# Penn & Teller: Fool Us - Anybody Watching?



## waynomo

Is anybody watching Penn & Teller: Fool Us on the CW? This is one of the best magic television shows ever broadcast. If you're into magic or you like Penn & Teller, this show is a must view.

The production values are great. The selection of magicians that they are showcasing are first rate.

I think most magic on TV is usually pretty shlocky. This show breaks the mold.


----------



## kdmorse

Are these the same episodes that aired in the UK (I think Jonathan Ross was the host), airing in the US for the first time? (Which I've seen)

Or - are these newly produced episodes I haven't seen before?


----------



## waynomo

These are the ones that aired in the UK with Ross. They are slightly edited down, so assume you got to see more in the UK.


----------



## dfergie

We love them along with the Wizard Wars show with Penn & Teller ...


----------



## Craigbob

I prefer wizard wars to fool us.


----------



## Jeeters

I've been watching it and enjoying it. I do find it annoying that whenever they pick an audience member to volunteer, the person gets up from their seat and you can see they're already wearing a microphone pack. I realize they might have just already been pre-chosen and given a mic in the interest of time, but it also leads to "I wonder if they're in on it" thoughts.

I tried watching the first episode of Wizard Wars but couldn't get into it.


----------



## LifeIsABeach

I have been watching it and like it a lot. I saw an interview with Penn & Teller before the show started and they said their favorite trick was one that actually didn't fool them. Unfortunately I forgot what they said and now I keep trying to figure out which one it may have been.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

I like it.

They are showing them out of order, however, which only matters because the first one they showed was the only one where they didn't explain what they were (and were not) going to do, which led to some false expectations on my part (it seemed anti-climactic that they kept saying "We know how you did it" and expected us to take their word for it; in the other episodes, they explain up front that they won't be giving away the secrets).


----------



## bigpuma

LifeIsABeach said:


> I have been watching it and like it a lot. I saw an interview with Penn & Teller before the show started and they said their favorite trick was one that actually didn't fool them. Unfortunately I forgot what they said and now I keep trying to figure out which one it may have been.


Was it Piff the Magic Dragon? Penn talks about him on his Sunday School podcast frequently and says he has had the most success since the show despite not fooling them at all.

Penn also said on his podcast if they get good ratings they may get a second brand new season to make in Vegas for the CW. I have been enjoying it.


----------



## waynomo

Yeah, I think it was Piff.


----------



## waynomo

I didn't even know about Wiazrd War. Damn. Now I need to check it out.


----------



## JohnB1000

I watched one and was driven crazy because the magician did fool them so we never learned how the trick was done


----------



## ebockelman

Craigbob said:


> I prefer wizard wars to fool us.


I'm the opposite. Wizard Wars relies way too much on box tricks and slight of hand. It's limited by the props. Fool Us is more wide open, so you get better routines.


----------



## Ereth

I've been enjoying it. I've seen some of the bits before on Youtube, but had never watched the entire show. I tend to fast forward through the Magician Introductions, though. I enjoy the tricks themselves far more than "I'm a street magician in London who has worked hard to learn my craft" for the 14th time.


----------



## TonyTheTiger

I watched it when it was on UK TV and re-watching it now. The quality of the magic is generally very good and the occasional trick is really well thought out and presented.

It's fun to watch the tricks performed and, as an (ex) amateur magician myself, I love the way P&T handle the tricks. The performers know whether or not they've been fooled and many will give up halfway through Penn's explanation.


----------



## LifeIsABeach

bigpuma said:


> Was it Piff the Magic Dragon? Penn talks about him on his Sunday School podcast frequently and says he has had the most success since the show despite not fooling them at all.
> 
> Penn also said on his podcast if they get good ratings they may get a second brand new season to make in Vegas for the CW. I have been enjoying it.


That most likely was it then. Thanks!


----------



## DUDE_NJX

Loved the show. I've had the opportunity to ask Teller about bringing it to the U.S. a couple of years ago. He said they've been in talks with networks for a while, but supposedly the market wasn't ready for it at that time. Hopefully it's ready now!


----------



## scandia101

I like the show. Sometimes I wonder how some of the magicians come on with a standard trick from decades ago thinking that P&T could possibly be fooled by it... and then they get fooled by it.


----------



## VegasVic

There are often several ways to do a particular effect. P&T may know many of them but once in awhile someone is using a technique P&T isn't familiar with. That's cool.


----------



## NorthAlabama

ebockelman said:


> Wizard Wars relies way too much on box tricks and slight of hand. It's limited by the props. Fool Us is more wide open, so you get better routines.


same here - the production values of fool us are higher quality, it has a bigger studio (& audience), and fewer props - i'm watching and enjoying both, though.


----------



## midas

I suspect most are just happy to get themselves on TV. Actually fooling P&T is probably a small concern.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

midas said:


> I suspect most are just happy to get themselves on TV. Actually fooling P&T is probably a small concern.


And on the last one, there were a couple who were blown away just to be praised (justly) by P&T (well, by P). The kid almost cried, he was so happy.


----------



## voidptr

Jeeters said:


> I've been watching it and enjoying it. I do find it annoying that whenever they pick an audience member to volunteer, the person gets up from their seat and you can see they're already wearing a microphone pack. I realize they might have just already been pre-chosen and given a mic in the interest of time, but it also leads to "I wonder if they're in on it" thoughts.


Penn stated on Twitter the other day that they mic the audience members up after they're chosen off-camera.



> People are asking how the audience people have on microphones. We stop recording to wire, but they are not coached or pre-selected.
> 
> That tweet about microphones was answering about "Penn & Teller: Fool Us" on the CW. At live P&T show, we don't stop for microphones.


----------



## tvmaster2

It's a really fun show - started in 2011 in the U.K, didn't it?


----------



## lew

Piff the magic dragon was just on AGT. Did the exact same trick, same comedy bits. Dog was left out. Heidi Klum was used instead of an audience member.
Got a great reaction. Piff should make it to the live shows


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

This is coming back soon! All-new episodes (i.e., not ones aired in England years ago).


----------



## DUDE_NJX

Awesome!


----------



## waynomo

I better make sure my OnePass is still there!


----------



## TheBar1

Rob Helmerichs said:


> This is coming back soon! All-new episodes (i.e., not ones aired in England years ago).


Season premiere July 6th!

http://www.cwtv.com/shows/penn-teller-fool-us


----------



## busyba

lew said:


> Piff the magic dragon was just on AGT. Did the exact same trick, same comedy bits. Dog was left out. Heidi Klum was used instead of an audience member.
> Got a great reaction. Piff should make it to the live shows


This just reminded me to look for the AGT thread. Interesting that there isn't one yet.


----------



## jjd_87

TheBar1 said:


> Season premiere July 6th!
> 
> http://www.cwtv.com/shows/penn-teller-fool-us


Crap. I just switched from cable to Directv and for some reason they don't offer CW. Guess I'll be stuck watching it online.


----------



## lew

jjd_87 said:


> Crap. I just switched from cable to Directv and for some reason they don't offer CW. Guess I'll be stuck watching it online.


CW would be a local channel. Channel 11, NYC CW affiliate, is available on DTV for subscribers in the NYC area. Check your local channels.


----------



## jjd_87

lew said:


> CW would be a local channel. Channel 11, NYC CW affiliate, is available on DTV for subscribers in the NYC area. Check your local channels.


I have. Its a sub station of our local NBC affiliate (WVVA) and apparently they don't play nice with DTV. The first day we had DTV the NBC station was off the air for contract negotiations.


----------



## Ereth

Alas too far into the future to set up a season pass for.. yet.

I tried.


----------



## DUDE_NJX

Not in Sonarr


----------



## Ereth

I don't know what that is.

I assume it's not this:


----------



## DUDE_NJX

https://sonarr.tv


----------



## Ereth

DUDE_NJX said:


> https://sonarr.tv


Well, that was a waste of time.

What is it with people that they can't answer a simple question, but instead just give you a link to a poorly designed web site that you have to then LEAVE to find out what the heck the product does?

One sentence. "It's a tool for finding shows in newsgroups". Instead, I have to dig through GitHub and find a FAQ and read that before I figure out what the heck you are talking about.


----------



## DUDE_NJX

Maybe if you actually asked a question in the first place...


----------



## Ereth

I didn't realize you were Alex Trebek and couldn't parse that "I don't know what that is" is functionally equivalent to "What is that?".


----------



## busyba

Ereth said:


> I don't know what that is.
> 
> I assume it's not this:


Please put comic book references in spoiler tags.


----------



## cmontyburns

Ereth said:


> Alas too far into the future to set up a season pass for.. yet.
> 
> I tried.


I was afraid waiting for it to show up in the guide would cause me to forget, so I just set up an autorecord wish list with the title keywords "fool us".


----------



## lew

jjd_87 said:


> I have. Its a sub station of our local NBC affiliate (WVVA) and apparently they don't play nice with DTV. The first day we had DTV the NBC station was off the air for contract negotiations.


I'm surprised your station thinks CW has enough value to demand $$$.

CW is partly owned by CBS. NBC won't be putting any pressure on your local station to come to terms.

Does anyone have the episode with Piff the Magic Dragon?


----------



## Donbadabon

lew said:


> Does anyone have the episode with Piff the Magic Dragon?


The P&T episode or the AGT episode?

Here is part of the P&T:

Piff The Magic Dragon:


----------



## waynomo

Is "AGT" America's got talent?


----------



## Regina

waynomo said:


> Is "AGT" America's got talent?


Yes. Piff was on the 1st audition show this season.


----------



## jamesl

Donbadabon said:


> The P&T episode or the AGT episode?
> 
> Here is part of the P&T:
> 
> Piff The Magic Dragon:


OMG, why would they post a video on youtube and cut it off so early


----------



## lew

Donbadabon said:


> The P&T episode or the AGT episode?
> 
> Here is part of the P&T:
> 
> Piff The Magic Dragon:





jamesl said:


> OMG, why would they post a video on youtube and cut it off so early


Don I found the complete video online. The video has been pulled from most sites.

The videos were pulled from youtube. Video is no longer on either P&T or Piff's youtube videos. I don't know how google automatically identifies videos. My guess is the video is too short for the automatic identification.

AGT likes to "pretend" they discovered these acts. P&Ts Fool Us was Piff's big break.


----------



## MikeAndrews

Woah. What happen?

I just saw Penn on Celebrity Jeopardy. He's morbidly skinny! His jacket was drooping. 

I haven't been following him closely enough.
Did he get a gastric bypass or or did something bad happen?


----------



## BrettStah

MikeAndrews said:


> Woah. What happen?
> 
> I just saw Penn on Celebrity Jeopardy. He's morbidly skinny! His jacket was drooping.
> 
> I haven't been following him closely enough.
> Did he get a gastric bypass or or did something bad happen?


http://bfy.tw/6Fx


----------



## LoadStar

MikeAndrews said:


> Woah. What happen?
> 
> I just saw Penn on Celebrity Jeopardy. He's morbidly skinny! His jacket was drooping.
> 
> I haven't been following him closely enough.
> Did he get a gastric bypass or or did something bad happen?





BrettStah said:


> http://bfy.tw/6Fx


I'll summarize: he had high blood pressure, and was encouraged by his doctor to lose weight.

I imagine that he'll be a lot like Drew Carey, who lost a ton of weight shortly after starting on The Price Is Right. People said similar things about Carey after he lost weight, asking if he was healthy and such. After a while, Carey settled into a "new normal" and didn't look so emaciated anymore.


----------



## nataylor

Just a note on Fool Us: A new season is starting on the CW on 7/6. CW ordered a new season after some ratings success airing reruns of the British version.


----------



## TonyTheTiger

Good show last night. I love that they allow some acts with absolutely no chance of fooling P&T, but not too many. The guy with the mirror was hugely entertaining, but even I could see how it was done (and not that well, IMHO!).

Loved Penn's reaction to plunger guy!

The one thing I found lacking was any explanation of what, besides a cheap trophy (with an unfortunate sight gag!), was awarded to anyone who was successful.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

TonyTheTiger said:


> The one thing I found lacking was any explanation of what, besides a cheap trophy (with an unfortunate sight gag!), was awarded to anyone who was successful.


They get to open for P&T, according to Jonathan Ross.


----------



## nataylor

Glad they kept Jonathan Ross around for this version.

The plunger trick was really good. And I think the Rubik's Cube guy is just phenomenal at manipulating the cube.


----------



## busyba

I just thought it was funny that the opening credits package and the giant poster on stage featured Fat Penn, and then Skinny Penn walks through the curtain. 

One would think they would have reshot some things.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

busyba said:


> I just thought it was funny that the opening credits package and the giant poster on stage featured Fat Penn, and then Skinny Penn walks through the curtain.
> 
> One would think they would have reshot some things.


They should have turned it into the punch-line for a trick!


----------



## Donbadabon

The french guy bored me to tears. 

The Rubik's Cube must've been a professional version, since it seemed so easy to manipulate. All the ones I remember playing with were a bit stiff to turn.


----------



## busyba

Donbadabon said:


> The french guy bored me to tears.
> 
> The Rubik's Cube must've been a professional version, since it seemed so easy to manipulate. All the ones I remember playing with were a bit stiff to turn.


I've seen competitive cubers use baby powder to make the cubes easier to spin (take the cube apart, apply it to the insides, reassemble). Presumably, the guy used some kind of similar lubrication.


----------



## gschrock

Rob Helmerichs said:


> They get to open for P&T, according to Jonathan Ross.


I saw an interview with Penn, and apparently it's not that they open for P&T, but apparently during the show they do a segment with the acts that fooled them. Not sure how long of a run the people get out in Vegas as part of the show.


----------



## Ereth

I have to find another source. The version my DVR recorded is unwatchable for the first half or so. It cleared up after that. I didn't see the plunger trick!


----------



## DUDE_NJX

Ereth said:


> I have to find another source. The version my DVR recorded is unwatchable for the first half or so. It cleared up after that. I didn't see the plunger trick!


It's freely available on CW's website and their apps/channels.


----------



## Turtleboy

nataylor said:


> Glad they kept Jonathan Ross around for this version.
> 
> The plunger trick was really good. And I think the Rubik's Cube guy is just phenomenal at manipulating the cube.


I think so. But it also looked like when he was presenting the finished cube, he was holding it in such a way that he was hiding 2-3 sides. It's possible that he didn't complete the full cube and only made it look that way.


----------



## justen_m

Turtleboy said:


> I think so. But it also looked like when he was presenting the finished cube, he was holding it in such a way that he was hiding 2-3 sides. It's possible that he didn't complete the full cube and only made it look that way.


I think he really solved it. I watched the last part of his act frame-by-frame. As he is sort of tossing the cube around like a hot potato while talking to P&T, he is also solving the cube. He is manipulating it and rotating planes. It happens so fast and with such amazing dexterity using just a couple light finger touches that I can't see it in real time. It is obvious in the frame-by-frame. To me he just seemed ridiculously dextrous and fast with his cube manipulations, and was good covering them up while he appeared to just be handling the cube normally.

The French dude was somewhat boring. I've seen similar things with the 'mirror' before. Some of the other stuff in his act was poorly done. When he made the scarf jump from the table into his hand, just before that you could see him grab the line at the back of the table that and I also caught a reflection(?) off the line (fishing line?) as he pulled the scarf to him. Probably just due to the camera angle and not visible to the audience.

I've seen other acts similar to the Shocker, but I have no idea how it is done. I wonder what was hiding under the tablecloth? The plunger guy's act was completely new to me, and even more inexplicable. Probably my favorite of the night -- funny and incredible. I like card tricks.


----------



## LifeIsABeach

Turtleboy said:


> I think so. But it also looked like when he was presenting the finished cube, he was holding it in such a way that he was hiding 2-3 sides. It's possible that he didn't complete the full cube and only made it look that way.


That is how several videos on youtube claim it is done. They take stickers from other cubes and make it so that the white side has random colors on it. They then do a small series of moves they can quickly and easily undo to make it look unsolved and then solved. However, if you watch the video he mentioned on the show he throws the cube to the police officer after doing the one-second solve and all sides are solid.


----------



## dtle

busyba said:


> I've seen competitive cubers use baby powder to make the cubes easier to spin (take the cube apart, apply it to the insides, reassemble). Presumably, the guy used some kind of similar lubrication.


I used Vaseline when I was a kid (no jokes please). My best time solving a cube was around 30 seconds. I just learn the normal way, not the shortcut way to solve them.

I'm really surprised how P&T didn't even discussed the trick before declaring "Fool Us". I guess they all showed the tricks to P&T before the actually taping on stage.


----------



## gschrock

dtle said:


> I'm really surprised how P&T didn't even discussed the trick before declaring "Fool Us". I guess they all showed the tricks to P&T before the actually taping on stage.


According to that same interview I mentioned earlier, they only get one shot in front of P&T, so I don't think that's happening.


----------



## BrettStah

dtle said:


> I'm really surprised how P&T didn't even discussed the trick before declaring "Fool Us". I guess they all showed the tricks to P&T before the actually taping on stage.


It wouldn't take them more than a glance or two for each to know if the other is stumped, after working together for so long.


----------



## Ereth

I think it was pretty clear from Tellers face that he didn't have a clue, and that was all Penn needed, because Teller is the one with the strongest magical background. Penn knew he didn't know, and he could see Teller didn't know, so no discussion needed.

The guy flat out says he never got good enough to win the speed competitions so he had to start cheating. I think they are custom built Rubiks Cubes.


----------



## busyba

Btw, you could tell the exact moment Teller figured out the plunger trick. After he puts his card back in the deck and the magician puts the deck fown, Teller looks up at him with a wry grin. It was right then that he knew.


----------



## BrettStah

Has anyone mentioned how it was likely done? It sure fooled me! So did the Rubik's cube dude.


----------



## Ereth

Finally had a chance to watch the plunger trick.

Wow.

I'm particularly amused because you almost never see Penn that off balance by a trick. Exclaiming "get out of here" when it works was truly surprising and pretty awesome for the magician.

I'm definitely stumped. Awesome trick.


----------



## MarkofT

Plunger trick:


Spoiler



It's basic science. Cards are flat. Very very flat. They are also thin and have smooth surfaces. This allows for the all the air to be evacuated from between the cards. So when the plunger picks up the top card, the suction between the cards picks up the ones below. He never holds the cards up for long or tilts them without also quickly setting them down.

Basic magic manipulations allow him to put the tiniest air gap in specific places to allow the plunger to find the selected cards. At least I think that how the plunger selected cards. I know that is how it picked up more then one card at a time.


----------



## MarkofT

Just tested my explanation. I was right for the first part, the second part I have also figured out.


Spoiler



There is a little bit of crown. If you counter that crown, the deck will split at that different crown. A magician with true slight of hand skills can slip in a card with the back printed on both sides in the specific place.

I should clarify my statement about the cards being flat. They are, but a deck will all crown together. A very minute crown but that is all it takes for the trick to work


----------



## Jeeters

BrettStah said:


> Has anyone mentioned how it was likely done? It sure fooled me! So did the Rubik's cube dude.


I don't know exactly how the cube trick worked, but a fake cube was involved for at least part of it - At one point he shows a seemingly unsolved cube; i.e., the three sides showing are unsolved. He then quickly flips it over and the cube is instantly solved - the three sides showing are now all the same color. But if you freeze frame it at the right spot, you can see the bottom, 4th side of the "solved" cube, and that bottom side has mixed up colors. I'm assuming for that part of the routine, he had a cube where 3 sides were solved and 3 sides were unsolved and it was just a matter of flipping it to make the cube appear solved or unsolved.

I was also wondering if there was something going on with magnets... perhaps the cube pieces were held together by magnets which he could easily separate and then rearrange. If so, then the pieces could have colors on many sides - just pull a section off the cube, rotate it to show different colors of his choosing, then stick the section back.


----------



## Ereth

I'm imagining tiny motors. It solves itself, while it's out of view.


----------



## waynomo

Come on. It's magic!


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

I'm sure they simply sold their souls to Satan in exchange for the power to work dark magic. Occam's razor!


----------



## Donbadabon

I did a search for self-solving Rubik's Cube and looks like there are a lot of videos out there.

This guy has a method, but one side is always unsolved.


----------



## Turtleboy

If you find the video where he used the trick to get out of a ticket, he handed the behind the back trick cube to the cop at the end.


----------



## LordKronos

justen_m said:


> I've seen other acts similar to the Shocker, but I have no idea how it is done. I wonder what was hiding under the tablecloth


That trick is called the one ahead trick (at the end of the act, Penn even said "you were one ahead of us", at which point Shocker sort of grinned and nodded, acknowledging they knew it). It basically works like this

1) Shocker asks guy for name of a girl
2) Shocker writes down 8D
3) Audience member reveals name of girl is "Donna"
4) Shocker asks girl for what she wants to do
5) Shocker writes down "Donna"
6) Girl answers "Wrestling"
7) Shocker pulls out a deck of cards that contains only 3 of clubs
8) Teller takes a card
9) Shocker writes down "Wrestling"

At this point, there's some sort of sort of manual manipulation that goes on or something to switch up the envelopes. I'm not 100% clear on that part. It could be a trick envelopes or something...the (1) written on the front peels off to have a (3) behind it so it looks like he's inserting the card into a (1) envelope when it's really a (3) envelope. It was hard to tell since the camera's did not show any of how he grabbed the envelopes.

From there, it's obvious how he presented the envelopes in an order different than he wrote them. The only trick left was how he turned the 8 D into a 3 C. If you look at the 3 C, it's plainly obvious it's a 8 D with certain parts removed. There are a number of ways he could accomplish that. It could be some sort of disappearing ink, or a trick layered paper (the parts that disappear are on a different layer paper that then gets removed somehow when it's on the table). That part again can't be determined for sure, since the camera focuses away from the table and you can't see what's going on with the paper.


----------



## justen_m

Thanks! So the Shocker's trick was pretty basic. No wonder vets like P&T figured it out immediately, no discussion required. I guess I'm naive enough to want to believe the card decks and Rubik's cube are real, for the most part, and it is just sleight of hand that is fooling me.


----------



## nataylor

I'm convinced the Rubik's cube guy is really manipulating the cube. When he does the part where he shows Teller the mixed up cube and throws it in the air to reveal a solved cube, I was able to analyze the cube patterns. When he starts showing Teller, the cube is in a position that would take six moves to solve. He then says if he turns it one time, it will still be mixed up. He actually does two moves on it, bringing it within 4 moves of being solved. I think he does another two moves while he covers the cube with his hands and then two move when he tosses the cube. There is one part when he does only solve three of the sides. But when he does the cube in the bag and toss behind the back, I think he really is quickly getting in 4-6 moves.


----------



## Turtleboy

Here's him getting out of a ticket.


----------



## nataylor

The toss behind the back begins 4 moves from being solved. He's obviously got a system down, because the cube patterns are exactly the same in that video as when he performed it for P&T.


----------



## DUDE_NJX

In the YT video, you can hear him move the cube when he holds it in his palm and behind his back.


----------



## cmontyburns

My reaction to the acts in this first episode:

1. Tiny plunger: This was the best act and the most entertaining. I knew the basic principle (as described above by MarkofT) that was allowing the trick to work, and accepted that there was some sleight-of-hand involved to set things up so that the principle would deliver the desired result. But the overall act still worked: it was really entertaining, the tiny plunger conceit was fun, and the sleight-of-hand was opaque enough to me that the net was really effective. Good stuff.

2. Magic mirror: As an entertainment act, this was just fine. I did think his timing was a little off in spots, but that's a minor complaint. As a magic act, though, I thought it was wanting. There wasn't much "magic" involved.

3. Rubik's Cube: This didn't do much for me. Even if I couldn't do what this guy was doing, I knew what he was doing. He's a speed cubist. Where's the magic? There wasn't any in this act.

4. Shocker: Didn't like this one. The mind-reading illusion worked just fine, but it was a pretty standard trick that we've seen many times before. Meh. The envelope "transformation" at the end might have been more effective if the camerawork weren't so poor: we could even see it! And I thought the magician's "Shocker" persona added nothing to the act he was doing.

5. P&T's fish trick: That was neat.


----------



## LordKronos

cmontyburns said:


> 3. Rubik's Cube: This didn't do much for me. Even if I couldn't do what this guy was doing, I knew what he was doing. He's a speed cubist. Where's the magic? There wasn't any in this act.


I can pretty much agree with everything else you said, except for this. This guy wasn't just a speed cubist. Much of magic is slight of hand, and (assuming he didn't have something like a mechanically self solving cube) this guys slight of hand was amazing. To be able to make even a couple of turns of the cube, single handedly, while not looking, and while throwing it...that was impressive slight of hand.

Regarding P&T's end performance. I did think it was great, but I was a little thrown off. This is my first time watching this show, so I didn't know what to expect. I didn't think they were just doing a trick...I could have swore they said something like they were going to show how the trick works (which I know they've done before). But I didn't really see that. I thought the bucket was part of that, but it appears the bucket was just a distraction. That all confused me a bit. Did I misunderstand?


----------



## LordKronos

Also, when Penn is talking about each performers act, he seems to work the name of the trick into his discussion. As I mentioned earlier about The Shocker, he said "you were one ahead of us", and "one ahead" was the name of that trick. For the mirror guy, he used the phrase "daylight seance", which appears to be the name of that trick (found several of that trick when searching for that term). 

With the plunger guy, Penn talked a lot about how the trick took his breath away, which gave Teller a clue to how it was done. That doesn't make sense that Penn's reaction gave Teller a clue, so I'm guessing he was trying to do a same thing there with using the name of that trick in his analysis. Does anyone know what the name of that trick would be called? I tried searching on a few of the things he said, but couldn't come up with anything.


----------



## BrettStah

Tiny plunger. You can buy a DVD showing how to do the trick (it comes with a couple of plungers) for around $40-50 I think.


----------



## Donbadabon

LordKronos said:


> I thought the bucket was part of that, but it appears the bucket was just a distraction. That all confused me a bit. Did I misunderstand?


The bucket was used when Penn threw the phone into it. Then it was raised up and (out of sight of us) it was retrieved, placed into a fish and then put into the audience.

So the bucket was just a means to get the phone off the stage.


----------



## busyba

The tiny plunger, btw, is a smartphone accessory. You use the suction cup to stick it to the back of your phone in order to use it as a kickstand.

http://www.perpetualkid.com/iplunge-phone-stand.html


----------



## BrettStah

Donbadabon said:


> The bucket was used when Penn threw the phone into it. Then it was raised up and (out of sight of us) it was retrieved, placed into a fish and then put into the audience.
> 
> So the bucket was just a means to get the phone off the stage.


Not only retrieved, but put into a sealed plastic bag, then placed into a fish, and then put into a box, and then the box was put into the audience. All within a pretty short period of time. It's a pretty good trick... I wonder if the phone was somehow retrieved before we think it is.


----------



## LordKronos

Donbadabon said:


> The bucket was used when Penn threw the phone into it. Then it was raised up and (out of sight of us) it was retrieved, placed into a fish and then put into the audience.
> 
> So the bucket was just a means to get the phone off the stage.


That's what I thought was going to happen, but I thought the bucket was in view at all times, and I never saw anybody up in the scaffolding retrieve it (did I miss that)? So I thought the bucket was a misdirection, and that teller had craftily removed the phone from the bucket without us knowing, so that the whole audience was convinced the phone was up there the whole time, when it really wasn't. Right after the bucket, Teller walks off to the side of the stage (and out of sight of the camera), and I assumed he was handing off the phone to someone else there (without us realizing it, since we thought it was in the bucket).

I'm going to have to watch that again and see what I missed.


----------



## Donbadabon

LordKronos said:


> Right after the bucket, Teller walks off to the side of the stage (and out of sight of the camera), and I assumed he was handing off the phone to someone else there (without us realizing it, since we thought it was in the bucket).


Ohh. Now that is something I didn't catch. So you may very well be right - the bucket was there to make the audience think it was there the whole time, when it was just a mis-direction. That would actually make more sense.


----------



## Bardman

I don't think the phone was ever in the bucket... or the fish, but Teller used slight of hand instead...
quickly make a switch and throw a look-a-like phone in the bucket before raising the bucket (distraction)
at a convenient time, slip phone in bag and place in his coat next to a mic that is connected to speaker in fish box (planted before the show)
when fish is cut open, slight of hand the phone bag out, making sure to get fish guts on the outside of the bag so it looks like it just came from within.
<profit!!>


----------



## BrettStah

Bardman said:


> I don't think the phone was ever in the bucket... or the fish, but Teller used slight of hand instead...
> quickly make a switch and throw a look-a-like phone in the bucket before raising the bucket (distraction)
> at a convenient time, slip phone in bag and place in his coat next to a mic that is connected to speaker in fish box (planted before the show)
> when fish is cut open, slight of hand the phone bag out, making sure to get fish guts on the outside of the bag so it looks like it just came from within.
> <profit!!>


Nice theory! Makes a lot of sense...

You know, there's a good way to find out - we just need to track down the guy who was picked for the trick, and have him share the video that was made during the whole thing!


----------



## hefe

cmontyburns said:


> My reaction to the acts in this first episode:
> 
> ..
> 
> 3. Rubik's Cube: This didn't do much for me. Even if I couldn't do what this guy was doing, I knew what he was doing. He's a speed cubist. Where's the magic? There wasn't any in this act.
> 
> ...


Just as much magic as any trick, since there's no such thing. I don't see why being a speed cubist is any less impressive. It takes sleight of hand to a new level, I think. You still have to craft an effective illusion. Would it have been more satisfying if he was pulling solved cubes out of his sleeve?


----------



## Bardman

Bardman said:


> I don't think the phone was ever in the bucket... or the fish, but Teller used slight of hand instead...
> quickly make a switch and throw a look-a-like phone in the bucket before raising the bucket (distraction)
> at a convenient time, slip phone in bag and place in his coat next to a mic that is connected to speaker in fish box (planted before the show)
> when fish is cut open, slight of hand the phone bag out, making sure to get fish guts on the outside of the bag so it looks like it just came from within.
> <profit!!>


I just watched it again...

clarifying the "dummy phone in the bucket" theory... Teller himself went to the audience to pick the "lucky audience member" who just happened to have a phone with no case.
They then held his phone right up to Penn's mic so they could get a great audio clip of the ring tone for an off-stage helper to replay through the speaker in the fish box later (under the "very well light lady" in the audience)
Penn then swapped the phone with a dummy when putting the necklass on Chris Angel. "Chris" then transported the phone off stage to be inserted into bag before being positioned for Teller to palm it while cutting open the fish.


----------



## Jeeters

I think the cardboard Criss Angel cut-out was maybe involved in getting the phone off the stage. While Penn is holding the phone he puts the necklace around the neck of Criss Angel. I think when he does that, the hand holding the phone goes disappears behind Angel for brief moment. I think at that moment, he may have switch phones with one that was already hidden behind Criss Angel. From that point on, as Penn is waving the phone around, he seems to be trying to cover up the bezel and the back of the phone, and only allows the glowing screen to show, as if he doesn't want to the audience to see it's a different phone.


----------



## Bardman

BrettStah said:


> Nice theory! Makes a lot of sense...
> 
> You know, there's a good way to find out - we just need to track down the guy who was picked for the trick, and have him share the video that was made during the whole thing!


Yea! Penn said that the secret of the trick would be revealed by watching the video!!


----------



## justen_m

LordKronos said:


> Regarding P&T's end performance. I did think it was great, but I was a little thrown off. This is my first time watching this show, so I didn't know what to expect. I didn't think they were just doing a trick...I could have swore they said something like they were going to show how the trick works (which I know they've done before). But I didn't really see that. I thought the bucket was part of that, but it appears the bucket was just a distraction. That all confused me a bit. Did I misunderstand?


This was also my first time watching this show, and your post echoes my sentiments word for word. Based on their comments, I expected they would show us how the trick worked and just hide that from the stooge from the audience.


----------



## MarkofT

LordKronos said:


> Also, when Penn is talking about each performers act, he seems to work the name of the trick into his discussion. As I mentioned earlier about The Shocker, he said "you were one ahead of us", and "one ahead" was the name of that trick. For the mirror guy, he used the phrase "daylight seance", which appears to be the name of that trick (found several of that trick when searching for that term).
> 
> With the plunger guy, Penn talked a lot about how the trick took his breath away, which gave Teller a clue to how it was done. That doesn't make sense that Penn's reaction gave Teller a clue, so I'm guessing he was trying to do a same thing there with using the name of that trick in his analysis. Does anyone know what the name of that trick would be called? I tried searching on a few of the things he said, but couldn't come up with anything.


When something takes your breath away, you inhale sharply. That is also known as sucking in air. That inhale gave Teller the idea that suction is what made it work.


----------



## cmontyburns

hefe said:


> Just as much magic as any trick, since there's no such thing. I don't see why being a speed cubist is any less impressive. It takes sleight of hand to a new level, I think. You still have to craft an effective illusion. Would it have been more satisfying if he was pulling solved cubes out of his sleeve?


Obviously it's all sleight of hand/misdirection no matter the trick, but usually I can't tell _what_ is being done, or when. In this case, both were readily apparent. It's still impressive on a physical level, but there really is no illusion involved because he makes it apparent right from the start how good he is at manipulating the cube. For example, when he reached into the bag and pulled out the cube solved, he couldn't disguise the fact that he was manipulating the cube while his hand was in there. Could I do that? No way. Is there any mystery as to how he did it? Also no.


----------



## LordKronos

MarkofT said:


> When something takes your breath away, you inhale sharply. That is also known as sucking in air. That inhale gave Teller the idea that suction is what made it work.


But it also didn't make sense that he said Teller already did a version of this trick before, so you'd think as soon as Teller saw it he'd recognize it. He wouldn't need a clue. And maybe indeed that's what happened, and his talk about the clue was just his coded way of telling the performer what they thought the secret was, rather than the name of the trick (perhap that particular trick doesn't have a specific name)


----------



## LordKronos

About the P&T act, indeed, I think Bardman and Jeeters were right in saying it was Criss Angel that was the key there. And doing it that way addresses the other concern I had...what if they slipped up and dropped the guys phone (either Penn throws it wrong or Teller misses the catch). Swapping at the Criss Angel step removes that concern.

I also did a frame by frame of the bucket catch, and I can't see any way that Teller could have got ahold of the phone, even with a trick bucket with a hole.

And as for Teller picking the phone out of the audience, that's why Penn had everyone hold up their phones. P&T had a newer model iphone (I can't tell which version precisely), which there was almost certain to be someone in the audience that has an identical one. They hold up their phones, and then Teller goes and picks the match.


----------



## MikeMar

LordKronos said:


> About the P&T act, indeed, I think Bardman and Jeeters were right in saying it was Criss Angel that was the key there. And doing it that way addresses the other concern I had...what if they slipped up and dropped the guys phone (either Penn throws it wrong or Teller misses the catch). Swapping at the Criss Angel step removes that concern.
> 
> I also did a frame by frame of the bucket catch, and I can't see any way that Teller could have got ahold of the phone, even with a trick bucket with a hole.
> 
> And as for Teller picking the phone out of the audience, that's why Penn had everyone hold up their phones. P&T had a newer model iphone (I can't tell which version precisely), which there was almost certain to be someone in the audience that has an identical one. They hold up their phones, and then Teller goes and picks the match.


Good point, be great if they did it with a Windows phone


----------



## GoPackGo

There are plenty of videos on Youtube of the trick from the phone's vantage point.


----------



## LordKronos

GoPackGo said:


> There are plenty of videos on Youtube of the trick from the phone's vantage point.


Awesome. Thanks for those videos. That clarifies it completely. So it definitely was Criss Angel that was the key to swapping out the phone. And as for the return of the phone, apparently there's no slight of hand there. "I'm gonna walk over here and put your phone in this dead fish"


----------



## DUDE_NJX

Yes, the fish is cut on one side to insert the phone, and then on the opposite side to retrieve it.


----------



## busyba

A review of their Broadway show speaks of a technical glitch that gives some insight into the fish trick. Apparently there's a speaker under one of the seats that is playing the phone's ringtone, probably recorded when the phone was rung into the mike, rather than the sound coming from the phone itself. The glitch was that there was random noise coming from that speaker over the course of the show (and it was under the seat next to the seat the reviewer was sitting in). Oops.


----------



## GoPackGo

When the companion calls the phone, and Penn has the phone near his mic, their sound crew must be making a recording of the ringtone and that's what they playback out of the seat speaker.


----------



## MikeMar

GoPackGo said:


> When the companion calls the phone, and Penn has the phone near his mic, their sound crew must be making a recording of the ringtone and that's what they playback out of the seat speaker.


I think that was said above

But I BET when they do this trick they hope for a funky ringtone


----------



## DUDE_NJX

I was going to see them on Broadway, but the tickets are quite expensive. $50 in fees per ticket? Yikes.


----------



## danterner

DUDE_NJX said:


> I was going to see them on Broadway, but the tickets are quite expensive. $50 in fees per ticket? Yikes.


I remember seeing them when they came to my college in the 90's. It was a great show then, made better as I got to see my roommate's reaction when he discovered they weren't a "normal" magic act - he had never seen them before. Their opening card trick involved Penn unexpectedly stabbing a knife through the back of Teller's hand. My roommate practically jumped out of his seat.


----------



## hefe

danterner said:


> I remember seeing them when they came to my college in the 90's. It was a great show then, made better as I got to see my roommate's reaction when he discovered they weren't a "normal" magic act - he had never seen them before. Their opening card trick involved Penn unexpectedly stabbing a knife through the back of Teller's hand. My roommate practically jumped out of his seat.


I saw them in Chicago, I want to say around 1990. They did a trick with Teller locked in a Houdini-style water tank. I was the volunteer pulled out of the audience to help with that. One of the props was a keychain with TELLER written across it, I still have that somewhere.

Here's a video about that trick:


----------



## DUDE_NJX

I saw them live a couple of years ago. It was great, and got to talk to them after the show. I don't remember paying this much. Maybe $60-70 per ticket, total.


----------



## Turtleboy

Cube guy's Reddit AMA.


__
https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/3d5wlc


----------



## MikeAndrews

nataylor said:


> Glad they kept Jonathan Ross around for this version.
> 
> The plunger trick was really good. And I think the Rubik's Cube guy is just phenomenal at manipulating the cube.


I suppose we should have trick spoilers.

I think when he was scrambling the cube with and after Teller at the beginning, he was making it match what Teller had. He's so good that he can figure out what moves get it into a certain pattern. How he "solves it?" I think he can switch cubes at will, like how he produced the matching cube at the end.

The plunger guy? Teller saw something while Penn was being amazed. The hint was breath.

Brian Brushwood will be on the next show! I'll bet he doesn't fool them but he'll do a good act.


----------



## nataylor

Watching the new episode tonight. This is all becoming very meta. Magicians are throwing in misdirection that's completely unnecessary to the trick in order to just mislead P&T. The first act tonight is an example. The cube guy said he did it in his AMA, too. As someone who loves the art form, I'm tickled to see it.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

Teller speaks!


----------



## DUDE_NJX

The shocker guy last week also had trick envelopes. The numbers were changeable. You can see it when he mishandles the first envelope and the "1" is clearly moveable inside a cutout window.


----------



## nataylor

That was a fantastic bit of sleight of hand tonight.


----------



## LoadStar

The duo in tonight's episode might have fooled P&T, but I thought it was just bad. There was just so much happening on the stage, and as a result I didn't care about any of it. Plus, none of it had good patter or flow... it was all very disjointed.


----------



## Savafan1

You can see how Leon and Romy did the trick...



Spoiler



When Leon goes and picks up the yellow helmet, you can see the card in his other hand and he puts in on the back of the chair.


----------



## MikeAndrews

justen_m said:


> ...I've seen other acts similar to the Shocker, but I have no idea how it is done. I wonder what was hiding under the tablecloth?


One step is that there's carbon paper inside the envelope so he only has to write on the outside to mark the paper. How he gets a chance to write is something I don't know but in similar tricks they use the same weird stand for the envelopes. Maybe it's rigged mechanically so a helper can write remotely.

He did way too much wiggling to put the paper in - to get it one correct side of the carbon paper. And removed the seal from the envelope flap but the envelopes didn't seal.

I might have missed how he goes to the stand and is able is write during some misdirection.

OH, we gotta guess that P&T trick has an aide or two taking the phone from the bucket in the wings and sneaking it into the box and into the audience.


----------



## Donbadabon

nataylor said:


> That was a fantastic bit of sleight of hand tonight.


He was faster than my DVR frame-by-frame. Fantastic.


----------



## lew

DUDE_NJX said:


> I was going to see them on Broadway, but the tickets are quite expensive. $50 in fees per ticket? Yikes.


You must be looking at a broker/scalper/resale site.

The show has been frequently available at the TKS booth, same day generally half price.

There are a limited number of same day rush tickets available at the box office for $40.

Both have modest, or no, fees.

You should be able to purchase regular priced tickets at Ticketmaster. Regular, ripoff, Ticketmaster fees....But not 50/per ticket.


----------



## DUDE_NJX

MikeAndrews said:


> One step is that there's carbon paper inside the envelope so he only has to write on the outside to mark the paper. How he gets a chance to write is something I don't know but in similar tricks they use the same weird stand for the envelopes. Maybe it's rigged mechanically so a helper can write remotely.
> 
> He did way too much wiggling to put the paper in - to get it one correct side of the carbon paper. And removed the seal from the envelope flap but the envelopes didn't seal.
> 
> I might have missed how he goes to the stand and is able is write during some misdirection.
> 
> OH, we gotta guess that P&T trick has an aide or two taking the phone from the bucket in the wings and sneaking it into the box and into the audience.


I believe it was explained earlier in the thread. He writes each answer after he hears it and switches numbers on envelopes. You can see him writing "Donna" when he's supposed to be writing "wrestle".


----------



## DUDE_NJX

lew said:


> You must be looking at a broker/scalper/resale site.
> 
> The show has been frequently available at the TKS booth, same day generally half price.
> 
> There are a limited number of same day rush tickets available at the box office for $40.
> 
> Both have modest, or no, fees.
> 
> You should be able to purchase regular priced tickets at Ticketmaster. Regular, ripoff, Ticketmaster fees....But not 50/per ticket.


Nope. The official site.


----------



## busyba

Savafan1 said:


> You can see how Leon and Romy did the trick...
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> When Leon goes and picks up the yellow helmet, you can see the card in his other hand and he puts in on the back of the chair.


That was my guess as well. Although that was such an obvious move that it could have been another deliberate false move.

I'm surprised P&T didn't know how the guy vanished the marker. I thought it was pretty obvious that


Spoiler



he palms it in his right hand and then tosses it into his vest


----------



## MikeAndrews

LordKronos said:


> About the P&T act, indeed, I think Bardman and Jeeters were right in saying it was Criss Angel that was the key there. And doing it that way addresses the other concern I had...what if they slipped up and dropped the guys phone (either Penn throws it wrong or Teller misses the catch). Swapping at the Criss Angel step removes that concern.
> 
> I also did a frame by frame of the bucket catch, and I can't see any way that Teller could have got ahold of the phone, even with a trick bucket with a hole.
> 
> And as for Teller picking the phone out of the audience, that's why Penn had everyone hold up their phones. P&T had a newer model iphone (I can't tell which version precisely), which there was almost certain to be someone in the audience that has an identical one. They hold up their phones, and then Teller goes and picks the match.


It helped that Teller went into the audience to find someone with a "very rare" white iPhone. 

In the first season there was the lady magician who made the item appear in a unopened walnut _inside an egg_. There is some system to do the switch, even though I swear they never touch the object.

OOOOO, they have a duplicate fish and they switch the whole fish from the box!

Teller says that many tricks work with way too much preparation the audience would never expect, like hiding items in 12 places and telling the subject "look under the lamp."


----------



## MikeAndrews

The cube guy's FU:
http://www.killsometime.com/videos/17825/Rubiks-Cube-Magician-Fools-Penn-Teller


----------



## lew

DUDE_NJX said:


> Nope. The official site.


The official site links to Ticketmaster when you click on buy tickets. Maybe you selected a sold out date and Ticketmaster sent you by in their broker site. Maybe you weren't really on the official site.


----------



## DUDE_NJX

Talking about their Broadway show.
http://www.broadway.com/shows/penn-teller/


----------



## lew

DUDE_NJX said:


> Talking about their Broadway show.
> http://www.broadway.com/shows/penn-teller/


Official site
http://pennandtelleronbroadway.com/

Your link is to a reseller site.

Tickets are showing up at tkts booth tdf.org


----------



## angbear1985

Can't figure out how the guy did it ... with the cartoon gal - coloring her hair, shirt, etc. what did I miss? seems obvious to P&T.


----------



## Jeeters

angbear1985 said:


> Can't figure out how the guy did it ... with the cartoon gal - coloring her hair, shirt, etc. what did I miss? seems obvious to P&T.


I couldn't figure it out either. I think Penn was referring to "Thumper" the rabbit during his discussion, so I was guessing the guy was tapping his foot or something as a signal, but I didn't see anything like that happen. And even so, I don't know what it would accomplish.

I thought the couple at the beginning was pretty easy to figure out (the 'how' was mentioned in an earlier post); I'm surprised P&T missed it.

The guy who tapped the girls shoulder and the chalkboard was easy. Even sort of amateurish...


Spoiler



He tells her to close her eyes and remember anything she feels. He then starts running around her and waving his arms. That's when he touches her shoulder. The very first time he touches her is completely obvious. The second not so much. The chalkboards probably have trick slates. Message is already written on them. He puts the boards together, and the slate from one board jumps over to the other board (maybe via magnets), revealing another slate underneath, with a message on it, and a message on the back side of the slate that jumped.


I thought the Asian guy with the cards was really impressive. I'm guessing the producers thought so, too, since it seemed they gave him a lot of air time for the routine.


----------



## lew

angbear
65854 said:


> Can't figure out how the guy did it ... with the cartoon gal - coloring her hair, shirt, etc. what did I miss? seems obvious to P&T.


The paper has "invisible" ink. The "markers" , all the same, have whatever liquid necessary to reveal the color.

Search amazon for invisible ink coloring book.


----------



## angbear1985

lew said:


> The paper has "invisible" ink. The "markers" , all the same, have whatever liquid necessary to reveal the color.


:up:


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

lew said:


> The paper has "invisible" ink. The "markers" , all the same, have whatever liquid necessary to reveal the color.


Then why did the color of the marker cap match the color he drew?


----------



## Donbadabon

So what was the purpose of the marker guy being blindfolded?

I first thought he was going to just tell the guy what colors were used (and he would've been told through an earpiece which colors the guy used). 

He could've just sat in a chair and watched the guy color.


----------



## pdhenry

But the markers have caps that match the color that appears. So it's not that any pen will produce the correct color at the appropriate spot.

The guy picks up a pen and then the magician tells him what part to color in. He knows (somehow) which pen so he knows where to tell the guy to color.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

Yeah, I figured there was just a gap in the blindfold (I could see little dark spots along either side of his nose)...


----------



## Turtleboy

angbear1985 said:


> Can't figure out how the guy did it ... with the cartoon gal - coloring her hair, shirt, etc. what did I miss? seems obvious to P&T.


Penn was referring to a "Thumper."

http://www.penguinmagic.com/p/S9252

it seems to be some sort of silent "buzzer" that thumps against his skin, or in his pocket, like the Apple Watch does.

He has a partner in the audience who sends him a signal using the thumper as to what colors were chosen.

I assume that he has a bunch of dolls in various configurations. How he chooses the right one and makes the other ones disappear, I don't know.


----------



## pdhenry

Once he know what pen the participant is holding he only needs one doll.


----------



## nataylor

angbear1985 said:


> Can't figure out how the guy did it ... with the cartoon gal - coloring her hair, shirt, etc. what did I miss? seems obvious to P&T.


One big hint is that he doesn't tell the guy what to color in until he selects a marker. So that means he has to have some way to know what color marker the guy was holding. But his eyes were genuinely covered. So there must have been someone else that could see what color the guy was holding and could relay that information to the magician. A "thumper" is one method by which a third party could relay information to the magician.


----------



## nataylor

Turtleboy said:


> I assume that he has a bunch of dolls in various configurations. How he chooses the right one and makes the other ones disappear, I don't know.


He doesn't need a bunch of dolls. The coloring is always going to come out the same because he knows to tell the participant where to put each color.


----------



## nataylor

Donbadabon said:


> So what was the purpose of the marker guy being blindfolded?
> 
> I first thought he was going to just tell the guy what colors were used (and he would've been told through an earpiece which colors the guy used).
> 
> He could've just sat in a chair and watched the guy color.


So the magician knows he has a doll with red hair, purple shorts, etc. if he can see the participant pick up each marker, he can just tell the person where to put each color. That's not much of a trick. The trick is getting the audience to think he doesn't know what color the person is holding.


----------



## LoadStar

Note that the markers were all placed into the cup with the obviously colored cap up, making it easy for the assistant to see which color the audience member picks up.

Additionally, there was a tell during this routine. The audience member picked up a pen but didn't make it obvious which pen he picked up, and then the cap covered in his hand. The magician hesitated... "Go ahead and color.... do you see her.. umm... belt..."


----------



## Donbadabon

I love this thread. I never even considered the order/color was the key.


----------



## MikeAndrews

No Brian Brushwood this week!


----------



## cmontyburns

Donbadabon said:


> He was faster than my DVR frame-by-frame. Fantastic.


Assume you were talking about Shim Lin. I agree -- really terrific routine. Probably the best thing I've seen on this show to date.


----------



## NorthAlabama

i stumbled across this story on the interwebs, there's a slide show at the end of the linked story (theatermania.com):



> _Debbie Harry, Gilbert Gottfried, and More Toast Penn & Teller's Magical New Broadway Show_
> A who's who of stars came out to welcome the legendary illusionists back to the New York stage.
> 
> Magical duo Penn & Teller celebrated their Broadway opening night on July 12, at the Marquis Theatre. The pair began their latest New York engagement on July 7, and will continue in the Big Apple through August 16.


----------



## MikeAndrews

NorthAlabama said:


> i stumbled across this story on the interwebs, there's a slide show at the end of the linked story (theatermania.com):


Am I the only one who thinks that skinny Penn looks _un_healthier.

I figured out the invisible touch with a REW- as above, the trick being that he doesn't say _when_ she felt the touches.

I saw some behind the scenes with P&T where Teller was endlessly practicing with the ball and thread.

I think that the thread passes through his left hand put he has a power reel in his pants or vest. His left thumb moved a bit.

The signed card thing must be a magic staple. We've seen two acts do it already. Am I totally off by thinking that the signature is easy to duplicate?


----------



## nataylor

MikeAndrews said:


> Am I the only one who thinks that skinny Penn looks _un_healthier.
> 
> I figured out the invisible touch with a REW- as above, the trick being that he doesn't say _when_ she felt the touches.
> 
> I saw some behind the scenes with P&T where Teller was endlessly practicing with the ball and thread.
> 
> I think that the thread passes through his left hand put he has a power reel in his pants or vest. His left thumb moved a bit.
> 
> The signed card thing must be a magic staple. We've seen two acts do it already. Am I totally off by thinking that the signature is easy to duplicate?


Yeah, the invisible touch act was Banachek's classic PK Touches routine. Ridiculously simple, but quite convincing.

And I think you're on the right track with Shim Lin's card trick. The key is having someone with good penmanship who doesn't mind working in cramped quarters (and setting up the routine so people only see their own actual signature up close).


----------



## series5orpremier

I saw them on Broadway 25 years ago. I wonder if they would use any of the stuff or a variation of it from back then. I caught on to one of their misdirections. Teller and I were looking at each other and when I turned to whisper to my friend sitting next to me I think he knew that I knew. I don't even remember the details of the trick, just the misdirection behind it because it was so unique and clever. Never to this day have I ever seen anything else like it.


----------



## cmontyburns

I'm glad they did the ball-and-thread trick. I read a profile of Teller in the NYT a few years ago that talked about the thousands of hours Teller had spent practicing the illusion to be able to pull it off. It's nice to have seen it finally.


----------



## MikeMar

cmontyburns said:


> I'm glad they did the ball-and-thread trick. I read a profile of Teller in the NYT a few years ago that talked about the thousands of hours Teller had spent practicing the illusion to be able to pull it off. It's nice to have seen it finally.


I loved that Pen said the thread part before, made it even better!


----------



## NorthAlabama

MikeAndrews said:


> Am I the only one who thinks that skinny Penn looks _un_healthier?


it's a noticeable change, especially around his neck, but as far as his overall health, looks are probably deceiving - i'm sure his doctor is pleased with the weight loss, and is the best judge.


----------



## bpaulsen

LordKronos said:


> With the plunger guy, Penn talked a lot about how the trick took his breath away, which gave Teller a clue to how it was done. That doesn't make sense that Penn's reaction gave Teller a clue, so I'm guessing he was trying to do a same thing there with using the name of that trick in his analysis. Does anyone know what the name of that trick would be called? I tried searching on a few of the things he said, but couldn't come up with anything.


Google for "breather crimp". It's a way of putting a nearly undetectable crimp in a card that then allows you to cut to the card nearly every time. Combine that with the suction effect mentioned earlier and the plunger will automatically go to the right spot every time.


----------



## MarkofT

cmontyburns said:


> I'm glad they did the ball-and-thread trick. I read a profile of Teller in the NYT a few years ago that talked about the thousands of hours Teller had spent practicing the illusion to be able to pull it off. It's nice to have seen it finally.


When I saw the title of this episode I was almost more excited for the Penn and Teller trick then for the rest of the show.

I'm pretty sure the conversation about the card trick guy went something like this:

P: I've done about 4 of those tricks myself.
T: I counted 4 flashes.
P: Same here.
T: I know that kills a trick for you, but I couldn't look away.
P: True and true.
T: So he fooled us and we get an excellent opening act?
P: And we get to watch this a few more times.


----------



## cmontyburns

MarkofT said:


> When I saw the title of this episode I was almost more excited for the Penn and Teller trick then for the rest of the show.


I went searching for that NYT article and instead found this Las Vegas Weekly article from 2007, which covers a lot of the same ground.


----------



## waynomo

LoadStar said:


> The duo in tonight's episode might have fooled P&T, but I thought it was just bad. There was just so much happening on the stage, and as a result I didn't care about any of it. Plus, none of it had good patter or flow... it was all very disjointed.


Agreed!

And the trick really didn't fool them. They knew how it was done, but they went with the female getting it to the skate boarder instead of the male. The hardhat/headdress thing was just stupid.

You can see him manipulate the signed card to the bottom of the deck right at the start. Then he does the false shuffle to bring the card to the top. Once it's there he can do anything he wants with it.


----------



## getreal

We've seen and discussed the coloring trick in an AGT thread from last season or the one before last. A plant in the audience sends cues (e.g., throat clear, cough, sneeze, etc.) to indicate the selected color.


----------



## waynomo

getreal said:


> We've seen and discussed the coloring trick in an AGT thread from last season or the one before last. A plant in the audience sends cues (e.g., throat clear, cough, sneeze, etc.) to indicate the selected color.


Did they use some clue words to suggest to the magician that they new how the trick was done?


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

waynomo said:


> Did they use some clue words to suggest to the magician that they new how the trick was done?


See the earlier discussion of "thumper"...


----------



## Turtleboy

According to the AMA, P&T only get one guess. So if there is a trick that can be done one of two ways, and it's really 50/50, if they guess the wrong one, then it counts as fooling them.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

Turtleboy said:


> According to the AMA, P&T only get one guess. So if there is a trick that can be done one of two ways, and it's really 50/50, if they guess the wrong one, then it counts as fooling them.


Which is more than fair, really, because if they have to guess then they don't actually _know _how it was done...


----------



## busyba

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Which is more than fair, really, because if they have to guess then they don't actually _know _how it was done...


Although, as someone lamented earlier, acts are going to try to exploit that rule by doing multiple false moves that don't service the illusion in any way, just to try to throw off P&T.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

busyba said:


> Although, as someone lamented earlier, acts are going to try to exploit that rule by doing multiple false moves that don't service the illusion in any way, just to try to throw off P&T.


