I watched this the past weekend. I really didn't like it. why do you need to keep getting out and putting away a deck of cards to rip a single card up and restore it?

"now the pieces are back together!" let me just get the deck out so I can get rid of seams!"

umm no lol

I think that is VERY much a anti-climax, and is done only for the reason of clean up, and that is not a good reason my friends.

I would also argue that seams make it more believeable!

ill stick with lovicks or garcia's.

Yep! I agree with you Joshua. Having a deck also seems weird... I guess some people will say that in order to get a card, you need a deck... Well ok... But at the end it's... well... finished, so why take the deck again?

No daffydoug, it's true she didn't spot that... But what I described was her reaction DURING the effect... Isn't it a pity that someone thinks something like that, even if afterwards you sort of "prove" that the card is really restored? Magic should happen WHILE the effect is done; if people think afterwards "ok that WAS magical", it kinds of ruins everything. And actually they often do NOT think that because magic has to be EXPERIENCED: it's an "on the moment" FEELING, not an afterwards THOUGHT. So ok, the card is restored and you prove it, but they still will stick with their idea that it MIGHT have been glued, even if something is missing for the explanation. Actually, I don't care at all if it's glued or not or how it's done: what I say is that it LOOKS LIKE it's being glued, no matter if there's a clean-up at the end or not... At this point I'm not even interested in examining the card...

Let me take the example of Torn for example: the pieces slightly touch and BOOM it's restored! Done! The pieces hardly touch each other for half a second AND IT's DONE! For Holy Grail there's a lot of messing around with the fingers, the performer seems to ask himself "so... are they sufficiently glued so that I can let go of the pieces or should I apply some more pressure?"... See what I mean?

Agree with you Joshua, Lovick's and Garcia's are great!

There shouldn't even be seams, because you don't crease the card in the first place. Its just not natural.

What about JC wagners does anyone think that it's not magical looking?

Also true...!

Putting the pieces of a torn up card is not exactly natural either! Since this is a physical impossibility that you are doing, something that's rarely done in the natural physical world, who's to say if welding the pieces of a card back together with "magic" would leave seams or not? (Yes, I'm playing devil's advocate.)

I think it is very magical looking, but the Reformation is based off of that, and in my opinion, is a lot better.

To some people, they would think the effect is thqt you are somehow sticking the pieces together, then restoring the card.

The too perfect theory?

Ok, ok... Why not actually, it's really not the part that bothers me here (in fact it does not really bother me because I do not perform this effect, just sharing ideas... )...

Daffydoug, I guess you're referring to one of my post when you ask "The too perfect theory"...? I won't go into details about this theory; there are threads concering this in the Café and I'm sure you perfectly know about this, maybe better than I do.

Maybe my allusion was not clear. I just wanted to prevent people writing that, regarding the "too perfect theory", Holy Grail was a good effect. This theory, very basically, supports the idea that an effect "must not" be too perfect, and that you have to give a beginning of explanation to the spectator, otherwise it's just "too impossible" and is sort of "anti-climax" (I know it's more complicated than that, but it gives an idea for those who don't know about this... do a search for more info on the subject...!). I just wanted to say that it is not appropriate to think this (the theory is already controversial amongst the magic community), because the "beginning of explanation" is not subtile at all... It just doesn't look magical. It first has to look magical, THEN you can bother about the theory...

My concern about Holy Grail is mainly the handling. Maybe it is possible to find a new one that does not need the performer to apply so much pressure (or at least it should be hidden with other moves, and NOT TOO MANY), and that gives the illusion that the pieces barely touch before being restored?

Great review. Seriously considering this or Torn Too.

Well... What I would suggest you ChrisK is to have a look at both video demos and make your own opinion...

You MAY also consider the fact that Torn is a NEARLY impromptu effect, whereas Holy Grail apparently needs some setup (15 min I was told?). It's not THAT important, but, well, just an info. Also, with Torn you do not need to have a deck with you and the card is IMMEDIATELY examinable at the end of the restoration, BUT it still has creases, wheras Holy Grail provides a method that resores the card completely at the end... although I do not really like the method... (which COULD be applied to Torn btw, but the routine in the Torn DVD stops when the card is restored, with the creases still visible).

Anyway, have a look at both demos before making your choice... I prefer Torn (for the reasons I explained before), but I fully understand that some people are happier whith Holy Grail...

Cheers!

The torn routine looks better, and ends better with no real set up time, maybe 30 seconds. again, I like the idea here, but there is a lot left to be desired and the whole ending is just off in my book

Totally agree with you there: you just sumed up in 2 lines what my feeling is about all this...

Josh,

Can you explain why you think the ending is "off" or what about it is off? For me (and this just may be my crazy brain thinking this) but if you are going to restore a card to its previous in altered state then why leave the creases? For me removing the creases and the visual aspect of them being removed takes it to a new level because now the card is fully restored to what it looked like before the tearing. Also anyone that has actually performed this for spectators can vouch that their reactions are over the top. So at least perform this for someone other than yourself in the mirror then it may change your opinions.

Thanks,
Jordan

P.S. Be on the look out for Inked at http://www.blacksmagicgroup.com

The prep work should not be considered a weakness. How many of us perform Gene Anderson's Torn and restored newspaper? Lots of prep work there (AND black fingernails.)

The "too-perfect theory" is that if an effect is too perfect, the methodology becomes apparent because, the effect being perfect, there is no other solution except the correct one and spectators are not stupid.

In this case, the girlfriend who thought the pieces were actually being glued together with glue was led to that conclusion because there was no other. Not knowing this pariclular version of T&R card, I don't know if she is correct, but I'll bet she is at least close.

By the way, it's called a theory because not everyone believes in it (such as T. A. Waters, Tommy Wonder). But in this case, it would seem to apply.

Since I haven't seen the effect, I'm just guessing here.

Well... Isn't it a bit more complicated than that in this case? There are other versions of T&R card and people do not think that the card is being glued... AND these versions (I'm mainly thinking of Daniel Garcia's Torn) really seem to be perfect...

But I must confess the idea of the theory is quite nicely summed up.

How many times have you performed this goldeneye007?

P.S. That doesn't include to yourself in the mirror, that means getting out and performing. Or do you even own this to be making speculations?

Hello Jordan!

You mean Holy Grail? I do not own it so I have never performed it, and I've always stated this from the beginning of the thread...

I'm sorry your T&R card didn't really convince me; I'm just giving MY personal opinion here regarding the video demo I have seen. I've performed Torn hundreds of times for audiences and have tried other versions (Unripped is really nice for example but, imo, not very practicle if you want ot do the WHOLE routine... anyway...), and yes I find Torn practicle and magical looking. Please do not take this personaly: one of the objectives of this forum is letting people freely give their opinion as long as they have arguments which make these opinions profitable for everybody. I gave my opinion on Holy Grail and gave arguments regarding this opinion. Again, I'm sorry I won't be a fan of this version of Holy Grail; the method indeed seems to be very clever and other people seem to have liked Holy Grail. I'm just not one of them, that's all...

PS: Maybe another handling would be possible using the same method?

No in not taking it personal at all. I would just rather have people that have actually purchased the effect to post their opinions in a DVD review thread. There is a place for opinions in Latest and Greatest subforum and there is a Holy Grail thread already started in there. Everybody has there own opinion or idea of effects but please don't post them in a review thread when you have never seen it to review.

Many thanks,
Jordan Johnson