Performing with fancy moves...

[Luka]

Here is some food for thought. I see alot of people out there that do Dan and Dave style Flourish effects, with cards. I want to know why? Yes i know it looks cool, and it shows that you can handle cards very well. But whats the point. I am not trying to knock dan and dave they have some amazing flourishes, and original material.

I do very little flourishing while preforming an illusion, this is my logic behind it. I try to hold a deck of cards like a normal person would. While preforming I am not trying to show the spectators all the fancy things I can do with cards, I am not a show off. I like things to look and feel natural, I dont want them to second guess where their card is because I did a fancy twirl.

Yes its true I dont know how to do a lot of fancy flips, twirls, cuts with cards, but i dont feel the need or see a reason to do all of that unless i am only a card guy, which I am not.

so if you do a lot of flourishes while preforming card tricks, tell me why, other than it looks cool, how does it add to your performance (or take away)

If you do NOT use a lot of flourishes while preforming card tricks tell me why (other than you are not able too)

There is no right or wrong answer, I am not knocking those who do flourish, I am just wondering what element it adds. Does it make things look more graceful and if it does what is your preformance style.

 

[praetoritevong]

As a mentalist, it would be rather ridiculous for me to be seen manipulating cards during a performance. I was to eliminate any thought of sleight of hand skill, manipulation of cards, or the label of "card technician" when I do use playing cards because my presentation and my performing persona are based around a student of psychology and anecdotes.

The argument I would offer in favour of flourishes would simply be to introduce and increase the perception or skill.

 

[sourboarder]

To me, I like the "show within a show" aspect of it. I have not heard any other magician use this term so let me explain. You have your spectator pick a card and return it to the deck. Then you make it a simple transpo effect. It's cool and everything but is it really what you wanted to do or is it what they wanted to see? Where is the visual aspect, they came to see, outside of the two beats of the first change or transformation and then the final revelation. I like to have some flair and flashy points in my magic, as long as it is clear that the sleight wasn't accomplished by the flashy cut. As we all know confusion is not magic. Make everything clear but have the visual aspects of magic in as many points as possible. I do not do flourishes to show off either. The majority of real spectators watching do not care about or even know what a Sybil is.

 

[praetoritevong]

To me, I like the "show within a show" aspect of it. I have not heard any other magician use this term so let me explain. You have your spectator pick a card and return it to the deck. Then you make it a simple transpo effect. It's cool and everything but is it really what you wanted to do or is it what they wanted to see? Where is the visual aspect, they came to see, outside of the two beats of the first change or transformation and then the final revelation. I like to have some flair and flashy points in my magic, as long as it is clear that the sleight wasn't accomplished by the flashy cut. As we all know confusion is not magic. Make everything clear but have the the visual aspects of magic in as many points as possible. I do not do flourishes to show off either. The majority of real spectators watching do not care about or even know what a Sybil is.

A very important issue facing mentalists these days (visual moments). Good point.

 

[JetEyeNight]

I think it's a good idea to do a flourish before an illusion because it disarms the spectator, it shows that you have skill, that you're a pro not just another amateur. They won't consider trying to figure out your illusion because they know they won't be able to. I read this in a book.

 

[praetoritevong]

Your reasoning behind it is interesting, but I think it's better to be a disarming person, and learn to be disarming, rather than having to do a flourish simply for that effect. There are of course many ways to appear as a professional..

 

[sourboarder]

I think it's a good idea to do a flourish before an illusion because it disarms the spectator, it shows that you have skill, that you're a pro not just another amateur. They won't consider trying to figure out your illusion because they know they won't be able to. I read this in a book.

I am glad you brought this up about disarming the spectator, totally forgot about why the "show within a show" idea is really effective for me when i perform which I must admit isn't much lately. But with flourishy presentation it shows it's not all about the method it's about the attempt of making it look beautiful and personal to the performer. It's about having fun and entertaining as much as possible, not all trickery. All in all it's about you and showing your personality through the cards, don't just stop and let the cards run the show. You're performing for a reason, more than likely it's your personality not just your skill level.

 

[William Draven]

I would have to say the choice to incorperate flourishing strongly depends on the kind of character you choose to present to your audience.