Kind of like Survivor...after the show started being populated by fans of the show, it started being not so much people playing the game as people gaming the system...


----------



## lew

The first season an act faked a deck swap. They weren't given credit for foolin P&T.

a deliberate fake doesn't count. I don't know where they draw the line


----------



## waynomo

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Which is more than fair, really, because if they have to guess then they don't actually _know _how it was done...


That's thin imo. They essentially knew how the trick was done. I believe they even referenced getting the card to the top of the deck. Once the card is there there can 100 different ways to get the card on the bottom of the skateboard. We all know it was there before the skateboarder went over the ramp.


----------



## hefe

waynomo said:


> That's thin imo. They essentially knew how the trick was done. I believe they even referenced getting the card to the top of the deck. Once the card is there there can 100 different ways to get the card on the bottom of the skateboard. We all know it was there before the skateboarder went over the ramp.


Yeah, if there's two obvious ways to do something, and it's just a matter of guessing which known method was used, that's not really fooling.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

hefe said:


> Yeah, if there's two obvious ways to do something, and it's just a matter of guessing which known method was used, that's not really fooling.


By that logic, a football team would never lose the coin toss at the beginning of the game...


----------



## hefe

Rob Helmerichs said:


> By that logic, a football team would never lose the coin toss at the beginning of the game...


----------



## getreal

waynomo said:


> That's thin imo. They essentially knew how the trick was done. I believe they even referenced getting the card to the top of the deck. Once the card is there there can 100 different ways to get the card on the bottom of the skateboard. We all know it was there before the skateboarder went over the ramp.


Once the girl went to the opposite side of the stage while the host was distracted with the feather hat, someone could have easily flung the signed card across the backstage to another person who then stuck it to the skateboard. Then when Penn suggested that someone "ran the card quickly backstage to the other side" he would have been wrong on a technicality, and therefore "fooled". That act will not win anything, so it's not really a big deal other than bragging rights to say that they fooled P&T.

I wonder if they get to keep the F-U trophy  or if it's just a prop used over and over again for the acts that fooled P&T?


----------



## waynomo

The guy did something with the card when they were getting the feathered hat. His hand went behind the podium. I suppose that could have been a misdirection also, but I've seen the same basic tricks plenty of times.


----------



## getreal

waynomo said:


> The guy did something with the card when they were getting the feathered hat. His hand went behind the podium. I suppose that could have been a misdirection also, but I've seen the same basic tricks plenty of times.


Yes, he dropped his left hand with the cards needlessly behind the stand with the hardhat while grabbing the hardhat with his right hand, and I believe that is when he dropped the signed card to a sticky device which someone offstage pulled on a string to get it offstage and applied it to the skateboard.

At first I thought the assistant who brought the feathered hat might have stepped on the card and simply walked it offstage, but her foot did not go to the back of the hardhat stand.

The girl walking the deck to the opposite side of the stage was an intentional (and smart) distraction in order to fool P&T.


----------



## busyba

getreal said:


> The girl walking the deck to the opposite side of the stage was an intentional (and smart) distraction in order to fool P&T.


When they have the close-up acts performing, P&T each pick one of the magician's hands to focus on for the entire trick.

They should have similarly each picked one person to stay focused on.


----------



## waynomo

busyba said:


> When they have the close-up acts performing, P&T each pick one of the magician's hands to focus on for the entire trick.
> 
> They should have similarly each picked one person to stay focused on.


I'm guessing they tried to and perhaps did and saw multiple opportunities and picked the wrong one.

I also feel like someone may have suggested that more people fooling them would be good for ratings.


----------



## NorthAlabama

have they ever been fooled twice in one episode before? if so, i can't remember it.


----------



## getreal

NorthAlabama said:


> have they ever been fooled twice in one episode before? if so, i can't remember it.


The pilot episode (2010) had two fellows fool P&T.
1. John Archer (50) is a comedy magician had audience members trying to select one out of five envelopes labeled "Something", "Nothing", "Mine", "Yours" & "Sex". Only one envelope had money while the rest had a commemorative $0 bill.
2. Benjamin Earl (29) is a sleight-of-hand magician. He fooled P&T on a technicality where the producers ruled that P&T had guessed wrongly.

Pretty boy Benjamin Earl went on to land a magic series on British television in 2013.


----------



## NorthAlabama

getreal said:


> The pilot episode (2010) had two fellows fool P&T.
> 1. John Archer (50) is a comedy magician had audience members trying to select one out of five envelopes labeled "Something", "Nothing", "Mine", "Yours" & "Sex". Only one envelope had money while the rest had a commemorative $0 bill.
> 2. Benjamin Earl (29) is a sleight-of-hand magician. He fooled P&T on a technicality where the producers ruled that P&T had guessed wrongly.
> 
> Pretty boy Benjamin Earl went on to land a magic series on British television in 2013.


thanks for the info. afaik, i've seen every ep, and i can remember the john archer illusion, but not earl (or the double fooling) - glad he was able to land the series.


----------



## 2004raptor

I hadn't heard of this show until I saw this thread the other day. I've been going through youtube the last few days and trying to catch up on S1.
Been a fa of P&T for years. I remember them on the original Late Night with David Letterman.


----------



## getreal

Here's Ben Earl's trickery from "P&T: Fool Us":


----------



## cmontyburns

getreal said:


> Here's Ben Earl's trickery from "P&T: Fool Us":


Hmm, how many UK seasons did they do? That set looks much different than what I recall seeing from the show overseas.


----------



## getreal

cmontyburns said:


> Hmm, how many UK seasons did they do? That set looks much different than what I recall seeing from the show overseas.


That pilot episode was used to sell the initial season, so it was technically referred to as episode00. The set was modified for episode01 through episode08. Filmed in 2010, it aired in 2011. The Pilot aired in January 2011 and the series aired in June 2011.
The US (current) season is S02 ... filming in 2015.


----------



## cmontyburns

getreal said:


> That pilot episode was used to sell the initial season, so it was technically referred to as episode00. The set was modified for episode01 through episode08. Filmed in 2010, it aired in 2011. The Pilot aired in January 2011 and the series aired in June 2011.
> The US (current) season is S02 ... filming in 2015.


Thanks for that. I knew this US season was #2 and I thought i had seen all the eps from the UK season. Wondered if I missed a secret season in there somewhere.


----------



## Ozzie72

MikeAndrews said:


> No Brian Brushwood this week!


He'll be on this week (Monday 7/20).


----------



## MikeAndrews

OK, so the Brian Brushwood and Penn copped on the "your signature on it" trick that they never show the signature up close. My guess: Brushwood had multiple fake bills with the same serial number.

I saw the magic bullet trick up close where Penn asked ME to look at the bullet. They've refined and enhanced the trick, The glass used to break - I assumed they had a sharp pin/hammer in the base of the stand. Now they can swap the glass entirely. They never had the shell marked or asked if the bullet had riffling or the gun was fired.

They get the bullets from the helmets and palm them. Aiming the lasers is a fine misdirection.

As above, I guess the assistant can make a reasonable facsimile of signature on the bullets.


----------



## nataylor

They don't swap the glass. Their guns are really putting holes through the glass.

They also don't need anyone to duplicate the initials/drawings. They really are looking at the original bullets and casings they signed.


----------



## MikeAndrews

nataylor said:


> They don't swap the glass. Their guns are really putting holes through the glass.
> 
> They also don't need anyone to duplicate the initials/drawings. They really are looking at the original bullets and casings they signed.


So the laser sights are rigged to aim the guns through the glass - or where the glasses are set downstage - and the bullets get absorbed in the quilted backstops?

Right. The marked bullets are carried backstage by an assistant(s) and put into the opposite helmets.


----------



## nataylor

They don't actually fire bullets, but whatever is loaded in the gun is enough to produce a hole in the glass. You can see it quite clearly stepping through the frames of tonight's episode that the holes are in line with with the gases expanding from the gun barrels. In a sense, the glass acts as a safety device, absorbing some energy of firing.

The actual bullets do indeed get swapped backstage. But the shells that are signed are the ones that are loaded into the guns and fired.


----------



## Turtleboy

Like Penn, I've seen a video of the iPad magician before. The girls up front are plants and he has previously taken a picture with them. It's close enough, and they don't focus on it long enough for the audience to see the differences.


----------



## Jeeters

MikeAndrews said:


> My guess: Brushwood had multiple fake bills with the same serial number.


Unless I missed something, at the end he merely read the supposed serial number out loud to everybody. The participating audience member was only asked to confirm his printed name. So, the actual serial number on the bill could have been anything, which I thought was kinda lame.


----------



## MarkofT

I can't believe P&T got fooled by Handsome Jack. They must have given up watching there at the end and missed him palming the torn pieces while bringing the whole playbill, folded up just so, to the front for the reveal.


----------



## cmontyburns

MarkofT said:


> I can't believe P&T got fooled by Handsome Jack. They must have given up watching there at the end and missed him palming the torn pieces while bringing the whole playbill, folded up just so, to the front for the reveal.


Maybe it's just being on TV, where the camera affords a better view than you'd get in an audience, but the performers on this show have a surprising number of slips. I don't necessarily mean in ways that give a layperson the answer to how things are done exactly, but more when things are happening. Like the part you describe. Or in the husband and wife act, she starts ducking down before the curtain is all the way up. I guess I'm just talking about polish.

Anyway, I didn't think much of Handsome Jack. That's two weeks in a row that P&T were fooled by the worst act of the episode.


----------



## lew

Tickets are/were available on groupon.

Tickets are frequently available at the TKTS booth, generally half price.

The long line is for customers buying tickets to musicals. Customers only buying tickets to a regular (non-musical) play can go to the, almost always, non-existent line for regular plays. That line is generally near where the people who just bought tickets exit the ticket window area.

There are also a limited number of rush tickets available at the box office.


----------



## waynomo

nataylor said:


> The actual bullets do indeed get swapped backstage. But the shells that are signed are the ones that are loaded into the guns and fired.


How are they swapped? I don't see the opportunity.

I figure when they load the gun somehow at that point they can remove the bullet and do whatever they want with it. However, I don't see the opportunity where the timing works.

My best guess is that they put the bullets in their mouths when they put the vests on. That's the only opportunity I see for that.


----------



## waynomo

MarkofT said:


> ... missed him palming the torn pieces while bringing the whole playbill, folded up just so, to the front for the reveal.


Do you see him palm it? I certainly didn't. It's taking an old trick and putting a new twist on it.


----------



## nataylor

waynomo said:


> How are they swapped? I don't see the opportunity.
> 
> I figure when they load the gun somehow at that point they can remove the bullet and do whatever they want with it. However, I don't see the opportunity where the timing works.
> 
> My best guess is that they put the bullets in their mouths when they put the vests on. That's the only opportunity I see for that.


The stands with the glass that happen to have legs that extend below the quilts or curtain (depending on where they are performing the trick) are the perfect means for getting the bullets to stagehands.


----------



## waynomo

nataylor said:


> The stands with the glass that happen to have legs that extend below the quilts or curtain (depending on where they are performing the trick) are the perfect means for getting the bullets to stagehands.


I guess in this instance you mean the screens with the rotating bullets. Or behind the screens there is a curtain. From watching on TV it doesn't look like the stands are close enough to the the curtain to fit underneath or behind. I'm thinking it is all screen because it looks like the floor extends pretty far back underneath. This could be deceiving and what looks like the floor is actually on the screen.

At any rate, that was one possibility I thought of, but it looked like the stands and the legs stayed in the open. However, this would explain the colored tape on the ends of the legs and the 180 degree rotation and Penn's very pensive stare when placing the stand down.


----------



## waynomo

Turtleboy said:


> Like Penn, I've seen a video of the iPad magician before. The girls up front are plants and he has previously taken a picture with them. It's close enough, and they don't focus on it long enough for the audience to see the differences.


Ugh. You're right. On close examination of the photo it does not match up with what they show in the background when taking the picture. I still don't get what was so mysterious then about the act "three weeks previous" that Penn and Teller had seen that gave the trick away.

As a rule, I hate plants. All of a sudden this calls into question any audience member who will ever be called to assist. "Are they in on it too?"


----------



## nataylor

waynomo said:


> I guess in this instance you mean the screens with the rotating bullets. Or behind the screens there is a curtain. From watching on TV it doesn't look like the stands are close enough to the the curtain to fit underneath or behind. I'm thinking it is all screen because it looks like the floor extends pretty far back underneath. This could be deceiving and what looks like the floor is actually on the screen.
> 
> At any rate, that was one possibility I thought of, but it looked like the stands and the legs stayed in the open. However, this would explain the colored tape on the ends of the legs and the 180 degree rotation and Penn's very pensive stare when placing the stand down.


The legs of the stand definitely extend just under whatever backing material they use as that venue. I mentions curtains because I've seen this trick done on other shows where the stands are placed back against the stage curtain. I forget how they do it at their Vegas show.


----------



## Donbadabon

waynomo said:


> As a rule, I had plants. All of a sudden this calls into question any audience member who will ever be called to assist. "Are they in on it too?"


I think that way too. If they aren't plants, they should just let Penn & Teller pick the people from the crowd.


----------



## MikeMar

Donbadabon said:


> I think that way too. If they aren't plants, they should just let Penn & Teller pick the people from the crowd.


They should have Penn or Teller throw a ball backwards to whoever catches it


----------



## nataylor

Some tricks require stooges. It's up to P&T to say whether they thought a particular trick required that, not to screw up the act by preventing the performer from using stooges.


----------



## MikeMar

nataylor said:


> Some tricks require stooges. It's up to P&T to say whether they thought a particular trick required that, not to screw up the act by preventing the performer from using stooges.


No I mean in reference to the tricks that do NOT require stooges

Since the tricks that do require them kinda ruins it for the ones that don't. Do something 100% random like that if you really could use anyone


----------



## busyba

If you require that for the tricks that do not need plants, you kind of attach a giant neon sign to the ones that do, no?


----------



## DUDE_NJX

lew said:


> Tickets are/were available on groupon.
> 
> Tickets are frequently available at the TKTS booth, generally half price.
> 
> The long line is for customers buying tickets to musicals. Customers only buying tickets to a regular (non-musical) play can go to the, almost always, non-existent line for regular plays. That line is generally near where the people who just bought tickets exit the ticket window area.
> 
> There are also a limited number of rush tickets available at the box office.


TKTS is same day only right?


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

busyba said:


> If you require that for the tricks that do not need plants, you kind of attach a giant neon sign to the ones that do, no?


Seems to me that's not a problem for the ones that DON'T need plants. Their problem is that everybody will assume that THEY'RE using plants. Why should they make things easier for the other guys at their own expense? 

I've seen people on this show use random methods (like the toss-a-ball one mentioned earlier), so if they don't do that, I just assume that it HAS to be a plant.


----------



## MikeMar

busyba said:


> If you require that for the tricks that do not need plants, you kind of attach a giant neon sign to the ones that do, no?


yeah, probably piss off the other magicians and such


----------



## MikeAndrews

waynomo said:


> How are they swapped? I don't see the opportunity.
> 
> I figure when they load the gun somehow at that point they can remove the bullet and do whatever they want with it. However, I don't see the opportunity where the timing works.
> 
> My best guess is that they put the bullets in their mouths when they put the vests on. That's the only opportunity I see for that.


There is the rigmarole where both P&T set the guns on acrylic stands on the tables upstage. They could have a system that lets a helper grab the bullets behind the tables.

They do put the bullet in the mouth when they don the goggles. We might notice that's when Penn gets quiet because hehazabuwwwetinismout.


----------



## nataylor

MikeAndrews said:


> There is the rigmarole where both P&T set the guns on acrylic stands on the tables upstage. They could have a system that lets a helper grab the bullets behind the tables.


The bullets are long gone by then. You'll notice that once the bullets are initialed, we never see them again until the end of the trick. Even when the audience members are drawing on the casings, P&T are very careful to cover the bullets with their fingers. That's because the bullets aren't in the casings anymore.


----------



## waynomo

nataylor said:


> The bullets are long gone by then. You'll notice that once the bullets are initialed, we never see them again until the end of the trick. Even when the audience members are drawing on the casings, P&T are very careful to cover the bullets with their fingers. That's because the bullets aren't in the casings anymore.


My guess is the bullets are passed off the first time they go for the glass stands. When they first go to them one of the legs is behind padded back drop on wheels. If indeed they have already switched out the bullets by then, that seems like a better opportunity. (yes, I watched it again. And yes, I still think it's a great trick.)

I was thinking that the goggles and vest were just for show, but now I'm guessing that maybe they are there because if whatever they have loaded the guns with doesn't work as planned, they could get some glass shards or something. I guess it's something powerful enough to break the glass, but not seriously harm a person.


----------



## nataylor

waynomo said:


> My guess is the bullets are passed off the first time they go for the glass stands. When they first go to them one of the legs is behind padded back drop on wheels. If indeed they have already switched out the bullets by then, that seems like a better opportunity. (yes, I watched it again. And yes, I still think it's a great trick.)
> 
> I was thinking that the goggles and vest were just for show, but now I'm guessing that maybe they are there because if whatever they have loaded the guns with doesn't work as planned, they could get some glass shards or something. I guess it's something powerful enough to break the glass, but not seriously harm a person.


Yeah, the bullets get dropped through the hollow stands behind the quilts to be picked up by people backstage. They're then doctored so they appear to have riffling, making it look like they've been fired. They're then loaded somewhere into the protective gear so P&T can put them in their mouths when donning the gear. The shells have wax or some other substance in them that vaporizes when fired and produces enough force to break the glass. And indeed, since the glass is really breaking, the protective eyewear is definitely needed.


----------



## nataylor

I really enjoyed P&T's trick from last night. It's a trick for one person!


----------



## BrettStah

nataylor said:


> I really enjoyed P&T's trick from last night. It's a trick for one person!


Yeah, that was cool!


----------



## Turtleboy

nataylor said:


> I really enjoyed P&T's trick from last night. It's a trick for one person!


They did the same trick when I saw them live 15 years ago. Bullet trick too.


----------



## NorthAlabama

nataylor said:


> I really enjoyed P&T's trick from last night. It's a trick for one person!




BrettStah said:


> Yeah, that was cool!



p&t are great entertainers, the audience really enjoyed it, too.


----------



## DUDE_NJX

I understand developing good tricks is hard, but they've been recycling way too many of them for the longest time.


----------



## waynomo

nataylor said:


> I really enjoyed P&T's trick from last night. It's a trick for one person!


It was fun, but I'm not sure I'd call it a magic trick. They did trick someone.

My thought was that of all the tricks they could have done, why that one?


----------



## nataylor

Sure it's a magic trick. It just puts the audience in with the magicians, knowing how it was done. To the performers, all magic tricks are just tricking someone. Why do it? Because it's fun!


----------



## gschrock

cmontyburns said:


> Maybe it's just being on TV, where the camera affords a better view than you'd get in an audience, but the performers on this show have a surprising number of slips. I don't necessarily mean in ways that give a layperson the answer to how things are done exactly, but more when things are happening. Like the part you describe. Or in the husband and wife act, she starts ducking down before the curtain is all the way up. I guess I'm just talking about polish.


I noticed this watching an act on a cruise ship recently. The guy was obviously not used to having a stage that protrudes into the audience, and quite frankly, was pretty poor at concealing what he was doing to people that were somewhat off to the side.


----------



## MikeAndrews

When I saw Penn & Teller I was close enough that I could see Teller's saddle shoes walking back and forth behind the (billowing) curtain where he was supposedly passed out and tied to a chair.


----------



## waynomo

Was that at the Rio?


----------



## lew

DUDE_NJX said:


> TKTS is same day only right?


I didn't notice the question. TKTS is generally same day. At least some of their locations sell tickets for next day matinee. There website, and app, tells you what's currently available and if a shoe is never, occasionally or frequently available.

Briadwaybox.com*. not an official site* Does a decent job aggregating most available discounts


----------



## pdhenry

I think you mean broadwaybox.com


----------



## Donbadabon

I don't know how the phone book guy fooled them. It seemed obvious to me, unless I am missing something.

He looks over and sees what number is written down.

The sword already has the page attached to it when he turns around to stab in the air.

He doesn't show anyone the page. He just says these are the page numbers and then throws it down. So it was just a random page.


----------



## LoadStar

I get P&T being more cagey with their references to some less obvious, more obscure illusion techniques, so as not to reveal the secrets. When they started to be cute with their reference to a "force," though, it was a little annoying (especially because it was so obvious what they were referring to).


----------



## MikeAndrews

waynomo said:


> Was that at the Rio?


No. At a theater in the Chicago Loop.


----------



## markb

Donbadabon said:


> I don't know how the phone book guy fooled them. It seemed obvious to me, unless I am missing something.
> 
> He looks over and sees what number is written down.
> 
> The sword already has the page attached to it when he turns around to stab in the air.
> 
> He doesn't show anyone the page. He just says these are the page numbers and then throws it down. So it was just a random page.


I'm with you for most of this, but when did he look to see the number that Jonathan wrote down? I watched it a couple times, and I don't see where he had the opportunity.


----------



## busyba

markb said:


> I'm with you for most of this, but when did he look to see the number that Jonathan wrote down? I watched it a couple times, and I don't see where he had the opportunity.


He admitted to doing something called a "peel back and peek" (I think that's what Penn called it). I presume that means the guy managed to see the acutal phone book page that Jonathan picked, so he wouldn't have needed to see what Jonathan wrote.


----------



## nataylor

Penn said "holding a break and a peek afterwards." He marks the location in the phone book when he's showing the pages to Jonathan. That's the "holding the break." When he's demonstrating the wrong way to rip the phone book in half, he reopens it to the mark, which are the same pages Johnathan was looking at. That's the "peek." Where I think Penn got confused was that he missed that the guy never showed Jonathan the page. He was assuming that the guy had an index (a device or method of producing one of multiple possible items that a participant may select from), that he pulled the appropriate page from.


----------



## markb

Ok, I missed the part where he admitted to "holding a break and a peak." Though I still don't know how he held a break in the phone book.

Anyway, I thought his presentation wasn't very good, and I found the whole act uncomfortable to watch. It's too bad the best acts often don't win in this format.


----------



## MikeMar

How does the guy do the string through the eye thing?

Wasn't the best ep, can't think of 1 act I really liked


----------



## BrettStah

MikeMar said:


> How does the guy do the string through the eye thing?


My guess is that the string never went from his mouth to his eyeball.

He horked the string into his mouth, and then attached another string to his eyelid using some small amount of adhesive, and used his hand to keep tension on it, while slowly releasing string from his hand while pulling back from the eye.


----------



## MikeAndrews

I'm getting so in tune by watching that I knew what the invisible purse guy was doing on the first view.

Penn's hints: "Index" 
"Pockets"

He has the cards indexed so he can grab which one he wants. Say, having cards of each suit in a separate pocket and then having them sorted 2-A in each.

I reached into his left pocket and retrieved the right folded card between his fingers. That's why he did the strange right palm up showing of the purse frame, which Teller repeated.

Now I'm in tune why magicians make some unusual gestures.

The "force" hint was thinking that the guy forced the yellow page he wanted picked, like they do with cards. Wrong.


----------



## markb

MikeAndrews said:


> He has the cards indexed so he can grab which one he wants. Say, having cards of each suit in a separate pocket and then having them sorted 2-A in each.


Yes, except I think he only had the hearts. That's was what the "getting lucky" comment from Penn was about. The magician had a backup plan to arrive at hearts if she chose a different suit.


----------



## busyba

MikeAndrews said:


> Now I'm in tune why magicians make some unusual gestures.


A good rule of thumb when watching magic is when the magician is trying to make you look at his hand, look at the other one instead.


----------



## Turtleboy

Was having Jonathan throw the wrong phonebook part of the act?


----------



## busyba

Turtleboy said:


> Was having Jonathan throw the wrong phonebook part of the act?


If by "part of the act" you mean if was intentional, then yes.

If you are asking if it was a necessary element to allow the magician to perform his side of the illusion, then no.


----------



## hefe

MikeAndrews said:


> No. At a theater in the Chicago Loop.


Did you see them at the Chicago Theater somewhere around 1990 or thereabouts? That's where I saw them and was the participant from the audience on the water tank trick...


----------



## cmontyburns

I thought this was the second weak episode in a row, in terms of the acts.

The first guy with the candle was polished enough, but it wasn't hard to divine how the tricks worked. I mean, putting his hand behind his neck while "using static electricity" on his forearm was a really big, obvious move. The sparkler trick was pretty neat, but that obviously just involved a card force and a doctored deck ("hiding the gash", as Penn put it). Meh.

The second guy, who did the act with the sword box and stuff, came off well enough and was probably the best of the four. I kind of liked the classicism of it. But like Penn said, using a cabinet that was a bit too big pushed against a curtain at the back of the stage takes most of the mystery out of it. You tip your hat to the skill, but there was no real illusion achieved. That said, I did really enjoy how genuinely thrilled Penn and Teller seemed to be to see the guy's parents come out at the end, and even though they obviously were not fooled, it was nice show of respect for them to claim to be fooled. 

The digital prop comic was boring. His hand motions were out of sync with the video on his iPad (although the vase reveal was done pretty well). And the "pick an app" trick, even though I don't know specifically how it was done, was quite obvious in what was going to happen, and and it was just a card trick gussied up with a needless prop. (And it seemed to take a long time.)

As for the fourth act, I'm guilty of, as Penn put it, enjoying seeing a couple of X chromosomes up there. I thought she was really engaging. But as Penn pointed out, the physical part of her act needed a little work. And while I don't know how it was done, there was absolutely no mystery to it to Penn and Teller, which suggests there was nothing special about it. I really prefer tricks that don't immediately feel like I've seen them before.


----------



## mattack

btw, renewed.


----------



## nataylor

The last performer was nervous as heck. Still, she did a really good job working through it, even if she couldn't control the hand shakes.

Glad to hear it's been renewed.


----------



## NorthAlabama

nataylor said:


> Glad to hear it's been renewed.


me, too. :up:


----------



## mrmike

cmontyburns said:


> As for the fourth act, I'm guilty of, as Penn put it, enjoying seeing a couple of X chromosomes up there. I thought she was really engaging. But as Penn pointed out, the physical part of her act needed a little work. And while I don't know how it was done, there was absolutely no mystery to it to Penn and Teller, which suggests there was nothing special about it. I really prefer tricks that don't immediately feel like I've seen them before.


The 4th trick is a mentalist trick. She actually memorizes the position of every card in the 26 and then performs a shuffle in such a way as to retain the order or change it in a known way. She then counts out to the correct card. It's mostly a mental trick with a small amount of physical work (the shuffle).


----------



## cmontyburns

mrmike said:


> The 4th trick is a mentalist trick. She actually memorizes the position of every card in the 26 and then performs a shuffle in such a way as to retain the order or change it in a known way. She then counts out to the correct card. It's mostly a mental trick with a small amount of physical work (the shuffle).


Ah. Duh. Sure, that makes sense. Thanks.


----------



## pdhenry

cmontyburns said:


> I did really enjoy how genuinely thrilled Penn and Teller seemed to be to see the guy's parents come out at the end, and even though they obviously were not fooled, it was nice show of respect for them to claim to be fooled.


I'm sure they were genuinely thrilled that Mark Wilson and Nani Darnell were part of the trick.


----------



## busyba

When I saw P&T live several years ago, that bunny trick ultimately ended with the live bunny "accidentally" getting dropped into a running wood chipper, along with the expected result.

Can't imagine why they would do an abridged version of the trick now....


----------



## Turtleboy

It seems that a lot of the magicians just want the TV time, and aren't really trying to fool P&T.


----------



## Michael S

busyba said:


> When I saw P&T live several years ago, that bunny trick ultimately ended with the live bunny "accidentally" getting dropped into a running wood chipper, along with the expected result.
> 
> Can't imagine why they would do an abridged version of the trick now....


They did the same trick on Fallon a few nights ago.


----------



## busyba

Michael S said:


> They did the same trick on Fallon a few nights ago.


With or without the wood chipper?


----------



## 2004raptor

I'm still several episodes behind. I could make a thread on darn near every single segment. My eyes just aren't fast enough to keep up with what happens.

Like the guy that ate the guinea pig??? How the heck did he do that? I went back and even watched it again.


----------



## DUDE_NJX

The pig drops into the box as he pulls cotton candy from behind the box.


----------



## 2004raptor

DUDE_NJX said:


> The pig drops into the box as he pulls cotton candy from behind the box.


Really?

BUt then he pulls it out of his pants. I gotta watch it again.


----------



## LordKronos

cmontyburns said:


> The second guy, who did the act with the sword box and stuff, came off well enough and was probably the best of the four. I kind of liked the classicism of it. But like Penn said, using a cabinet that was a bit too big pushed against a curtain at the back of the stage takes most of the mystery out of it. You tip your hat to the skill, but there was no real illusion achieved. That said, I did really enjoy how genuinely thrilled Penn and Teller seemed to be to see the guy's parents come out at the end, and even though they obviously were not fooled, it was nice show of respect for them to claim to be fooled.


That was a really odd trick. Usually, using an audience signature is done as a means to eliminate the possibility of some sort of swap from the minds of the viewer. But in this case, it doesn't do anything but distract. You see the guy carry it behind the curtain. Then it's like "oh, he got it into the sealed box....oh, not really". Then it's like "oh, now he comes from the back of the studio with it...so we know that's actually him and not a twin...or maybe not". And in the end it's like "oh, look...the cloth was there behind the curtain...exactly where we saw it last" The only purpose other purpose of that signed cloth was to lead to the reveal of his parents...which again was not the slightest bit mysterious.

The only part of that trick even the slightest bit interesting was the glass box switch. Not sure how that was done. Did they have a second glass box in the curtained box(or backstage) that they were able to swap out? Or did they just climb out of and into the same glass box? Yeah there were swords, but honestly they left a lot of wiggle room in that box. It was also a little confusing with the video edit they used. If you watch carefully, you notice at one point that the box suddenly has a couple swords in it that we never saw them insert.


----------



## LordKronos

busyba said:


> When I saw P&T live several years ago, that bunny trick ultimately ended with the live bunny "accidentally" getting dropped into a running wood chipper, along with the expected result.
> 
> Can't imagine why they would do an abridged version of the trick now....


At least with that sort of setup, much like the sawed in half box trick earlier this season, you can see the wood chipper or saw prop there ahead of time, and with P&T you KNOW it's going to get used in such a way.

I was letting my 5 year old daughter watch this show with me (magic is interesting, and it all seems innocent enough). I just discovered the show this season, so we were watching the season 1 episodes to catch up. When we got to the trick where the guy has the mind reading stomach, I was thinking it was no big deal...the card would go into the door, and come out his mouth. When he suddenly ripped out his guts, she had this shocked look, and then she said "I don't ever want to see that again"


----------



## LordKronos

2004raptor said:


> Really?
> 
> BUt then he pulls it out of his pants. I gotta watch it again.


I don't remember that part of the trick, but I definitely watched it in slowmo, and you can clearly see him push the guinea pig off the back of the box and pull up the cotton candy instead. But it seems the easiest explanation for the pants is that he has a second one there for the reveal.


----------



## 2004raptor

LordKronos said:


> I don't remember that part of the trick, but I definitely watched it in slowmo, and you can clearly see him push the guinea pig off the back of the box and pull up the cotton candy instead. But it seems the easiest explanation for the pants is that he has a second one there for the reveal.


Thanks. I'm sure you guys are right. I didn't slo-mo it when I rewatched.


----------



## MikeAndrews

cmontyburns said:


> ...The second guy, who did the act with the sword box and stuff, came off well enough and was probably the best of the four. I kind of liked the classicism of it. But like Penn said, using a cabinet that was a bit too big pushed against a curtain at the back of the stage takes most of the mystery out of it. You tip your hat to the skill, but there was no real illusion achieved. That said, I did really enjoy how genuinely thrilled Penn and Teller seemed to be to see the guy's parents come out at the end, and even though they obviously were not fooled, it was nice show of respect for them to claim to be fooled.


Son...the "guy's parents were Mark Wilson and his wife Nani Darnell who were TV staples in my day. Liek Penn & Teller, I loved The Magic Land of Allakazam where they had THE BANANA MAN.

He has to be 90....Let me look. Born 1929 He's 86
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Wilson_(magician)


----------



## Donbadabon

cmontyburns said:


> The digital prop comic was boring. His hand motions were out of sync with the video on his iPad (although the vase reveal was done pretty well). And the "pick an app" trick, even though I don't know specifically how it was done, was quite obvious in what was going to happen, and and it was just a card trick gussied up with a needless prop. (And it seemed to take a long time.)


I agree. I haven't seen a digital prop 'magician' yet that was entertaining.

And Penn & Teller were doing digital things way back in the VHS days. Anyone remember where you would wipe the dust off your TV and the picture would swirl?

I don't know for sure how he switched the one on the stand, but it looked like he triggered it with his feet. He does a very unnatural move while he was standing by it and trying to distract with his hands.


----------



## pdhenry

LordKronos said:


> The only part of that trick even the slightest bit interesting was the glass box switch. Not sure how that was done. Did they have a second glass box in the curtained box(or backstage) that they were able to swap out? Or did they just climb out of and into the same glass box? Yeah there were swords, but honestly they left a lot of wiggle room in that box. It was also a little confusing with the video edit they used. If you watch carefully, you notice at one point that the box suddenly has a couple swords in it that we never saw them insert.


It looked like anyone could still exit/enter through a trap door in the bottom of the box despite all the swords surrounding them.


----------



## murgatroyd

Turtleboy said:


> It seems that a lot of the magicians just want the TV time, and aren't really trying to fool P&T.


I don't think the show would have the same appeal to these performers if it were only about the TV time or competing to get a gig in Vegas. It would only be a magic-show edition of America's Got Talent then.

Showing off their act to P&T is the important thing. Being able to fool them is gravy.


----------



## Michael S

Donbadabon said:


> I agree. I haven't seen a digital prop 'magician' yet that was entertaining.
> 
> And Penn & Teller were doing digital things way back in the VHS days. Anyone remember where you would wipe the dust off your TV and the picture would swirl?
> 
> I don't know for sure how he switched the one on the stand, but it looked like he triggered it with his feet. He does a very unnatural move while he was standing by it and trying to distract with his hands.


Not familiar with the VCR thing. But sometime in the 90s they made a game for the Sega CD called Smoke and Mirrors. But unfortunately game got cancelled since the Sega CD didn't have a long life span. You can watch footage of it on youtube.


----------



## Donbadabon

Michael S said:


> Not familiar with the VCR thing.


It is here:











The first few minutes explain the setup. Basically you are watching a movie with friends and get up to clean the screen. But every time you wipe the screen the picture gets smudged. The smudging takes place at 3:30.


----------



## The Spud

MikeAndrews said:


> Son...the "guy's parents were Mark Wilson and his wife Nani Darnell who were TV staples in my day. Liek Penn & Teller, I loved The Magic Land of Allakazam where they had THE BANANA MAN.
> 
> He has to be 90....Let me look. Born 1929 He's 86
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Wilson_(magician)


As a child of the 60's, I grew up watching the Magic Land of Alakazam. My parents even got me a Mark Wilson Magic Kit. I may even have a couple of his books laying around the house somewhere.

All throughout Greg's act I was wondering if Mark and Nani were still alive. I had tears in my eyes when they came out.


----------



## Turtleboy

Donbadabon said:


> It is here:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The first few minutes explain the setup. Basically you are watching a movie with friends and get up to clean the screen. But every time you wipe the screen the picture gets smudged. The smudging takes place at 3:30.


Wow, Teller doesn't age.


----------



## Ereth

What bothers me is that I swear I've seen that whole thing before, complete with his parents coming out, and Penn and Teller being overjoyed to meet them.

But I can't imagine where.


----------



## kdmorse

Ereth said:


> What bothers me is that I swear I've seen that whole thing before, complete with his parents coming out, and Penn and Teller being overjoyed to meet them.
> 
> But I can't imagine where.


Are you sure it wasn't the UK version of Fool Us? A different group gave a very similar performance, with a near identical ending.


----------



## Ereth

kdmorse said:


> Are you sure it wasn't the UK version of Fool Us? A different group gave a very similar performance, with a near identical ending.


Well, then, that's probably what it was. I don't remember it well enough, but I do remember it was a 2nd generation magician who popped his parents out of the box to big applause.

If that was the UK edition and the magicians in question were different, then cool. That explains it. Thank you.


----------



## kdmorse

Ereth said:


> If that was the UK edition and the magicians in question were different, then cool. That explains it. Thank you.


This act is what I was thinking of, the P&T segment starts at the 1:19 mark. May or may not be what you're thinking of.


----------



## MikeAndrews

The Spud said:


> As a child of the 60's, I grew up watching the Magic Land of Alakazam. My parents even got me a Mark Wilson Magic Kit. I may even have a couple of his books laying around the house somewhere.
> 
> All throughout Greg's act I was wondering if Mark and Nani were still alive. I had tears in my eyes when they came out.


Yeahbut, do you remember THE BANANA MAN? (He was also on Captain Kangaroo.)

I dunno why I thought the Mark Wilson show was called Magic Circus.

Weirdness for me is figuring out that they were in their 30s at the time we were 5 or 6. Now the age gap doesn't seem so wide.


----------



## nataylor

First act today: Wow! I've only watched it through once, but that guy was really, really good. I wasn't expecting much from a "corporate magician," but that was spectacular.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

nataylor said:


> First act today: Wow! I've only watched it through once, but that guy was really, really good. I wasn't expecting much from a "corporate magician," but that was spectacular.


Yeah, he was wonderful.

I suspect there was some insider baseball going on there. From the way Penn got so increasingly agitated, the guy must have been doing things that confound a magician's expectations of how magicians shuffle decks.


----------



## nataylor

I think the thing that was getting Penn was that he was legitimately mixing up the cards. It seems he had a completely clean deck (no deck switches, no trick deck). When he fanned the cards at the end, it was 51 cards showing, which accounts for the one card that fell off the table when they were doing the drunk shuffle. 

I think at the point Penn put his card back in the deck, he had the position of the two cards memorized, along with memorizing the position of all the face down cards in the deck. When he's showing off the now squared-up deck, he does a split and some turns, showing that some cards are face up and some are face down. I think in those few short moves, he's turned P&T's cards face down and turned the face down cards face up. If he really did it like that, that is some serious card handling skill.


----------



## kdmorse

You can see a move that would account for the two selected cards being face down, and in known positions - that's the easy part.

I'm sure in one of the moves he separated all the inverted cards into one hand, and flips them all at once face up in one of the inverted half cuts. But I sure as hell didn't see it on repeated watchings.

I would assume that there was some tactile difference that permitted him to in one swift move raise all the inverted cards out of the deck at once. But you can tell that when Teller took the cards, that's exactly what he was looking for when he sat back down and even with the cards in his hands, he couldn't find anything.

This is easily one of my two favorite performances on the show. The other being a similar act (but different trick) in season one.


----------



## Turtleboy

I didn't like the time/watch guy at all. Especially since he wasn't magnanimous about losing. While I don't know "how" he did it, it was clearly a trick watch that was pre-set to display 4:50, or 4:50 was somehow otherwise forced.


----------



## nataylor

The thing about the watch guy was that Penn completely ignored the disappearing hands and just focused on the time.


----------



## LoadStar

The first act tonight was good... Penn's reaction to the act made it great. I loved that there are some magic acts that (seemingly) legitimately surprise even him.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

LoadStar said:


> The first act tonight was good... Penn's reaction to the act made it great. I loved that there are some magic acts that (seemingly) legitimately surprise even him.


And more importantly, Teller.


----------



## nataylor

Teller actually giggled at one point.

It gets more impressive each time I watch it through. If you compare the sequence of cards from the time he fans them out before P&T pick cards to when he's thumbing through them for P&T to put their cards back in the deck, you can see he's already been able to get some of the face down cards turned face up. And from what I can tell, he does indeed separate out the face down cards and turns them over all at once at the end. But keeping track of their locations, as well as the locations of P&T's cards and pulling them out of the deck blind is amazing. He really makes it look effortless.


----------



## Donbadabon

The first act was really amazing. I loved how Penn knew what was going to happen, but he couldn't spot how it happened.

I think the watch hands must be designed to disappear when exposed to heat. So when the watch is held between your palms for that long, it has enough heat to make them dissolve, for lack of a better word.


----------



## BrettStah

nataylor said:


> The thing about the watch guy was that Penn completely ignored the disappearing hands and just focused on the time.


If that was his point, he didn't do a great job in explaining it. I think the magician should have said something like, "well, there are two parts to it, and you have figured out one part, but haven't mentioned the second part".


----------



## BrettStah

nataylor said:


> Teller actually giggled at one point.
> 
> It gets more impressive each time I watch it through. If you compare the sequence of cards from the time he fans them out before P&T pick cards to when he's thumbing through them for P&T to put their cards back in the deck, you can see he's already been able to get some of the face down cards turned face up. And from what I can tell, he does indeed separate out the face down cards and turns them over all at once at the end. But keeping track of their locations, as well as the locations of P&T's cards and pulling them out of the deck blind is amazing. He really makes it look effortless.


Wait, so I haven't gone back to re-watch it, but you're saying that he is somehow actually flipping the cards around as he's shuffling/handling the cards to get them all facing the same way, except for their two chosen cards? All in front of P&T (and the cameras)?? That is almost unbelievable to me. I assumed that he had somehow been able to swap decks and had somehow slipped in their cards into it, or something like that.


----------



## nataylor

BrettStah said:


> If that was his point, he didn't do a great job in explaining it. I think the magician should have said something like, "well, there are two parts to it, and you have figured out one part, but haven't mentioned the second part".


Rewatching the watch guy, I see how he did it. The hands are drawn on the face of the watch, presumably with some type of marker that rubs off or evaporates while Simon is holding it.

I think that may be why he had an issue with Penn talking about a watch gimmick that allowed the crown to be turned without moving the hands.


----------



## nataylor

BrettStah said:


> Wait, so I haven't gone back to re-watch it, but you're saying that he is somehow actually flipping the cards around as he's shuffling/handling the cards to get them all facing the same way, except for their two chosen cards? All in front of P&T (and the cameras)?? That is almost unbelievable to me. I assumed that he had somehow been able to swap decks and had somehow slipped in their cards into it, or something like that.


Yup. There is absolutely no deck switch. He was manipulating the cards right in front of their faces.


----------



## rahnbo

That first highly impressive act barring some sleight of hand could have been a very well practiced act of counting/memorization maybe? I've seen kids on child genius shows do it in like an hour (in fact it was on the show Child Genius this year) so perhaps someone that has been practicing this for a long time could do it that well as a trick.


----------



## nataylor

I *think* I've got an idea of how the first guy did it. When he's thumbing through the cards while Penn is putting the last card back in the deck, he's actually pulling the face-down cards to the bottom of the deck in his right hand.So he's left with a deck with a single face down card on top and a stack of face down cards on the bottom. When he does the cut right before fanning the cards are the end, he's taking the face down portion of the stack and rotating it face up. He keeps Teller's card, which got inserted in the deck face up, in the portion of the deck that has all face down cards. Penn's card, which went in the deck face down, stays in the portion of the deck that's all face up. So when he finally fans them, only P&T's cards are face down.


----------



## MikeAndrews

Rob Helmerichs said:


> And more importantly, Teller.


And Teller took a random sample of cards to see if they were gimmicked.


----------



## markb

nataylor said:


> Rewatching the watch guy, I see how he did it. The hands are drawn on the face of the watch, presumably with some type of marker that rubs off or evaporates while Simon is holding it.
> 
> I think that may be why he had an issue with Penn talking about a watch gimmick that allowed the crown to be turned without moving the hands.


I don't think the hands disappear while in Simon's hands. There appears to be some sort of slight of hand happening right before the watch is placed in Simon's hands. It doesn't look like the watch is swapped, but he did have the opportunity to do something to it.


----------



## markb

I don't have a clue about how the first guy did the card trick, even though I've watched it a few times, now. Here's the video:






Something annoying is that his hands go out of the frame a couple of times while the cards are being drawn. (For instance, at 3:35 in the above video.) But I don't have any idea what he could do at that time that would be consistent with everything that happens afterward.


----------



## nataylor

markb said:


> I don't think the hands disappear while in Simon's hands. There appears to be some sort of slight of hand happening right before the watch is placed in Simon's hands. It doesn't look like the watch is swapped, but he did have the opportunity to do something to it.


He might have rubbed off the marker on the face of the watch himself right then.


----------



## nataylor

Here's the order of the cards when he fans them right before having P&T pick cards: 









Here's the order when he fans them at the end:









You can see that all the face up cards from the first fan remain in order. Where there were face down cards in the first fan, they've been moved, so the face up cards are all right next to each other. The cards to the left of the Jack of Hearts in the final fan are all the face down cards that were in the original fan.


----------



## getreal

nataylor said:


> Here's the order of the cards when he fans them right before having P&T pick cards:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's the order when he fans them at the end:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can see that all the face up cards from the first fan remain in order. Where there were face down cards in the first fan, they've been moved, so the face up cards are all right next to each other. The cards to the left of the Jack of Hearts in the final fan are all the face down cards that were in the original fan.


Good catch!

I was theorizing that if half of the deck was trimmed 1/32" off the long side, you could easily track the wider cards from the thinner cards when the deck is squared up and put them back one way or another. But having P&T each pick a card, face up or down, and then return them to the deck face up or down would suggest a forced card(s). This guy was very smooth. I'm also baffled.


----------



## LoadStar

The only real trick in this is the speed and fluidity that he was able to "clean up" the deck into two stacks, one containing the face up cards, and the other the face down ones. It's a technique he teaches called the Roadrunner Cull. If you slow it down, you can see he's doing that during when he asks Penn and Teller to slide their cards into the deck. From there, it's easy for him to slide P&T's cards into the "wrong" stack as they put the cards into the deck.

He then flips over the face up stack, again very smoothly so it isn't very obvious. He does this at the moment Penn groans "nooo..." Kostya even seemingly hangs a lantern on what he's doing at that moment with his patter, saying "Some cards are face up and some are face down..." even though that's actually not technically true (well, sort of, if you include P&T's cards). When he does this, this ends up with P&T's cards, which were sorted into the "wrong" deck, facing the opposite direction from the rest of the deck.


----------



## rifleman69

I can see where he got Teller's card into position but not Penn's

*edit* Now it's more revealing, he just fooled them by a different way even though they both knew the punchline.


----------



## LoadStar

rifleman69 said:


> I can see where he got Teller's card into position but not Penn's


There's no real "positioning" of their cards. (The trick doesn't depend on a "force.") As he's sliding the cards from his left hand to his right, he's actually separating out the cards into the two stacks.

P&T's cards remain exactly where they put them back into the deck - but only in relation to the other cards facing the *opposite* direction from theirs.


----------



## cmontyburns

My summary of the acts:

1. As you all have been discussing, the "corporate magician" was just fantastic. One of the two or three best acts of at least this season. An amazing trick, flawlessly done, right under P&T's noses, and entertainingly acted, to boot. I don't care how he did it. That was spectacular. That Penn got legitimately agitated because he knew what was happening the whole time, but not how, was icing on the cake.

2. The watch magician was bad, through and through. It's possible his delivery was thrown off a bit by the surprise of Simon Pegg coming to the stage. Even so, he seemed excessively nervous and awkward. And the trick stunk. The watch hands were obvious fakes even in the one glimpse of them we got. And the rest was a variation on standard mentalist routines. And then he was an ungracious loser. Boo.

3. I liked the violinist's act. I think sometimes you have to watch the show knowing that there's no way the trick is going to fool P&T, and that you've probably even seen a version of it a time or two, but good showmanship also counts. And this guy had that. As Penn pointed out, there's nothing special about the rising card or disappearing birdcage, so this was not going to fool them. But he had good stage presence and was polished and fun. A successful failure.

4. I have the same summary for the confetti trick magician. The workings of the trick were transparent the whole way through, but it was a creative routine, playfully executed, and I liked it. Another successful failure.


----------



## markb

I wish the cameras would get closer for these close up tricks. P&T were fooled by te closeup magician, and they were sitting right there. We didn't stand a chance, because the shot was too wide during the critical parts of the trick.


----------



## Ereth

I was amused by Penn saying he was the only magician in North America who liked that sand trick (Sands of Egypt, was it?), because way back in the 1970s I saw Doug Henning (who was rather famous then) perform it on TV. At least I think it was a variation on that trick. He did it with an aquarium and sand that was magically not wet when pulled from the water.


----------



## TonyTheTiger

kdmorse said:


> Are you sure it wasn't the UK version of Fool Us? A different group gave a very similar performance, with a near identical ending.


That was Martin Daniels performing and ending the trick with his father, Paul making an appearance.

Paul Daniels and his wife Debbie McGee had countless TV shows and appearances in the UK throughout the 80's and 90's.


----------



## cmontyburns

End-to-end, this was the strongest array of acts in several weeks, I thought. The last serval episodes have each featured at least one dud, and I didn't think any of the acts tonight were near that level. Only one real high, but pretty solid throughout. My thoughts:

1. Dollar bill magician: This was the best of the bunch, easily. Really good act, really well done, and kind of a mind-blower. I had the same thought as Penn, that the guy had some onions in giving the linked bill to P&T to examine in their chairs after the trick. Great stuff. I sort of thought P&T cheated in saying they weren't fooled, because while they may have known what he did, they admitted to not knowing how he did it. I guess their familiarity with him did him in. Still, a really good trick. (One of the pleasures of the show, I think, is watching P&T react to a trick. It's a lot of fun watching them react warmly to an act they really respect.) 

By the way, wasn't the guy who gave up his dollar bill the same guy who was on stage with the magician in the plaid suit (who "ate" his guinea pig) a few weeks ago?

2. Blindfold card trick: Good variation on a card force, wrapped in kind of a neat conceit. I wasn't going "wow" the way I was with the dollar guy, but it was a solid trick executed well. 

3. Not/knot scarves: Probably my least favorite, just because -- as the magician acknowledged -- knotting scarves is a very old trick. No idea how he did it (I take it there was a device involved in producing the wine and the stuffed animal), although you can't help noticing the exaggerated hand and arm movements as he puts the scarves down on the chairs. Not my favorite because it seemed so familiar, but again, it was done well. And P&T seemed to have a lot of respect for his skill in doing it.

4. Storyteller: Interesting act. Was he ever going to get to the trick? At least his patter was genuinely funny -- Penn was in stitches. The actual trick wasn't anything special, and Penn seemed to indicate as much. But the whole act was fun and I enjoyed it as a piece of stage performance even if the magic part of it was the least of the act.

Good episode overall.


----------



## Ereth

cmontyburns said:


> 2. Blindfold card trick: Good variation on a card force, wrapped in kind of a neat conceit. I wasn't going "wow" the way I was with the dollar guy, but it was a solid trick executed well.


At the beginning, we see the cards with faces. At the end, they are all blank. And yet there was no deck swap. I'm still trying to work that out. 3 sided cards? Faces that disappear?

And how do you do a force when the person is allowed to simply think of any card they want?


----------



## cmontyburns

You're right -- I forgot that they had faces at first, and thus I didn't start at the significance of his denial of doing a deck swap. That's pretty cool.

I don't know how that force is done, but it's not the first time we've seen that even this season, I don't think.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

cmontyburns said:


> 1. Dollar bill magician: This was the best of the bunch, easily. Really good act, really well done, and kind of a mind-blower. I had the same thought as Penn, that the guy had some onions in giving the linked bill to P&T to examine in their chairs after the trick. Great stuff. I sort of thought P&T cheated in saying they weren't fooled, because while they may have known what he did, they admitted to not knowing how he did it. I guess their familiarity with him did him in. Still, a really good trick. (One of the pleasures of the show, I think, is watching P&T react to a trick. It's a lot of fun watching them react warmly to an act they really respect.)


They knew how he did it...there was a break and rejoined seam on the bill. They just couldn't find the seam, even handling the bill.


----------



## Turtleboy

I don't know how the blindfolded card guy did the trick. Did he have an associate in the audience sending him signals?

I noticed he said think of a "number," which removes the possibility of J, Q, K, and probably A.


----------



## cmontyburns

Rob Helmerichs said:


> They knew how he did it...there was a break and rejoined seam on the bill. They just couldn't find the seam, even handling the bill.


Right. I guess what I meant is that if the magician is too good for them to actually catch him doing what they believe he is doing, it seems tantamount to fooling them. Or maybe I just liked that trick so much I wanted it to get through.


----------



## Ereth

Turtleboy said:


> I don't know how the blindfolded card guy did the trick. Did he have an associate in the audience sending him signals?
> 
> I noticed he said think of a "number," which removes the possibility of J, Q, K, and probably A.


I assumed he was listening to the count as the guy placed the cards down.

But after he revealed that the card the guy chose was the only one with a face, I wonder if there really was a force, somehow, and the deck was gimmicked to only have that card.

The whole "feel" thing would be an easy way to feel the blank cards for one with a face (assuming the face isn't perfectly smooth).

How to force? And how to make all the cards blank? Those are the steps I don't know.


----------



## BrettStah

I was thinking that if he was either secretly signaled of the selection, or could guarantee that he could otherwise deduce the card that was chosen, then he could have the 36 possible cards (since the selection should only be between 2 and 10, multiplied by 4 suits) hidden in his clothing, and have the locations memorized, and then somehow pull the selected card out and hide it in the deck of otherwise blank cards. But I went back and re-watched it, and I just don't see how/when he could have done this, so I'm stumped.


----------



## nataylor

cmontyburns said:


> You're right -- I forgot that they had faces at first, and thus I didn't start at the significance of his denial of doing a deck swap. That's pretty cool.
> 
> I don't know how that force is done, but it's not the first time we've seen that even this season, I don't think.


I just rewatched it, and we never see faces on the deck of cards. So it probably is all blank cards. I don't think there's any force involved. Some things I noticed is that the guy had two cards (presumably the jokers) he was using to demonstrate counting out the number and suit. Those cards went out of view below the tabletop at least once during the routine. The obvious answer for how he knew what card it was is a thumper. So I think he's retrieving the chosen card from from an index.


----------



## Turtleboy

nataylor said:


> The obvious answer for how he knew what card it was is a thumper.


I know that all magic is obviously fake, but for some reason, the thumper disappoints me more than the other tricks. It seems like cheating.


----------



## MikeAndrews

cmontyburns said:


> 3. Not/knot scarves: Probably my least favorite, just because -- as the magician acknowledged -- knotting scarves is a very old trick. No idea how he did it (I take it there was a device involved in producing the wine and the stuffed animal), although you can't help noticing the exaggerated hand and arm movements as he puts the scarves down on the chairs. Not my favorite because it seemed so familiar, but again, it was done well. And P&T seemed to have a lot of respect for his skill in doing it.


Penn says there is mechanical gimmick - I assume to make and remove teh knots.

The rabbit and the bottle are spring-loaded cloth puppet props like what The Banana Man used..and I assume, the fuzzy balls and such that magicians use.

WOOOWWWW Just found him.










Funny. My toddler memory said he said "Wow!" over and over and he took off in the train.

http://www.charliethejugglingclown.com/BananaMan.htm
http://www.babyboomer-magazine.com/news/166/ARTICLE/1253/2008-03-21.html


----------



## Dots

nataylor said:


> The obvious answer for how he knew what card it was is a thumper.


I have an idea for the general way in which he deduced the card but missing a few details.

When he takes the deck back after the number and suit has been revealed to the audience, he splits it up into 3 parts. 2 parts go on the table in front of him and just as he is saying "And I'm gonna tell you how, I'm gonna go by feel", he is holding the remaining 3rd part of the deck in his hands. The 3rd part of the deck contains exactly 8 cards which is the number of cards dealt off the top by the audience member (4 for "4" and 4 for Diamonds). As the deck wasn't shuffled before it was handed to the audience member, I believe the initial bottom card has some obvious blemish to touch which signifies the total number of "identification" cards.

