Thread Tools
Old 08-22-2015, 11:31 PM
Charter Member
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: 地球
Posts: 27,308
Quote:
Originally Posted by glee View Post
I repeat that he can do any card in the deck (no force necessary), there is a single deck of almost all 'blank' cards (no extra cards are used) and that the trick requires some skill to perform.
Cool, and I would love to buy 2.0 if the price comes down to $25 or less.
Old 08-23-2015, 10:39 AM
Guest
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 1
Re: Shawn Farquhar

These screen grabs from youtube should give a little more insight into how Shawn does the trick.

http://i.imgur.com/VkDYv8j.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/XR0Vvx2.jpg
Old 08-23-2015, 10:52 AM
Charter Member
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Near Philadelphia PA, USA
Posts: 11,300
Quote:
Originally Posted by gth853g View Post
These screen grabs from youtube should give a little more insight into how Shawn does the trick.

http://i.imgur.com/VkDYv8j.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/XR0Vvx2.jpg
Yeah. You can see him fiddling with the box (which he's pretending is a deck) even without looking at individual frames. The question is, how does he get the card into the right spot in the deck?
Old 08-23-2015, 11:33 AM
Guest
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: rhode island
Posts: 37,504
I'll have to watch it again, but last time I looked I thought Penn may have pulled the card from a fresh deck instead of the one he shuffled. So Shawn just had to hold that spot to re-insert the card.
Old 08-24-2015, 03:34 AM
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irishman View Post

Wes Barker was entertaining. [...] But it's really simple, so simple I had to study for a while to get it.

SPOILER:
The only person that looks at the page number on the sword is Wes. Even Jonathan is too far away to see it, and Wes quickly drops it right after the reveal, before Jonathan thinks to look over and try to look at the page himself.
This makes perfect sense... it just has a bit of a risk factor in the event that the page the volunteer stops at has a particularly distinctive advertisement or something recognizable... A way around this may be not to let them see the back side of the stabbed page very well and they'd assume it was that one - the fact that he reads the page numbers in order might reveal that if the front page should be the right one, but most casual audience members not knowing where the trick is going might not think fast enough to notice.
Old 08-24-2015, 04:54 AM
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidm View Post
I have to wonder about how well card tricks do in a Vegas theater, which is where they'll be appearing if they fool P&T. Card tricks are better close up rather than in a large theater.

Of course, just because they do a card trick for TV it doesn't mean they have to do one for the live show.
I don't know if they still say the premise of the show during the intros (I tune out or fastforward), but I believe the original UK show suggested they would go to Vegas to perform the same trick. I think they may have also shown some of the acts actually fulfilling this by doing the trick in vegas, but maybe I'm imagining that.

I was surprised that this show is shot at the P&T theater (which I assume is the theater they do their own vegas show). The audience shots don't make the place look very large and I'd assume an act like P&T would have a fairly large theater (that said, I haven't been to a Vegas show in a couple of decades so maybe the rooms are smaller than I think)
Old 08-24-2015, 05:10 AM
Guest
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Obama country
Posts: 14,969
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheHYPO View Post
I don't know if they still say the premise of the show during the intros (I tune out or fastforward), but I believe the original UK show suggested they would go to Vegas to perform the same trick. I think they may have also shown some of the acts actually fulfilling this by doing the trick in vegas, but maybe I'm imagining that.

I was surprised that this show is shot at the P&T theater (which I assume is the theater they do their own vegas show). The audience shots don't make the place look very large and I'd assume an act like P&T would have a fairly large theater (that said, I haven't been to a Vegas show in a couple of decades so maybe the rooms are smaller than I think)
Yes, the original UK show said the successful acts would go to Vegas.

The Penn + Teller theatre is part of the Rio casino and seats 1,475 people.
I've been to two Penn and Teller shows on my visits to Vegas and they only had a couple of tricks in common. The theatre was very comfortable, the magic was stupendous and there was a Penn and Teller 'meet + greet' afterwards (yes, Teller will then talk to you!)
Old 08-24-2015, 06:12 AM
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 83
Edit: sorry for the long post. This episode got my mind running.

Quote:
Originally Posted by glee View Post
Yes, the original UK show said the successful acts would go to Vegas.
But I thought it might have been more specific that they would go to vegas to perform the same trick that fooled P&T. Maybe not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hentor the Barbarian View Post
I just watched the commercial for the watch again. The hands say 3:05 the whole time. He just holds it upside down the first time (and says 3:15 when the hands look more like 3:35), holds it sideways and says 12:20, which it looks like sideways (but not from it's proper orientation), and then does the trick to result in 3:05.

The guy on Penn & Teller may have thought that was too obvious, but it would have been better to go for that rather than to never show the face at the beginning.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I think the time the watch shows is 9:15, not 3:15 (which would be both hands pointed just about to the right).

The commercial is grossly misleading because at the end in the text it suggests the watch can be set to ANY time. If the hands are inked, this would appear to be BS - unless you do draw the hands on yourself and so you can (one time only) select whatever time you want the hands to be at.

But the fact that this guy argued if the gimmick is ink hands is such ridiculous BS. Penn basically said (after the guy pressed him) that this could not be done with any old watch and that spinning the dials did not set the time and that ink that sense, it was a gimmicked watch (i.e. not a retail normal watch. On what planet does this guy argue that watch with no functionality and drawn on hands that use disappearing ink is NOT a gimmicked watch?

There was a guy on America's Got Talent that went viral with a video of him doing a card trick where the reveal is that the deck is actually a "flipbook" animation of a stick figure pulling a card from his top hat and the last card reveals the chosen card (as picked by the flipbook magician).

I subsequently discovered that this trick is a retail trick (as far as I know, the guy on the show was not the guy selling it). So a guy showed up on AGT with a storebought gimmick that practically makes the trick (similar to the watch guy) and that just pissed me off about as much as the Grappler which I posted about previously. This watch guy annoys me in the same way.

He indicated he was a resident magician at the magic castle, but he seemed very unpracticed in his presentation (all three of the other performers on the latest episode had wonderful stage presence and charismatic and smooth presentations. This guy seemed clunky and awkward and I'm surprised (without knowing that much about the magic castle) that he would be a regularly practicing magician with that weak a stage presence. Confidence is key to good presentation, in my view. Even coming down to little things like not having a nice way to demonstrate to Pegg how to hold his hands so that he has to correct Pegg to hold them vertically. It just screams of amateur. A polished magician would have some way to demonstrate how he wants the hands. The whole trick was terrible though, not just the use of a gimmick. The use of the manila envelope (a magic prop that just seems amateur to me no matter who uses it) and a photocopied paper watch face on which he drew really childish watch hands... the outfit which was cumbersome for no reason (at least not for this trick - no hidden props as far as I could tell), and the completely gimmicky satchel of that does nothing more than prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the time was a force (since the coins were clearly prepared in advance, and it would be pretty unlikely and boring for the guy to produce period coins totaling $12.36 if that time came up). His reveal of the coins was painfully slow too given that as soon as money came up, you know what it would total. I don't like to be mean to someone who is clearly trying and who, I'm sure still has more skill than I would if I tried magic (I have terrible manual dexterity), but this one was bad on all levels. Kudos to the guy for his military service, but that doesn't make him a good magician.