Heh, I almost feel like a broken record with that character business. It's a word you'll hear me use a lot. However I stand behind what I say as I do believe it to be very true.

If your character is a card hustler, shark, pro-gambler then of course you are going to want to incorperate many diffrent types of knuckle busting flourishes. You want to show off. You want ever down beat that you aren't doing something magical filled with your card juggling to impress upon your audience that you are indeed a complete and full master of your craft and a very dangerous person to sit across from during a poker game.

If your character is a mentalist, then you probably wouldn't want to use flourishes at all since your entire act is usually built around using seemingly normal objects with normal handeling that disarms the audience and lulls them into a state of suspended disbelief.

Now those are two extremes, and I'm sure most people here will fall somewhere in the middle as you muddle through your act still trying to find yourself. (Hell I'm still trying to find myself. It's a process that never really ends I think.) I think as a general rule, an well rounded approach for any magician is to know some basic flourishes, and incorperate them when able. Such flourishes as card fans, and one handed charliee(sp?) cuts should be required. Sybils and one handed shuffles should be extra credit. Anything really above that I think for your average worker is uncessessary. Please note that while I only list four flourishes in my response I do imply that there is a handfull more that could easly accompany the ones I mentioned.

 

[visualartist]

I use pseudo-scientific explanations and speak of spirituality.And tie in catholic mythology sometimes into my effects. A sybil woul look ridiculous in between all this.

Though I do perform a simple pirouette or little spring to bring a little 'umph' in.

 

[Althor]

I forget where I read this today, so if I'm stealing someone's post, sorry.

According to... the person I forget... there are three performance types in card magic: Sloppy, normal, and flashy.

Sloppy can add comedy to a routine and makes the magic moments seem like real magic ("He can hardly even shuffle! How then did he pull my card out of his wallet? It must be magic!")

Normal gives the impression that anyone can do it. ("That was pretty sneaky, pulling my card out of your wallet like that.. I wouldn't mind learning that myself.")

Flashy makes people think that, yes , it is all slight of hand, but everything is learned by years and years of knuckle-busting. ("That was cool.. there's no way I'd be able to do that in a million years.")

It therefore depends on how you want your audience to feel..

 

[jok3r]

I would have to say the choice to incorperate flourishing strongly depends on the kind of character you choose to present to your audience.

Heh, I almost feel like a broken record with that character business. It's a word you'll hear me use a lot. However I stand behind what I say as I do believe it to be very true.

If your character is a card hustler, shark, pro-gambler then of course you are going to want to incorperate many diffrent types of knuckle busting flourishes. You want to show off. You want ever down beat that you aren't doing something magical filled with your card juggling to impress upon your audience that you are indeed a complete and full master of your craft and a very dangerous person to sit across from during a poker game.

If your character is a mentalist, then you probably wouldn't want to use flourishes at all since your entire act is usually built around using seemingly normal objects with normal handeling that disarms the audience and lulls them into a state of suspended disbelief.

Now those are two extremes, and I'm sure most people here will fall somewhere in the middle as you muddle through your act still trying to find yourself. (Hell I'm still trying to find myself. It's a process that never really ends I think.) I think as a general rule, an well rounded approach for any magician is to know some basic flourishes, and incorperate them when able. Such flourishes as card fans, and one handed charliee(sp?) cuts should be required. Sybils and one handed shuffles should be extra credit. Anything really above that I think for your average worker is uncessessary. Please note that while I only list four flourishes in my response I do imply that there is a handfull more that could easly accompany the ones I mentioned.

this man speaks the truth.
I agree totally.
Im not a mentalist, i don't claim to have special powers, i just claim love cards.
People love my flourishes, my friends always say do the crazy chin cut.
Flourishing works with my tricks, and my performances.

If it doesn't fit your style, THEN DON'T DO IT
I mean really, were not all the same.
Do what you want to do, but don't bash someone else because they don't perform like you think they should.