I'm not sure however how he determines the split though i.e. 8 can be 7 of clubs, 6 of hearts, 5 of spades of 4 of diamonds. He seems to be touching them carefully around the 3rd/4th/5th cards as if he is looking for some other blemish. Only thing I can think of is that contact with the felt does something to the bottom of the cards but that would be extremely elaborate.

Then after he put all the cards together again, he might have already had all the possible valued and suited cards in the deck and counted to where he knew the 4 of diamonds was (As he had still not shuffled).

Now, this might just be me, and it's hard to tell with camera angles and so on, but to me the deck looks thicker at the start of the trick than at the end. Anyone else think that or am I crazy and just looking for things for the sake of it? When the audience member is dealing to show the audience the deck looks quite big and when the magician is holding it in his hand during the reveal it looks a bit thinner meaning he discarded the remaining cards with values and suits (There were a couple of times where he made some gesture involving dragging his right hand/arm towards him off the desk). If this is the case, he could have gone some number above 52 for the start and below 52 in the end so that in each case it looks like a 52 card deck (As starting with 52 and ending with like 20 would make it obvious at the end.)


----------



## RickyL

Did he force the number of cards counted out?

I have never heard the suits ranked with diamonds at the top. Its always clubs, diamonds, hearts, spades.


----------



## LordKronos

I can work out a possibility for part of the trick, but I can't work it into a whole solution. For the cards, they never get shuffled. So he could easily have them numbered sequentially with some sort of braille like system for him to feel the numbers. After the guy from the audience deals out the 4 + 4 (and the magician moves them to the bottom of the deck), the numbers at the bottom of the deck (from bottom to top) will be 5, 6, 7, 8, 1, 2, 3, 4, 52. It would be very easy to feel for the 52, split the deck there, feel the top number and see it's a 4, thus telling you the number is 4. Then feel the bottom 5 cards looking for the #1 to know what the suit was. (Alternately, you feel the top card and see it's a 9, telling you 8 cards are dealt off, then feel how many cards up the 1 is, telling you how to split the 8 into 4+4). With a little practice, this would actually be quite easy to do, even for someone with a minimal of skill.

The problem then becomes, once you know what the card is, how do you insert that card into the deck of blanks? If he's a skillful manipulator, there are a number of times he could have slipped something into his palm. The problem is, with the above method, he wouldn't know what card he needed to insert until after he handled them to feel the sequence, and watching his moves, I'm not seeing anywhere that he could have done it in that time frame.

Now, what I do see is that after he used the above technique to determine the card picked, he reassembles the deck and then carefully searches through it. So it would seem like he actually doesn't need to insert the card into the deck, because he has all the cards there already. The question is, how can that deck have all the legitimate cards yet appear all blank? I could imagine some sort of trick where alternating card are real/blank, and he has them rigged so that they stick together in the proper way when fanned out. But at the end he gives all the cards to the audience member and tells him he can check to make sure they don't peel apart or anything. So in order for that to work, either
1) the audience member would need to be a plant
2) he's just gambling that the guy won't actually bother checking or if he does check he'll go along with it (instant stooge)
3) they're stuck together in a way that makes is extremely difficult to detect (like the dollar bill guy, where P&T knew there was a seam but couldn't find it).

In the end, I'm pretty sure the braille-like approach is what he used to figure out the card. I just can't figure out how he got it to show up in the blank deck.

Edit: another possibility is that he uses some sort of invisible ink on the cards, which he then activates on the 1 card he pulled out. Ex: maybe it's heat activated, and he sets that 1 card down on a spot on the table that is heated. I really don't know what state of the art is on that sort of thing, so don't know how feasible it is. It seems like a stretch, but maybe it's easier to do than I think.


----------



## busyba

Turtleboy said:


> I know that all magic is obviously fake, but for some reason, the thumper disappoints me more than the other tricks. It seems like cheating.


I think what your issue with it might be is that, unlike most elements of tricks, the thumper is an element that doesn't involve any skill.

At least, that's why I myself find it unimpressive.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

Wow, I'm trying to imagine what David Roth must have been like when his hands were steady. Because even with shaky hands, he's awesome.

Another show with all good acts!


----------



## nataylor

Argh, my cable card crapped out tonight, so I missed this episode (along with a bunch of other recordings). Have to catch it on Hulu tomorrow.


----------



## busyba

The lady with the tied up thumbs, it was exceedingly obvious that



Spoiler



she held her hands in a way so that the ropes were each only tied around a single thumb



but I think that it's only because there was a camera closeup during the first tie that made it so obvious. Other than that, it was well-executed.


----------



## Hank

The last guy with the coins -- I could see almost every single one of his sleights... and he goofed up on one of them. I can't believe P&T said he fooled them, it was so obvious!!

I want to know how the Claude Rix trick was done.


----------



## Turtleboy

Hank said:


> The last guy with the coins -- I could see almost every single one of his sleights... and he goofed up on one of them. I can't believe P&T said he fooled them, it was so obvious!!
> 
> I want to know how the Claude Rix trick was done.


He didn't fool them. They gave it to him out of respect for his career.


----------



## Hank

Turtleboy said:


> He didn't fool them. They gave it to him out of respect for his career.


Meh... He still wasn't that good. The 13 yo kid was better.


----------



## markb

A problem I had with David Roth's routine was that a lot of it was too fast, so I was left wondering what I'd seen, more than being impressed by what I had seen. When I slowed it down, there were a couple of vanishes where I couldn't see how it happened. No doubt that the guy is talented, though.

I continue to be irritated by the directing of this show. For example, when the thumbs woman held her hands toward the audience to take a look, the cameras switched to a wide shot!


----------



## cmontyburns

In some ways, P&T grading on a curve is a good thing. It lets them reward acts that they respect even if the duo weren't technically "fooled". On the other, it's kind of disappointing. Neither the three-card monte kid nor Roth, the coin guy, fooled them. If one of them were going to be given a break, wouldn't you rather it be the kid who did a good act on a big stage rather than the professional magician whom everyone already respects utterly and is known as a master of what he does? 

All that said (and back the other way), I do like how P&T genuinely want to pay their respects to their peers whether the act fools them or not. Penn was genuinely excited to get up on stage and watch Roth perform, saying, "I can't wait to see this!" So I guess I don't mind it so much in the end.

My summary of the acts:

1. Three-card monte kid: No way this was going to fool P&T. They knew it and he knew it. But as I've said before, one of the fun parts of the show is just watching P&T enjoy an act that is well-done, even if they know exactly what's going on. And I really love the silent encouragement that Teller gives the young magicians while Penn is critiquing their acts. The kid wasn't the best child magician the show has had on, but this was a good act done well. Enjoyed it.

2. Thumb-tie woman: That first moment when she ran "through" the staff was an effective one. Otherwise I didn't really care for the act. It took too long to develop and it's not like we didn't know, or couldn't see, that her hands were coming apart. So the crux of the trick was immediately obvious: her thumbs really weren't tied together, or she was able to slip the knots. Meh.

3. Ubuntu guy: Maybe watching the show long enough now has put me off on "is this your card?" tricks. But this one didn't do it for me. I assumed there was some sleight-of-hand involved to pocket the card Penn picked and then produce it at the end, with the rest of the bit being theater. Don't know if that is right, although Penn did tell the guy he thought his comment that "there is no sleight of hand going on" was honest only in that moment (when he was dealing the cards). So that suggests my thought is possibly right. Either way, since we knew exactly where the trick was going, it actually getting there was not climactic in any way. And even though this guy is apparently quite experienced, his stage presence didn't di it for me. Another meh.

4. Roth, the coin vanisher: Wish I could have seen him in his prime. One thing that bothers me a bit about sleight-of-hand acts is that exaggerated hand motions they have to use to pull it off. It's still cool that you usually can't catch them at it, but the abnormal movements shine a light on what they are doing. I found that true in this case, with the tremors making that issue worse for me. I still thought it was impressive overall, but I suspect that as good as Roth may still be, he's not nearly what he once was. I wish Penn & Teller could have been legitimately fooled and not respectfully "fooled". I enjoyed this act but I didn't go "wow!" the way I have with some other acts on the show.


----------



## markb

It's possible that Roth did indeed fool P&T. He said there was only one small part of the routine that he thought could fool them, and maybe they gave it to him based on that.

One way the card guy could have done the trick is with a deck that was mostly made up of the three of hearts (or whatever the chosen card was). The part of the deck that was not fanned out was other cards, and he did a false cut, and then added a few more normal cards to the bottom of the deck. Then the rest of the trick just works by itself. But that doesn't really account for the multiple endings comment that Penn made.

The kid's act, unfortunately, wasn't impressive. The secret was some gimmicked cards, and there was very little skill involved. The biggest problem with the act was he did the same trick multiple times, so it was easy to catch on.


----------



## busyba

I liked P&T's "flag burning" trick ever since they did it on The West Wing, even though even when I saw it back then, it was pretty obvious how it was done. I wonder if they added the part where they do it with clear plastic in order to placate the people who would genuinely freak out over it.


----------



## busyba

markb said:


> It's possible that Roth did indeed fool P&T. He said there was only one small part of the routine that he thought could fool them, and maybe they gave it to him based on that..


According to a tweet from Penn, "he did some stuff I couldn't figure."


----------



## markb

busyba said:


> I liked P&T's "flag burning" trick ever since they did it on The West Wing, even though even when I saw it back then, it was pretty obvious how it was done. I wonder if they added the part where they do it with clear plastic in order to placate the people who would genuinely freak out over it.


P&T have always been known as the magicians that show how tricks are done, at least since I became aware of them about 25 years ago. They're really pretty selective about what they reveal, but it's a reputation that they have cultivated.

I think in this case, the reveal goes along with the monologue, about countries that don't give their citizens many rights, and it's also a setup to make the final vanish more impressive.


----------



## cmontyburns

busyba said:


> According to a tweet from Penn, "he did some stuff I couldn't figure."


Thanks. I don't think that really came across in the way the show played (at least to me).


----------



## MikeAndrews

busyba said:


> I liked P&T's "flag burning" trick ever since they did it on The West Wing, even though even when I saw it back then, it was pretty obvious how it was done. I wonder if they added the part where they do it with clear plastic in order to placate the people who would genuinely freak out over it.


I RW the first time and could see that Teller grabbed the flag from the tube behind Penn's back. Penn left the corner of the flag out to make it easy and it wasn't there when he lifted the tube.

I could see that the coin guy got the big coin from his waist behind and palmed it, but not much else. That's when raises his jacket.


----------



## waynomo

Hank said:


> The last guy with the coins -- I could see almost every single one of his sleights... and he goofed up on one of them. I can't believe P&T said he fooled them, it was so obvious!!
> 
> I want to know how the Claude Rix trick was done.





Hank said:


> Meh... He still wasn't that good. The 13 yo kid was better.


Reading through the thread my reaction to your first post was, hmmm, maybe he knows more than I do. Then you blew it with the next post.

The kid did a store bought trick. I don't even think he did it that well. I'll give him a lot of credit for being a 13 yo kid, but there is no way you can compare the skill involved with that with the sleight of hand of Roth.

I watched Roth in slow motion several times. I knew what to look for and still couldn't see it. I don't know what you think you saw, but I would love you to point it out to me. (Other than the large coin trick at the end.)


----------



## waynomo

cmontyburns said:


> 3. Ubuntu guy: Maybe watching the show long enough now has put me off on "is this your card?" tricks. But this one didn't do it for me. I assumed there was some sleight-of-hand involved to pocket the card Penn picked and then produce it at the end, with the rest of the bit being theater. Don't know if that is right, although Penn did tell the guy he thought his comment that "there is no sleight of hand going on" was honest only in that moment (when he was dealing the cards). So that suggests my thought is possibly right. Either way, since we knew exactly where the trick was going, it actually getting there was not climactic in any way. And even though this guy is apparently quite experienced, his stage presence didn't di it for me. Another meh.


I didn't go back and watch this guy because as you said, "Meh."

However, my assumption is that he marked the place where Penn put the card back in the deck. And when I say mark I don't mean a physical mark. Magicians have ways of picking up the deck and keeping the location of the card known to them. He then did a false shuffle before distributing the cards to piles. I don't think the card ever went to a pocket. He may have, probably did palm it at least once.

Also, I think, (again I didn't go back and watch) after Teller's first die roll he counted pile 2 as #1. Basically he asked Teller which end do you want me to start counting at? Teller said the right so he looked at the first pile on the right and said okay will start here and then started with 1 at the next pile over. (Technically pile 2 in my eyes.)

I didn't really care for the act so I didn't bother rewinding, etc. so I could totally be full of it.


----------



## markb

waynomo said:


> Reading through the thread my reaction to your first post was, hmmm, maybe he knows more than I do. Then you blew it with the next post.
> 
> The kid did a store bought trick. I don't even think he did it that well. I'll give him a lot of credit for being a 13 yo kid, but there is no way you can compare the skill involved with that with the sleight of hand of Roth.
> 
> I watched Roth in slow motion several times. I knew what to look for and still couldn't see it. I don't know what you think you saw, but I would love you to point it out to me. (Other than the large coin trick at the end.)


This is right on.

As David Roth said at the end, he thought he may have fooled Penn and Teller when the three coins disappeared one by one near the end. I watched this part in slow motion, and it's done very well.


----------



## cmontyburns

markb said:


> As David Roth said at the end, he thought he may have fooled Penn and Teller when the three coins disappeared one by one near the end. I watched this part in slow motion, and it's done very well.


I just did the same, and it became clear how he did it.



Spoiler



He wants you to have forgotten about the cloth bag the coins came out of at the beginning of the trick. It's sitting right behind the mug he drops the coins in during the vanish. When he picks up one of the coins, he palms it and only pretends to move it to his other hand. With the same hand, he then drops the remaining coins into the mug. As he does this, he releases the original coin from his palm into the cloth bag directly behind the mug. That hand is now empty, and he uses it to wave the wand over the other hand, which ostensibly contains the first coin but of course never did. Poof, it's gone!

You can see all these clearly in slow-mo. During one of the rounds of vanishing the coins one by one, his fingers come apart just enough after he has "transferred" the coin to his other hand to see the coin still in the original hand. And then as he drops the other coins into the mug, you can just see the coin fall into the bag. You really can't see this at normal speed. Not sure how it wouldn't be noticeable in person, close-up, but apparently it's not.


----------



## Hank

I agree-- even not in slo-mo, you could see he was doing the same basic sleight each and every time. Yeah, he was pretty good at it, but once you saw him sleight the coin, it was easy to see the rest of the times. At one point, he had one coin between his right thumb and the back of the mug which slipped out and clinked behind the mug. I'm pretty sure that wasn't supposed to happen. Since this still is TV, I'm surprised they didn't do a second take.


----------



## busyba

Hank said:


> Since this still is TV, I'm surprised they didn't do a second take.


It's TV, but I believe that (from a legal standpoint) it's also a game show, so they can't edit out anything relevant to the outcome of the competition.

After the fixing scandals of the 50s game shows have been tightly regulated.


----------



## Hank

busyba said:


> It's TV, but I believe that (from a legal standpoint) it's also a game show, so they can't edit out anything relevant to the outcome of the competition.
> 
> After the fixing scandals of the 50s game shows have been tightly regulated.


I don't think this qualifies as a game show, I'll have to re-watch the disclaimers again... but at the end of every real game show is the disclaimer "portions of this program not affecting the outcome of the game may have been edited".

Several shows ago, Penn made a subtle comment "when we saw you do this trick two weeks ago..." implying that there is an off-screen preview or audition for each performer, by the time they get to the real show, it's just entertainment. There are no cash prizes or awards, just a tacky trophy and the "chance" to perform in LV at some nebulous, undefined point in the future.

So this is just an entertainment show, not a game show. I've seen several times the acts are edited when hand positions or people's place on stage changes to fast, where it's painfully obvious they edited something out or re-shot some scene. Like I said, it's just TV.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

Hank said:


> Several shows ago, Penn made a subtle comment "when we saw you do this trick two weeks ago..." implying that there is an off-screen preview or audition for each performer, by the time they get to the real show, it's just entertainment. There are no cash prizes or awards, just a tacky trophy and the "chance" to perform in LV at some nebulous, undefined point in the future.


I think that was just Penn seeing a performance by that magician, not a preview for the show. He's made comments like that before...once he mentioned seeing somebody's act on You-Tube. He said something like "It would be easier to fool us if you did something we haven't seen you do before."

A lot of these guys are professional magicians, and it's a small world. It doesn't surprise me that P&T have seen some of these people perform before, and it doesn't surprise me that they try their best tricks (which they do all the time) on the show.

From what I've heard, they edit for time but they don't do re-shoots or do-overs.


----------



## Hank

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I think that was just Penn seeing a performance by that magician, not a preview for the show. He's made comments like that before...once he mentioned seeing somebody's act on You-Tube. He said something like "It would be easier to fool us if you did something we haven't seen you do before."
> 
> A lot of these guys are professional magicians, and it's a small world. It doesn't surprise me that P&T have seen some of these people perform before, and it doesn't surprise me that they try their best tricks (which they do all the time) on the show.
> 
> From what I've heard, they edit for time but they don't do re-shoots or do-overs.


Ok that's all plausible, but I still don't think the show qualifies as a "game show".

But I do think P&T do see a preview of all the acts prior to actual taping.


----------



## waynomo

Hank said:


> But I do think P&T do see a preview of all the acts prior to actual taping.


I believe they have represented that they don't see a preview. That's where I would put my money. They might see something on YouTube, etc. but I wouldn't consider that a preview. I would call that magicians doing research.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

waynomo said:


> I believe they have represented that they don't see a preview. That's where I would put my money. They might see something on YouTube, etc. but I wouldn't consider that a preview. I would call that magicians doing research.


Yeah, there have been times when they looked genuinely surprised. And from what I've seen of Penn in movies, he's not much of an actor.


----------



## Hank

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Yeah, there have been times when they looked genuinely surprised. And from what I've seen of Penn in movies, he's not much of an actor.


I think it's all an act. Years ago I had the opportunity to ask Penn a few questions, and I asked him about his broken bottle juggling act, where he goes on and on about how this one bottle is so oddly broken, and it's different from any other time he's done the trick. I asked him if that's true or not, or if it's actually the same oddly broken bottle each night (rigged to break that way).. and his only response was: "IT'S F**KING SHOW BUSINESS, D*UC*EBAG" and walked away.


----------



## LoadStar

I'm pretty sure they (P&T) don't get to see a preview. My guess is that the only people that see the act in advance are production assistants that function as talent scouts. 

I also understand they have another magician on staff that serves as a judge to settle disputes. I'd guess that not only does he also get to see the act in advance, the people appearing on the show are required to reveal the "trick" to the illusion/sleight-of-hand/etc. to him, so that he can determine whether P&T come to the right conclusion about how the trick works.

But no, I don't believe P&T get to see the act in advance -- if only because they're extremely busy with their own show, both the Las Vegas residency and the tour. (Which, BTW, I'm going to see on Friday!!)


----------



## Hank

LoadStar said:


> But no, I don't believe P&T get to see the act in advance -- if only because they're extremely busy with their own show, both the Las Vegas residency and the tour. (Which, BTW, I'm going to see on Friday!!)


Not really a factor. Take out the commercials and pre-and-post bumpers and bios, and P&T could see all 4 or 5 tricks inside of 20 minutes. The show is taped right at the Rio anyway, it's not like they have to go far. And their own show is "in the can" and really requires much additional time if they're performing the same show and bits every night for the last several years. Yes, I've seen the Rio show several times, and they do change out a few bits, but much of it remains unchanged. And the Rio show as a whole includes bits they've been doing for their entire career. I saw P&T in Phila in the 80's and they're still doing some of the same bits.


----------



## NorthAlabama

LoadStar said:


> ...I don't believe P&T get to see the act in advance -- if only because they're extremely busy with their own show, both the Las Vegas residency and the tour. (Which, BTW, I'm going to see on Friday!!)


have a great time! i'm jealous, but know it'll be a great show. :up:

p.s. at one point this season, penn mentioned one act had been auditioned before the taping, it was during one of the first eps.


----------



## Turtleboy

I think it's part of the rules that they don't see anything beforehand.


----------



## kdmorse

NorthAlabama said:


> p.s. at one point this season, penn mentioned one act had been auditioned before the taping, it was during one of the first eps.


I believe the acts are auditions and explained to the producers (or someone) beforehand. But not to Penn and Teller - I don't believe they see the acts ahead of time within the context of the show.


----------



## NorthAlabama

kdmorse said:


> I believe the acts are auditions and explained to the producers (or someone) beforehand. But not to Penn and Teller - I don't believe they see the acts ahead of time within the context of the show.


i remember penn saying he was fooled during the audition, and still fooled at the taping. he could have watched a recording, though.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

NorthAlabama said:


> i remember penn saying he was fooled during the audition, and still fooled at the taping. he could have watched a recording, though.


If we're thinking about the same thing, he was talking about an earlier time he had seen that guy perform.


----------



## BrettStah

Yeah, I don't think they see the acts ahead of time as part of this show, but they may have seen some performed at a different time.


----------



## NorthAlabama

Rob Helmerichs said:


> If we're thinking about the same thing, he was talking about an earlier time he had seen that guy perform.




BrettStah said:


> Yeah, I don't think they see the acts ahead of time as part of this show, but they may have seen some performed at a different time.



ok, that makes sense. i wasn't paying too close attention, and recalling from memory, thanks.


----------



## Hank

Turtleboy said:


> I think it's part of the rules that they don't see anything beforehand.


Then wouldn't they have to disqualify any act/trick that P&T have seen before?



> i remember penn saying he was fooled during the audition, and still fooled at the taping. he could have watched a recording, though.


That's what I pretty much remember also.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

Hank said:


> Then wouldn't they have to disqualify any act/trick that P&T have seen before?


I guess they (P&T) feel that if somebody is dumb enough to present an act they could have seen before, that's their prerogative. (And it's clear that some contestants have no illusions that they're going to fool them; they just want to be on the show.)


----------



## Hank

Which is why I think there aren't any hard-and-fast rules about the show -- it's just entertainment. And because it's just entertainment, unless there's actual proof somewhere, it seems logical to me (based on what I've seen) that yes, they do see the acts prior to taping. I'll have to go back and watch, but what gives me this impression was that Penn said something like "when you showed us this trick two weeks ago..."... it wasn't just "when we saw you do this in the past.." kind of deal, it was pretty specific.


----------



## waynomo

I recall them talking about one act where if they hadn't seen it three weeks earlier they would have been fooled, but that was independent of Fool Us. So while they had just seen it, it wasn't part of an audition or rehearsal.


----------



## BrettStah

The nice thing about Fool Us is that because the trick is being done for us, we automatically show the audience that its being done live. The magicians who come out and work for us get one shot. Once they start, they have to finish, and theres no way around that.

Though Penn & Teller have been involved in several other series, Fool Us is both the easiest and the hardest one theyve done, Jillette maintains. Were producers on the show, but were not allowed to see the guest list, were not allowed to see the trick list and were not allowed to be at the rehearsals. Its a pretty odd position to be in.

http://zap2it.com/2015/07/penn_teller_fool_us_thrown_out_an_airplane/


----------



## BrettStah

(That hopefully ends this silly debate.)


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

BrettStah said:


> (That hopefully ends this silly debate.)


(Good luck with that. )


----------



## ct1

Rob Helmerichs said:


> From what I've heard, they edit for time but they don't do re-shoots or do-overs.


It also seems fake when they choose audience members at 'random'. Each person they so choose gets miked, then sent back to their seat to be 'chosen' again. It feels fake, like they know who to choose and the person knows they will get chosen, but it really was random the first time you don't actually get to see.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

ct1 said:


> It also seems fake when they choose audience members at 'random'. Each person they so choose gets miked, then sent back to their seat to be 'chosen' again. It feels fake, like they know who to choose and the person knows they will get chosen, but it really was random the first time you don't actually get to see.


You can see the method they use, and I always assume they're using a shill unless they have a relatively foolproof method. Which they usually don't.

And do they redo the "choose" scene, or do they just stop filming while they mic the "volunteer"?


----------



## Hank

waynomo said:


> I recall them talking about one act where if they hadn't seen it three weeks earlier they would have been fooled, but that was independent of Fool Us. So while they had just seen it, it wasn't part of an audition or rehearsal.


But nobody really knows for sure, you're guessing just as much as I am.



BrettStah said:


> The nice thing about Fool Us is that because the trick is being done for us, we automatically show the audience that its being done live. The magicians who come out and work for us get one shot. Once they start, they have to finish, and theres no way around that.
> 
> Though Penn & Teller have been involved in several other series, Fool Us is both the easiest and the hardest one theyve done, Jillette maintains. Were producers on the show, but were not allowed to see the guest list, were not allowed to see the trick list and were not allowed to be at the rehearsals. Its a pretty odd position to be in.
> 
> http://zap2it.com/2015/07/penn_teller_fool_us_thrown_out_an_airplane/


Or as Penn told me personally, when I asked him about what he says during his own Rio show: "IT'S F**KING SHOWBIZ, D**CHBAG" -- essentially admitting that he lies to his audience EVERY SINGLE NIGHT.

So no, just because Penn said that does not mean that it's actually true, and in fact, I'm even more convinced it isn't true and it's just a cover up that sounds good or better sells the show, because "IT'S F**KING SHOWBIZ, D**CHBAG".

He's in the business of illusion -- and yes, this is just another one of hit tricks, and he'll SAY ANYTHING to sell the trick, even if it's a boldfaced lie. It's all a part of the deception to make it work.


----------



## LoadStar

So, basically, because of one off-the-cuff thing he said to you once, you're convinced he's always lying, and nothing anyone can say and nothing they've said on the show can dissuade you of that.

Huh. Good discussion this has been.


----------



## Hank

No, I'm not saying he's _always_ lying.. just that he let it slip once that he had seen the act before (and from my recollection, it was in context of the show, not by chance). But it does sell the show better to make people think they don't see the acts in advance. But yes, I'd need some hard proof that what he says is actually true... because most everything he does or says (even when off-stage) is part of a bigger deception that's part and parcel of his character "Penn".


----------



## nataylor

I don't even think P&T see the tricks. They filmed all their reaction shots and commentary ahead of time. When you see P&T go on stage, those are just stand-ins. All the performers on the show are just actors. The audience are all actors. Jonathan Ross is actually two kids in a trench coat.


----------



## LoadStar

Maybe Penn is another incarnation of The Doctor, and as everyone knows, The Doctor Lies.


----------



## busyba

Hank said:


> But nobody really knows for sure, you're guessing just as much as I am.
> 
> Or as Penn told me personally, when I asked him about what he says during his own Rio show: "IT'S F**KING SHOWBIZ, D**CHBAG" -- essentially admitting that he lies to his audience EVERY SINGLE NIGHT.
> 
> So no, just because Penn said that does not mean that it's actually true, and in fact, I'm even more convinced it isn't true and it's just a cover up that sounds good or better sells the show, because "IT'S F**KING SHOWBIZ, D**CHBAG".
> 
> He's in the business of illusion -- and yes, this is just another one of hit tricks, and he'll SAY ANYTHING to sell the trick, even if it's a boldfaced lie. It's all a part of the deception to make it work.


I have a slightly different interpretation of that conversation....


----------



## cmontyburns

Ha. 

It doesn't make any sense to me to assume that they see the tricks in advance _for the show_. (As others have pointed out, a lot of the contestants are working magicians and P&T seem to keep up with current events in their field, so it's reasonable to suppose that they have seen some of the acts before, elsewhere.) You can tell just by watching: way too many of their reactions are obviously extemporaneous. If they had already seen everything before, they wouldn't or couldn't act that way.


----------



## Hank




----------



## waynomo

waynomo said:


> I recall them talking about one act where if they hadn't seen it three weeks earlier they would have been fooled, but that was independent of Fool Us. So while they had just seen it, it wasn't part of an audition or rehearsal.





Hank said:


> But nobody really knows for sure, you're guessing just as much as I am.


No, I'm not guessing. I'm going by what he said. It makes no sense to admit on TV that they see all the acts in rehearsal. That is essentially what you're implying. I don't remember his exact words, but when he spoke of seeing the trick it was definitely not in the context of the show. Again, you're saying he essentially admitted they were cheating to get an edge on the acts. That makes no sense. P&T want people to fool them. The show works as advertised. There is really no reason for them to cheat so they aren't fooled.

Hank, I don't know how to say this with affection. I don't want you to hate me. I don't hate you.... But you're starting to sound like a conspiracy nut.  I have plenty of tin foil at the house if you need a couple of hats.


----------



## BrettStah

Hank said:


> just that he let it slip once that he had seen the act before (and from my recollection, it was in context of the show, not by chance).


You're mistaken. I've seen every episode and such a "slip" would have stood out to me, given the understanding I'm under that they don't see any rehearsals. 
They HAVE acknowledged multiple times that they are familiar with certain magicians, certain tricks, etc.

Also, what would be the benefit of them watching the rehearsals, exactly?


----------



## BrettStah

By the way, magicians who have appeared on the show have confirmed that they do a rehearsal only in front of the producers (excluding P&T) and have to divulge how the trick works, so that the producers can decide if P&T are indeed fooled (in case there's a dispute). Also confirmed is that the magicians aren't allowed to even meet P&T ahead of the show. 

But maybe they're lying too because SHOWBIZ.


----------



## Hank

BrettStah said:


> You're mistaken. I've seen every episode and such a "slip" would have stood out to me, given the understanding I'm under that they don't see any rehearsals.
> They HAVE acknowledged multiple times that they are familiar with certain magicians, certain tricks, etc.
> 
> Also, what would be the benefit of them watching the rehearsals, exactly?


Well, you are mistaken because he really did say it, and other people have confirmed that. I'm not making it up, he really said something like "When we saw your trick two weeks ago...". Whether or not it was in context of the show is what is up for debate. I think it is.



BrettStah said:


> By the way, magicians who have appeared on the show have confirmed that they do a rehearsal only in front of the producers (excluding P&T) and have to divulge how the trick works, so that the producers can decide if P&T are indeed fooled (in case there's a dispute). Also confirmed is that the magicians aren't allowed to even meet P&T ahead of the show.
> 
> But maybe they're lying too because SHOWBIZ.


Source? Link? And yes, maybe they are lying because of showbiz. Next you're going to tell me "Reality TV" is real and not scripted? Every single reality TV show has some level (or even 100%) scripting going on, but everyone in the production crew and cast will "confirm" that the shows are 100% real and not scripted (except a few that break their NDAs and speak out against such shows). It's just entertainment TV.

----

Also, as a side note, my interaction with Penn wasn't just a one-off flippant event. I get to see and interact with him almost every year at James Randi's "The Amazing Meeting" conference held in Vegas. Penn and Teller are among the biggest sponsors and supports of the James Randi Educational Foundation (JREF), and Penn attends the conference most years, and does talks, panels, and Q&A sessions. The annual conference is the biggest gathering of skeptics, critical thinkers, atheists, and paranormal and pseudoscience 'debunkers'. I've been going to this conference every year since 2005, and I've had the chance to interact with many of the speakers and quests, including Penn and to a lesser extent Teller (he doesn't attend every year). So I get to see and experience a side of Penn that most people don't get to see, and ask him questions outside of just meeting him for 30 seconds after his show at the Rio (which I've also done). For the last few years at TAM, he's also hosted his "Bacon and Donut Party" where his band ("The No God Band" ) plays all night long while serving seemingly endless amounts of free bacon and Krispy Kream donuts to the attendees. And we're talking hundreds of people, so you can imagine how much bacon and donuts they need to produce for the event. Oh yeah, and strippers on stage, almost forgot about that part. So when I say I think Penn is "Fooling" you all by just saying he doesn't see the acts ahead of time, yeah, I really do think it's just part of the ruse and the show to portray it that way. His whole life is built on skillfully deceiving people, and this is no exception. That big "FU" on the prize statues goes both ways, and I think that's Penn's way of saying that EVERYONE was being fooled. That's totally Penn's way of doing things, going for the long con and having the last laugh.


----------



## Ereth

If I remember that bit correctly, they said "When we saw your act two weeks ago...", meaning the magician did a trick for the show that he also does in his regular act, which Penn and Teller had seen.

I don't see any big con here, or anything else. It's clear you are predisposed to not like the guy, and to want to bust the bubble on the show, but it's also clear you are a minority of one.


----------



## Hank

I'm fine being in a minority, and I don't not like the guy, I'm actually a "fan". I've just seen most of his own "bulls**t" (on and off stage) to know when it's actually BS!


----------



## BrettStah

I'm still wondering what the point would be? P&T would still need to sit through the actual performance, right? What is the benefit of spending the extra time watching them in rehearsals?


----------



## Hank

Penn is a control freak and probably doesn't want any surprises or wants veto power to say some particular act can't appear on the show for whatever reason -- for instance if a performer is actually claiming some psychic, paranormal, or ESP or telekinetic powers (even though we all know it's not real) -- they probably don't want to be surprised to see something like that for the first time during the actual taping. Or if they come across someone who they think is a real magic "hack" they wouldn't want to appear on the same stage, or give the hack any exposure on national TV. Sure, the producers could screen out much of that, but still, I really don't think Penn and Teller are absolutely in the dark about the performers or tricks performed.


----------



## The Spud

Not that it adds anything to the conversation, but my wife & I are going to see Penn & Teller tonight.


----------



## Hank

The Spud said:


> Not that it adds anything to the conversation, but my wife & I are going to see Penn & Teller tonight.


Have a good time! (ha ha  ). Let us know if there's an act from FU that follows the P&T show, and if so, who it is.

In case you don't know, if you ask Penn to autograph a dollar bill after the show, he'll scratch out "GOD" on the bill from "In God We Trust".


----------



## ct1

Hank said:


> In case you don't know, if you ask Penn to autograph a dollar bill after the show, he'll scratch out "GOD" on the bill from "In God We Trust".


I enjoyed God No!.


----------



## Turtleboy

Camera tricks are not magic.


----------



## Hank

Turtleboy said:


> Camera tricks are not magic.


It's kinda funny he disses Criss Angel.. there's a performer/"mentalist" called Banachek (also known as Steven Shaw) who has created most of Criss Angel's "magic". It's not well known, but some people believe that James Randi himself "created" the character "Criss Angel" in a book he wrote for children about magic (I have been unable to prove this claim but continue searching for evidence).

Steve Shaw also has created tricks for Penn & Teller -- most notably the Double Bullet Catch they do most every show. You might also remember that Penn has mentioned "Steven Shaw" a few times on "Fool Us" as an originator of some tricks the contestants do. Banachek is an amazing magician/illusionist in his own right. He mostly does college tours, but if you ever have a chance to see him perform, he's amazing. Way better than P&T by a long shot. Steven Shaw has also been an officer of the JREF for quite some time now, too. Although, due to James Randi's recent retirement, the future of the JREF is uncertain.


----------



## Turtleboy

The JREF used to be right down the street from me. I drove by it all the time.


----------



## LoadStar

Favorite bit ever on this show: Teller during Rick Lax's routine. I won't spoil it, you gotta see it.


----------



## cmontyburns

I'm traveling and watched live; no DVR available so I'm left only with memory of the routine. I'm coming up empty. Why don't you spoiler tag what you're thinking of (please).


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

LoadStar said:


> Favorite bit ever on this show: Teller during Rick Lax's routine. I won't spoil it, you gotta see it.


He does that from time to time. And always with that Evil Angel expression on his face. 


cmontyburns said:


> I'm traveling and watched live; no DVR available so I'm left only with memory of the routine. I'm coming up empty. Why don't you spoiler tag what you're thinking of (please).





Spoiler



Lax wanted somebody to tell a story, and looked at Teller. Teller smiled and gave him the finger.


----------



## cmontyburns

Ah. Thanks.


----------



## Donbadabon

Every time a magician picks someone in the audience I immediately think they are a plant and it takes away from the trick.


----------



## Turtleboy

Donbadabon said:


> Every time a magician picks someone in the audience I immediately think they are a plant and it takes away from the trick.


I feel the same way. They sometimes are plants.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

Turtleboy said:


> I feel the same way. They sometimes are plants.


Yeah, in this case the first guy was probably a plant, but the second lady couldn't have been (unless everybody in the chain between them was in on it!)...

Tricks like that don't really impress me because there's so much busy stuff going on, so many different points at which they could be pulling a fast one. There were a couple like that this week. It's the simple ones that are much more likely to impress, since then there's less smoke and mirrors to distract me.


----------



## LoadStar

I enjoyed Lax, even though it was pretty obvious that *something* was up at the beginning when he put the box (and, briefly, the cards) into his jacket pocket.

I liked the Joel and Spidey duo; they had just enough comedy in their patter to make it enjoyable.

I did *not* care for Bruce Gold at all. For me, he was too busy trying to be a comedian, and most of his comedy was just painfully corny stuff that just became annoying after short order.

Marcus Eddie was just kind of boring for me, and we've seen other acts that do the "pass an object through the body" trick.


----------



## Hank

LoadStar said:


> I enjoyed Lax, even though it was pretty obvious that *something* was up at the beginning when he put the box (and, briefly, the cards) into his jacket pocket.
> 
> I liked the Joel and Spidey duo; they had just enough comedy in their patter to make it enjoyable.


Yeah, that deck switch was so obvious, but if he hadn't done that, it's a really good trick. He should have used this: 




The Spidey trick with the books -- P&T do that same trick in their show! (or used to).


----------



## Turtleboy

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Yeah, in this case the first guy was probably a plant, but the second lady couldn't have been (unless everybody in the chain between them was in on it!)...
> 
> Tricks like that don't really impress me because there's so much busy stuff going on, so many different points at which they could be pulling a fast one. There were a couple like that this week. It's the simple ones that are much more likely to impress, since then there's less smoke and mirrors to distract me.


I assume for that one it was an electronic pen like Livescribe that transmitted the information somewhere else. Not sure what the magnifying glass's significance was. Maybe it received the information.


----------



## Hank

Yeah, I can't figure out how the magnifying glass would be gimmicked.


----------



## nataylor

Hank said:


> Yeah, I can't figure out how the magnifying glass would be gimmicked.


I don't think it was. The pen was, though.


----------



## Hank

nataylor said:


> I don't think it was. The pen was, though.


Right, so why did Penn make such a big deal over the magnifying glass? Misdirection of the audience?


----------



## nataylor

As far as the pen and paper go, I believe the paper already had a number written on it in hidden ink. The guy writes on it with the pen, which has disappearing ink. Body heat activates the hidden ink. By the time the paper reaches the girl, the number the guy wrote down is gone and the number the performers wrote on the paper shows up.


----------



## nataylor

Hank said:


> Right, so why did Penn make such a big deal over the magnifying glass? Misdirection of the audience?


IT'S F**KING SHOWBIZ, D**CHBAG. 

It's not uncommon for him to mention several things, including a gimmick, when he talks to the performer. He doesn't want to give away too much, but he wants the performer to know P&T are aware of the gimmick.


----------



## Hank

nataylor said:


> IT'S F**KING SHOWBIZ, D**CHBAG.
> .










.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

Who are you calling touchy?


----------



## markb

Hank said:


> Yeah, that deck switch was so obvious, but if he hadn't done that, it's a really good trick. He should have used this:


Surely that can be used to good effect in the right routine, but it's way obvious in that video!


----------



## Michael S

Turtleboy said:


> I feel the same way. They sometimes are plants.


I start to think that when they immediately go and pick out that one person in the audience and not even go and scan the crowd.


----------



## Donbadabon

And the girl had a mic pack on her belt.

Maybe the producers pre-select the audience members? It just seems fishy.


----------



## Hank

If anything, they shouldn't pre-mic people and just hand them a microphone or have Johnathan Ross hold the mic for them. Would be much more believable.

But this also plays into my theory that very little on the show is as spontaneous as it tries to project.


----------



## NorthAlabama

Donbadabon said:


> And the girl had a mic pack on her belt.
> 
> Maybe the producers pre-select the audience members? It just seems fishy.


of course volunteers are pre-selected, why would you try and force an unwilling participant onto the stage? how else would it be accomplished, have the stage crew drag someone upon stage against their will? though that would be exciting to watch...


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

I suspect that after the person is selected, the cameras paused while they are mic'ed...


----------



## markb

NorthAlabama said:


> of course volunteers are pre-selected, why would you try and force an unwilling participant onto the stage? how else would it be accomplished, have the stage crew drag someone upon stage against their will? though that would be exciting to watch...


How else? Just ask for volunteers to raise their hands. Magicians do this all the time.


----------



## LordKronos

markb said:


> How else? Just ask for volunteers to raise their hands. Magicians do this all the time.


I'm not sure how what you are suggesting is different. I thought the argument was that pre-selecting someone seems like a plant. Well, if you have the volunteers from the audience raise their hands, then the plant just raises their hand too and the magician selects them. Isn't that basically the same thing?

That said, I don't think there's any pre-selection taking place. The magician selects, the producers mic up the person, and the producers edit it out so they don't waste precious airtime seconds on something so trivial.


----------



## Hank

Forget P&T, they need to get this kid on the show.


----------



## markb

LordKronos said:


> I'm not sure how what you are suggesting is different. I thought the argument was that pre-selecting someone seems like a plant. Well, if you have the volunteers from the audience raise their hands, then the plant just raises their hand too and the magician selects them. Isn't that basically the same thing?


I was simply saying that there is another way to select a non-plant that is not preselecting and is not forcing someone to participate that doesn't want to.


----------



## LordKronos

LoadStar said:


> I enjoyed Lax, even though it was pretty obvious that *something* was up at the beginning when he put the box (and, briefly, the cards) into his jacket pocket.


That performance bugged me. It was very well done overall, but the cards into the pocket didn't sit well with me. It was so blatent and clumsily done, that it felt like an intentional misdirect...one of those performers that puts something in there clearly intended to misdirect P&T and capitalize on the fact that they only get one guess. Of course it sounded to me like P&T didn't fall for it. They didn't quite know how it was done, but at least they didn't fall for the bait. They called out what he wanted them to think was the secret and said that's clearly not how it was done.

So even though misdirection is a legitimate magic technique, when it's used to exploit the 1-guess rule of the show it feels to me like cheating, and in this case it was completely unnecessary cheating that soured and otherwise great performance.



> I liked the Joel and Spidey duo; they had just enough comedy in their patter to make it enjoyable.
> 
> I did *not* care for Bruce Gold at all. For me, he was too busy trying to be a comedian, and most of his comedy was just painfully corny stuff that just became annoying after short order.


I felt the exact opposite on these 2 comedy performances. But both performances felt subpar magic-wise.

The duo had no real magic talent displayed in their act. It was 100% technological. I don't even know that he was a mentalist, in terms of having memorized anything. The pen the random audience member used was one of those motion sensing pen which relayed to someone offstage what was written, they looked it up, and relayed the answer to the guy writing. If felt to me like there was no skill involved. I have no talent for any of the stuff that a magician does, and it felt to me like even I could have done that act, and with almost no practice required.



> Marcus Eddie was just kind of boring for me, and we've seen other acts that do the "pass an object through the body" trick.


The first 2 tricks were all incredibly obvious (2 keys, one already on the chain and concealed via slight of hand...and a false-wrap of the chain around the hand), yet they take some slight of hand talent, so I can sort of appreciate it, unlike the 2 comedy acts. The 3rd part was fairly obvious (extra chain segment take from the abdomen and transferred to the back), but I couldn't quite make out the mechanism that was used to keep the actual chain in front of him. I'm pretty sure that while he stepped over the extra chain segment (which he later hid behind his back), the real chains were running up his arms and across his abdomen, but I couldn't see the chains at that step, so it was well done.


----------



## LoadStar

Donbadabon said:


> And the girl had a mic pack on her belt.





Hank said:


> If anything, they shouldn't pre-mic people and just hand them a microphone or have Johnathan Ross hold the mic for them. Would be much more believable.


She wasn't pre-mic'ed. The performer selected her, then they paused filming to have a production assistant come over and put the mic pack on her. She sat back down, then they started filming again. I've been to live filming, and it's completely common to pause filming to take care of technical elements like this.

In fact, you can tell there was an edit, and not even a very good one. Bruce Gold said "... so I'll just look for a friendly face. Let's see... Hi. You have a very pretty smile... you --" then there's a VERY abrupt edit. The next words are "--help. Give her some encouragement..."

It would not have been practical/workable at all to have her holding a mic, and even less so to have Jonathan Ross out on stage holding a mic for her. Neither are even remotely realistic suggestions.

(The only realistic suggestion that doesn't involve having the audience member mic'ed up is to use a boom mic, but that has it's own set of issues, and really isn't all that practical either.)


----------



## Hank

LoadStar said:


> She wasn't pre-mic'ed. The performer selected her, then they paused filming to have a production assistant come over and put the mic pack on her. She sat back down, then they started filming again. I've been to live filming, and it's completely common to pause filming to take care of technical elements like this.
> 
> In fact, you can tell there was an edit, and not even a very good one. Bruce Gold said "... so I'll just look for a friendly face. Let's see... Hi. You have a very pretty smile... you --" then there's a VERY abrupt edit. The next words are "--help. Give her some encouragement..."
> 
> It would not have been practical/workable at all to have her holding a mic, and even less so to have Jonathan Ross out on stage holding a mic for her. Neither are even remotely realistic suggestions.
> 
> (The only realistic suggestion that doesn't involve having the audience member mic'ed up is to use a boom mic, but that has it's own set of issues, and really isn't all that practical either.)


What you describe is what I call "pre-mic'd". Regardless of how they do it, it still looks really bad from the viewer's perspective and makes it look like a setup or a plant.


----------



## LoadStar

Hank said:


> What you describe is what I call "pre-mic'd". Regardless of how they do it, it still looks really bad from the viewer's perspective and makes it look like a setup or a plant.


But unfortunately, this is television, and there's no other reasonable alternative than to have the audience participant get mic'ed up with a body pack, especially since the routine required her to have both her hands free.

They could have shown the audience member getting mic'ed, but that doesn't exactly make riveting television.


----------



## Hank

Except that we've seen it done better in lots of other shows.


----------



## DavidTigerFan

Does anyone know how this is done?






There are way too many cuts IMO for this to not be a "lets switch out the football" routine.


----------



## DavidTigerFan

Does anyone know how this is done?






There are way too many cuts IMO for this to not be a "lets switch out the football" routine.


----------



## Hank

It's like David Blane "street magic" which isn't magic at all but creative camera angles, editing, and plants.


----------



## Amnesia

You should always key in on when the magician does something strange, like when he asked them to line up with their backs to the football...


----------



## Hank

You can also see him clearly palm and hide the phone as he's wrapping it in the towel. What he does with it I don't know, I think it's in his right hand as he throws the empty towel and then stashes it somewhere when the towel is thrown. Or edit tricks.

*It's the same move you see them do with they tear and untear a newspaper.


----------



## Marc

I was taken aback when I saw Bruce Gold because he looked and sounded familiar, but I couldn't place why. I eventually remembered that he was the host/magician onboard Norwegian Getaway as part of their Illusionarium magic/dinner show when we sailed on that ship last September.


----------



## Turtleboy

Penn talks about being fooled by Kosta. If you listen, they don't even know who is going to be on the show, until their name comes up in the introduction.


----------



## Hank

Yeah, he can _say_ anything.


----------



## LordKronos

Turtleboy said:


> Penn talks about being fooled by Kosta. If you listen, they don't even know who is going to be on the show, until their name comes up in the introduction.


I'm just shocked at how stumped they were. That was one of them I knew instantly how it was done. It takes a great amount of manual skill to be able to pull it off the way he did (such that I'd probably NEVER be able to do it), but the actual process he used was pretty basic and fairly obvious (I thought). Very impressive trick, to be sure, but nowhere near a fooler to me.


----------



## DUDE_NJX

So what's the actual process, then?


----------



## Turtleboy

LordKronos said:


> I'm just shocked at how stumped they were. That was one of them I knew instantly how it was done. It takes a great amount of manual skill to be able to pull it off the way he did (such that I'd probably NEVER be able to do it), but the actual process he used was pretty basic and fairly obvious (I thought). Very impressive trick, to be sure, but nowhere near a fooler to me.


It's not that they didn't know how it was done. It was that they didn't catch him doing it.


----------



## Hank

DUDE_NJX said:


> So what's the actual process, then?


It's called the "Roadrunner Cull".

There are a few videos on the technique.


----------



## busyba

Turtleboy said:


> It's not that they didn't know how it was done. It was that they didn't catch him doing it.


I think what Penn said in the youtube video is that they knew several ways of doing it, but he did it some other way that they hadn't known about and didn't catch him doing.


----------



## Turtleboy

Here's them doing it.

http://www.today.com/popculture/penn-teller-perform-baffling-card-trick-today-t29866


----------



## Hank

I think they used a different method, like two deck switches. I don't see them doing the roadrunner cull.


----------



## markb

Hank said:


> I think they used a different method, like two deck switches. I don't see them doing the roadrunner cull.


I think that's correct. And I think it's very easy to miss the secret to Kostya Kimlat's trick if you are looking for something else. P&T were probably looking for a deck switch or something else that wasn't right in front of their faces.


----------



## MikeAndrews

Turtleboy said:


> Penn talks about being fooled by Kosta. If you listen, they don't even know who is going to be on the show, until their name comes up in the introduction.


"Binary" makes me think that he can turn red-black-red-black...into binary 0101... and memorize the corresponding base 10 numbers or ASCII letters.


----------



## MikeAndrews

Teller is in Chicago working on the Chicago Shakespeare Company putting real magic into "The Tempest." 
Interview here:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/enter...-teller-tempest-interview-20150915-story.html
Teller does a couple of simple tricks at the end, and even though you've seen how he does the ball and cup....


----------



## 2004raptor

DavidTigerFan said:


> Does anyone know how this is done?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There are way too many cuts IMO for this to not be a "lets switch out the football" routine.


I know this is a P&T thread but i caught this show last night. Some of the stuff on his show looked impossible without a plant or camera edit.


----------



## LordKronos

DUDE_NJX said:


> So what's the actual process, then?


I believe a few other people in this forum discussed the method in detail a few pages back.


----------



## Hank

Here's the full episode with the football trick: http://www.nbc.com/mat-francos-got-magic

It features P&T towards the end. Also, in several tricks he uses dollar bills. Of course, on any of the bills where you can clearly see the serial number (like the trick with a ramen package), people are attempting to enter them on Where's George? -- and of course, I block them as I find them.

This guy won "America's got Talent".. but frankly, all of the "tricks" in this program are set ups, plants, editing tricks, or the same ancient sleight of hand tricks we've seen ad-nauseum -- like the ripped dollar bill trick (or newspaper) that magically becomes unripped. I don't think any of his tricks require that much actual "talent" -- unlike the tricks Kosta does that require extensive practice and talent.

But I sure want to try that Rio zip line next time I'm in Vegas!


----------



## cmontyburns

Looks like we get one more episode this season. I've really enjoyed this show overall. There was a string of pretty weak episodes through the middle part of the summer, but the last several weeks have been pretty fun. I thought this was a decent episode, too; hopefully the wrap-up next week will take us out on a high note for this run.

My opinion of the acts this week:

-- "Escape from Alcatraz" duo: This was the weakest of the four acts, I thought. Maybe I've gotten jaded from watching the show for a few months now, but I'm pretty impatient at this point with acts that are 95% setup and 5% (or maybe even less in this case) illusion. You can overcome that if the presentation and patter is good, but I didn't think this duo was entertaining in that way. I also find that I prefer illusions that are based on sleight-of-hand, or skills beyond "I bought a trick [whatever] and learned to use it". P&T seemed impressed enough with the core illusion, which I suppose means something, but overall this fell flat. (They weren't helped by the editing; it was not at all obvious that the guy had brought a balloon out to P&T after the first pass through the bars.)

-- Coin trick: Now we're talking. Apparently this one was gimmicked as well, at least partially, but that didn't bother me because it wasn't obvious (to me, anyway) during the execution. And, further to my point above, it was all execution. No setup other than picking the audience members, and I loved that the guy let Penn do it. (So did Penn, it seemed.) The very specific ways that magicians of this type hold their hands continues to bother me, but overall I thought this was a great routine. And it should put to bed any debate about what P&T do or don't know before the acts come out, given what we saw of the call offstage to the judge.

-- Card shredder: I guess I don't have a lot to say about this. The shredder, to me, added nothing, because the guy was going to be right or wrong regardless of whether he shredded the cards or not. He might as well just have dropped the unneeded decks on the floor. I get that the shredder is supposed to add suspense, but it didn't work for me. There were way too many decks in that bin for Jonathan to inspect, so I assume the trick boiled down to finding the deck that was weighted properly and then doing a pretty standard card find within that. (Although I can't relate any of that to Penn's Flintstones reference, so maybe I'm off base there.) Decent trick, but the whole was less than the sum of the parts to me.

-- Mentalist: I'm curious about this one, specifically what the whole point of trying to "influence" the people giving the numbers was. Good trick, though. It was pretty obvious from the beginning that he was not going to fool P&T, since you could tell they knew who he was. And indeed, he's got a book they've read. At least they admitted they would have been fooled had they not read his book. I might have to check it out to see how he did this.


----------



## nataylor

Paul Vigil's book: https://www.vanishingincmagic.com/magician/Paul-Vigil/

I'd love to see it, but $200 is a little much for my curiosity.


----------



## cmontyburns

So much for swinging by Barnes & Noble to browse.


----------



## MikeAndrews

cmontyburns said:


> Looks like we get one more episode this season. I've really enjoyed this show overall. There was a string of pretty weak episodes through the middle part of the summer, but the last several weeks have been pretty fun. I thought this was a decent episode, too; hopefully the wrap-up next week will take us out on a high note for this run.
> 
> My opinion of the acts this week:
> 
> -- "Escape from Alcatraz" duo: This was the weakest of the four acts, I thought. Maybe I've gotten jaded from watching the show for a few months now, but I'm pretty impatient at this point with acts that are 95% setup and 5% (or maybe even less in this case) illusion. You can overcome that if the presentation and patter is good, but I didn't think this duo was entertaining in that way. I also find that I prefer illusions that are based on sleight-of-hand, or skills beyond "I bought a trick [whatever] and learned to use it". P&T seemed impressed enough with the core illusion, which I suppose means something, but overall this fell flat. (They weren't helped by the editing; it was not at all obvious that the guy had brought a balloon out to P&T after the first pass through the bars.)


Teller mentioned something about using a table that is thin on the edge but widens out downstage so they can hold a man. That's not how the bowling ball in the briefcase thing worked but I could see on RW that Puck was carefully holding the lid of first the case up so that you couldn't see that the open lid, like for of all of the cases, were hiding the ball. You can see the red case lid open when they're taking out the black case. Each open case lid hides the ball behind it as they remove that case to collapse it to be a thinner case.

My guess is that there's something in the arrangement of the bars that provides a path through.



cmontyburns said:


> -- Coin trick: Now we're talking. Apparently this one was gimmicked as well, at least partially, but that didn't bother me because it wasn't obvious (to me, anyway) during the execution. And, further to my point above, it was all execution. No setup other than picking the audience members, and I loved that the guy let Penn do it. (So did Penn, it seemed.) The very specific ways that magicians of this type hold their hands continues to bother me, but overall I thought this was a great routine. And it should put to bed any debate about what P&T do or don't know before the acts come out, given what we saw of the call offstage to the judge.


Penn mentioned a turtle on a previous act.

My guess is that a turtle is a sort of shell that can hold the hands up and away from the coins. Penn said a dozen turtles whatever, but he only used a turtle at the end (???)

I noticed that he had huge metal rings on his finger so it could have been magnets again.



cmontyburns said:


> -- Card shredder: I guess I don't have a lot to say about this. The shredder, to me, added nothing, because the guy was going to be right or wrong regardless of whether he shredded the cards or not. He might as well just have dropped the unneeded decks on the floor. I get that the shredder is supposed to add suspense, but it didn't work for me. There were way too many decks in that bin for Jonathan to inspect, so I assume the trick boiled down to finding the deck that was weighted properly and then doing a pretty standard card find within that. (Although I can't relate any of that to Penn's Flintstones reference, so maybe I'm off base there.) Decent trick, but the whole was less than the sum of the parts to me.