While I'm on the subject of presentation, confetti guy had a beautiful presentation. He needs to work on his manipulation thought, because every time he went into the hat (particularly the first time), it did seem pretty clear he was manipulating pockets or a bundle in some way to access each colour of confetti (I agree with person here who posted that everything is preloaded into the hat into separate compartments - I don't believe there is any load from his jacket when he grabs the wand). The "mistake", as penn points out, allows him to dump all of the original mixed confetti so the hat will be empty at the end and it would be a lame trick for that reason if the presentation wasn't wonderful.

If you don't know, the original magic sand trick has water poured into a bowl that quickly turns black - sand of different colours are poured into the water and swished around and the magician then reaches in and pulls out handfuls of sand, each colour separated. This trick is a more mysterious effect as to how someone could separate grains of sand in a liquid compared to confetti in a hat. The original trick also does not require dumping the mixed sand - the trick is chemical and the sands basically stay separated in the black liquid (which conceals the sand).

If this guy was better at reaching in and cleanly grabbing each confetti pile as well as he grabs the green batch (the only colour left at that point), it would be a better illusion, but great presentation anyway. It's a shame the "mistake" is needed because from the magic POV, it does take away from the impression that he really did sort the original confetti, and moves it more into the realm of his can just magically produce confetti from the hat, which has a bit less of the sense of wonder than if he actually does seem to sort the confetti in an instant - that's what the original trick has in spades.

Last edited by TheHYPO; 08-24-2015 at 06:13 AM.
Old 08-24-2015, 07:14 AM
Guest
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Obama country
Posts: 14,969
Quote:
Originally Posted by glee View Post
Yes, the original UK show said the successful acts would go to Vegas.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheHYPO View Post
But I thought it might have been more specific that they would go to vegas to perform the same trick that fooled P&T. Maybe not.
They did do the same trick!
Old 08-24-2015, 07:27 AM
Charter Member
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 7,130
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheHYPO View Post
On what planet does this guy argue that watch with no functionality and drawn on hands that use disappearing ink is NOT a gimmicked watch?
He wasn't arguing that. He was saying that since it was obvious the watch was gimmicked in some way, merely saying the watch is gimmicked wasn't enough to be unfooled. He probably thought he had some unique way of gimmicking the watch that could fool P&T but evidently, he didn't.
Old 08-24-2015, 09:32 AM
Guest
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 14,014
NM

Last edited by Clothahump; 08-24-2015 at 09:33 AM.
Old 08-24-2015, 10:34 AM
Charter Member
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Near Philadelphia PA, USA
Posts: 11,300
Quote:
Originally Posted by glee View Post
Yes, the original UK show said the successful acts would go to Vegas.

The Penn + Teller theatre is part of the Rio casino and seats 1,475 people.
I've been to two Penn and Teller shows on my visits to Vegas and they only had a couple of tricks in common. The theatre was very comfortable, the magic was stupendous and there was a Penn and Teller 'meet + greet' afterwards (yes, Teller will then talk to you!)
They still do the meet and greet? Wow. I met them twice in Philly when they did that (for The Refrigerator Tour and the tour with Mofo The Psychic Gorilla and, as you say, Teller does talk). I would have thought that they would have given that up once they became Vegas regulars. Meeting and greeting over a thousand people after every show day after day seems like a great trick by itself!
Old 08-24-2015, 02:55 PM
Charter Member
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Med city USA
Posts: 1,871
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheHYPO View Post
<snip> While I'm on the subject of presentation, confetti guy had a beautiful presentation. He needs to work on his manipulation thought, because every time he went into the hat (particularly the first time), it did seem pretty clear he was manipulating pockets or a bundle in some way to access each colour of confetti (I agree with person here who posted that everything is preloaded into the hat into separate compartments - I don't believe there is any load from his jacket when he grabs the wand). The "mistake", as penn points out, allows him to dump all of the original mixed confetti so the hat will be empty at the end and it would be a lame trick for that reason if the presentation wasn't wonderful.

If you don't know, the original magic sand trick has water poured into a bowl that quickly turns black - sand of different colours are poured into the water and swished around and the magician then reaches in and pulls out handfuls of sand, each colour separated. This trick is a more mysterious effect as to how someone could separate grains of sand in a liquid compared to confetti in a hat. The original trick also does not require dumping the mixed sand - the trick is chemical and the sands basically stay separated in the black liquid (which conceals the sand).

If this guy was better at reaching in and cleanly grabbing each confetti pile as well as he grabs the green batch (the only colour left at that point), it would be a better illusion, but great presentation anyway. It's a shame the "mistake" is needed because from the magic POV, it does take away from the impression that he really did sort the original confetti, and moves it more into the realm of his can just magically produce confetti from the hat, which has a bit less of the sense of wonder than if he actually does seem to sort the confetti in an instant - that's what the original trick has in spades.
Was the original, mixed confetti going into the hat a mistake? I could see how he could have just pocketed it in his coat and pull out the different colors, so I wonder if he realized after the first color that he had accidentally thrown the original batch into the hat and covered for it with the magic wand. Penn said something about quick thinking when a mistake was made; I assume that was it.
Old 08-24-2015, 03:05 PM
Guest
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: rhode island
Posts: 37,504
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnGalt View Post
Was the original, mixed confetti going into the hat a mistake? I could see how he could have just pocketed it in his coat and pull out the different colors, so I wonder if he realized after the first color that he had accidentally thrown the original batch into the hat and covered for it with the magic wand. Penn said something about quick thinking when a mistake was made; I assume that was it.
I'd have to watch again, but I though 'the mistake' was forgetting to use the wand so the colors didn't change, which was part of the routine. I think this was more of a mime act than magic since there's nothing all that mysterious about the effect. He was pretty good, but seemed a little bit nervous, perhaps his biggest stage so far, and he seemed to have his 'reactions' timed instead of waiting to sync with the audience. It's better magic for a kid's show than some of the acts I've seen done for that purpose, and as a mime better than watching some robot moves or the tired old Marceau moves.
Old 08-24-2015, 03:18 PM
Guest
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 23,450
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnGalt View Post
Was the original, mixed confetti going into the hat a mistake? I could see how he could have just pocketed it in his coat and pull out the different colors, so I wonder if he realized after the first color that he had accidentally thrown the original batch into the hat and covered for it with the magic wand. Penn said something about quick thinking when a mistake was made; I assume that was it.
It's a fake mistake. He "forgets" to use the magic wand, so the confetti doesn't change color, which allows him to discard the real confetti. Thus Penn's comment about getting rid of the evidence "with a mistake." Of course, it's a double misdirection. The audience knows it's not really a mistake, because it's actually a joke!
Old 08-24-2015, 03:45 PM
Member
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Santa Clara, CA
Posts: 11,316
Quote:
Originally Posted by friedo View Post
It's a fake mistake. He "forgets" to use the magic wand, so the confetti doesn't change color, which allows him to discard the real confetti. Thus Penn's comment about getting rid of the evidence "with a mistake." Of course, it's a double misdirection. The audience knows it's not really a mistake, because it's actually a joke!
That does bring up an interesting question... what would happen if, during the filming, the performer just totally and completely flubbed the trick? Would they still broadcast it? Edit out entirely? Or give the performer a chance to try it again later?
Old 08-24-2015, 04:14 PM
Charter Member
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: 地球
Posts: 27,308
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxTheVool View Post
That does bring up an interesting question... what would happen if, during the filming, the performer just totally and completely flubbed the trick? Would they still broadcast it? Edit out entirely? Or give the performer a chance to try it again later?
Edit it out is my guess, however I don't believe this has occurred since they show the producers before hand. If they are so bad as to mess it up on stage, they should not be there.

