Final Thoughts on "Bank Night"

I wanted to talk a little bit about what to place into the "loser" envelopes during the Bank Night effect. It seems that most modern versions of this effect use lottory tickets. This is a fantastic idea and I use it in my performances. The lotto tickets are cheap and there is a chance that someone could win something off of the ticket. I hope people do win so that they will remember me forever. Lee Earle shows his class by pre-signing the back of each of the lottery tickets so that if the spectator does win big he will need Earle's assistance to cash in the ticket - very classy indeed.

Other things can be used intstead of lottory tickets. In tradeshow performances why not fill the "loser" envelopes with coupons, discounts, or vouchers for the company you are working for? Instead of winning actual money the spectator wins discounts for the company. Working a night club? Why not fill the "losers" with free drink coupons? In a restaurant use coupons for free meals or appetizers insuring that the spectators will return to the restaurant in the future. In other words, fill the "losers" with something appropriate for the venue you are working.

Also, I think the Bank Night Effect gives the performer a perfect opportunity to give out his business card. Take Osterlind's handling for example. In his handling, the last spectator envelope contains four lotto tickets that are handed out to all of the players. The other three spectators only received a blank slip of paper inside their envelopes. Instead of using blank paper, why not throw a business card in there? This way, three of the spectators will walk away with your contact information after just one effect. To me, this is a great way to give out your card. It works well because the spectator still gets a prize, but he also gets your card.

Well, that is enough on Bank Night for a while. There are so many other things to discuss....

A Small Addition to Osterlind's Bank Night Presentation

I have added a small new addition to Osterlind's handling of "Bank Night". As usual, this description will be vague in order to avoid exposing the method behind Osterlind's effect. However, those of you who own the effect should not have a problem following along. If, for some reason, you need clarification or don't understand my ramblings you can email me and I will be happy to elaborate.

My additional handling comes before the effect truely begins. I like to walk in front of the spectators holding a crisp $100 bill very openly for all to see. I then take out an envelope and clearly and cleanly place the bill inside the envelope and seal it up. Then I take out four other envelopes that have been pre-sealed and I mix them all together so that nobody knows which envelope contains the money. Then I number the envelopes in front of everyone and proceed with the effect as described on Osterlind's "Mind Mysteries" DVD.

At first glance this addition doesn't seem like much, but I think that it adds greatly to the effect. First, I walk in front of the audience holding money. This ALWAYS quiets the crowds and gets everyone's attention. People are drawn to money because deep down we are all greedy sons-of-bitches. Second, the audience sees the money go into the envelope so they know it is a real game. They know they could win real money and they take the game seriously (those greedy bastards). I think that one of the weakness of other Bank Night plots is that the audeince really isn't sure what is at stake. Even if they are told it is money they only half believe it because they have not seen the money. Finally, it builds a great deal of suspense. After all, it was Pavlov who taught us that the dogs don't salavate unless you ring the bell. In this case, the audience won't fully appreciate the stakes or the "real" chance they have at winning the money unless they actually see the cash being placed in an envelope. You cannot get more drama than having the entire audience know that there is real money in one of those envelopes and they will have a free choice to try and win that money.

So how do you accomplish such a feat? Well, Osterlind gives us the method in his DVD by showing us how to reveal the money in the last envelope. In other words, watch the DVD and see how Osterlind removes the 100 dollar bill from his envelope. Now, take that method and reverse it so that instead of removing the bill you are placing it inside the envelope (If that isn't clear email me I will be more specific). This method is simple and clean and VERY convincing - you place the money in the envelope and then show your hand completely empty (implying the bill must be in the envelope) then the envelope is sealed and the game begins.

This little addition has really increased the reactions I have gotten from the effect. Many times I even hand out the money for inspection prior to placing it in the envelope to prove it is real money. Give it a try and see if it makes a difference in your performances.

Bank Night Plots

Over the years there have been many different varieties of the "Bank Night" theme. There are some really dumb ones (e.g. Dan Harlan's from his "Packs Small, Plays Big Mentalism Show") and there are some great ones. My particular favorite, which I am sure will be a huge suprise to anyone who reads this blog, is from Richard Osterlind.