Yabba DABba DO. A dab of rubber cement or such on the chosen card and box? I could see on RW that he was carefully feeling the edge of the cards, and wasn't sure which card he would set aside.



cmontyburns said:


> -- Mentalist: I'm curious about this one, specifically what the whole point of trying to "influence" the people giving the numbers was. Good trick, though. It was pretty obvious from the beginning that he was not going to fool P&T, since you could tell they knew who he was. And indeed, he's got a book they've read. At least they admitted they would have been fooled had they not read his book. I might have to check it out to see how he did this.


I'm wondering if you can throw the whole thing off by repeating a choice, or choosing the obvious choice.


----------



## nataylor

MikeAndrews said:


> Penn mentioned a turtle on a previous act.
> 
> My guess is that a turtle is a sort of shell that can hold the hands up and away from the coins. Penn said a dozen turtles whatever, but he only used a turtle at the end (???)


A turtle is a shell of an item that holds a similar item inside. In this case, it's a coin that can fit another coin inside it.


----------



## Turtleboy

Yaba DAUB a doo.

Daub. http://www.penguinmagic.com/p/1315


----------



## Hank

I feel like this show is on it's last season. I feel that every time a magician comes out with cards or coins or some obviously gimmicked prop, we've seen this before. Sure, they might be really really good at their craft, but it's getting repetitive. A long time ago P&T did a TV show on magic, and vanished a small submarine from under water at the end of the show. Throughout the show, Penn kept saying, after they do the trick, after the credits, they will reveal how they did it, but be warned, "magic is ugly". And when they revealed how they did it, it was *really ugly*. Here's the video: 




I think I'm getting to that point while I don't know how every trick is done, the "magic" of the magic is gone, knowing it's either sleight of hand that I can see (all those strange hand movements) or gimmicks or misdirection, or even plants/thumpers. When i was a kid I had that same coin trick I bought for $10 -- it was a two quarters where one fit inside the other (one was hollowed out, and the other trimmed down to fit inside). I had another which was the same but a dime and hollow nickel, but the back of the dime had the back of the nickel, so it would "disappear" inside the nickel. These are literally "dime-store" magic tricks. Come on.

The guys with the bowling ball you could on certain camera angles how the bars were offset to each other when the camera was not looking dead forward and that there were big gaps between the bars which was just an optical illusion the bars were so close to each other. They could have fixed that in editing, but they left those revealing shots in?!?! Weird.


----------



## DUDE_NJX

I don't know about you guys, but I'm sick of card tricks at this point, mainly due to this show.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

Hank said:


> I feel like this show is on it's last season.


Except it's already been renewed...


----------



## Hank

ugh.


----------



## LoadStar

Hank said:


> I think I'm getting to that point while I don't know how every trick is done, the "magic" of the magic is gone, knowing it's either sleight of hand that I can see (all those strange hand movements) or gimmicks or misdirection, or even plants/thumpers.


Perhaps, then, the fault is yours, not that of the show.

Penn even does a bit of a monologue in the P&T live show that somewhat criticizes those who sit there and try and dissect stage illusions, those who sit there and say to themselves "Oh, yeah, I know how that works." Essentially, his conclusion is that if you're going to sit there and do that, then perhaps magic isn't really for you.

(At the show I went to, he starts into it a little bit during when he does the broken bottle juggling, but continues it in the finale, where he does a fire eating stunt.)



Hank said:


> ugh.


No one is forcing you to watch or comment on the show. If you're tired of it, then watch something else.


----------



## Hank

I'd agree with you if this were a genuine magic show. But it's not. It's set up specifically to look inside the magic and expose (to some extent) how it's done. The entire premise is that magic is just sleight of hand or gimmicks or plants.


----------



## LoadStar

Hank said:


> I'd agree with you if this were a genuine magic show. But it's not. It's set up specifically to look inside the magic and expose (to some extent) how it's done.


I would disagree that it is to look inside the magic or expose anything. In fact, P&T deliberately bury their theory of how the illusion is done in code words, so people at home won't get the trick "spoiled."

Yes, those who are really interested in "spoiling" the illusion can decode those code words and references that P&T use... but that's on those people if they choose to do so.

Also, P&T never reveal more than is absolutely necessary to convey to the performer that they know how the trick is done.


----------



## Hank

Thanks, Mr. Obvious.. but the show is not a magic show, it's a show about magic. There's a big difference.


----------



## LoadStar

Hank said:


> Thanks, Mr. Obvious.. but the show is not a magic show, it's a show about magic. There's a big difference.


Again, I'd disagree. It is a magic show. The hook is the bit about "can the performer(s) fool P&T?" but otherwise, it's a pretty standard magic show.


----------



## markb

Hank said:


> The entire premise is that magic is just sleight of hand or gimmicks or plants.


Well, of course magic is fake. But I think the secret is only half of what magic is. The other half is the performance. A good gimmick in the wrong hands will make for a terrible show. A good magician can put on a good show with even a simple gimmick.


----------



## MikeMar

I enjoy the show, I KNOW it's not a magic show per say but a show about Magic

But the fun for ME is watching it, trying to figure it out a bit, and reading this thread (well parts of this thread) that talk about the tricks and such

Thank you for everyone that posts that stuff, helps the thread a lot and I enjoy it


----------



## getreal

MikeMar said:


> I enjoy the show, I KNOW it's not a magic show per say but a show about Magic
> 
> But the fun for ME is watching it, trying to figure it out a bit, and reading this thread (well parts of this thread) that talk about the tricks and such
> 
> Thank you for everyone that posts that stuff, helps the thread a lot and I enjoy it


Teachable moment: the correct phrase is "*per se*" ... though it is pronounced as you wrote it. 

Just yesterday I had watched an episode of Dating Naked (Season 2) and I cringed as one guy (who admitted that he didn't finish high school) tried to quote Winston Churchill and followed it up by saying that he probably didn't get it "per batem" when he clearly should have said "verbatim" ... _UGH!_

Note to MikeMar: I do NOT equate you with the per batem guy.


----------



## MikeAndrews

getreal said:


> Teachable moment: the correct phrase is "*per se*" ... though it is pronounced as you wrote it.
> 
> Just yesterday I had watched an episode of Dating Naked (Season 2) and I cringed as one guy (who admitted that he didn't finish high school) tried to quote Winston Churchill and followed it up by saying that he probably didn't get it "per batem" when he clearly should have said "verbatim" ... _UGH!_
> 
> Note to MikeMar: I do NOT equate you with the per batem guy.


Yeah. Ya know? You don't have to get the quote exactly correct for say.


----------



## busyba

Hank said:


> A long time ago P&T did a TV show on magic, and vanished a small submarine from under water at the end of the show. Throughout the show, Penn kept saying, after they do the trick, after the credits, they will reveal how they did it, but be warned, "magic is ugly". And when they revealed how they did it, it was *really ugly*. Here's the video:


You know that wasn't a genuine reveal, right?


----------



## Hank

busyba said:


> You know that wasn't a genuine reveal, right?


Ok, then what was it?


----------



## nataylor

Hank said:


> Ok, then what was it?


Bad CGI.


----------



## busyba

Hank said:


> Ok, then what was it?


IT'S F**KING SHOWBIZ, D**CHBAG!

Also... bad CGI.


----------



## Hank

Yeah, no, I don't think so. The quality of that video is so poor you can't tell me that it's CGI from 10 years ago. If that's not how they did it, or you have some sort of proof or backup to show what it really was, then I don't know how you can make that claim, other than you're both just trying to yank my chain.


----------



## nataylor

Really? It's obvious CGI to me. Fake camera push and everything.

Also, you'd never lift something like that with three helicopters. The load pulling down would want to pull the three helicopters together, which would be bad.


----------



## BrettStah




----------



## busyba

Hank said:


> Yeah, no, I don't think so. The quality of that video is so poor you can't tell me that it's CGI from 10 years ago. If that's not how they did it, or you have some sort of proof or backup to show what it really was, then I don't know how you can make that claim, other than you're both just trying to yank my chain.


I genuinely believe that that was just CGI, not just because it looked like bad CGI, and not just because there's a conspicuous absence of all the other surface vessels and land features that were visible in all the other previous surface shots, but also because the idea of three helicopters lifting an 80 ton sub strains credulity for me.

I do, however, also find it curious that you're so convinced that Penn was telling the truth there, given how adamant you've been about the alacrity with which Penn lies to the audience.


----------



## markb

nataylor said:


> Really? It's obvious CGI to me. Fake camera push and everything.
> 
> Also, you'd never lift something like that with three helicopters. The load pulling down would want to pull the three helicopters together, which would be bad.


I have no idea if it is CGI or not. But it looks like only one helicopter is taking the weight of the submarine, and the other two are just stabilizing it.


----------



## Hank

busyba said:


> I genuinely believe that that was just CGI, not just because it looked like bad CGI, and not just because there's a conspicuous absence of all the other surface vessels and land features that were visible in all the other previous surface shots, but also because the idea of three helicopters lifting an 80 ton sub strains credulity for me.
> 
> I do, however, also find it curious that you're so convinced that Penn was telling the truth there, given how adamant you've been about the alacrity with which Penn lies to the audience.


I'm not convinced it's the truth -- but until someone comes up with a better explanation on how it was done, it seem pretty plausible. And the absence of other support vehicles? They show it flying away -- everything else could be behind the camera, like 10 feet. Or they just did that shot later, but still used some other device to lift the sub out of the water, and that just looked good.


----------



## busyba

Here's an article on "the largest transport helicopters in the world", and while I admittedly only skimmed it, none of them seem to be able to handle 80 tons.

http://www.autoevolution.com/news/the-largest-transport-helicopters-in-the-world-24549.html


----------



## Hank

That was a tiny sub -- it wasn't 80 tons.


----------



## LoadStar

Of course that was CGI. That was the joke.


----------



## busyba

Hank said:


> That was a tiny sub -- it wasn't 80 tons.


Penn said it was 80 tons. Are you saying he's lying?


----------



## nataylor

Any movement of the sub (even straight up) is going to make currents that significantly affect the bubble curtains. The obvious answer is that the divers were in on it.


----------



## Hank

nataylor said:


> Any movement of the sub (even straight up) is going to make currents that significantly affect the bubble curtains. The obvious answer is that the divers were in on it.


If that's the case, then that's not magic, it's bullsh*t! P&T should do a BS show on themselves.


----------



## LoadStar

Hank said:


> If that's the case, then that's not magic, it's bullsh*t!


Of course it is. They were lampooning the giant disappears that performers like David Copperfield and such were doing. In virtually all cases, the trick is completely done with editing/camera tricks, and a host of observers who are all insiders.


----------



## Hank

But if they were lampooning the giant vanishes, then I'd think they'd find some more novel way to do it that didn't require plants or camera/editing tricks. That makes them no better than the hacks they're trying to lampoon.


----------



## Turtleboy

It seems that they revealed how other tricks were done, which didn't make the magician community happy.

http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewtopic.php?topic=193543&forum=177


----------



## BrettStah

I find it hard to believe anyone thinks the sub was carried away by helicopters.


----------



## markb

Turtleboy said:


> It seems that they revealed how other tricks were done, which didn't make the magician community happy.
> 
> http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewtopic.php?topic=193543&forum=177


They mostly reveal tricks that P&T invented, and only when they think exposing the secret make the effect more entertaining. They reveal only a small fraction of their tricks, anyway.


----------



## Turtleboy

How I "secretly" fooled Penn and Teller.


----------



## hefe

Turtleboy said:


> How I "secretly" fooled Penn and Teller.


That was pretty cool.

Interesting comments that had been posted about the performance on this forum... http://www.theory11.com/forums/threads/i-think-sankey-fooled-penn-and-teller.39250/


----------



## phillipmaz

If you watch the clip, they use a boom mic from underneath, not a lapel mic.


----------



## Mikeyis4dcats

Turtleboy said:


> How I "secretly" fooled Penn and Teller.


seems like a giant ******.


----------



## nataylor

I was surprised to see season three is premiering tonight. I hadn't heard it was starting.


----------



## bigpuma

nataylor said:


> I was surprised to see season three is premiering tonight. I hadn't heard it was starting.


The only reason I knew about it was because Penn talked about it on his podcast recently. Otherwise I would not have known about it.


----------



## Turtleboy

nataylor said:


> I was surprised to see season three is premiering tonight. I hadn't heard it was starting.


I didn't know either. Is it under the same series name so that Tivo should pick it up?

Edit: Yes!


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

There was some talk a while back when it was announced that Hannigan was going to be the new host; that's what clued me in.


----------



## waynomo

I saw a Tweet from Penn tonight that reminded me.


----------



## Ereth

I'm a huge fan of Alyson Hannigan. However, she was very stiff as the host. I'm hoping she loosens up some as the series goes on.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

Ereth said:


> I'm a huge fan of Alyson Hannigan. However, she was very stiff as the host. I'm hoping she loosens up some as the series goes on.


Yeah, she was trying too hard. Hopefully, she'll relax.


----------



## BrettStah

She seemed a little nervous but I liked her more than Ross.


----------



## cmontyburns

Ereth said:


> I'm a huge fan of Alyson Hannigan. However, she was very stiff as the host. I'm hoping she loosens up some as the series goes on.





Rob Helmerichs said:


> Yeah, she was trying too hard. Hopefully, she'll relax.


Very much agree with you both.



BrettStah said:


> She seemed a little nervous but I liked her more than Ross.


But not you!


----------



## cmontyburns

We discussed weekly episodes in this thread last season, so I assume we'll do so again for season 3. Here are my thoughts on the first episode of season three. Spoilers, natch.

It's curious to me that the opener and, especially, the graphics in the theater still use "big Penn". He hasn't been that size for quite some time now. I might've guessed at leas the theater would be updated.

As I assented above, I thought Hannigan was OK as host, but probably was pressing a bit much. Honestly I might not have noticed had she not succeeded Jonathan Ross, who I thought was really excellent as host. He was warm with the magicians, was a great setup man, and quite funny while knowing full well the show was not about him except when it needed him to build bridges between acts or between the act and the commentary by P&T. Not that Hannigan wasn't those things, necessarily, but Ross made it seem pretty effortless where with Hannigan it felt like she was working. She did growmon me a bit as this first episode went on, but overall it felt like she needs to relax a touch.

My summary of the acts:

Sherlock Holmes
I confess it took me longer than it should have to anticipate that his book would be blank. I spent some part of the act wondering, "when is the trick going to start?" Overall this one felt dissatisfying even though it fooled P&T. So it wasn't a memory trick, and he said there was no book switch either, but that sure was a large coat he was wearing and a lot of stuff went in and out of the pockets. I basically came away feeling like this was less amazing than it should have felt because the solution is surely pretty mundane.

Bottle guy
This one was cool. I knew it had no chance of fooling P&T, but there's obviously a lot of skill involved in the trick, they pointed out, and it was fun to watch. And cool that he used objects as large as bottles. I thought his patter was maybe a little unfinished, but overall it was probably my favorite act.

Toilet paper
I frankly don't know what this one was. It didn't have any coherence even as a short set and the tricks, while well done I guess, were unremarkable -- versions of stuff you see at any magic show. Pass.

Golf ball
This is another one that felt more underwhelming than they guy probably thinks it is. Plenty of opportunities for him to force the paper with "golf ball" written on it, and it was obvious that the pole had changed height. Not sure how that related to him switching the jar or whatever he did -- and P&T actually didn't figure that part out; were they fooled? -- but in general this one was kind of dull. I think some of that came from his stage presence, which was pretty weak. He didn't sell the trick well enough.

Penn & Teller
Like so much of their act, it's more about presentation and showmanship than amazing prestidigitation (although Teller has that skill and then some). So it's a simple math trick with cards. Eh. Kind of a bummer for Hannigan that she screwed it up.


----------



## Hank

The only one the fooled me was the first one with the blank book. Passé passé bottles is mechanical, you can buy it on eBay. The other two were total obvious hack jobs... You could see each step of the trick. The woman in the box--her hands didn't line up correctly (they were other hands) and the golf ball guy was just really bad. The pole didn't move, he needed the chair to ditch the empty bottle with the black cloth.. And then at the end he just reached up to get the box with the planted golf ball from the start.


----------



## Hank

There are many examples of this, but here's an almost word-for-word performance of Passe Passe Bottles -- same as on Fool Us: 




For the last trick, you can see every instance where he's palming or ditching the props. When he first palms the empty bottle, and then ditches it in the black cloth, which is there for absolutely no reason at all. What he should have done (which is what P&T do for some tricks) is just have a pocket on the back of the chair to ditch the empty glass. He also should have made the pole higher, and used the chair to pick up the box at the end of the trick - making use of the chair necessary. Because he didn't need the chair at the end, and the pole didn't move (grow/shrink), you question why he needed the chair at the beginning. You can also see how he delicately handles the red box at the beginning, as to not "rattle" the golf ball in the jar already in the box. And then his palming of the empty jar is really clumsy, too.

With the disappearing woman, you can clearly see where she fits into the step-ladder on the left side of the box... it's hollow when they bring it out, then there's a cut, and then the sides are covered up and they roll it away very quickly. Another hack job.

The toilet guy was obvious, but very quick and very well done.


----------



## Turtleboy

The real goal of the performers isn't to fool P&T, but to get TV exposure so others will hire them.


----------



## cmontyburns

Hank said:


> Passé passé bottles is mechanical, you can buy it on eBay. The other two were total obvious hack jobs... You could see each step of the trick. The woman in the box--her hands didn't line up correctly (they were other hands) and the golf ball guy was just really bad. The pole didn't move, he needed the chair to ditch the empty bottle with the black cloth.. And then at the end he just reached up to get the box with the planted golf ball from the start.


I knew the bottle trick was done with rigged props, but I still enjoyed it.

Regarding the golf ball trick, I seldom see how things are done immediately, and I usually don't try. I prefer to let the trick happen and react to it and the performance before watching again more closely. I was queueing off Penn's comment that pole seemed to shrink; I didn't notice what you did at first, although it was obvious that he was not reaching to the same place where he first put the jar in the box.


----------



## Turtleboy

With the girl in the box, I like how Penn used the homophones: stares and stairs.


----------



## BrettStah

For the Sherlock Holmes trick, I don't know if it makes any difference, but the reading glasses he used early on in the trick did have lenses - you can see some glare/reflection. 

If he didn't swap out the books, my next thought was he has an earpiece and he has someone back stage with a copy of the book, feeding him details.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

BrettStah said:


> For the Sherlock Holmes trick, I don't know if it makes any difference, but the reading glasses he used early on in the trick did have lenses - you can see some glare/reflection.


My thought was that the book was printed with some kind of invisible ink that was visible through the glasses, and instead of swapping the book, he swapped the glasses.


----------



## Hank

Turtleboy said:


> The real goal of the performers isn't to fool P&T, but to get TV exposure so others will hire them.


Well, if that's the bar, I'd say only the first guy surpassed it, he was very entertaining and very non-obvious how he did it. I still don't know. I was also thinking the entire time "so when does the real trick start"? BTW, we've seen P&T do similar tricks where the joke is just on one volunteer person on stage, and the rest of the audience is in on the joke. But that's not the kind of trick you do when you're trying to "fool" P&T on TV.



Rob Helmerichs said:


> My thought was that the book was printed with some kind of invisible ink that was visible through the glasses, and instead of swapping the book, he swapped the glasses.


Oh, I like that possibility! Nice.



cmontyburns said:


> I knew the bottle trick was done with rigged props, but I still enjoyed it.


Yes, it is very entertaining and a good trick. Takes real skill to pull it off well. I sure couldn't go it. I'm pretty sure each bottle (except for maybe one) are thin aluminum shells that fit inside each other.. and somehow the magician simulates a good "bottle thump" each time he exposes a new bottle.

Even if you don't watch very closely, the girl in the box was so clumsy -- just look at the angle of her arms in the box, and the angle of the 'hands' on top. People's wrists don't bend like that.


----------



## cmontyburns

Spoilers from the 7/20 episode coming up from this point.

My thoughts on tonight's episode:

Host
Hannigan seemed a little more at ease this week than last. Although I wonder if that's just me, as these two eps may have been taped back-to-back: wasn't she wearing the same dress as last week? Her guest banter was still lacking but at least she seemed more comfortable otherwise. Still prefer Jonathan Ross though.

Sword swallower
The biggest issue here, like Penn said, is that it wasn't a trick. Yeah, there was the sushi bit at the end, but -- though I don't know how he did that -- it seemed fairly conventional. 99% of the act was the sword swallowing which, while impressive as a physical act, is a variety stunt and not a magic trick. So I spent most of the time wondering what he was doing on this show.

Card illustration
This was fun. The bit with Bones the stuffed animal was odd, though; I couldn't tell if that was some sort of distraction -- like, a reason for him to put his hand back in his pocket before going back to the deck -- or if it was just a random element the guy threw in. One thing I really enjoy about the show is how genuine P&T can be with some of the guests. Maybe they are really supportive of a young performer, or showing real respect for someone they know but who didn't fool them, or, like this guy, someone who did fool them in a way they just didn't expect. I thought Penn's enthusiastic "wow!" was a lot of fun -- he obviously was super-impressed, and delighted, that he thought they had it figured and were wrong.

Disappearing woman
On the one hand, it was a version of a stock disappearing-person trick. So while it was effective, and the wheel was novel, it had a whiff of familiarity to it. On the other, it's nice when some of these acts are big stage productions and not just another guy with a deck of cards. So I appreciated the theatricality most of all, and that it was well-executed if not amazing.

Lentils
The guy's got his stage persona down pat. Unique and funny. Here I thought maybe Penn was a little too generous with praise, though, because the trick seemed like elementary school magic. A standard card-force and a little bit of sleight-of-hand, so obvious that Penn had nothing to talk about besides going on about how funny the guy was. Which was true, but I would have preferred him to be funny with a little more magic in his magic act.

Eisenberg
Pretty lame trick. Card forcing rules the night. And oops, the disadvantage of filming this stuff way before it airs, because the movie opened a few weeks ago and hardly is a "blockbuster".


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

cmontyburns said:


> ...or, like this guy, someone who did fool them in a way they just didn't expect.


I'm a little surprised that more people don't do this...use P&T's knowledge of how tricks are done to mislead them. Clearly, they knew exactly what he seemed to be doing, and clearly he knew that and did something completely different.

Yeah, Alyson looked more at ease (IIRC, it was a similar dress but different color, but that would be the case even if they did tape them back-to-back; she would change between episodes). But Eisenberg was clearly nervous...you could see his hands shaking!


----------



## Donbadabon

For the disappearing woman trick, what did one assistant having big shoes and the other being barefoot have to do with anything?

I enjoy Hannigan in her acting roles, but she is really not a good host for this show, IMO. Her banter with the contestants is strained and forced, she doesn't appear to be comfortable at all.


----------



## Mikeyis4dcats

Hank said:


> Well, if that's the bar, I'd say only the first guy surpassed it, he was very entertaining and very non-obvious how he did it. I still don't know. I was also thinking the entire time "so when does the real trick start"? BTW, we've seen P&T do similar tricks where the joke is just on one volunteer person on stage, and the rest of the audience is in on the joke. But that's not the kind of trick you do when you're trying to "fool" P&T on TV.
> 
> Oh, I like that possibility! Nice.
> 
> Yes, it is very entertaining and a good trick. Takes real skill to pull it off well. I sure couldn't go it. I'm pretty sure each bottle (except for maybe one) are thin aluminum shells that fit inside each other.. and somehow the magician simulates a good "bottle thump" each time he exposes a new bottle.
> 
> Even if you don't watch very closely, the girl in the box was so clumsy -- just look at the angle of her arms in the box, and the angle of the 'hands' on top. People's wrists don't bend like that.


They are like matryoshka dolls. You could even visibly SEE the difference in sizes, which was the biggest disappointment to me.


----------



## TonyTheTiger

cmontyburns said:


> Spoilers from the 7/20 episode coming up from this point.
> 
> My thoughts on tonight's episode:
> 
> Host
> Hannigan seemed a little more at ease this week than last. Although I wonder if that's just me, as these two eps may have been taped back-to-back: wasn't she wearing the same dress as last week? Her guest banter was still lacking but at least she seemed more comfortable otherwise. Still prefer Jonathan Ross though.
> 
> Sword swallower
> The biggest issue here, like Penn said, is that it wasn't a trick. Yeah, there was the sushi bit at the end, but -- though I don't know how he did that -- it seemed fairly conventional. 99% of the act was the sword swallowing which, while impressive as a physical act, is a variety stunt and not a magic trick. So I spent most of the time wondering what he was doing on this show.


Agree that this is a circus act and not a magic trick. The one bit of sleight he did was really bad and obvious!



cmontyburns said:


> Card illustration
> This was fun. The bit with Bones the stuffed animal was odd, though; I couldn't tell if that was some sort of distraction -- like, a reason for him to put his hand back in his pocket before going back to the deck -- or if it was just a random element the guy threw in. One thing I really enjoy about the show is how genuine P&T can be with some of the guests. Maybe they are really supportive of a young performer, or showing real respect for someone they know but who didn't fool them, or, like this guy, someone who did fool them in a way they just didn't expect. I thought Penn's enthusiastic "wow!" was a lot of fun -- he obviously was super-impressed, and delighted, that he thought they had it figured and were wrong.


I loved this. The force was first class. I've seen the trick before, but he obviously performed it diferently to the kit you can buy even though he invented it!



cmontyburns said:


> Disappearing woman
> On the one hand, it was a version of a stock disappearing-person trick. So while it was effective, and the wheel was novel, it had a whiff of familiarity to it. On the other, it's nice when some of these acts are big stage productions and not just another guy with a deck of cards. So I appreciated the theatricality most of all, and that it was well-executed if not amazing.


Terrible, just terrible! I felt the gimmick was obvious and clumsily performed.



cmontyburns said:


> Lentils
> The guy's got his stage persona down pat. Unique and funny. Here I thought maybe Penn was a little too generous with praise, though, because the trick seemed like elementary school magic. A standard card-force and a little bit of sleight-of-hand, so obvious that Penn had nothing to talk about besides going on about how funny the guy was. Which was true, but I would have preferred him to be funny with a little more magic in his magic act.


Loved this guy! Proof that a good stage persona can make even a simple trick much more than the sum of its parts.



cmontyburns said:


> Eisenberg
> Pretty lame trick. Card forcing rules the night. And oops, the disadvantage of filming this stuff way before it airs, because the movie opened a few weeks ago and hardly is a "blockbuster".


Well, no comment really. Lame excuse to pull Eisenberg into it and obvious use of the force, although three forces from the same deck can be tricky (no pun intended).


----------



## Turtleboy

Traditionally in the card trick, each and every card is on the back of one of the cards, so you just have to force the right one to the end. Which is what P&T were expecting. How he got it so it was only that one card, I dont' know.


----------



## john4200

Turtleboy said:


> Traditionally in the card trick, each and every card is on the back of one of the cards, so you just have to force the right one to the end. Which is what P&T were expecting. How he got it so it was only that one card, I dont' know.


Two possibilities I can think of.

1) I don't know how hard it is for the performers to get shills in the audience. If he could get a few shills, it would not be too hard to throw the stuffed animal to one of them. But I guess it is hard for them to get shills in, especially into the front of the theater. If it was not a shill, it is too bad he did not throw it over his back like tossing the bouquet at a wedding.

2) I think it is called "dictionary" or something like that if he has 52 cards hidden somewhere and he grabs the one he needs and puts it at the end.


----------



## Hank

My bet is on a dictionary trick.

He did one grab for something under the table right before the reveal.


----------



## Hank

> Terrible, just terrible! I felt the gimmick was obvious and clumsily performed.


Please elaborate, I'm curious to hear how other people think it was done.


----------



## cmontyburns

Turtleboy said:


> Traditionally in the card trick, each and every card is on the back of one of the cards, so you just have to force the right one to the end. Which is what P&T were expecting. How he got it so it was only that one card, I dont' know.


I've never seen that trick before so I had to look up how it was done. Now that I know, I can see why Penn was so blown away.


----------



## TonyTheTiger

Hank said:


> Please elaborate, I'm curious to hear how other people think it was done.


Penn pretty much told us how it was done. He said, and I'm paraphrasing, "The light doesn't always come from where you think". Plus, the guy stated his love for videography during the intro film.

If you still have it, look at the clumsy assistant who removes the left-hand light and then when the magician reaches in to 'pull' the girl through doesn't match up.


----------



## justen_m

TonyTheTiger said:


> Penn pretty much told us how it was done. He said, and I'm paraphrasing, "The light doesn't always come from where you think". Plus, the guy stated his love for videography during the intro film.
> 
> If you still have it, look at the clumsy assistant who removes the left-hand light and then when the magician reaches in to 'pull' the girl through doesn't match up.


This type of videography has been used a few times in various acts on America's Got Talent, too. Not magic acts. Just performance art. Often dance. It combines live human actors with computer projections. When it is done properly, the live human parts visible to the naked eye combine seamless with the computer projected parts, while the real human part is hidden behind the projection screen. There's probably a better explanation somewhere.


----------



## Hank

TonyTheTiger said:


> Penn pretty much told us how it was done. He said, and I'm paraphrasing, "The light doesn't always come from where you think". Plus, the guy stated his love for videography during the intro film.
> 
> If you still have it, look at the clumsy assistant who removes the left-hand light and then when the magician reaches in to 'pull' the girl through doesn't match up.


Yeah, I figured that part out, that the girl is just a projection, And I saw his arm didn't line up with the projection, too.... but where does she actually go? Into the floor of the platform? I didn't see them slide her away like they did with the stairs last week (THAT was so obvious).


----------



## BrettStah

There's room under the hamster wheel and if you look closely you can even see the trap door she used to slide under.


----------



## Hank

BrettStah said:


> There's room under the hamster wheel and if you look closely you can even see the trap door she used to slide under.


I studied that intensely, but it just doesn't look like that much space down there!


----------



## nataylor

I don't think there's any videography used in the hamster wheel trick. Combining Penn's statements on the different footware and the direction of light, I think the other assistant's (who's removed her boots) silhouette is what we see.


----------



## Hank

nataylor said:


> I don't think there's any videography used in the hamster wheel trick. Combining Penn's statements on the different footware and the direction of light, I think the other assistant's (who's removed her boots) silhouette is what we see.


Ah ha! Now I'll have to re-watch. I couldn't make heads/tails of the footware comment.


----------



## BrettStah

Hank said:


> I studied that intensely, but it just doesn't look like that much space down there!


The part that's under the wheel is a matte black color, making it blend in with the set. But it's definitely enough room for a limber performer to squeeze into (IMHO).


----------



## nataylor

BrettStah said:


> The part that's under the wheel is a matte black color, making it blend in with the set. But it's definitely enough room for a limber performer to squeeze into (IMHO).


Yeah, she's hidden somewhere on the wheel, which is why Penn mentioned it was good she was petite.


----------



## MarkofT

If you look at the first part of the trick before the girl disappears and she is in silhouette, there is an assistant holding the light source for backlighting. But if you look at his position in relation to the lightshow on the screen, it's obvious that isn't the case. If that backlight was really used, there would be a shadow from the rim of that side of the wheel. Instead the backlight shadow shows the light to be directly behind the screen.

The shadow show was projected onto the screen hiding the activities behind it.


----------



## LoadStar

The disappearing woman act reminded me of something that I'd see on "Magic's Greatest Secrets Finally Revealed." I was even imagining Mitch Pileggi's narration in my head making fun of the act and the nimble, gyrating assistant.

True, the sword swallowing act wasn't a trick... but then again, Penn does a flame eating bit in at least some of P&T's live shows.


----------



## Turtleboy

It's funny. If a guy _pretended_ to sword swallow, but wasn't really doing it, and P&T didn't know what he was really doing, then that's a trick that would fool them.


----------



## nataylor

MarkofT said:


> If you look at the first part of the trick before the girl disappears and she is in silhouette, there is an assistant holding the light source for backlighting. But if you look at his position in relation to the lightshow on the screen, it's obvious that isn't the case. If that backlight was really used, there would be a shadow from the rim of that side of the wheel. Instead the backlight shadow shows the light to be directly behind the screen.
> 
> The shadow show was projected onto the screen hiding the activities behind it.


I'm relatively certain the image wasn't front protected. There's too much margin of error in positioning the image to hit a target that may not be positioned perfectly. The image would have to be perfectly aligned with the screen to avoid any spillover or blank screen.


----------



## nataylor

The more I look at it, the more I think it's simpler than I first assumed.

I think the backlight the guy is holding is actually what is producing the light and silhouette. But, by being off to the side, there's a wedge shaped area towards the center of the circle that objects inside won't project onto the front of the screen. All they're need is a slide-out platform for her to step on to when she exits the left side. When the backlight goes off she lays down or something so she's obscured by the base. When the screen goes up on the right side, she then climbs back on the platform and steps into the light on the right side.


----------



## Hank

That is just so simple, that's probably how it's done.

Like Penn says, magic isn't pretty.


----------



## TonyTheTiger

All magicians know that often, the simpler the gimmick, the bigger the payoff!


----------



## TonyTheTiger

No comments on this week's show? I'm surprised.

I did not like the hip-hop guy and I don't think he actually did fool P&T. Some of his moves were clumsy and his stage presence was non-existent!

Contrarily, I loved the latino guy from the DR. His moves were very good and his patter was excellent.

Did anyone else notice that the two assistants for the escapologist were the couple from America's Got Talent who did the sword swallowing stuff?



Spoiler



She shot an arrow and hit his neck while he was swallowing a lamp stand this week, so they didn't get through.


----------



## Turtleboy

And Dave and Leeman were on AGT last year or the year before.


----------



## cmontyburns

We've had a couple of posts on this episode already, but if you didn't catch them, *spoilers for the 8/2 episode* follow.

Due to some travel, I didn't post about last week's episode, which I thought was, overall, quite disappointing. I thought mostly the same about this week's episode, for varying reasons. My take on the acts:

Rope Duo
Fine, I guess, but I prefer acts that come on this show and do one main trick rather than a few small ones. I prefer the illusion that performers really are trying to fool P&T and not just trying to get exposure for themselves. It was obvious from the get-go that they were not going to do anything unusual and so all the air went out of the act right away.

Jibrizy
Granted he's basically a kid, but as TonyTheTiger observed, his patter needs a lot of work. The pencil-pen thing was kind of cool even though it was obvious what he did, and I guess he did a good job with the sugar packet. I wish that hadn't fooled P&T though; we've seen tons of variations on that trick. I want them to be fooled by something obviously cool.

Escape artist
Neat act, and certainly kind of nuts. So props for that. But I'm not sure what could have "fooled" P&T in this one. Put him on AGT or something, and I'll be all in on his act. Put him on P&T, and it turns Fool Us into a variety show and that's not why I watch.

DR card magician
Liked him, and it was a good trick even though it's an oldie. That also means it wasn't going to fool P&T, though. And as I've said, I like acts that don't immediately seem familiar and low-stakes within the context of the show. So while I enjoyed him as a performer, I wish he had done a different trick.


----------



## markb

Had to look up Slydini. Worth a watch, I think:


----------



## TonyTheTiger

markb said:


> Had to look up Slydini. Worth a watch, I think:


I read his book and am familiar with his techniques. He was a master at sleight and VERY respected (obvs!!).


----------



## getreal

nataylor said:


> I don't think there's any videography used in the hamster wheel trick. Combining Penn's statements on the different footware and the direction of light, I think the other assistant's (who's removed her boots) silhouette is what we see.


It's a clever variation of this idea ...


Spoiler










 ... and is what Penn was referring to about the light source.


----------



## innocentfreak

I don't know if it was discussed in the thread, but one of the magicians who didn't fool Penn & Teller posted on Reddit after someone posted the clip from their episode. 

The producer's requested he do a specific trick he was known for even though it was obvious it wouldn't fool Penn & Teller. 

It shouldn't come as a surprise based off some of the tricks, but still a little disappointing.


----------



## TonyTheTiger

innocentfreak said:


> I don't know if it was discussed in the thread, but one of the magicians who didn't fool Penn & Teller posted on Reddit after someone posted the clip from their episode.
> 
> The producer's requested he do a specific trick he was known for even though it was obvious it wouldn't fool Penn & Teller.
> 
> It shouldn't come as a surprise based off some of the tricks, but still a little disappointing.


How cute to think that reality TV is real!

Anyway, without deets, all this is, is a nice story.


----------



## pdhenry

1. Only if the prize for fooling P&T was worth anything, really.
2. So the allegation is that he had a trick that could have fooled them?


----------



## innocentfreak

TonyTheTiger said:


> How cute to think that reality TV is real!
> 
> Anyway, without deets, all this is, is a nice story.


Not thinking reality TV is real. It was more an explanation of why magician's did obvious routines on the show that have been around forever when "attempting" to fool Penn & Teller. Of course just being on the show is promotion.



pdhenry said:


> 1. Only if the prize for fooling P&T was worth anything, really.
> 2. So the allegation is that he had a trick that could have fooled them?




__
https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/4stalh/_/d5c0bid

It looks like he edited his response after the fact. I couldn't remember the magician so had to go digging for it.



> I pitched an original routine to them and they liked it, but the producers went on my YouTube channel and wouldn't stop talking about how great the bottles would look on the show. They wanted the energy that this trick creates. So I decided to do it, knowing that 99.9999% of their audience are not magicians. Most of the magic that Fools P&T ends up being sort of procedural, lots of steps, instructions, exposition and can have a tendency to appear less energetic and flashy.
> 
> The original trick that I first pitched - I believe it may have fooled them. It's an original handling, method and a pretty original plot.
> 
> The other bonus for me is that the bottles are something I have performed more than anything else. So I knew I would rock it without shaky hands.
> 
> EDIT: I just want to reiterate - it was my choice ultimately to do the routine I did. I chose it because I thought it would make better television than my original choice.


----------



## cmontyburns

innocentfreak said:


> Not thinking reality TV is real. It was more an explanation of why magician's did obvious routines on the show that have been around forever when "attempting" to fool Penn & Teller. Of course just being on the show is promotion.


Related to artifice in the show, I've been wondering how they manage to do it such that each episode, exactly one act of the four -- no more, no less -- fool Penn & Teller. I suppose one way is that the producers manipulate the performances such that one is most likely to do it. Or they actually have more than four acts filmed for each episode, and pick the best four.


----------



## Hank

I've seen a few eps that had more than one fooler. It happens.


----------



## pdhenry

cmontyburns said:


> Related to artifice in the show, I've been wondering how they manage to do it such that each episode, exactly one act of the four -- no more, no less -- fool Penn & Teller. I suppose one way is that the producers manipulate the performances such that one is most likely to do it. Or they actually have more than four acts filmed for each episode, and pick the best four.


I've assumed that they know how all of them are done and they get "fooled" for the show.


----------



## BrettStah

pdhenry said:


> I've assumed that they know how all of them are done and they get "fooled" for the show.


Unless you think they are lying, that's not true. They don't even know which magicians will be appearing. They take a guess or two and if they guess incorrectly they say they were fooled. Some tricks can be done a few different ways.

The magicians have to show the producer (who is an experienced magician in his own right) ahead of time how the trick is done so that he can confirm wether P&T's guess is correct if the magician says their guess is wrong.


----------



## pdhenry

I'm being cynical, but I'm not saying they're in on what the producer knows. I just saying it's easy for them to say they're fooled if they want to be fooled, so I wonder if they're ever really fooled.


----------



## BrettStah

pdhenry said:


> I'm being cynical, but I'm not saying they're in on what the producer knows. I just saying it's easy for them to say they're fooled if they want to be fooled, so I wonder if they're ever really fooled.


Gotcha - basically I am giving them the benefit of the doubt - for one thing, it makes THEIR lives easier... no rehearsals to sit through, no extraneous acting needed, etc. Just show up, watch some magic acts, and take their best guess at how it was done. They get one look at it, and can't rewind like we can with DVRs. They could probably rattle off the 10 different ways a famous trick is done, but they usually only guess once or twice at most before giving up.


----------



## markb

cmontyburns said:


> Related to artifice in the show, I've been wondering how they manage to do it such that each episode, exactly one act of the four -- no more, no less -- fool Penn & Teller. I suppose one way is that the producers manipulate the performances such that one is most likely to do it. Or they actually have more than four acts filmed for each episode, and pick the best four.


I think they probably do some editing. The order you see the routines is not the order in which they were performed. I assume they record several episodes worth of acts in a day, and do this for several days. Then the editors choose which acts to put into each episode.

This also may be why Alyson wears the same dress in every episode. It gives the editors more freedom.


----------



## cmontyburns

markb said:


> This also may be why Alyson wears the same dress in every episode. It gives the editors more freedom.


I've wondered about that as well. However, P&T wear different clothes each episode so I don't think that's it.


----------



## Hank

The quality of the acts in S3 is really going downhill. That x-ray machine guy was awefully clumsy and it looks SO fake. Yes, I know it's fake, but it was so forced to lost everything. The Sucker Die box (with the iPad) was pretty good. The guy with the girl-in-the-box with the broken mirror was just painful to watch. 

The only one with any real talent was the "unshuffled" guy.


----------



## cmontyburns

Hank said:


> The quality of the acts in S3 is really going downhill. That x-ray machine guy was awefully clumsy and it looks SO fake. Yes, I know it's fake, but it was so forced to lost everything. The Sucker Die box (with the iPad) was pretty good. The guy with the girl-in-the-box with the broken mirror was just painful to watch.
> 
> The only one with any real talent was the "unshuffled" guy.


I haven't posted detailed thoughts on the last couple of episodes, partly due to travel and partly due to apathy for the reason you mention. Most of the acts have been "meh" at best.

I thought the Die Box guy was really good, though, and probably the best act of the season. As I've said before, I think the show is at its most fun when P&T really get enthused about an act, where everything comes together: the trick, the execution, the performer. So it was with Die Box guy, who had fantastic stage presence and a solid trick that was executed in a really entertaining manner. You could tell they really, really admired his stagecraft. Lots of fun.

So I disagree with you that the unshuffled guy is the only one with any talent, because while his trick was great, his stage presence (and trembling hands!) were not. Die Box guy did a solid if familiar trick exceptionally well, which is its own kind of talent.

Those two have been the best by far of the past few weeks.


----------



## markb

cmontyburns said:


> I've wondered about that as well. However, P&T wear different clothes each episode so I don't think that's it.


Hmm.. do they? I thought they wore their stage costumes in every episode. I'll have to go back and check now.

Edit to add: Looks to me like they do wear the same outfits in every episode, down to their ties.


----------



## cmontyburns

markb said:


> Hmm.. do they? I thought they wore their stage costumes in every episode. I'll have to go back and check now.
> 
> Edit to add: Looks to me like they do wear the same outfits in every episode, down to their ties.


I only have the last two episodes on my DVR to check, but you're right, they are dressed the same in those. I made the comment because Teller often wears red sneakers, and I happened to notice in one of these episodes that he wasn't wearing them. Now I wonder if I remember the sneakers so well not because he wore them recently because he wore them for the entirety of last season and hasn't worn them at all this year.

Let's keep an eye on their clothing for next week's episode!


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

I could have sworn Hannigan wore a different dress in her first episode. Maybe that was a kind of pilot/test run? She also seemed much more visibly nervous in that one than since...


----------



## rahnbo

cmontyburns said:


> So I disagree with you that the unshuffled guy is the only one with any talent, because while his trick was great, his stage presence (and trembling hands!) were not.


Unshuffled guy seemed really bad to me. He might be talented but yes those shaky hands were something and the really odd way in which curled his knuckles under the deck was bizarre. The two issues combined made me wonder if he supported the deck that way because of the trembles or if it was part of the trick. Also at one point it appeared that a card shot right out of his sleeve to the bottom of the deck.


----------



## markb

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I could have sworn Hannigan wore a different dress in her first episode. Maybe that was a kind of pilot/test run? She also seemed much more visibly nervous in that one than since...


I just checked the episode that's labelled 301 (http://www.cwtv.com/shows/penn-tell...in/?play=3067aa34-7bd0-4660-b232-d5829d394b44) and she's still wearing the same dress. I didn't check every episode, though, so there's still a possibility there's one where she wears something different, but I don't remember it.

I don't think they would want to film a traditional pilot (film just one episode long before the rest of the episodes), because this show is filmed on the same stage as P&T's nightly Vegas show. That show has to go dark, not just during filming, but also for setup and tear down of the TV set. They wouldn't want to to double the setup and tear down days.


----------



## worachj

I would think they are similar to game shows where they shoot multiple episodes on the same day/night and are just too lazy to change their outfits.


----------



## Turtleboy

If there was a studio audience, then they had to have advertised for tickets, right?

http://edgevegas.com/complimentary-tickets-for-penn-tellers-fool-us/

The show taped from April 7-15 of this year.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

worachj said:


> I would think they are similar to game shows where they shoot multiple episodes on the same day/night and are just too lazy to change their outfits.


Although in this case it doesn't seem to be laziness...they're setting it up so they can divide the acts into the kind of shows they want.


----------



## markb

worachj said:


> I would think they are similar to game shows where they shoot multiple episodes on the same day/night and are just too lazy to change their outfits.


Although most game shows do tape multiple episodes per day, the hosts usually change their clothes for every episode. Fool Us is an exception, not just in that they wear the same clothes, but also in that the segments are unconnected, and make sense in any order, in any episode. So I suspect these things are connected.


----------



## Turtleboy

I would hope they have multiple of the same outfit, and not just wear the same one.


----------



## Mikeyis4dcats

I was thinking they probably taped all the episodes in one long day, or a couple of days, hence the same wardrobe. 

But I haven't looked at the studio audience to see how often they change.


----------



## cmontyburns

Not that it's a surprise at this point, but in last night's ep (August 25), everybody wore the same clothes again. So that's that.


----------



## Turtleboy

cmontyburns said:


> Not that it's a surprise at this point, but in last night's ep (August 25), everybody wore the same clothes again. So that's that.


You may have missed my post:



Turtleboy said:


> If there was a studio audience, then they had to have advertised for tickets, right?
> 
> http://edgevegas.com/complimentary-tickets-for-penn-tellers-fool-us/
> 
> *The show taped from April 7-15 of this year.*


----------



## vertigo235

I think they wear the same clothes to help with editing together the performances so they can spread out the best performers.


----------



## markb

I'm beginning to regret pointing out the clothes. There was a new episode last night. Can we talk about that?

It's weird that Penn commented on multiple outs for the bus photo trick. That doesn't address the interesting part of the trick, which, at least to me, is the moving photo that can be inspected after the trick. Or did Penn give some hints about that that I missed?


----------



## getreal

markb said:


> ... It's weird that Penn commented on multiple outs for the bus photo trick. That doesn't address the interesting part of the trick, which, at least to me, is the moving photo that can be inspected after the trick. Or did Penn give some hints about that that I missed?


An overlaid cutout of the bus which slides across the underlying photo print is my obvious explanation. If they examined the photo album rather than the print, there would be no questions, IMHO.


----------



## markb

getreal said:


> An overlaid cutout of the bus which slides across the underlying photo print is my obvious explanation. If they examined the photo album rather than the print, there would be no questions, IMHO.


I thought of that, but I couldn't catch the overlay being removed.


----------



## Turtleboy

For the clock, there was obviously someone with a remote setting the time. That wasn't a good trick. A good trick would have had her date of birth too.


----------



## markb

Turtleboy said:


> For the clock, there was obviously someone with a remote setting the time. That wasn't a good trick. A good trick would have had her date of birth too.


He did seem to be doing something to the back of the clock while it was still in the bag, though.


----------



## cmontyburns

Turtleboy said:


> You may have missed my post:


Nope, didn't miss your post. The clothes thing started because I wondered how they managed to have exactly one fooler each episode. I had rejected that they were mixing and matching from different tapings (or making multiple episodes out of fewer, longer tapings) because I thought I had seen that their clothes varied. Since they actually don't, they can construct episodes out of multiple tapings no matter the shoot dates.


----------



## BrettStah

They also don't always have exactly one fooler per episode.


----------



## series5orpremier

They were on James Corden last night promoting Fool Us. They did the Blast Off routine which I've seen several times over the years but it never gets old.


----------



## cmontyburns

BrettStah said:


> They also don't always have exactly one fooler per episode.


It has happened once or twice, but not this season. It effectively never happens.


----------



## BrettStah

cmontyburns said:


> It has happened once or twice, but not this season. It effectively never happens.


It did happen more early on - if Wikipedia is accurate there have been 6 episodes out of 28 where either zero or two acts have fooled them. Maybe they decided midway through season 2 to even out the "foolers" to exactly one per episode. I guess time will tell!


----------



## TonyTheTiger

cmontyburns said:


> It has happened once or twice, but not this season. It effectively never happens.


Doesn't the first part of this sentence make the second completely wrong?


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

TonyTheTiger said:


> Doesn't the first part of this sentence make the second completely wrong?


Check his tenses.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

By the way, scheduling heads-up...looks like for at least the next two weeks they're showing a second episode on Friday night.


----------



## cmontyburns

Spoilers for the 8/31 episode ahead!

Time to get back to posting my thoughts on the acts in each episode instead of peripheral matters.

Teenager
I usually like the youth acts but this one didn't do it for me. Penn was being gracious in liking the hoverboard entrance, but it struck me as a gimmick looking for a purpose. (Maybe it does kill with he kid crowd.) Likewise, his schtick with the t-shirt gun was more hokey and awkward than funny. Presumably he'll refine that as he gets older. As for the trick -- eh. He wasn't smooth in doing the quick change with the t-shirt when he spun around, and the basic trick is the sort of thing we've seen before on the show.

Zabrecky
OK, he was successfully weird. He's going for a unique stage presence and he achieved it. As for the trick, well, it was basically the same thing as the guy who guessed people's underwear just a couple of weeks back, so it was hardly unique. Kind of entertaining from a showbiz aspect, but not so much from magic/mentalism.

David Garrard
I really enjoyed this. There was no way it was going to fool P&T, at least not with how the trick was done, although Penn was obviously gobsmacked to see his daughter pop out. His delight was a lot of fun. And also a little disappointing, because I didn't know at first she was his kid, and I thought his delighted reaction was from being totally taken by surprise that it was a kid instead of some different woman. But still, the performer just seemed like a nice guy, delighted to be there, and the act was fun. Well done.

Mentalist
On the one hand, I have no idea how he did it, even though the basic trick (card to wallet, as Penn pointed out) has been done a million times on the show. And it did fool them. But it still fell flat for me. I think it's because we could see where the trick was going from the get-go, and it just took so long to arrive there. Felt like the routine could have been tightened up a bit. Also, it seemed strange that the audience member's name (Carlos) was apparently printed on the letter, and there was no pause to acknowledge that the magician had achieved that. And P&T didn't address it later.


----------



## markb

I finally got around to watching S03E13, which I think is the season finale.

It was pretty lackluster. Penn pretty much gave away the answers to Anthony Asimov (walnuts) and Angela Funovits (dictionary).

On the walnut trick, I think the camera cut away when he stole the prepared walnut from behind the table. I wonder if that is intentional, or if the camera direction is just poor?

Ivan Amodei fooled P&T, but I'm pretty sure it was by technicality. I think the part about handing out the cards in clusters was correct. He only needed to know one card in each cluster and the whole set of cards that he handed out to the group on stage. Possibly he was able to determine one card in each group via marked cards.

Vince Charming's trick (jigsaw puzzle) went awry, as two pieces were missing when there was supposed to be only one. I wonder what was going on when the audience member was taking so long to take a handful of pieces from the box? It must have been setup somehow to limit her choices.

P&T's trick looked like something they had thrown together on the day of filming. They must have run out of tricks that they want to show on TV. Not too surprising.


----------



## nataylor

New season of Penn & Teller: Fool Us starts July 13 on the CW.


----------



## NorthAlabama

nataylor said:


> New season of Penn & Teller: Fool Us starts July 13 on the CW.


thanks for posting, it just popped into my to do list...can't wait!


----------



## cmontyburns

****SPOILERS FOR THE SUMMER 2017 SEASON FROM THIS POINT****


----------



## cmontyburns

**SPOILERS FOR JULY 13, 2017 EPISODE*
*
This was a fun premiere episode. I especially liked Kayla Whatwashername. Once I saw she was doing a torn paper trick, I knew there was no way she was going to fool P&T (also knew because they had already been fooled by the first guy, and there's only one fooler per episode) but I didn't care. I thought her whole routine was utterly charming. Really well performed, and of course Teller was the perfect partner for it. Great fun.


----------



## BrettStah

cmontyburns said:


> there's only one fooler per episode


That's not true.


----------



## Hank

I don't know about all the tricks, but wowza.. I liked that red jumper on Allison Hannigan!! She can FU me anytime!! 

I have no idea how the lottery guy did that trick.


----------



## cmontyburns

BrettStah said:


> That's not true.


We've been through this before in this thread. The vast majority of the time, it is the case. I'd be happy to wager there will no episodes this season with more than one fooler.


----------



## BrettStah

If you had said that the vast majority of the time there's only one act that fools them, you'd have been correct. There's no rule that requires only one, and there have been more than one in the past, so I would not assume there will only be exactly one cooler in every episode. 

There have also been episodes where no one fooled them. 

Anyway, no biggie...


----------



## TriBruin

Hank said:


> I don't know about all the tricks, but wowza.. I liked that red jumper on Allison Hannigan!! She can FU me anytime!!
> 
> I have no idea how the lottery guy did that trick.


That was the only trick i saw tonight (forgot to setup a OnePass) and I think I know how it is done. I also figured that P&T would know it immediately as well.


----------



## cmontyburns

BrettStah said:


> If you had said that the vast majority of the time there's only one act that fools them, you'd have been correct. There's no rule that requires only one, and there have been more than one in the past, so I would not assume there will only be exactly one cooler in every episode.
> 
> There have also been episodes where no one fooled them.
> 
> Anyway, no biggie...


Agreed, no biggie. I'm leaning on my impression that it is pretty clear that they've settled into the one-per format. Wikipedia has the rundown.

The first season, in the UK, had several instances of more than one fooler per episode. But in the US run, we haven't seen one since the beginning of season two, two years ago. None for the rest of that season and none for season three last year, either. Doesn't mean we won't see a double again at some point -- and mind, I wish we would, since it would leave a little suspense in the show -- but it's been so long that it seems safe to assume that once we get one in an ep, that's it.


----------



## Hank

TriBruin said:


> That was the only trick i saw tonight (forgot to setup a OnePass) and I think I know how it is done..


Soooo.... ????


----------



## cmontyburns

I re-watched Kayla Drescher's segment. I'm smitten.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

cmontyburns said:


> I re-watched Kayla Drescher's segment. I'm smitten.


I don't know...I'm not sure what to think about a woman who goes after a man she knows isn't going to speak...


----------



## markb

For some reason the local CW affiliate was in standard definition on DirecTV last night.. argh!

Edit: Looks like it's been in SD ever since CW changed affiliates and became a subchannel in this market earlier this year. Double argh!


----------



## Donbadabon

Hank said:


> I have no idea how the lottery guy did that trick.





Spoiler: My thought is ...



he had a wireless small printer upside down attached to the lid of the box. Notice we saw in the box, but not under the lid. And Penn also mentioned they 'flipped their lid'.

He put them in numerical order (like a real lottery ticket) so his off-stage assistant could enter them into a handheld device, and then hit print. The printer then printed out the fake ticket and dropped it into the box (since it was upside down).


----------



## BrettStah

Donbadabon said:


> Spoiler: My thought is ...
> 
> 
> 
> he had a wireless small printer upside down attached to the lid of the box. Notice we saw in the box, but not under the lid. And Penn also mentioned they 'flipped their lid'.
> 
> He put them in numerical order (like a real lottery ticket) so his off-stage assistant could enter them into a handheld device, and then hit print. The printer then printed out the fake ticket and dropped it into the box (since it was upside down).





