Price$35.00
Media TypeTrick
CategoryMentalism
Date AddedAug 03, 2006
Trilogy Streamline
Brian Caswell
(Based on 1 review)
Trilogy Streamline
by Brian Caswell
3 Times The Effect 100 Times The Impact
Effect
You name a random card, spectator one picks a random number. Next you name a second random card and a second spectator picks a different number. Finally, YOU name a number and spectator three names ANY CARD he likes. Get this, you ALWAYS choose first! We bet you can see where this is going and are already thinking how the...!
OK - here goes: You open the card case and remove the deck. You freely show that all 52 cards have different numbers on them. You remove the card spectator number 3 named and place it face up on their hand. You now turn the deck over and remove the cards bearing the numbers spectators one and two named. When you flip over the first two you have an exact match card/numbers! The third card is still face up, Remember; spectator three had a free choice of ANY card. It couldn't possibly be, could it? The spectator turns it over - it's the exact number you named!!! All three spectators are left holding the exact card/number match that they picked!
An absolutely incredible 3 way prediction.
Easy to do and quick to reset.
Small enough for close-up & big enough to play on stage.
Trilogy Streamline is one effect you will be mad to miss!
Brian Caswell's original Trilogy was one of the best selling effects of 2005. Now Trilogy Streamline is set to do the same in 2006!
Trilogy Streamline has all the impact of the original but get this; the deck is in full view from the very beginning!
Comes complete with 8 page instructions (including method & presentation by Richard Bellars) and special deck of cards required.
Reviews
(Top ▲)
If you'd like to hear my thoughts on the basic effect, check out my review of the original "Trilogy". This review will only focus on the differences in this new version.
First and foremost, the instructions were a thousand times better. They were clear, covered the issue of a 76-card thin deck right up front, and made learning the method quite easy.
The main "improvement" in method is that this version only requires one deck. Unfortunately, from my point of view, the effect has suffered with the change.
In the original, you had only one little bit of "guiding" the card selections. You simply ask one person for a "lowish number" and the second person for a "highish" number. There are plenty of reasonable ways you can justify this.
But with this new version, each of the two people has to choose a number that's both "odd and low" or "even and high". If you follow the script in the instructions, these two requirements are set out at different times. (paraphrasing) "Bob think of an odd number and, Martha, think of an even one." Then a few moments later, after naming a card from the deck, (again, paraphrasing) "Bob, your clue is that between 1 and 52 your number is a lowish number." Unless you have the audience management skills of Max Maven, this could easily turn into a nightmare.
We've seen it so many times. A "better" method leads to a weaker (and/or more confusing) effect.
First and foremost, the instructions were a thousand times better. They were clear, covered the issue of a 76-card thin deck right up front, and made learning the method quite easy.
The main "improvement" in method is that this version only requires one deck. Unfortunately, from my point of view, the effect has suffered with the change.
In the original, you had only one little bit of "guiding" the card selections. You simply ask one person for a "lowish number" and the second person for a "highish" number. There are plenty of reasonable ways you can justify this.
But with this new version, each of the two people has to choose a number that's both "odd and low" or "even and high". If you follow the script in the instructions, these two requirements are set out at different times. (paraphrasing) "Bob think of an odd number and, Martha, think of an even one." Then a few moments later, after naming a card from the deck, (again, paraphrasing) "Bob, your clue is that between 1 and 52 your number is a lowish number." Unless you have the audience management skills of Max Maven, this could easily turn into a nightmare.
We've seen it so many times. A "better" method leads to a weaker (and/or more confusing) effect.