Roland Deshain's Revolvers from The Dark Tower Movie

Okay, as regards the grips looking small in his hands...

I've participated in Cowboy Action Shooting. I have owned ivory handled '51 Navys (consecutive serial #s, hand carved to resemble Hickock's), and Colt model 1873s. I've even had a chance to fire a genuine double-action Lightning (very rare, and used by Val Kilmer in Tombstone). So, I have a bit of experience with these guns.

I've fired a replica 1858 Remington. They have awfully small grips, especially when compared to the Colt Navy. And, like in "Pale Rider", the entire cylinder drops from the frame and a new one is easily (if you do a little filing) popped in. The "web" under the barrel is the ramrod for the unmodified cap and ball loading mechanism; when converted to fire cartridges the web just drops down (you can see the spring loaded catch under the end of the barrel), exposing the small metal axle the cylinder rotates around. Pull that out, and there is nothing to keep the cylinder in place. Let it fall, drop a new cylinder in, pop the pin back in place, and slap the metal rib back into place and you're ready to rock.

I've seen guys that practice that particular move and can do it INCREDIBLY fast. The design of the frame doesn't lend itself well to a loading gate, and most shooters just go with the cylinder swap. Do that, and you don't need an ejector. And can carry many cylinders, like the picture shows. I'm 100% certain those are complete cylinders. Damned heavy and bulky, but efficient enough.

Since the books mentioned that the hot shells left burnt-in circles on Roland's fingertips, we can safely assume that the revolvers used in the books are NOT Remington-based. Yet one more reason I'm thinking that this movie will 1) suck and 2) be a standalone. Of course, why the shells would burn his fingers when he doesn't need to touch the newly-fired ones (they drop out, you only have to push in new ones!) always puzzled me...
 
I just remembered that Ruger made a modern cap-and-ball gun in stainless steel that looks like a beefy version of the Remington. Convert that to fire cartridges (really just replace the hammer and remove the ramrod portion of the loading mechanism since you wouldn't need an ejector or loading gate), then sandblast it, and you'd have something that looks an awful lot like these guns...
 
cshoier said:
like in "Pale Rider", the entire cylinder drops from the frame and a new one is easily (if you do a little filing) popped in. The "web" under the barrel is the ramrod for the unmodified cap and ball loading mechanism; when converted to fire cartridges the web just drops down (you can see the spring loaded catch under the end of the barrel), exposing the small metal axle the cylinder rotates around. Pull that out, and there is nothing to keep the cylinder in place. Let it fall, drop a new cylinder in, pop the pin back in place, and slap the metal rib back into place and you're ready to rock.

I've seen guys that practice that particular move and can do it INCREDIBLY fast. The design of the frame doesn't lend itself well to a loading gate, and most shooters just go with the cylinder swap. Do that, and you don't need an ejector. And can carry many cylinders, like the picture shows. I'm 100% certain those are complete cylinders. Damned heavy and bulky, but efficient enough.
Click to expand...

The pic below shows the speed loaders in his belt. You can easily see the bullet tips. This would tend to indicate that they are NOT complete cylinders.

attachment.php
 
I stand corrected! Now that I am on a tablet and can enlarge the picture beyond the 1-click my laptop allowed, I DO see the full-moon clips. But I stand by my statement that this gun's design does NOT support that method since you have to remove the entire cylinder to reload. It's not much faster, and requires juggling the frame, cylinder, AND clip to reload. Slow and clumsy, even for a Gunslinger.
 
A bunch of this is not adding up to me. All these "hero" shots that we're seeing shows pistols that appear to have no natural way of loading other than dropping the ejection arm, pulling the cylinder rod and dropping the cylinder. There's no visible loading ports and no visible hinges of any sort that I can see on them....

BUT... All those rounds on Sai Roland's belt are clearly in moon clips, which seems counter productive for a pistol that just drops the whole cylinder(it'd be better to just carry multiple cylinders). We're missing something here, and it's weirding me out, lol

My fear is that their going to make some woo woo magical way of loading the guns... or something goofy like that... I dunno... I'm just hoping these closeups have been rubber stunt guns....
 
I wonder if there are no actual firearms used in the film. The trend in Hollywood for a while now has been to not use real guns whenever possible. Its cheaper to use dummy guns\airsofts, insurance companies that insure these productions like it, and its safer. Maybe there are only different stunt versions and the only "hero" guns would be used for any close up shots of him reloading, if they even do that. Just because King made numerous references to it in the books doesn't mean it'll be in the film. They've already said this film isnt a direct adaptation of any one of the books. I don't want to spoil anything, but if you know how the books end, then you know how its possible that Roland's story may change.
 
Until the gun-reload mystery is solved. I am hoping we can get a picture of the back of the holster belt. I suspect it will just be plain and simple like the front. But I'd like to see it anyways.
 
cshoier said:
Since the books mentioned that the hot shells left burnt-in circles on Roland's fingertips, we can safely assume that the revolvers used in the books are NOT Remington-based. Yet one more reason I'm thinking that this movie will 1) suck and 2) be a standalone. Of course, why the shells would burn his fingers when he doesn't need to touch the newly-fired ones (they drop out, you only have to push in new ones!) always puzzled me...
Click to expand...

