Blade Runner ID comparisons

Kurt,

That's a beautiful missive, and it has many of the syntactical earmarks of a former friend of mine, whom I thought was busy tilting at other windmills. Apparently, his attention has again turned towards me.

Everything you extrapolate in your post is false and misleading.

The goal here is either to force me into divulging additional information and compromising my contacts, or getting me to contradict myself in order to discredit me—or both.

Regardless, I think the way I've conducted myself in the community for the past eight years speaks for itself, and I have absolutely nothing to prove; particularly, in this case, to people who haven't even purchased the wallet set in the first place.

I stand by the project. I stand by my contact. And I stand by my accomplishments and contributions to the prop community at large.

I have NEVER ripped anyone off.

I am NOT a thief.

I am NOT a liar.

If you don't like me, that's your problem. But I've never done anything to anyone that deserves this level of hate and animosity.

Shame on you and everyone else who posted to this thread attacking my veracity. You are people with no empathy or concern for the feelings of others.

None of you seem to want to contribute to the community. On the contrary, destruction is the sole motivation behind your poorly executed and transparent actions.

Days like this make me ashamed to tell people I collect props.

Phil
 
<div class='quotetop'>(Serafino @ Sep 9 2006, 05:13 AM) [snapback]1316264[/snapback]</div>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9-1-1

They were still trying to make it universal in 1999, but sure someone could have known about it in '84.
[/b]


In the UK the number is 999 and has covered the whole of the UK since the 1930s. Being from the UK could Ridley Scott have discussed this with him before he made the ID's stating clearly what he wanted on them?

Chris.
 
<div class='quotetop'>(philippes @ Sep 9 2006, 12:29 AM) [snapback]1316267[/snapback]</div>
Kurt,

That's a beautiful missive, and it has many of the syntactical earmarks of a former friend of mine, whom I thought was busy tilting at other windmills. Apparently, his attention has again turned towards me.[/b]

Phil,

Quit looking for conspiracies against you and start looking at the messages being sent. This isn't the first time you've suggested that my words were not my own when I've disagreed with you, and the act is getting tiresome. I'm open for constructive criticism, but the idea that I'm too stupid to form my own opinions and arguments I can't stomach lightly. If you've got evidence to support your theories, feel free to post it. Otherwise, I don't patronize you in that way, so I'd appreciate it if you'd do the same.

<div class='quotetop'></div>
Everything you extrapolate in your post is false and misleading.

The goal here is either to force me into divulging additional information and compromising my contacts, or getting me to contradict myself in order to discredit me—or both.[/b]

A. I don't care what "additional information" you have. I think we all have all the information we need to see "what's what".

B. You're doing a good job of contradicting yourself, which is going far in your current discredit.

<div class='quotetop'></div>
Regardless, I think the way I've conducted myself in the community for the past eight years speaks for itself, and I have absolutely nothing to prove; particularly, in this case, to people who haven't even purchased the wallet set in the first place.[/b]

As I stated, whether your wallet/ID's are accurate or as described to those you sold to is between you and the buyers as far as that single matter goes. Whether your customers have reason to believe that you may have dropped the ball in this instance does though go toward showing that you have a huge conflict of interest in speaking for what the "stakeholders" think (as you have), and defending them as simply an interested third party, when you yourself are a stakeholder in this matter whose best interests are served by having the photos removed. It's what happened at that point...when our forum was denied use of good reference that what you can prove becomes important.

<div class='quotetop'></div>
I stand by the project. I stand by my contact. And I stand by my accomplishments and contributions to the prop community at large.

I have NEVER ripped anyone off.

I am NOT a thief.

I am NOT a liar.

If you don't like me, that's your problem. But I've never done anything to anyone that deserves this level of hate and animosity.[/b]

I never called you any of those things and this isn't personal. "Hate" has nothing to do with it. Our forum has been denied something valuable because of back-room dealing and self serving interests. That bothers me. That's why I've commented on this.

<div class='quotetop'></div>
Shame on you and everyone else who posted to this thread attacking my veracity. You are people with no empathy or concern for the feelings of others.[/b]

You yourself have admitted that you were wrong. You claimed not to have a stake in the matter but do. You can't seem to explain that contradiction or seemingly any other contradiction without sidestepping the issues and devolving into victimhood. I believe this is exactly the same way the Miami Vice ID controversy played out if I'm not mistaken.

