It's definitely exactly the same helmet on eBay and on PiH.
If you compare the screen grabs, it really seems that they used those helmets in both movies. First picture is from the Monty Python movie and the second and third picture is from "Henry V".
O ..... M ....... G ..
There are so many 'possibilities' here, I wouldn't know which one is 'better' or 'worse'.
They are both British films; so this helmet having been used in / rented from the same prop supplier / studio for, both films, is absolutely not impossible.
The only thing in question here is how PIH has sold it is as being from Monty Python, when it's last 'known' statement of provenance was on eBay, which said it was from Henry V.
Unless they can prove (and only screen-caps are going to cut it) that it was used on Monty Python, then IMO, PIH has alot of explaining to do.
I can only say one thing with absolute certainty - eBay seller whale1250_1 is banging his head against the wall at this moment if he knows about the situation.
Last edited by Alan Castillo; Aug 4, 2012 at 5:04 AM.
All those props were rented for Python anyway. Odds are the they are all the same stuff.
All I hear in my head now is, "i spit in your general direction!" LOL.
He bought it for 30 and sold it for 6500 thats a small profit .
The auction doesn't say "odds are" – it says "it is". Huuuuuge difference.Bowelrock said:
A claim this specific requires a screen match. Needless to say, that didn't happen.
Henry V needed dozens (maybe a hundred+?) but MP only needed a handful. Even if they came from the same rental place (not known), the odds are not great that a particular Henry helmet was also used in MP.
This is yet another Profiles fudging of the facts. I wouldn't believe them if they said the sky was blue. Unless they had a screen cap.
Fixed that for you...ecl said:
But doesn't this mean that someone bought the helmet for a very CHEAP price, did research and sold it for more? Is that bad?
But did what research? You mean like thinking 'Hey, that looks kind of like the Monty Python helmets... I bet I could list it in PIH and make tons...'
Then, yeah, that's probably exactly what it means...
Considering that, as mentioned, there are likely 100 or more of these helmets made for/used in Henry V, and maybe a dozen in Python? How can you even speculate that it's used in Grail? Just because it looks similar? You basically have someone 'in the movie industry' guaranteeing it's a helmet from Henry V (why would he lie for $40...?), and someone else with a history of questionable sales claiming it's from a completely different film (why would he lie? Oh wait... $6500...).
Considering that the consignor has a history of listing shady things in PIH (anyone remember the Statue of Liberty from Planet of the Apes (er, I mean The Terminal) head fiasco?) and eBay (see Jason's blog), I doubt there was a lot of research involved...
I have to admit though, even if you knew it was from Holy Grail (but couldn't prove it was worn by one of the 4 French guards seen prominently in the film, Cleese in particular), would it really be worth $6500? For a possible background helmet? Or does including that photo of Cleese and the others suggest it's actually one of THOSE 3 helmets (the 4th being a different design, doesn't count). There's a British memorabilia site that has two of these helmets listed as being from the film for £1,400 each, and they seem to sell other stuff sanctioned by Cleese himself, so I'd trust those a little more than something bought off eBay... And at 1/4 the price (counting premium...) (Never heard of them before, so can't really speak for their authentication tho. But if you are going to take a shot-in-the-dark on a 'French helmet from Python', I'd rather do it for ~$2200 than $8000)
Oh, for F's sake - that thing? Dude, Give. It. Up. It ain't from "Apes". For the simple reason that the Statue of Liberty 'head' they built for "Apes" HAD NO FACE.Rik1138 said:
Period. Done.
God....... Go here - http://images.wikia.com/planetofthea...0/Scaffold.jpg
Gene
Uh, maybe you missed the significance of what I posted... It was a joke (that's why I said 'fiasco'...). PIH listed it as Planet of the Apes. The guy that _built_ it for The Terminal came forward to debunk that claim. He has pictures of it in the shop he worked under construction in 2003/2004. I _KNOW_ it's not from Apes...GKvfx said:
That's been proved already...
My point was, the same person that consigned the Liberty head to PIH as a POTA prop is the same guy that bought the Henry V helmet off eBay and listed in PIH as a Python screen-used helmet...
See a pattern there?
