Mysteries Anywhere (Ebook) by Pablo Amira $15.00
56 pages, 15 photographs, 3 illustrations
Available at: http://www.amirasideas.com/
Pablo Amira hails from Chile. In this ebook, he shares six mentalism effects that can be performed anytime, anywhere, using borrowed materials.
Being from Chile, its no surprise that Mr. Amiras primary language is not English. It is surprising and disappointing that the author didnt have this manuscript proofread by at least one capable English-speaking editor.
His writing is very rough and he does a poor to adequate job of teaching the material. Some words are capitalized for no reason and words that should be capitalized arent.
Spaces are missing between paragraphs, giving the text a claustrophobically cluttered look.
Some of the photographs are helpful, some arent.
The author includes his complete presentational script with each effect.
Mr. Amira dutifully cites his inspirational sources.
Perfect Coin, Maybe: The performer asks a participant to remove a coin from her purse and hold it in her closed fist. He suggests that the coin will feel heavier. The participant acknowledges that the coin feels heavier and then returns to its former weight.
The performer suggests that the coin will feel warmer. The participant acknowledges that the coin warms up and then returns to its former temperature.
The performer holds the participants fist and asks her to concentrate on the digits in the coins date. He correctly divines the first three digits.
He releases her fist and asks her to close her eyes. He asks her to engage in visualization as he counts aloud from 0 to 9. The performer correctly identifies the final digit.
His method for creating the heavy, warm coin phenomena is old and well known.
His method for divining the coins date doesnt account for coins minted in the 60s and 70s. My wife collects coins. Believe me, there are still a lot of coins from those wondrous decades out there.
Mr. Amira offers another old, well known method of determining the coins date.
I dont like it.
I.D.S.: The performer tears an index card in half and folds the pieces into quarters. He gives one piece to the participant and he places the other piece in his pocket. He asks her to imagine a simple image and write a one word description on her card, which she then folds up. He places her card under a glass.
The performer removes his card from his pocket and draws his impression of the participants image. He folds the card and asks the participant to hold it.
The performer removes the participants folded card from under the glass and concentrates on it. He correctly announces the participants word. She opens his card and sees that he correctly drew an image of her word.
He offers an alternative method that is even better.
I like it.
Chronoincidence: The performer invites two participants on stage. He takes the first participant aside and asks her to engage in a mental relaxation exercise as she concentrates on a freely chosen time.
The performer approaches the second participant and asks her to remove her watch. He pulls out the stem and demonstrates how to change the time. He turns the watch face-down and hands it back to the participant. She turns the stem to set the watch to a random time and then she pushes in the stem.
The first participant announces that she chose the time 2:45. The second participant turns the watch face-up and displays that she set it to 2:45.
Im not giving too much away by stating that the performer must somehow determine the first participants freely chosen time. Mr. Amira acquires that information in the boldest, most direct manner possible. Too direct for my tastes.
The method for causing the correct date to appear on the watch is old and well known.
I dont like it.
OHP: A participant shuffles a deck and hands it to the performer. He spreads the deck with the faces toward him, removes a card and reinserts it near the middle of the deck. He announces that he is predicting the Five of Clubs.
To demonstrate how to deal a card face-up onto his hand, the performer flips the top card of the deck face-up. He lifts it off of the deck, tables the deck and places the face-up card on his palm.
He instructs the participant to deal cards onto his palm face-up until she decides to stop. She places the next card face-down on top of the face-up cards and then deposits the remaining cards face-up on top.
The performer squares the deck and spreads it face-up. One face-down card is seen in the middle of the spread. The participant removes it and discovers the Five of Clubs.
This is an inferior handling of the Open Prediction. Demonstrating to any participant over the age of two how to deal a card face-up onto ones palm is contrived and insulting. The author also executes the primary sleight when all the heat is on the deck.
I dont like it.
The Frankenstein Experiment: The performer invites three participants on stage and hands each of them a piece of paper. He asks the first participant to write male or female on her paper, fold it, write 1 on it and drop it into a cup.
He asks the second participant to think of a name. To ensure that the name is appropriate for the selected gender, the second participant removes the folded paper from the cup, peeks at the gender, folds the paper and drops it back into the cup. She writes an appropriate name on her paper, folds it, writes 2 on it and drops it into the cup.
The third participant thinks of a hobby, writes it on her paper, folds it, writes 3 on it and drops it into the cup.
The performer writes his impression of the gender on his paper. He removes paper #1 from the cup, opens it toward himself and reads male. He shows that he wrote male on his paper.
He focuses on the second participant and writes his impression on his paper. He removes paper #2 from the cup, opens it toward himself and reads Roberto. He shows that he wrote Roberto on his paper.
The performer focuses on the third participant and writes his impression on his paper. He removes the last paper from the cup, opens it toward himself and reads coin collecting. He shows that he wrote coin collecting on his paper.
In Mr. Amiras handling of this Annemannesque effect, the performer can show neither the numbers on the billets nor the participants written selections.
He offers another method in which you can display the numbers on the billets but he doesnt adequately teach part of the method and I dont like the moment of the dirty work. Superior methods exist for performing this classic effect.
I dont like it.
The Challenge of Zeus: The performer tables a folded piece of paper. The participant considers the name Zeus and through a process of elimination, arrives at the letter S. She opens the paper and reads a passage that identifies the letter S.
The odds against success are a mere 3:1. I dont like mythological presentations. The method is what you think it is. Theres nothing new here.
I dont like it.
Read exclusive online reviews of products and discuss them.
1 post • Page 1 of 1