<div class='quotetop'></div>
None of you seem to want to contribute to the community. On the contrary, destruction is the sole motivation behind your poorly executed and transparent actions.

Days like this make me ashamed to tell people I collect props.
[/b]

I say the real problem here is self hate and a need to be made the victim. Again...take some time and think about it. I, and many of those who have disagreed with you aren't your enemy. Seriously consider this constructive criticism. Otherwise, I fear your going to be repeating patterns that really aren't in your best interest for some time, and paying with your reputation.
 
<div class='quotetop'>(philippes @ Sep 9 2006, 12:29 AM) [snapback]1316267[/snapback]</div>
Kurt,

Everything you extrapolate in your post is false and misleading.


Phil
[/b]


But not in mine.

Still gonna buy mine back, Phil?
 
As I said before:
Phil should be REQUIRED to provide proof that his ID is what he says it is:
<div class='quotetop'></div>
. . . this prop exactly reproduces the ID briefly shown by Rick Deckard after he dispatches the Replicant Zhora[/b]
If he cannot, I believe he should be permantly banned for committing fraud as per the RPFÂ’s CoC:
<div class='quotetop'></div>
In EXTREME CASES such as fraud, threats, recasting etc., the RPF Staff may omit any or all steps in this system.[/b]
 
<div class='quotetop'>(juno @ Sep 9 2006, 01:10 AM) [snapback]1316295[/snapback]</div>
As I said before:
Phil should be REQUIRED to provide proof that his ID is what he says it is:
<div class='quotetop'>
. . . this prop exactly reproduces the ID briefly shown by Rick Deckard after he dispatches the Replicant Zhora[/b]
If he cannot, I believe he should be permantly banned for committing fraud as per the RPFÂ’s CoC:
<div class='quotetop'></div>
In EXTREME CASES such as fraud, threats, recasting etc., the RPF Staff may omit any or all steps in this system.[/b]
[/b][/quote]

I don't necessarily agree. He's already conceded that he or his sources where in error when this claim was made. I feel there's no need to further beat this dead horse - he can deal with his customers privately if they have an issues with him. He's claimed he stands behind his COA and I know in the past that when requested, he's made refunds to people who requested them.

Unless people come here claiming that Phil will no longer stand by his word and his COA's, then I think a call for banning is jumping the gun severely. Until I see clear evidence that someone KNOWINGLY lied about a deal like this, in an attempt to defraud them, I wouldn't call for their banning. Though, I'm pretty much against bannings for all but trolls and the most serious serial rip-off artists anyways. I don't think anyone (at least I hope) thinks Phil falls into either of those categories.
 
As much as I hate to admit it, I think I'm in agreeance with you on the kinds of people who should be banned. I just see this as such a huge ripoff.

Ah well, deep down I know that nothing much will come of this except maybe the longest thread in history.
 
Juno, I disagree with your line of attack... and why are you so hellbent on getting Phil kicked off the RPF?

Might I also politely ask - who made you the Judge™ of the RPF? You're a regular member, same as I, and same as Phil. If we are all truly equal, can I ask for a temp ban of you for being a troublemaker? Can I get paranoid and say "OMG LOL T4BB members are at it again."?

No - that's silly. We're all adults here. Can I politely ask that you stop playing net nanny and Columbo in the eleventy Blade Runner threads (a subject you CLAIM to have no interest in) and go make something? Is your hobby now patrolling the RPF to find injustice? I know a guy I used to call friend that pretty much became what he hated, doing the very same thing.

Phil has answered these incessant questions, and has put up with an undue amount of suspicion and rabble-rousing from the playa-haters. Either believe him, or don't - but stop embarassing yourself by asking for his PERMANENT BAN (cue thunderclap) for what we have been told was an HONEST case of "trying to reproduce to the best of human ability lots of variant props from a movie from 25 freaking years ago".

He is human. So is the original owner of the BR wallet. I don't think anyone lied. They did their best. I still would buy a set if I had a free $1k in the prop fund and if I had the other more desirable props on my list.

