I just got back from a Penn & Teller magic show, where I was lucky enough to be picked to verify on stage their "double bullet catch" trick. For those interested, my blurb on the nifty event is at http://www.donath.org/Rants/PennTellerBulletTrick
Penn & Teller Bullet Trick
- Thread starter ctdonath
- Start date
George Hill
Staff Alumnus
I dont know how they do it...
Think I will go home and try it -
"Hey Honey - lets do a magic trick - here is my pistol..."
JUST JOKING!
------------------
"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity." - Sigmund Freud
RAGE AGAINST THE MACHINE
Think I will go home and try it -
"Hey Honey - lets do a magic trick - here is my pistol..."
JUST JOKING!
------------------
"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity." - Sigmund Freud
RAGE AGAINST THE MACHINE
Way back during the early days of television, when they were powered by kerosene, Earnie Kovacks had a program of magic acts followed by a skit. One of the acts had a man catch a bullet in his teeth much the same way as described above. Without lazer sights of course. Sometime later there was a program that explained how the bullet was stopped (not by tooth power).
Still, I would hope that the person firing the pistol REALLY liked me if I was doing the trick. I mean REALLY REALLY liked me.
------------------
Ne Conjuge Nobiscum
"If there be treachery, let there be jehad!"
Still, I would hope that the person firing the pistol REALLY liked me if I was doing the trick. I mean REALLY REALLY liked me.
------------------
Ne Conjuge Nobiscum
"If there be treachery, let there be jehad!"
Gee, if Penn or Teller would try that trick with Janet Reno or Schumer, Feinswine or a whole host of elected politco whores, I'd go to see it.
------------------
Vigilantibus et non dormientibus jura subveniunt
[This message has been edited by 4V50 Gary (edited October 22, 1999).]
------------------
Vigilantibus et non dormientibus jura subveniunt
[This message has been edited by 4V50 Gary (edited October 22, 1999).]
The trick is inspired by an older magic trick that has been around since the 1800's I think.
The original trick was done with a muzzleloader. It involved the magician already having the lead ball inside his mouth. The trick is to have a special ramrod that will catch and remove the ball before the gun is fired.
By the way, I once heard Teller recall a tale on a TV documentary about a magician who did this trick in a saloon once. And after he performed it and amazed the crowd, a cowboy stood up and yelled, "Catch this!" and shot him in the chest. Hecklers.
Unfortunately, I don't know how Penn & Teller's modern adaptation works. And it doesn't help that I've never seen the trick myself. But I do know that they have incredible sleight of hands. And between talking about the cardinal rules and donning ridiculous armor equipment, they seem to have plenty of time to "work their magic" while keeping the audience properly misdirected. The glass is most likely to be shattered by sharp upward impacts generated by the stage glass holders.
Maybe someone else can fill in the blanks?
The original trick was done with a muzzleloader. It involved the magician already having the lead ball inside his mouth. The trick is to have a special ramrod that will catch and remove the ball before the gun is fired.
By the way, I once heard Teller recall a tale on a TV documentary about a magician who did this trick in a saloon once. And after he performed it and amazed the crowd, a cowboy stood up and yelled, "Catch this!" and shot him in the chest. Hecklers.
Unfortunately, I don't know how Penn & Teller's modern adaptation works. And it doesn't help that I've never seen the trick myself. But I do know that they have incredible sleight of hands. And between talking about the cardinal rules and donning ridiculous armor equipment, they seem to have plenty of time to "work their magic" while keeping the audience properly misdirected. The glass is most likely to be shattered by sharp upward impacts generated by the stage glass holders.
Maybe someone else can fill in the blanks?
George Hill
Staff Alumnus
No - I saw the trick on TV - it looked as if the glass was indeed shot through.
The only thing I can think of is that the guns are live fired at each other... Or more accuratly - at each other's reflections as the short quite one is always a certain distance away... and the bullet passes the actual person being shot at - who has a bullet in his mouth...