Kostya Kimalat did say, though, that it is very disorienting to be on stage when the trick begins. He, of course, had a card trick. Once he got it going, it went smoothly.
Old 08-24-2015, 05:19 PM
Member
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Santa Clara, CA
Posts: 11,316
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahaloth View Post
Edit it out is my guess, however I don't believe this has occurred since they show the producers before hand.
Right, which makes it more likely for me that they'd allow them a second shot, since they've presumably already proven that they have a great trick there.
Old 08-24-2015, 06:00 PM
Guest
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Houston, TX, USA
Posts: 12,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheHYPO View Post
But the fact that this guy argued if the gimmick is ink hands is such ridiculous BS. Penn basically said (after the guy pressed him) that this could not be done with any old watch and that spinning the dials did not set the time and that ink that sense, it was a gimmicked watch (i.e. not a retail normal watch. On what planet does this guy argue that watch with no functionality and drawn on hands that use disappearing ink is NOT a gimmicked watch?
As Shalmanese said, it's about the specific gimmick. Look at John Archer - he had a gimmicked envelope. He made Penn guess at the specific gimmick, and Penn guessed wrong. Someone else won by the words "false shuffle". I think is totally fair for him to push for more specifics than "gimmicked watch".

For example, let's consider a watch where the stem is disconnected and the face can be rotated and set the mechanical hands. That would be a very different gimmick that will allow setting any time, but then you need a different means for making the hands disappear.

Penn went vague and the judge decided that didn't matter, the prop was a commercial item that they were familiar with, so don't push the specific point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheHYPO View Post
There was a guy on America's Got Talent that went viral with a video of him doing a card trick where the reveal is that the deck is actually a "flipbook" animation of a stick figure pulling a card from his top hat and the last card reveals the chosen card (as picked by the flipbook magician).

I subsequently discovered that this trick is a retail trick (as far as I know, the guy on the show was not the guy selling it). So a guy showed up on AGT with a storebought gimmick that practically makes the trick (similar to the watch guy) and that just pissed me off about as much as the Grappler which I posted about previously. This watch guy annoys me in the same way.
But his deck was not the store-bought version, it was hand drawn. Copying someone else's trick with your own prop and banter is common.


Quote:
If this guy was better at reaching in and cleanly grabbing each confetti pile as well as he grabs the green batch (the only colour left at that point), it would be a better illusion, but great presentation anyway. It's a shame the "mistake" is needed because from the magic POV, it does take away from the impression that he really did sort the original confetti, and moves it more into the realm of his can just magically produce confetti from the hat, which has a bit less of the sense of wonder than if he actually does seem to sort the confetti in an instant - that's what the original trick has in spades.
Yes, while it empties the hat, he could just as easily put them in one of the pouches. It removes a joke, but improves the illusion of the sorting. I think the reason he doesn't is the orange. He would have to gather all the bits around that object in the way. Too easy to miss some.



Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnGalt View Post
Was the original, mixed confetti going into the hat a mistake?
No, the "mistake" was forgetting the wand so he could dump or the hat.

Quote:
Penn said something about quick thinking when a mistake was made; I assume that was it.
I think what he said was something about it was a nice way to cover that he doesn't actually sort. He was masking his meaning.

Spesking of that, I like that he elaborated on the premise that they talk in code so people who just want to enjoy the performances without spoilers can do so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TriPolar View Post
It's better magic for a kid's show than some of the acts I've seen done for that purpose, and as a mime better than watching some robot moves or the tired old Marceau moves.
There is that.
Old 08-25-2015, 02:21 AM
Guest
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 82
8/24/15 - Teller Plays With A Full Deck

1. The "Dollar" Guy - Okay, the guy is clearly playing with a gimmicked buck. Even my untrained eyes saw that he gave the audience guy's dollar bill right back to him. Like Penn said, he knew the move, but the stitches were smooth.

2. The "Blindfold" Guy - Fooled the guys, although they definitely had four ideas how he could have done it (they just picked the wrong one). They mention a deck switch, but weren't the cards always blank the whole time? They're never shown face up until the very end. I get the feeling they knew what was going on, but picked up on the wrong thing. Perhaps just a technicality.

3. The "Knot" Guy - This guy was a talker, which always throws me for a loop. I can't keep up with what he's saying and what's going on at the same time. I think I saw at least one move where he undid the knot, so it's basically just sleight of hand, like he says (and could have easily been guessed). Which really isn't fair, he seems doomed from the start.

4. The "Jesus" Guy - I liked this guy more as a comedian than a magician. He commanded the room and was genuinely funny. Penn mentions Tommy Wonder and his "Hold Up" trick. A quick google search, and it also seems to involve the watch, ring and wallet. Another "old" trick doomed from the get go.

5. The "Teller" Guy - This routine went on a bit too long for me. It was obviously complex and had lots of moving parts, I just couldn't focus on what Penn was saying and what Teller was doing at the same time. But it's obviously a very skilled presentation from two seasoned professionals (although the camera angles give away some of Teller's moves).

Anyone know if next week's ep is the season finale? (That would make it 9 episodes, same as the first season.)
Old 08-25-2015, 02:26 AM
Guest
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Houston, TX, USA
Posts: 12,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheHYPO View Post
. the outfit which was cumbersome for no reason (at least not for this trick - no hidden props as far as I could tell),
The costume was Victorian, a stylistic choice for flair not actually contributing to this trick, except for the monetary tie in that wasn't particularly useful. It's basically he's a neoVictorian or steampunk or whatever look. Not necessary, merely creating his unique character of his act.