Also, with respect I say this - your public posting of the "real" BR ID was devoid of class, and in my opinion can be seen as a ban-able offense. You deliberately are stirring an already scalding pot. What in the world are you hoping to accomplish? For real?

If we ban Phil, will "justice" be served? Will the meadows return to green? Will hummingbirds flit from flower to flower under the approving gaze of Pan himself?

Nope... pretty sure that all it would do is delight a few banned members and the RPF would lose one more active and well-intentioned member.

I apologize for the rant - I'm just really sick of the hostility I read from you.
 
Hey guys-

I'm just another member and I'm pretty dismayed by this thread.
I have dealt with Phil quite a few times and he is an honorable guy.

I absolutely believe that Phil in good conscience recieved what he believed to be the actual prop. In fact, I'm convinced it was production created, just not used in that scene.
Most screen featured prop collectors know that sometimes when multiple props are created they differ from eachother. They have prototypes, working versions, revised versions etc. Sometimes all used on set at the same time.

Ridley Scott is notorious for his art direction and his constant changing of details.
In fact, I just looked at some photos of Deckard's gun from the film and though the hero prop matches the 'Bradbury photo shoot' and end sequence with Rachel, it doesnt match other scenes. At least 2 different heroes that don't match each other exactly.

In fact, how many debates have members had about lightsabers not matching up?

If you bought a wallet set and you have concerns, then I feel you should contact Phil. If you didnt, then you would not or should not have had access to the replica anyway, so you shouldnt have any involvement in this.

Please don't call me names, flame me or ban me. I am just another member of this board who wanted to have his say.
 
This arguement just doesn't make sense to me.

The Phil ID matches up very closely (graphics and material) with the V ID that came from a completely unrelated prop seller. This cannot be a sheer coincidence. Unless "Phil's great money making conspiracy" goes back to the mid eighties you guys are way off base. Phil just replicated what he thought was authentic and for all intensive purposes is. The reuse of the ID on a TV show a made couple years later proves it's "pre-conspiracy" existence without a doubt.

How the ID was actually used in BR production is another matter and an interesting one. How much money Phil did or didn't make is irrevelant and an improper thing to complain about. However, if he actively tried to coverup the incongruity between IDs, that is a problem but I don't think he did. I'm not an Phil apologist either. In fact if you go back to one of the original threads you'll find that I was the absolute FIRST to point out the difference in the Zhora ID and what Phil's ID.

Buyer beware is always the case in all practises. Especially in a super bizarre case like this. We are talking about replicating a prop that in all honesty is really even seen on screen. You won't find many bigger BR geeks than I in the world but even I wasn't willing to cough up the cash for the wallet set. It just isn't in the movie for the most part. Two scenes and blurry as hell.

In alot of ways the appeal of buying the wallet set was the fact that you were buying something that wasn't on screen and really couldn't be replicated without the original item present. That irony is even compounded now that the one piece in the wallet we get a look at on screen is different than the one replicated. However if Deckard had flopped over that wallet one more time I'm sure we would have seen that nice shiny gold wallet badge that is see nin Phil's set... but Deckard did not.

You guys just want to make waves and shake your fists in the air. Sheesh. Go bitch about MR remaking the same Blaster and Saber over and over again and getting details wrong every time. I'm still pissed about their crappy TOS phaser design. There's a conpiracy for you.

Nick
 
Moffeaton, I could whip up some equally vitriolic response to your post, but THAT would be devoid of class.
 
Been an interesting and exciting time to be a blade runner fan.

Phil, you gotta run for office man. Your ability to not be wrong, even when your'e wrong about something major like this, is something to behold. :angel And I don't mean that as an attack, I wish I had that kind of skill.. You're a wordsmith. An artist man.

And it's entertaining on top of that. I'm sorry I missed the Miami Vice ID thread back in the day. Sounds like a real zinger.

I think Juno's intentions are to reveal a potential scam, and there is nothing wrong with that. I'm sure even Phil would agree. The hostility probably comes from the way some folks dance, which is expertly. :p

Not everyone likes dancing. :eek:

But the rant is understandable Jason. This stuff is frustrating no matter what your opinion is, or how you feel about all of this stuff. It's important to root out scam artists and liars, and thieves, but this takes a huge toll on our enjoyment of this hobby, doesn't it?

