Han Solo ANH Blaster From RIA, Prev on Pawn Stars

[kpax]

So it looks like they turned off the comments for that video. Interesting as it’s another manipulative misdirect and narrative control..



That photo will never see the light of day. It’s all they have to authenticate this sale apparently. I’m sure the truth within that photo (what ever it might be) would be revealed within minutes. If you are going to use a photo to authenticate something it’s ultimately useless to the greater public if you are the only one looking at it don’t you think?

This is the only truth within that video.. just short of the purity line that is.

“The goal of the two men wasn’t to create the blaster exactly as it was..“

Unfortunately, sadly they are trying to sell it as if it where though. View attachment 1607843

In the PS episode Tony says "we don't have the paper work of booking it out but we DO have the continuity photograph from the time... if you look at some of the witness marks on the gun you can see that they match..."

As anyone can see, the "continuity photograph" ( which looks like a modern print and not 40 years old BTW) is CLEARLY the very same pre-production LEFT side image WE have had for a very long time. The two photos MATCH exactly. If the preproduction 2813 HERO Image and their claimed witness photo are the same image, it is NOT any sort of proof that the PS Mauser that we know has a different SN and completely different build is the same. To claim THAT image as the proof is absurd. I believe this is the photographic PROOF RIA was referring to. Nice try...


In that image, the scope SN is not clearly visible so I don't believe for a minute that the scope is what he was referring to.

Before we had the CLEAR images of the PS scope we did not know the SN or markings on the scope. No image was clear enough to be sure.

 

[kpax]

This is the only truth within that video.. just short of the purity line that is.

“The goal of the two men wasn’t to create the blaster exactly as it was..“

Unfortunately, sadly they are trying to sell it as if it where though. View attachment 1607843

This RIA guy should be a salesman on QVC !

I do like how he keeps a straight face while talking...

 

[thd9791]

wrong thread sorry

 

[chubsANDdoggers]

In the PS episode Tony says "we don't have the paper work of booking it out but we DO have the continuity photograph from the time... if you look at some of the witness marks on the gun you can see that they match..."

As anyone can see, the "continuity photograph" ( which looks like a modern print and not 40 years old BTW) is CLEARLY the very same pre-production LEFT side image WE have had for a very long time. The two photos MATCH exactly. If the preproduction 2813 HERO Image and their claimed witness photo are the same image, it is NOT any sort of proof that the PS Mauser that we know has a different SN and completely different build is the same. To claim THAT image as the proof is absurd. I believe this is the photographic PROOF RIA was referring to. Nice try...


In that image, the scope SN is not clearly visible so I don't believe for a minute that the scope is what he was referring to.

Before we had the CLEAR images of the PS scope we did not know the SN or markings on the scope. No image was clear enough to be sure.


View attachment 1607893

That picture from PS can’t be the picture in question. That’s truly a joke then. That has to be the “approved for tv” picture. The LucasFilm/Disney one in question has to be under lock and key and clearly one no one has seen. But ur probably right and if so this is how they compared them.

Even if you couldn’t make out each serial number on the barrel you can see they are not even equally stamped on each. Wow $500grand. “I feel this auctions getting worse all the time.”

 

[deadbolt]

$$ are all anyone care about anymore. There's not much passion left, other than the far and few of us.


-Carson

 

[Tommy]

Forgive me if I've just missed it, but what was the source for the rumor of RIA claiming to supposedly have a photo match that they're conveniently not allowed to show?

I keep seeing reference to the rumor, but I don't recall seeing anyone mention where it originated.

 

[kpax]

Forgive me if I've just missed it, but what was the source for the rumor of RIA claiming to supposedly have a photo match that they're conveniently not allowed to show?

I keep seeing reference to the rumor, but I don't recall seeing anyone mention where it originated.

I think it was from a reply to an email a member sent refuting the claims. Not sure which member.

 

[kpax]

That picture from PS can’t be the picture in question. That’s truly a joke then. That has to be the “approved for tv” picture. The LucasFilm/Disney one in question has to be under lock and key and clearly one no one has seen. But ur probably right and if so this is how they compared them.

Even if you couldn’t make out each serial number on the barrel you can see they are not even equally stamped on each. Wow $500grand. “I feel this auctions getting worse all the time.”View attachment 1607940

He was trying to sell the prop to Rick on PS first. That photo was the PROOF he offered.
Rick says... "there's the serial number right there" and points with his thumb at the Mauser SN.

They cut away and he says, " everything matches up perfect"
This was his show editing so they knew what they were doing.

I seriously doubt Tony has any other images. He doesn't have the important records from Bapty. Why would they have an obscure photo?

Disney has nothing to do with this at all. Any photos Bapty had as continuity images or records of renting out the prop is their property. Disney or Lucas don't own that prop or they could not be selling it.

 

[kpax]

When they sell this prop, having the RIA seal of approval. people will assume it is the real deal and lends some authenticity to the argument. Happens all the time in the art world.

I would not be surprised to see it go up for sale again in a year or so.

 

[Gregatron]

…this really does feel like last year’s phaser auction all over again. What a shame.