Notice if you will the lack of PAIN from the heat of the bullet. Bullets, when fired, are very hot. Every have ejected brass hit you? Rather Warm eh? Catch one in your mouth...
This is just the proof that it is a trick and the younger lurkers should not try this at home!
------------------
"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity." - Sigmund Freud
RAGE AGAINST THE MACHINE
The only thing I can think of is that the guns are live fired at each other... Or more accuratly - at each other's reflections as the short quite one is always a certain distance away... and the bullet passes the actual person being shot at - who has a bullet in his mouth...
Notice if you will the lack of PAIN from the heat of the bullet. Bullets, when fired, are very hot. Every have ejected brass hit you? Rather Warm eh? Catch one in your mouth...
This is just the proof that it is a trick and the younger lurkers should not try this at home!
------------------
"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity." - Sigmund Freud
RAGE AGAINST THE MACHINE
SB:
I know how other variants of the trick are done, as you describe. Unfortunately for explainations, I signed both the bullet and the shell, ensured that it was indeed placed in Teller's gun, nobody crossed the dividing line, shots fired, I took the signed bullet out of Penn's mouth, and verified rifling marks & powder burns on the bullet and a distinct smell & appropriate discoloration on the shell (which I removed from Teller's gun). Everything indicates a legitimate firing. Beats the heck out of me!
Long Path:
I'm quite aware that some magicians plant assistants in the audience. I have conclusively proven to myself that the audience members chosen to verify the trick are not "plants". I know that doesn't satisfy _you_, but that's your problem . If you're still skeptical, I recommend you go to the show (~$35), get near-front-row-center (I was at fourth row, slightly left) seats, and volunteer (be ready to give a very brief explaination of how you know guns; "trained at Gunsite and Lethal Force Institute" worked for me). Some things ya just gotta prove to yourself thru experience.
George:
There were two glass plates. One was pretty well destroyed, but the other had 1/3 of the distinctive "shot glass" crack pattern. The bullet in Penn's mouth was indeed the one I put in Teller's gun, and had rifling marks and powder burns and smelled freshly fired.
As for discomfort, the first time I saw it done live (last year), Penn did indeed look uncomfortable while he seemed to be moving the bullet to his teeth.
The shots did not seem as loud as a normal .357; the rounds may have been under-powered, loaded just enough to cross ~10 yards, penetrate two panes of glass and land in one's mouth without harm. (Heck, that's the best explaination I can come up with!)
I know how other variants of the trick are done, as you describe. Unfortunately for explainations, I signed both the bullet and the shell, ensured that it was indeed placed in Teller's gun, nobody crossed the dividing line, shots fired, I took the signed bullet out of Penn's mouth, and verified rifling marks & powder burns on the bullet and a distinct smell & appropriate discoloration on the shell (which I removed from Teller's gun). Everything indicates a legitimate firing. Beats the heck out of me!
Long Path:
I'm quite aware that some magicians plant assistants in the audience. I have conclusively proven to myself that the audience members chosen to verify the trick are not "plants". I know that doesn't satisfy _you_, but that's your problem
. If you're still skeptical, I recommend you go to the show (~$35), get near-front-row-center (I was at fourth row, slightly left) seats, and volunteer (be ready to give a very brief explaination of how you know guns; "trained at Gunsite and Lethal Force Institute" worked for me). Some things ya just gotta prove to yourself thru experience.George:
There were two glass plates. One was pretty well destroyed, but the other had 1/3 of the distinctive "shot glass" crack pattern. The bullet in Penn's mouth was indeed the one I put in Teller's gun, and had rifling marks and powder burns and smelled freshly fired.
As for discomfort, the first time I saw it done live (last year), Penn did indeed look uncomfortable while he seemed to be moving the bullet to his teeth.
The shots did not seem as loud as a normal .357; the rounds may have been under-powered, loaded just enough to cross ~10 yards, penetrate two panes of glass and land in one's mouth without harm. (Heck, that's the best explaination I can come up with!)