Fun stops in it's tracks, then it gets yanked into the bushes and beaten with a pillowcase full of doorknobs. 'least for me. :unsure

The reason fun was stopped, and beaten however, was not Juno's doing. This is a "reaction" thread.

I'm not sure about banning for the Id's not matching, I for one don't think this should go as unpunished. The wallet project was advertised here, and Phil is a member of this community, it should be able to be openly discussed I think.

Unpunished seems like a strong word for how I feel, but I'm not sure what else to write, and it's really late. :)

I don't have any real problem with the ID being posted, it's been around for a long time now, everyone who wants a photo of it, has a photo of it.

The funny thing is, the photo of the ID would not be here, and this thread would never have happened, no one would have ever questioned Phil or Richard's character if Karl would not have been asked to remove his photos. None of the drama that ensued would have. Interesting how that works, you're trying to protect somebody, and end up getting shot yourself. No good deed goes . . .

This whole thing makes me feel :thumbsdown

Njc----------------------
 
I bought the whole set from Phil, because I know from experience that his contacts within the industry as well as high-end collectors is almost unsurpassed. Thus I knew that his replica would be drawing from sources nobody else had access to. Was I aware that different prop data might surface at some future date? Yes.

Was I aware at the time that most of the Blade Runner hand-props were constructed in three different versions? No.

Does it make any difference to me? No.

Do I think that Phil would have made the best replica it was possible for him to do at the time? Yes.

If Phil had access to the "Worldcon" material, do I think he would have used that? Yes.

Was I a member of Toys for Big Boys when the friendship between Phil and its owner, a banned member of the RPF disintegrated? Yes. It was very ugly. One of the parties involved, the smaller man, is well-known for his crusades, his vendettas, his ever-shifting alliances and his malleable morals.

Did I see that afore-mentioned banned member use his forum as a whipping post to organize ad hoc attacks at the RPF by those weak-minded enough to willingly act as catÂ’s-paws? Yes. Constantly. I still have some of the threads archived.

Does a different forum exist where the members largely do nothing more than howl about what idiots the members of the RPF are? On those occasions when they're not talking about how much better they'd run the place if they were in charge? Yes. Doc supplied a link to it earlier.

Is that a forum that seems to hold a magnetic attraction for members of an ethically challenged profession, also convicted embezzlers and convicted pedophiles? Yes. Although in all fairness, the pedophile no longer openly frequents that board.

Do I see a large number of those who commonly frequent that forum leaping into this thread to take shots at Phil? To raise doubts about what was or may have been unknowable? Yes and Yes.

Do I think that these actions are at the behest of the afore-mentioned banned malcontent? No I do not.

I cannot imagine this individual - fondly referred to as Voldemort by some - jeopardizing his image with such a request. No, I believe that it is more than likely motivated by some appallingly sycophantic desire that some people have to ingratiate themselves with a small, bullying little man who also happens to be the fiercest keyboard cowboy around.

I also cannot imagine that the administrators of this forum can look at some of the contributors within this thread and not understand where this is coming from. What has motivated it. I am not saying that there are not some good questions being asked, nor am I stating that I have not seen a good point or two rise up.

I *AM* saying that the moderators and administrators here at the RPF have allowed things to get whipped into a lynch mob by some contributors with very questionable motives. I haven't seen such dog piling since I walked away from Toys 4 Big Babies in disgust.

Phil, a man we both know - likewise stabbed in the back by the same maggot - is doing well and is much happier since he stopped participating in areas where the little shyster can extend his leprous tendrils. I urge you to abstain from posting to this thread, and correspond with any concerned wallet or ID owners via eMail only.

In closing, I can only state that in the seven years I have known Phil, I have never seen him act in a dishonest manner. I have seen him refrain from doing so for profit several times. I do not know the answers to many of the questions posed in this thread, I wish I did. But I will happily reserve judgment until Phil answers them. I am aware - as perhaps some of you are not - that Phil must protect the confidentiallity of others than himself quite frequently. But let me state for the record that my trust in Phil is absolute. I do trust him enough to have instructed my heir to use Phil Steinschneider as the agent of sale for my screen-used props should anything unexpected ever happen to me. Not that this matters, but that is trusting him with a great deal.

