Charles Bach: Popping balloons. I thought he might have had a bike pump under his sleeve or something, but that doesn't explain how the balloon floated in the end. I'm curious what Teller said to him after Charles said "There is no helium tank."
Love this trick. Did he have an assistant popping the self-popping balloons backstage? Penn suggests free choice, so is it coincidence that the first balloon popped was uneventful and that all the subsequent ones have gimmicks? (the ungimmicked one would logically be the first). Teller had the option to pick from two and he could have popped the orange one no matter what Penn said. Charles told him to pick one for Teller. If Penn picked yellow, he could have said "you picked the yellow one for teller, so let's get rid of the orange one.

His comment about a heliuim tank suggests that perhaps there are 9 balloons in the box and somehow the relevant coloured one was inflated at the last minute and attached to string (again, teller felt an inflated balood before the trick though). Trap door in the table and an assistant underneath loads the relevant balloon into the box from below?)
#1095
Old 09-16-2016, 02:33 AM
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by numeroussyrup View Post
guy was really neat. I liked the routine although I dunno how P&T missed the napkin. Probably just over thinking it.
They didn't expect a trick to occur and so weren't looking for a move at that moment. The genius of the trick (I didn't love this guy's performance style at all btw) was that the load was in a napkin and the wiping his mouth with the napkin after spitting milk was a very honest and believable move that wouldn't strike anyone as done for a magic purpose, but just to wipe his mouth. Most magic moves are spotted because there's no good reason for the move (hand in pocket or behind back - no reason for your hand to be there). The napkin was totally natural to use at that moment because of the milk spit.
#1096
Old 09-16-2016, 04:17 AM
Guest
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheHYPO View Post
They didn't expect a trick to occur and so weren't looking for a move at that moment. The genius of the trick (I didn't love this guy's performance style at all btw) was that the load was in a napkin and the wiping his mouth with the napkin after spitting milk was a very honest and believable move that wouldn't strike anyone as done for a magic purpose, but just to wipe his mouth. Most magic moves are spotted because there's no good reason for the move (hand in pocket or behind back - no reason for your hand to be there). The napkin was totally natural to use at that moment because of the milk spit.
I would agree with you, but Teller is looking right at the guy as he does it. Given how observant P&T are, you would think that this should send huge signals.

His style was a bit dry but the routine is great. I don't think I've ever seen a "follow me" type routine before and I think it's a great idea. Really can have fun with people with a bit of magic.
#1097
Old 09-16-2016, 05:00 AM
Guest
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by numeroussyrup View Post
I would agree with you, but Teller is looking right at the guy as he does it. Given how observant P&T are, you would think that this should send huge signals.
This is the moment where it happens. Teller was so busy hamming up his performance at the milk gag, he didn't even notice the load (or see it coming). He looks away right as Chris brings the napkin down (and we can clearly see he's holding something in his mouth). Missed it by that much.
#1098
Old 09-16-2016, 10:46 AM
Guest
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by cluck View Post
This is the moment where it happens. Teller was so busy hamming up his performance at the milk gag, he didn't even notice the load (or see it coming). He looks away right as Chris brings the napkin down (and we can clearly see he's holding something in his mouth). Missed it by that much.
I wonder what Penn was looking at. But given the name of the show, the milk gag most likely fooled both of them, so that counts right?
#1099
Old 09-16-2016, 11:12 AM
Guest
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: rhode island
Posts: 37,358
Quote:
Originally Posted by numeroussyrup View Post
I wonder what Penn was looking at. But given the name of the show, the milk gag most likely fooled both of them, so that counts right?
Not that type of fooling. It's not a matter of them knowing what happens next. They knew how he did the milk thing after it was done.
#1100
Old 09-16-2016, 12:48 PM
Guest
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 10
Unlurking for a moment ... We did calculator gags like this when I was in high school (oh, so long ago). Calculators have a memory store/memory recall button. You can enter a number, and retrieve it with a button press. To recreate the trick, all you would have to do when you borrow the phone is enter the final result and store it. Then, you do the two random number things, and then when the last number is entered, you'd do the memory recall to display the pre-stored number.

Had P&T chosen "random" numbers like "10000" and "10" it would have been very obvious, since there is no way a 2 digit number would not end in 00000 ;-) Since we don't know what number she selected, no one is the wiser.
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:30 AM.

Copyright © 2017
Best Topics: artichoke haircut style guitar case lock overdose antibiotic alexandra nickname ball kicking stories buckled hat spell wrongly nicotine patch expiration northwest arrow silver tarnishes west wing psychiatrist grape coke drano burn trumpet cheeks dsl vs t1 ma and paw stupid pollock qvc alberti stretch wool dating message boards kava root high koogle peanut butter pu stink les nessman office turntable slows down bachelorette blowjobs trailer trash hooker plugged ringing ear texas dealer tag excel consulting rates stefnie duck kamikaze pronunciation selling herbalife large female hands end of bed chests athletes foot cream not working do twins have the same size genitalia making a box spring 2010 hyundai santa fe door lock actuator novels by john steinbeck can your high school diploma be revoked what does oz stand for glasses coating coming off why do people hate creed how long to get a social security card replaced vegas call girl cards what does white pepper taste like songs like i will follow you into the dark funny sounding body parts is the chicago citypass worth it how much is two bits worth bart simpson i am so great books on codes and ciphers roto rooter pipe shield review target vs walmart vs kmart how much does a new cessna 172 cost hard vein in arm after iv drug use 3 audio jack to 1 are apartments cheaper than dorms is saturday a business day for amazon what does ky jelly mean what happens when you get a warning for speeding name something you might find in a haunted house advil liquid gel vs tablet bouncing ball with handle tonsil stones stuck in throat spanish word for socks can dwarfs have babies can a big dog mate with a small dog