Alleged Screen Used Hero TOS Phaser up for auction

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.


Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Anakin Starkiller

Master Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
9f0870983f272e95417cc1b7430243e1127257c0.jpeg
db0fc4d8df7477e536f6832d81c353cfd34d5e57.jpeg
lf (1).jpg
lf (2).jpg
lf (3).jpg
lf (4).jpg
lf (5).jpg
lf (6).jpg
lf (7).jpg
lf (8).jpg
lf (9).jpg
lf (10).jpg
lf (11).jpg
lf (12).jpg
lf (13).jpg
lf.jpg
 

Gregatron

Sr Member
Fake. But a good fake.

Details do not match the known (non-Greg Jein) heroes. Velcro on the wrong side of the P1, no hint of a P1 jewel, some body details/shapes (trigger box, P1 cradle ribs, P1 rear taper, etc.) don’t match the Jein, when they should be identical, since the heroes and midgrades all appear to have come from the same molds.

The paint and aging also look a little too sloppy and distressed, especially when compared to the Jein.
 

robn1

Master Member
The Velcro is on the same side as it is on Greg's, but the problem there is that Greg's was the only hero with Velcro. There were 4 heroes and the other three are all seen on screen with no Velcro. The other three P1s also have jewels.

The one metal rail on the P1 right side is wide and fits into a slot in the P1 side, the rail on Greg's is narrow and is glued to the shell's outer surface. The other hero P1s seen up close on screen also have rails glued to the outside.

The setting dial numbers are the same sequence as Greg's.

The handle looks quite different from Greg's.

The P1 contours are different, as is the crispy texture.

The P2 beam emitter has no taper, it's just a straight cylinder.
 

Trebor

Active Member
Not an expert but I'm skeptical.

Considering the amount of money involved there is plenty of incentive to fake up a previously unknown Phaser.

The story I saw over on FB was the P1 was already "known" and was paired with a P2 that allegedly Wah Chang had in his possession when the show was cancelled so he could repair or "rework" the prop. He supposedly didn't return it because there was no need once the show was over.

The thing is, that story is just too convenient. Any apparent "wonkiness" can be hand-waved away with, "When Chang worked on it he changed (that odd specific feature) so that's why it's like that now."

If Chang did have it, what's the chain of custody from him to now? And what's the proof that he had it in the first place?

"The accompanying LOA states the studio had sent the Phaser pistol body to Chang for repair and the show was cancelled before he was able to return it."

So who wrote the letter? The person who allegedly got it from Chang in the 60's? What's the proof behind that part of the story?

I mean, we can discuss the oddities that are apparent even to me like the handle size, the large slots on the bottom of the handle and the emitter. And the appearance in general just seems "off" to me.

(Of all those, the emitter bothers me the least as I can see the original breaking and someone sticking something in there as a replacement).

I'll say again though that I'm not an expert. I would really want to believe that a previously unknown prop from my favorite show has been found. But, I'm skeptical between the oddities and the story.
 

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

ALLEY

Master Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
Let’s see…

- What appears to be modern sewing Velcro vs. vintage 1960’s Velcro (vintage 1960’s Velcro and modern Velcro have distinctive differences in “hair” density, length, and overall spread, or pattern).

—The use of a stamped aluminum extra crispy vs. a Mylar extra crispy.

—The inability to tie this piece directly to any previously identified prop or screen shots.

—Stories of provenance involving apparently long-dead people who cannot be contacted for verification, etc.

I don’t know. You tell me.
 
Last edited:

Highliners

Active Member
Fake. But a good fake.

Details do not match the known (non-Greg Jein) heroes. Velcro on the wrong side of the P1, no hint of a P1 jewel, some body details/shapes (trigger box, P1 cradle ribs, P1 rear taper, etc.) don’t match the Jein, when they should be identical, since the heroes and midgrades all appear to have come from the same molds.

The paint and aging also look a little too sloppy and distressed, especially when compared to the Jein.

Personally, I find what's going on here quite interesting. Mind you, I am not out to deliberately embarrass anyone on here but I find some of these comments patently absurd.

You are all behaving as if these things weren't "work-a-day film props" that were written-off (as accounts see things) or "consumed" during filming. At the time these things were never religious Icons of any sort. One MUST keep in mind, these were used and greatly abused during the shooting of the original show. Have any of you ever worked on so much as one actual "Hollywood" production?

That said, by your own comments, it appears you are all experts, (and that's despite one claim to the contrary) why is it then that Heritage Auctions did not ask any of you to in come and give your opinions as to the authenticity?

----Are any of you aware of just who it was that they did ask to do this verification, and provide truly genuine expert authentication?

To further explain what I am postulating:

All of you have ignored/overlooked Wah Chang's reportedly having possession in order to repair the thing, ostensibly for damage accrued during filming. Even perhaps for a broken off acrylic "emitter tip" which would then have to be replaced and therefore no longer identical with the initial "original" piece. It was not simply "stuck in" either. So, pomder this: how is it that those cracks get "put" into these things? ---I do "wonder" about that! (Not!)

Have any of you considered how often such repairs/repaints occur during principal filming and to what extent such repairs change or even outright modify a polyester/fiberglass film prop? THREE Seasons guys, 79 episodes, that's a lot of repair work.

But what occurs to me is you are all going on and on about insignificant external minutiae, those unimportant and most easily corrupted details as if those thing didn't change with their being thrown across a sound-stage, or Bill S. (as usual) dropping such a thing onto the studio's concrete floor, or with each repaint, or script required re-fit, etc.