For those who don't know Osterlind's version, I will briefly describe the effect. The mentalist comes on stage holding five manilla envelopes clearly marked one through five. He tells the audience that in one of the envelopes there is a 100 dollar bill and that four people in the audience will have an opportunity to win the money. Four spectators are asked to choose one envelope each. The choice is an absolutely free choice - any envelope may be chosen. At the end the menalist is left with one envelope and four spectators each have one envelope. The envelope that contains the money is always the one left in the mentalist's hands at the end of the effect (even after giving an audience member the opportunity to switch envelopes with him). The four audience members are not left empty handed. Instead, they each walk away with a scratch-off lotto ticket for a chance to win even more than the 100 dollars offered by Osterlind. I like this version for 3 main reasons.

First, the audience members that participate are left with something after the effect (the lotto tickets), thus removing the "Sucker" feeling to the routine. I am pretty sure that it is a universal feeling amongst mentalists that we shouldn't present effects as a challenge or that diminish our spectators. This is good advice because without spectators we would have no reason to perform at all. Osterlind does a good job of NOT making his effect a challenge to the audience.

Second, even though the spectators get something, they don't know this fact until the very end of the routine. To me, this adds suspense and excitement to the effect. In other versions, the performer goes out of his way to say that the spectators will all be winners. This hurts the effect. After all, if they are all going to get a prize why have them pick envelopes? Instead, you would just hand them the stuff and be on your way. However, with Osterlind's handling, the spectators only know about the prize money and not the lottery tickets so their thoughts are on picking the envelope with the money rather than just picking an envelope for some door prize. What is more suspenseful and entertaining: Wondering if one of the spectators will win a substantial amount of money by freely choosing any one of five envelopes OR Watching four people select envelopes that they already know are loaded with a prize?

Finally, I like Osterlind's overall handling of the effect. The method is simple and easy, which makes it one of those effects that you can concentrate on your performance rather than moves. You can have a lot of fun with this routine and there is a lot of room for comedy during the presentation.

In comparison, I have just recently watched a version of this effect called "Manilla Miracle" on the "Desert Brainstorm Series Vol. 2" DVD by Lee Earle and it was weak. Earle goes out of his way to tell the spectators that "All of the envelopes have something in them for you but one envelope contains something I don't want you to have" What the hell? Why say that? If you don't want them to have it then don't put it in the damn envelope to begin with. Not to mention the spectators have no idea what it is he has placed in the envelope. That doesn't build suspense, it builds confusion. In the end, all the envelopes are opened to reveal a scratch-off lotto ticket and the envelope not selected contains a lotto ticket and a $50 bill. The revelation is so magical and inspirational that you can almost hear the audience think, "oh, so thats what he didn't want us to have. Why'd he put it in the envelope to begin with then?" On a side note, Earles technical handling and method is pretty good and very interesting. The method and handling alone make the effect worth a look.

Another example of a Bank Night Plot that doesn't make sense to me is Dan Harlan's "Lotto Luck." In this version, four envelopes are used and handed out to four specatators. Then Harlan picks one spectator to be his partner and reassures the new found partner, "Its good that you are my partner because it is a sure thing. I never lose." At the end of this effect, Harlan's aforementioned words make no sense whatsoever. The other three spectators find Lotto Tickets in their envelopes and get to keep the tickets. Meanwhile, the one spectator who is partnered with Harlan opens her envelope to discover....Wait for it....let the suspense build... A one dollar bill! The exact amount it would cost to be buy a lotto ticket. Here is the kicker though, Harlan doesn't let the women keep the buck. So basically, everyone except the winner actually wins something while the actual winner gets nothing - Brilliant! I want to point out that Harlan's method is interesting and can be applied to many different things. It was just the presentation that I really didn't like.

I don't mean to pick on either Earle or Harlan. I like a lot of both of their works. However, I don't think they really put a lot of thought or effort into their Bank Night Routines. Both routines could be made to be much more entertaining with minimal effort.

