Thank you for your time, Alex. Hopefully the magic community can move forward and I, of course, will take everything on board to improve future reviews.
if your review show is your opinion. you shouldn't censor yourself. you have nothing to apologize for. the magic community is full of sensitive babies. the fall is a terrible trick and your review was totally accurate. you shouldn't have taken down your video
Hearing this I can see that Scott actually is a performer, and he knows that his review wasn't good, but won't admit it, but anyways actually he did a really good job, because everyone's a winner. He got subs, you got some subs, The fall got a lot of exposure and is sold out, and we the viewers got a lot of fun content. :D Thank you Scott!
I like how he jumps in before you play your examples with 4 minutes of explanation in order to "save time." More time would have been saved if he just let you play the examples.
The stage performance was not addressed. It is not a stage effect firstly because of the underside angles and second because the action happens on a small scale. The latter could only be addressed if you had a video camera and a big screen for most of the audience to see. And yet you have people like Craig Petty hyping it as a stage trick due to "the number of people you can involve". No Craig it is not a stage effect if (a) People can't see it and (b) People in the front two rows have the angle to see the method.
Absolutely. Lot's of things weren't addressed. Unfortunately, we only had 30 minutes but we could have discussed this for much longer. TLDR - it absolutely cannot be performed on stage, just like I say in my original review.
@@EverythingMagicPro99 I only perform close up and parlour really. I have done a couple of things on stage, but I was very very careful to have big showy props eg jumbo cards and a stand. I've seen so many poor stage effects as an audience member. People doing stuff with coins or rings and the like. They invite people up to be the "eyes" of the audience. But that's just lazy, shoehorning a close up effect onto a stage. As an audience member, I want to use my own eyes. If they take the trouble to have cameras and project on a big screen, that's fair enough.
I think Scott lacks self awareness. I remember us disagreeing on OMEGA by Max Major. You took the time to show how you could build a version cheaply and fairly quickly. I still thought you were wrong but realized I hadn’t clarified so that was on me (the OMEGA deck can be cut either way and all of the function is very aggressive so it never misses which is a problem I wanted solved). Thus your points were totally valid and so were mine. There really wasn’t a big disagreement just different needs in performance if that makes any sense. Online chatter suffers from this a lot, people get the wrong idea because of assumptions and blind spots in the conversation.
He didn't reveal anything. Every magician knows it is done using m****ts anyway. The video of the effect exposes the method, he goes under the plastic with the deck, it's obvious. And the only people who read these kind of magic reviews are magicians anyway. Also, as Noel says himself, anyone who has been into magic 3 months could guess how it's done.
My takeaway from this whole thing is Scott simply isn't qualified to be doing reviews. He still spent the time given here by Alex to justify his "opinion" even in the face of direct evidence to the contrary.
We all know magicians and magic companies selling something have always straight up lied to sell magic products. Let’s be real about this. So with the advent of the internet I feel some had to clean up Their act and be either more honest oooorrrr they just made the ad copies sneakier. So this issue really showcases what is wrong with the magic industry. Not all of it but a big part. And for this guy to get scapegoated for being honest. Doesn’t shock me. It’s being a trope of hobbiest magicians “we all have a box/drawer of junk we’ll never use.” Maybe if we stopped buying junk or demanded the quality be higher. I’m not just talking breakage. I could go on and on. I’ll stop here. But support this guy. I know there are some of you who will disagree with me. However you know we’ve wasted a lot of money. Are we just secret collectors? Maybe we’re just arguing semantics.
Who is anyone to police anothers opinion? There are many positive reviews out there from the creators 'friends' refreshing to get an unbiased review. Having listened to most reviews, went ahead & purchased to make my own empirical decision….4/10 Thank you Scott for your honesty.
Thank you for your time, Alex. Hopefully the magic community can move forward and I, of course, will take everything on board to improve future reviews.
Thank you for being so open. Great interview
if your review show is your opinion. you shouldn't censor yourself. you have nothing to apologize for. the magic community is full of sensitive babies. the fall is a terrible trick and your review was totally accurate. you shouldn't have taken down your video
Scott gone from sledgehammer to nuance, his ass fell out! 😂😂😂😂😂
@@yiggort 💯
It was nice seeing a level headed mature chat about this.