---And not one of you commented on how the internal operating mechanisms are virtually identical, even down to the use of "Dykem layout fluid" (comes in blue, purple and red) on the clearly "batch-made" operating, internal metal components. Please, tell me; HOW could that possibly be the case, if the Phaser in the upcoming auction was exclusively made from photographs?

Nor did one of you comment or even notice that under the early-on 1st season shooting schedule repaint from B&W into two tone grey, the original "Mantrap" black paint appears on the "Hand Phase" body, is easily seen wherever there are chips in that hastily brush-applied grey paint.

"GREGATRON" claims the Velcro on the wrong side compared to Greg Jein's, Um, how do you know that? The jewels were held on with what specific adhesive ---so they will be there no matter how hard Shatner handled the things?

"ROBN1" states: "The handle looks "quite different from Greg's (Jein)" Are you absolutely certain you know what you are saying here Robn1?

Also: "The other three had jewels" Precisely WHEN did these things have jewels, Robn1? Neither of the two depicted have any jewels. Is that irrefutible "proof" neither of these is an original??? Robn1 also says, the "...contours are different" and you know this Robn1 from personally handling these things? Have you any proof that you are capable of the task of matching said contours?

"Crispy" as an adjective here? Robin1, THAT does sounds like you do enjoy those fries. And too, brush applied, enamel paint occludes a "crisp finish" you know.

"TREBOR" Sez: "And the appearance in general just seems "off" to me." But, but, ... I though you said you weren't an "expert" Trebor?

"ALLEY" Claims: "The use of a stamped aluminum extra crispy that appears to have been possibly subjected to a “black wash” vs. a Mylar extra crispy." Again with the "cripsy", it's probably time to lay off all the fries and potato chips guys.

Alley, This material is embossed (rolled actually) thin (as in less than .010" thick) sheet aluminum, precisely the same stock as used on the Klingon Disrupter barrel tip "Coffins". But here, one of these Hand Phasers has the material applied inverted, 180 degrees out from the other. You are looking at the underside of the very same material! Do you see that now that I have pointed it out?

But this comment is simply too much for me to bear Alley: "—The inability to tie this piece directly to any previously identified prop or screen shots." HOW do YOU know?

---Enough.

1) None of you noticed both grips are made entirely from brass, with the correct plugs on both ends for conversion to Phaser III configuration. Were any of you aware of that tid-bit prior to the announcement of this auction?

2) Not one of you noticed under that early-on shooting schedule repaint into grey, the initial black paint appears where there are chips.

3) It feels as though you guys have a tough time accepting the reality of/with the final appearance and genuine crudity of that period's filmed props.

Perhaps most important:

I get a distinct feeling that you guys have some deep seated fear, that according multiple known and true expert opinion(s) of those retained by the (not in-expert) people themselves at Heritage Auctions, and after lengthy physical examination that this actually is a genuine, filmed Star Trek Phaser prop.

Are any of you considering the source of your own skepticism? Could this be due to the fact that the reality of this situation is the hammer price of this "item" in all probability will be greater than each of your total self-worth? And therefore, not one of you will be the one to ultimately own this Phaser?

As all of you would say: I'm just saying....
 
Last edited:

robn1

Master Member
The P2 beam emitter has no taper, it's just a straight cylinder.
The phaser from the Court Martial deleted scene has an emitter tip very similar to this one, so this is not necessarily indicative of a fake.
Capture.JPG


Capture 2.JPG


What's odd about the emitter (on the auction phaser and the Court Martial) is that the tip is a slightly smaller diameter than the rest of the tube, as if it's a separate piece glued onto the tip. I made a few this way, so I could use tube for the main part of the emitter without having to drill it out.
 
Last edited:

ALLEY

Master Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
The phaser from the Court Martial deleted scene has an emitter tip very similar to this one, so this is not necessarily indicative of a fake.
View attachment 1465780
That’s not the same phaser….

The top rim of the side dial in the phaser screen shot, above, runs partially into the side ribs (the very bottom row of the side ribs is partially cut into by the top rim of the side dial).

The side dial in this newly discovered hero phaser does not exhibit this detail and does not interrupt the bottom row of the side ribs.

BFECC6A1-A395-41BD-8E20-297A7CAC3265.jpeg
 

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Gregatron

Sr Member
That’s not the same phaser….

The top rim of the side dial in the phaser screen shot, above, runs partially into the side ribs (the very bottom row of the side ribs is partially cut into by the top rim of the side dial).

The side dial in this newly discovered hero phaser does not exhibit this detail and does not interrupt the bottom row of the side ribs.

View attachment 1465781

And, since the other screenused phasers all seem to have the knob cut partially into the ribs, it indicates that the depression for the knob was a part of the P2 body mold. Unlike this one.
 

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Anakin Starkiller

Master Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
The main arguments against authenticity, beyond feel and style, is that the Velcro does not seem to match 1960s Velcro and the extra crispy is aluminum, not Mylar, which is generally associated with modern replicas.
 

Dsimdude

Member
And not to be a Debbie Downer but... the person who's trying to sell this is guilty of fraud, and the auction house that's trying to sell it would be also complicit in that fraud. Just sayin'...
 

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. Your new thread title is very short, and likely is unhelpful.
  2. Your reply is very short and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  3. Your reply is very long and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  4. It is very likely that it does not need any further discussion and thus bumping it serves no purpose.
  5. Your message is mostly quotes or spoilers.
  6. Your reply has occurred very quickly after a previous reply and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  7. This thread is locked.

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Top