Ed Brunner
New member
Consider this; Tremendous sleight of hand involved. There is a lot of time involved.
Suppose the rounds you were shown and signed were blanks with a bullet seated with a light crimp. The marks you made on the bullet
were shown to the entire world and could have easly been duplicated by an assistant on a fired bullet which was given to the "target" along with the masks etc. The firer slips the marked bullet out of the case and fires a blank. The glass is broken by any of a number of methods simultaneously with the sound of the shot.
If you dont like this explanation I have another but it is not near as likely as this one.
Illusion is neat. Why do you think there was a yellow line down the middle of the stage?
Knowing what you know, could my explanation work?
------------------
Better days to be,
Ed
Suppose the rounds you were shown and signed were blanks with a bullet seated with a light crimp. The marks you made on the bullet
were shown to the entire world and could have easly been duplicated by an assistant on a fired bullet which was given to the "target" along with the masks etc. The firer slips the marked bullet out of the case and fires a blank. The glass is broken by any of a number of methods simultaneously with the sound of the shot.
If you dont like this explanation I have another but it is not near as likely as this one.
Illusion is neat. Why do you think there was a yellow line down the middle of the stage?
Knowing what you know, could my explanation work?
------------------
Better days to be,
Ed
Ed:
Not a chance.
The marks were not easily duplicated. I put three marks - two my initials, which I'm quite familiar with writing - on a surface which was difficult to write on. I noted certain small errors/variations in what I wrote. It would have been easier for them to put firing marks on it, which I find unlikely.
Jim:
The bullet remained entirely intact. See the photo at the link at the top of this thread.
They covered all the well-known explainations on this one. At this point, the best explaination I've got is an under-powered round: just enough powder to get it there.
Not a chance.
The marks were not easily duplicated. I put three marks - two my initials, which I'm quite familiar with writing - on a surface which was difficult to write on. I noted certain small errors/variations in what I wrote. It would have been easier for them to put firing marks on it, which I find unlikely.
Jim:
The bullet remained entirely intact. See the photo at the link at the top of this thread.
They covered all the well-known explainations on this one. At this point, the best explaination I've got is an under-powered round: just enough powder to get it there.
Ed Brunner
New member
Wasnt there enough time for them to swedge the bullets thru a die to produce the marks?
The one thing that we are sure of is that it didnt happen the way it appeared to happen.
I dont have a time line on the trick, but I understand that a lot of time elapsed between signing the bullets and cases and recovering the bullets. And there IS a simple explanation!
------------------
Better days to be,
Ed
The one thing that we are sure of is that it didnt happen the way it appeared to happen.
I dont have a time line on the trick, but I understand that a lot of time elapsed between signing the bullets and cases and recovering the bullets. And there IS a simple explanation!
------------------
Better days to be,
Ed
ctdonath,
I saw Penn & Teller do the same illusion about 10 yrs ago and have never figured out exactly how they do it, but let's run this up the flagpole and see who salutes it.
The rounds are made of a regular case with a frangible bullet seated far below the mouth, this is what breaks the glass without endangering the other person. The 'fake' bullet, the one you initialled, is seated over that with a weak crimp. And the fake bullet already has riflings on it which are inside the casing. The real trick is to remove the bullet from the case and transfer the proper bullet to the other performer. Since both Penn and Teller are expert illusionists, I don't think that would be too hard for them if the guns were out of your sight for around 1 or 2 seconds. Ever see Munden or Miculek load or unload a revolver? Since both Penn & Teller end up with one of the revolvers, the previously removed bullet could be passed at that time and the audience is none the wiser.
I think it is painfully obvious that they don't actually shoot any projectile that will reach the other person. This would be much too difficult to achieve reliably and they only have one chance per show to do it right. If they do it wrong, there may not be any more shows. Or they could rename the act "Penn Remembers Teller" or just "And Teller".
I saw Penn & Teller do the same illusion about 10 yrs ago and have never figured out exactly how they do it, but let's run this up the flagpole and see who salutes it.