Spoiler



CUPP - Cesaral Ultimate Portable Prediction - Cesaral Magic


----------



## inaka

Donbadabon said:


> Spoiler: My thought is ...
> 
> 
> 
> he had a wireless small printer upside down attached to the lid of the box. Notice we saw in the box, but not under the lid. And Penn also mentioned they 'flipped their lid'.
> 
> He put them in numerical order (like a real lottery ticket) so his off-stage assistant could enter them into a handheld device, and then hit print. The printer then printed out the fake ticket and dropped it into the box (since it was upside down).


Yup, that's how it's done.
They also mentioned that there's a lot that can be random but one thing that has to go right:



Spoiler



That's gotta be incredibly nerve racking and a potential moment of panic when he first opens the box, and hopes there wasn't some technical issue with the printing of the ticket. The rests of the random part is all show and irrelevant really. It all hinges on that printer (and his assistant) working flawlessly, otherwise he hangs out there to dry.


----------



## Hank

Ok maybe, but he gave the ticket to penn and said "that's a real lottery ticket."

So he outright lied.


----------



## BrettStah

Hank said:


> Ok maybe, but he gave the ticket to penn and said "that's a real lottery ticket."
> 
> So he outright lied.


I'm sure it's not too difficult to use a real ticket in the trick.


----------



## markb

Hank said:


> Ok maybe, but he gave the ticket to penn and said "that's a real lottery ticket."
> 
> So he outright lied.


That's totally acceptable in magic, though. Magicians outright lie all the time.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

BrettStah said:


> I'm sure it's not too difficult to use a real ticket in the trick.


I'm guessing it would be impossible...


----------



## lew

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I'm guessing it would be impossible...


I'm guessing it would be easy to print a ticket which looks like at real ticket. Right font, ink color, type of paper etc. A ticket which looks real to an observer. Getting a ticket which looks real to the lottery office, right bar code, probably impossible.


----------



## BrettStah

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I'm guessing it would be impossible...


Why? Buy some some lottery tickets, then let the numbers fade from age and sun, etc. Or maybe even get a blank ticket. Have a friend or relative that works at a place that sells tickets, who knows your not doing anything really nefarious like trying to scam the lottery, and you can get some.


----------



## BrettStah

By the way, I don't he actually went to the trouble of doing that. There's no real real to do so when you can just print out a very realistic one.


----------



## pteronaut

Magic, is in its essence, is someone going so far out of one's way to achieve an effect, to the extent that the audience won't know or believe that they went that far.

Also, did anyone suspect that the person who handed off one of the balloons, was the stooge?


----------



## Hank

pteronaut said:


> Also, did anyone suspect that the person who handed off one of the balloons, was the stooge?


I saw that, but I'm sure the stooge had to be offstage.


----------



## nataylor

No stooge needed.


----------



## Hank

Somebody has to key it into the micro-printer. He surely didn't.


----------



## nataylor

Hank said:


> Somebody has to key it into the micro-printer. He surely didn't.


The marker he had was all he needed to enter the numbers.


----------



## JTAnderson

Hank said:


> I don't know about all the tricks, but wowza.. I liked that red jumper on Allison Hannigan!! She can FU me anytime!!


Well, you should be happy then, because you'll probably get to see it every week.


----------



## Hank

Well, it'll keep me watching this crappy show.


----------



## KungFuCow

I like the magicians. I always turn it off when its Penn and Teller doing a trick. And yea, Ive always been an Allison Hannigan fan so that definitely helps.


----------



## inaka

BrettStah said:


> Why? Buy some some lottery tickets, then let the numbers fade from age and sun, etc. Or maybe even get a blank ticket. Have a friend or relative that works at a place that sells tickets, who knows your not doing anything really nefarious like trying to scam the lottery, and you can get some.


When you said to use a "real lottery ticket" and people said that would be impossible, I'm assuming people are assuming you meant "a real lottery ticket with pre-printed numbers." That _would_ be impossible for that trick. The numbers are obviously printed on the fly.

Yeah, there would be ways to get a real lottery ticket that has the number line blank, but I'm sure if anyone took the time to freeze frame the image of the ticket itself, and scanned the bar code at the bottom, those numbers wouldn't match up at all.


----------



## Hank

inaka said:


> Yeah, there would be ways to get a real lottery ticket that has the number line blank, but I'm sure if anyone took the time to freeze frame the image of the ticket itself, and scanned the bar code at the bottom, those numbers wouldn't match up at all.


I didn't actually scan the bar code, but if you google CA lottery ticket, the bar codes on real tickets are much denser than the trick ticket.


----------



## john4200

I've never played the lottery, but I wonder is it possible to do it without buying an official ticket? 

I mean, from a practical standpoint, you just need to choose some numbers and record the fact that you paid for those numbers and they are associated with your name. Is a ticket strictly necessary? Can you buy a "ticket" over the Internet? How difficult is it to become licensed or whatever to sell tickets? Could the magician or someone he works with be licensed to sell tickets and thus was able to print a real ticket?


----------



## john4200

So, how did chicken Curry choose the correct page? If the magician was telling the truth that it was not the paper and he did not signal the chicken, it seems the only thing left is the marker used to write. The magician clearly did not swap the marker after the first page. So maybe it has to do with the ink drying. The chicken pecks the page where the ink has finished drying?


----------



## Hank

john4200 said:


> I've never played the lottery, but I wonder is it possible to do it without buying an official ticket?
> 
> I mean, from a practical standpoint, you just need to choose some numbers and record the fact that you paid for those numbers and they are associated with your name. Is a ticket strictly necessary? Can you buy a "ticket" over the Internet? How difficult is it to become licensed or whatever to sell tickets? Could the magician or someone he works with be licensed to sell tickets and thus was able to print a real ticket?


Not from a tiny wireless printer hidden in the box top.


----------



## john4200

Hank said:


> Not from a tiny wireless printer hidden in the box top.


Yes, from a tiny wireless printer hidden in a box.


----------



## Hank

Not a real lottery ticket from the state lottery system, no.

Do you realize how tightly regulated state lotteries are? There's no lottery on the planet that would allow a licensed agent to print lottery tickets from a completely insecure, mini wireless printer.

The ticket was also dated October, 2016.

Let's see you get a real lottery ticket printed with last year's date.


----------



## BrettStah

inaka said:


> there would be ways to get a real lottery ticket that has the number line blank


That was what I was getting at.


----------



## john4200

Hank said:


> There's no lottery on the planet that would allow a licensed agent to print lottery tickets from a completely insecure, mini wireless printer.


Prove it.

You seem to think there is something special about the paper ticket, but as I already explained, that cannot be the case. The important things are that the numbers are associated with your identity, and that the ticket was paid for. The actual paper ticket is not so important.

I have never bought a lottery ticket, but I have seen the kiosks and convenience stores where they are printed when people buy them. Printing the tickets is certainly not very secure. If they really relied on the paper ticket as an ultimate verification, then there would be all sorts of fraud going on.

The date is a different matter. When was the episode actually taking place?


----------



## john4200

BrettStah said:


> That was what I was getting at.


But would that be a "real" lottery ticket? I contend that what makes the ticket real is that it could win and pay off if the number hit. It is not the paper that is important -- it is the validity of the claim on the numbers if they hit.


----------



## BrettStah

john4200 said:


> But would that be a "real" lottery ticket? I contend that what makes the ticket real is that it could win and pay off if the number hit. It is not the paper that is important -- it is the validity of the claim on the numbers if they hit.


This isn't a court of law. It's a magician saying it's a real ticket. That is open to a wide array of interpretations, some more reasonable than others. If I decide that I'm going to make my own lottery and print out a ticket, then that's a real ticket (for my new lottery).


----------



## john4200

BrettStah said:


> If I decide that I'm going to make my own lottery and print out a ticket, then that's a real ticket (for my new lottery).


Not really. In common usage, that is not what people mean when they say it is a "real ticket". A good illusion tricks people in certain ways that are satisfying and entertaining, and I think you will find few people that would consider using an obscure interpretation of a phrase to be a good illusion.


----------



## BrettStah

In the world of deception it's perfectly fine. The main thing magicians do is mislead people.


----------



## jamesl

john4200 said:


> I've never played the lottery, but I wonder is it possible to do it without buying an official ticket?


no



> I mean, from a practical standpoint, you just need to choose some numbers ...


and the only way to do that is by buying a ticket

and numbers are not associated with your identity

I've bought "mega millions" tickets, "lotto" tickets and "power ball" tickets

and never ever have I shown ID

there is no "associating the numbers with your identity"

the paper tickets are everything


----------



## inaka

Guys, guys, it's obviously a FAKE ticket. Meaning it's newly printed on-the-fly via a printer in the top of the box, and likely printed on an old/reused "official" ticket paper. That's it. That's the trick to make the ticket appear as a "real lottery ticket". That's the trick.


----------



## cmontyburns

Sometimes knowing how a trick is done enhances my enjoyment of it. Like Jimmy Ichihana this week, the former math teacher with the cards. I have no idea how that was done, but it was clear that it's hard, and I suspect knowing it would only have increased my appreciation that it could be done at all.

The lottery ticket printer trick is the exact opposite. Obviously you've got to have some showmanship to be able to make people think the trick is happening somewhere else in the routine, but I could do that trick right now. Lame.


----------



## MarkofT

john4200 said:


> Prove it.
> 
> You seem to think there is something special about the paper ticket, but as I already explained, that cannot be the case. The important things are that the numbers are associated with your identity, and that the ticket was paid for. The actual paper ticket is not so important.
> 
> I have never bought a lottery ticket, but I have seen the kiosks and convenience stores where they are printed when people buy them. Printing the tickets is certainly not very secure. If they really relied on the paper ticket as an ultimate verification, then there would be all sorts of fraud going on.
> 
> The date is a different matter. When was the episode actually taking place?


When a lottery ticket is requested the lottery terminal contacts the lottery servers and an ID is generated. The numbers are associated with that ID in the lottery database and the ID and numbers are returned with a time & date stamp. The terminal then prints the ticket. No personal information whatsoever is stored. Just the drawing, terminal ID, the ticket ID, the numbers, and the time & date.

Whoever holds the ticket can claim it and has sole rights to the prize. That's why there are often lawsuits in the news involving those lottery pools. The lottery commission doesn't care who they pay, as long as the ticket presented is on official paper and bears the correct drawing terminal ID, ticket ID, the numbers, and the time & date. It would be fairly easy to get blank ticket paper since any cashier working where there is a terminal has access. It's just as easy to print a fake ticket. But what's just about impossible is to insert an entry that matches the info on the fake ticket.


----------



## TonyTheTiger

The whole point of magic is to make something look like it's one thing when it really isn't. I don't recall the magician saying that it was an official ticket from XXX lottery, did he?

Anyone who has dabbled in magic or even received a '101 Magic Tricks' set for Christmas knows this to be true. Take the linking rings. If you know the secret, then it's obvious really, but if you don't, well, that's another thing.


----------



## Worf

They call magicians "illusionists". Because that's all it is, an illusion. There is nothing being done that is not explainable by plain old everyday science. 

The trick to doing tricks is knowing human behavior. Convince the eye that one thing is happening when it's something else entirely. The real craft to magic is practice - because it's easy to accidentally flash or do a tell. 

And if the lottery ticket was real (hint: it isn't), that magician will no longer be a magician for obvious reasons. Very few people "make it big". Most of them are really just making enough to live on, so if they could magically come up with a way to win the lotto, who would continue to do low-rent shows?


----------



## Frylock

Interesting that they had to go to the judges for last week's episode. I wonder what the magician thought he was doing that Teller didn't tell him in their convo.

I agree the math guy was REALLY impressive.


----------



## inaka

It's funny that this show is a competition show all. That itself _*is*_ the illusion, complete with a parody trophy "F-U".

The most impressive examples of illusions on the show are often ones that don't really fool them, but are done so spot-on and flawlessly that others can't do them. Like the math guy.

I bet in the planning stages of the show, they toyed around with the idea of making an "America's Got Talent" type voting system, but then someone would likely have to be the "bad guy" rejecting people, and this is a more light-hearted show this way.


----------



## cmontyburns

inaka said:


> The most impressive examples of illusions on the show are often ones that don't really fool them, but are done so spot-on and flawlessly that others can't do them. Like the math guy.


These are often my favorite acts, because Penn & Teller are so obviously appreciative of seeing hard stuff done well even when they know the trick.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

cmontyburns said:


> These are often my favorite acts, because Penn & Teller are so obviously appreciative of seeing hard stuff done well even when they know the trick.


And the performers aren't there to fool P&T...they know they won't. They just want to show what they can do.


----------



## cmontyburns

Yep, like my TV girlfriend from the first episode this season. There's no way she could have thought she would fool them with a torn-and-restored paper trick, but her act was just charming and well worth being on the show to do.


----------



## markb

Rob Helmerichs said:


> And the performers aren't there to fool P&T...they know they won't. They just want to show what they can do.


Well, the smart ones aren't. There seem to be a few that think their tricks are harder to figure out than they actually are.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

markb said:


> Well, the smart ones aren't. There seem to be a few that think their tricks are harder to figure out than they actually are.


But those aren't the ones cmontyburns was talking about...


----------



## NorthAlabama

Rob Helmerichs said:


> And the performers aren't there to fool P&T...they know they won't. They just want to show what they can do.


i agree this is mostly correct, but there have been a few whose appearances have been specifically to fool p&t, and they have said as much on the show, but only a couple of successes.


----------



## getreal

cmontyburns said:


> Yep, like my TV girlfriend from the first episode this season. There's no way she could have thought she would fool them with a torn-and-restored paper trick, but her act was just charming and well worth being on the show to do.


I think she specifically was auditioning to appear in P&T's existing show, as the scenario of a man & woman with HER taking charge of the trick was super charming. Otherwise it would be Teller taking a lady from the audience and him taking charge of pulling off the trick with her attempting to follow his lead, but this switcheroo just made it so much more memorable (to me, anyway).

Also, I think most magicians appearing on the show are just trying to get television exposure. The whole "F.U." trophy is just P&T poking the TV network in the eye while winking at their audience.


----------



## getbak

Technically a casting spoiler for the next new episode (regarding a performer returning to the show)...


Spoiler



I just noticed in the episode description for tonight's episode that Shin Lim will be on again. He had one of the best previous appearances on Fool Us, won the FU trophy.

As Penn said, "We didn't even know how you vanished the ************* marker."


----------



## Maui

getbak said:


> Technically a casting spoiler for the next new episode (regarding a performer returning to the show)...
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> I just noticed in the episode description for tonight's episode that Shin Lim will be on again. He had one of the best previous appearances on Fool Us, won the FU trophy.
> 
> As Penn said, "We didn't even know how you vanished the ************* marker."


Shin Lim is incredible. his routine last night was just as good as the first one.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

A little Misty Lee trivia: Her husband created Harley Quinn.


----------



## Turtleboy

Rob Helmerichs said:


> A little Misty Lee trivia: Her husband created Harley Quinn.


I thought it was Jennifer Schwalbach's.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

Turtleboy said:


> I thought it was Jennifer Schwalbach's.


No, they created Harley Quinn Smith.


----------



## markb

I think I figured out a substantial portion of Shin Lim's routine last night.



Spoiler



Making the cards appear and disappear was mostly done with black-backed cards, which blended in with the table when face down. When he's making them disappear, you can see him go through the motions of sliding the cards off the table after they vanish.

For the part where he makes the deck change color, the deck is designed so when it's fanned one way, it shows red backs, and when it's fanned the other way, it shows blue. (The back of each card is half red / half blue.) Same with the faces, which change to spell out Penn & Teller. There's some more involved, of course, such as replacing the top card, which isn't half and half.


----------



## cmontyburns

getbak said:


> Technically a casting spoiler for the next new episode (regarding a performer returning to the show)...


When I read your spoiler, I thought, "I wonder if that's the guy who..." and it was. Really amazing routine.


----------



## Donbadabon

The P&T dove routine that lasted 10 minutes was terrible. I FF'd to the end, and it looked like even the payoff was lame.


----------



## Hank

The first act with the gimmicked knives was terrible! I'm surprised she made it on to the show with that. You could see her toggling the button on each one.. and they even looked like gimmiked knives with the super big handles and "clinky" sounds. It's like a vegas magic shop trick for $30. BAD!

And yeah, the P&T trick at the end was just as bad.


----------



## Frylock

The knife trick was awful! And I was also hoping for the Dove bit to have a great payoff at the end, but it disappointed. I guess Lim made up for the rest though.


----------



## NorthAlabama

Frylock said:


> The knife trick was awful! And I was also hoping for the Dove bit to have a great payoff at the end, but it disappointed. I guess Lim made up for the rest though.


while the dove bit was mostly nostalgia, i was impressed with teller's ability to keep producing the live doves, over and over again, while his jacket sleeves were mostly rolled up and completely visible - the man is a true sleight of hand master, that's for sure.


----------



## Boot

On the escape trick on tonight’s show, I’m guessing either every key worked and the magician had a way to set the lock to appear jammed, or none of them worked and it wasn’t actually a key that opened the lock. Maybe a hidden release button? Either way it was the lock that was rigged.


----------



## pteronaut

I'm guessing a trick lock, all keys but one have a missing projection but the tumbler at that location was not sprung and can be jiggled. Notice how he was shaking his lock holding hand on all locks?
The fourth key that Alyson tried had all the required projections to align all the tumblers and turn the lock freely.


----------



## inaka

That lock trick was pretty lame. After Alyson shook the keys to give the illusion that there was just one key that worked, she handed the glass to an assistant who literally walked behind the set and was off camera for a second. I personally think it was a trick lock and all the keys actually worked, however, it's lame when the assistant could have just switched the entire jar with a matching jar filled with all working keys. When a trick has multiple ways for it to be easily done, it's not really an impressive trick.


----------



## justen_m

Agreed. This makes two weeks in a row that the opening act has been lame.


----------



## Hank

Also, when he says "sorry, we don't have time to test all 20 keys" is a lame cop-out. Also, it looked like the handcuffs where gimmicked. 

The P&T trick at the end was also a pretty simple card force... when Penn goes to "fan" the deck, you can see him bend over, off camera, and pick up a prop of perfectly fanned cards.. we don't see him do it on camera. My guess is that the card is the 4 of spades every time and the "computer program" is just a video.


----------



## midas

Hank said:


> The P&T trick at the end was also a pretty simple card force... when Penn goes to "fan" the deck, you can see him bend over, off camera, and pick up a prop of perfectly fanned cards.. we don't see him do it on camera. My guess is that the card is the 4 of spades every time and the "computer program" is just a video.


I can't see how it could have been a card force since he handed the couple the deck and they chose from the full deck. But I suppose it's possible. I could actually see it being fairly easy to write the alleged program. However, my gut tells me it was a phony.

I think it's more likely just a planted couple. Or maybe just a deck where every card except one says, "Pick the 4 of spades." And people just go along with it.


----------



## midas

And guy that won with the card trick, very odd. His personality made the trick entertaining to watch. But if I had to watch him do a full act I think it would drive me crazy.


----------



## Hank

midas said:


> I can't see how it could have been a card force since he handed the couple the deck and they chose from the full deck. But I suppose it's possible. I could actually see it being fairly easy to write the alleged program. However, my gut tells me it was a phony.
> 
> I think it's more likely just a planted couple. Or maybe just a deck where every card except one says, "Pick the 4 of spades." And people just go along with it.


Not a planted couple, I'd guess. Penn clearly said, "this trick totally depends on me doing a perfect card fan".. but then you don't see him do it.. be bends over to pick it up.

The other thing that comes to mind (I'd have to re-watch).. but nobody really shuffled the deck, yet when it was fanned out, it looked random/shuffled. If they bought a brand new deck, you'd think they'd be in order.


----------



## Turtleboy

I think having a plant in the audience is against the rules of the show.


----------



## Hank

Turtleboy said:


> I think having a plant in the audience is against the rules of the show.


Except when it's YOUR SHOW!! 

There's a trick P&T do in their real show where Teller (disguised) pretends to be an audience plant.


----------



## markb

midas said:


> And guy that won with the card trick, very odd. His personality made the trick entertaining to watch. But if I had to watch him do a full act I think it would drive me crazy.


Even in that small quantity, I found him very annoying. And his trick was super lame. Even if it wasn't done with a force (or was it that it wasn't done with a particular type of force?) it could have been easily done that way.


----------



## LoadStar

Tonight's ep: hated the guy with the supposed magic app. I was irritated from moment one on that one, and ended up just fast forwarding over it. Super gimmicky.

I'm trying to figure out what was with Teller and the monitor he was holding while Penn was on stage with Alyson and Ondrej (the Czech magician). I've never seen that before, where he had to watch the act on a monitor.


----------



## getbak

He's been using the monitor all season (I don't remember if he used it in previous seasons). I think they mostly use it on the close-up type tricks.


----------



## innocentfreak

LoadStar said:


> Tonight's ep: hated the guy with the supposed magic app. I was irritated from moment one on that one, and ended up just fast forwarding over it. Super gimmicky.
> 
> I'm trying to figure out what was with Teller and the monitor he was holding while Penn was on stage with Alyson and Ondrej (the Czech magician). I've never seen that before, where he had to watch the act on a monitor.


That banana trick sure looked familiar.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

It's a classic...that's why Penn kept referring to it as "Banana-Bandana."


----------



## Donbadabon

LoadStar said:


> Tonight's ep: hated the guy with the supposed magic app. I was irritated from moment one on that one, and ended up just fast forwarding over it. Super gimmicky.


I agree. It went on way too long and I FF'd it too.

This was a great episode for the Alyson fans.


----------



## windracer

LoadStar said:


> I'm trying to figure out what was with Teller and the monitor he was holding while Penn was on stage with Alyson and Ondrej (the Czech magician). I've never seen that before, where he had to watch the act on a monitor.


Penn talked about this on episode #319 of Penn's Sunday School podcast (Penn's Sunday School). Usually Allison is not "in" on the tricks, so she can be treated as a random audience member. But in this case, she was "in" on it and participated in rehearsals. She asked for the monitor so she could see what she looked like. Penn & Teller weren't told this, so the monitor confused them and they thought they were fooled (but they knew how the trick was done otherwise).


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

I think LoadStar was talking about the monitor/tablet that Teller was using during at least a couple of the segments to watch the video feed of the tricks...


----------



## vertigo235

Yeah I have seen almost an exact replica of that banana bandana trick on a cruise before. 

I can't remember if it was Magic Dave or Farquar but I think it was Magic Dave.


----------



## windracer

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I think LoadStar was talking about the monitor/tablet that Teller was using during at least a couple of the segments to watch the video feed of the tricks...


Oh, I think I may be an episode behind. Sorry ...


----------



## cmontyburns

windracer said:


> Oh, I think I may be an episode behind. Sorry ...


Yep. Regardless, on the trick you were referencing, I kept thinking Allison had to be in on it because it would require her to hunch over or whatnot and not spill the beans about what she was experiencing. Makes sense that she was.



Donbadabon said:


> I
> This was a great episode for the Alyson fans.


You were referring to the next episode as well, but I thought she also killed it in the above-referenced trick. Very funny. Overall I think she's been improved this season versus last, and these past two episodes have been very strong for her.


----------



## midas

The trick P&T did at the end was kind of lame. Penn is talking about how great Teller is at sleight of hand., and then Teller's drop of the paper into the bag was terrible. Worst move I've ever seen him make.


----------



## LoadStar

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I think LoadStar was talking about the monitor/tablet that Teller was using during at least a couple of the segments to watch the video feed of the tricks...


Correct. When Penn went up on stage, Teller pulled a monitor over from the side table next to his chair onto his lap to watch.

I think I might have developed a theory: when Penn is up on stage, he gets a close-up view. In those cases, Teller might be using the monitor to get him an equivalent view to what Penn is seeing.


----------



## windracer

midas said:


> The trick P&T did at the end was kind of lame. Penn is talking about how great Teller is at sleight of hand., and then Teller's drop of the paper into the bag was terrible. Worst move I've ever seen him make.


I had to watch several times in slow motion and frame-by-frame to see what you were talking about (and how Teller got it in the first place). Not sure I would have noticed that even if I had been the volunteer up on stage. What I couldn't figure out is where the _original_ paper slip went.

I won't be switching from LastPass to P&T's method any time soon, though.


----------



## getbak

LoadStar said:


> Correct. When Penn went up on stage, Teller pulled a monitor over from the side table next to his chair onto his lap to watch.
> 
> I think I might have developed a theory: when Penn is up on stage, he gets a close-up view. In those cases, Teller might be using the monitor to get him an equivalent view to what Penn is seeing.


No, Teller has used the monitor when he's sitting beside Penn too. You can see it during this escape trick from a few weeks ago.






There was one trick, either this week or last where I noticed that they were both holding a monitor to watch the trick.

I think it's just that Teller is nearly 70 years old and can't see as well as he used to.


----------



## cmontyburns

getbak said:


> There was one trick, either this week or last where I noticed that they were both holding a monitor to watch the trick.


Yep, that was this week.


----------



## pdhenry

Hey this trick was on a couple of weeks ago but no one commented that week (and I'm just catching up).

It was a P&T trick at the end of the show. One audience member covers Teller's eyes with her hands and another looks at a fanned deck and mentally selects one card. The deck is shuffled and then she announces what her selection was. She deals cards from the top of the deck to blinded Teller who flings each card away until he stops accepting cards. The next card on the top of the deck is her chosen card.

What the??

They had also performed it on the Today show a day or two before I watched the episode so I paid particular attention during Fool Us. I couldn't see any opportunity for manipulation.

Guesses?


----------



## getbak

windracer said:


> What I couldn't figure out is where the _original_ paper slip went.


My guess is that there are two things at work here...



Spoiler



One: When we see the paper inside the bottle, our brains assume it's white. However, a green piece of paper inside the green bottle would look essentially the same. Once the bottle is broken, a piece of green paper lying in a pile of broken glass would be hard to spot. The volunteer would be more concerned with not cutting herself on the broken glass than looking for something amiss in the shards of glass, especially when the white piece of paper she expects is readily visible.

Two: The paper is attached to the side of the bottle. No matter how much Penn moves the bottle, the paper never changes position. It's most obvious when Teller takes it off the hook and it doesn't ever move. When he smashes the bottle, he swings the hammer right through the part of the bottle where the paper is attached. He also makes sure that piece falls first and all the other shards land on top of it. They make sure the paper inside the bottle falls exactly where they want it to fall.

...

Actually, now that I think about it a bit more, even better than a green piece of paper would be if the "paper" was actually a piece of plastic, similar to the type the drop cloth is made from. Thick plastic like that folded over a couple of times would look similar to a piece of paper through thick green glass. Then, when Teller breaks the bottle, the plastic could fall onto the drop cloth and even if the volunteer saw it, it would just look like a piece of the drop cloth.


----------



## getbak

pdhenry said:


> It was a P&T trick at the end of the show. One audience member covers Teller's eyes with her hands and another looks at a fanned deck and mentally selects one card. The deck is shuffled and then she announces what her selection was. She deals cards from the top of the deck to blinded Teller who flings each card away until he stops accepting cards. The next card on the top of the deck is her chosen card.
> 
> What the??
> 
> They had also performed it on the Today show a day or two before I watched the episode so I paid particular attention during Fool Us. I couldn't see any opportunity for manipulation.
> 
> Guesses?


It's basically this same trick that was done as a fooling attempt in an earlier season.








Spoiler



From the clues Penn gives in guessing her technique, he mentions a couple of magicians who literally wrote the book on memorized decks. Basically, the magician has a deck that is in what appears to be a completely random order, except it's a pre-set deck and they've actually memorized the position of every card in the deck.

At some point, there has to be a deck switch after the magician shows the volunteer that all the cards are unique. The volunteer is given half the deck to pick from (which already reduces the number of cards that need to be memorized by half).

In the Kramer clip, she turns her back completely to the audience and likely makes the switch then. At that point, she does some false shuffles and combines her half of the deck with Jonathan's. More false shuffles to keep her half in order on top, then it's just a matter of knowing where the chosen card is.

Here's P&T's version.






Penn doesn't ever completely turn away from the audience, so it's hard to pinpoint when he could have made the switch. I'd guess it's precisely when he says that he's not doing any slight of hand.

Another possibility that wouldn't require a switch would be if half the deck was double printed (i.e. if one side of the card is printed as the 7 of hearts and the other side is the 9 of spades, when fanned out, you would see one card or the other depending on which way you're holding them). You can see a few cards that are printed like that in this deck on eBay: Ellusionist 56 Cards GAFF deck BICYCLE Playing Magic Trick Mixed Double Sided

In that case, when the cards are fanned out, you only see the upper left side of the card, so he can show 52 unique cards. Then, before he hands half the deck to the volunteer, he just has to flip the deck and the volunteer will see a different group of cards (only the full card at the front would not be double-printed). Notice how Penn has already fanned out the cards before he hands them to the volunteer. If that half of the deck is double-printed, it will ensure the volunteer doesn't fan out the wrong side. He also tells the volunteer not to touch the card or pull it out, just think of it. That would also protect them from having a double-sided deck exposed.

After the volunteer has picked his card, Penn has him shuffle them and Penn false shuffles his own half. Then, he combines the two halves and false shuffles his half to the top. If everything goes without a hitch, Teller just has to count down to the chosen card in the memorized half of the deck.


----------



## Turtleboy

If she announces the card before Teller chooses, then there's some sort of deck switch or false shuffle. Penn places the cards in an order that Teller has memorized, and then he just waits until it gets to that card.

Edit: Or what he said.


----------



## pdhenry

You're right, Penn swaps the two halves of the rejoined deck to the top and bottom a few times but never shuffles. Before the halves are combined Penn (false) shuffles his half but doesn't even do a false shuffle of the combined deck.

So probably it's two identical deck halves, one of which remains in memorized order and is cut to the top of the deck and then dealt into Teller's hand.

If he really is showing 52 unique cards in the whole deck fan then half-printed cards would be necessary. He doesn't really give the audience member time to do more than concur that they're not all the same.


----------



## inaka

I'm great with faces. I watched the last episode and saw that first Italian magician who was lame and thought, "Wait a second I know this guy." Took me about 10 seconds and then I realized I saw him as the main contestant on Love Connection with Andy Cohen like 3 weeks ago. Guy must be hitting up every reality TV show he can because his trick was terrible.


----------



## cmontyburns

It was a strangely-presented trick, too. A show like this seems to be the only place he could perform it because the audience will assume that Allyson Hannigan won't just get up there and lie. I'm not sure there's any other circumstance in which he could get a subject that the audience wouldn't just assume is a conspirator.


----------



## getbak

cmontyburns said:


> I'm not sure there's any other circumstance in which he could get a subject that the audience wouldn't just assume is a conspirator.


That's pretty much true for any mentalism/hypnotism style trick. The audience either believes the volunteers are real or not. It's all about the performer's ability to convince them to believe it.

This is the guy who invented the trick. In the video he performs it with passersby on the street. Doing it for small groups like that would make it seem more authentic.


----------



## markb

And here's someone inadvertently revealing the secret to 100th Monkey. Make sure you're viewing full screen in high def, and freeze frame at 2:47.






Up close, it looks like "Edatactan", but far away, it's "Education".


----------



## pdhenry

I had assumed that was the gimmick there.


----------



## billboard_NE

midas said:


> The trick P&T did at the end was kind of lame. Penn is talking about how great Teller is at sleight of hand., and then Teller's drop of the paper into the bag was terrible. Worst move I've ever seen him make.


Just watched, I saw the drop at regular playing speed, most of the time I do not know how the tricks are done, and am happy to believe it is simply magic, but this one I know was a drop.


----------



## Hank

Woah... watch this guy!








Spoiler: How it's done



Not sure how it works? We don't blame you, we couldn't figure it out either, but the wisdom of the YouTube commenters cracked it: The magician is using a special set of cards where the corners on the 3 and Ace cards are switched, like so (that's an actual ace at the top):










Rewatching the video, you'll notice that the magician is always covering the false corners of the cards - and that he willingly shows off the entire 2 card, which is normal. It's an impressive piece of sleight of hand and coordination to keep those false corners hidden so smoothly.


----------



## KDeFlane

FYI, tonight's scheduled episode was to have been the season finale. theCW has decided to postpone it.


----------



## pdhenry

My bolt is happily recording what it thinks is Fool Us (it's wrong - I just checked) so I think that means it will miss it when it really airs.


----------



## cmontyburns

pdhenry said:


> My bolt is happily recording what it thinks is Fool Us (it's wrong - I just checked) so I think that means it will miss it when it really airs.


Just set it to record all with duplicates and you should get it, no?

I was wondering why the CW postponed it, and then I realized: it takes place in Las Vegas.


----------



## pdhenry

Even with changing from "New only" to "New & reruns" a TiVo still won't record the same episode twice in about 28 days.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

pdhenry said:


> Even with changing from "New only" to "New & reruns" a TiVo still won't record the same episode twice in about 28 days.


Although in recent years they've been pretty good at "correcting" for this sort of thing. Even post-Rovi. So knock wood, keep an eye out, but it may resolve itself.


----------



## markb

Apparently, the season finale was postponed due to the Las Vegas shooting. But until when?

The CW Postpones Penn & Teller Finale, iHeartRadio Fest After Vegas Shooting


----------



## series5orpremier

I don’t understand the need to hold Penn and Teller off the air, certainly for this long. It was pre-taped off the main strip, not even close to where the shooting occurred. Is the mere thought or concept of Las Vegas now supposed to be disturbing to people and if so for how long?


----------



## Hank

I bet they do the bullet catch as their final act.


----------



## markb

Hank said:


> I bet they do the bullet catch as their final act.


I think they already did that in a previous season.


----------



## vertigo235

They did


----------



## midas

series5orpremier said:


> I don't understand the need to hold Penn and Teller off the air, certainly for this long. It was pre-taped off the main strip, not even close to where the shooting occurred. Is the mere thought or concept of Las Vegas now supposed to be disturbing to people and if so for how long?


I suspect, and this only a guess, that they would feel the need to say 'something'. They could either tape a small segment or wait long enough that it wouldn't seem necessary. I think they'll just opt to wait. Saying something will usually make somebody mad. It would also seem out of place if this ever gets sold in syndication.


----------



## Hank

markb said:


> I think they already did that in a previous season.





vertigo235 said:


> They did


The US show or the UK show?


----------



## vertigo235

I don't recall but they have done it before. 

That doesn't mean that one of the guests doesn't do another variation of it though.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

Hank said:


> The US show or the UK show?


The UK show was also the first season of the US show.


----------



## getbak

They did the bullet catch in the second season of the show (the first season shot in Vegas).


----------



## KDeFlane

series5orpremier said:


> I don't understand the need to hold Penn and Teller off the air, certainly for this long.


My uneducated guess is that this episode will be folded into the next season. The fall slate of programs began and theCW no longer has an open slot to fill with an extra stand-alone thing. I'll still keep an eye out, of course, and will probably post in the _Season Pass Alerts _section if it crops up. Maybe one night when other news preempts one of the first-runs, they'll bump the other hour and fill with this one.

(and I don't think it was necessarily any sensitivity about mentioning Las Vegas, and more likely a combination of being respectful of the nation's mood while also expecting many local affiliates to preempt the hour with late-breaking news that night. After that, it became inconvenient to reschedule.)


----------



## markb

KDeFlane said:


> My uneducated guess is that this episode will be folded into the next season.


In that case, Allison will have to wear the same outfit for a whole extra season!


----------



## getbak

It looks like the season finale will finally be airing on Thursday night in the 9:00pm time slot.


----------



## cmontyburns

getbak said:


> It looks like the season finale will finally be airing on Thursday night in the 9:00pm time slot.


Thanks. It's marked as new in the guide, so it's already scheduled to record. Cool.


----------



## series5orpremier

BrettStah said:


> Anyone know how the guy did the ace of diamonds prediction?


The ace of diamonds was never in the deck to begin with. I still-framed when he laid all the cards out on the table face up at the beginning and I couldn't find it there. Then I counted as Allison one-by-one laid out 53 cards (including two jokers), again missing a card. Presumably the card she put down the other way was just some random card that wasn't the ace of diamonds. Then the guy forced the ace of diamonds into the deck in it's place but I couldn't tell when/how he did that.


----------



## BrettStah

series5orpremier said:


> Then the guy forced the ace of diamonds into the deck in it's place but I couldn't tell when/how he did that.


Your post started out so promising, then it ended up very unsatisfying.


----------



## series5orpremier

BrettStah said:


> Your post started out so promising, then it ended up very unsatisfying.


That's what she said.

Seriously, if P&T didn't see anything up close in person why would I in compressed 720p. The ace of diamonds was definitely not the 24th card in the deck. The card right after the jack of spades was the seven of hearts.

EDIT: Penn snuck in the code words smooth and rough. The guy didn't force a separate card in. It was a gimmicked deck with a double-sided card on the bottom. He flipped the deck near where Allison stopped so that the next card in would be the card on the bottom. The other side... a smooth sided ace of diamonds that would fan out to be visible. Face up of the other cards were rough so that the card Allison picked, face up rubbing against another face up, wouldn't fan out.


----------



## Hank

Did a few posts get deleted? 

Didn't someone write above "remember, that's tonight people!!"?? and then I posted a followup that I assumed my SP would pick it up as new, but it did not. So I missed it.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

That was the thread in the Season Pass Alert forum...


----------



## billboard_NE

My TiVo missed it as well. Fios cable service


----------



## pdhenry

I'm surprised to see the variation. Aren't we all fundamentally getting the same info for a network show?


----------



## cmontyburns

Yeah, as I mentioned above, my TiVo was set to record it automatically and did so. I even still had the prior airing of the episode -- which wasn't actually the episode -- saved on the DVR.


----------



## nataylor

Fool Us is back tonight. Season 5 starts at 8pm Eastern on the CW.


----------



## BrettStah

Anyone catch their recent appearance on The Tonight Show? Did they rely on camera tricks to accomplish it (meaning, do you think everyone in the live audience were also likely unaware of how it was accomplished)? Because I sure have no clue how they did it, if they didn't "cheat" by waiting for the camera being shown to cut away to an audience shot.


----------



## pdhenry

I'm guessing:



Spoiler



Did they ever show through the back end of the chicken box? What if the gorilla was behind a false back all along?


----------



## BrettStah

pdhenry said:


> I'm guessing:
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Did they ever show through the back end of the chicken box? What if the gorilla was behind a false back all along?


I thought that Teller walked behind it near enough to make that solution impossible, but maybe that was what they wanted me to think!


----------



## markb

BrettStah said:


> I thought that Teller walked behind it near enough to make that solution impossible, but maybe that was what they wanted me to think!


I posit that the assistant was IN the box the whole time. The chicken was only in the front section, which was probably only a small portion of the depth of the whole box.


----------



## BrettStah

markb said:


> I posit that the assistant was IN the box the whole time. The chicken was only in the front section, which was probably only a small portion of the depth of the whole box.


That has to be the case, I suppose. But Teller seemed to walk right behind the box, leaving no room for the assistant. But that's why they're so good at what they do.


----------



## markb

BrettStah said:


> That has to be the case, I suppose. But Teller seemed to walk right behind the box, leaving no room for the assistant. But that's why they're so good at what they do.


I'm suggesting that there was nothing behind the box, though, just in the box. The box is bigger than you think.


----------



## Turtleboy

And she's thin and probably a contortionist.


----------



## DUDE_NJX

She just switched costumes from the chicken to the gorilla one.


----------



## getreal

Yes, the gorilla with the cymbals remained backstage while the showgirl who was inside the box got all the credit. I noticed that Penn was leaning against the box the entire time to mask any possible shaking while the showgirl folded the chicken into the false floor before the cloth was lifted and she could emerge. 

I am glad that Penn has managed to keep the weight off, and I really prefer him with shorter hair. I know that he was also considering stopping coloring his hair after he turned 60, but he can do that after they retire (if ever) their act.


----------



## pdhenry

Penn looked a little heavier, or less gaunt, to me.


----------



## vertigo235

Are you all talking about the show that airs tonight? I'm confused.


----------



## vertigo235

Oh I see now, an appearance on The Tonight Show, got it.


----------



## markb

vertigo235 said:


> Oh I see now, an appearance on The Tonight Show, got it.


Specifically, this:


----------



## cmontyburns

getreal said:


> I am glad that Penn has managed to keep the weight off, and I really prefer him with shorter hair. I know that he was also considering stopping coloring his hair after he turned 60, but he can do that after they retire (if ever) their act.


This is the first year without the pony tail, right? I think he still had it last season.


----------



## Donbadabon

The Australian guy with all the beer glasses was just terrible. I think that is a perfect example of an act that shows you need personality, which he doesn't have.

I liked the power-point guy. The slides were realty funny, and he pulled off a trick in the end.

After watching P&T for so long, the final trick from them seemed to be obvious -



Spoiler: Spoiler



Teller brought the little table onstage at the end, which contained the scroll with the lyrics. It had a false top on it, and when they put the safe on top they just reached through and pulled out the scroll from the top of the table


----------



## vertigo235

markb said:


> I posit that the assistant was IN the box the whole time. The chicken was only in the front section, which was probably only a small portion of the depth of the whole box.


Yeah, clearly this, they kind of give it away because when they show the chicken, there is a fake "background" in the box. But when the gorilla is in there, you can see all the way through, they should have had a background behind the gorilla to sell it better.


----------



## BrettStah

vertigo235 said:


> Yeah, clearly this, they kind of give it away because when they show the chicken, there is a fake "background" in the box. But when the gorilla is in there, you can see all the way through, they should have had a background behind the gorilla to sell it better.


I took that background (when the chicken is visible) to be comprised of the blanket, and at the end, he removes the entire blanket. So if it was just a plain wire crate, it makes sense that the audience can see through it when the blanket is removed.

I do think that the gorilla has to already be there behind the chicken though, so it's not just a plain wire crate.


----------



## vertigo235

Then it should have looked like the back of a blanket and not the forced perspective background the had on it


----------



## vertigo235

So I went back and looked again, I think if the fake background was actually the same color as the blanket/cover it would have looks more like that, but on my screen it was a much lighter shade inside the box than the actual blanket, so it didn't sell it to me.


----------



## BrettStah

vertigo235 said:


> So I went back and looked again, I think if the fake background was actually the same color as the blanket/cover it would have looks more like that, but on my screen it was a much lighter shade inside the box than the actual blanket, so it didn't sell it to me.


Yeah, the inside is a different color, but some blankets are like that, so I didn't really pay attention to it at first.


----------



## Hank

It was also so clear the box was much deeper than it appeared with just the chicken... but they never shot it from the side, so you couldn't see if it was deep enough to hold the gorilla, which it obviously was. There was also probably a wedge shaped cavity that the chicken dropped into below the box that you also couldn't see from the forced perspective of the camera.

The mentalist trick with the couple was so stupid and easy to figure out. He clearly had a planted card in his pocket or inside his lapel that he grabbed when the cards were flying around, it was so simple to hide snatching it from wherever he had it tucked. I can't believe that they "fooled" P&T it was so dumb!

The broomstick levitation wasn't a fooler, but it was a damn good show. If you watch again, you can see the assistant has a bulging cuff under her shirt, and you can see her (not so smoothly) connecting and disconnecting the rod from the cuff. If they can polish that part up a tad, it's a great trick. I also liked how the camera when behind the assistant to show there wasn't really anything going on behind her.. all the mechanics were under her clothes. I think the part at the end when he removed one of the step ladders is just a center-of-gravity physics illusion and no real trickery involved. Still, very entertaining. 

The Aussie beer guy was OK, but a little clumsy.

The last P&T trick was a waste of time, not funny, and gee, the top of the treasure chest was covered up... hmm.. what's up there, a wireless printer perhaps? We've seen that same thing how many times now?


----------



## getbak

Hank said:


> The mentalist trick with the couple was so stupid and easy to figure out. He clearly had a planted card in his pocket or inside his lapel that he grabbed when the cards were flying around, it was so simple to hide snatching it from wherever he had it tucked. I can't believe that they "fooled" P&T it was so dumb!


That would only work if the woman in the audience who claimed to have drawn the flower was a stooge. From what I know of the show, stooges are not allowed, so that would seem to rule out him having the card hidden somewhere before the trick began.

The most-likely answer is that he could partially see through the blindfold and he could figure out what was drawn on the the cards as he grabbed them. Then, either she always draws a flower and he just has to find a card with a flower drawn on it, or they have a list of objects pre-selected and he has to give her a clue of some sort to tell her which one to draw. Each object would have an associated code word or phrase which he says during his patter after he exits the box. She'd be listening for the code and draw whatever matches what he said.

Really, having Alyson name a celebrity and guessing it correctly was more impressive than the flower trick because there was only one person selecting one celebrity (if you ask 100 people to draw anything they can think of, you're probably going to get 20 or 30 flowers). However, it was also likely done with a list of code words matching the most-common celebrities that someone might name. The question is how they would deal with it if she had named a more-obscure celebrity.



Hank said:


> The last P&T trick was a waste of time, not funny, and gee, the top of the treasure chest was covered up... hmm.. what's up there, a wireless printer perhaps? We've seen that same thing how many times now?


A wireless printer would have been unnecessarily complex. As suggested already, the more-likely way would have been to have the scroll completed backstage as it was going on, then the scroll is hidden in the false top of the table that Teller brought on stage and the box would have a false bottom which Piff reached through to grab the scroll.


----------



## kdmorse

Hank said:


> It was also so clear the box was much deeper than it appeared with just the chicken... but they never shot it from the side, so you couldn't see if it was deep enough to hold the gorilla, which it obviously was. There was also probably a wedge shaped cavity that the chicken dropped into below the box that you also couldn't see from the forced perspective of the camera.


There were a few shots from an angle (over the hosts shoulder), which showed that the box was deeper than implied. But even in that shot, Penn was conveniently standing in front of the corner, which made an actual approximation of depth hard to determine.

But all that said, it was still a very small box, but there was clearly space reserved for a very compact gorilla behind the backdrop.

Also, if you look closely, when the chicken is there, there's a wood frame around the permiter. After the Gorilla, when we see the wire frame, it's not there. I'm sure the rear blanket was mounted to a wooden frame, that was folder forward and down.

And as someone said, I'm sure the girl in the gorilla suit was a nice skinny contortionist, and that the majority of the Gorilla was fluff, and easily folded.


----------



## markb

Hank said:


> I think the part at the end when he removed one of the step ladders is just a center-of-gravity physics illusion and no real trickery involved. Still, very entertaining.


The remaining stepladder would need to be attached to the floor for this to work, or attached to some sort of base that's much wider than the ladder. He was obviously covering something up with the board when he moved the step ladder at the beginning. Did he work with the producers to attach some sort of bracket to the stage ahead of time? Impressive if he somehow did this without anyone from the production noticing.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

It's bad enough that the Dragon Song trick just wan't that good. But now that ^#%@ing song is stuck in my head! 

The Powerpoint guy was a stitch. Penn was right...he didn't even need a trick.


----------



## cmontyburns

getbak said:


> That would only work if the woman in the audience who claimed to have drawn the flower was a stooge. From what I know of the show, stooges are not allowed, so that would seem to rule out him having the card hidden somewhere before the trick began.


Yep, stooges are against the rules.


----------



## nataylor

I thought the mentalists were quite good. They’ve had to do a lot of memorization to pull that off. The little name-the-celebrity trick was actually more impressive than their main trick.


----------



## LoadStar

My first thought about that act was that the flower drawing was very intricate. I had to pause it to verify that it was, in fact, hand-drawn (I think it was), but my initial thought was that it still seemed a little unlikely that someone would take the time to draw something that complex from an audience seat during a break in filming.


----------



## Hank

LoadStar said:


> My first thought about that act was that the flower drawing was very intricate. I had to pause it to verify that it was, in fact, hand-drawn (I think it was), but my initial thought was that it still seemed a little unlikely that someone would take the time to draw something that complex from an audience seat during a break in filming.


I thought that too... that seemed really suspicious. Which is why I thought it was a plant (pun not intended!)

Out of that entire audience, only one person drew a flower? Also was sitting right up front? What if three people drew a flower and they were sitting in the back or balcony?

Another thing, when he dumped the box of folded cards, there seemed to be A LOT more cards than there were people in the audience. Surely they didn't get 100% participation for "heh, draw something on this card". It seemed like he had to shake it twice -- once to get the audience's cards, and a second time to release hundreds more under a flap.


----------



## Hank

On the broomstick levitation, at the exact moment below, right after measures the "overhang", he slides the wood plank to the left (towards himself) and I think at that point, there's a double "C" type latch that firmly connects the plank to the right side step ladder, that makes the final illusion work. Great trick.


----------



## pdhenry

Hank said:


> On the broomstick levitation, at the exact moment below, right after measures the "overhang", he slides the wood plank to the left (towards himself) and I think at that point, there's a double "C" type latch that firmly connects the plank to the right side step ladder, that makes the final illusion work. Great trick.
> 
> View attachment 35151


But it still _*appears*_ that the center of gravity is beyond the left end of the ladder that everything is resting on so even if the board is rigidly attached to the ladder you'd expect it all to fall/rotate to the left.


----------



## markb

pdhenry said:


> But it still _*appears*_ that the center of gravity is beyond the left end of the ladder that everything is resting on so even if the board is rigidly attached to the ladder you'd expect it all to fall/rotate to the left.


I agree. That's the most interesting part of the trick. How is the stepladder attached to the floor?


----------



## Hank

The right end of the board is filled with lead or shot or something to move the COG. Also I think the holes he "drilled" were fake. The entire contraption is probably steel.


----------



## Hank

markb said:


> How is the stepladder attached to the floor?


I don't think that would be allowed. Also, he moves around both step ladders (which are obviously not real ladders but handmade props).

I think when he "drills" the fake holes, he's activating something to make the trick work. Also the air hose seems like a diversion, but I can't tell for what.

I think it's a physics trick similar to (but not exactly) this is:


----------



## vertigo235

The reveal would have been better if he somehow accidentally removed the left stool.


----------



## nataylor

Hank said:


> Out of that entire audience, only one person drew a flower? Also was sitting right up front? What if three people drew a flower and they were sitting in the back or balcony?


He holds up the drawing and asks "whose image is this?" You can even see him check over his shoulder to make sure the he card is showing on the video screens the audience can see.

If they were really using a known pre-drawn card, you'd think the drawing the lady revealed would have matched better. You can see she drew a flower with a stem/leaves and covers them up with her finger when she turns the card around.










No, I think they're doing this the hard way. She bases what she draws on something communicated from him (either through his banter or movements).


----------



## nataylor

markb said:


> I agree. That's the most interesting part of the trick. How is the stepladder attached to the floor?


He tries to cover it up with the board, but the camera was at the right angle to catch a little "nubbin" that appears to be on the stage floor when he moves the supporting stool.










See those white dots between the board and his shoe? That's something sticking up from the surface. It's much more obvious in moving video.

And I don't think it's actually attached to the stage. When he drills the holes, you can see a bit of an edge revealed by the sawdust. I think he has a steel plate on the floor, roughly the same size of the board, painted to match the surface of the stage. You can see the edge running between the legs of the two step stools here:


----------



## markb

Hank said:


> *I don't think that would be allowed.* Also, he moves around both step ladders (which are obviously not real ladders but handmade props).


That's why that part is interesting. And he's clearly hiding something with the board while he moves the stepladder away.

I don't think there's any way to make the stepladder plus the end of the board dense enough to move the center of gravity far enough. The ladder has to be attached to something.



nataylor said:


> He tries to cover it up with the board, but the camera was at the right angle to catch a little "nubbin" that appears to be on the stage floor when he moves the supporting stool.


Yeah, caught that, but the "nubbin" quickly vanishes, if you watch the video carefully. I wasn't sure if that was a reflection or part of the mechanism. Note where the ladder starts and where it ends are two different spots, so if the mechanism was covered by the ladder at the beginning, it would have to be moved to the ladder's new position while hidden by the board.



> And I don't think it's actually attached to the stage. When he drills the holes, you can see a bit of an edge revealed by the sawdust. I think he has a steel plate on the floor, roughly the same size of the board, painted to match the surface of the stage.


Possible. But I think anything thin enough to blend in wouldn't be strong enough to make this work. Unless maybe he was able to remove one of tiles from the stage and put his platform in it's place. And it still requires matching the stage surface material, which would be difficult without some help from the producers.


----------



## nataylor

markb said:


> Yeah, caught that, but the "nubbin" quickly vanishes, if you watch the video carefully. I wasn't sure if that was a reflection or part of the mechanism. Note where the ladder starts and where it ends are two different spots, so if the mechanism was covered by the ladder at the beginning, it would have to be moved to the ladder's new position while hidden by the board.


I see the nubbin the whole time until it goes out of view from the camera. There's no good camera angle after that to see it. And if you notice, he moves the ladder, but then moves it right back to its initial position. In fact, he's careful about positioning the ladder back in the same spot, meaning he's either getting it to engage with something on the floor or putting it on a mark.


----------



## pdhenry

Maybe it's a variation on Michael Jackson's patent.


----------



## nataylor

Zoom and enhance:


----------



## getbak

When Penn is talking about that act, he says something about how they should get him to work with their crew to build something on their stage. Since he's often speaking in code when he talks about the acts, that could mean that the guy did have anchors in the stage to hold the ladder in place and that was Penn's way of telling him that they knew how that part of the trick was done.

I can't think of any previous acts on Fool Us where the performance wasn't fully self-contained, but I don't know if there are any rules against it.


----------



## markb

nataylor said:


> Zoom and enhance:


There's something really obvious there at first, but when he moves his foot away, there's much less to see (though I do see something there, now). And when he puts the ladder back, he puts it further to the left, so whatever is holding the ladder down shouldn't be in that spot, except that's a good place to hide it when the ladder is in it's first position. But if it's movable, that brings up other questions.


----------



## markb

nataylor said:


> And if you notice, he moves the ladder, but then moves it right back to its initial position.


I disagree with this. It's much further to the left at it's final position, judging it's position relative to the board.


----------



## Hank

I think you guys are narrowing in.. watched again.. you can see the nub at the beginning of the act.. you do not see him place the right ladder on the nub. The camera is on the drill when he does it. 

He also definitely locks the plank into place when pulling it to the left.


----------



## vertigo235

nataylor said:


> He holds up the drawing and asks "whose image is this?" You can even see him check over his shoulder to make sure the he card is showing on the video screens the audience can see.
> 
> If they were really using a known pre-drawn card, you'd think the drawing the lady revealed would have matched better. You can see she drew a flower with a stem/leaves and covers them up with her finger when she turns the card around.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, I think they're doing this the hard way. She bases what she draws on something communicated from him (either through his banter or movements).


I didn't go back and watch the whole bit, but when she passed the guy the pen, I assumed that she did that for a reason. So I think she had the card that he is displaying, and so she knew what to draw the whole time. Anyhow, he gave him the original drawing when she passed him the pen.


----------



## nataylor

vertigo235 said:


> I didn't go back and watch the whole bit, but when she passed the guy the pen, I assumed that she did that for a reason. So I think she had the card that he is displaying, and so she knew what to draw the whole time. Anyhow, he gave him the original drawing when she passed him the pen.


That requires an audience stooge. Also, I'm not sure why her flower depiction would be so different if she had seen the original drawing.


----------



## vertigo235

I dunno, just the way she handed him the pen and how he handled it afterwards seemed a little off to me.


----------



## Hank

You can see that she started drawing a flower almost immediately upon him exiting the box. He said very little to tip her off to the image he selected. It also looks like he didn't have a chance to view the image on the card. 

I think they knew well in advance the card was going to be a flower.


----------



## vertigo235

Yeah, also he had that huge ring, what's up with that, there could have easily been a camera in there.


----------



## BrettStah

Hank said:


> You can see that she started drawing a flower almost immediately upon him exiting the box. He said very little to tip her off to the image he selected. It also looks like he didn't have a chance to view the image on the card.
> 
> I think they knew well in advance the card was going to be a flower.


