It's Luke Jermay's dangerous opener. Not sure which came first, but Luke has the same effect. He uses a slightly different presentation, but a brick and a father would work just as well.
Also has the very specific wording you mentioned.
kartoffelngeist wrote: It's Luke Jermay's dangerous opener. Not sure which came first, but Luke has the same effect. He uses a slightly different presentation, but a brick and a father would work just as well.
Well it's nice to know I'm thinking along the lines of the great Luke Jermay!! Do you know if his effect in still in print anywhere or on DVD etc? Just so I can see if my method can be honed. I'm definitely going to try it out in a couple of weeks and see how it plays!
Nevermind - just discovered it was in Coral Fang. I was lucky enough to find a copy as it's out of print. Expected delivery in 3 days. Hopefully it's as good as the TM reviews from way back in 2006!!!!!
kevmundo wrote: Nevermind - just discovered it was in Coral Fang. I was lucky enough to find a copy as it's out of print. Expected delivery in 3 days. Hopefully it's as good as the TM reviews from way back in 2006!!!!!
kevmundo wrote: Not sure I'll get any takers on this one but since this is TM I'll give it a shot!
I can't sleep. I mean I literally can't sleep because of this brick in a bag effect.
A spectator sits at a table and two bags are in front of him. The performer is very specific and states, 'pick a bag, and to be clear, whichever bag you choose will be the one I open, turn upside down and let the contents drop on your hand.' The spec picks the one on the right, it's turned upside down and a feather comes out. The other is turned upside down and a brick comes out.
Now, I have woken up in the middle of the night twice now dreaming about this effect, or I should say, having nightmares about it. It can't be equivoque since the performer is so specific. It must (I have convinced myself) be a mxxxxxe oxt. But what possible oxt could it be. I have thought of several oxts but they are all total c*** (not the best) and for the life of me I cannot think of a natural ending that would look clean. I'm findng it difficult to focus on anything else at the minute.
I'm not asking for anyone to tip any commercial methods since the oxt is never revealed. I'm not aware of it being commercially available? (If it is, please tell me and I'll buy it!). So, if you have an active imagination and you genuiely want to prevent me going on a killing spree, would you be kind enough to PM me if you have any ideas for a decent mxxxxxxe oxt for this effect. I can tell you all my many ideas, but I can assure you, they aren't any good!
This is such a typical magicians problem? You don't need to switch things out, you don't need gimmicks just use equivoque, done right the spectator has no idea so what difference does it make? Hint: It doesn't, it only makes a difference to you.
Did you ever see him perform the effect again? Just because he was so specific does not rule it out.
I'm assuming you haven't seen Max perform it? Forgive me if I'm wrong. There is no way on earth that this effect is achieved using equivoque. Max states quite clearly "There are two bags in front of you. Select one of them and whichever one you select I will empty the contents of that bag onto your hand." He emphasises that the choice is free and the selected bag will be emptied on his hand. Eugene Burger picks a bag. It has a feather in it. The other has a brick.
As I've said previously, my opinion is that the effect isn't an effect at all and Max was just lucky. It's just a genuine choice. The trick to it is there isn't a trick.
Oh I do hope you're right. I got a little E-mail this morning from Ebay saying that my manuscript has been dispatched. From what I've read of the reviews it's a beautiful piece of work. Really looking forward to getting it. I'll let you know if I have a lightbulb moment once I've read it!
Just so you know I received my copy of Coral Fang. It's interesting (though slightly off topic) - the entire manuscript is what I call "Advanced Mentalism." That doesn't mean that it's difficult. It means that it's so advanced hardly anyone will perform it. In my view there's two types of mentalism: Straightforward and Advanced.
Straightforward mentalism is mentalism that's either self working or requires memory systems or just plain hard practice.
Advanced mentalism (IMHO) is the kind of mentalism that when you read the method you say to yourself "NO XXXXXXX way is that gonna work" and you throw it in your 'never to be performed in a million years draw.' A good example would be 'Tervil' or 'A question and the answer' in PME. The swindels are so bold, so daring, so obvious once you know their secret, that no-one with a single brain cell would dare to perform them.
BUT...... There are some that realise they CAN be performed, and with great success. And it's those people that are the "advanced mentalists" in my view.
Coral Fang is just that, and I imagine 90% of people who bought it cried when they read some of the methods. I read, read, read and re-read Dangerous Opener. It annoyed me because it's a Dunninger subtlety I am aware of and it is explained in full in Psychological Subleties which I own, but Luke Jermay has simply employed the concept in a beautiful, elegant and effortless way. We all stand on the shoulders of giants I suppose.
Well, I have made a decision. I'm giving an after dinner speech at a Rotary Club on 21st November. This is going to be my closer. I'm using Luke Jermay's method. There's going to be approximately 50 people present. Anything less and I'd be too scared to use it. If it works then I'll let you know. I have a masonic Ladies night gig in February (approx 100 people) and I' m desperate to find a powerful closer for it. Hoping this is it.......... but......... it's advanced mentalism, so I'm scared!!!
New to the forum but I too was kept awake by this brick in a bag video from Max. I know there are many people who have published a solution. I have a solution that is simple and elegant. I do not want it published here. If you P.M. me, I will let you know my solution as simple as I think it is. Cheers, Brad.
Last edited by radbrad on Jul 6th, '17, 01:27, edited 1 time in total.
Welcome to TM Brad, FYI the PM function doesn't kick in until after your first five posts.
kevmundo wrote: I'm assuming you haven't seen Max perform it? Forgive me if I'm wrong. There is no way on earth that this effect is achieved using equivoque. Max states quite clearly "There are two bags in front of you. Select one of them and whichever one you select I will empty the contents of that bag onto your hand." He emphasises that the choice is free and the selected bag will be emptied on his hand. Eugene Burger picks a bag. It has a feather in it. The other has a brick.
What if both bags had a brick and feather in?
Your thinking how does he make him choose the correct bag when I'm thinking what if either bag was correct?