The rounds are made of a regular case with a frangible bullet seated far below the mouth, this is what breaks the glass without endangering the other person. The 'fake' bullet, the one you initialled, is seated over that with a weak crimp. And the fake bullet already has riflings on it which are inside the casing. The real trick is to remove the bullet from the case and transfer the proper bullet to the other performer. Since both Penn and Teller are expert illusionists, I don't think that would be too hard for them if the guns were out of your sight for around 1 or 2 seconds. Ever see Munden or Miculek load or unload a revolver? Since both Penn & Teller end up with one of the revolvers, the previously removed bullet could be passed at that time and the audience is none the wiser.
I think it is painfully obvious that they don't actually shoot any projectile that will reach the other person. This would be much too difficult to achieve reliably and they only have one chance per show to do it right. If they do it wrong, there may not be any more shows. Or they could rename the act "Penn Remembers Teller" or just "And Teller".
Come on now, folks. Instead of spending all this time trying to figure it out, just enjoy the trick. I saw them do this trick on TV several years back. It truely amazed me and no, I don't know how they did it. But, that's the whole point isn't it.
That's why its called magic!
That's why its called magic!
Ed Brunner
New member
Grayfox; My curse is that I gotta know how things work. There IS a simple explanation!!!
------------------
Better days to be,
Ed
------------------
Better days to be,
Ed
OK, folks, time for a very amateur prestidigitator to make a few comments.
I've seen Penn & Teller do this trick on TV; how they managed it, I don't know. In the course of studying illusion, I have learned how many of the great stage illusions are done, and I think you should all take Grayfox's advice: don't try to figure it out, just sit back and be amazed. It's more fun that way, believe me.
If you discover the "secret" behind some of these magic tricks, it will really p*ss you off, because they are sooooo simple.
The only branch of magic in which knowing how the trick is done makes the tric even more amazing is pure sleight-of-hand; to be able to stack 25 to 50 half dollars on the back of one's hand and roll that stack from front to back and vice versa in a split instant without the hand appearing to move is even more magical when you can actually see it being done. To see the trick without seeing how it's done leaves you doubting your senses; to see how the trick works makes you doubt reality.
------------------
Shoot straight regards, Richard at The Shottist's Center http://forums.delphi.com/m/main.asp?sigdir=45acp45lc
I've seen Penn & Teller do this trick on TV; how they managed it, I don't know. In the course of studying illusion, I have learned how many of the great stage illusions are done, and I think you should all take Grayfox's advice: don't try to figure it out, just sit back and be amazed. It's more fun that way, believe me.
If you discover the "secret" behind some of these magic tricks, it will really p*ss you off, because they are sooooo simple.
The only branch of magic in which knowing how the trick is done makes the tric even more amazing is pure sleight-of-hand; to be able to stack 25 to 50 half dollars on the back of one's hand and roll that stack from front to back and vice versa in a split instant without the hand appearing to move is even more magical when you can actually see it being done. To see the trick without seeing how it's done leaves you doubting your senses; to see how the trick works makes you doubt reality.
------------------
Shoot straight regards, Richard at The Shottist's Center http://forums.delphi.com/m/main.asp?sigdir=45acp45lc
Well, believe it or not, there are several different kinds of people that make up the human race.
To be specific for the current thread, there are those who are entertained by watching something work and there are those who are entertained by knowing how something works. Several of us here fall into both camps and neither group should be criticized no matter how slightly.
I know Grayfox didn't mean to criticize me in any way, but since his comment came immediately after my post, I did feel a slight sting. I have been trying to figure out the physical universe all my life and this is no different.
To be specific for the current thread, there are those who are entertained by watching something work and there are those who are entertained by knowing how something works. Several of us here fall into both camps and neither group should be criticized no matter how slightly.
I know Grayfox didn't mean to criticize me in any way, but since his comment came immediately after my post, I did feel a slight sting. I have been trying to figure out the physical universe all my life and this is no different.