|
||||||||
How did he do that ( Spoilers) |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#51 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 21,722
|
Quote:
Worst trick ever.
He wasn't flicking through the book, he very obviously placed the card exactly where he needed it to be. He asked Alesha to remember the first word of the page he had very obviously chosen himself (therefore he had very obviously chosen the word as well as the page). I am completely baffled as to why anyone could be impressed by this. |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#52 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Warwickshire
Posts: 8,216
|
Quote:
What?
It's perfectly feasible to create a fake book for your own prop without anyone's permission. (Or indeed, it is possible to buy a pre-made tricked-out book for the trick and just slip the dust jacket from Amanda's book over it for the initial joke.) The flaw in Magic8Balls theory is that the book was available for inspection after the tick, so that method of a faked book would have been spotted then. |
|
|
|
|
|
#53 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,202
|
Quote:
Because it was flawlessly executed. Nearly all tricks use props or sleight of hand.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#54 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 21,722
|
Quote:
I don't know how you can say it was flawlessly executed. It looked like he was doing it for the first time. He handled the book and photograph horrendously, none of it appeared natural at all. All i could think was "why is he clasping the book so tightly? Why is he flicking through the tiniest corner of the pages rather than fan through the book how you normally would? Why is he putting that photo in there, and being so meticulous about the position of it?". A flawlessly executed trick would look as if he was handling the props naturally.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#55 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,202
|
Quote:
To me it was, it's my opinion. I'm not a professional magician.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#56 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 21,722
|
Quote:
Well nor am I. What is your definition of flawlessly executed? That he didn't drop anything, or accidentally show the part-page attached to the back of the photograph or anything like that? You're not setting the bar very high...
|
|
|
|
|
|
#57 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,202
|
Quote:
It's my opinion, I don't know which bit of that you don't understand.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#58 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 21,722
|
Quote:
I understand that your opinion is that it was "flawlessly executed", yes. I'm now trying to ascertain what you mean by that. I mean, I could also "flawlessly execute" that trick having seen it once by your definition (if I'm understanding it correctly, which is why I asked), it doesn't really say much.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#59 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,202
|
Quote:
I give up. Your opinion was that it wasn't executed well, mine is that it was. I have just watched it again and I still have that opinion.
You haven't started anything to "give up" on.What was the purpose of the photograph? What was the point of the whole "burning the word" onto the page? |
|
|
|
|
|
#60 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Warwickshire
Posts: 8,216
|
Quote:
I understand that your opinion is that it was "flawlessly executed", yes. I'm now trying to ascertain what you mean by that. I mean, I could also "flawlessly execute" that trick having seen it once by your definition (if I'm understanding it correctly, which is why I asked), it doesn't really say much.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#61 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,202
|
Quote:
I know you're deliberately trying to be an a**hole but, to humour you, it appears as though Walter White was using it how anyone would use it. To flawlessly execute means to do something without making any errors. I would agree with Mr. White that Richard nailed it because I, like the majority of people who voted, was suitably impressed and wanted him in the final. I suppose none of us can know whether or not he 'flawlessly executed' the trick because only Richard knows how he intended to do it and whether he made any errors. However, to someone who is none-the-wiser there were no obvious errors and the trick was impressive.
1. Flick through the book without anyone seeing any parts of the pages 2. Slide the photograph in so that the phoney page attached to the back lined up with the pages in the book 3. Let Alesha see this tiny portion 4. Remove the photograph (and attached page portion) and conceal it from everybody 5. Pick up the prop bottle and make the bottom fall away, which you'd have to assume is some simple trigger near the top 6. Light a match and burn the pre-treated paper in the right place. Which part of that is impressive? The handling of 1,2,3 & 4 was awful, everything looked so unnatural, the total opposite of how a trick should be executed. 5 just makes you go "oh look, a rigged bottle" and 6 was utterly pointless - Alesha was instructed to pick the first word on the page so by already having that page there was no "reveal" of the word "bottom" necessary
|
|
|
|
|
|
#62 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Warwickshire
Posts: 8,216
|
Quote:
I guess I underestimate how stupid some people are. In order to "flawlessly execute" this trick, he had to:
1. Flick through the book without anyone seeing any parts of the pages 2. Slide the photograph in so that the phoney page attached to the back lined up with the pages in the book 3. Let Alesha see this tiny portion 4. Remove the photograph (and attached page portion) and conceal it from everybody 5. Pick up the prop bottle and make the bottom fall away, which you'd have to assume is some simple trigger near the top 6. Light a match and burn the pre-treated paper in the right place. Which part of that is impressive? The handling of 1,2,3 & 4 was awful, everything looked so unnatural, the total opposite of how a trick should be executed. 5 just makes you go "oh look, a rigged bottle" and 6 was utterly pointless - Alesha was instructed to pick the first word on the page so by already having that page there was no "reveal" of the word "bottom" necessary ![]() Secondly, yes. And did he do all those things you just said? Yes. So did he flawlessly execute the trick as intended? Yes. It was impressive on the night because I hadn't sat on a forum reading a bunch of members picking holes in it and supposing how it had been done. If his goal was to do enough to get through to the next round, which I am fairly certain it was, then he succeeded. |
|
|
|
|
|
#63 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Warwickshire
Posts: 8,216
|
Quote:
What he said.