 

[lonepigeon]

The photo in the video is not the one in question. I remember this coming up before. IIRC the photo in question was cut from the video (perhaps for the same reasons it can't be shown now).
I spoke directly to people from RIA at SDCC about the photo.
They've seen it but the original is still in Karl's hands.

 

[kpax]

The photo in the video is not the one in question. I remember this coming up before. IIRC the photo in question was cut from the video (perhaps for the same reasons it can't be shown now).
I spoke directly to people from RIA at SDCC about the photo.
They've seen it but the original is still in Karl's hands.

All sounds very convenient to me.

I don’t doubt your word but did you specifically ask if the photo used in the PS episode was the image they saw?

What possible reason would there be to show a a photo that disproves their claims but not show a photo that would?

The video of the RIA guy is very carefully worded. This SPIN is amazing to behold. Can’t wait to see the auction. Hopefully will get video. The description should be amazing.

Sounds a bit too fishy to me.

I’m sure RIA told you what you say. But that doesn’t mean they are telling you the truth.

The fact is, regardless of what photographic evidence they have it can never make it a screen used Mauser. The scope yes.

We have all seen the film scenes that the blaster is shown. All the exact same 2813 blaster. All the promo pics are the same 2813 blaster. No other “real” Mausers appears on screen that I have seen. Am I wrong? The Greedo blaster aside.

Maybe. Maybe they have a photo of the other 2-3 cut barrel Mausers? Maybe it shows the PS SN? But no one disputes their story of having other c96s with cut barrels. Still won’t be a screen used prop. There is only one.

Could they possibly have a photo that clearly shows the PS Mauser all dressed as the HERO prop on set in a screen used scene? I tend to doubt a photo of that clarity could possibly exist and maintain there would be no legitimate reason not to show it. Maybe Jimmy Hoffa is holding it? Or a real alien?

And if it were a second screen used HERO… Wouldn’t there be archive images of it?
I know some members here have had access to the archives. Any members ever see such an image in the archives. ? There are images of the 2813 HERO pre production. The 2813 HERO Post production and The Greedo. Where is the mystery second screen used ANH Han Solo blaster. ?

But hey. I could be wrong! I’d love to be wrong.

 

[Tommy]

I thought I'd share the attached email template that I've put together in my limited effort to reach out to journalists. I've tweaked the language a fair bit after my last attempt crashed and burned, hopefully making it abundantly clear that I'm not accusing the news site (or anyone in fact) of lying. [Obviously we may suspect as much on the part of the auction house, but absent proof, I don't imagine it's a tactful argument in this context.]

As I say, I am not an expert, so I welcome any constructive feedback if anyone is willing to give it a read (I'll warn that it is fairly lengthy). I've tried my best to characterized known facts accurately, but I won't be at all shocked if I've gotten a few details mixed up or used the wrong terminology in places. I will default to your expertise. Thanks!

[Edit: I've updated the document to my latest version for reference.]

 

[Jediseth]

I posted this on a thread on Facebook, but I would be interested to see what the final sold price is. Hopefully the person purchasing the item is aware of the facts. If not I could see this ending up in a lawsuit. The basis will be that information is withheld and the some of the statements made on the auction description are false. I keep thinking as more light is being shed and I wouldn't doubt someone of significant relation to the dealings of the auction is aware of what's being said here that changes would be made before the hammer comes down. At this point I'm curious to see how things play out. I know this isn't the first time this type of situation has presented itself. People of power always have great influence among others to protect what they value and that's usually money. It certainly feels like this is the case to me.

 

[Tommy]

The photo in the video is not the one in question. I remember this coming up before. IIRC the photo in question was cut from the video (perhaps for the same reasons it can't be shown now).

Wouldn't the photo have been shown to Propstore when it was offered to them? If it's the one and only piece of incontrovertible visual proof, surely he would have presented it at that time - if not at first, then at least when word came back that Propstore was doubtful... right? And even if the photo was discovered later, why would he not re-approach Propstore with the newfound proof? I feel like the fact that he went to Propstore presents a bit of a sticking point.

I keep imagining what kind of a lewd pose Harrison Ford must be holding the gun in if it's too scandalous to be released... We know it can't be that he's pointing the gun at his head, because we've already got that one!

Hopefully the person purchasing the item is aware of the facts. If not I could see this ending up in a lawsuit.

I'm no legal expert, but I'd wonder how strong a case they'd have. Since (as far as I'm aware) we can't absolutely prove the negative that the C96 was NOT on the set of Star Wars, and the auction house has technically provided some evidence (albeit laughably flimsy), I don't know that you could prove legal wrongdoing... Most if not all of their major claims could still be true, even if the proof is lacking, right?

Unfortunately, I imagine it's more likely the winning bidder will be oblivious. Though next to RIA pulling the lot from sale and relisting the scope, my next best dream scenario would be that some billionaire buys it and then publicly acknowledges that the gun is questionable but that it was worth ensuring that the historic scope ended up in a museum. I can wish anyway.

