Han Solo ANH Blaster From RIA, Prev on Pawn Stars

[chubsANDdoggers]

You really see the details and differences when putting all these parts under a CAD microscope..

Edit: The re-engineering of the parts are pretty accurate I just did the assembly pretty fast so it’s not all lined up but close..

 

[Flyingblind]

I don't normally post but this thread has been Great.

 

[thd9791]

Nice work on those models!

I swear, the thing that threw me the most was the fact that they milled a thick bar instead of screwing a smaller rectangle to a flat bar for the dovetail stand-in

 

[robstyle]

Something more to converse,

Is the line on pawn stars about the serial number being right there possibly in regards to the number on the scope?

 

[Halliwax]

Something more to converse,

Is the line on pawn stars about the serial number being right there possibly in regards to the number on the scope?

I don’t know… I wouldn’t take anything said serious at all. These shows are filmed to make your believe it’s real, there’s cuts, there’s reshoots, the directors tell you what to say, what to wear.

They used the pawn stars show just to raise awareness to this thing and hype the auction

Disgusting all the way around

 

[russellsch]

Well, I guess so much for my grand voting idea (though thank you TerranCmdr).

I’ve gone with the roughly-apparent consensus: auction / horizontal / two-tone / label.

Here it is – price is at-cost (i.e. I’m not making anything):

https://extraordinary-claims.creator-spring.com/listing/at-least-we-know

Hope it turns out alright; PM any issues. And thanks everyone for being so welcoming to a newbie!

I have received the wrong shirt. I sent an email

 

[Tommy]

I have received the wrong shirt. I sent an email

That's disappointing - sorry to hear that. For what it's worth, it seems to be a freak error, as mine arrived correct the same day as 7-11 Jedi . Not that that helps you a whole bunch.

I don't know if an email from my end as the "seller" might carry any weight, but I'll PM you. Anyone else with any issues, feel free to PM me.

 

[Tommy]

Is the line on pawn stars about the serial number being right there possibly in regards to the number on the scope?

That's a fair point to raise - the scope number IS visible in that photo, and in fact larger than the gun's serial. However, two problems:

1. Despite the size, the scope number in the photo is barely visible to my eye, and I have to blow the image up to double that of the print they showed in order to confidently read it. In contrast, the gun's serial is easily legible in that photo at that print scale.

2. The spot on the photo that Rick points to, and the spot on the "blaster" that he indicates with his thumb, seem to correspond with the gun serial.

So while not impossible, I think in all likelihood they were referring to the gun. But worth considering!


[Edit: In reference to kpax 's point below, I'm just referring to confidence in comparing the scope # in the production photo to the auction lot; it's definitely not clearly legible on its own - at any scale.]

 

[kpax]

Something more to converse,

Is the line on pawn stars about the serial number being right there possibly in regards to the number on the scope?

This was discussed a while back also.

As Tommy said, Rick points to the Mauser SN...

It would be smart for them to now "claim" that is what they were comparing... but the fact is the BIG thing they want to confirm is the Mauser... so at the very least it would be misleading...

That image Tony presents is the same one we all have in pretty hi res. You can clearly see the Mauser SN and other details. You can not however read the scope SN or see the GW clearly.

Years and Years ago when we were researching the blaster for the DEC kit we studied the scope carefully from all images available. The scope SN and knob base SN were not readable. We could MAYBE make out a few number shapes or location.

At that time 11 years ago, I don't think ANY replica attempted to included the scope SN or even acknowledged it was supposed to be there.
That level of replica detail was not being pursued. In fact it wasn't until members started to collect and share info about real HW3x scopes that we learned of the different SN and GW engraving and location types and tried to figure out the numbers.

Long story short. We could never figure out or read the SN based off this pic clearly enough to identify the SN. There were a lot of guesses.

IF those numbers and the GW ( there are stamped block letters and fancy script engraved versions) design was clear enough I would have included them on my replica! I in fact guessed (correctly) at the script GW and put in place holder numbers that resembled the messed up engraving in the image.

NOW that the scope as been found and cleaned, and the photos are sharp and hi-res the numbers are very clear.

NOW when you compare the 2 images, you can pick out the blurred lines on the old image and match it up. But you can not make out the numbers only from the old pre image IMO.

Question:

Tony has NO rental records from Bapty. No paperwork at all...
...But he did just so happen to have this very clean, newly printed-looking 8x10 glossy blow up image of the pre-production gun just hanging around? ....................sure.

Or did he pull the image from the internet? Did he mistakenly find images of the MR or SOLO blaster props online and had Carl use those for reference being "official" Lucasfilm approved designs. Even the square-hole is placed more like the MR and SOLO versions. Heck, SOLO copied the MR mount for some reason!