So you think he could see through the blindfold and grabbed papers until he found a flower? That's certainly possible, and would be the easiest solution. But as was already mentioned I think, I bet if you ask a large random group of people to draw an object on a piece of paper, there will almost guaranteed be multiple flowers, houses, dogs, cats, horses, rainbows, and trees. So if he just spies _any_ of these common things through the blindfold, it would be pretty easy to have each of those common items linked to a word or phrase that he then says when he leaves the booth.

He says the following words/phrases after choosing a piece of paper, and before she starts drawing:
CUT IT
OK
THINK
YOU MAY
ONE OF YOU DREW THIS IMAGE

He also holds up the paper in his left hand when saying the last phrase, and he puts the blindfold away in his pants pocket with his right hand.

Just as a simple made-up example:

It could be that if he says "YOU MAY" and puts the blindfold in his right pocket it's a flower, left pocket is a tree, and if he leaves it in his hand, it's a rainbow.

If he says "YOU CAN" instead of "YOU MAY", then right pocket means dog, left means cat, and no pocket means horse.

If he says "SURE", three other options are possible based on what he does with the blindfold.


----------



## BrettStah

vertigo235 said:


> Yeah, also he had that huge ring, what's up with that, there could have easily been a camera in there.


What would the camera do to help with this trick? Do you think that blindfold had a hidden screen?

Maybe the assistant palmed one of the papers, and he was told to pick out a flower, and then when handing the box to the guy, he somehow handed it to him?


----------



## vertigo235

Yeah I thought "Dan" might have had something to do with it too.


----------



## Hank

vertigo235 said:


> Yeah, also he had that huge ring, what's up with that, there could have easily been a camera in there.


You guys are good. And she has a little screen or speaker in her hair curls either above her forehead or next to her left ear.

You can see him point his ring at the card at the Elvis trick.


----------



## vertigo235

It's just what I learned from Penn and Teller, they have mentioned rings before, which is why I call BS that they didn't know how he did this one. I thought for sure they would ask about the ring when he said they wanted to come on stage. 

They even mentioned cameras in the booth, but didn't bother to think about the huge ring on his finger?


----------



## vertigo235

I think it's more likely that she has an earpiece and someone else is watching the camera.


----------



## BrettStah

vertigo235 said:


> I think it's more likely that she has an earpiece and someone else is watching the camera.


Are they allowed to use someone off stage like that on this show?


----------



## vertigo235

BrettStah said:


> Are they allowed to use someone off stage like that on this show?


I'm not sure, but "Dan" their friend was there on stage too maybe he had a viewer in his pocket or something.


----------



## Hank

vertigo235 said:


> I think it's more likely that she has an earpiece and someone else is watching the camera.


Yes, exactly this. And yes that's allowed, P&T do many similar tricks and we've seen offstage helpers before.


----------



## BrettStah

Ah, if that's allowed then that could be it. But didn't they check the woman for an earpiece when they went up on stage?


----------



## Hank

Not an earpiece, but a tiny speaker in her big hair 'lobes' on her left side or above her forehead.


----------



## windracer

After watching this show I always find myself googling Penn's code words and learning all sorts of stuff about magic tricks.  This time I learned about ethereal suspension, broomstick harnesses, and UMDs.


----------



## Donbadabon

Last night they had people return that had previously fooled them.

I didn't like the British time-travellers at all. The act was so slow, and of course they are going to get the answers right, so the slow reveal was just painful.

The royal-flush card guy. Not sure why he fooled them. He was dealing off the bottom of the deck, and the rest of the act (the royal flush) could be accomplished just by fake shuffles and manipulation.

And finally, I hate acts that use a flipper coin.

I liked the non-nude guy. I am thinking Gilbert was live.


----------



## rcobourn

Regarding the flower drawing, I recall hearing the phrase "there are a bunch of these" in reference to the number of cards, and assuming the result would be a flower, which it was. It almost seemed too obvious. For a car, would he have said, "this really gets my motor running!"?


----------



## Hank

Donbadabon said:


> Last night they had people return that had previously fooled them.


I felt the entire show was extremely weak. Most of the tricks were obvious, especially the "unshuffled" guy. You could see him pulling from the bottom of the deck. The magic coin trick is a $10 magic store trick. The time traveler magicians were just tedious to watch.

I think they're running low on finding good NEW magicians to come and try to fool them. When will Teller jump the shark? 

And the last P&T trick (that we just saw before), you could see that Penn was somewhat concerned that the wire cage door wasn't closing all the way. It didn't effect the trick any, but I don't think it was working properly.


----------



## getbak

rcobourn said:


> Regarding the flower drawing, I recall hearing the phrase "there are a bunch of these" in reference to the number of cards, and assuming the result would be a flower, which it was. It almost seemed too obvious. For a car, would he have said, "this really gets my motor running!"?


It's possible, but like you say, it's probably too obvious. I think some mentalist acts use more complex codes like first/last-letter and word and syllable counts to make it even harder to decipher exactly what their code is to an outside observer.

I watched some videos of the Sentimentalists doing other shows and they seem to have some pretty sophisticated code work involved in their show. I think they use a combination of body language/hand signals plus the verbal codes to communicate a wide range of things. They do the replicated drawing thing in their act, but in the more-traditional way of having one volunteer draw one thing and she replicates it. In their act, he also wears a blindfold for that trick, so I'd say it's safe to say he can see through it and just uses code to tell her what to draw. They did it a little differently on Fool Us, but the basics are the same.

On this week's show, Penn made reference to the Piddingtons. I had never heard of them before, but they were a mentalism act that was popular in the UK and Australia in the 1950s: The Piddingtons - Wikipedia

Even 60+ years later, their exact techniques are still widely unknown because they didn't share the information with even their closest family. One thing that some people think they may have used was silent codes, where the amount of time he paused between sentences was able to convey information to her. The technology that was available to them in the 50s wasn't as good as what exists today, so things like thumpers wouldn't have been possible.

I'd guess the time-travelling mentalists on this week's episode were using a thumper of some sort to communicate in addition to the verbal codes. I liked Penn's Kodak = Code Act reference.


----------



## rcobourn

Hank said:


> And the last P&T trick (that we just saw before), you could see that Penn was somewhat concerned that the wire cage door wasn't closing all the way. It didn't effect the trick any, but I don't think it was working properly.


It would have been pretty funny if the chicken escaped out the front. When Teller arrives, I believe he leaves with just the divider that exposes the already hidden gorilla (there have to be two) and the chicken is subsequently stashed in the gorilla suit. If the chicken escapes, Teller has no excuse to be making off with the divider.


----------



## Einselen

Hank said:


> When will Teller jump the shark?


Not until after Aug 18th. https://pagesix.com/2018/07/02/penn-tellers-raymond-teller-recovering-from-back-surgery/. Glad Teller got the necessary surgery and seems to be recovering but sad as we have tickets for the Penn and Teller show in our area early August so I expect in a few weeks to get the dreaded unfortunately we canceled the show phone call.


----------



## windracer

Einselen said:


> Not until after Aug 18th. https://pagesix.com/2018/07/02/penn-tellers-raymond-teller-recovering-from-back-surgery/


Penn has discussed this on his Sunday School podcast. Apparently they are still rehearsing around Teller's recover schedule, but not as much as they usually do. Penn is doing some sort of diet/cleanse during this time too. He said it's the first time in like 30 years he hasn't had Penn & Teller stuff to do every day.


----------



## cmontyburns

I agree with previous comments that this week’s episode (July 2) was pretty weak — disappointing given that it was an all-star episode of sorts. 

I thought all of the acts except for the coin guy had really odd pacing problems. Very slow to develop.

The naked magician’s trick was a little better in hindsight than it struck me at first. The first time watching, I didn’t notice that the card had the audience member’s name on it. Still, the stuff with Gottfried took forever and the trick was very slow.

The time travelers were, again, draggy. And their stage presence needs work. The whole trick was too sedate. Not impressed.

The card guy was a bummer. I thought his “unshuffled” trick from a prior visit was terrific. Agree that you could clearly see him bottom-dealing here. I suspect there was some editing done during the conversation with Penn and Teller, because Hannigan’s annoucement that he fooled them came very suddenly, after he said he didn’t do anything with his back turned. Feels like some back-and-forth was edited out. He may have won on a techicality.

I liked the coin guy. Basic trick I guess, but at least he was quick with it. I don’t know what a “flipper” is, so that helps.


----------



## BrettStah

There were two acts that fooled them in this episode, right? Typically the is only one.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

BrettStah said:


> There were two acts that fooled them in this episode, right? Typically the is only one.


I think usually they spread the winners out among episodes (they film in blocks). This time they couldn't because of the all-star bit.


----------



## Hank

cmontyburns said:


> I suspect there was some editing done during the conversation with Penn and Teller, because Hannigan's annoucement that he fooled them came very suddenly,


Right, I forgot about that! That was really strange for Alison to say "you fooled them" without any real confirmation from P&T. Something really strange happened there and was edited out.

Also, during the Gilbert Godfried trick, he walks off camera right after "Mark" is selected. At one point he stands right in front of the envelope on the desk behind him, completely obscuring the manila envelope on the desk... I suspect that's when some misdirection/switch happened. Or a false panel in the desk that someone swaps it with another. And then you can see the magician fooling around with the box to force the gorilla choice for Mark. So they always know he's going to pick a gorilla, all they have to do is get his name on the sheet.

The whole act was messed up... The first box of stuffed animals had:

Turtle
Raccoon
Penguin
Elephant
Tiger
Parrot

But the "duplicate" box of animals he called out:

Turtle
Elephant
Spider
Tiger
Parrot

You'd think he could at least memorize 6 stuffed animals in the first box.

I'm also thinking that when GG goes offstage and all you see is the envelope on the desk, they did a "Speed" (the movie) trick with the video feed.. paused it, swapped the envelope, restarted the video. Not sure if that would be allowed, but then again, as Penn guessed a green screen, I didn't think that would be allowed either.

And another thing... you can see Teller throw the foam "selection ball" to the audience from his stage to the first few rows of orchestra right seats -- the ball is definitely traveling roughly parallel to the stage.. but when "Mark" catches it, he's several more rows back, and the ball was clearly tossed perpendicular to the stage. You can't even see "Mark" when Teller throws the ball. Sure, it's just editing several different takes, but it's really sloppy.


----------



## getbak

Hank said:


> Right, I forgot about that! That was really strange for Alison to say "you fooled them" without any real confirmation from P&T. Something really strange happened there and was edited out.


That has happened before. From what I've read, that usually happens if Penn might have revealed too much about the possible technique he's suggesting the magician used. In the heat of the moment, Penn can get agitated if he thinks the magician is trying to get out on a technicality and so he'll go into too much detail describing the technique until the magician surrenders. They don't want to potentially ruin the act for performers who do it the way that Penn is suggesting, so they'll edit it out and have Alyson just announce that they were (or weren't) fooled. This one wasn't as jarring as some of the edits we've seen in the past.

Penn was suggesting that he loaded the Royal Flush cards when his back was turned, but I don't think that's how it was done at all, so they were barking up the wrong tree.

I think it was much easier than that...


Spoiler: Spoilered speculation



The magician had a legitimate shuffled deck (although the 5 Royal spade cards were missing because he wouldn't want someone to pick one and ruin the final reveal when another one showed up) and the volunteers had a legitimate choice of any of the cards.

As they were returning their cards to the deck, he simply controlled them to get them to the bottom of the deck (notice he collected them in the reverse order they were revealed later). As he did the "count off" he bottom-dealt the chosen cards to the top of each pile. That's the first part, and P&T said they saw all the moves, and some of them were pretty easy to spot even without their trained eyes.

For the Royal Flush reveal, I believe it was a case of hiding them in plain sight. They were sitting on the table the whole time, with black velvet backs to match his performance mat so they'd blend in. When he does the reveal, he flips the whole pile over, so the backs of the bottom cards are never seen. Before he does the Royal Flush reveal, he carefully straightens out each of the piles. I believe he does that to make sure the black backs are fully covered by the piles on top so it doesn't give the trick away.


----------



## midas

Hank said:


> Also, during the Gilbert Godfried trick, he walks off camera right after "Mark" is selected. At one point he stands right in front of the envelope on the desk behind him, completely obscuring the manila envelope on the desk... I suspect that's when some misdirection/switch happened. Or a false panel in the desk that someone swaps it with another. And then you can see the magician fooling around with the box to force the gorilla choice for Mark. So they always know he's going to pick a gorilla, all they have to do is get his name on the sheet.


I'm pretty sure the feed itself was stopped. I think there was a still image on the screen until GG came back on.

The question that arises either way, it would require GG to be live. 99% of the time when we see stuff like this it's just a timed video.


----------



## rcobourn

getbak said:


> For the Royal Flush reveal, I believe it was a case of hiding them in plain sight. They were sitting on the table the whole time, with black velvet backs to match his performance mat so they'd blend in. When he does the reveal, he flips the whole pile over, so the backs of the bottom cards are never seen. Before he does the Royal Flush reveal, he carefully straightens out each of the piles. I believe he does that to make sure the black backs are fully covered by the piles on top so it doesn't give the trick away.[/SPOILER]


Clever!


----------



## rcobourn

getbak said:


> Spoiler: Spoilered speculation
> 
> 
> 
> For the Royal Flush reveal, I believe it was a case of hiding them in plain sight. They were sitting on the table the whole time, with black velvet backs to match his performance mat so they'd blend in. When he does the reveal, he flips the whole pile over, so the backs of the bottom cards are never seen. Before he does the Royal Flush reveal, he carefully straightens out each of the piles. I believe he does that to make sure the black backs are fully covered by the piles on top so it doesn't give the trick away.


Clever!


----------



## cmontyburns

midas said:


> I'm pretty sure the feed itself was stopped. I think there was a still image on the screen until GG came back on.
> 
> The question that arises either way, it would require GG to be live. 99% of the time when we see stuff like this it's just a timed video.


It felt prerecorded to me. There were a couple of moments when the magician's comment to Gottfried and the timing of his response did not feel natural.


----------



## midas

cmontyburns said:


> It felt prerecorded to me. There were a couple of moments when the magician's comment to Gottfried and the timing of his response did not feel natural.


Unfortunately I already deleted it. But what if the first part was recorded to give that feel but the second part was live?


----------



## getbak

I wonder if the live/taped thing is what led to them being fooled? It might have been done intentionally to make a live feed look pre-recorded to throw them off. In the past, there have been acts that did the opposite, making a pre-recorded bit appear live until it was revealed at the end to be taped.

If it was pre-recorded, about the only way it could have been done was with a visual effect. If that was the case, I'd consider it a cheap win for the guy if they were just judged to have been fooled because they said "green screen" when it easily could have been done with motion tracking text onto the screen without use of a green screen effect.

If it was live, the easiest way would have been to switch to a still image once Gilbert walks out of the shot, then putting the paper with Mark's name on it into the envelope and switching back to the live shot just before Gilbert returns. As long as the envelope is in the same position after it is loaded, you wouldn't be able to tell when the video switch was made.

The easiest way to make a live feed look recorded would have been to have Gilbert do his pieces on a timer (like you would if you were actually pre-recording it) or have someone give him cues as to when to speak without allowing him to actually hear what the magician is saying. That way, his reaction is going to look unnatural and stilted because he's just waiting for the cues without actually responding to what was being said.

It would be easier to make a live bit appear to be recorded rather than the other way around.


----------



## rcobourn

During the time from when Mark reveals his name, up until when Gilbert moves the envelope to hide the parrot, the envelope is positioned perfectly centered on the credenza, with it's edge exactly aligned with the edge of the credenza. A thermal print head is mounted to the underside. It adds Mark's name to the page in just a few seconds. Because the gorilla was forced, obviously, that part could be printed in advance.

Edit: notice how delicate Gilbert is around the box and envelope. The surface is a wrap, maybe mylar. Strong enough to hold a box of stuffed animals, but Gilbert is careful not to put any extra weight on it and deform it. Gilbert is also careful to not show us the front of the envelope, which is cut out to expose the paper. The image is printed mirrored to look correct from the back side of the page.


----------



## Hank

I too had considered a thermal print head in the desk, but the print was very dark and well formed. It didn't look thermal. There was also no weight on top to push the paper against the print head.. thermal print heads need to be right up on the paper. 

I agree that the envelope was perfectly aligned, but I think that was for the video pause/cut/whatever and not a more complicated under desk mounted printer. 

Also, GG never said "Mark" in the video feed.. he said "the volunteer" and "your friend". So it's looking more like it was pre-recorded and there are a couple of awkward timing moments between GG and Vinny.

One more thing.. the way that GG turns and walks off camera to the left seems like a good place for a "cut" or transition between two video feeds (I don't know the proper term for it).


----------



## rcobourn

I think the reason for the cut is an excuse to cut the audio, as the print mechanism is not silent. I agree the print quality is a bit too good, although there were a couple points where I froze it in which it looked better then others. Other than that, I think I could build a prototype out of stuff in my garage. 

Perhaps something more like silk screening?

Penn actually says "green screen, blue screen, chroma key" which I think rules out the page itself being altered through video manipulation. Vince hesitates though, and says that's not exactly how it was done. Keeping in mind the referee knows how the trick is performed and is telling Penn if he was fooled or not, I think the paper had to actually say "Mark" on it.

Watch the way Gilbert handles the envelope to never show the open side. It couldn't be coincidence. I think the magician lied, Gilbert did fool them. Lol. Watching again, it seems to me that when the envelope is propped up to hide the parrot, it may have been to give the ink time to dry, if it was silk screening. Would not be necessary for thermal printing.


----------



## Hank

There is a camera cut-away to P&T laughing when GG is handling the envelope. We don't know for sure that the reverse side was never shown. Also, GG isn't that delicate with the surface of the desk, especially when he's placing the parrot behind the envelope and propping up the envelope with the parrot behind the box. Usually these tricks are much more simple and ugly than a concealed thermal printer covered by a mylar/vinyl covering. Also, that would have to be one big thermal print head or it would have to do multiple passes THROUGH the vinyl.. I just don't think the final print quality says thermal printer. 

Also, video tricks when the magician has all the tech on stage with him seems to be an OK method (like iPads or TV screens, etc)... but in this case, it seems the production crew would have needed to be involved in some fashion to make it work because it's using the stage backdrop video wall and remote cameras and/or a pre-recorded video feed, and that doesn't seem kosher to me. I still think the entire thing was a setup for entertainment purposes only.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

Hank said:


> I still think the entire thing was a setup for entertainment purposes only.


Or for misdirection purposes? Give P&T something to concentrate on that's not what's really happening?


----------



## getbak

I think the idea of using a thermal printer over-complicates things, especially since this was likely a one-off trick and not something he's going to regularly perform in his act.

The much easier answer is that Gilbert takes care to place the envelope down in a specific place so it's easier to match the shot when they switch between the live feed and the still frame of the scene to sneak the paper into the envelope.


It is weird though how the magician hums and haws when Alyson asks if it was done with a visual effect. I wouldn't consider switching to a still frame and loading the paper into the envelope to be a visual effect, so that should have been an easy "no" if that's how it was done. That makes me think it was done with motion tracking. It's not exactly a chroma key, but it's the same basic idea as what they were suggesting.


----------



## rcobourn

Wasn't the envelope in position from the start? I think it was. Too perfectly to be an accident. Photo paper exposed by X-ray? Hehe.


----------



## Hank

rcobourn said:


> Wasn't the envelope in position from the start? I think it was. Too perfectly to be an accident. Photo paper exposed by X-ray? Hehe.


No, it started placed on top of the box.. GG removed the "instructions" to the trick and then placed it squarely on the desk behind him. I think I counted two different instances when GG was standing in front of the envelope totally obscuring it for a brief moment -- maybe enough time for someone to swap it out.


----------



## LoadStar

rcobourn said:


> Penn actually says "green screen, blue screen, chroma key" which I think rules out the page itself being altered through video manipulation. Vince hesitates though, and says that's not exactly how it was done. Keeping in mind the referee knows how the trick is performed and is telling Penn if he was fooled or not, I think the paper had to actually say "Mark" on it.





getbak said:


> That has happened before. From what I've read, that usually happens if Penn might have revealed too much about the possible technique he's suggesting the magician used. *In the heat of the moment, Penn can get agitated if he thinks the magician is trying to get out on a technicality and so he'll go into too much detail describing the technique until the magician surrenders. *They don't want to potentially ruin the act for performers who do it the way that Penn is suggesting, so they'll edit it out and have Alyson just announce that they were (or weren't) fooled. This one wasn't as jarring as some of the edits we've seen in the past.


Bolding added, because almost definitely what happened here. The hesitation probably cued Penn in that he's trying to wiggle out on a technicality, so the cut segment was probably Penn getting irritated, a call to the referee, some discussion, etc.


----------



## Hank

Some good tricks tonight.

I liked the dollar bill machine trick. So simple, but so well done.

The reverse voice guy was good. I'm assuming that Penn was saying "Force" backwards, meaning he forced that card onto Allison, so he didn't have to learn how to say 9 numbers and 8 words in reverse speak. I think the trick would be better if he used a marked deck or some other trick instead of forcing a single known card and just saying that backwards.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

Hank said:


> The reverse voice guy was good. I'm assuming that Penn was saying "Force" backwards, meaning he forced that card onto Allison, so he didn't have to learn how to say 9 numbers and 8 words in reverse speak. I think the trick would be better if he used a marked deck or some other trick instead of forcing a single known card and just saying that backwards.


Huh, I thought it was pretty dreadful. It was obvious what he did (the card force), and it was obvious how he did the reveal (masking the backward talking with the other tracks). So there were a few seconds of him doing a force that pretty much anybody could do with a few hours' practice, and then several minutes to do the reveal. Interminable, obvious, not entertaining...he pretty much hit the trifecta of bad magic tricks.


----------



## Hank

Perhaps, but it was inventive and new, and therefore, quite entertaining. 

The coin trick guy, we've seen that trick a thousand times, and maybe he's just really good at it, but even I could see him palm, ditch, load, and steal the coins. BORING!


----------



## nataylor

I really enjoyed Losander's trick. It's so super simple, but it takes so much practice to not look horrible. He makes it look so natural and fluid.


----------



## Hank

For the simpletons, how does it work? Is it a hidden support rod in his right hand? A balsa wood table? How did he vanish it at the end?


----------



## nataylor

Hank said:


> For the simpletons, how does it work? Is it a hidden support rod in his right hand? A balsa wood table? How did he vanish it at the end?


Yeah, you've got it figured out. Very light material table, hidden support armature he kept in his right hand. Candle on top has attachment points so he can control the table from there, or remove the candle. He's basically puppeteering the table, which you can imagine could look really bad. Take a lot of practice to look natural and make it seem like the table has weight and momentum.

The vanish at the end is new. I think he's just refined his table design so it's collapsable. It's stuck to the underside of the big cloth, he collapses it so it's flat, and it gets tossed back with the rest of the cloth.


----------



## cmontyburns

*Season 5 Episode 3
*
Can't tell if I'm getting jaded or if the magicians just aren't as good anymore. There used to be at least one "wow" act per episode for me. That's not a regular occurrence anymore and it didn't happen tonight.

I didn't like the music guy. Agree with Rob that it was completely obvious how he did it. It would have been cool if all four tracks somehow came together to form the card reveal, but instead three of them, and thus 90% of the act, were irrelevant. And it was obvious in the moment what he was doing: force card, say name of card backwards in the looper. Blah.

I thought the coin guy's prestidigitation was good, especially the variety of it -- although there were moments, most obviously with the big coins, where he wasn't smooth enough with the motions. But I really hated his monologue. It didn't even seem to be an act, but his actual personality. Found it very annoying.

The paper machine was pretty underwhelming until he brought out the different monies and let them choose. Doing the trick in a prescribed order would have been very weak. I haven't thought much about what "pocket" means in reference to the solution, but it was apparently pretty obvious. I wonder if it is done the exact same way the P&T magic kit edition is done. Ended up kind of neat overall.

Table guy -- eh. It was exactly the same illusion for three or four minutes straight, though I agree that it was well performed. Like P&T, I was not expecting the vanish at the end; that was neat. Probably would give him higher marks overall if the main part of the trick were not so old and fairly monotonous.


----------



## Hank

cmontyburns said:


> . I haven't thought much about what "pocket" means in reference to the solution,


His money machine, instead of having some sort of thin plastic film as the "magic" rollers, he had a very thin, but firm, aluminum spool wrapped around both solid posts (which is what makes the trick work).

At the end of the trick, when he picked up the machine and appears to be unscrewing the top (A LOT), he's actually winding up the aluminum spool off the two rollers, so by the time he takes off the wooden top and takes it all apart, he's palmed the wound up spool and dropped it into his pocket.

At least that's what I think.


----------



## TonyTheTiger

The coin magic did not even come close to this guy...






Runs rings around the guy on P&T!


----------



## vertigo235

So how do they do that so well, I assume there is more than one technique at work.


----------



## Hank

I believe the AGT kid has a lot more technology at work, like little LCD screens or a gimmicked tabletop.

I think the P&T guy was just doing sleight of hand.


----------



## markb

The coin act on Fool Us was pretty good, in my opinion, except for the finale with the big coins. Setting the cards on top of the box was suspicious, which isn't what you want in a magic gimmick! And he messed up the first big coin, which was visible under the card before he set it down on the table.


----------



## getbak

Yeah, the completely out-of-place plant at the bottom of his table is a pretty big giveaway that Tsai is using a gimmicked table. I don't think there's any chance Tsai would have fooled Penn & Teller.

I believe the guy on Fool Us this week did it all with sleight of hand. I assume, like with Shin Lim, they weren't necessarily "fooled", but were entertained enough that they forgot that they were trying to follow every move he made, which is close enough for them.


----------



## xuxa

Hank said:


> I believe the AGT kid has a lot more technology at work, like little LCD screens or a gimmicked tabletop.
> 
> I think the P&T guy was just doing sleight of hand.


The AGT act was a gimmicked black table and some editing/digital tricks by the AGT production. Notice how much the table shakes without him touching it. Even Will Tsai describe himself as a visualist and not a magician. He is well known for doing video editing tricks in his act. P&T don't allow (post production edits etc.) on their show.


----------



## cheesegod

TonyTheTiger said:


> The coin magic did not even come close to this guy...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Runs rings around the guy on P&T!


----------



## Donbadabon

It's been awhile since I've enjoyed all the acts on the show. Tonight was one of those times.
I think it was because they all got to the point, they didn't draw anything out.

The first guy, how did his tie appear? lol. I was already fooled at that point.
The blocks he moved looked like they had magnets on the edges to hold them together, but when he ended up with 3 free-standing, that was really cool.
I was thinking he had some sort of elbow invisible shelf, which is why he covered up the props when his act was over.

The king of spades guy, he really pulled the card from the deck. That took a lot of practice. 

The Swedish singer made me chuckle. He started out with a standard two-rope with magnetic tips and turned it into ones that went through his body.
I was expecting his voice to go high when he pulled it through his pants, but he didn't. Maybe that is an American joke.

Rubics Cube guy, the only thing I can figure is the black cube loses the blackness when he shook it. But I really have no idea.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

Donbadabon said:


> The first guy, how did his tie appear? lol. I was already fooled at that point.
> The blocks he moved looked like they had magnets on the edges to hold them together, but when he ended up with 3 free-standing, that was really cool.
> I was thinking he had some sort of elbow invisible shelf, which is why he covered up the props when his act was over.


The tie looked really fake where it attached to his neck.

I notice when he "disassembled" the stack of blocks it took some work to detach each one.

The Swedish guy, the end of his rope that went "through" the front of his body was obviously stiff; he was just holding the end against himself and moving it around. I assume he used magnets for the other end "the backside end).


----------



## Hank

The final PT trick was SUPER lame.


----------



## Donbadabon

Hank said:


> The final PT trick was SUPER lame.


I agree. The ending was obvious when they started it, the recording of Penn's voice was evident when they turned it on, and it was drawn out.


----------



## markb

Rob Helmerichs said:


> The Swedish guy, the end of his rope that went "through" the front of his body was obviously stiff; he was just holding the end against himself and moving it around. I assume he used magnets for the other end "the backside end).


I'm not sure. He was definitely doing that when it appeared attached to his face. But when it was attached to the front of his clothes, it looks a little too planted. I'm thinking he has some ferrous metal under his clothes that the magnet stuck too.


----------



## vertigo235

Hank said:


> The final PT trick was SUPER lame.


It usually is, I've only been impressed by P&T trick like maybe 2 times before on this show.

Sometimes it's still entertaining, but most of the time it's a snoozer.


----------



## markb

Donbadabon said:


> Rubics Cube guy, the only thing I can figure is the black cube loses the blackness when he shook it. But I really have no idea.


If you look closely, you can see seems along the edges of the yellow side, which was the top side (facing the opening) while it was in the bag. (Click the image for full resolution.)










The blank rubik's cube may have actually had one side that was yellow, and it was just inserted into a shell with the other five sides. Or maybe the yellow side is a hinged lid on the shell. Anyway, after the reveal, it's never demonstrated to be a working rubik's cube until it's handed to Penn. I'm sure the magician switched cubes at some point.

The first rubik's cube also involved a gimmicked cube and a switch before handing it to Teller. I'm not sure how the gimmick works, though.

In both cases, the camera view conveniently cut to a long shot around the time the switch would have had to occur.

Source of screenshot:


----------



## rcobourn

The first cube didn't need to be tricked at all. It was two moves from being solved, he used a formula that works back to a solved cube. Penn knew this, it's what he meant by it not being random.


----------



## markb

rcobourn said:


> The first cube didn't need to be tricked at all. It was two moves from being solved, he used a formula that works back to a solved cube. Penn knew this, it's what he meant by it not being random.


It looks like while turning the left side (from camera's point of view), he'd have to then turn the top in one direction and the bottom in the other direction, both in 1/30th of second. Even if the top and bottom could be turned that quickly at one time, they can't be turned at the same time as the left side is turning, as it appears to be in the video. So it seems like it would be very difficult to do without some sort of gimmick. Maybe, I guess.

These three screenshots are consecutive frames:


----------



## rcobourn

Speed cube. I think my youngest could have done that, when he was practicing. The cubes they get from Asia are nothing like the cubes we had when I was his age.


----------



## Hank

Yeah, I could do that first cube trick. He was two moves away from a solved cube.


----------



## markb

Hank said:


> Yeah, I could do that first cube trick. He was two moves away from a solved cube.


I count four moves. Relative to audience/camera point of view:

1) Left face counter-clockwise
2) Top face clockwise
3) Bottom face clockwise
4) Left side counter-clockwise

Here's a rubik's cube simulator:

Online Rubik's Cube Simulator

To get it into a similar orientation, enter "YY". (Case matters.)

To scramble: "LudL"

To solve: "lUDl"

Is there a shorter solution? Do I have the scrambled cube right?


----------



## cmontyburns

Donbadabon said:


> It's been awhile since I've enjoyed all the acts on the show. Tonight was one of those times.


This was exactly my first thought upon finishing the episode. None of the tricks were stupendous or anything, but they were all enjoyable in their own way.

The block guy wound up in a pretty good place and I liked him generally, but I think his stage presence and execution need some refinement. He seemed nervous or something, and the trick would be more impressive overall if he didn't have to be so slow and deliberate in assembling and disassembling the blocks.

The card guy, by contrast, was terrific on stage. Really enjoyed watching him. I guess I didn't think the trick -- and it wasn't even a trick -- was all that impressive, though I totally respect the effort it must have taken to master that skill. Great act, though.

When the Swedish guy brought out the rope, I thought, OK, this has no chance of fooling even me probably, but hopefully it's an entertaining performance. It was. Hardly magical, and I don't think he thought he had any chance of fooling Penn & Teller with his act, but good fun.

Finally, the cube guy. I like performers who seem genuinely happy to be there. He seemed to be having fun, so I had fun. The speed cube bit was obvious. I don't know how the other trick was done, but it was another instance of a magician having to be too careful with a bag and thus making it obvious something is happening that you can't see. Still, a pretty fun performance.


----------



## rcobourn

markb said:


> I count four moves. Relative to audience/camera point of view:
> 
> 1) Left face counter-clockwise
> 2) Top face clockwise
> 3) Bottom face clockwise
> 4) Left side counter-clockwise
> 
> Here's a rubik's cube simulator:
> 
> Online Rubik's Cube Simulator
> 
> To get it into a similar orientation, enter "YY". (Case matters.)
> 
> To scramble: "LudL"
> 
> To solve: "lUDl"
> 
> Is there a shorter solution? Do I have the scrambled cube right?


I think you are right, four moves. Impressive. Fast, to be sure, but he doesn't have to think. No other explanation, he admitted that Penn had busted him on the non-random thing. My youngest (15) is out of the country visiting his girlfriend in Canada (really!), so I may have to ransack his room later looking for his speed cube.

I think I had a girlfriend in Canada at his age, but she was imaginary. They grow up fast these days. :sigh:


----------



## Hank

markb said:


> I count four moves. Relative to audience/camera point of view:
> 
> 1) Left face counter-clockwise
> 2) Top face clockwise
> 3) Bottom face clockwise
> 4) Left side counter-clockwise
> 
> Here's a rubik's cube simulator:
> 
> Online Rubik's Cube Simulator
> 
> To get it into a similar orientation, enter "YY". (Case matters.)
> 
> To scramble: "LudL"
> 
> To solve: "lUDl"
> 
> Is there a shorter solution? Do I have the scrambled cube right?


Ok, four moves.. I didn't analyze it.. but to me it was painfully obvious he was mixing, and then un-mixing the cube in a clearly deliberate manner so he could "solve" it with minimal moves.


----------



## TriBruin

rcobourn said:


> I think you are right, four moves. Impressive. Fast, to be sure, but he doesn't have to think. No other explanation, he admitted that Penn had busted him on the non-random thing. My youngest (15) is out of the country visiting his girlfriend in Canada (really!), so I may have to ransack his room later looking for his speed cube.
> 
> I think I had a girlfriend in Canada at his age, but she was imaginary. They grow up fast these days. :sigh:


Is her name Alberta and does she live in Vancouver?


----------



## DaveBogart

Hank said:


> The final PT trick was SUPER lame.


That's an understatement.


----------



## FrodoB

TriBruin said:


> Is her name Alberta and does she live in Vancouver?


I'm glad someone made this joke.


----------



## markb

S05E05:

Emily Victoria - music on phone trick
I don't even care how this was done. I was just bored.

Patrick Folkerts - desk organizer puzzle
At least this one had decent delivery. I think it was basically this: Missing square puzzle - Wikipedia

Migz - card/mirror trick
This one was clever, but it was easy to see how it was done in the closeups.

Seth Grabel - escape from car
Ok, this was just bad. I mean, this was the worst trick that I have ever seen on Fool Us.

P&T - egg in bag
This was ok.


----------



## Hank

I liked the first one with the iPhone. I don't know how she did it, but it was a good, new trick.

The rest were just bad, really really bad. ESPECIALLY the escape from the car. Ugh. 

The desk organizer was just painful to watch, as I knew as soon as he put it up there it was just the same puzzle illusion we've all seen.


----------



## windracer

Yeah, I was able to catch a lot of these.

The puzzle guy collapsed the one box when he took it off the board and held it against his chest. When he puts it back, the little photograph is missing:










You can see the collapsible section here:










Reflection-guy's fingers didn't match (edit: although now that I look again, this could just be an angle thing):










And the back of the car wasn't "welded" shut. Gee, you think he snuck out the back?


----------



## getbak

The music on the phone trick was too simple that they overlooked the obvious.


Spoiler



She was wearing an Apple Watch synced to her iPhone. A quick glance after Alyson had selected the song and she knew what it was. The camera angle when she's questioning Alyson gives this away.



For the puzzle boxes, I think when he added the first small box (ring?) it was essentially the same as the Missing Square puzzle, but in order to get it to fit inside the frame, there was one more thing he had to do. Unfortunately, freeze frame isn't his friend on this one.


Spoiler



If you look at the boxes before and after the trick, there is one box present before that isn't there after (it has a small Polaroid photo in it). It looks like that compartment slides and compresses into the others it's attached to. When that box is gone, it creates enough room for the two new boxes he added.



The cards in the mirror trick was pretty much an out-of-the-box trick you can buy (Penn's clue in Japanese was actually the name of the inventor who sells the trick). His force of the 8 of Clubs was pretty sloppy. To top it off, I don't think he even pretended that he didn't know exactly what card was going to be picked.

The only thing worse that big stage illusions on this show is a big stage illusion that's so big it doesn't fit on the stage. Truckasaurus Wrecks was pretty cool, but I can't imagine anyone thinking the guy was inside the car for more than 30 seconds after he climbed inside. That sort of trick is pretty bad at the best of times, but you need to at least give the audience some reason to think the magician is still inside. Look at the prison box trick that Penn & Teller did last week, they had the hand sticking out of the hole in the box and used the echo effect on Penn's speech to make you think he was in the box the whole time. This guy didn't even do something as simple as that.


----------



## cmontyburns

Hank said:


> I liked the first one with the iPhone. I don't know how she did it, but it was a good, new trick.
> 
> The rest were just bad, really really bad. ESPECIALLY the escape from the car. Ugh.
> 
> The desk organizer was just painful to watch, as I knew as soon as he put it up there it was just the same puzzle illusion we've all seen.


I agree about Emily Victoria (phone trick). Part of the reason I liked it was her. She was just a person doing a trick she came up with, not a "professional" who wasn't nearly as impressive as they thought they were. She seemed stunned that she fooled them, as any of us would be. It was nice.

The puzzle bit was bad. I didn't think much of his delivery and it may have been the least "magical" act they've ever had. I kept waiting for the trick to start. When are you going to try to fool us? Oh, never.

The mirror thing might have the foundation of a decent trick, but he didn't perform it well and his patter didn't help. In better hands this might have been a decent trick.

The car thing? Again, when does the trick start? That never should have made it on the show. And it was made worse by how cool he acted like he was for "attempting" it.


----------



## markb

windracer said:


> Yeah, I was able to catch a lot of these.
> 
> The puzzle guy collapsed the one box when he took it off the board and held it against his chest. When he puts it back, the little photograph is missing:
> 
> View attachment 35670
> 
> 
> You can see the collapsible section here:
> 
> View attachment 35667


Good catch!



> Reflection-guy's fingers didn't match (edit: although now that I look again, this could just be an angle thing):
> 
> View attachment 35668


I think it's just an angle thing. I think the card is printed on transparent stock with tiny black dots on one side and white and black dots on the other side. From one direction, it looks tinted, and from other direction, it has an image of a card that appears to be translucent. In the closeups, you can see the dots.


----------



## markb

The white background really highlights the black dots:


----------



## Hank

getbak said:


> The music on the phone trick was too simple that they overlooked the obvious.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> undefined


Wow, good call! But that's how magic works. The best tricks are the most simple ones.



getbak said:


> The only thing worse that big stage illusions on this show is a big stage illusion that's so big it doesn't fit on the stage. Truckasaurus Wrecks was pretty cool, but I can't imagine anyone thinking the guy was inside the car for more than 30 seconds after he climbed inside. That sort of trick is pretty bad at the best of times, but you need to at least give the audience some reason to think the magician is still inside.


Also, there were so many "outs" for him, it was just totally stupid. And as he comes running out with the fire extinguisher, clearly something was _supposed _to be on fire, but whoops, that didn't work. So he looked even more foolish putting out a fire that didn't exist. To make the trick .0001% better, he should have jumped out of the top of Carzilla with no visible/easy way to get up there.


----------



## Hank

Just rewatched and you can very clearly see her Apple Watch on left wrist turned around and she glances at it while obscured by the note pad. Very well done!


----------



## vertigo235

That's so hilarious that they were fooled by that.


----------



## Turtleboy

Hank said:


> Just rewatched and you can very clearly see her Apple Watch on left wrist turned around and she glances at it while obscured by the note pad. Very well done!


The TV cameras were at an angle that no one in the theater were, and P&T weren't either. I don't think they should have shown that on TV.


----------



## Turtleboy

vertigo235 said:


> That's so hilarious that they were fooled by that.


I'm sure they knew it was a bluetooth devise of some sort. But they didn't _catch_ her doing it, and they only have one guess.


----------



## vertigo235

Yeah, they knew she had the information, they apparently just have never used an apple watch.


----------



## Hank

Turtleboy said:


> The TV cameras were at an angle that no one in the theater were, and P&T weren't either. I don't think they should have shown that on TV.


Except that we're not really sure of whats shown on the jumbo-tron screens in the theater -- could easily be the alternate views from the other TV cameras. P&T also have those ipad video devices for close-ups they use from time to time.

But we do have the advantage of rewind and freeze-frame that they don't have. It's very easy to miss the big watch right there on her wrist if they weren't looking at the big screen at that particular moment. And she purposely hides her wrist with the notepad anyway.


----------



## Donbadabon

Apple watch. That is hilarious. I totally missed that. I really liked her presentation though.


----------



## rcobourn

I kept noticing she held the pen to her face, even pressed against her temple at one point. I was thinking the watch was a misdirect, and she had rigged the pen with a Bluetooth speaker (bone induction?). One or the other was a red herring, anyhow.


----------



## Turtleboy

The thing to remember is that P&T can't keep guessing until they get it right. That's unfair to the contestants. So they went with either her glasses or something in her ear. Once that was not correct, they couldn't then guess her watch afterwards.


----------



## Boot

Emily Victoria has been responding to comments on Reddit regarding her trick. Many 'real' magicians are criticizing her for not deserving to be there, because she's not a 'real' magician and didn't do a 'real' trick. Others vehemently disagree, as do I. Her trick was on par with many other tricks that career magicians have done on the show. It was obvious when you had the right angle, or paused and re-watched, but I think she legitimately fooled them (they knew she got the information, but didn't know how). And, she is actually quite upset that she fooled them, because she's convinced that it was a pity vote and undeserved, and because it brought her far more attention than she wanted. She expected to go on the show, do a silly trick that didn't fool them, and have a great story to tell. Instead, she has people online calling her a fraud.


----------



## Hank

I totally agree! Her trick was easily better than 50% of the tricks or "real magicians" that come on the show -- ESPECIALLY the "magicians" that come on with a $10 magic shop trick, with lots of words around it. Blech. I really feel sorry for her... the internet is a rough place, especially for women breaking into what has traditionally been a male dominated industry.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

Yeah, my only observation about her is that her presentation was very amateurish...which is to be expected from somebody who is not a magician, and has only been playing around with this one trick for a year or so. But it was a good trick, and a good "story." A more polished performer could have made it amazing.


----------



## Hank

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Yeah, my only observation about her is that her presentation was very amateurish...which is to be expected from somebody who is not a magician, and has only been playing around with this one trick for a year or so. But it was a good trick, and a good "story." A more polished performer could have made it amazing.


She addresses that on reddit.. she was nervous performing on stage for the first time. Also, they switched her outfit after dress rehearsal, she had cardigan on that obscured the watch for all of a few seconds, but they nixed that, and she had to scramble for an alternate outfit that didn't totally expose the watch.

(good god I hate how this forum inserts reddit threads as "media")


Code:


https://www.reddit.com/r/FoolUs/comments/91ovyo/2_magicians_review_season_5_episode_5/?author=EmilyVMagic


----------



## markb

Turtleboy said:


> The thing to remember is that P&T can't keep guessing until they get it right. That's unfair to the contestants. So they went with either her glasses or something in her ear. Once that was not correct, they couldn't then guess her watch afterwards.


This is true, but it's also a problem with this show. It encourages tricks that could have many possible solutions, making it difficult for P&T to get it right. And to me, if I can think of multiple ways to do the trick, it's not an interesting trick. An interesting trick is either difficult to figure out, takes a lot of skill, or has a clever solution.


----------



## vertigo235

Yeah and the experienced magicians take advantage of that, they throw in a lot of misdirection to throw P&T off with different techniques.


----------



## vertigo235

In this case P&T apparently have just never used an apple watch


----------



## Boot

markb said:


> This is true, but it's also a problem with this show. It encourages tricks that could have many possible solutions, making it difficult for P&T to get it right. And to me, if I can think of multiple ways to do the trick, it's not an interesting trick. An interesting trick is either difficult to figure out, takes a lot of skill, or has a clever solution.


I don't think it's really a problem. I assume they film more contestants than they use. We already know that they mix and match performances that weren't originally done back to back, and that they have a target of one or (rarely) two foolers in every episode. So, they create the episodes they want from the performances they want to use. If they had a string of performers all stumping them on technicalities, they probably just wouldn't bother to air those after a while.


----------



## markb

Boot said:


> I don't think it's really a problem. I assume they film more contestants than they use. We already know that they mix and match performances that weren't originally done back to back, and that they have a target of one or (rarely) two foolers in every episode. So, they create the episodes they want from the performances they want to use. If they had a string of performers all stumping them on technicalities, they probably just wouldn't bother to air those after a while.


I would assume they use most if not all of the acts they film, because they don't want to waste the time of P&T, Alyson, and the crew with acts that don't make it to air. (There are a lot of people involved in taping a show!) But I'm sure there is also a tryout process, and the producers reject a lot of acts before taping.

But given they want a mix of acts... not too many card tricks, some big tricks, some tricks that have a chance of fooling P&T, they seem to let a number of acts through that are not very interesting. (I think we can all agree that car escape should never have made it on the show.)


----------



## cmontyburns

Boot said:


> Emily Victoria has been responding to comments on Reddit regarding her trick. Many 'real' magicians are criticizing her for not deserving to be there, because she's not a 'real' magician and didn't do a 'real' trick. Others vehemently disagree, as do I. Her trick was on par with many other tricks that career magicians have done on the show.


I would have "liked" your post, but didn't want that to be misconstrued that I liked that she was being harassed. I'm with you. As I said upthread, I thought she was charming and hers was my favorite act on this episode. As much for her being a regular person and how well she handled being there (and how stunned she was to win), as for the trick (which I also enjoyed).

I mean, compare her to the truckosaurus guy. Which trick was the "it's glaringly obvious how it was done" trick? Which performance was the annoying one? And which one of them is the professional magician? (For that matter, which one fooled P&T?) None of the answers are her.


----------



## gschrock

I think she fell into one classic mistake though - don't read the reviews for something you did, and even more, don't try to interact with the idiots writing them. You're just never going to win when you do that.

Personally I thought she did fairly well. Yes, it was obvious she was pretty nervous. Quite honestly, even some of the "professional" magicians they've had on were pretty obviously trying to conquer their nerves too. Yes, when you know how it was done, it's obvious, but so are a lot of other tricks. Was it the best act I've seen on the show? No. Was it the worst act I've seen on the show? No. (Heck, as commented by others here, it wasn't even really the worst act on the *episode*.) (I figured it was done with bluetooth somehow, but I honestly missed the watch - my first guess would have been the glasses.)


----------



## Einselen

rcobourn said:


> I kept noticing she held the pen to her face, even pressed against her temple at one point. I was thinking the watch was a misdirect, and she had rigged the pen with a Bluetooth speaker (bone induction?). One or the other was a red herring, anyhow.


Bone conduction was my thought as well. Didn't think about the watch as that one almost seems too obvious.


----------



## rcobourn

Einselen said:


> Bone conduction was my thought as well. Didn't think about the watch as that one almost seems too obvious.


Sometimes a pen is just a pen. I suppose I should have guessed it wasn't the pen, as she didn't mention any engineering classes.


----------



## markb

So, on the most recent episode, they had a guy who bent stuff, and he seemed to take some inspiration from Uri Geller. Interesting that Penn had nothing to say about that, or maybe it was edited out. P&T HATE Uri Geller.


----------



## Turtleboy

I picked up on that too. They love Randi. Why did the producers put this guy on? Or why did this guy not know enough to downplay the Uri Geller connection. He even did the same act.


----------



## windracer

I was wondering about that too since they have never loved mentalists.

The "Penn's Sunday School" podcast has been using banked shows recently and they usually talk about some of the acts on "Fool Us" so I'm curious to see if Penn will bring it up once they are doing "current" shows again.


----------



## TonyTheTiger

markb said:


> So, on the most recent episode, they had a guy who bent stuff, and he seemed to take some inspiration from Uri Geller. Interesting that Penn had nothing to say about that, or maybe it was edited out. P&T HATE Uri Geller.


Geller put on a show in my office when the publisher did a deal with him to put his name on a magazine we produced. I was not impressed at all. He was all over the tv in the uk at that time with the same act.

This guy was a cheap copy.


----------



## BrettStah

Turtleboy said:


> I picked up on that too. They love Randi. Why did the producers put this guy on? Or why did this guy not know enough to downplay the Uri Geller connection. He even did the same act.


The difference could be that I don't think Uri admitted it was an act - he went around claiming it was real. This guy on Fool Us went on a show where it's acknowledged that everything is a trick/fake, and Penn and Teller try to figure out the trick. And this guy admitted pretty quickly that they guessed correctly.


----------



## cmontyburns

While we wait for a new episode tonight, a few more comments on last week's "...vs. the World" episode.

I really enjoyed the Japanese guy. I like acts that are complete performance pieces like that vs. lots of patter around a trick. It was obvious enough what he was doing -- you can hide a lot of stuff in loose clothing like that -- but he was very smooth with it and the act had a lot of personality. The fact that he didn't speak English made me hope the rest of the ep would be in other languages; alas no. This act was the best part of the episode.

I feel the same as others about the metal-bending guy. Meh. Seen it before, and his stage presence needed work.

I've forgotten by now, but there was a card magician, too, right? I remember not being especially impressed by the act, for example why he had the second volunteer on stage. She basically wasn't asked to do anything. 

And the Australian woman was bad -- maybe one of the worst performers the show has had. I did kind of respect the right-to-the-point, I'm-here-to-do-a-trick-and-here-it-is nature to her routine, but... it wasn't a routine. For an allegedly professional magician, she had no act, no delivery, no timing, and no apparent skill. I found her really off-putting, especially since she did gimmick tricks that it appears absolutely anybody could do. It really bothered me that she got counted as a fooler. She was bad.


----------



## markb

cmontyburns said:


> I've forgotten by now, but there was a card magician, too, right? I remember not being especially impressed by the act, for example why he had the second volunteer on stage. She basically wasn't asked to do anything.


Yes. This was another case where they go to a long shot just as I suspect the shenanigans are happening.


----------



## Donbadabon

I thought last nights episode (8/6/18) was pretty bad.

The first guy with the beard, he was clearly palming the cards and dropping them into his lap. It was really bad.

The boat girl. It seemed obvious to me that her method of being contacted by a helper was that gigantic marker. It was ridiculously big, and easily could've pulsed to give her hints. I can't believe she fooled them.


----------



## cmontyburns

Donbadabon said:


> The boat girl. It seemed obvious to me that her method of being contacted by a helper was that gigantic marker. It was ridiculously big, and easily could've pulsed to give her hints. I can't believe she fooled them.


One pulse for a boat, two for a tree, seven hundred for a house...? That doesn't seem to be it.

She really only fooled them, of course, because they weren't sure how she was getting the information and they weren't allowed several guesses. They knew full well how it was done, just not _how_ it was done. I agree that's not my favorite kind of fooling.


----------



## Donbadabon

cmontyburns said:


> One pulse for a boat, two for a tree, seven hundred for a house...? That doesn't seem to be it.
> .


If only there was a method of dashes and dots that could've been used.

-... --- .- -


----------



## midas

My guess was the shoes.


----------



## cmontyburns

Donbadabon said:


> If only there was a method of dashes and dots that could've been used.
> 
> -... --- .- -


Ha! Fooled me, too.

My one mild objection is that it's a pretty big info dump to do by Morse while everyone waits. She not only named the picture but described it. Of course, she stalled quite a bit in the process which would allow the detail to come in.

I presume it wasn't the marker, though. Probably would be tough to custom-build an electronic device that would pass as an ordinary marker, much less when handed to a pro like Teller. And there's the risk that the subject would drop the marker and it would break, etc. More likely she was wearing a thumper or something similar under her clothes and the Morse was transmitted that way. As Penn noted, they couldn't actually search her to confirm any such suspicions. My thought is that even if they guessed she had something under her clothes, they didn't think about Morse and thus couldn't complete the guess. Penn seemed very reluctant to admit they had been fooled, likely because they knew the means but not the method.


----------



## Jeeters

midas said:


> My guess was the shoes.


That was my guess, too. I figured she has some sort of tapping mechanism in those huge clog heels she was wearing that signaled her via something like morse (sp) code.

It was also obvious that P&T weren't at all impressed by her. No gushing adulation or praise of her act at all. Just a very quick 'nice act; we think we know how you did it'.


----------



## markb

I liked this part, that Penn said after the crossbow trick:

"...and we know something that no other show would talk about, and I want to talk about, and that is we know you would not be allowed on this show if you were doing something dangerous."

The "other show" that immediately popped into my mind was America's Got Talent. (Which isn't to say that's what Penn was thinking of.)

Penn went on to say, "we both believe that it's not only stupid, it's also immoral. You would not ever do that to Alyson."


----------



## getbak

My guess on the fooler is that she had some sort of receiver in the mask, either an audio device that went over her ear or a small video screen over the eyes. You could see when they were handling the mask that it had a bit of structure to it and wasn't just a piece of black fabric.

If it was a screen and it was off, Teller wouldn't have been able to tell it was there when he checked the mask, but it would easily shine through the black fabric when activated. If it was an audio device, there's a chance that there would have been wires that Teller could have felt when inspecting the mask, so that makes it less-likely.

There's also the possibility she stuck an earpiece in her ear after Teller inspected her. After she had Teller check her ears/eyes/hair/etc, she went over to the side table and picked up the mask. If she had a small earbud, she could have easily palmed it when she handed Teller the mask. Then, when Teller is helping to tie the mask, she had time and opportunity to put something in her ear. She has her hands by her ears as she puts the mask in place and the mask effectively covers her ears during the trick.


----------



## cmontyburns

*OAD 8/13/2019 episode
*
Ventriloquist: I've mentioned before that I usually enjoy _acts_, performers with some stagecraft vs. simply patter and a trick. This one was an exception. So much fairly boring filler for a pretty banal trick. That it fooled P&T made it worse. I can respect the effort he put into the whole thing but I don't have to enjoy it. Yuck.

Card magician: Now this is more like it. I doubted this would end up fooling them since the first guy already got the fooler slot on the episode, and of course we almost always just get one, but I wanted him to. This was riveting end to end. The only place I thought he fell down was when he reached into his jacket to get the "stickers" -- very easy to swap something in and out there. Otherwise this was aces (so to speak). I love this kind of magic.

Mentalist: I thought he had a nice easy stage presence and it helped the routine be a pleasant way to pass the time. Nothing we haven't seen before it but it was fine.

Light bulb: I was prepared to hate this guy just based on his wild hair and self-professed Dennis the Menace alter ego. I generally don't much like stage personas, especially ones that seem forced. But it turned out that I really liked him. I thought his earnestness and respect for his mentor and the trick he was doing was cool, even though he and we knew he wasn't really there to try to fool Penn & Teller. He was there to pay tribute to a founding father of modern magic. And I always enjoy how much respect Penn & Teller have for those founding fathers and the people that keep their legends alive. This was brief but it had good vibes all over it and I liked that.


----------



## rcobourn

cmontyburns said:


> *OAD 8/13/2019 episode
> *
> Ventriloquist: I've mentioned before that I usually enjoy _acts_, performers with some stagecraft vs. simply patter and a trick. This one was an exception. So much fairly boring filler for a pretty banal trick. That it fooled P&T made it worse. I can respect the effort he put into the whole thing but I don't have to enjoy it. Yuck.
> 
> Card magician: Now this is more like it. I doubted this would end up fooling them since the first guy already got the fooler slot on the episode, and of course we almost always just get one, but I wanted him to. This was riveting end to end. The only place I thought he fell down was when he reached into his jacket to get the "stickers" -- very easy to swap something in and out there. Otherwise this was aces (so to speak). I love this kind of magic.
> 
> Mentalist: I thought he had a nice easy stage presence and it helped the routine be a pleasant way to pass the time. Nothing we haven't seen before it but it was fine.
> 
> Light bulb: I was prepared to hate this guy just based on his wild hair and self-professed Dennis the Menace alter ego. I generally don't much like stage personas, especially ones that seem forced. But it turned out that I really liked him. I thought his earnestness and respect for his mentor and the trick he was doing was cool, even though he and we knew he wasn't really there to try to fool Penn & Teller. He was there to pay tribute to a founding father of modern magic. And I always enjoy how much respect Penn & Teller have for those founding fathers and the people that keep their legends alive. This was brief but it had good vibes all over it and I liked that.