This week: four more contestants.

1. Blake Vogt - This guy proves they don't declare people foolers just because the skill level is impressive or P&T can't duplicate it. Something was definitely off in the linking rings, which was quickly evident - flat, not round. The trick itself was tearing a dollar bill to make two halves as two rings, and then doing linking ring trick. Now it is clear that he really does tear one ring and do pass throughs, and I saw a few places of his handling. It would be a lot easier to see from where Penn and Teller are sitting, as some of the moves the camera panned back to do a wide shot. It also didn't help him that he's shown Penn and Teller a lot of tricks. But the real trick is not the ring handling, but rather the reassembly of the rings in the linked form in such a way that the tear is undetectable even under close inspection. I don't know what adhesive he uses or how he gets it so cleanly aligned - practice, of course. But not fooled.

2. Joshua Jay - This trick starts out interesting - the idea of doing a magic trick for a blind person. Except his trick wouldn't work if the blind person is the audience, because the can't confirm the cards or see the trick. Anyway, this trick seems impressive, except I saw a video not long ago (that I am sure I posted somewhere on this board, but can't find now) where a guy gives a lengthy story as part of a lecture to high school students. His story in part talks about how he ran into a blind man who asked him to show him a trick. Anyway, he figured a way to do a trick to make the blind man part of the trick rather than the butt of the joke, but it works with the same method used here. For that story, it was interesting and beautiful, but here the method just feels cheap. Are you ready? It's "instant stooge".

I tried to follow the flow, connecting the dialogue to the comments to see how the volunteer would read the remarks, and it's rather extra simple. When he says to Todd something about a code to tell the audience what the cards are, he taps the guy's hands 4 times in an uneven pattern, but clearly 4 times. Then he has the guy count out the number (4), then he assigns a number to each suit and has the guy count out cards to the correct suit (4). Then he just digs through the deck to his one planted 4 of diamonds, and the rest are blanks. Simple set up.

What surprises me is why Penn and Teller thought there was a deck switch. There was no need. Nobody ever sees any of the cards until he does the reveal. Todd picked the card in his head, not seeing anything. The blind person story was just a gimmick to allow the counting of cards rather than looking in the deck.

Anyway, knowing how it's done, I don't care for this trick. I guess they just misremembered something and that's why they needed a deck switch. So he fooled them, but the trick shouldn't have fooled them. They correctly pegged to the signalling and how it communicated the forced card.

3. Levent - No way doing classic tricks gets past these two. Entertaining banter with the knot/not story. As Penn states, he does the same looking trick several different ways, which makes it harder to bust if you expect it to be repeating the samething.

The first is a simple variation on the three rope trick whereby he swaps tied silks for the three he shows are separate in the last quick move, thus having three untied for the second. He then ties those with a loop knot that he then separates as he is setting them down.

Then he takes the knotted ones, sets them down as pulls the slip knots so Jonathan can immediately show them separately.

The tricky one to me is how he gets the second chair to have the three way knot.

The bottle and the bunny come from his pockets, you can tell early there's something there, so the surprise is only in the timing of the reveal, not that something magically appears.

4. Ben Seidman - well-rehearsed talk. I saw him palm something up to his wrist for the watch pull, so fake watch that goes into the envelope and out the bottom. I think that's why the envelope is the size it is, even though it's a bit too small for actually holding that watch convincingly - a bigger envelope makes the holding trickier. The wallet gets swapped as he's putting it into his belt, it goes into the coat and a loaded dupe goes into his belt. The ring goes into and through the envelope, and then he palms it onto his finger while he's throwing the envelope parts. His watch is on his arm the whole time, up the sleeve where it won't be seen until he reveals it. Funny, but not clean.

Given his jacket, I was wondering if he was going to do a costume reveal, but no, he didn't go there. I'm thinking card inside the back of the jacket, or quick change. No, it's just cover for the manipulations.

Penn and Teller's routine is beautiful. Great story, great flow with the cards. Of course the 3 of clubs is a force, probably a short card on the riffle. He palmed in the two Aces on top of the deck when he gets it back from the audience guy.

Ace of Diamonds is electromagnetism, which Teller uses a magnet to hold the Ace of Hearts to secure the stack of cards to his hand (ring).

Ace of Hearts is gravity, and gravity drops the cards.

The Ace of Spades is the Strong interaction via the String interaction. Nice.

That leaves Ace of Clubs as Weak force, using his lips to suck? Or something on the back to grip in his teeth?

Not sure on the count downs. Is it just masking the deck with the way he holds the cards and shows the sixth card each time?

Palms in deck from pocket when turns to the side, not well masked.

How does he pop the 3 up when he pops the balloon? I suppose he could palm out the device when we see the audience clapping.

Then he palms a deck off the back of the chair for the final fountain.
Old 08-25-2015, 02:36 AM
Guest
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Houston, TX, USA
Posts: 12,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by cluck View Post
1. The "Dollar" Guy - Okay, the guy is clearly playing with a gimmicked buck. Even my untrained eyes saw that he gave the audience guy's dollar bill right back to him.
Crap, he did a great job with the misdirect. He does the juggle and pause and the question is to distract enough you lose track which bill was the original. Worked on me.


Quote:
2. The "Blindfold" Guy - Fooled the guys, although they definitely had four ideas how he could have done it (they just picked the wrong one). They mention a deck switch, but weren't the cards always blank the whole time? They're never shown face up until the very end. I get the feeling they knew what was going on, but picked up on the wrong thing. Perhaps just a technicality.
No, there weren't four different ideas. He was using four as a code word. The guy tapped the volunteer's hand 4 times, then has him count down to the number of the card (4), then count down to the number representing the suit (4).

That one is tricky. He did a lot of touching of the guy's arm and whatnot to mask the touches when he says the magic words about "code" that is the clue to the volunteer to pay attention for a code. Then he taps 4 times, so the guy knows 4 is the code.

So deal down the number (4). Now assign a number to each suit, and deal down the number for the suit (4). Now he could either use the same number and hope you don't catch it was 4 both times, or he could try another touch cueing and hope that isn't too obvious.

What fooled them is they for some reason decided there had to be a deck swap, and guessed when and how that occurred, but he didn't do a deck swap, so he won.