Recipe: Magic Advocate's Nacho Dip

Here is the recipe for my soon-to-be-world-famous nacho dip. A few hefty servings of this delightful dish is gauranteed to add unwanted flab to your midsection and narrow your arteries by roughly 75%! It also tastes damn good too.

Ingredients that you'll need:

• Two cans of "Cambell's Cheddar Cheese" soup
• 1 Pound Ground Beef
• 1 Packet of Taco Seasoning (I prefer the "Ortega Spicey Fajita Seasoning"
• 1 Small can (sorry I don't remember the exact size, but it is the smallest can available) of diced Jalapeno Peppers
• 1 bag of your favorite Torilla Chips for dipping

Preparation:

1. Brown ground beef on stove - drain fat
2. Add Packet of Taco Seasoning to beef and follow instructions on the seasoning packet
3. Mix beef, Cheddar Cheese soup, and Jalapeno Peppers together in a crock pot
4. Cook on low until warm, stirring occasionally (Alternatively, you can mixe everything in a microwave-safe bowl and heat in Microwave until hot, stirring occasionally)
5. Serve with Tortilla Chips
6. Enjoy!

It is a very simple recipe and doesn't take long to make. It is quite tasty too. Enjoy!

Change of Mind for the Lazy and Unprepared!

As I have mentioned before, I love Richard Osterlind (Its not like that, I have a girlfriend). Osterlind's thinking is brilliant and in my opinion he is THE best mind in mentalism these days. No, I am not affilitated with Osterlind on any level other than being a student of his wonderful products and effects. I just like to give praise where it is due.

One of Richard's effects that appears on his "Mind Mysteries" video series is called "Change of Mind". The effect is both simple and amazing. The mentalist predicts what coin spectator is going to select before the spectator selects anything. Not only is the denomiation of the coin predicted but so the date of the coin. It is a beautiful effect and I encourage everyone to pick up the DVD and watch it.

The last prediction in this effect is brilliant. The performer shows a handful of change that is in his pocket. He then makes a prediction. A spectator reaches into the pocket and pulls out one coin and sure as shit the prediction matches. This is a great ending that requires a little prop to be built that is easy to build and compact to carry. However, I am to lazy to do anything these days so I came up with my own handling that I am going to share with you. Of course, I am not going to tip Osterlind's methods so if you already own the effect you will know what I am talking about. If you don't then you should go over to Osterlind's website and buy the product and then you will know what I am talking about.

Okay, I mentioned I am too lazy to build the overly simple prop that Osterlind's handling requires. Instead, I use a small drawstring bag that can fit in my pocket. Here is what happens. I ask if any spectators have some loose change in thier pockets. When I find a spectator that does have the spare change I hand them the clearly empty draw string bag (it really is empty) and I ask the spectator to pour his change into the bag without showing anyone the amount or types of coins. Then I proceed with Osterlind's method for predicting the spectators coins with the only difference being the spectators choosing the coins from the drawstring bag instead of their pockets. To end, I decide that I should choose a coin too. I write down my prediction and I reach into the bag and pull out a coin (remember, these are the spectator's coins and I never touch the bag until I have to reach in and pull out a coin) and slicker than snot on a door knob my prediction matches the coin I pull out.

Predicting my selection is super simple. I have a coin of my own in finger palm. When I reach into the bag I just pull out my palmed coin. Of course, I have written the information from my palmed coin as my prediction and all ends well.

I truely believe Osterlind's version is better than mine. However, if you are lazy like me and don't want to put together the very simply prop than this will work well. Also, if you ever find yourself without the prop and are asked to perfrom you can use this version to great success. You don't need a drawstring bag. Instead, you can using any non-transparent container (even and envelope) to hold the change. The only real downside is that you will lose money on this effect. After all, it is supposed to be the spectator's money so you have to give it back. But, if you use pennies or nickles it shouldn't bankrupt you.

So there is my slight variation on "Change of Mind" for those of you who are either lazy or find yourself without your prop. I just hope I haven't soiled Osterlind's great thinking too much. Give it a try and let me know what you think.