The ventriloquist bit seemed pretty obvious. Look at the way he had his finger on the selected emoji. All you need is something like a Braille identifier on that spot, and he knows which was selected. I don't even recall him shuffling then, so maybe it was even easier than that. Then he just has to have one of each cloth secreted on Dummy Penn.


----------



## vertigo235

I think it's pretty clear at this point the best trick to fool p&t is to do a trick that can be done in many different ways and hope p&t don't pick the correct one.


----------



## getbak

That's the biggest flaw of the show's concept. It may have been conceived with the idea that magicians would try to come up with all-new tricks to try to fool them, but it's just become a guessing game where the magician hopes to do enough to throw off Penn & Teller so they'll guess the wrong one of a half dozen different methods that can be used to create the same effect.


----------



## Donbadabon

Ventriloquist: He annoyed me so much with his fake laughing. A lot of Ventriloquists seem to do that to pretend they are caught off guard by the puppets comments, but I hate it.

Card magician: I really liked this one. There were a few things I could catch (like when a card has a flipping panel on it that reveals some other face underneath) but overall I liked it. And I have no idea how the cards turn white.

Mentalist: I liked him too. I had also picked Turkey, like Penn. I don't know how he did that one either.

Penn & Teller - I loved that cenotaph when they introduced in back in the 90's. Their presentation of it now seemed a little disjointed.


----------



## midas

It seemed obvious to me that there was someone in the box under the Teller doll. The doll head moved more than once and I didn't see any obvious input from the magician. Someone in the box could see what was chosen and rig the rest of the trick.


----------



## Maui

The Penn and Teller dolls were pretty awesome even if the act wasn't


----------



## getbak

midas said:


> It seemed obvious to me that there was someone in the box under the Teller doll. The doll head moved more than once and I didn't see any obvious input from the magician. Someone in the box could see what was chosen and rig the rest of the trick.


Yeah, I assume that's how it was done. There was plenty of time between when Alyson picked the "emoji" and when he picked up the Penn dummy for someone in the box to load the right cloth into the puppet.


----------



## Hank

Not on PTFU (yet), but his new trick/routine was pretty impressive:


----------



## Donbadabon

Just in case your pass didn't pick it up, there is a special on tonight (4/1). 

Penn & Teller: Fool Us(CW at 9) - The magician duo returns for a special April Fools Us Day episode during which they prank Chris Hardwick of “Talking Dead.”


----------



## markb

Donbadabon said:


> Just in case your pass didn't pick it up, there is a special on tonight (4/1).
> 
> Penn & Teller: Fool Us(CW at 9) - The magician duo returns for a special April Fools Us Day episode during which they prank Chris Hardwick of "Talking Dead."


I was actually in the studio audience when they taped the intro for this episode. My impression is that this is partly a clip show. They were actually taping an episode for next season that day, and the intro for the April Fools episode was tacked onto the end of the taping. We didn't get to see any other part of that episode.


----------



## pdhenry

All the more reason for Allison to wear the same outfit every episode.


----------



## windracer

I enjoyed some of the behind-the-scenes footage in this ep. Although Chris Hardwick should have realized he was being set up.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

The set-up was entertaining, but there really wasn't any pay-off.


----------



## Hank

windracer said:


> I enjoyed some of the behind-the-scenes footage in this ep.


There was about one minute of actual BTS stuff (the french magician who lost then won) in this otherwise completely boring and totally useless episode. What a waste of an hour. Losing respect for P&T by the minute. Blech.


----------



## MarkofT

Frankly Hank, it wasn't made for you. Without going back through the thread, I recall that you have a good bit of magic knowledge. In this thread we've discussed the hints Penn has given and was a segment of the 4/1 show. The bit where they highlighted the lies told by magicians was new to anyone that didn't know/figure out the tricks involved without actually showing the point where the magic happened. They did explicitly show how one trick was performed as well as how they thought it was performed which would have also been a valid method.

The trick played on Chris Hardwick was a hidden lesson in 3 card tricks. They didn't just use a stooge each time, they used 3 practiced magicians and each used a different method for performing a card trick. The end reveal could have been better, but an epic fail would have been crueler then funny.

My wife and I enjoyed the episode, and she doesn't have any love for clip shows either.


----------



## vertigo235

We actually enjoyed the episode. However I do agree that Chris should not have fallen for that, I knew what was going on immediately. I almost have to believe that Chris Hardwick was a plant as well.


----------



## Hot4Bo

This was my nephew last night In Las Vegas. They gave him rings to keep which, of course, he now has to figure out how to use. LOL


----------



## Hot4Bo

He’s pretty shy so you can’t tell but he is super, super excited. He’s a huge fan and watches their show all the time.


----------



## Steveknj

We saw them in Vegas a couple of months ago. Great show, but we had no guts to get up on stage


----------



## mattack

Penn tweeted about a new season starting IIRC next week.


----------



## rcobourn

mattack said:


> Penn tweeted about a new season starting IIRC next week.


Starting Monday at 8 PM, a NEW SEASON of @CWPennandTeller's @FoolUsTV (@WPIX-TV ch.11 NYC)[email protected]& @PennJillette are joined by David Copperfield/@D_Copperfield, mentalist @JanReinder, @OndrejPsenicka, Giancarlo Bernini/@BerniniMagic, with host Alyson Hannigan/ @AlyDenisof http://pbs.twimg.com/media/D832GhmXsAACNXC.png


----------



## hefe

Steveknj said:


> We saw them in Vegas a couple of months ago. Great show, but we had no guts to get up on stage


I saw them probably in the early 90s in Chicago. I was pulled up on stage to help with the "Teller dies in the water tank" trick. They gave me the key to the lock with the big TELLER tag on it. I still have it in a box somewhere.


----------



## cmontyburns

****SPOILERS FOR SEASON 6 (SUMMER 2019) FROM THIS POINT****


----------



## cmontyburns

*Spoilers through S06E02 (OAD 6/24/2019) start here.
*
I had a few thoughts on the acts in the premiere episode last week that I don't remember now, but anyone feel free to chime in on that episode as well.

As for tonight's episode, all returning foolers --

The Australian lady, Helen, is probably one of my least-favorite performer they've ever had on. I think her stage presence is terrible and what she thinks is funny "attitude" is pretty annoying. Penn obviously thinks so. Her act last time was barely an act and it rubbed me the wrong way that she fooled them, so it really rankled that she did it again! And the trick seemed weak. Fine, we weren't going to be allowed to observe her directly, but that giant screen seemed like an enormous cheat. I don't know what she did either, but I wasn't impressed. Please don't bring her back.

I don't know how Rebecca, the British woman, did her trick, but it was a little too much theater and not enough "magic" for my taste. It was interesting that Penn mentioned a thumper as a possible solution for how it was done (though she didn't use one). I thought the use of hidden accomplices was not allowed on the show.

I liked Javi, the Spanish guy, and his string trick. Penn more or less gave away the solution in his comments -- it was sleight-of-hand after all -- but darned if I know when he did it. And Javi's enthusiastic stage presence is fun. And I always enjoy Penn and Teller's reaction to stuff they know is truly good. You can tell the difference when they are giving phony appreciation and when they are really impressed.

As they were with the tie-and-table guy, whatever his name was. They knew what he was doing -- we've all seen variations on those tricks before -- but Penn seemed really appreciative of the engineering to build whatever the guy built, and to have it be something that could be performed on a stage like that, vs. in more controlled conditions. I like that guy and hope they have him back sometime.


----------



## getbak

Last week, they only had three attempted foolers instead of the usual 4.

The blindfolded guy with the rat traps.
The weird Czech guy with the card trick where Alyson picked a card (Ace of Spades) and he pulled out all the other aces. (Fooler)
The guy with the "time traveling" cell phone.
Then, of course, the final foolers were Penn & Teller themselves with special guest star David Copperfield.


----------



## Donbadabon

I was surprised P&T didn't ask to look behind the screen after Helen was done.
My thought is that the cuffs were tricked, but both were setup to be opened to start with. Then when her husband chained up Teller, he disengaged the device so Teller couldn't get out. While hers remained engaged to be opened since Penn didn't know the secret of how to actually lock them.


----------



## series5orpremier

I thought the guys who brought out the screen around her were there unnecessarily longer than they needed to be and were fiddling with something before they left. They could have easily opened the handcuffs for her.


----------



## Hank

series5orpremier said:


> I thought the guys who brought out the screen around her were there unnecessarily longer than they needed to be and were fiddling with something before they left. They could have easily opened the handcuffs for her.


Yeah, and they spent too much time fiddling with the screen to get it into position, and then walked _behind_ the screen.. at any point they could have passed her a key or some method of escape (see below).



Donbadabon said:


> I was surprised P&T didn't ask to look behind the screen after Helen was done.
> My thought is that the cuffs were tricked, but both were setup to be opened to start with. Then when her husband chained up Teller, he disengaged the device so Teller couldn't get out. While hers remained engaged to be opened since Penn didn't know the secret of how to actually lock them.


Wasn't that her father?  But I think you're close. I think the locks were magnetically activated, and only she knew the secret of where on the post was the opposing magnet to unlock the locks, and perhaps her father did something to Teller's locks to disable the magnets if just by chance Teller hit the unlock magnet.

Or maybe there was a magnet embedded in the screen that unlocked her locks.

I didn't like that Rebecca, the British woman, wasn't blindfolded or anything, even though her "eyes were closed"... that seemed like part of the trick. She should have instructed Penn to put the blocks in the holder and then put it facing up, so at no point was it visible to the audience. I don't know how she did it, but there seemed to be a lot of holes.


----------



## cmontyburns

series5orpremier said:


> I thought the guys who brought out the screen around her were there unnecessarily longer than they needed to be and were fiddling with something before they left. They could have easily opened the handcuffs for her.


I had forgotten about that by the time I posted, but I had the exact same thought watching it live.


----------



## Donbadabon

The final P&T trick, they fooled me. I knew it was Teller's hands, but I couldn't figure out why Penn would just stand there emotionless while Teller did the trick.


----------



## Hank

I knew right away that wasn't Penn's head. Just something about it looked 'off'. The hair was too neat or something. I thought it was maybe someone else (I didn't realize it was Teller, so maybe they fooled me), but it was definitely NOT Penn.


----------



## series5orpremier

Donbadabon said:


> The final P&T trick, they fooled me. I knew it was Teller's hands, but I couldn't figure out why Penn would just stand there emotionless while Teller did the trick.


I knew it was Teller. I saw them around 1991 off-Broadway (Penn & Teller Rot in Hell) and they did a similar thing; I knew then too and whispered it to my friends next to me who had no idea - it was Teller's eyes that gave it away to me that time. Teller in disguise blended in with the audience coming back to their seats after an intermission. Penn then went out into the audience and selected about 10 people at random to sit on stage (one was Teller). I don't remember what happened next but remember I caught Teller being the ringer well ahead of time from his eyes. He also saw me whispering to my friends and they knew not to approach us.

This disguise was better though because it covered his eyes.


----------



## cmontyburns

The Penn & Teller trick is probably one that is more effective in a theater environment, as the audience there saw it, than it is on TV. We get a closer view and more thus more opportunity to see things like the hands pretty clearly not being Penn's. (On the flip side, as TV viewers, all we saw was Teller in his chair. The audience presumably could have seen him get up and go backstage if they were paying attention.)


----------



## Donbadabon

As a side note, P&T are on The Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon tonight.


----------



## BrettStah

I'm watching the recent episode now - I just realized that they put a lapel mic on Teller. Seems unnecessary, huh?


----------



## getbak

BrettStah said:


> I'm watching the recent episode now - I just realized that they put a lapel mic on Teller. Seems unnecessary, huh?


It's probably because the judges are listening to their conversation when they're trying to figure out how a trick was done. Having them both mic'd would ensure the judges don't miss something that was said.

They both also wear earbuds that allow the judges to speak directly to them.


----------



## LoadStar

Speaking of judges, I was sad to see the message earlier in the season that Johnny Thompson (the backstage judge, and long-time legendary magician) passed away. Apparently, he collapsed during a rehearsal for Fool Us, and died a few days later in the hospital.


----------



## cmontyburns

I saw that message, too, and had meant to look up the story. I don't think I would have heard of him before but for P&T's many reverent comments about him on the show.


----------



## LoadStar

I wonder if that was the reason for the rather odd feeling episode where almost half the show was P&T performing for David Copperfield? I wonder if he popped over as a favor to P&T, and to Johnny.


----------



## cmontyburns

Interesting theory. Copperfield seemed really uncomfortable during that whole segment, like he would have preferred not to be doing it. Assuming I read him right, it’s hard to envision him agreeing to that bit just because P&T wanted a change of pace or something. So you could be right.


----------



## TonyTheTiger

When I saw Copperfield at the MGM, it was evident that he was not comfortable doing the small magic patter. He was best at the grand illusions and came across as much more comfortable.

This could have something to do with the perceived awkwardness.


----------



## getbak

If you have an hour to spare, here's a behind the scenes podcast from a couple of people who work on the show talking about the Copperfield episode: P&T FUBTS 0601 Copperfield | The Mind Noodler on Patreon (language warning, they do swear a lot).

They have been trying to get Copperfield on the show for a number of years and he finally agreed on the condition that he'd get to be the judge against Penn & Teller -- which just happened to be what they were going to pitch to him.

Even then, no one was 100% sure he'd actually show up on taping day.

Apparently, both Copperfield and P&T were trying really hard to "win" the challenge, to the point that it took three takes for Copperfield to even say the words "you fooled me". It took a lot of convincing on Teller's part to finally satisfy Copperfield that he had been fooled.

Later in the episode, they talk a bit about P&T's relationship with Copperfield as "frenemies".

They also mention that Johnny Thompson had collapsed in the hallway at the Rio while they were shooting this year's new intro and was in the hospital during the entire season of shooting, but didn't pass away until after the season had wrapped.

Also, through the episode, they talk about each of the performers who tried to fool P&T on the first episode. They seemed to like the rat trap guy the most even though he had no chance of actually fooling P&T. They don't give away any of the tricks, but you can read between the lines on some of their comments to figure things out (although none of the tricks on the first episode were particularly complicated).

---------

I thought it was a good listen and am now considering throwing them a $1 a month on Patreon to hear about the rest of the season.


----------



## Hank

Thanks for the summary. You could definitely tell Copperfield wasn't exactly comfortable on the show.


----------



## markb

We saw the cell phone time travel trick at the taping I attended. (All of the other acts will presumably air in other episodes.)

A couple of behind the scenes tidbits:

1) Before the act, someone came out and said they needed a volunteer with a _particular model_ of iPhone. I'm not sure if P&T were even present during that part. Seems kind of cheaty to keep that from the TV audience and P&T (though for all I know, P&T knew about it).

2) During the act, it took a really long time for the photo to show up on Penn's phone. Obviously, that got cut from the show. Also, Penn (from what I could see on giant screen in the theater) looked pretty annoyed when the contestant announced that the producers had given him Penn's phone number!


----------



## Hank

yeah -- about that... during that trick, you could see that very briefly the volunteer's iPhone had turned off (the screen locked and/or went black).. but the magician was able to open it right back up without the audience member unlocking it. Maybe during the prep they asked him to temporarily turn off touch-id or an unlock passcode, but that seems unlikely. 

What's more likely is that there was a second matching iPhone the magician was using.


----------



## markb

Although, when he had the volunteer unlock his iPhone, the magician asked him to confirm that it was his phone, and he said yes. But I'm not sure what he was looking at to make that determination. With my phone, I would easily be able to identify it from the lock screen. And then from the home screen, I can identify my particular arrangement of icons.

From what I could tell during the taping, the magician had no chance to study the volunteer's phone before the cameras started rolling.


----------



## markb

Testing with my iPhone, the screen dims substantially about 20 seconds or so after unlocking, and then the screen goes completely black and locks after another 10 seconds. I think what you see in the show is the screen dimming, but not locking.


----------



## TonyTheTiger

I'm not at all surprised to hear about Copperfield. He's a great illusionist, but his patter is not good. Saw his show in Vegas a few years ago and was even on stage for the final trick. He was awesome, but when he performed close-up, he was awkward and hard to watch.

Add the discomfort of P&T and you get what we saw!


----------



## Rob Helmerichs

I'm actually losing interest in this show...for some reason, this season it's gotten hard for me to make it through.


----------



## NorthAlabama

i've felt the same for a couple of seasons now, and have found it helpful to ffwd through the visiting magician intros and begin watching only each of the tricks themselves, and also ffwd through allison's post-trick banter so i get to penn's explanation right when the trick is finished.


----------



## Hank

NorthAlabama said:


> i've felt the same for a couple of seasons now, and have found it helpful to ffwd through the visiting magician intros and begin watching only each of the tricks themselves, and also ffwd through allison's post-trick banter so i get to penn's explanation right when the trick is finished.


I do the exact same thing.


----------



## JTAnderson

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I'm actually losing interest in this show...for some reason, this season it's gotten hard for me to make it through.


Thank you!

Not only have I lost interest in the show, it has pretty much caused me to lose interest in seeing magic acts when we go to Las Vegas. Overload.

(Deleted the series recording just a couple of days ago.)


----------



## Hank

Well, if you're tired of P&T FU, try P&T FUUU&U






And of course the bits that didn't make it into the game:


----------



## cmontyburns

**** SPOILERS FROM OAD 7/1/2019 FROM THIS POINT ***
*
I understand some of the recent complaints and even share some of them, but I still enjoy the show overall and am sticking with it. I thought this was a pretty decent episode for the most part. And a very rare double Fooler!

The pirate guy seemed to have not much trick wrapped in a ton of exposition, but I found myself enjoying it anyway -- even though it seemed to have no chance of fooling P&T (and Penn looked kind of underwhelmed throughout it). Indeed it didn't fool them, but I liked the twist that it didn't fool them because the method used had caught their eye previously, and it was invented by the guy performing it.

I really liked the German mentalist guy. No idea how he did that but it was a cool trick. I alway enjoy Penn & Teller's obvious respect for seeing something truly new.

The hyper Spanish was kind of an annoying stage presence, but I enjoyed how he seemed to be annoying Penn, too. I was surprised to see Penn & Teller basically saying as the trick unfolded that they didn't know how the right card could be in there. And I don't think I've ever seen them announce a Fooler immediately like that before. The theatrics around pretending like that box came locked all the way from Spain were a bit much, but regardless, the right card was in there behind several layers of protection.

The gallows guy was not good. Penn did his best to be complimentary but there was no way that trick was going to fool them. Yeah, sure each of those envelopes had a different number in it.

And Penn and Teller's trick was a variation on things we've seen them do a bunch of times before. It wasn't as good as the German guy's trick, that's for sure. It's also getting pretty obvious how much of "Penn & Teller" is really just "Penn Stands Around & Teller".


----------



## Hank

The only good one was the mentalist-- I have no freaking clue how he did that. You can't exactly palm or stash a huge cactus. I thought that maybe he was placing the items Alison felt on top of the 'revealed' object already in the box with the black cloth hiding it, and he just removed that smaller object before opening the box. But the cactus went nearly to the top of the box, not leaving room for a stuffed animal or a hairbrush (things he could easily stash). I'm also thinking maybe the wine glass was the trick glass that has wine inside the walls, but doesn't spill. Anyway, great trick.

The rest were pretty bad. The spanish guy with the 2 of diamonds-- he was bending over and had his left hand inside the lego box the entire time. It looked really strange. Maybe he rehearsed with a slightly higher table and it wasn't obvious his had was on the clay box the entire time. I'm really surprised P&T (a) didn't see this and (b) were fooled at all. Now I don't know how he placed the card in the box, but lots of clues abound.

The gallows guy was the worst. First, I think the "bar placement" was just a hoax/diversion and didn't matter at all which gallows she placed it on. We also never found out the number, which she should have revealed (even if every card in the bag was a "2"). Second, I don't think it mattered which number Allison choose... I think the gallows was just rigged such that any trap door with sufficient weight on it didn't open when the lever was pulled (that's why all the other stand-ins were just tripods with a photo). If not that, there were dozens of chances his wife/assistant had to flip a switch or level to de-activate the one he was standing on. But I think it was just a gamed trapdoor that didn't open. Lame.


----------



## cmontyburns

**** Spoilers for the 7/15/2019 episode from this point ***
*
At first I thought this was an episode with only three acts, but it turned out that TiVo's commercial skip function skipped me past one of the middle acts. Since it turned out to be the gross-out act, I probably should have been grateful.

Thoughts in brief:

Props to the Spanish guy, I think, for the double fake-out. He said he was going to do a trick that P&T would recognize, but in a different way. So they clearly thought of an rejected the way the ring would normally get to his shoe, and went with a reel. But obviously he expected them to think that, given his tearaway outfit. I don't know how he really did it, but a pretty mundane trick on the surface became a pretty solid fake-out by the end. I think they really respected it.

The rapping swimmer was pretty entertaining. I enjoyed his act, thinking that it was fun but something so simple had no chance of fooling them. And it didn't, but it seemed like it was on a knife's edge of actually getting past them. So that was pretty neat for an amateur. I liked that Penn seemed disappointed that he didn't fool them.

I don't really care for gross-out acts, although I was interested to find out that this actually was "magic" and not "geek stuff" as Penn put it. That is, I infer, there actually was a trick to what they did and not just physical grossness. Cool?

The Italian mentalist was a nice story but a pretty routine act. Felt like something we had seen before, more than once.

As is often the case, the P&T trick at the end was the worst part of the show. That was painful.


----------



## Hank

cmontyburns said:


> Props to the Spanish guy, I think, for the double fake-out.


Yeah, really great trick. All I know (after having the benefit of TiVo) is that the trick is centered around the purple scarf -- right after he vanishes the ring, the scarf hangs all the way down his right leg covering whatever gimmick is in the scarf to get the ring to his shoe. Because immediately after that, you can see the ring on his shoe. But how he did that so quickly and without his hands is really, really, impressive. You can tell by looking at the close ups the ring is on a separate shoe lace loop stuffed into the top of his shoe, but it's all black and you really can't tell. Still really, really impressive.

The gross-out stuff wasn't magic or a gimmick, it's just biology. Anyone can do that stuff with the right training and desire.

The rapper was entertaining.

The rest, meh.


----------



## MikeMar

getbak said:


> Last week, they only had three attempted foolers instead of the usual 4.
> 
> The blindfolded guy with the rat traps.
> The weird Czech guy with the card trick where Alyson picked a card (Ace of Spades) and he pulled out all the other aces. (Fooler)
> The guy with the "time traveling" cell phone.
> Then, of course, the final foolers were Penn & Teller themselves with special guest star David Copperfield.


I'm a bit behind and just have watched these 3 acts so far these season

How were #1 and #3 done?


----------



## LoadStar

Hank said:


> The gross-out stuff wasn't magic or a gimmick, it's just biology. Anyone can do that stuff with the right training and desire.


That would imply "geek stuff," which Penn said it wasn't, and they confirmed.


----------



## getbak

Hank said:


> Yeah, really great trick. All I know (after having the benefit of TiVo) is that the trick is centered around the purple scarf -- right after he vanishes the ring, the scarf hangs all the way down his right leg covering whatever gimmick is in the scarf to get the ring to his shoe. Because immediately after that, you can see the ring on his shoe. But how he did that so quickly and without his hands is really, really, impressive. You can tell by looking at the close ups the ring is on a separate shoe lace loop stuffed into the top of his shoe, but it's all black and you really can't tell. Still really, really impressive.
> 
> The gross-out stuff wasn't magic or a gimmick, it's just biology. Anyone can do that stuff with the right training and desire.


Except, it apparently was "magic". Otherwise, they would have been foolers.

For the ring, I'd guess it's just strong magnets on his shoe and the shoelace loop. When he places the ring in the handkerchief, he does so very deliberately. That would be where he's setting up the trick and putting the ring on the loop. Once that's done, it's just a matter of dropping the ring in the right way so that the two magnets will come together.



MikeMar said:


> I'm a bit behind and just have watched these 3 acts so far these season
> 
> How were #1 and #3 done?


#1 was just a matter of having a (at least partially) see-through blindfold. He could see where the missing rat traps were and step into those spots. The part where he does the final couple on his hands is just him showing off.

#3 is less clear. He had three "provers" in the trick, but 2 were pretty simple to figure out. The first was the stuffed animal that supposedly travelled from one box to the other. That's pretty easy. The second prover was the drawing that the audience member drew. The fact that the audience member "drew" the thing with his eyes closed and by moving the pen around on the page is a pretty big clue as to how that was done (no ink in the pen, the drawing that matches the one in the box was already made on the second page of the notepad and is "torn out" of the pad).

The third prover is more difficult and is really what the whole trick hinges on. He put the volunteer's phone into a bag, put that bag into the box and it magically transported into the other box with two hours added to the timer. The bag switch is relatively straightforward with a false-bottom to the bag and a hole in the table top.

The stopwatch is the one difficult part. On the iPhone, if you have a stopwatch running and change the time ahead by two hours, the stopwatch will show that it has been running for two hours longer than it has. That appears to be how he did that. The only issue is that it isn't particularly easy to manually change the clock, and the guy's phone wouldn't be "clean" at the end of the trick. One way I could see him getting around that is when he sent the photo to Penn, he was holding the phone for a long time. Someone who was at the taping, said it took quite a while for Penn to receive the message -- much longer than was shown on tv. If that is how it was done, he could have cleaned his tracks by taking the guy's phone back and telling him he had to delete Penn's contact info off the phone (if this happened, it wasn't shown).

I suppose if he's done the trick enough times, he'd get to be pretty fast at doing what he needs to do while making it look like he's doing other things, which I guess is the essence of all sleight-of-hand.


----------



## Hank

LoadStar said:


> That would imply "geek stuff," which Penn said it wasn't, and they confirmed.


Well, I'm friends with an old carny performer who does all those tricks and more (like passing a condom from his mouth through his nose) .. and I've seen the drinking through the nose and milk from the eyes tons of times before from other performers. There are lots of youtube videos showing these tricks. It's not magic. They're old carny trash tricks.

I don't know what "geek stuff" is supposed to mean.


----------



## cmontyburns

I'd have to watch it again, but my recollection is that Penn essentially said, "you were close to actually doing what you appeared to be doing, but you weren't," and they agreed. So I agree with the other posters that it wasn't carny trash trickery.


----------



## getbak

"Geek stuff" is where you say you're going to bite the head off a live chicken and then bite the head off a live chicken.

A magician would say he's going to bite the head off a live chicken, make you think he bit the head off a live chicken, then restore the chicken's head and let it run around the stage.


They did stuff that looked like carney trash "geek stuff", but apparently did it using "magic" techniques.

I think it's pretty easy to figure out the magic way to do the milk shooting out of the eye bit. It's tougher to think of a magic way to do the milk coming out through the straw in his nose bit.


----------



## MikeMar

Anyone know how the rubic cube guy did it?

The ear piece guess was weak though


----------



## cmontyburns

MikeMar is referring to the *episode that aired Monday, July 22. Spoilers for that episode from this point.
*
I just watched this one last night. My reactions:

Jimmy Ichihana was the best performer on the episode. I really enjoyed his routine even though it felt familiar and I figured there was no way it was going to fool P&T. I thought it was interesting, though, that Penn copped to some parts of the act "fooling" Teller and some parts "fooling" Penn. I didn't even really catch enough coded language in Penn's remarks to satisfy me that that had Ichinana nailed, but Jimmy seemed to accept he was caught.

I thought Penn was pretty harsh with the lying mentalist. Leaned a little too hard into "we thought we were going to hate this" and didn't quite recover with enough "but we ended up loving it!" The guy looked pretty crestfallen. I do agree it was well-scripted and so I didn't mind sitting through it, but the trick seemed pretty basic.

The clown guy with the chicken? Couldn't get him off the stage fast enough for me. That's one where Penn should have stayed with the insults, since he doesn't like clowns. I could hardly focus on the trick since the character was so annoying. Oh, there were two ducks.

The cube kid was... eh. Feels like his class won't graduate too many professional magicians, although I guess it was a decent enough act. Totally agree with @MikeMar that Teller's guess of an earpiece and an accomplice was lame. That feels like an amateur hour approach that wouldn't even get someone on stage. Also, I guess I don't know the rules of the show that well, because I thought that sort of trick was banned.

P&T's trick (or, Teller's), was fine, I guess. Presumably those fat markers were transmitting to something that was making a copy of the drawing.


----------



## getbak

They make "smart" cubes that can track the movement and position of a cube in real time.

Here's one that's on the market:





The sides don't look exactly like the classic Rubik's cube, but it probably wouldn't be too hard to get one custom-built to look more like the classic with all the electronics inside.

In fact, here's a custom-built one that is actually self-solving too:





The smart cubes connect to an app on the user's phone and can report the exact configuration of the cube. If he's not using an earpiece, I'd guess he's using a thumper of some kind to send him the information.

...

Or not.

...

I just rewatched it and now I think it's actually way less complicated than all that.



Spoiler: My analysis of the trick



Here's the video of his performance:





After he talks about the total number of positions possible, he mixes up the cube by making a few small turns.

If you pause at 1:49, you can see that the left and right sides on the top of the cube are both white-blue-yellow and the middle is orange-green-orange. If you pause at 1:54, you can clearly see there are three white blocks in the middle of the cube. On the left side, the corners are green and the middle is red. On the right side, the corners are blue and the middle is orange.

When Alyson brings the cube forward, the first side she shows (2:28) is rotated but the same configuration as at 1:49 with white-blue-yellow on the top and bottom and orange-green-orange in the middle.

Next, he has her turn the cube to show another side (3:20). This time, it's the same configuration as the one at 1:54. Three white in a row in the middle, green-red-green on one side of the white line and blue-orange-blue on the other.

After that, they cut away for the audience reaction and I believe he mixes up the cube a little bit more. This time, he holds it in such a way that you can't see the full face with the orange center square, but you can see enough of it to make out all but 2 of the squares. Just before he hands her the cube (3:45), you can see the top row is red-white-white; the middle row is blue-orange-?; and the bottom row appears to be green-red-?. What he places on the board is exactly that but flipped (blue and green are the two ?).

BTW, if you go back to the first part of the trick, he shows the orange centered side (1:49) and you can see that all four corners are red and there are no green squares, which is why I'm confident he made some additional moves while they're walking over to the board.

So... What does this all mean?

Alyson never changes any of the sides. He demonstrates what he wants Alyson to do and tells her not to play with it, but just put it behind her back and turn it. Because we can't see what they're doing behind their backs, we assume they're mixing it up, but they're not. In the second part of the trick, he even holds the cube up in front of himself and just demonstrates that he wants her to turn the cube in her hand to pick a side.

At the beginning, he primes us to think about mixing up the cube and creating a virtually unlimited number of possibilities, but he's the only one who ever changes the configuration and he knows which moves to make. As a result, he only really needs to remember 6 different side configurations for each part of the trick. In fact, for the first part, I think the opposite sides of the cube are like mirror images of each other (at one point, you can briefly see the yellow-centered side and it has the same middle stripe with blue and green corners as the white side), so he'd only need to remember three unique patterns for that part. In the second part, the view isn't as clear, so I don't know how unique each side is.

As long as he makes the right moves when "mixing up" the cube, each side will always be in the configuration he wants (and has memorized). At that point, he just needs to have some way of figuring out which side is facing up when Alyson makes her choice. For that, (if he's not using an off-stage accomplice) I think he would still likely need something embedded in the cube to transmit its orientation to him, likely with a thumper to send him the numbers 1-6. Because it doesn't need to track every move, it would likely be a lot more simple than the smart cubes above.


----------



## getbak

cmontyburns said:


> Also, I guess I don't know the rules of the show that well, because I thought that sort of trick was banned.


What sort of trick? Using a backstage accomplice? Those are allowed, and some of the tricks couldn't possibly work without one.

The only technique that isn't allowed (AFAIK) is the use of audience stooges. If a "random person from the audience" is involved in the trick, they must actually be a random person from the audience.

Also, any trick that has a legitimate risk of severe injury to the magician is also forbidden, as Penn has said numerous times.


----------



## cmontyburns

getbak said:


> The only technique that isn't allowed (AFAIK) is the use of audience stooges. If a "random person from the audience" is involved in the trick, they must actually be a random person from the audience.


This may be what I was thinking of. I was pretty sure that there was a prohibition against an accomplice scenario of some type.


----------



## Donbadabon

I thought having help was off-limits too.

ETA: And in this case when P&T guessed earpiece and the guy said no,I guess that didn't mean he didn't have a shoe buzzer, pocket buzzer, etc.

If they have to guess exactly what method the assistant is communicating with, that doesn't seem fair to P&T. 

I don't like the idea of using assistants that we can't see. That seems like a cheat to me.


----------



## cmontyburns

Donbadabon said:


> ETA: And in this case when P&T guessed earpiece and the guy said no,I guess that didn't mean he didn't have a shoe buzzer, pocket buzzer, etc.


When Penn guessed earpiece, Rabby did say he did the trick all on his own.


----------



## Hank

Yeah, it seems like 90% of the tricks on P&T would be brain dead easy with an accomplice backstage and an earpiece and/or thumper. Maybe they've loosened up the rules a bit to keep the show on the air?


----------



## NorthAlabama

i'm just about over our local cw affiliate when it comes to this show (the only cw show i regularly watch).

a few weeks ago, there were audio dropouts every few seconds for the first 15-20 minutes of the show, but it was finally adjusted. then when i went to watch the last 2 eps yesterday? phased audio for the entirety of ep5, and analog static through all of ep6 (making it the first completely unwatchable ep this season).


----------



## getbak

Hank said:


> Yeah, it seems like 90% of the tricks on P&T would be brain dead easy with an accomplice backstage and an earpiece and/or thumper. Maybe they've loosened up the rules a bit to keep the show on the air?


No, they've been allowed from the beginning (or at least season 2). I did a Google search for "fool us thumper" and there was a link to a video from Season 2, Episode 2 of a guy named Mike Hammer. In his analysis, Penn talks about cartoon rabbits, especially the one who taps his foot on the ground and the magician immediately says they got it.

I think the problem is if they banned all unseen assistants, they basically wouldn't be able to have any mentalists on the show. In most cases, there would only be one way that a trick could have been done if you eliminate stooges and off-stage/unseen assistants/assistance.


----------



## MikeMar

*episode that aired Monday, July 29. Spoilers for that episode from this point.

*
-The tarrot card guy was boring 
-The red ball guy one was kinda stupid and seriously fooled them?
-The 12 year old girl was GREAT for her age, and kinda decent regardless of age
-Crossword puzzle guy - pretty boring as well


----------



## cmontyburns

I liked the tarot card guy. I thought there was no way he was going to fool them, and he didn't, but I was interested to find the trick was more involved than I might have guessed it was. You can tell when Penn doesn't think much of a trick, and I don't think this was one of those cases.

I also liked the sponge guy. It was a little slow at first, when he was leaning more into the bowl and vibration bit, but once he got Alyson over there it took off. Nice coda after the act was done in pulling a sponge out of his beard and a green sponge out of Alyson's hair. P&T clearly had nothing.

The girl had one curious flaw in her act: where her premise was that she was showing how not to get cheated, and she let them pick their own cards without a force, etc., she did the cuts herself. Anyway, she had no chance of fooling P&T and didn't, but kudos to her for being a better act than the guy that followed her. I've said this before, but I always enjoy the sincerity P&T have for tricks they've not seen before or performers who are just getting started. I think they were sincerely tickled by this young girl performing and that was fun.

The puzzle guy's trick was decent, I guess, but I really didn't like him. Leaned way too hard into being "weird" and ostracized and stuff. His act was just plain awkward.


----------



## cmontyburns

**** Spoilers for episodes through 8/19/2019 from this point ****

We missed commenting on the prior episode that aired. I'm not going to go back to refresh my memory now, but I recall liking an act or two. And wasn't it a rare double-fooler episode? Made up for that this time out (8/19) by having no foolers. Although I thought two of the acts were really solid, which is one to two more than the show often has.

The mentalist act confused me. What was the point of telling Teller how they did their trick -- or was the idea to confuse him into thinking they were doing one thing when they actually did another? Whatever -- it didn't work. I think mentalist acts are tough to make interesting, not least because you always assume they are getting help of some sort, no matter how many signs they put on stage saying they aren't. (Although Penn confirmed that sign was telling the truth in this case.) I'm sure it was probably difficult, but it wasn't really entertaining.

I thought the drawer box guy was really good. Fascinating to hear Penn say that it was one of the most intricate acts they've ever had. Sign of a good magician that you really couldn't tell. Cool stuff, and good drama having to throw to the judges. I was sorry he didn't fool them.

Also sorry the jugglers didn't. That was one of the more entertaining acts the show has had in a while. Great patter, good skill, great idea making Teller part of the trick, and a good payoff -- even if Penn spoiled it in his comments. And I always like seeing Penn and/or Teller really enjoying a performance, which Penn obviously did. Fun stuff.

Card kid? Not much to say but: meh.


----------



## Hank

I have no idea how the mentalists did that trck.

I thought the draw box guy was sloppy. The VERY FIRST thing I noticed (without Tivo or rewinding) was that the first box he showed (red diamond) was the same as the second box he showed just upside down. Then I rewound and confirmed my observation. It was also very awkward how he held the boxes under his arm like that... there were just soooo many places and opportunities for sleight-of-hand maneuvers that spoiled it for me. Yeah, sure, it was a complex trick, and for the most part well performed, but didn't fool me. Sorry.

The jugglers were great.. very entertaining without a lot of flash or BS... and I liked they didn't have a uniform-- just street clothes. Just a lot of fun.

The card trick kid -- I just want to know the science behind his tricks. Obviously not magic, but photo-sensitive materials. Very well done. I liked it. I thought the rubber gloves were an awkward addition. Not sure why he felt like he needed those.


----------



## Donbadabon

For the card kid, I was thinking the rubber gloves kept his body heat off the cards. If he touched them, maybe they would change colors at his fingerprint points?


----------



## cmontyburns

Hank said:


> I thought the draw box guy was sloppy. The VERY FIRST thing I noticed (without Tivo or rewinding) was that the first box he showed (red diamond) was the same as the second box he showed just upside down. Then I rewound and confirmed my observation. It was also very awkward how he held the boxes under his arm like that... there were just soooo many places and opportunities for sleight-of-hand maneuvers that spoiled it for me. Yeah, sure, it was a complex trick, and for the most part well performed, but didn't fool me. Sorry.


I noticed that first thing with the box, too. I'm fortunate in that, for the most part, I can just take in a trick the first time I see it more subjectively, and if it doesn't feel too familiar, if hand movements aren't obviously unnatural, if the patter is good, if there aren't obviously a million ways to do it, etc., I can enjoy it. I get a little more critical if I rewind and watch a second time more carefully. Despite that early bobble, this guy passed my "first watch" test.

That sort of thing was my issue with the card kid. Nobody was up close, gloves, equipment nobody could look at, etc. Magic is easier and easier the farther away you stand from anybody.


----------



## getbak

Donbadabon said:


> For the card kid, I was thinking the rubber gloves kept his body heat off the cards. If he touched them, maybe they would change colors at his fingerprint points?


Yeah, that was my thought for the gloves as well. Although, it may also have been misdirection to make us think that because I think that hardly any of the cards actually changed color (possibly none of them).

Most of his trick was done with good old sleight of hand with either bottom dealing or dealing seconds (or both). Most of the cards were colored on one side and white on the other and he just used old magic techniques to make it look like he was showing us both sides of all the cards.

At most, I think he may have had one card that actually reacted to the light. That would be the "slow" blue one that he changed from white to blue and back again. That one may actually have been sensitive to UV light. All the other color changes would have been produced by just shining different colors of light on the colored cards.


----------



## getbak

For the mentalists, I wonder if they revealed their techniques to Teller because they didn't want to worry about Penn spoiling the trick with his code-speak. In the past, it has been said that many acts go on the show with no intention of actually fooling Penn & Teller, they're just looking for exposure and nice video to add to their demo reels. That may have been the case here.

If their guarantee that they don't use electronic devices is true, I'm not sure how they did it. He didn't speak enough to be giving her the information through coded speech.

I wonder if they get around that on a technicality because it says that they don't use "hidden" electronic devices. If the white board and clipboard have transmitters to relay anything that has been written on them (technology that does exist -- and I believe has been used previously on the show) and the goggles have the receiver and a display that shows her that information, they wouldn't be using "hidden" devices because they're in plain view through the whole act.


----------



## TonyTheTiger

...but Teller was clearly seen wearing the goggles while Penn was talking!

On a cruise a few weeks ago, there was a magician called Levent, who has been on the show (routine using knotted and unknotted silks) and also Masters of Illusion eight times. I mentioned the fact that I thought the competition was secondary to a chance to perform on national TV and his response was 'Absolutely! When they went to the network to pitch the show and they would not have got a series if it was just another magic show, but as a contest, they jumped at it'.

So don't think the performers are actually trying to fool P&T, they really are there for exposure.


----------



## getbak

TonyTheTiger said:


> ...but Teller was clearly seen wearing the goggles while Penn was talking!


If that is how it was done, the goggles would either have a power button so she could turn it off before she handed it to Teller, or it would have an auto-reset timer that would put it into a sleep mode when it's not receiving any data. Either way, it would look like a blacked out goggle when Teller put it on.

This site has products similar to what I'm thinking of: Fabrice's products


----------



## nataylor

No way they could hide a display in those swim goggles.


----------



## Hank

Maybe she had an apple watch (not hidden)?


----------



## mattack

I admit it's AGT and not this show, but I really wish I knew how some of the "mentalist" tricks were done. (I'm finally catching up on AGT since finding out about the QuickMode speedup.. I go to 1.9x, and use that speed for all of the non-performance stuff, and watch the vast majority of performances at normal speed... once in a rare while, if I would have FFed instead, I just watch the rest of a performance in quickmode instead.. but that's been literally 10% or less for the past bunch of episodes I've watched over the past few weeks.)

There's the guy that's calling himself a modern Sherlock Holmes, but it's basically the same kind of mentalist tricks.

I will probably do the same with P&T after I get through AGT. (watch non performance sped up.. though maybe even performances at 1.5x)


----------



## pdhenry

This week's mentalists on AGT had issues. But I have no idea how they're doing it. I figure he's using code words to communicate the answers to her but some of it is too detailed for that.


----------



## Hank

Ok, for the FP&T mentalists, the number Teller wrote was:

7 2 1 8 4 5
6 6 6 8 2 1

And everything the guy spoke during that part was:

And faster
Wonderful, huh?
The first figure
Thanks yes
But read the remaining positions
If you break it into 6 sets of 2 digits, they would only have to memorize 100 words to encode into those phrases.

For Teller's friend's birthday "Oct 22, 1956" he says the following:

And tell her in your mind
Darling
please look at the zodiac sign
It's probably pretty easy to encode a date with slightly different phrases based on those. But then how did she get the name as "Tim" as that wasn't written down anywhere?

I also don't know how she got "kumquat".


----------



## getbak

If he was able to communicate that much information with the small amount that he actually spoke, it would be insanely impressive. What would be even more impressive is that because they're based in Austria, they do a lot of their shows in German, so they would have to have similar codes that worked in either language. That might be an indication that any code they use could be timing based rather than using code words.

For the birthday name thing, since they knew Teller was going to be their "volunteer", they could have researched people whose birthday he would be most-likely to pick and then got lucky that he picked one of those people. If he had chosen a birthdate she hadn't memorized, she could have skipped the step where she says the person's name and no one would have known any different.


----------



## xuxa

getbak said:


> For the birthday name thing, since they knew Teller was going to be their "volunteer", they could have researched people whose birthday he would be most-likely to pick and then got lucky that he picked one of those people. If he had chosen a birthdate she hadn't memorized, she could have skipped the step where she says the person's name and no one would have known any different.


Probably correct on that theory, the "Tim" in this case is Teller's good friend Tim Jension , who they made a movie about, Tim's Vermeer. Outside of immediate family he would be a good pick to memorize.


----------



## Einselen

mattack said:


> There's the guy that's calling himself a modern Sherlock Holmes, but it's basically the same kind of mentalist tricks.


Colin Cloud. He has toured with the Illusionists and is one of my favorite acts. Though I have see him a live, with the Illusionists, a few times I am starting to pick up on some of his methods but I would love to see just his one man show and/or show with one other magician/illusionist to see more of some of the types of acts he performed on AGT.


----------



## mattack

sorry more off topic stuff:
Sorry, btw, I guess you realize this but I'm actually watching the *2017* AGTs at the moment. These are the kinds of shows I record in SD so that I don't mind if I pile up a couple of seasons. Despite enjoying the show, the 'fluff' besides the actual performances was vaguely entertaining, so not enough to FF through it, but also made me feel like not watching it most of the time. Now being able to watch that part at 1.9x makes me able to go through/enjoy the shows a lot quicker!

(and I'll probably do something similar with the P&T shows after I finish up with other reality shows.)


----------



## Hank

Eegads this show has gone downhill. Now everyone gets a participation trophy?


----------



## TonyTheTiger

Literally just finished watching it. I'm pretty sure it was just for this special.


----------



## Hank

I know, but still. What next, a 'clip show'?


----------



## nataylor

There may not be a “next.” The show hasn’t been renewed yet (hasn’t been canceled yet, either).


----------



## getbak

It was renewed shortly after the last episode aired:



__ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10157824633077558



(Mike Close is a magic consultant on the show)


----------



## cmontyburns

There was a new episode? Come to think of it, I did see that the folder had floated to the top in my Now Playing list. Will have to watch it tomorrow.


----------



## getbak

It was a Christmas special. There was no attempted foolings on the episode and everyone got a special holiday FU trophy.

The fact that The CW buried this on the Friday of Thanksgiving weekend is probably a good indication of how well they expected it to do.


----------



## Steveknj

I don't watch this show all the time, but it's always a fun watch. I took this episode as one where "friends" came back to perform on the show for fun.


----------



## HarleyRandom

I'm not sure where to list this problem, and it's too late for me to go back and look for a correction, but the Christmas special was listed as Season 7 Episode 1, while Wikipedia says Season 6 Episode 14. 13 episodes is the standard number for series that don't have 22 episodes a season.


----------



## markb

HarleyRandom said:


> I'm not sure where to list this problem, and it's too late for me to go back and look for a correction, but the Christmas special was listed as Season 7 Episode 1, while Wikipedia says Season 6 Episode 14. 13 episodes is the standard number for series that don't have 22 episodes a season.


I think there are a lot of counter-examples to those season lengths. But anyway, the CW web site has it labeled as episode 614. If you look at the filenames they use for streaming on the same website, the episodes usually have a production(?) number, which usually matches the episode number, but for this episode, there was no production number in the filename. (It does have the episode number in the filename.)

So that's my over-analyzed answer to your not-a-question!


----------



## MikeMar

Did YoutubeTV pick this up for anyone? I don't see it in my list, last recorded was 2 months ago


----------



## rcobourn

If I search for Fool Us it shows up under "Extras".


----------



## HarleyRandom

markb said:


> I think there are a lot of counter-examples to those season lengths. But anyway, the CW web site has it labeled as episode 614. If you look at the filenames they use for streaming on the same website, the episodes usually have a production(?) number, which usually matches the episode number, but for this episode, there was no production number in the filename. (It does have the episode number in the filename.)
> 
> So that's my over-analyzed answer to your not-a-question!


And my TiVo is showing that this episode will be repeated and still calls it Season 7 Episode 1.


----------



## cmontyburns

So _is_ anybody watching?

I've watched very little linear TV during the pandemic, so it wasn't until a month ago or so that I switched the input over to the TiVo to see what it had for me, and discovered a new season of Fool Us was well in-progress. Obviously they shoot these very, very early.

I think we're through episode seven or eight now, and overall I find this to have been a really strong season so far, one of the best in the last few years. Almost every episode has at least one act that is really good, and more importantly, there have been relatively few duds in my book. Sure, they keep inviting back that annoying Australian woman who somehow has fooled them three times now, and she continues to be the worst act they've had on the show. But then we get an act like Lea Kyle, the French quick-change magician from last week's show. She was delightful.

That act in particular has been one of my favorites, not only because it was a good piece of stagecraft but because of how thoroughly it delighted Penn & Teller. The best acts are always the ones where they can't hide their respect for what the magician did. During Kyle's performance, the camera caught Penn literally mouth-agape a couple of times, and Teller looked beside himself happy. Just great. And of course Kyle herself was just charming. I will say that hers is an act that is not done any favors by slo-mo TiVo watching; some of her techniques were obvious live, and most of the rest become apparent on a closer re-watch. (That black enclosure sure did a lot of work). But then some, like the final flourish when she ends up in a full dress again, were spectacular -- leading to Penn with his hands up in the air and Teller exclaiming, "Marvelous!" And at live speed on first viewing, the whole thing was just a great deal of fun. No wonder they loved it.

Anyway. Anyone else enjoying the season?


----------



## Hank

I'm watching it. There are some good acts and some I just can't figure out. That pisses me off! Even with the "clues" Penn gives, some of the tricks are just so well done.


----------



## MikeMar

Hank said:


> I'm watching it. There are some good acts and some I just can't figure out. That pisses me off! Even with the "clues" Penn gives, some of the tricks are just so well done.


I miss whoever posted each act here because it's hard to remember all of them by the time I see this thread 

Always enjoy this show, always ups and downs. Still amazing some of them even when you KNOW how they are done like the women who did the quick change act. SO many changes!!!!!


----------



## HarleyRandom

I don't know how any of them are done and the code doesn't help.

I watched the show hoping to learn how tricks were done. That doesn't usually happen. If I just wanted to see tricks I could watch another CW show too.


----------



## NorthAlabama

i've really been enjoying this season, the acts have been great.


----------



## mattack

How did the guy do the tea trick (IIRC it was a rerun a few weeks ago)? Penn said something like "timing", which I figured out too -- obviously some kind of delayed chemical reaction to turn the water brown. But the host tasted it, and it really was tea.


----------



## cmontyburns

MikeMar said:


> I miss whoever posted each act here because it's hard to remember all of them by the time I see this thread


That was me.  I'm not going to try to recap the season thus far but now that I know others are still watching I might post my thoughts on each act going forward.


----------



## pdhenry

The podcast "Penn's Sunday School" has featured a discussion of the Fool Us episodes a week or two after they air. Not discussing the "how" per se but Penn's reaction to the stagecraft of the performances.


----------



## Steveknj

This is one of those shows that I watch when there's nothing on and I flip through channels old school.


----------



## rcobourn

pdhenry said:


> The podcast "Penn's Sunday School" has featured a discussion of the Fool Us episodes a week or two after they air. Not discussing the "how" per se but Penn's reaction to the stagecraft of the performances.


There is also a podcast by Matt Donnelly called Abracababble. It has lots of behind the scenes info.


----------



## cmontyburns

rcobourn said:


> There is also a podcast by Matt Donnelly called Abracababble. It has lots of behind the scenes info.


This one looks to be paid only?


----------



## rcobourn

cmontyburns said:


> This one looks to be paid only?


Yes, through Patreon.


----------



## mattack

Steveknj said:


> This is one of those shows that I watch when there's nothing on and I flip through channels old school.


I've been recording it for a while, and realize I have a couple of seasons downloaded in SD.. then when we ran out of new shows earlier than usual, I started re-recording episodes in HD when avail.. and watching at 1.7x (sometimes normal speed for the trick itself)...

I just wonder if they came up with the joke for the trophy (F U) first, then thought of a name that would fit that.


----------



## Hank

mattack said:


> I just wonder if they came up with the joke for the trophy (F U) first, then thought of a name that would fit that.


Yes I firmly believe this!


----------



## cmontyburns

MikeMar said:


> Still amazing some of them even when you KNOW how they are done like the women who did the quick change act. SO many changes!!!!!


As I posted above, I loved that act. A lot of if was fairly obvious but I don't think it mattered. I mean, obviously she was wearing everything to start with -- just look how bulky her outfit was at the beginning, and how everything got skimpier -- but I have no idea how, at the end, she went from the halter top, bikini bottom and half skirt to the full gown. Or how, earlier than that, she went from bare legs to boots. The black cloth enclosure did a lot of work, as I said. In one of her best moves, where the green dress flew off the rack and onto her, you could see, if you watched carefully, that it actually went behind her into the enclosure, and her other dress peeled off front to back and went into the enclosure as well, revealing a matching green dress underneath. I assume she had someone inside there pulling things off her since almost every change happened with her stationed right in front of the curtain. They could cue the whole thing to music. Still, as I said, that last change, which was away from the black curtain, is a mystery to me. And there's a lot we don't see in the edited version -- that thing was gone when P&T took the stage to congratulate her, so if someone were in it, how would they have gotten on and off-stage? Really great act, though.


----------



## getbak

cmontyburns said:


> I've watched very little linear TV during the pandemic, so it wasn't until a month ago or so that I switched the input over to the TiVo to see what it had for me, and discovered a new season of Fool Us was well in-progress. Obviously they shoot these very, very early.


They got very lucky with this season. They typically shoot the new season's acts over a couple of weeks in late-February/early-March. They finished taping the final set of performances for this year's shows the day before Las Vegas went into lockdown.


----------



## markb

I just watched S07E07, and I noticed when Jaana Felicitas did her floating chair performance, there was an interesting setup on the right side of the stage ("stage left"). I didn't get a look at other side of the stage. It seemed like quite a giveaway to the studio audience and P&T. I presume it was sort of an artificial stage wing, since the set elements, although inside a real theater, mostly block the actual stage wings.


----------



## boywaja

I loved Boris Wild's act 'deep fake penn'

here's a Boris Wild interview with Jason Parker





jason does reaction videos to P&T which are well worth watching. Rarely a magician will do a reaction video to his reaction video. This is the second time Jason has had a straight up interview with a magician. Its worth the hour in my opinion.


----------



## mattack

On I think two eps this season, we've seen Penn I think twice and Teller I think once have a funny "mouth agape" look while watching the trick. Unfortunately, on at least one of them, they DID know how it was done.. (On I think Penn's cases, the magician fooled them.)


----------



## markb

mattack said:


> On I think two eps this season, we've seen Penn I think twice and Teller I think once have a funny "mouth agape" look while watching the trick. Unfortunately, on at least one of them, they DID know how it was done.. (On I think Penn's cases, the magician fooled them.)


That's perhaps acting and editing. They certainly asked the audience to act reactions when I attended a Fool Us taping last year. Maybe they do the same with P&T. (I've only been to two TV tapings in my life. One was basically live-to-tape, and then there was this one, which was at completely the opposite end of the spectrum.)


----------



## mattack

Well, I admit I've only been watching fairly regularly for the past several months (I've been recording it all along -- I have a ton of SD recordings downloaded off my Tivo -- and saw a few eps at a friend's house I think).. But I hadn't seen them do this before, and it seemed genuine.


----------



## KDeFlane

fyi, season finale airs next week.


----------



## getbak

Also, they recorded a new season a few weeks ago, so it will likely return in the New Year, earlier than usual.


----------



## cmontyburns

getbak said:


> Also, they recorded a new season a few weeks ago, so it will likely return in the New Year, earlier than usual.


Wow, how did they do that? No/limited audience?


----------



## NorthAlabama

cmontyburns said:


> Wow, how did they do that? No/limited audience?


didn't vegas reopen because, hoax?


----------



## cmontyburns

But Penn (of all people) never would go along with that.