Quote:
5. The "Teller" Guy - This routine went on a bit too long for me. It was obviously complex and had lots of moving parts, I just couldn't focus on what Penn was saying and what Teller was doing at the same time. But it's obviously a very skilled presentation from two seasoned professionals (although the camera angles give away some of Teller's moves).
Sometimes it can be hard to follow action and words simultaneously, especially when you're trying to think to study the action for finesse.
Old 08-25-2015, 02:48 AM
Guest
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irishman View Post
No, there weren't four different ideas. He was using four as a code word. The guy tapped the volunteer's hand 4 times, then has him count down to the number of the card (4), then count down to the number representing the suit (4).

That one is tricky. He did a lot of touching of the guy's arm and whatnot to mask the touches when he says the magic words about "code" that is the clue to the volunteer to pay attention for a code. Then he taps 4 times, so the guy knows 4 is the code.

So deal down the number (4). Now assign a number to each suit, and deal down the number for the suit (4). Now he could either use the same number and hope you don't catch it was 4 both times, or he could try another touch cueing and hope that isn't too obvious.
Damn, I didn't pick up on that at all. Those forces always seem so risky. Makes sense, though. In my mind, the final card wasn't necessarily predetermined. I thought maybe he just counted out the silence in his head (when the guys picks the diamond suit, the fourth card down, there's a REALLY long pause which could easily have been guessed). But your idea is much simpler.
Old 08-25-2015, 09:05 AM
Guest
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 302
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irishman View Post
2. Joshua Jay - This trick starts out interesting - the idea of doing a magic trick for a blind person. <snip> For that story, it was interesting and beautiful, but here the method just feels cheap. Are you ready? It's "instant stooge".
After all the quality illusions we've seen all season, I just can't believe P&T or the producers would allow an instant stooge act. I think there are ways this could have been done legitimately.

As Penn said, the deck was never shuffled or handled to start. So say he had a "slick" or otherwise texturally marked card on top AND bottom to start. The volunteer counts cards down to come up with the number the value of the card and puts the deck on top. Then counts cards down again to come up with the suit and puts the cards on top. After both of these moves, the number of cards from the bottom of the deck to the first slick card would give the magician the suit, and number of cards from that slick card to the next would give the value.

You can clearly see the magician discard the top two thirds of the deck and fan through the bottom ones, I think that's what he was doing to figure out the card selected. The tricky part is how he then gets that freely-selected four of diamonds into the deck (which I assume was all blanks the entire time). Some kind of indexed system of cards on his person somewhere? I didn't see him reach into his coat at any point, so that part is what I believe to be what ultimately tricked them.
Old 08-25-2015, 09:12 AM
Guest
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 5,325
Did anyone else think of a card for the Joshua Jay trick? Mine was the 3 of diamonds so that was either a coincidence or I subconsciously picked up on some of the clues, almost.
Old 08-25-2015, 09:14 AM
Charter Member
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Flavortown
Posts: 34,324
The one I found strange was when Penn explained the guy's trick as being done with sleight of hand. Well, yeah, but so are most magic tricks. That shouldn't count as a sufficient explanation to avoid being fooled.
__________________
If you ever drop your keys into a river of molten lava, let 'em go, because man, they're gone. ~~Jack Handey
Old 08-25-2015, 10:47 AM
Guest
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: rhode island
Posts: 37,504
I only got a quick look at the acts, have to re-watch to pick up more details.

I don't see see the need for an instant stooge for the blind trick, there are other means of picking up his counts and then inserting the chosen card into the deck. Don't know why they thought a deck switch was used since we never see the card faces until the end.

Dollar bill guy was good. They knew what he did though because he had shown them before, still great praise at the end. Obviously he used a prepared bill, not the one from the audience. I'd like to find out what he does, though I have a feeling my fat fingers couldn't fool anyone.

Knot guy I've seen before. Good routine but you can't fool P&T with classic acts.

Envelope guy was funny, entertaining, but nothing impressive. His ring restore was very obvious, and of course he just needs a second watch on his arm and a trick wallet or duplicate. He was a bit clumsy with the wallet. Good sound effect device up his sleeve.

The average quality of the acts was pretty high this time. I'm curious if they needed some time to book the better acts on the show. Since it's been renewed the next season could be much better.
Old 08-25-2015, 11:08 AM
Member
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Santa Clara, CA
Posts: 11,316
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joey Tightlips View Post
As Penn said, the deck was never shuffled or handled to start. So say he had a "slick" or otherwise texturally marked card on top AND bottom to start. The volunteer counts cards down to come up with the number the value of the card and puts the deck on top. Then counts cards down again to come up with the suit and puts the cards on top. After both of these moves, the number of cards from the bottom of the deck to the first slick card would give the magician the suit, and number of cards from that slick card to the next would give the value.
I don't _think_ that would work. He was counting from the top of the deck, then put the deck on the pile, then doing that again for the suit. So there would only be one marker card you could count to... no way to distinguish between 4 of clubs and 5 of spades.

But all he needed was a "thumper" (a piece of terminology I learned from this thread) with a confederate offstage, or some way to see through/around the blindfolding),which doesn't seem very difficult, and a pre-indexed deck of cards to pull the chosen card out of while his back is turned, and he's good to go. The initial deck is blank all the time.

I did find it suspicious that he didn't specify what to do for an ace or a face card, which argues for the instant-stooge theory.


The dollar bill trick was pretty amazing, although I agree that it was clearly his bill from the beginning, which was a bit clumsy. But linking them well enough to fool close inspection from P&T is pretty amazing. I thought that was the best trick of the evening.
Old 08-25-2015, 12:18 PM
Guest
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: rhode island
Posts: 37,504
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxTheVool View Post
I don't _think_ that would work. He was counting from the top of the deck, then put the deck on the pile, then doing that again for the suit. So there would only be one marker card you could count to... no way to distinguish between 4 of clubs and 5 of spades.

But all he needed was a "thumper" (a piece of terminology I learned from this thread) with a confederate offstage, or some way to see through/around the blindfolding),which doesn't seem very difficult, and a pre-indexed deck of cards to pull the chosen card out of while his back is turned, and he's good to go. The initial deck is blank all the time.
I have been wondering if there is some way to use touch to detect the selected card, but aside from telling the total based on a special bottom card I'm not sure how that would be done. A peek or offstage help seems more likely. It's a small blindfold, but quite thick. Maybe there's an LED and receiver in it that he can use for the signaling if it's not a more common thumper device. But we didn't see the selection process for the audience member, maybe he was instant stooged at some point.
Old 08-25-2015, 01:17 PM
Guest
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 7,465
Just so I know...what is the difference between an instant stooge and a plant?

One is on purpose (plant) and one is a volunteer that is forced (instant stooge)?

If that's the case, then why aren't we assuming that the guy who the blindfold guy brought up just isn't a plant that knows to say 4 of diamonds?
Old 08-25-2015, 01:51 PM
Guest
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 302
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxTheVool View Post
I don't _think_ that would work.
No, I'm pretty sure it would, although I'm going from memory without the video in front of me. Say he had two texture-marked cards at the beginning of the trick, "T" on top and "B" on bottom. Say the volunteer picks "5", he counts five cards down one by one and puts the deck on top. So now, you have "T" at the bottom, 4 blank cards, then "B" above them.