Anywho... no. Not giving them the benefit of doubt.

 

[DamnYankee123]

Very interesting read. Two important ideas I feel deserve reinforcement. chubsanddoggers’ reference of Roger Christian’s recollection as to the source of the Han Solo blaster, and Robstyle’s mention of Star Wars being a result of a collaborative effort among many gifted creators vs the top down product of one man.

Upon reading Christian’s Cinema Alchemist work, I was immediately struck by how MUCH of the uniqueness of Star Wars he was claiming credit for. Right down to the dice hanging in the Falcon cockpit. Given that Lucas had just seen huge renown for American Graffiti, as well as his own personal history with Southern California 50s hot rod culture, that was particularly incredible to me. A little confession here… I have a very skeptical nature… so when I read Christian’s take on seeing THIS pistol and THESE parts and how he just kind of added his artistic eye, and viola! the icon was born, I’m fighting an uphill battle to believe it entirely.

I don’t doubt the man’s talent or his story, per se, but have to wonder about the effects of age and time on our relationship with objective truth. As well as the natural tendency to inflate the importance of our own involvement in historical events to soothe our human ego.

(Side note: brief but interesting similarly subjective recollection of Gil Taylor’s involvement in Star Wars, mostly by his wife Dee, just prior to his passing here:

https://slate.com/culture/2013/08/gilbert-taylor-recalls-shooting-star-wars-for-george-lucas-and-dr-strangelove-for-stanley-kubrick.html)

It could be argued that Lucas has done the same by steadfastly propagating a version of the history of Star Wars that neglects, or in some cases denies even the importance of all the players and the various roles they played. As many have noted, the movie would probably not exist at all (outside of a print in a film vault somewhere) much less have had any success, without the editing skills of his ex-wife, for example. The genius of that first film despite its flaws, is heavily dependent on the creative talent of hundreds of people. Subsequent productions, despite their own successes, failed to marshal and properly use that talent to the same effect.

 

[kpax]

^^
Agree. I try to balance the stories with experience. I know human nature pretty well. People tend to exaggerate a bit. If you are being interviewed you tend to spin your involvement to best advantage. You are selling your wares after all. That's fine. It does tend to confuse when we try to figure out the timeline of events.

George is the creator and director and gets the blame for bad so he should get the praise for good. Of course he didn't do it alone. And as you say, Marcia as well as his director buddies, Coppla, DePama, Spielberg etc, gave notes to help make SW what we love. But ultimately it is Georges decisions, yes or no, for what goes in to the film. People present things and are accepted or rejected by George. The crew is there to try and facilitate the directors vision. Good or bad. He is responsible so he gets the credit. People are usually not speaking philosophically when being interviewed and may "forget" to mention others or it is edited out for time considerations. I tend to let it go unless there is a huge conceded ego that is purposely diminishing the cast or crews importance.

I try to take everything I hear with a handful of salt. ; )

There was a group effort. Everyone played their part. Who did what exactly can only be answered with detailed questions and so far no interview was ever done that focused on the blaster history specifically.

Bapty had Mausers. Roger and Carl fabricated the preproduction HERO at Bapty together it seems. Maybe Carl showing parts to Roger and trying different things.

IMO based on all I've heard to date:

Roger and Carl end up with basically the Sweeney gun with left side scope and a MG81 FH attached.

The initial idea was accepted by George. Roger has the art dept. make a mold and cast the MerrSonns.

Maybe after testing they find the left side mount and scope too big and clumsy and can't be used cowboy style so Roger takes it back to Carl. They find the ST scope and mount. He has Carl switch the mount to the right side and fit the scope.

They take the pre-production photo.

Roger has the Art Dept. mold the right side mount gun now. This becomes the Luke stunt with no grill.

Roger/crew adds the plastic bits to complete the HERO. Grill, Sight, Mystery disk etc.

Roger said and we have some confirmation that there was only one HERO holster made for ANH and does not mention a backup blaster. He does say they made a blaster for Luke BUT it was a different design... that became the ESB.

Could this second "Luke" blaster Roger mentions be the Bapty website blaster? Hmmm...

 

[Gregatron]

I would take anything coming from Roger Christian with several tons of salt. He very much seems like one of those people who, after the fact, has seen how much money STAR WARS brings in and is happy to inflate his own legend to exploit that fact. Like offering up a Graflex with fan-made parts for auction, claiming it to be original (or a "prototype").

And people seemed thrilled to adopt a single Robertson screw to attach d-rings onto their ANH-style Graflexes because that's what his replicas feature...and then we confirmed the two-rivet theory with 4K screencaps.

