Don't nail guns require pressure on the head to fire? Simply pulling the trigger will not fire a nail.
Possibly...but you don't chance sticking it against your neck for a trick if there's the possibility of getting the pressure wrong...in the 'live' version Penn 'nails' his own neck and then carries on and even though you know it's safe there's still that element of 'what if' when you allow yourself to be taken in with the moment which is what magic is all about...theatre...and that trick is great theatre.
And again Michael Vincent does a beautiful card trick...I doubt whether he could ever trick P&T but that doesn't matter his stuff is classic wonderful card magic. There's only a few moves involved in that trick but they are done with so much precision that you can;t see them...and even if you know what techniques are being used...you still can't see them...much...
I think that they thought out the trick very cleverly for the show. Strange how the 'switch' was so bad that virtually everyone saw it! Penn & Teller therefore sat back believing they knew how it was done. It seemed that they were waiting for this to be the answer that P&T gave.
I sat not ten feet away from Teller as he did the goldfish trick in Vegas (though the version they do live is about twice as long as the version they did on TV) and I couldn't see how it was done. It was so wonderful that I'm not sure that I want to know how it was done.
That's how I feel. If a trick is a bit lame then I don't care if I know how it was done.
But when it comes to spectacles like this and David Copperfield's 'Death Saw'(my favourite magic act of all time), I really don't want to know.
I think that they thought out the trick very cleverly for the show. Strange how the 'switch' was so bad that virtually everyone saw it! Penn & Teller therefore sat back believing they knew how it was done. It seemed that they were waiting for this to be the answer that P&T gave.
No I dont htink so,just Penn & Teller went for one option instead of an equally obvious one.
He should have showed it pushing into the wood and not firing. It just make it look like it's the gun not a trick.
It's a 'trick' gun...but the thing is..work out HOW it's a trick gun...and then think: does it matter...it's great theatre magic...the reaction you could see in the crowd is what I experienced and saw when I saw that live...just like the Derren Brown Russian Roulette show...you knew he wasn't going to harm himself but you still were pulled in and shouted 'Don't do it'...well a lot of us were who actually enjoyed it...
If they didn't switch the decks then they made it look like they did with that *clumsy* move which imo was done deliberately so that they would get through as P&T would have said it was a switch as their first explanation as that could be a way of doing the trick. They shouldn't be going to Vegas.
Possibly...but you don't chance sticking it against your neck for a trick if there's the possibility of getting the pressure wrong....
It does require quite a bit of pressure. It's to prevent idiot builders from shooting themselves.
As a fail safe the gun could be modified so not to fire a nail when held in the horizontal position.
If they didn't switch the decks then they made it look like they did with that *clumsy* move which imo was done deliberately so that they would get through as P&T would have said it was a switch as their first explanation as that could be a way of doing the trick. They shouldn't be going to Vegas.
Any "clumsy" move was probably just nerves, P&T are big legends in magic world plus they are performing to biggest audience ever(TV audience). Give them a break; the trick wasn't that interesting but neither was Michael Vincent's.
FoolUsTV To be clear. M&W did NOT do a deck switch - all cleared by the independent guru. They fooled em! @pennjillette@mrteller@wossy@morganmagic 2 minutes ago via web
It does require quite a bit of pressure. It's to prevent idiot builders from shooting themselves.
As a fail safe the gun could be modified so not to fire a nail when held in the horizontal position.
Indeed it could...I'd rather not chance it though and it's still a great trick.
FoolUsTV To be clear. M&W did NOT do a deck switch - all cleared by the independent guru. They fooled em! @pennjillette@mrteller@wossy@morganmagic 2 minutes ago via web
E.B.White said: "Analyzing humor is like dissecting a frog. Few people are interested and the frog dies of it."
It's very similar to magic...most people enjoy bring tricked and have that wow factor as 'knowing how it is done' just doesn;t give them any sense of superiority that it gives to some people...
I would. Why not just leave the cards on the table before you turn over the matched pairs?
(I know the answer, but if you want people to really believe that it's not just the card trick that it is, you have to be able to explain the point of a totally pointless element to it)
I thought West was making signals at Morgan; hence the slight hestiation for some of them. It would've been better if West couldn't see the card either, and just leaving it to Ross to reveal the cards. Or even better, Penn or Teller.
I'm not sure how, but with the last trick with Penn and Teller, I reckon they had a specially made custom nail gun that might of had a sensory feature, so you could only trigger it off once it came face to face with wood. It's probably made to react to certain materials.
I thought West was making signals at Morgan; hence the slight hestiation for some of them. It would've been better if West couldn't see the card either, and just leaving it to Ross to reveal the cards. Or even better, Penn or Teller.
I've never seen the trick before and would have had no idea how it was done had they not made it so obvious.
P&T I think were seduced by the dummy "deck switch" although M&W did say that it wasn't an intentional misdirection to make them rule out other techniques early on in the piece *, but the hand signals while holding the cards were obvious.
While the "deck switch" didn't involve switching the deck, it surely did involve putting the four (I think it was) cards on the bottom of the deck (in a specific order) that JR turned over himself at the end, without the prearranged holding signals that made the earlier cards so obvious. (hence there was nothing in the bag/box at the end, but they could legitimately claim that there was no "deck switch")
* That would be a very easy thing to deny and a very difficult thing to prove
Generally a pretty unexciting trick, and I don't think P&T were impressed by it either. I'd much rather have seen the first act through (although I did think it was a little too long).