Repeat the process for suit, say 3 for Clubs. He deals 3 cards one by one from the top. Now at the end of both segments, from the bottom of the deck going up, you have 3 blank cards, then the "T" card, then 4 blank cards, then the "B" card. If you can feel the number of cards counting up from the bottom of the deck to both the "B" and "T" marker cards, you can figure out the selection. The key is that he does both sequences separately, and both times he deals from the TOP of the deck one by one and replaces the deck.

Just in case this is NOT the way the trick was done, I hope one of the real magicians here will use this idea and popularize it as the "Tightlips" method (although I'm sure I'm not the first to think of this).
Old 08-25-2015, 01:59 PM
Guest
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: rhode island
Posts: 37,504
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir T-Cups View Post
Just so I know...what is the difference between an instant stooge and a plant?

One is on purpose (plant) and one is a volunteer that is forced (instant stooge)?

If that's the case, then why aren't we assuming that the guy who the blindfold guy brought up just isn't a plant that knows to say 4 of diamonds?
You have it correctly, the instant stooge is forced, persuaded, or manipulated to do something necessary to make the trick work. We assume that P&T wouldn't allow the magician to pick a plant out of the audience. There was suspicion in the previous season that an instant stooge was used by having him read the desired words from a piece of paper instead of giving an answer based on what he observed.
Old 08-25-2015, 02:28 PM
Member
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Santa Clara, CA
Posts: 11,316
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joey Tightlips View Post
No, I'm pretty sure it would, although I'm going from memory without the video in front of me. Say he had two texture-marked cards at the beginning of the trick, "T" on top and "B" on bottom. Say the volunteer picks "5", he counts five cards down one by one and puts the deck on top. So now, you have "T" at the bottom, 4 blank cards, then "B" above them.

Repeat the process for suit, say 3 for Clubs. He deals 3 cards one by one from the top. Now at the end of both segments, from the bottom of the deck going up, you have 3 blank cards, then the "T" card, then 4 blank cards, then the "B" card. If you can feel the number of cards counting up from the bottom of the deck to both the "B" and "T" marker cards, you can figure out the selection. The key is that he does both sequences separately, and both times he deals from the TOP of the deck one by one and replaces the deck.

Just in case this is NOT the way the trick was done, I hope one of the real magicians here will use this idea and popularize it as the "Tightlips" method (although I'm sure I'm not the first to think of this).
You're right, there's a difference between deal-4-and-put-the-deck-on-them followed by deal-4-and-put-the-deck-on-them vs deal-5-and-put-the-deck-on-them and then deal-3-and-put-the-deck-on-them.
Old 08-25-2015, 02:36 PM
Guest
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nars Glinley View Post
Did anyone else think of a card for the Joshua Jay trick? Mine was the 3 of diamonds so that was either a coincidence or I subconsciously picked up on some of the clues, almost.
I played along at home and I picked the 4 of diamonds. So, I don't know if it was just dumb luck or I legitimately got picked up on something.
Old 08-25-2015, 02:38 PM
Guest
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Houston, TX, USA
Posts: 12,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by cluck View Post
Damn, I didn't pick up on that at all. Those forces always seem so risky. Makes sense, though. In my mind, the final card wasn't necessarily predetermined. I thought maybe he just counted out the silence in his head (when the guys picks the diamond suit, the fourth card down, there's a REALLY long pause which could easily have been guessed). But your idea is much simpler.
Well, like I said, I saw that youtube I can't find about a guy who claimed to do a magic trick for a blind man. The key in his point was to try to show the blind man what magic feels like, so instant stooge incorporated him into the trick so he could amaze his wife. So as soon as he said the girl was blind, that's where my thoughts went.

I tried googling to see if this is the same guy, but couldn't find the reference. All I can find is a blind magician.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joey Tightlips View Post
After all the quality illusions we've seen all season, I just can't believe P&T or the producers would allow an instant stooge act. I think there are ways this could have been done legitimately.

As Penn said, the deck was never shuffled or handled to start. So say he had a "slick" or otherwise texturally marked card on top AND bottom to start. The volunteer counts cards down to come up with the number the value of the card and puts the deck on top. Then counts cards down again to come up with the suit and puts the cards on top. After both of these moves, the number of cards from the bottom of the deck to the first slick card would give the magician the suit, and number of cards from that slick card to the next would give the value.
No, the two slick cards would be back to back. The top card is placed right under the bottom one.

Quote:
You can clearly see the magician discard the top two thirds of the deck and fan through the bottom ones, I think that's what he was doing to figure out the card selected. The tricky part is how he then gets that freely-selected four of diamonds into the deck (which I assume was all blanks the entire time). Some kind of indexed system of cards on his person somewhere? I didn't see him reach into his coat at any point, so that part is what I believe to be what ultimately tricked them.
That would be a substitution of some kind, and perhaps why they thought he did some move. Still don't know why they thought deck swap and not index and insert.

But I'm confident it is instant stooge. Look at how much he touches Todd all over the arms. Listen to what he says when he's handing over the cards. Right as he is explaining how to tell us the chosen card, he says the word "code" (or is it signal? ) and taps the guys hands 4 times. It is distinct. Match that with the selected card being the 4 and the suit being given the number 4.

As for the producer's allowing it, why not? Yeah, it's cheap IMO, but it's a legitimate technique, and given some of the clumsy or amateur other acts, they clearly aren't filtering on that basis.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fear Itself View Post
The one I found strange was when Penn explained the guy's trick as being done with sleight of hand. Well, yeah, but so are most magic tricks. That shouldn't count as a sufficient explanation to avoid being fooled.
Because all he did were classic moves out of introductory books, he didn't do anything innovative or creative in the tricks. You can't fool an expert by beginner moves.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TriPolar View Post
Dollar bill guy was good. They knew what he did though because he had shown them before, still great praise at the end. Obviously he used a prepared bill, not the one from the audience. I'd like to find out what he does, though I have a feeling my fat fingers couldn't fool anyone.
I suspect soaked the bill in some pressure or possibly heat sensitive adhesive. The skill is aligning the "tear". I'm not sure how he could pre-cut the bill since they handled it to sign it.

Yeah, I'd love to really know and not be guessing.


Quote:
Envelope guy was funny, ... Good sound effect device up his sleeve.
Sound effect?


Quote:
Originally Posted by TriPolar View Post
But we didn't see the selection process for the audience member, maybe he was instant stooged at some point.
The point of instant stooge is it doesn't use any pre coordination, it is all done real time. You basically rely on the volunteer going along, either to be in on it or just to not ruin the show.