My "Zen Billet Tear" Routine: Going to the Movies

I often find myself in a position to do mentalism when I am least prepared. It seems that people are always more interested in metalism and ask to see stuff on days when I am just not carrying anything "amazing". Until I read "Peek Performances" I would use various psychological forces from Banachek's "Psychological Subtleties" - which is a fantastict book that you MUST buy if you like mentalism. However, now that I have the Busch's Zen Billet Tear under my belt I have a three to five minute miracle that I can perform at any time.

If you have read "Peek Performances" and are familiar with the Zen Billet Tear you will know that this tear requires the spectator to draw or write her secret information in a specific area of the the billet. Busch refers to this area as "screens" and gives several examples of different ways to prepare the billet to make sure the written information ends up in the correct place. One of these "Screens" is a drawing of a movie theater where the spectator writes the information on a movie screen (see page 24 if you are following along at home). This is the billet preparation you will need to try out my routine.

Here is the Effect:

Going to the Movies

I begin by removing a folded index card from my pocket as I tell the spectator that we are going to try a small experiment. I comment on how the the human mind can be a very powerful tool and that some its most powerful potential comes from our sense of memory (or some other horse shit mumbo jumbo that comes to mind at the time of performance). Then I ask the spectator if they like going to the movies. Most of the time the spectator will say "yes" and I unfold the billet to show my drawing of a movie theater. I say, "its good that you like movies. You will be perfect for this experiment (coincidently, if they say "no" I respond with, "its good that you don't like movies. You will be perfect for this experiment").

I explain that while my drawing is a crude re-creation of a generic movie theater I want the spectator to imagine it is a specific theater. I ask the spectator to think about their favorite movie theater or to think back to a favorite movie and imagine that they are in the actual theater where they saw that movie. I hand them the billet and turn away then I ask them to imagine the name of their favorite movie printed on the screen. I tell them that once they can see the name clearly on the screen in their mind they should write it down on the drawn screen and fold the card back up.

I take the card from the spectator as I tell them to imagine themselves actually going to that theater. I tell them to imagine the smell of the freshly popped corn. I tell them to imagine the sounds of the corn popping the sounds of the soda fountain pouring icy beverages. The point here is to paint as vivid a picture as I can of a movie theater to get the spectator to actually start thinking of her favorite movie theater. I tell her it is important that she actually puts herself their in her mind. While I say all of this I am maintaining eye contact (although, I am suprised by how often the spectator will close her eyes as she imagines the movie theater) and I am tearing up the billet in the Zen Billet Tear fashion. Then when I am ready for my peak I say, "imagine now that you have your popcorn and soda and you are walking into the theater. Look how dark it is. Look at all the other people sitting there. Notice the sometimes the floor can even be a little bit sticky from a spilled soda or butter from some spilled popcorn". As I say that, I look down towards my feet as if I am pretending to step in something sticky and I take my peek (this isn't necessary as the Zen Tear lends itself nicely to peeking secretly but I think my presentation adds to the mood of the effect). After I get my peek I tear the card a few more times and place the pieces in the spectator's hands and I say, "Now, in your mind, look up at the screen in the theater. Imagine the pre-show trivia questions. The advertisments. The previews of the coming attractions. Now imagine that your movie is starting and the openning credits are starting to scroll across the screen. Imagine now that the title has appeared on the screen. Look at that title. Concentrate on the title. Think about the title." Then I go on to reveal the name of her movie.

Often times, if I am familiar with the movie the spectator has written, I will ask them to imagine the openning scene of the movie. Instead of telling her the title right away I will describe the openning scene she is thinking about. Then I will name an actor in the movie and then I will name the movie. This seems to add more credibility to the effect because I am describing what she is thinking and not just what she had written down earlier.

The whole key to this effect is to really get the spectator thinking of a movie theater. Be very descriptive and vivid. Ask questions during the effect such as, "can you smell the popcorn?" and get the spectator to agree with you. I like to tie this all together by prefacing the effect with something like, "the more you can place yourself in that theater in your mind, the better this experiment will work". This gets the spectator thinking and participating.