----------



## rcobourn

cmontyburns said:


> Wow, how did they do that? No/limited audience?


They did most of the acts remotely. Acts done in person were requested to quarantine and test. Everybody on the production staff quarantined and entered the bubble after testing. They reserved two floors in the Rio to house the production staff. Frequent testing during the accelerated production. Penn and Teller worked together on their bits in a rented home before production, in their own bubble. There was one person during production that developed symptoms and left, but they ended up testing negative. Basically, they did everything they could, and they got lucky too.


----------



## rcobourn

cmontyburns said:


> Wow, how did they do that? No/limited audience?


No audience. Volunteers for bits were basically family members of production staff, I think.


----------



## getbak

They set up a big video wall behind Penn & Teller during the shoot, presumably to cover up the fact that the audience was (near) empty.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1316944664314978305

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1319171452638162949


----------



## pdhenry

And as you can see, Penn is down to (at last report) 211 pounds.


----------



## LoadStar

So are they going to do the "Masked Singer" route and fake an audience? That seems to be the only reason I can think why they'd need a chroma key backdrop behind P&T... they'd need that if they were going to digitally insert a fake audience.


----------



## markb

LoadStar said:


> So are they going to do the "Masked Singer" route and fake an audience? That seems to be the only reason I can think why they'd need a chroma key backdrop behind P&T... they'd need that if they were going to digitally insert a fake audience.


It could just be a test pattern.


----------



## HarleyRandom

The last episode I saw had Penn mentioning that Teller was the smart one. But of course Penn always treats him like the moron of the act.


----------



## Hank

Did anyone else catch the lifts on Tellers shoes?


----------



## vertigo235

markb said:


> It could just be a test pattern.


After seeing the show now, I think they have the green screen on for the P&T shots so they can digitally add the "episode" audience in as I'm pretty sure they cut the different acts together later, kind of like how they wear the same outfit for the whole season as well.


----------



## pdhenry

I noticed that Alyson is wearing a different dress this season...


----------



## getbak

pdhenry said:


> I noticed that Alyson is wearing a different dress this season...


She wears a different outfit each season, she just wears it all season long.


----------



## pdhenry

I'm aware of the same dress (and the rationale for that), I just thought that they were always red. This was the first blue dress I recall.


----------



## Hank

I think I figured out one way the ballon-in-a-balloon trick could be done, and I'm surprised that P&T didn't think of this.

When he uses the inflator to inflate the inner black ballon, it releases a small amount of some sort of mild acid inside the black ballon. He knows the timing of the acid very well, and once he lets it settle on the bottom, he knows how much time it will take to pop the inner ballon. And when it pops, there's really no evidence left. Of course, if there is enough acid left over, it could pop the outer balloon after the trick is done.


----------



## Donbadabon

The ballet dancer - They spliced together several shots for her performance. You can see the colored cards she drops end up in different places as the camera angle changed. I would've thought a video submission had to be a single continuous shot.


----------



## cmontyburns

I take it from these posts a new season has started. Cool! I hadn't looked as I expected it to be a summertime thing again.


----------



## Savafan1

Hank said:


> I think I figured out one way the ballon-in-a-balloon trick could be done, and I'm surprised that P&T didn't think of this.
> 
> When he uses the inflator to inflate the inner black ballon, it releases a small amount of some sort of mild acid inside the black ballon. He knows the timing of the acid very well, and once he lets it settle on the bottom, he knows how much time it will take to pop the inner ballon. And when it pops, there's really no evidence left. Of course, if there is enough acid left over, it could pop the outer balloon after the trick is done.


I think there are just several ways it could be done, and I don't think they really wanted to get it right for him.



Spoiler



Most likely it was done with a laser, the black balloon will absorb the energy and pop. You can find examples using google showing this, and also the same thing using a magnifying glass.


----------



## getbak

pdhenry said:


> I'm aware of the same dress (and the rationale for that), I just thought that they were always red. This was the first blue dress I recall.


Oddly enough, she hasn't actually worn a red dress on the show (except for a red Santa-style dress for the Christmas special they did). She has worn a dark blue dress in 2 of the seasons, and pantsuits in the other 4 seasons -- one black with a red jacket, one red with a black jacket, an all red suit, and now an all blue suit.



Donbadabon said:


> The ballet dancer - They spliced together several shots for her performance. You can see the colored cards she drops end up in different places as the camera angle changed. I would've thought a video submission had to be a single continuous shot.


It seems that as long as the trick itself doesn't rely on camera tricks, they're able to shoot it a few times from multiple angles and edit them together for the best look. I thought it was really obvious with the woman performing in front of the canals in Amsterdam last week. You'd see a boat come into the canal from one angle, but when they cut to a different angle, that boat was gone.



cmontyburns said:


> I take it from these posts a new season has started. Cool! I hadn't looked as I expected it to be a summertime thing again.


Yes, but it's airing on Friday night now instead of Monday.


----------



## Hank

Savafan1 said:


> I think there are just several ways it could be done, and I don't think they really wanted to get it right for him.


Oh, so sort of a professional courtesy because they've known him since their early Philly days. Respect.



Savafan1 said:


> Most likely it was done with a laser, the black balloon will absorb the energy and pop. You can find examples using google showing this, and also the same thing using a magnifying glass.


Yes, lasers can easily pop black balloons, but not once the beam passes through the semi-transparent ballon. The beam divergence would just be too great to be powerful enough to still pop the black balloon. And anything powerful enough (i.e. quick enough pulse) to do that through the transparent balloon would not be legal to operate in the U.S. without a variance from the FDA/CDRH. And certainly not in a handheld/concealed manner and without laser protective eyewear for everyone nearby. Your everyday 5mw laser pointer would not be powerful enough to do this.

Disclaimer: I have several multi-watt lasers in my basement and I'm also a Laser Safety Officer (LSO) by the International Laser Display Association (ILDA).


----------



## cmontyburns

Just checked the TiVo and didn’t realize I was already three episodes behind. Awesome.


----------



## cmontyburns

I just watched the first episode. Did anyone else get forced into all the same selections by the video mentalist as Penn, Teller, and Allyson?


----------



## rcobourn

cmontyburns said:


> I just watched the first episode. Did anyone else get forced into all the same selections by the video mentalist as Penn, Teller, and Allyson?


Not even close.


----------



## markb

getbak said:


> It seems that as long as the trick itself doesn't rely on camera tricks, they're able to shoot it a few times from multiple angles and edit them together for the best look. I thought it was really obvious with the woman performing in front of the canals in Amsterdam last week. You'd see a boat come into the canal from one angle, but when they cut to a different angle, that boat was gone.


I can tell you when I was in the studio audience, they didn't do any retakes on the performances. (They did edit some stuff out, though) But without a studio audience, I suppose that could have changed.


----------



## rcobourn

getbak said:


> It seems that as long as the trick itself doesn't rely on camera tricks, they're able to shoot it a few times from multiple angles and edit them together for the best look. I thought it was really obvious with the woman performing in front of the canals in Amsterdam last week. You'd see a boat come into the canal from one angle, but when they cut to a different angle, that boat was gone.


As a bonus trick, she casually vanishes a boat, and you are not impressed!


----------



## getbak

markb said:


> I can tell you when I was in the studio audience, they didn't do any retakes on the performances. (They did edit some stuff out, though) But without a studio audience, I suppose that could have changed.


Yeah, I was referring specifically to the on-location performances that they're running this year.

With the performers who are in the theatre, I'd expect they still do them in the way you've described because they have complete control of the theatre and can shoot with multiple cameras from a variety of angles simultaneously. Although, for the broadcasts, they have been known to edit in footage from the dress rehearsals for some acts as needed.

For the remote performers, it would be easier (and cheaper) to shoot with one camera and have the magician perform their act multiple times as they move the camera between each performance to get the needed angles.


----------



## cmontyburns

markb said:


> I can tell you when I was in the studio audience, they didn't do any retakes on the performances. (They did edit some stuff out, though) But without a studio audience, I suppose that could have changed.


I would be fascinated to see the live version. Watching on TV, it's easy to see where edits have been done and things re-staged; for example, the detritus of the act has often been cleared away when Allison starts her interview, even though it seems like she just walks right over when the trick is done to start talking.

A specific example: having just watched the second episode, I noticed that the straightjacket guy's act ended with pillows featuring Penn and Teller's faces on the couch. When Allison walked over to interview him, those pillows were gone, and there was one there featuring her face instead.


----------



## HarleyRandom

cmontyburns said:


> I would be fascinated to see the live version. Watching on TV, it's easy to see where edits have been done and things re-staged; for example, the detritus of the act has often been cleared away when Allison starts her interview, even though it seems like she just walks right over when the trick is done to start talking.


And "the boys" are always magically ready to talk when she's through. Well, Penn is.

I'm curious how a microphone would work that would pick up their voices when they have to talk so softly Allyson and the audience can't hear them, but the "judge" can. The judge being the one who knows how the trick is done and is the final word on whether Penn & Teller were fooled.

I haven't seen an episode lately. Give me time. They're on the Roamio waiting.


----------



## knuckles

HarleyRandom said:


> And "the boys" are always magically ready to talk when she's through. Well, Penn is.
> 
> I'm curious how a microphone would work that would pick up their voices when they have to talk so softly Allyson and the audience can't hear them, but the "judge" can. The judge being the one who knows how the trick is done and is the final word on whether Penn & Teller were fooled.
> 
> I haven't seen an episode lately. Give me time. They're on the Roamio waiting.


The chat with Allyson is timed and clipped. Penn and Teller can be heard by the judges and the judges talk to them. Penn has talked about this on his podcast often. He likes it when the judges tell them they aren't on the right track or are wrong. They are all long time friends.

I love how Penn talks about each act. P&T love what they do and enjoy the program so much and it shows.


----------



## Hank

While I knew exactly how the liquid nitrogen act was going to end, and the fact that Teller's fake hand was SO INCREDIBLY FAKE LOOKING (like they didn't even try to make it look real???).... the entire bit was pretty entertaining.


----------



## Hank

knuckles said:


> I love how Penn talks about each act.


Just once I'd like to see Penn say "_You know what, this act sucked. It wasn't funny. Another lame sleight of hand card trick everyone has seen a thousand times. But the real magic here is how did you get so bad at this... so for that, I guess you fooled us!_"


----------



## Turtleboy

Hank said:


> Just once I'd like to see Penn say "_You know what, this act sucked. It wasn't funny. Another lame sleight of hand card trick everyone has seen a thousand times. But the real magic here is how did you get so bad at this... so for that, I guess you fooled us!_"


I know you're joking, but Penn has said that he doesn't want to do that kind of show. It will never be like the other talent shows where the judges tell people that they suck. The point of the show isn't really to fool P&T, it's to give these magicians exposure.


----------



## Hank

Yes, I'm joking and I know they like doing this show for ultimately other reasons. That's fine.

But personally, I'm getting a little worn out at the "here, pick a card. Now sign it and put it back into the deck" tricks. 

There was one "magician" on the most recent episode whose skill was sub-sub-par. I could see every force, lift, steal, and stash he was doing. I'm not saying I could do it any better, it's just that when Penn starts to praise his act, I throw up a little in my mouth.  

Conversely, there is at least one act per episode I have no freaking clue how the trick(s) were done.


----------



## HarleyRandom

knuckles said:


> The chat with Allyson is timed and clipped.


Of course it is, but like magic, it ends right when it has to.


knuckles said:


> Penn and Teller can be heard by the judges and the judges talk to them.


Again, I'm asking about the technology. I'm picturing some technology like they convinced Barney Fife he was using when they wanted him to sing so softly no one could hear him, and then he looked so amazed when he heard Glen Cripe's booming voice.


knuckles said:


> Penn has talked about this on his podcast often. He likes it when the judges tell them they aren't on the right track or are wrong. They are all long time friends.


He did explain about what the judges do on a few occasions but I never knew the conversations were two-way. In fact, "the" judge has to talk in Allyson's ear in some cases.


knuckles said:


> I love how Penn talks about each act. P&T love what they do and enjoy the program so much and it shows.


Yes they do.


----------



## HarleyRandom

Turtleboy said:


> I know you're joking, but Penn has said that he doesn't want to do that kind of show. It will never be like the other talent shows where the judges tell people that they suck. The point of the show isn't really to fool P&T, it's to give these magicians exposure.


It is pretty amazing that everyone is so good.

I never watched "American Idol" but if I did it would be for Simon's comments. And I've had the ability to record and fast-forward the whole time that show has been on the air.


----------



## Hank

HarleyRandom said:


> Again, I'm asking about the technology. I


No special technology, just regular microphones. The mics on Alison and the guest on stage can't pick up P&T talking to each other or to the judges. The control room controls what mics get cut in to the final mix you and everyone else hears. They just don't include P&T's mics when they're talking to each other.


----------



## HarleyRandom

Hank said:


> No special technology, just regular microphones. The mics on Alison and the guest on stage can't pick up P&T talking to each other or to the judges. The control room controls what mics get cut in to the final mix you and everyone else hears. They just don't include P&T's mics when they're talking to each other.


But Barney was told not to sing the way he normally does. It amazes me that they could talk loud enough to be heard by the judges and not be heard by anyone else.


----------



## Hank

HarleyRandom said:


> But Barney was told not to sing the way he normally does. It amazes me that they could talk loud enough to be heard by the judges and not be heard by anyone else.


They just need to be not heard by the microphones. If P&T are just talking to each other, I doubt Alison+Guest could hear everything they're saying. 
Also, does it matter if they hear P&T deliberating about the act's own performance?

What matters is that the audience doesn't hear P&T "talking shop" with the specific details of the act. The guest already knows how he did it, and if P&T got it right, no big deal. If they got it wrong, the guest would know for sure they didn't know how it was done without Penn "talking in code" which he only really does for the audience.


----------



## mattack

I think one of the guys on a recent episode (within the last half dozen I think) did his act on America's Got Talent..

I have NO IDEA how it works -- the cards on different sides of the little 'strip' on the table being different colors, and he moves cards under the strip and they change colors.. he moves the strip around and the card underneath changes colors....

and the last one of the last bits is when the card is 'chopped' exactly where he stops moving the strip over the card.


----------



## markb

mattack said:


> I think one of the guys on a recent episode (within the last half dozen I think) did his act on America's Got Talent..
> 
> I have NO IDEA how it works -- the cards on different sides of the little 'strip' on the table being different colors, and he moves cards under the strip and they change colors.. he moves the strip around and the card underneath changes colors....
> 
> and the last one of the last bits is when the card is 'chopped' exactly where he stops moving the strip over the card.


That's Eric Chien, and you're right, he was on America's Got Talent.

On that last part, with the chopped card, I think the way he carefully projects a shadow with his hand is a clue.

My theory:


Spoiler



The ribbon is dragging piece of velvet around, which covers part of the card. He projects a shadow with his hand so we don't see the texture move against the background. When it's not moving, it's not apparent. The lighting appears to be setup intentionally so he casts a very dark shadow on the table.


----------



## mattack

but the color changing cards? Even it's a special light and special ink on the cards, that doesn't seem to cover all situations he shows.


----------



## markb

mattack said:


> but the color changing cards? Even it's a special light and special ink on the cards, that doesn't seem to cover all situations he shows.


I'm thinking the part where the color changes as he drags the ribbon across the card must be similar to the chopped card:



Spoiler



Instead of a piece of velvet being moved with ribbon, it's a red filter.



But there are obviously a lot of other effects going on in that routine. I haven't decoded it all, and what the secrets that I think I have decoded are speculation.


----------



## markb

markb said:


> That's Eric Chien, and you're right, he was on America's Got Talent.
> 
> On that last part, with the chopped card, I think the way he carefully projects a shadow with his hand is a clue.
> 
> My theory:
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> The ribbon is dragging piece of velvet around, which covers part of the card. He projects a shadow with his hand so we don't see the texture move against the background. When it's not moving, it's not apparent. The lighting appears to be setup intentionally so he casts a very dark shadow on the table.


Actually, I think I've got to take some of that back. I watched it again, and he lifts up the cut card, so there's definitely a gimmicked card, involved, too! Not quite sure how that gimmick works.


----------



## Hank

That Niagra Fools trick was the dumbest trick I've ever seen on FU.

Edit: "Hocus Pocus" was almost equally as lame. LAME!


----------



## Donbadabon

Yes! That Niagra Falls trick was awful. Besides all the camera cuts where at any point he could've just stepped out, as he was getting in the camera panned so we couldn't see that other end, which was blocked by an assistant. I figured right then he was just going all the way through.

Hocus Pocus, agree too that it was lame. Clearly the paper was filled out back stage, brought out of the back of the chair, and when he stepped down he pulled it from the chair. You could even see a glimpse of the white along the edges of his envelope as he held the paper behind it.


----------



## Hank

Exactly on both points. Niagra falls was just an insult to magicians. So many freaking outs. At least Chris Angel tries to do complete, uncut takes with multiple cameras (although you really don't know for sure) --- at least he TRIES to make it believable there are no outs. Also, with NF, there was absolutely NO confirmation he was in the barrel after they closed it, like his tied hands through the bung hole. I mean, even THAT they could have faked with a robotic hand. Nope.

And Hocus Pocus you could see him lift the mad-lib from the back of the chair without Tivo/replay.


----------



## windracer

Agree on both points. It made no sense to have the assistant take the chair away other than making it completely obvious that is where the completed mad lib was coming from. And yeah, I could have performed that Niagra Falls trick myself!  

The plate spinning trick was cute, but it was also pretty easy to figure out that no matter what number you picked, the logic would always end up on #1.


----------



## HarleyRandom

As I finally get around to watching, I'm up to the episode where Penn and Teller use liquid nitrogen. It's so funny to see Penn constantly telling Teller he should wear gloves because what he is doing is dangerous. I've seen enough evidence when they talk about how tricks they were shown were done that Teller is actually smarter than Penn, and yet in performances Penn often gives the impression that Teller is a moron.

When they put the ball in liquid nitrogen it reminded me of what they showed us in junior high school. It's weird I would think of that as something I had already seen. It has been so many years, in fact, that Penn and Teller hadn't even met.


----------



## HarleyRandom

vertigo235 said:


> After seeing the show now, I think they have the green screen on for the P&T shots so they can digitally add the "episode" audience in as I'm pretty sure they cut the different acts together later, kind of like how they wear the same outfit for the whole season as well.


The audience is appearing via some type of Zoom software. They look weird when no one moves but you would think they'd always be shown reacting or something.


----------



## mattack

HarleyRandom said:


> As I finally get around to watching, I'm up to the episode where Penn and Teller use liquid nitrogen. It's so funny to see Penn constantly telling Teller he should wear gloves because what he is doing is dangerous. I've seen enough evidence when they talk about how tricks they were shown were done that Teller is actually smarter than Penn, and yet in performances Penn often gives the impression that Teller is a moron.
> 
> When they put the ball in liquid nitrogen it reminded me of what they showed us in junior high school. It's weird I would think of that as something I had already seen. It has been so many years, in fact, that Penn and Teller hadn't even met.


How old are you? Haven't they known each other for 40+ years?

Edit: Wikipedia says they met August 19, 1975.


----------



## HarleyRandom

mattack said:


> How old are you? Haven't they known each other for 40+ years?
> 
> Edit: Wikipedia says they met August 19, 1975.


In that case, I do not remember when the precise date we were shown how liquid oxygen or liquid nitrogen works, so I can't really say which happened first.


----------



## HarleyRandom

I'm not going to search 53 pages to see if this has been said, but I have realized that if Penn explains exactly how the trick is done (which is how I hoped the show would be done because I want to know how) he's wrong and they fooled him and Teller. It's only when he speaks in code so as not to give the secret away to those who don't want to know it that he knows.


----------



## Turtleboy

Penn already knows if they’ve been fooled or not. They tell the producers their guess. The producers tell them if they are right or wrong. The rest is show biz.


----------



## cmontyburns

I don’t think they tell the judge independent of the contestant. The judge hears their guess at the same time as the magician does.


----------



## getbak

cmontyburns said:


> I don't think they tell the judge independent of the contestant. The judge hears their guess at the same time as the magician does.


No, the judge hears everything Penn & Teller say to each other when they're discussing the act. I believe they also have ear pieces so the judge can talk to them if needed. I don't think the judge always tells them if they're right or wrong, but sometimes will tell them if they're way off so they can just go to the reveal and get it over with.

During the last season, there were a few times that there was some confusion and Alyson just said, "The judges have heard everything Penn & Teller have said, so I'm going to ask the judges if you fooled them."

When Penn does a detailed explanation of the wrong answer, I think he does that so the audience can understand how impressive the real trick actually was and so they don't just assume the "easier" wrong answer is actually correct.


----------



## bobfrank

mattack said:


> How old are you? Haven't they known each other for 40+ years?
> 
> Edit: Wikipedia says they met August 19, 1975.


I was a chemistry major when I started college. I was chosen to do a demonstration using liquid nitrogen on flowers, rubber balls, etc. for Founder's Day where the general public was invited to tour the campus. That was in 1964.


----------



## cmontyburns

getbak said:


> No, the judge hears everything Penn & Teller say to each other when they're discussing the act. I believe they also have ear pieces so the judge can talk to them if needed. I don't think the judge always tells them if they're right or wrong, but sometimes will tell them if they're way off so they can just go to the reveal and get it over with.
> 
> During the last season, there were a few times that there was some confusion and Alyson just said, "The judges have heard everything Penn & Teller have said, so I'm going to ask the judges if you fooled them."
> 
> When Penn does a detailed explanation of the wrong answer, I think he does that so the audience can understand how impressive the real trick actually was and so they don't just assume the "easier" wrong answer is actually correct.


Well yes, I know the judges hear, but I doubt P & T are told whether they are right or wrong before addressing the magician.


----------



## Turtleboy

cmontyburns said:


> Well yes, I know the judges hear, but I doubt P & T are told whether they are right or wrong before addressing the magician.


They do. Sorry to spoil the TV magic. As the prior poster said, you can tell by the way that they guess that they already know. It's just that sometimes the magician is a jerk about it and doesn't admit that they lost when they did.


----------



## cmontyburns

I still don’t think that’s right. What’s the point of Penn feigning surprise when he guesses and is wrong? Because that does happen.


----------



## Turtleboy

I could be wrong.


----------



## Hank

I could see it both ways, but I don't think P&T are told over the earpiece if they're right or wrong before speaking. 
I think the judge(s) listen in on their convo to decide if they got the trick or not, but only speak out if there's a dispute from the magician.


----------



## HarleyRandom

Hank said:


> I could see it both ways, but I don't think P&T are told over the earpiece if they're right or wrong before speaking.
> I think the judge(s) listen in on their convo to decide if they got the trick or not, but only speak out if there's a dispute from the magician.


I think this happens most often if the person doesn't speak English well and Penn can't speak in code and be understood.

The last episode I watched had a man in Germany show that it was an ordinary milk carton, and Penn STILL said he was a liar and he KNOWS those separate compartments were somehow hidden before he showed an "ordinary" carton. He said he was not. Penn finally had to admit, "You fooled us!"


----------



## HarleyRandom

Last night I saw the most disgusting trick ever performed on this show. And Teller actually touched the $50 bill!

Teller is the brains, Penn said, but he was fooled. Penn didn't try to do code because the man didn't speak English that well, but he figured it out. Or thought he did. Alyson was told by the judges he was right. That's a second trick.

Another change for the pandemic. Teller can't talk anyway because he has to explain how the trick was done. Instead of whispering in the man's ear, he uses a cell phone. How he's able to be heard without the audience hearing I don't understand. That's a third trick.


----------



## HarleyRandom

Okay, are there judges or is there a judge? The man wasn't sure last night so THE judge (and I can't remember his name now) had to talk to Alyson. And he did not fool them.

But if a judge knows whether they know, how did the man go months believing he hadn't fooled them, and then get a call saying he had and to come collect his trophy? I had forgotten this even happened. Or maybe I never saw the episode. I've still got bunch on my Bolt.


----------



## mattack

"last night" is reruns, right???


----------



## pdhenry

mattack said:


> "last night" is reruns, right???


Harley has a TiVo backlog to rival the IRS sending out refunds this year.


----------



## HarleyRandom

pdhenry said:


> Harley has a TiVo backlog to rival the IRS sending out refunds this year.


I have an entire Roamio and an entire Bolt full of unwatched shows.


----------



## mattack

pdhenry said:


> Harley has a TiVo backlog to rival the IRS sending out refunds this year.


Well, I have TONS of old shows too.. but I don't say "last night" unless I'm referring to something that AIRED last night..

I will refer to the ep name/number/season etc..


----------



## mattack

HarleyRandom said:


> I have an entire Roamio and an entire Bolt full of unwatched shows.


oh and heck, I think I only started WATCHING this show either this season or last.. I have the previous seasons offloaded in SD.. (and despite usually not watching reruns, when a reality/competition/game show type show reruns that I have offloaded, I will just re-record the HD rerun and watch it that way)..

I only started watching this show after I knew about the backdoor code to way speed up QuickPlay. With this show, I think I usually watch it fully at 1.7x. (for some other shows, like AGT or American Idol, I watch the 'performance' part at normal speed, and the rest at either 1.7 or 1.9x)


----------



## HarleyRandom

mattack said:


> oh and heck, I think I only started WATCHING this show either this season or last.. I have the previous seasons offloaded in SD.. (and despite usually not watching reruns, when a reality/competition/game show type show reruns that I have offloaded, I will just re-record the HD rerun and watch it that way)..
> 
> I only started watching this show after I knew about the backdoor code to way speed up QuickPlay. With this show, I think I usually watch it fully at 1.7x. (for some other shows, like AGT or American Idol, I watch the 'performance' part at normal speed, and the rest at either 1.7 or 1.9x)


Does Penn sound like a Munchkin? I picture Teller sounding that way. However, He did talk in one episode. It was revealed at the end of the trick that he was in disguise, which meant he was allowed to talk. But I don't remember what he sounded like.

One of the ways I was able to watch an illegal video of a CTV show I liked was that someone had produced a copy where they talked like Munchkins, and supposedly that got around the copyright rules.


----------



## Hank

Teller had a speaking role on Big Bang Theory as Amy's father, I think.


----------



## kdmorse

HarleyRandom said:


> I picture Teller sounding that way.


Teller does have a perfectly normal speaking voice. Which is perfectly normal.

The weird part is, why is it that when we look at him, our brain expects a not-normal voice? Absent audio, why do our brains look at his face and expect a high pitched voice?


----------



## mattack

because he's pretty small, at least especially compared to Penn


----------



## markb

Not hard to find examples of Teller talking:


----------



## mattack

I'm pretty sure I saw a history of magic show (not the one he & penn did) on A&E or History where he talked.. IIRC it was him in a chair in a "library in old mansion" type of look/set...


----------



## HarleyRandom

markb said:


> Not hard to find examples of Teller talking:


Amazing. In the episode I watched last night Penn said Teller said the same thing Teller said in that video.

I saw Teller's lips move when the caterpillar spoke. It looked and sounded like Alyson at the end but it was Penn's daughter.


----------



## nataylor

FYI, season 8 started on Friday.


----------



## justen_m

nataylor said:


> FYI, season 8 started on Friday.


It was pretty good. I liked that there were live acts. I got tired of all the video acts. There were two video acts last night, but they were awesome, from performers in Spain and Australia. Professionally produced videos. I can understand how international travel is still tough, but all the US-based acts were actually in the P&T theater. Curious to see if that continues with the next episode.


----------



## LoadStar

justen_m said:


> It was pretty good. I liked that there were live acts. I got tired of all the video acts. There were two video acts last night, but they were awesome, from performers in Spain and Australia. Professionally produced videos. I can understand how international travel is still tough, but all the US-based acts were actually in the P&T theater. Curious to see if that continues with the next episode.


Were these episodes produced at the same time as the previous "season", perhaps, meaning they were produced under heavy COVID precautions?


----------



## justen_m

LoadStar said:


> Were these episodes produced at the same time as the previous "season", perhaps, meaning they were produced under heavy COVID precautions?


Don't know. Piff the Magic Dragon was on stage in front of P&T, but he lives and performs in Vegas. P&T were on stage with the dice guy, who had been on P&T four times before, and fooled them twice. He's American, but don't remember from where. The videos from Spain and Australia were from performers that both fooled P&T three times before. I don't remember if there were only four acts? They were all longer than the usual ones. Plus the act from P&T at the end, but that was pretty short.


----------



## Donbadabon

The P&T act at the end was sloppier than ever. The fake Teller walked out from behind the box about 2 seconds too early and made it obvious Teller was going to go into the box from behind. They called that one in.


----------



## mattack

I totally had forgotten that Piff was on this show BEFORE AGT. I always think of him as an AGT guy. (Note I started watching this show at a friend's house.. so saw presumably a bunch of S1.. and have recorded it ever since but have most episodes downloaded off my Tivo and some still on my Tivo.. in SD.. then like a year or so ago I finally started recording MOST of my prime time stuff in HD -- actually it might have been post when I found out about the QuickPlay backdoor to make it even faster.. so like most non-scripted shows, I watch this one sped up.. though I think sometimes the actual act itself partially at normal speed, then the banter at 1.7x)

But the one guy on video on the runway -- the cage or whatever the people were in was completely covered..

So why couldn't they have gone STRAIGHT BACK FROM THE CAMERA? That seemed like the obvious answer.


----------



## JonAult

mattack said:


> So why couldn't they have gone STRAIGHT BACK FROM THE CAMERA? That seemed like the obvious answer.


That was my first thought, too - after all, those planes were back there for a reason, right? But it seemed to me when he was walking around behind the platform that you could see his shadow on the runway, and I didn't see any shadows back there when the curtain was closed. Also, I don't think P&T would have reacted the way they did if that were the explanation.


----------



## Savafan1

mattack said:


> I totally had forgotten that Piff was on this show BEFORE AGT. I always think of him as an AGT guy.


He was on season 1, which was broadcast on iTV. I'm not sure if it was ever broadcast in the US.


----------



## nataylor

Savafan1 said:


> He was on season 1, which was broadcast on iTV. I'm not sure if it was ever broadcast in the US.


Yup, seasons 1 and 2 aired on the CW.


----------



## Hank

That Piff routine was so bad, it's not even funny. It's the exact same trick done dozens of times already on FU and millions of times by every two-bit, dime-store magician. What a freaking waste of time. And he's not funny nor entertaining to make up for it. The dice hat trick was entertaining, but you could see every one of his moves with the big dice. The first act on the runway was good, not sure how he did it. But I'm really annoyed wth the Piff act - I don't know why anyone sees him entertaining at all. He's just annoying. 

Oh, and yeah, the P&T trick was super-lame also. It's like they phoned it in or couldn't come up with anything better.


----------



## Savafan1

JonAult said:


> That was my first thought, too - after all, those planes were back there for a reason, right? But it seemed to me when he was walking around behind the platform that you could see his shadow on the runway, and I didn't see any shadows back there when the curtain was closed. Also, I don't think P&T would have reacted the way they did if that were the explanation.


Watching it again, the shadows change as soon as the curtain drops. At first it looks like the main light is coming from the side of the runway, but when the curtain drops it looks like the light is from above. That would make it harder to see the shadows if they just ran out the back.

The best guess I've seen is that the observers behind the cage are blind, so they didn't see anything. I think it would fit the reaction that Penn and Teller had.


----------



## Hank

I did notice the bright sunny day changed to overcast just as the trick began. Hmmmm....


----------



## windracer

On Penn's Sunday School (podcast) Penn talked about the gorilla cage trick being a tribute to the old carnival gorilla girl freak show ... and they did it mainly to scare Allison. 

I wondered about the sudden light change with the runway trick as well. The shadows looked off.


----------



## cmontyburns

Hank said:


> That Piff routine was so bad, it's not even funny. It's the exact same trick done dozens of times already on FU and millions of times by every two-bit, dime-store magician. What a freaking waste of time. And he's not funny nor entertaining to make up for it. The dice hat trick was entertaining, but you could see every one of his moves with the big dice. The first act on the runway was good, not sure how he did it. But I'm really annoyed wth the Piff act - I don't know why anyone sees him entertaining at all. He's just annoying.
> 
> Oh, and yeah, the P&T trick was super-lame also. It's like they phoned it in or couldn't come up with anything better.


I can't stand Piff. Imagine spending most of your adult life in that stupid costume. Just perform as yourself. You'll still be a lame magician, but probably not as intolerable.


----------



## LoadStar

I don't mind Piff, but he's more of a comedian that happens to sort-of do magic. He's in the same category as The Amazing Johnathan (retired, I believe).

As with all things comedy, whether you find Piff funny or not is entirely personal.


----------



## Donbadabon

Piff isn't using the same dog he used 10 years ago. He doesn't fool us.


----------



## markb

On the dice trick, I was able to catch him putting things under the hat every time, except the largest die. So I assumed the largest die was nested over the next largest die and they went under the hat at the same time. But at the very end, after the verdict, he picked up the dice and showed the previously hidden sides, as if to say, nope, these are solid. So I'm not really sure how he did that one part. Was there room under that hat for both, without nesting?

Piff was terrible. Not a good trick and not entertaining. The routine needs to have at least one of those things! I don't remember him being quite so bad before.

Why do P&T make such dumb guesses sometimes? Is it that they know they are fooled, but they don't want to give away their actual thought process? Like on the runway trick, they guessed there was a trap door in the runway. Seriously?


----------



## kdmorse

markb said:


> On the dice trick, I was able to catch him putting things under the hat every time, except the largest die. So I assumed the largest die was nested over the next largest die and they went under the hat at the same time. But at the very end, after the verdict, he picked up the dice and showed the previously hidden sides, as if to say, nope, these are solid. So I'm not really sure how he did that one part. Was there room under that hat for both, without nesting?


Watch again as Penn and Teller turn their backs and walk away. He literally swaps the larger shell die out for a real one in plain view (of the camera).


----------



## cmontyburns

I had to watch the episode in a couple of sittings. I had previously paused after Piff, who annoyed me as I mentioned. When I saw the next person was that Australian lady, I revolted. She is without question my least-favorite contestant that has ever been on -- and now she's been there four times? And she keeps fooling them? She has no stage presence, her personality is grating, her tricks are uninteresting... no thank you. I fast-forwarded over her segment here. Just didn't want to watch her again.


----------



## markb

kdmorse said:


> Watch again as Penn and Teller turn their backs and walk away. He literally swaps the larger shell die out for a real one in plain view (of the camera).


Ha! You're right. I totally missed that. It was barely caught on camera, but it was indeed, plain as day! But he timed it so P&T couldn't see. Makes me think that's the part he wanted to fool them with, and him hitting the dice together after the verdict was a subtle way of pointing that out to P&T.


----------



## windracer

markb said:


> Ha! You're right. I totally missed that. It was barely caught on camera, but it was indeed, plain as day! But he timed it so P&T couldn't see. Makes me think that's the part he wanted to fool them with, and him hitting the dice together after the verdict was a subtle way of pointing that out to P&T.


Penn mentioned on his Sunday School podcast that multiple folks have tried the "swapping out the gimmicked objects for real ones while P&T's backs are turned" trick ... it's worked in once or twice in the past, but it wasn't going to work again regardless of how many times he banged those dice together.


----------



## Hank

kdmorse said:


> Watch again as Penn and Teller turn their backs and walk away. He literally swaps the larger shell die out for a real one in plain view (of the camera).


Wow, what a great catch! Yeah, I could see every single one of his tucks (or ditches, or whatever it's called). Every single one. I'm growing really tired of the same sleight of hand and card tricks on this show. The banter changes, but the tricks don't.



cmontyburns said:


> I saw the next person was that Australian lady, I revolted. She is without question my least-favorite contestant that has ever been on -- and now she's been there four times? And she keeps fooling them? She has no stage presence, her personality is grating, her tricks are uninteresting... no thank you.


I could not agree with you more! She's horrible!


----------



## Hank

I thought this week's episode was so much better. The first wrestling act was really entertaining.. maybe it was just a simple force trick, but yeah, got my money's worth. Would like to see more of that on the show. The glass table trick was also awesome. Surely the table was gimmicked in some way and the thick glass hid a slot or something through refraction, but he was also just really good. The kid was OK, nothing surprising, but good to get young kids involved. The bookcase trick was also good, but a gimmicked phone app and possibly a green-screened bookshelf. But still a good trick (and not another sleight of hand/card trick). 

I'm not sure how P&T did their trick, but it's probably something messy and simple, like most of their tricks.


----------



## LoadStar

cmontyburns said:


> When I saw the next person was that Australian lady, I revolted. She is without question my least-favorite contestant that has ever been on -- and now she's been there four times? And she keeps fooling them? She has no stage presence, her personality is grating, her tricks are uninteresting... no thank you. I fast-forwarded over her segment here. Just didn't want to watch her again.


I still enjoy watching her because she does some VERY challenging escape artist illusions. She keeps fooling them because they are very difficult illusions to figure out.


----------



## getbak

On this week's episode, I thought Penn's hints were enough to get a reasonable understanding of how the tricks were done in general.

For the wrestler, he said something about facing the tag team of "Applique" and "Magneto". That would mean he had different magnets with all the possible combinations. There were three 50/50 choices, so there were only 8 possible outcomes. He just needs to have the 8 magnets hidden somewhere, either on his body or around the ring, and make sure the right one is applied to the belt before it's revealed. It seems like the actual move was edited out of the show. At the start of the performance, he places the belt on the small table with the cups and balls. After he's attacked, the table gets broken and the belt ends up on the ground. We never see it get picked up, but at the end of the performance, the table is sort-of repaired and the belt is sitting on top of it. That likely means the actual move where the magnet was put onto the belt was edited out of the show.

For the card trick, Penn mentions both being one step ahead of the audience and he talks about angles a number of times. I don't know exactly what he does, but "one ahead" is a pretty common magic technique where the magician sets up the next move while the audience thinks he's doing a different move (which he set up during the previous move). I believe the angle comment has to do with the beveled edge of the table disguising some things and he's able to hide the moves with the angle of the bevel.

For the book selection, Penn makes a comment about seeing the magician in his flat, which is an odd choice of words for an American to say to another American when neither one is in a location where "flat" means apartment. However, as a code word to explain that most of the books on his bookshelf were just a flat façade, it's the perfect choice of words. He also mentioned that the magician was "laid back", which I believe is a coded way of saying when he covered the camera, the magician (or an off-camera assistant) pulled something that caused the flat fake books to all fall down. Penn also says that the magician was "not forced". This would be in reference to the book choice, where Penn did truly have a free choice --- of those three books. The "Instagram" app he showed, was almost-certainly fake and when he stopped scrolling, it triggered an ending animation that finished on the generic image which forced Penn to choose which way to scroll. I assume whichever direction Penn had chosen, we would have seen the same three books. He gave himself three out with the book. On one side of the dust jacket, he had the first book; on the other side of the dust jacket was the second book; and the third book was inside the dust jacket.


----------



## markb

getbak said:


> We never see it get picked up, but at the end of the performance, the table is sort-of repaired and the belt is sitting on top of it. That likely means the actual move where the magnet was put onto the belt was edited out of the show.


I noticed this, too. Super lame on the part of the editors! Don't edit out the core of the trick!


----------



## bobfrank

markb said:


> I noticed this, too. Super lame on the part of the editors! Don't edit out the core of the trick!


Just a wild guess here why the did it that way. Since the "judge" knows how the trick was done, and Penn & Teller were watching live, it may have been determined that the magician didn't make any kind of switch when the table was put back, so editing that part out had no affect on what the audience saw.


----------



## Hank

markb said:


> I noticed this, too. Super lame on the part of the editors! Don't edit out the core of the trick!


Maybe that _was_ the magic trick! That the table magically reset itself.


----------



## cmontyburns

They do those edits a lot. When things were more live and P&T used to go up on the stage after being fooled, you'd often see the stage had been cleared of whatever mess the magician had made in their act. I remember one where they went up there, gave the trophy, cut away to the magician celebrating, and then cut back to a wide shot of all of them and Penn was no longer wearing his jacket.


----------



## markb

cmontyburns said:


> They do those edits a lot. When things were more live and P&T used to go up on the stage after being fooled, you'd often see the stage had been cleared of whatever mess the magician had made in their act. I remember one where they went up there, gave the trophy, cut away to the magician celebrating, and then cut back to a wide shot of all of them and Penn was no longer wearing his jacket.


Those sorts of edits aren't the problem though. It's when they edit out a pivotal part of the trick, it's a problem.


----------



## MikeMar

yes, deleted


----------



## lew

markb said:


> Those sorts of edits aren't the problem though. It's when they edit out a pivotal part of the trick, it's a problem.


Many tricks can be exposed when we're watching in HD and have the ability to pause and watch in slow motion. It's kind of necessary to either edit or not show closeups at certain times of the performance. Some magic acts AGT camera shots are favorable to the magician and some make it clear what is being done.


----------



## markb

lew said:


> Many tricks can be exposed when we're watching in HD and have the ability to pause and watch in slow motion. It's kind of necessary to either edit or not show closeups at certain times of the performance. Some magic acts AGT camera shots are favorable to the magician and some make it clear what is being done.


I think that's something for the magicians to consider, not the editors. The way this was edited, I can't even tell if it was a good trick or not. It was an entertaining routine, but the trick might have been pretty lame. (Or not, I can't tell!) If performing the trick on TV, without favorable editing, exposes the method, then the magician either needs to be ok with that, or perform something else. Especially for this show.

I don't watch AGT much, but I think they are much worse at editing magic routines than Fool Us. Is it a different sort of show though.


----------



## mattack

OK, it was an "obvious" joke, but I admittedly laughed at it..

on a show from the last month or so at most I think (I have a couple new eps recorded that I started watching), one of the on Zoom (or whatever) magicians asked Penn something, then asked Teller something, and said (approx)
"Teller, I think you're on mute".

again, obvious joke, but I still thought it was good!


----------



## Turtleboy

From last year, but a fascinating podcast on the behind the scenes of the show.

https://www.patreon.com/posts/abrac...urce=copy_to_clipboard&utm_campaign=postshare


----------



## Turtleboy

I'm going to post below what we learn in the podcast.

I'm going to spoilerize it if you don't want to know how the sausage is made. The information in the spoiler below will tell what happens after an act goes on, how P&T deliberate, how they make their guess, what happens when they tell the magician, and how it is decided if they were fooled or not. If you don't want to know, don't read.

*Again, it's super interesting if you want to know how the show is made, but it is like revealing a trick and takes away some of the magic.*



Spoiler



P&T have no pre-knowledge of who is going to be on the show and what trick they are going to perform.

After the magician performs, P&T deliberate. The Judges, who are the producers of the show, magicians themselves, and know how the trick is done, listen in. P&T often deliberate for up to 10 minutes, but it is cut down for TV. Once they are finished deliberating, they make ONE GUESS *to the producers/judges. *The judges tell them if they are right or wrong. Penn then talks to the contestant, already knowing if he was fooled or not. Any questions that Penn asks, and any answer the contestant gives, is just for TV entertainment. It doesn't mean anything, as the judges have already told P&T whether they were fooled or not. In fact, the producers will often pre-write the coded hints for Penn, so they don't have to take up time making them up.

This came about because one of the contestants was accused of cheating because the audience said he did not answer Penn honestly. So the podcast had the contestant and the producer on to point out that the judges had already determined the fooling, and the answering didn't matter.


----------



## pdhenry

I remember the particular act. It was well done (and of course, P&T were fooled).

What was interesting to me was


Spoiler



that the "busts" are scripted.



Although, you can tell that


Spoiler



when Penn asks a direct question about the method, it means they're fooled and the guess is a wrong one - as Penn knows by that point.


----------



## HarleyRandom

Turtleboy said:


> I'm going to post below what we learn in the podcast.
> 
> I'm going to spoilerize it if you don't want to know how the sausage is made. The information in the spoiler below will tell what happens after an act goes on, how P&T deliberate, how they make their guess, what happens when they tell the magician, and how it is decided if they were fooled or not. If you don't want to know, don't read.


I always want to know or I wouldn't watch this show. Even when they do know, the code isn't enough to really help me. If I wrote down the very specific details I might be able to do the research. Oh, well.

I haven't watched lately but I have numerous episodes waiting to go.

I always suspected if Penn gave away the secret, he was wrong, and therefore was fooled, because he's not actually supposed to.


----------



## HarleyRandom

I have a bunch of episodes saved up to watch. Now would be a good time, I guess.

Happy 74th, Teller.


----------



## HarleyRandom

I have continued to avoid this show, but one reason was that I was afraid I'd forget I had seen an episode. One solution, I realized, was to look for episodes I had recorded twice. There was one where weather bulletins or interference meant I had to see the rerun, so I hope I kept the one that got interrupted so I know what to watch.

But if the first date the episode aired is the date of the recording, then I know I haven't seen it unless it has those interruptions. So I've been watching these.

After last night, I'm convinced Alyson is just showing her acting skill when she is squeamish about a dangerous stunt. Either she's great at improv or she has rehearsed. I haven't seen much that she has done before this, but on the episode I saw last night she was just great. She recovered so quickly when interviewing the magician that it had to be just acting. She was completely professional for the interview. If I was fooled before, well, I'm easily fooled. I watch the show wanting to know how tricks are done but of course I don't speak Penn's "code". I just feel more comfortable having heard an explanation whether I get it or not.

Seems like the comment was made that Alyson was fooled. She's always fooled. She's no magic expert. Unless she's acting again.

Penn explained a trick Teller was doing and once I understood I went back and played it again and again and I just couldn't follow what Teller was doing. But of course these two are some of the best in the business.


----------



## HarleyRandom

Turtleboy said:


> I'm going to post below what we learn in the podcast.
> 
> I'm going to spoilerize it if you don't want to know how the sausage is made. The information in the spoiler below will tell what happens after an act goes on, how P&T deliberate, how they make their guess, what happens when they tell the magician, and how it is decided if they were fooled or not. If you don't want to know, don't read.
> 
> *Again, it's super interesting if you want to know how the show is made, but it is like revealing a trick and takes away some of the magic.*





Spoiler



And of course last night Penn revealed exactly how the trick is done. Which makes it obvious he was fooled because he wasn't speaking in code and we're not actually supposed to know. And of course the magician said no, that's not how he did it and Penn and Teller both went up and examined the equipment.


----------



## mattack

HarleyRandom said:


> I have continued to avoid this show, but one reason was that I was afraid I'd forget I had seen an episode. One solution, I realized, was to look for episodes I had recorded twice. There was one where weather bulletins or interference meant I had to see the rerun, so I hope I kept the one that got interrupted so I know what to watch.


I use kmttg to download metadata files to keep track of which episodes of most shows (or even sometimes specials) I have seen. (Even though I have a bazillion tuners, because of necessary pre/post padding on many shows and sometimes delays/pre-emption, I can't keep ALL shows as 'new episodes only' and absolutely always get them.. Another magic show, the Dean Cain hosted show, is another I have to keep re-recording reruns since it often ends up skewed 15 minutes or sometimes the recording is something completely different).. also, even though I used to say I never watch reruns, for various reality/crime shows, I do sometimes watch reruns since I probably couldn't tell if they cut something out.. (I do wish streaming services allowed me to play faster than realtime though -- if they did, I might have subscribed to Discovery+ already.. instead of presumably getting the content automatically when they and HBO Max merge content..)


----------



## cmontyburns

Hasn't been much chatter on the show here of late, but there is a new season underway. Season 9. I thought Season 8 was a pretty strong one and there were several acts that I wanted to post about but never did. Season 9 has started off well too, so I want to try to get back to commenting on stuff I liked and didn't. Example of the latter: they had that Australian woman back on again to start season 9. She is my least-favorite contestant they've ever had. How she has fooled them 5 times in a row now is beyond me.

Anyway, in this week's episode (*Spoilers for S09E04 OAD 11/4/2022*), they had an example of the former. And in fact I thought he was one of the best acts the show has ever had on. Dani Daortiz, the card magician. What a delight. Even if his card tricks had been less amazing, his presence and patter were so much fun. I had a great time just watching him perform and imagine it must have been a blast to be sitting there at the table with him.

But the tricks! Wow. I've watched it back through a couple of times and there are one or two spots where, if you don't let yourself get distracted by his patter and calculated boisterousness, you can see that a little move must have been performed. But what that move was, and how it would led to the result, remains a mystery. Obviously to Penn and Teller too, who were sitting right there watching it close up, and were just blown away by what Daortiz pulled off. It was cool that they just gave him the trophy straightaway, but I really would have loved to hear what Penn would have said to him in the normal setting. 

What a great act.


----------



## mattack

Yeah for once I caught up already. There were a million tricks in one performance.

what was the name Penn gave about the cat ghost trick? He gave a much more direct mention of another magician’s trick.

also, the mention of something like “your jacket looked well fitting the entire time” was one of the most obvious hints besides the direct mentions of previous magicians. I don’t know how he did the pool cue though.. even slowed down it was amazing.


----------



## cmontyburns

mattack said:


> what was the name Penn gave about the cat ghost trick?


The spirit cabinet.


----------



## mattack

That was one thing, but I swear he also mentioned another magician's name.. maybe I'm misremembering which trick that was about, though.


----------



## Turtleboy

Ortiz's trick was insane. I can chalk up everything to him being the greatest sleight of hand magician in the world, but how did he force Allyson to choose the Jack of Hearts.


----------



## cmontyburns

I watched that a couple of times the night it aired, and probably half a dozen times more that weekend. One of the best routines I have ever seen. What makes it so good, on top of the incredible skill, is his presence and patter. The whole thing is just damned _fun_.


----------



## Hank

I watched it a few more times today, and I still can't see ANY moves he makes. Except when he throws the card "out of the box" I think he palmed that one and it just looks like it came out of the box. It certainly wasn't there before. 

He's a master at finding any card in the deck and stealing it before anyone can blink an eye.


----------



## kdmorse

Hank said:


> I watched it a few more times today, and I still can't see ANY moves he makes. Except when he throws the card "out of the box" I think he palmed that one and it just looks like it came out of the box. It certainly wasn't there before.
> 
> He's a master at finding any card in the deck and stealing it before anyone can blink an eye.


You can also catch him putting the 3 of hearts on top of the box, but that's the least impressive part of the trick. In addition to having found and palmed the card in the first place, the skill with which he keeps everyone's attention away from the box until the moment he wants them to look at it is an impressive feat in itself.


----------



## cmontyburns

Weird interaction with card magician Horret Wu in last Friday's episode (26-Nov). Penn said he had written down a bunch of code words in his notebook, but he didn't want to say them in order not to give away how parts of the routine were done. This is a scruple that seldom has troubled him in the past. So, he threw it to the judges to decide whether Wu had fooled them, based on their listening to Penn and Teller's deliberations. The ruling was that Wu had fooled them, but Penn and Teller didn't get up from their chairs to go to the stage and give him the trophy. They let Allyson do that. I wondered if that last part was because they didn't guess correctly and thus shouldn't have gone up to get a closer look at Wu's card setup. Regardless, the whole thing was weird.


----------



## getbak

It sounds like Teller got COVID during the time they were recording this season, so he had to miss a couple of shooting days. They recorded those acts with just Penn doing the review and then recorded the segments with P&T sitting in the chairs after Teller returned.

That's why they didn't go up on stage to give him the trophy. It would have given away the fact that Teller wasn't actually there.


They've done the "go to the judges" thing in the past when there isn't an easy way to speak in code to the magician (especially if it's someone who doesn't speak English well) and the trick doesn't have an easily identifiable name. He will often make a "guess" where he reveals a lot of information about how he thinks it's done, but those are almost always when the act is a fooler, so he's not actually spoiling anything.


----------



## cmontyburns

getbak said:


> It sounds like Teller got COVID during the time they were recording this season, so he had to miss a couple of shooting days. They recorded those acts with just Penn doing the review and then recorded the segments with P&T sitting in the chairs after Teller returned.
> 
> That's why they didn't go up on stage to give him the trophy. It would have given away the fact that Teller wasn't actually there.


DIdn't know that -- thanks.


----------



## Hank

Teller also had heart bypass surgery in October... probably well after the show wrapped.

*








Heart surgery forces Penn & Teller to postpone dates


Penn & Teller have temporarily taken down their hit show at the Rio as Teller recovers from open-heart surgery.




www.reviewjournal.com




*


----------



## getbak

Yeah, he had his surgery the same week the season premiere aired, so it would have been shot many months before.

When the show aired during the summer, they used to shoot the new seasons in the February/March timeframe. I don't know if that changed with the show moving to the fall, but it was still likely shot sometime in the spring at the latest.


----------



## cmontyburns

getbak said:


> They've done the "go to the judges" thing in the past when there isn't an easy way to speak in code to the magician (especially if it's someone who doesn't speak English well) and the trick doesn't have an easily identifiable name.


One more on this -- they have also just sent Teller up to the stage to show their notebook to the contestant rather than say anything too giveaway out loud. But given what you said about Teller not actually being there, it's obvious why they went the way they did.


----------



## HarleyRandom

getbak said:


> It sounds like Teller got COVID during the time they were recording this season, so he had to miss a couple of shooting days. They recorded those acts with just Penn doing the review and then recorded the segments with P&T sitting in the chairs after Teller returned.
> 
> That's why they didn't go up on stage to give him the trophy. It would have given away the fact that Teller wasn't actually there.
> 
> 
> They've done the "go to the judges" thing in the past when there isn't an easy way to speak in code to the magician (especially if it's someone who doesn't speak English well) and the trick doesn't have an easily identifiable name. He will often make a "guess" where he reveals a lot of information about how he thinks it's done, but those are almost always when the act is a fooler, so he's not actually spoiling anything.


Sorry to hear that. But it means it would have been harder to figure out the trick because Penn tells us Teller is the smart one.


----------



## HarleyRandom

cmontyburns said:


> DIdn't know that -- thanks.





Hank said:


> Teller also had heart bypass surgery in October... probably well after the show wrapped.
> 
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Heart surgery forces Penn & Teller to postpone dates
> 
> 
> Penn & Teller have temporarily taken down their hit show at the Rio as Teller recovers from open-heart surgery.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.reviewjournal.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


Wow. He looks so young to me.


----------



## getbak

I was surprised they were fooled by the act that fooled them this week. It was a basic math trick, which they knew, but somehow overthought it (or underthought it).



Spoiler: Trick breakdown



He started by asking Alyson to choose a month (number between 1-12) and multiply by a date (number between 1-31). Then, take the result and divide by a four-digit year (any four digit number from 1000-9999).

The maximum the product of the month and date can be is 372 (12 x 31). Regardless of which 3 numbers she chooses, the end result will be a decimal that's less than 1 because the year will always be greater than the product of the month and date.

Next, he mentioned how Las Vegas zip codes all start with 891 and end with 2 random numbers, then he asked Teller to indicate a number with his hands. This essentially forces it to be a number between 1 and 10. That makes the "zip code" he creates a number between 89101 and 89110.

He has Alyson subtract the zip code from the original decimal number. The result will be a negative number between -89100 and -89109 followed by a decimal and a string of numbers.

Finally, he has her divide the resulting number by the address of the Rio, which is 3700.

No matter what the random seed numbers were that Alyson and Teller chose, the end result is going be -24.08 followed by a bunch of additional digits, but he ignores them because they will change depending on what the random numbers were.



As Penn said, in any math trick, you have to somehow remove the audience member's chosen numbers from the equation. In this trick, he made the chosen numbers so small relative to the numbers he provided as to make them worthless when the final result is trimmed to 2 decimal places.

Penn & Teller knew the answer, but somehow didn't see it when it was put into action in this trick.


----------



## TonyTheTiger

getbak said:


> *I was surprised they were fooled by the act that fooled them this week. It was a basic math trick, which they knew, but somehow overthought it (or underthought it).*
> 
> ~
> 
> Penn & Teller knew the answer, but somehow didn't see it when it was put into action in this trick.


You DO know that it's not a real contest, right? the format is purely to make magic relevant and give it an audience.

I had my thoughts on it and had it confirmed by a guy who'd been on the show twice that I met on a cruise recently (well, BC - Before Covid).


----------

