Han Solo ANH Blaster on Pawn Stars

rockbottom

Sr Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
Wasn't this piece dismantled and returned to Bapty? Weathering doesn't match anything we've seen before either.

Seems to be a replica.
 

russellsch

Master Member
He doesn't even touch it (in the clip)! How does he know it's genuine, or anything else, if you don't handle it?
I will watch tonight though.... & laugh.
 

Peacefrog35

Sr Member
Sounds like this was put together just to get viewers and cash in on the release of the new movie.
There was zero research done....at least not in this clip.
 

Anakin Starkiller

Master Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
Definately fake. The mount is missing the dovetail and the slope when it connects to the cradle. The flash supressor is a replica that doesn't have the correct scallops in the back (I'm thinking one of Todd's earlier versions) And I don't think it's the correct version of the Mauser, it's a c96 to be sure but the hammer looks like an earlier model from the ANH prop.
pshan1.jpg
pshan2.jpg
pshan3.jpg
pshan4.jpg
pshan5.jpg
pshan6.jpg
pshan7.jpg
pshan8.jpg
pshan9.jpg
pshan10.jpg
 

Richard Baker

Sr Member
How many guns did they make for Han to use for the first movie?- I know they did have budget restrictions, but surely there were multiples of an essential prop in case there was an accident or for stunt purposes...
 

Darth Lars

Master Member
As far as anyone knows, the firing props in the UK were rented from Bapty's and the stunt blasters were casts - as stunt props usually are. Then one was cobbled together for a close-up, which was shot in the US: the "Greedo Killer". If this blaster had existed in the US, then this would probably have been the Greedo Killer, but it isn't.
We know the Hero blaster was cast, and that casts (in various configurations) were worn by Imperial Officers and used by Han Solo at least in subsequent movies.

The "bull-barrel" is a unique mod to a specific Mauser C96 upper, and I doubt that Lucasfilm would have replicated that by modifying a real C96. they usually didn't go to that level of detail.
Some owners of authentic Star Wars movie-props that are missing parts have added similar parts (authentic or replica) to them to make them look like they once had been, but I don't think many collectors would modify a genuine movie prop in that way because that would lessen its value.
 
Last edited:

HMSwolfe

Sr Member
When it comes to “screen-used” props up for sale, I always know to come here, because it’s usually a fake and there are hundreds of people here that can explain precisely why. If the episode doesn’t debunk it as not film-used, someone is going to be throwing a lot of money away on a merely decent-looking replica. It reminds me of the Kurtz lightsaber debacle.
 

James Kenobi 1138

Master Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
Pawn Stars doesn't care if it's fake and neither do the producers of the show.

THEY KNOW IT'S FAKE.

It's all for publicity, it's a stunt to get viewers. It doesn't mater if PS buys it or not on the show because as soon as the cameras are turned off PS will give the prop back the the guy that brought it in and then they'll tell him 'thanks' for helping them cash in on the topical Star Wars craze/interest from casual-non-prop-collecting-couldn't-care-less-fans.
 

kevin926

Sr Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
I studied this prop for months when I built mine. It's missing pieces and looks nothing like the screen grabs and doc pics I used .
 

James Kenobi 1138

Master Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
I studied this prop for months when I built mine. It's missing pieces and looks nothing like the screen grabs and doc pics I used .

That's because it isn't an original screen-used or production-made prop.

It's a replica, and Pawn Stars know it's fake. It will never look like the original prop because it isn't, it never was, and it could never be.
 

Inquisitor Peregrinus

Master Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
I also see no evidence of the T-track or pushrods on the top of the bull barrel, and cant help but notice we never see the other side (mystery disc accuracy would be a biggie). Hate this kind of disengenuousness.
 

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.
Top