I don't fell sorry for someone willing to pay 8000 USD for a prop helmet without provenance, just upon the claim by PIH that this is screenused. He should know better.
It is however another example of PIH not verifying their representations in the catalogue, which is an issue.
Rik1138 said:
God, no, that wasn't directed at you, Rik....... I checked out Jason's page and he had a link to the Statue of Liberty head on some other site and the Hemstock guy (or whoever has the thing now) is still saying it may be associated with "Apes..." and offering a COA as such.
Gene
Alan, hundreds upon hundreds of props sold by PIH have been shown by experts to be not as advertised over the years, including several in the recent auction, many of which have sold for thousands or even hundreds of thousands of dollars. As far as I can see, Profiles does virtually zero provenance on their own to authenticate items. IT IS ALL ABOUT MAKING AS MUCH MONEY AS POSSIBLE BY DUPING WEALTHY FOOLS.Alan Castillo said:
I understand your beef with PIH, and your correct about many items not being what they claim in hundreds of cases over the years. Your also correct that money drives PIH. However, to say that PIH does ZERO checking is not true. It's in PIH best interest in order to make money, to check items out, and get as much provenance as they can, and in many cases they fail, or ignore the facts? yes, this is true.rkpetersen said:
Although we will of course never find out, I cannot but wonder how many claims for refunds / lawsuits PIH has received from buyers, for having sold 'fakes' / misrepresented items to them.rkpetersen said:
I'll bet you the percentage is shockingly low.
I've been up to Profiles on a number of times helping with friends' consignments and on a couple of occasions I've noticed some props that have been incorrectly identified. Every time I've brought it up, they've responded. Never once have I seen the items I've disputed in an auction catalog. And, on one occasion, I had to field some calls from them as they were having trouble finding a frame grab for a particular item a friend was consigning. They were suspicious of the consignor's memory of the item and wound up pulling it since they couldn't find proof of what film it was from. (I later found out they were correct - the item wasn't from the the film the consignor remembered.)
Again, just my experience with them. Your mileage may vary.......
Gene
Thats a really good question . Anyone remember the Rocky gloves they tried to pawn off last year ? That went over about as well as a fart in Church.Alan Castillo said:
Stallone himself jumped all over it and forced Profiles to take them out of the auction.
Yeah, but that wasn't because they were fake, Stallone didn't want them sold at auction... Authenticity wasn't in question on those... In the end he couldn't stop it tho, didn't they show up and sell in the next auction?planet said:
There's more to that story than has been made public knowledge... Might be the case for a lot of iffy things sold through them... Just because they pull an item doesn't mean it was proved to be fake. Some things just 'shouldn't be sold publicly', if you know what I mean...
I had read it was a question of authenticity thats the reason he wanted it pulled. Not saying your wrong of course just what I came across .
When it comes to the Rocky gloves, I believe those originally came from me. They were authentic. I don't recall the whole story about what went on with them afterwards, but it was as pretty much as described above. Stallone didn't know any of the 22 or so pairs that were purchased for the production got out...but some did.
I've had at least two experiences where Profiles did much more research than I ever expected on pieces that came through me at some point:
1) A Tia Dalma locket I brokered was later presented to them for sale, but they refused to handle it until I got the guy who worked on Pirates to physically go to Profiles and speak with them. Someone else who worked on the films they use for provenance said it wasn't real. The piece eventually went to auction.
2) A Klingon rifle I sold to a collector was later sent to Profiles, where Mike Moore and Scott Brodeen identified it as fake before the auction. I had to go back to the guy for whom I'd brokered the piece and get a refund. He, in turn, had to go to the prop dealer who sold it to him (a very well-respected one), and fix that situation.
Bottom line: Profiles really tries quite hard to check the provenance of everything it sells. I think it's a matter of how squeaky the wheel is about a particular piece. The Grail helmet probably wasn't screamed about loud enough.
Phil
Like any other auction, people with deep pockets lose their effin' minds.
I'm always surprised by the clapping that takes place when an obscene amount of money is spent. Shouldn't we be feeling sorry for that guy?Clutch said:
Frankly, if it were me, I'd give a standing ovation to the fellow who pays the least for an item that is clearly worth much more than was paid.
Phil
Reply with Quote