 

[kpax]

I would take anything coming from Roger Christian with several tons of salt. He very much seems like one of those people who, after the fact, has seen how much money STAR WARS brings in and is happy to inflate his own legend to exploit that fact. Like offering up a Graflex with fan-made parts for auction, claiming it to be original (or a "prototype").

And people seemed thrilled to adopt a single Robertson screw to attach d-rings onto their ANH-style Graflexes because that's what his replicas feature...and then we confirmed the two-rivet theory with 4K screencaps.

But he is an academy award winner and also directed Battlefield Earth!

; )

 

[Gregatron]

But he is an academy award winner and also directed Battlefield Earth!

; )

The Academy Awards have been worthless for quite some time, and studios keep giving JJ Abrams and his acolytes money to ruin beloved franchises. It's all par for the course, at this point. Mental illness and poor taste are rampant during this dark and waning era of the great nerd culture. Which, of course, is why all the con artists and scammers have come out to play. Low standards and a lack of proper gatekeeping means opportunity for these people.

I would argue that there's nowhere else on the planet better equipped to suss out forgeries than the RPF. Collectively, we know more about these props than the people who made them. We know (or have educated guesses regarding) their quantities, timelines, and changes over the years.

Yet, an obviously-forged STAR TREK phaser (with the builder's fingerprints all over it, and in plain sight) and now an obviously-forged hero Solo blaster have both sold for six figures within the past year.

This shouldn't be rocket-science, and yet it keeps happening. Because the idle rich aren't informed enough to seek out properly-educated opinions, and those running the show just want their cut. Money ruins everything.


Not to keep bringing it back to the phaser, but that one still really burns me. Suffice it to say that I have it on good authority that fraud, bribery, and threats of litigation were involved at several levels during that joke of an auction. Anything and everything to push the fake prop through and get that sweet payday, to Hell with the historical record, honesty, or integrity.

Being even more high-profile, do you really think STAR WARS would be immune to that sort of thing?

 

[kpax]

Well said.


I hope you all know I was being sarcastic…

; )

 

[Gregatron]

Well said.


I hope you all know I was being sarcastic…

; )

Of course!

 

[robstyle]

Seems the history of the Han ANH blaster is known in regards to its initial design, fabrication and sources involved, with personal involvement variations according to whom the story is told by. The final mystery is this not seen or revealed photograph. Back to ifs and guesses its possible, if it exists, the photo was not part of Baptys records but done with a personal camera. Personal meaning not officially done by the production or Bapty. We're talking film and negative with developing costs.
As comparison to then VS now how photo documentation has been handled when props change hands from a shop to the production, shops generally dont take photos. Again there is no set industry protocol for this. It's up to the production to handle that. But, many times those whom created or worked with items will take their own reference photos. This is more and more common with modern digital VS the old days with camera film.

Again with Firefly/Serenity I had documented Mals pistols firsthand on my own just as the film production wrapped. Those photos are not part of any shop or official production documents. This was before QMX was allowed to do the same.

That mystery photo could indeed exist. The odd part is nobody is allowed to see it. Hence the bulllshit meter going off all around.

 

[kpax]

It must be a heck of a photo!

 

[chubsANDdoggers]

This mystery photo is a nonstarter. It should be squashed anytime someone brings it up as proof of some sort. It simply doesn’t exist at least not in anyway that shows this prop was actually used in ‘77 SW. The eye test is all that should matter. Plenty of photos do exist of the real prop. The film itself even shows evidence that is PS prop isn’t legit. Behind the scene footage, preproduction photos, post production photos from ‘77 SW only ever show one blaster.

To be fair anyone who’s new to this DL-44 world can be easily confused and mislead. Including all the official films, licensed replicas and now this PS blaster.. there are at least 18 different versions of this DL-44 that can be found in one Google search alone. So ya it can get confusing to say the least. But referencing a photo that doesn’t exist (or “can’t be shared”) as proof is insulting to a community that knows better.

 

[kpax]

I think the actual takeaway from all the hype and talk from RIA and Tony/Carl, is that they "legally" claim their gun to be 1of3 "made for the production. AND claimed it was "on-set" RIA said their photo is the evidence. Again, must be a heck of a photo to show ON SET and enough detail to identify it.

I don't think they ever "actually" said that it was THE screen used prop BUT they strongly implied it. If you say "well, we can't "prove" it is the screen used prop BUT it was found at Bapty and we know they made the real one and since we found it there it MUST be the real one... eager and excited people tend to believe.

IMO, even if it was a second Mauser on set, it WAS NOT USED ON SCREEN. Sure some people don't care. They just want a real piece of SW. So good enough for them. I guess if you have a spare million to throw away... why not.