For example, the incident I keep citing, the magician is talking to students, and as part of inspiring and motivating them about the value of communicating and understanding the other person, he talks about going around to restaurants and doing magic tricks. One time he ran into a blind man, and didn't have any tricks for a blind person.

As many people point out, it's not hard to trick a blind person. "Follow the queen, where is the queen, keep your eye on the queen."

So he thinks, how can I get him to feel magic? By making him part of it. So he sits down across from him and tells him he will use telepathy to allow the blind man to tell the cards. He will deal a card, and the blind man will say if it's red or black. And to the amazement of the man's wife, he could do it.

The trick was as he was explaining "red or black", he put his feet on top of the man's, and pushed down left for black and right for red. As he said the words, he demonstrated the code, and asked if the man understood.

He didn't need a private conversation, he did it in plain sight. The arrangement was the physical contact in synch with his explanation and confirmation the man understood. That's a bit of "dual reality" for you. The wife saw a straightforward question about "decide if it's red or black", but the man had the layer of "I will press on your foot to signal you".

And that's exactly what I saw here. "Here is how you will signal (tap tap tap tap) your card to the audience." (Here is my signal to you.)

And both items were 4, and Penn kept emphasizing 4 reasons. They got it.

If he's given a free selection, then why is "4" so important to P&T?

The only mystery is why they thought there was a deck swap.
Old 08-25-2015, 02:47 PM
Guest
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: rhode island
Posts: 37,504
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irishman View Post
Sound effect?
After he drops the watch and the ring into the envelope he shakes it so you hear them clinking. They were never in the envelope, he has a device up his sleeve to make that noise.

Quote:

The point of instant stooge is it doesn't use any pre coordination, it is all done real time. You basically rely on the volunteer going along, either to be in on it or just to not ruin the show.
The lowest form of instant stooging is go out into the audience to pick out a person and on the way back to the stage convince them to play along. I seriously doubt anything like that is going on in this case.

Last edited by TriPolar; 08-25-2015 at 02:47 PM.
Old 08-25-2015, 02:56 PM
Guest
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 302
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irishman View Post
No, the two slick cards would be back to back. The top card is placed right under the bottom one.
Take another look at my post #531, it would work. He's counting the cards down one by one into a new pile and then putting the rest of the deck on top. I think the clear distinction he makes between doing it that way as opposed to putting each card directly under the bottom of the deck lends credence to this being the likely method.
Old 08-25-2015, 03:23 PM
Guest
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: rhode island
Posts: 37,504
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joey Tightlips View Post
Take another look at my post #531, it would work. He's counting the cards down one by one into a new pile and then putting the rest of the deck on top. I think the clear distinction he makes between doing it that way as opposed to putting each card directly under the bottom of the deck lends credence to this being the likely method.
That should work. He says he finds the card by feel, but they could just be marked. They have an elaborate pattern on the back, and he's doing it right under his face where he could easily do a nose peek.

The real mystery here is the deck switch guess by P&T. Was that just a mistake and Teller wrote deck switch but he meant a card insert? Did they forget that he never showed the card faces?
Old 08-25-2015, 03:47 PM
Guest
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: The Golden State
Posts: 2,028
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriPolar View Post
That should work. He says he finds the card by feel, but they could just be marked. They have an elaborate pattern on the back, and he's doing it right under his face where he could easily do a nose peek.
I think Joey Tightlips got it right as well. The top and bottom cards are markers. The only mystery is exactly when and how he pulls the correct card out of his index so that it appears at the end.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TriPolar View Post
The real mystery here is the deck switch guess by P&T. Was that just a mistake and Teller wrote deck switch but he meant a card insert? Did they forget that he never showed the card faces?
That made no sense to me either. Since the deck was never shown, there would be no need for a switch. Either he misspoke, or they really were completely off-base on this trick.
Old 08-25-2015, 03:49 PM
Just Lovely and Delicious
Charter Member
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Northeast Ohio
Posts: 23,758
This episode was my favorite of this season. I liked all the acts!
Old 08-25-2015, 03:51 PM
Charter Member
Charter Member
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: 742 Evergreen Terrace
Posts: 6,204
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriPolar View Post
Well yeah, but I'm not going to call him that. He's not dumb, and he is bigger than me. He's probably even a better juggler than I am.
On Alec Baldwin's podcast, he said he went to an accountant with his notes on the money he made as a street juggler/performer, and the guy told him that the IRS would assume he was a drug dealer, making that much with that kind of story, and that he himself thought Penn was a drug dealer. He told Penn to just take the money and forget about the taxes.
Old 08-25-2015, 03:59 PM
Guest
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 302
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriPolar View Post
The real mystery here is the deck switch guess by P&T. Was that just a mistake and Teller wrote deck switch but he meant a card insert? Did they forget that he never showed the card faces?
That's one thing we all seem to agree on! Maybe you're right that they thought the cards were shown at some point to be a normal deck when in fact they weren't.

All the talk about a stooge makes me wonder if he couldn't have been using both techniques. He could have been using suggestion/taps/whatever to direct the volunteer to one of a few cards, and then he could have used the method I laid out to see if the stoogery worked.

For the entire trick, he had those separate four or so cards he used to demonstrate the deal. Maybe those four were "real" and were the most common cards the suggestion leads to being picked. He could have lucked out that the suggestion worked and it would then would be trivial to get one of those separate cards into the deck of blanks. That would explain why none of us caught any kind of switch. There could have been a backup plan if something like the King of Hearts was chosen.
Old 08-25-2015, 04:18 PM
Guest
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: rhode island
Posts: 37,504
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joey Tightlips View Post
For the entire trick, he had those separate four or so cards he used to demonstrate the deal. Maybe those four were "real" and were the most common cards the suggestion leads to being picked. He could have lucked out that the suggestion worked and it would then would be trivial to get one of those separate cards into the deck of blanks. That would explain why none of us caught any kind of switch. There could have been a backup plan if something like the King of Hearts was chosen.
I wondered about those cards also. He appears to have just two. As soon as the suit is selected he'll know the card if it's a peek or offstage help, the camera pulls back but you can see both of his hands at the edge of the table right then. If he has to read the cards somehow he doesn't have a lot of opportunity to insert the card. Unfortunately there are cuts in the video there so we can't see everything that happens, but he does fumble a little to turn over the selected card, he might have the chance to do a switch then.

Also, when the deck has been put down by the guest he can know the suit if the cards are marked by peeking at the top card. That gives him the chance to get ready with a smaller index when he works out the number value.

And in the set up he asks the guest to think of a number of the card, which should keep out face cards.

ETA: I like this trick, it can be done with a real deck that's marked using a nose peek to reveal the actual card in the deck.