Nice chat gents. Good to smooth the waters and move on. Definitely the right way to put this all to bed.
I was not subbed to this channel before. No reason besides I didn’t know about it. But man. I’m subbed. I love it what you did here.
Great conversation, kudos to both of you for doing this.
I really like both of these people.
Hearing this I can see that Scott actually is a performer, and he knows that his review wasn't good, but won't admit it, but anyways actually he did a really good job, because everyone's a winner. He got subs, you got some subs, The fall got a lot of exposure and is sold out, and we the viewers got a lot of fun content. :D Thank you Scott!
Thank goodness a conversation about The Fall, without a single personal insult being traded. Btw Alex that pullover is definitely worth a subscribe.
I like how he jumps in before you play your examples with 4 minutes of explanation in order to "save time."
More time would have been saved if he just let you play the examples.
i subscribed without even watching it that show much i love Alex
Defo the right man to put a line under it, eh Wayne.
The stage performance was not addressed. It is not a stage effect firstly because of the underside angles and second because the action happens on a small scale. The latter could only be addressed if you had a video camera and a big screen for most of the audience to see.
And yet you have people like Craig Petty hyping it as a stage trick due to "the number of people you can involve".
No Craig it is not a stage effect if (a) People can't see it and (b) People in the front two rows have the angle to see the method.
Absolutely. Lot's of things weren't addressed. Unfortunately, we only had 30 minutes but we could have discussed this for much longer. TLDR - it absolutely cannot be performed on stage, just like I say in my original review.
@@EverythingMagicPro99 I only perform close up and parlour really. I have done a couple of things on stage, but I was very very careful to have big showy props eg jumbo cards and a stand.
I've seen so many poor stage effects as an audience member. People doing stuff with coins or rings and the like. They invite people up to be the "eyes" of the audience. But that's just lazy, shoehorning a close up effect onto a stage. As an audience member, I want to use my own eyes. If they take the trouble to have cameras and project on a big screen, that's fair enough.
I think Scott lacks self awareness. I remember us disagreeing on OMEGA by Max Major. You took the time to show how you could build a version cheaply and fairly quickly. I still thought you were wrong but realized I hadn’t clarified so that was on me (the OMEGA deck can be cut either way and all of the function is very aggressive so it never misses which is a problem I wanted solved). Thus your points were totally valid and so were mine. There really wasn’t a big disagreement just different needs in performance if that makes any sense. Online chatter suffers from this a lot, people get the wrong idea because of assumptions and blind spots in the conversation.
He should’ve taken down the review and redone it. He was too harsh and revealed way too much of the method. Good video have subscribed. 👍👍
He didn't reveal anything. Every magician knows it is done using m****ts anyway. The video of the effect exposes the method, he goes under the plastic with the deck, it's obvious. And the only people who read these kind of magic reviews are magicians anyway. Also, as Noel says himself, anyone who has been into magic 3 months could guess how it's done.
My takeaway from this whole thing is Scott simply isn't qualified to be doing reviews. He still spent the time given here by Alex to justify his "opinion" even in the face of direct evidence to the contrary.
If somebody legitimately has views on something, positive or negative, where is the problem ? .... Oh no sorry I forgot. I don't care anymore!
We all know magicians and magic companies selling something have always straight up lied to sell magic products. Let’s be real about this. So with the advent of the internet I feel some had to clean up Their act and be either more honest oooorrrr they just made the ad copies sneakier. So this issue really showcases what is wrong with the magic industry. Not all of it but a big part. And for this guy to get scapegoated for being honest. Doesn’t shock me. It’s being a trope of hobbiest magicians “we all have a box/drawer of junk we’ll never use.” Maybe if we stopped buying junk or demanded the quality be higher. I’m not just talking breakage. I could go on and on. I’ll stop here. But support this guy. I know there are some of you who will disagree with me. However you know we’ve wasted a lot of money. Are we just secret collectors? Maybe we’re just arguing semantics.
Who is anyone to police anothers opinion? There are many positive reviews out there from the creators 'friends' refreshing to get an unbiased review.
Having listened to most reviews, went ahead & purchased to make my own empirical decision….4/10 Thank you Scott for your honesty.
Hmmmmmm.