Im a big fan of Brian Tudor, and even if you don't like him he's still a genius with a deck of cards.
two of my favorite quotes from him are

"id rather take credit then the deck"

"Showing skill takes away from the magic, but so does comedy"

Thats the way I see it

PS i wasnt saying mentalists claim to have special powers

 

[RDChopper]

and even if you don't like him he's still a genius with a deck of cards.
two of my favorite quotes from him are

"id rather take credit then the deck"

"Showing skill takes away from the magic, but so does comedy"

Thats the way I see it

Yeah he is pretty good with cards. But as an enterteiner? What do you want to be? a magician/enteirtener? Skillfulyoyotrickster/BrianTudor?

I used to think like you some time ago, I assure you, in a year you are going to think differently

 

[jok3r]

I use pseudo-scientific explanations and speak of spirituality.And tie in catholic mythology sometimes into my effects. A sybil woul look ridiculous in between all this.

Though I do perform a simple pirouette or little spring to bring a little 'umph' in.

And thats really cool, but they won't work for everyone.
Sure wouldn't work for me, even if i tryed for years.
Thats just not the kinda of stuff im into.

I dont understand why people think its wrong if its not the way they do it.
(not pointing fingers at anyone personally)

Its the same narrow view of things, as it is in everyday life.

"well he doesn't believe the same thing i do about church, so he must be wrong. "

people can't just respect the way other people want to do things.

 

[jok3r]

Yeah he is pretty good with cards. But as an enterteiner? What do you want to be? a magician/enteirtener? Skillfulyoyotrickster/BrianTudor?

I used to think like you some time ago, I assure you, in a year you are going to think differently

very true, but ive never seen him perform?

so how can i say hes a good or bad performer?

 

[RDChopper]

Its the same narrow view of things, as it is in everyday life.

"well he doesn't believe the same thing i do about church, so he must be wrong. "

people can't just respect the way other people want to do things.

Its not like that, we have seen you and we know that you can do better than that. Is that simple. We are not "degrading" your style, we are trying to make you imrpove to do something else .

 

[Luka]

this man speaks the truth.
I agree totally.
Im not a mentalist, i don't claim to have special powers, i just claim love cards.
People love my flourishes, my friends always say do the crazy chin cut.
Flourishing works with my tricks, and my performances.

If it doesn't fit your style, THEN DON'T DO IT
I mean really, were not all the same.
Do what you want to do, but don't bash someone else because they don't perform like you think they should.

Im a big fan of Brian Tudor, and even if you don't like him he's still a genius with a deck of cards.
two of my favorite quotes from him are

"id rather take credit then the deck"

"Showing skill takes away from the magic, but so does comedy"

Thats the way I see it

PS i wasn't saying mentalists claim to have special powers

This thread was not to bash anyone. I understand, that people have differnt performing styles. There is right or wrong way. not all mentalist claim to have powers or supernatural abilities. I do not exactly consider myself to be a mentalist but I do have some mentalists qualities in my performance. Never do I claim to have powers, a sixth sense, or sell my soul to the devil. I tell people that what i am doing is an illusion, and that scams and cons are based on the same principals that I use. But I choose to use them for entertainment, while others use them for scamming. Besides the point. I guess what I am really asking is if you use flourishing in your performance then what is your performance like. How does it add to your magic, and is it possible it can take a way. is there such thing as too much flourishing and not enough magic?

 

[RDChopper]

very true, but ive never seen him perform?

so how can i say hes a good or bad performer?

His general actitud towards life.

And comments that I have heard from people that meet him and saw him perform.

 

[popchris3]

All I will say about the matter is that I feel that if you do a couple of quick flourishes before an effect, it establishes credibitlity. It tells the people that you aren't uncle Charlie trying to guess 52 times to get their card.

Of course, while doing the effect it self, try and look smooth, but DON'T do jerky motions or flourishes.

 

[jok3r]

His general actitud towards life.

And comments that I have heard from people that meet him and saw him perform.

That gives you plenty of reason to think that, but it doesn't give me any reason.

and again im not saying hes good or bad performer.

but i love his material, and love his creativeness

 

[RDChopper]

That gives you plenty of reason to think that, but it doesn't give me any reason.

and again im not saying hes good or bad performer.

but i love his material, and love his creativeness

Dude, half his material isnt even his.

Generation Extreme was my first magic dvd, I have been practicing those routines for some time now, I agree his great with flourishes and with sleights but not all the stuff in that dvd is his.

Terry Lagerould helped him a lot with the routines.