Except the extra page 176 corner is hidden behind the photo at the start.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#64 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,202
|
Quote:
You're so pompous that it's actually laughable.
Tricks often have fairly simple mechanisms, it's a good magician's handling of them which makes you not notice.I guess mainly my point is that he was actually pretty poor in many ways (there'll be hundreds of better magicians working in the UK). Specifically, his handling of the book was awful - if you flip through a book for somebody to pick a page, you don't grip it tightly and just fan through a centimetre or so at the top. It barely looked like he was even doing anything and instantly drew attention to it. There was then no need for the photograph (it wasn't used to stop the page, so why on earth should it suddenly be inserted so Alesha can look behind it?) and it was all just really clumsily used, it looked ridiculous that he should insert it so carefully so that Alesha can peek behind it, before tucking it away in his pocket. (For example, why not open with some simple forced card trick so that Alesha handles the card and knows it's clean, and then use a gimmicked version of that card for that part of the trick?) The bottle he's just placed there, so again there's nothing amazing when the bottom falls off that, it's not like we had any reason to think it was an ordinary bottle. And then having established it was the same page Alesha said earlier, there's no further reveal of the first word on that page required, so the whole burning the page thing was just pointless. She didn't choose a word on the page, she was instructed to remember the first one. A poor routine IMO, and pretty poorly handled. |
|
|
|
|
|
#65 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 5,859
|
Quote:
Hate it how people always say 'how did he do that?'
I don't want to know how he did it, because then it's not magic. |
|
|
|
|
|
#66 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 21,722
|
Quote:
You "give up"?
You haven't started anything to "give up" on.What was the purpose of the photograph? What was the point of the whole "burning the word" onto the page? |
|
|
|
|
|
#67 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3,883
|
I thought it was well performed overall, he got the attention and applause of his immediate audience, and indeed managed to get votes out of the TV audience.
But I do agree with pjc229 on two points, the thing with the photo was a big flag of "I am doing something odd here" and the burning the word into the page gave a peculiar two or three endings to the same trick, maybe he thought he needed a bit of fire to end on a big note. Maybe even four endings 1. Yes it's page 176 then 2. Yes, it fits the book, 3. Yes the first word says bottom and 4. look the word is even burned into it. Probably only needed to do ending 2. and take the applause then. The whole first word on the page thing was just padding. |
|
|
|
|
|
#68 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: West Oxfordshire
Posts: 11,632
|
Look, we all know it's a trick and it's always possible to come up with the theories after. The point is that when he does it, it's fun, unexpected and suprising and you cannot see it being done right in front if you. It's a bit like saying because you know how a ventriloquist does it, there is no entertainment value in the act. The same people complaining that there are too many singers or dancers going through then pull all the variety acts apart when the variety acts are usually of a much higher standard relative to their genre, especially over the dancers. You can see dancers equally as good in any dance studio but you can't see the variety acts easily anywhere.
What I liked was how he gave each judge a role and he used Amanda's book. He is very likeable and has great presence and so dar his routines have been great. I also loved all the jokes made about Amanda's book: I lay panting in the grass! |
|
|
|
|
|
#69 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 3,713
|
As someone with many years magical knowledge it baffles me when magicians come on TV with crap tricks. There are better "book tests" available with a powerful punch.
Even in the 5 minutes available to the performer they could come up with something far more exciting. Something simple but wow would be this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvoJEHFqHBU Or this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akXDy1TPDj4 |
|
|
|
|
|
#70 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: County Durham
Posts: 78,613
|
Quote:
The magician guy - Probably one of the best tricks I have seen but how did he do that
|
|
|
|
|
|
#71 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: The TARDIS, Wakefield, UK
Posts: 330
|
Anybody who knows how to do a forced trick can see how this was done. All you have to do to learn it is google it. I learnt it from Dynamos magic box.
Here's how it was done.
Spoiler
|
|
|
|
|
|
#72 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: The TARDIS, Wakefield, UK
Posts: 330
|
Quote:
agreed. the trick from the audition was more difficult to explain than this
You could say he's not that clever a magician because he did two of the same type of trick. Thats the beauty of forced tricks you can do the same one a different way each time, you just have to be imaginative with the method. |
|
|
|
|
|
#73 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3,883
|
Quote:
Anybody who knows how to do a forced trick can see how this was done. All you have to do to learn it is google it. I learnt it from Dynamos magic box.
Here's how it was done.
Spoiler
And for a show like BGT it is probably more about how you perform it than the mechanics of the trick itself, and on that part he did very well indeed. |
|
|
|
|
|
#74 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: The TARDIS, Wakefield, UK
Posts: 330
|
Quote:
I don't think the leaving your "second" page 176 in there would work as the book was available to be freely inspected after the trick, which you would not allow if you've left a gimmick in there. So I still go with my theory that the part page we saw was removed from the book when the photo was pocketed. (A theory I worked out in my own head with no resort to google).
And for a show like BGT it is probably more about how you perform it than the mechanics of the trick itself, and on that part he did very well indeed. |
|
|
|
|
|
#75 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 650
|
the bottle had a trigger at the top .. he makes it obvious
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 14:36.




You haven't started anything to "give up" on.
Tricks often have fairly simple mechanisms, it's a good magician's handling of them which makes you not notice.