Nowadays, I carry one folded billet in my pocket prepared for this effect everyday. I now have a five minute routine at the drop of a hat that can really blow a spectator away. This effect has worked wonders for me so I hope you like it. I should mention that you don't have to use the Zen Billet Tear - any peek or center tear will work. However, I like using the Zen tear because of the Theater Screen concept that fits this presentation so well.

Peek Performances

Well, I just finished re-reading "Peek Performances" by Richard Busch. Do I recommend the book? Yes. Is the book the greatest thing since sliced bread like the internet hype makes it out to be? No.

Please do not get me wrong. I enjoyed the book and I have nothing against Mr. Busch. He certainly is more knowledgable than I and his reputation speaks volumes. However, I just didn't think the book lived up to the hype.

First, I should mention that the book is all about gaining secret peeks at information that spectators have written down. The peek then allows the performer to reveal the "secret" information in an apparent display of psychic prowess. The book delivers what it promises by detailing many unique peeks and the psychology behind the moves.

Of particular mention is the Zen Billet Tear. This is by far the best peek in this book in my opinion. I have adapted it to a specific routine that I will dedicate an entire topic on later. The instructions are clear and very easy to follow. You would have to be an idiot to get lost reading the directions. Although, Busch does have a fascination with bold type fonts!

Here is what I do not like about Busch's peeks. First, the majority of them require that the writing be in a specific spot on a card rather than in the middle. This means you have to go out of your way to justify why the spectator cannot just write anywhere or in the middle. Second, one of Busch's main principles (I won't detail it here. If you want specifics buy the book) draws undue attention to the billet. I have always lived by the philosophy that one should minimize the importance of the billet. When thinking back, the spectator should not even remember that a billet was used. Using one of Busch's principles puts the billet in play in ways that I believe lower the impact of the over all effect - although, what the hell do I know? Third, one of the reasons many people seek out Peeks is to get away from doing a center tear. It is becoming more popular among mentalists to use peeks so that the billet may be handed back to the spectator at the end of the effect. Well, the only peek I use from Busch's book requires a tear so I am back to square one anyway.

Aside from billet peeks, Busch details many peeks for playing cards and gives some nice insights on a couple of books tests. I didn't pay too close attention to the playing card peeks because I have my own ways of getting that information. The book tests, on the other hand, were a very interesting read and I really enjoyed them.

Having said all of that, I do recommend the book. I think if you are going to work with billets you should read about all different types of peeks, tears, and other methodologies. There are many good pointers and presentational tips. Overall, it is a good read and you will find something to use in this book.

I know I mentioned above that the book does not live up to all the hype. I still stand by that comment. However, I must say that Busch himself did NOT overhype the book and I do not want to give the impression that he did. It was the usually hype that lingers around the magic cafe whenever someone says they are going to publish something. At any rate, it is definitely worth a read.

Freedom of Speech

Okay, so I have been reading through many online forums some of which are magic related and some of which are not. Regardless of the forum topic, it is inevitable that someone will shout (or type in BOLD rather) how he/she is being censored and that it is violating his/her freedom of speech. That complaint can be responded to in one word - BULLSHIT!

Here is the real deal about freedom of speech. You DO NOT have the right to say whatever you want in a private forum on the internet. You DO NOT have the right to say whatever you want in a private house, club, bar, restaurant, or any other establishment. You just DO NOT have such a right. If you go to someone elses place of business or home or online forum THEY have the absolute right to modify, censor, delete, or restrict ANYTHING you say.

Oh, but what about the Constitution (that is if you are in the States)? What about the First Amendment? Well, these things mean NOTHING to private citizens and private organizations. The First Amendment (and ALL the other rights included in the Bill of Rights) is meant only to protect you from the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. Paraphrasing the Constitution, the First Amendment says that Congress shall pass no law infringing on freedom of speech. All this means is that the government can not pass laws restricting you freedom of speech. Any online forum that is not run the the government can restrict your speech as much as they want regardless of how much you whine.

From now on if you must improperly invoke a right while typing on an online forum please, please invoke your right to remain silent. We would all honor and respect your right to shut the hell up.