I've never seen the trick before and would have had no idea how it was done had they not made it so obvious.
P&T I think were seduced by the dummy "deck switch" although M&W did say that it wasn't an intentional misdirection to make them rule out other techniques early on in the piece *, but the hand signals while holding the cards were obvious.
While the "deck switch" didn't involve switching the deck, it surely did involve putting the four (I think it was) cards on the bottom of the deck (in a specific order) that JR turned over himself at the end, without the prearranged holding signals that made the earlier cards so obvious. (hence there was nothing in the bag/box at the end, but they could legitimately claim that there was no "deck switch")
* That would be a very easy thing to deny and a very difficult thing to prove
Generally a pretty unexciting trick, and I don't think P&T were impressed by it either. I'd much rather have seen the first act through (although I did think it was a little too long).
Love the conjecture in posts lol. Surely it would be easier to memorize cards rather than hand signals?
And again Michael Vincent does a beautiful card trick...I doubt whether he could ever trick P&T but that doesn't matter his stuff is classic wonderful card magic. There's only a few moves involved in that trick but they are done with so much precision that you can;t see them...and even if you know what techniques are being used...you still can't see them...much...
The card trick was awesome. I thought I saw a slight move when he put the second card on the table but still didn't expect the ending as it was all executed so brilliantly. I still think Mathieu Bich's "spreadwave" card trick earlier in the series was slightly better though as it is more creative and original imo. Probably my two favourite tricks of the series.
The card trick was awesome. I thought I saw a slight move when he put the second card on the table but still didn't expect the ending as it was all executed so brilliantly.
It's a good trick but I thought he looked a little clumsy just when he was squaring the deck after putting the signed cards back into it....like he was feeling for something.
Comments
He should have showed it pushing into the wood and not firing. It just make it look like it's the gun not a trick.
I think the look on Teller's face said it all. He had the same expression when Richard Bellers got through last week.
Contrast that with his genuine joy when Mathieu Bich fooled them.
Only the one asterisk in a*se, I think you'll find!!!!
Possibly...but you don't chance sticking it against your neck for a trick if there's the possibility of getting the pressure wrong...in the 'live' version Penn 'nails' his own neck and then carries on and even though you know it's safe there's still that element of 'what if' when you allow yourself to be taken in with the moment which is what magic is all about...theatre...and that trick is great theatre.
And again Michael Vincent does a beautiful card trick...I doubt whether he could ever trick P&T but that doesn't matter his stuff is classic wonderful card magic. There's only a few moves involved in that trick but they are done with so much precision that you can;t see them...and even if you know what techniques are being used...you still can't see them...much...
Oops.
I'll just pretend I was being ironic.
That's how I feel. If a trick is a bit lame then I don't care if I know how it was done.
But when it comes to spectacles like this and David Copperfield's 'Death Saw'(my favourite magic act of all time), I really don't want to know.
No I dont htink so,just Penn & Teller went for one option instead of an equally obvious one.
It's a 'trick' gun...but the thing is..work out HOW it's a trick gun...and then think: does it matter...it's great theatre magic...the reaction you could see in the crowd is what I experienced and saw when I saw that live...just like the Derren Brown Russian Roulette show...you knew he wasn't going to harm himself but you still were pulled in and shouted 'Don't do it'...well a lot of us were who actually enjoyed it...
It does require quite a bit of pressure. It's to prevent idiot builders from shooting themselves.
As a fail safe the gun could be modified so not to fire a nail when held in the horizontal position.
Any "clumsy" move was probably just nerves, P&T are big legends in magic world plus they are performing to biggest audience ever(TV audience). Give them a break; the trick wasn't that interesting but neither was Michael Vincent's.
FoolUsTV
And @mrteller @pennjillette had no idea and agreed they were completely fooled when told backstage afterwards @FoolUsTV @wossy
Indeed it could...I'd rather not chance it though and it's still a great trick.
To anyone whose followed the show they should know performers cant lie to P&T. They show method to adjudicator before show.
It's very similar to magic...most people enjoy bring tricked and have that wow factor as 'knowing how it is done' just doesn;t give them any sense of superiority that it gives to some people...
I would. Why not just leave the cards on the table before you turn over the matched pairs?
(I know the answer, but if you want people to really believe that it's not just the card trick that it is, you have to be able to explain the point of a totally pointless element to it)
I actually thought about putting those very words in my post, but I thought that opinion might offend some people.
I've never seen the trick before and would have had no idea how it was done had they not made it so obvious.
P&T I think were seduced by the dummy "deck switch" although M&W did say that it wasn't an intentional misdirection to make them rule out other techniques early on in the piece *, but the hand signals while holding the cards were obvious.
While the "deck switch" didn't involve switching the deck, it surely did involve putting the four (I think it was) cards on the bottom of the deck (in a specific order) that JR turned over himself at the end, without the prearranged holding signals that made the earlier cards so obvious. (hence there was nothing in the bag/box at the end, but they could legitimately claim that there was no "deck switch")
* That would be a very easy thing to deny and a very difficult thing to prove
Generally a pretty unexciting trick, and I don't think P&T were impressed by it either. I'd much rather have seen the first act through (although I did think it was a little too long).
Love the conjecture in posts lol. Surely it would be easier to memorize cards rather than hand signals?
JR shuffled the deck (before the additional cards were added to it)
It's a good trick but I thought he looked a little clumsy just when he was squaring the deck after putting the signed cards back into it....like he was feeling for something.