While King is one of my favorite authors of all time (and Dark Tower my favorite story), he is notoriously terrible with any firearm-related (he abhors them, naturally). He admits to this plenty of times. So his gun-related references in the books don't really mean anything. And it seems like that may carry over to the movie given the seemingly impossible setup we've seen in pictures.

Still hoping the movie isn't garbage. They've got some good names in there and a great story to draw from. There is potential there.

Dope
 
I was a big King fan back in high school, & somehow missed out on the DT series. No idea how.

I'm starting the series now to prepare myself for the film,& just started the second book, The Drawing of the Three. Since it's fresh in my mind, I thought I'd share that his guns & gun belts get wet at the beginning,& there's a description of him cleaning them...

The book clearly states that the cylinders 'swing out'. He also checked his rounds to see which ones might still be dry & he has a total of 57, with maybe 20 of those dry. These are carried in what's described as two standard leather gun belts that cross on his hips. Seems like the rounds are in what we usually think of, individual loops along the back of the belts.

I know this has no bearing on what they're doing in the movie, but I thought I'd share what seems to be a clear description from the books. Now, since the movie will be a continuation of the story, instead of an adaptation,i guess they can use any story related reasoning to change any aspect of it.
 
KhalDrogo said:
These are from the latest issue of Entertainment Weekly. Possibly stunt copies of the hero, but some good detail.

View attachment 646103

View attachment 646104
Click to expand...

Apart from the over cyclinder "Plate" it is pritty much the same design and the Colt navy. The piece of metal under the barrel is an ejection leaver to push out the "spent" brass.
You can just see the hinge in the 2nd image, but the casing in the middle is not wide enough.

Usagi Pilgrim said:
The book clearly states that the cylinders 'swing out'. He also checked his rounds to see which ones might still be dry & he has a total of 57, with maybe 20 of those dry. These are carried in what's described as two standard leather gun belts that cross on his hips. Seems like the rounds are in what we usually think of, individual loops along the back of the belts.
Click to expand...

I think the props people may not have known this when designing the gun.

They used a powder version for the prop because they are easy to get hold off, the converted models (as someone spotted) had part of the back frame filed out above the trigger finger so that a cartridge could be loaded.

If you are looking to start a 3d project then http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:1356367 would be a good starting point.
 
JamesPurcell said:
Apart from the over cyclinder "Plate" it is pritty much the same design and the Colt navy. The piece of metal under the barrel is an ejection leaver to push out the "spent" brass.
You can just see the hinge in the 2nd image, but the casing in the middle is not wide enough.
Click to expand...

The part over the cylinder is called a 'top strap'.

The ejecting rod on a cartridge converted Colt Navy is off-set. It is not centered under the barrel. It is off-set due to the loading-gate, which is also where the cartridges are ejected, being on the right side of the frame. As seen below.

Colt_Navy_51_Conversion_-_Colt_Open_Top_1872.JPG

Roland's guns are not Colt Navy or any other fixed-cylinder revolver. They are based on the Remington 1858. The first post was correct.
 
JamesPurcell said:
They used a powder version for the prop because they are easy to get hold off, the converted models (as someone spotted) had part of the back frame filed out above the trigger finger so that a cartridge could be loaded.
Click to expand...

The supposed filed out part to load a bullet is actually part of the original unconverted cap and ball design and NOT large enough to pass a bullet through into the cylinder when converted.

New_model_Army_IMG_3544.jpg
 
ARKM said:
The supposed filed out part to load a bullet is actually part of the original unconverted cap and ball design and NOT large enough to pass a bullet through into the cylinder when converted.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/45/New_model_Army_IMG_3544.jpg
Click to expand...

Yeh, but I was thinking (judging my the belt loops) that his was a modded cartridge one with the bigger filed out section.

My mistake, But what I thought was the loading pin (curse you Remington for ripping off Samual Colts design) is actually the cylinder pin which slides forward releasing the cylinder. which means he can simply just drop out the cylinder and insert a preloaded cylinder or quickly reload using the (halfmoon did you call them) clips.

OT oh now there is an idea how I will fit a knife blade as a loading leaver.
 
Reading the first book (first time reading them) and from the shootout in tully I get the impression that he may have a pair of "Brake top" style revolvers like this.
9385704_1.jpg
 
This thread is more than 5 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.

Similar threads

nitrox
Street Fighter The Movie - Bison Dollars
Replies
4
Views
584
Onkelpsycho
Onkelpsycho
DMO
Martian eye from War of the Worlds
Replies
0
Views
132
DMO
DMO
Snohoman
Working time machine model from 1960 movie "The Time Machine" based on book from H.G. Wells
Replies
4
Views
2,090
rocketeer25
rocketeer25
Birdie
Shipping ex military items from the US?
Replies
4
Views
399
Mozzie
Mozzie
BingoMaru
Kermit’s Banjo from The Muppet Movie
Replies
2
Views
864
joberg
joberg
Back
Top