Best Regards,

J.A.S.
 
And thus starts the John and T4BB did it pile up and spin on the things, void of all the facts, the real topic and issues at hand, just an easy cop out by pointing the finger towards T4BB and asking the staff to sweep it under the rug... :rolleyes :rolleyes :rolleyes
 
Do you want me to list the TfBB and OT-Whinefest/PropEd members in this thead for you? What percentage of participation in this thread would you say they make up? Any of the statements in my post you would like to debate, please feel free to start. I'm going to bed now, maybe I'll get to you in the morning. Probably not. I've got better things to do with my time.

'night,

J.A.S.
 
<div class='quotetop'>(outlander @ Sep 9 2006, 01:50 AM) [snapback]1316343[/snapback]</div>
Do you want me to list the TfBB and OT-Whinefest/PropEd members in this thead for you? What percentage of participation in this thread would you say they make up? Any of the statements in my post you would like to debate, please feel free to start. I'm going to bed now, maybe I'll get to you in the morning. Probably not. I've got better things to do with my time.

'night,

J.A.S.
[/b]

Yep, how about back on topic and away from T4BB...

Phil ID to screen used ID as claimed.
 
<div class='quotetop'>(Noeland @ Sep 9 2006, 02:21 AM) [snapback]1316325[/snapback]</div>
Fun stops in it's tracks, then it gets yanked into the bushes and beaten with a pillowcase full of doorknobs. 'least for me. :unsure

The reason fun was stopped, and beaten however, was not Juno's doing. This is a "reaction" thread.[/b]

Bingo. Most seem to agree that Phil wasn't out to scam anyone with the wallet/ID set purposefully. That's not what a lot of us are debating and complaining about here. People make mistakes. Even a slightly flawed replica from some people is better than a more accurate piece from others. No argument there. But this is about more than someone getting some reference wrong. This is about being disengenous and manipulating folks here when it's highly likely that there will be some angry customers (and I know there are) to contend with otherwise, and a continuing pattern that shows an inability for a guy to keep his definitive claims limited to what he can prove.

<div class='quotetop'>(outlander @ Sep 9 2006, 02:50 AM) [snapback]1316343[/snapback]</div>
Do you want me to list the TfBB and OT-Whinefest/PropEd members in this thead for you? [/b]

..and those that aren't? I count plenty.

Shifting blame is par for the course when you can't find a valid excuse for bad behavior. You can just as easily categorize those who are trying to enable this kind of thing...but I won't. Stop trying to find boogymen. Seriously.

At some point, Phil could have been a reasonable man, apologized for his self-interested motives and tried to move on. As we see in his post above, he's still in denial that he's done or is doing anything wrong and he and his friends are trying to shift the blame from the message writer to the messengers. Up until Juno posted her super-enhanced screen-cap (where the differences were undeniable), he was still insisting that those of us who knew better simply didn't have the contacts and sources he did in order for his claim to be wrong and that pointing out what he was doing was simply an attempt to destroy him (which is what seems to happen whenever anyone has some "tough love" constructive criticism for him).

Again...this seems to be a pattern, not a one time deal. Otherwise, I think more than a few people here wouldn't be making that big of a deal. A true friend would pull Phil aside and tell him to swallow his pride and make things right, first and foremost by stopping the charade that he's a party without stake in having photos removed by request of his friends. Enabling this kind of thing doesn't do anything to help the hobby (or Phil), in my opinion.
 
<div class='quotetop'></div>
That's a beautiful missive, and it has many of the syntactical earmarks of a former friend of mine, whom I thought was busy tilting at other windmills. Apparently, his attention has again turned towards me.[/b]

I've avoided this thread as I've got a pending e-mail reply from Phil concerning the BR Wallet Set, but felt it important to refute the above statement. In fact the "former friend" in question actually
told me early yesterday that the next tactic would be an attempt to lay all of this at his feet.

As for Outlander's comments, while I think the opening and closing remarks of his post are admirable in defense of his friend, the rest of it is an irrelevant and diversionary smear campaign. I take offense to this, as the clear majority of people posting in these threads with either questions or concerns over the accuracy of the wallet have no connection to T4BB at all.

Shameful.
 
This thread is more than 17 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.
Back
Top