Last edited by TriPolar; 08-25-2015 at 04:21 PM.
Old 08-25-2015, 04:47 PM
Guest
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Gardner MA USA
Posts: 2,390
I don't know if camera tricks are allowed in the pre-taped intro segments, but how the hell did Blake Vogt (I believe it was him) manage to restore the corner of a torn card - as it was held by someone else - simply by putting his mouth over it?
Old 08-25-2015, 05:02 PM
Guest
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: rhode island
Posts: 37,504
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephe96 View Post
I don't know if camera tricks are allowed in the pre-taped intro segments, but how the hell did Blake Vogt (I believe it was him) manage to restore the corner of a torn card - as it was held by someone else - simply by putting his mouth over it?
It's called Regeneration. He sells it. I don't know how it's done except that some type of glue is used, I think to attach a fake corner to a card to tear off. The real corner would be folded underneath around the back of the card.
Old 08-25-2015, 10:40 PM
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,899
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriPolar View Post
The average quality of the acts was pretty high this time. I'm curious if they needed some time to book the better acts on the show.
No, all the acts are filmed over a series of a few nights and through "the magic of TV" are mixed and matched into the various episodes well before the season starts - note the audience member who "lent" the dollar bill was the same guy pulled up on stage for a trick on an episode that aired back at the beginning of the series...
Old 08-25-2015, 11:27 PM
Charter Member
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: 地球
Posts: 27,308
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeminiJ View Post
I played along at home and I picked the 4 of diamonds. So, I don't know if it was just dumb luck or I legitimately got picked up on something.
I picked the three of clubs

Quote:
Originally Posted by zombywoof View Post
No, all the acts are filmed over a series of a few nights and through "the magic of TV" are mixed and matched into the various episodes well before the season starts - note the audience member who "lent" the dollar bill was the same guy pulled up on stage for a trick on an episode that aired back at the beginning of the series...
Do Penn and Teller wear the same suits every time?
Old 08-25-2015, 11:38 PM
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,899
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahaloth View Post
Do Penn and Teller wear the same suits every time?
Same suits (no surprise there - 3 piece grey pinstripe has been their costume for decades), same shirts/ties...Jonathan Ross is also always in the same suit/shirt/tie outfit.

Last edited by zombywoof; 08-25-2015 at 11:38 PM.
Old 08-26-2015, 02:24 AM
Guest
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 82
The "magic" of television, y'all.

I feel so cheated. Especially whenever Jonathan mentions that "one person" has tricked them on tonight's program...

Last edited by cluck; 08-26-2015 at 02:26 AM.
Old 08-26-2015, 06:19 AM
Guest
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Houston, TX, USA
Posts: 12,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriPolar View Post
After he drops the watch and the ring into the envelope he shakes it so you hear them clinking. They were never in the envelope, he has a device up his sleeve to make that noise.
Went back to watch again online, you are correct, there is noise sliding the items into the envelope and clink when the ring hits the watch. I think the watch is a paper folded object to give 3-D shape and fold flat. He palms out the fake watch (can see the move) and drops it into the envelope, pulls and drops the ring, puts in the bill, then mushes the envelope. That act is compressing the paper flat and maneuvering the ring out the slit in the envelope to his left hand. He's got his watch up his sleeve where it can't be seen, pulls up the ring, and has already swapped the wallet.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Joey Tightlips View Post
Take another look at my post #531, it would work. He's counting the cards down one by one into a new pile and then putting the rest of the deck on top. I think the clear distinction he makes between doing it that way as opposed to putting each card directly under the bottom of the deck lends credence to this being the likely method.
You are correct. Counting off the cards reverses the order, the top card is now bottom. Then he puts that stack under the bottom, he has the bottom card, the count, top card, then the next count.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joey Tightlips View Post
All the talk about a stooge makes me wonder if he couldn't have been using both techniques. He could have been using suggestion/taps/whatever to direct the volunteer to one of a few cards, and then he could have used the method I laid out to see if the stoogery worked.
Now I think you are right. I watched, and yes, he does sort to the bottom of the deck quickly when going by feel for the card, and counts from the bottom. The handling is distinct enough I think you guys are right he has those. He sets up and has 8 cards and he clearly feels and counts them. I also agree a nose peek is easy with that blindfold setup. You can see the gap at the nose.

But I think he got lucky and the instant stooge worked, so he didn't have to do a card insertion, he knew where his prepped card was and didn't have to swap it. I think the 4 of diamonds is in the deck, and also prepped by surface. When he runs through from the top, he finds that card and splits the deck, then finds the second card, splits deck, counts the bottom 8 and confirms the stooge worked, combines the deck and then by feel finds his prepped card. No swap required.

He would need an index with all the others prepped and have to change it if the guy didn't comply, but he got lucky. If he was going to have to swap, he'd need the 4 already located, which is why he found it first, the first split. That's there so if the count is off, he can do the swap because he knows where the 4 is.

I can only assume Penn and Teller thought he showed the deck at some point and thus had to swap it for the blanks.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahaloth View Post
Do Penn and Teller wear the same suits every time?
Yes, it is their performance costumes. Penn even admitted it in one of their performances, telling the audience that he didn't have his wallet and stuff on him because the outfits were wardrobe, not his street clothes.
Thread Tools

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 04:21 PM.

Copyright © 2017
Best Topics: lfm meaning cricket choir bruise alcohol flylady forums reverse altitude sickness nascar 28 interstitial alloy conn a ship alto stop sign trucker bombs sex glider chair bruised martini can earthworms swim sultry look stair flights homemade high explosives funeral pyre legal alcaligenes viscolactis barb wire tatoo imitation caviar playboy jewelery basswood pronunciation dilbert coffee nazi pronounce caligula cumshot safe words list jerry german mm equals artisan craftsman force depletion report indian spiders akami net what is disemboweling trs rollover bonafides pronunciation hm street sign what does joshing mean why are prescription lenses so expensive to day is good day to die pvc leak at joint man from nantucket poem does salt absorb moisture can i use check with old address how to make yourself pee now dragon scale armor for sale do ants carry diseases fleas on kittens 2 weeks old can whales live in freshwater do lizards have penises t shirt size distribution can i pickup a package from usps on sunday can you call a fax number how much strength does it take to snap a neck my seatbelt wont retract what are the restaurants that cook in front of you usaa garrison property and casualty insurance company fireman puts out weed fire what happens if you get the wrong blood type transfusion nervous about putting in two weeks the who vs led zeppelin types of scary movies origin of cross my heart and hope to die cuidado piso mojado translation why does us dominate olympics do women like dp ice cubes shrink in freezer positive effects of smoking cigarettes 2001 grand am radio wiring harness are you awake for cataract surgery window fan for car submersible well pump vs jet pump went through ez pass by mistake nh