 

[kpax]

Wouldn't the photo have been shown to Propstore when it was offered to them? If it's the one and only piece of incontrovertible visual proof, surely he would have presented it at that time - if not at first, then at least when word came back that Propstore was doubtful... right? And even if the photo was discovered later, why would he not re-approach Propstore with the newfound proof? I feel like the fact that he went to Propstore presents a bit of a sticking point.

I keep imagining what kind of a lewd pose Harrison Ford must be holding the gun in if it's too scandalous to be released... We know it can't be that he's pointing the gun at his head, because we've already got that one!


I'm no legal expert, but I'd wonder how strong a case they'd have. Since (as far as I'm aware) we can't absolutely prove the negative that it was NOT on the set of Star Wars, and the auction house has technically provided some evidence (albeit laughably flimsy), I don't know that you could prove legal wrongdoing. Most if not all of their claims could still be true, right?

Unfortunately, I imagine it's more likely the winning bidder will be oblivious. Though next to RIA pulling the lot from sale and relisting the scope, my next best dream scenario would be that some billionaire buys it and then publicly acknowledges that the gun is questionable but that it was worth ensuring that the historic scope ended up in a museum or whatnot. I can wish anyway.

Just for clarification. It’s the Pawn Stars not PropStore. I don't think PropStore would be handling this item this way.

They are being cleverly vague.

From Tony's letter:

First of all... the guy obviously lives under a rock. He said: "When I acquired the stock of Bapty and Co in 2000, I HAD LITTLE KNOWELAGE OF THIS FILM (STAR WARS!)

He says: The guns were returned and taken apart and refinished. So much for the "prop" proper.

He says: They had 5 worn and abused c96. 4 had standard barrels... "but one SN 9415 had a re-lengthened barrel" and "faint" witness marks on the side where it had been refinished and recolored" What is a RE-lengthened" barrel? Likely not a bull barrel or he would have said it had the barrel exactly like the SW blaster.

What possible 1977 photo evidence could they have ON SET and SCREEN that could match to "faint witness marks. AND in the PS video he points to the PS 9415 Mauser and boldly states "the witness marks match"... the photo he showed Rick... so I don't buy the second super secret photo premise. This is BS not PS... ; )

He says: This was "Undoubtedly" one of the 3 original guns used on the 1977 Star Wars set and the only one to survive. UNDOUBTEDLY? Based on that shady story and NO proof.

Again, where are the archive images of these other 2 HERO props? Is it not standard practice to photograph and document anything used on screen?

IF there was another c96 with bull barrel and mount lugs available ON SET as a back-up as some members have said, WHY did they need to take the scope and mount off the 2813 HERO for the Imperial soldier in-holster scene? The one Scott noticed? Wouldn't they have just used a backup? The image Scott posted had the dovetail attached and Carson's Lump so it was the 2813 HERO. They would have needed to remove the dovetail as well to mount the scope on a second c96 since there was only one mount as Tony said. Hmmm.

He says: " a flash hider was taken from our MG81 spares box, given the rarity FEASIBLY the same one used in 1977..."
We all know this is not true. The original PS FH was pristine and a modern INACCURATE replica with modern finish.
Everyone here knows without doubt it is not the HERO FH... but Carl did a nice job refinishing the FH for RIA.
NOTE: Any vintage MG81 FHs I have seen have been VERY worn and rusted. But Tony's is perfect... The thin metal didn't rust away in those 40 years like every other vintage MG81 FH...

Remember, Tony is no film expert. Didn't even know what Star Wars was. He was not there at the time of production. HE is the one who is conjecturing.

Disney doesn't want the photo shared... Must be Mickey holding up a convenience store with it... ; )

 

[thd9791]

Yeah, I’m no legal expert either but claiming the serial numbers match when they don’t is a straight up lie. That could absolutely be a good starting point for a lawsuit.

It has been said before but (since we have very few answers) considering how badly they replicated the mount, I don’t think this was a complete bid to fabricate the hero prop and deceive people. All the information to copy the parts is right here on this site, heck our replicas are more accurate than this.

I do honestly think this started out as them trying to put possible leftovers together into a whole item, for nostalgia or some version of preservation. Then it got out of control, and the nuances were lost once money came into the picture. Binary. It’s a Star Wars blaster or not… and here we are

 

[Tommy]

Just for clarification. It’s the Pawn Stars not PropStore. I don't think PropStore would be handling this item this way.

Apologies if I was unclear; I was referring to when Tony Watts offered the blaster to Propstore before going to Pawn Stars (according to scottjua). I would think that if he showed the photo to Pawn Stars and he's shown it to RIA, he logically should have shown it to Propstore too, no?

 

[kpax]

Absolutely. Not well thought out.

Snowballed no doubt. I doubt Tony had any idea of how they should preserve or go about restoring. What was important etc.

I am sure they have covered themselves with "to the best of our knowledge" and "our experts have authenticated" ( RIA) to the best available information etc...

Buyer has the responsibility for due diligence etc... Buying AS IS.... No backsies... etc.

 

[kpax]

Apologies if I was unclear; I was referring to when Tony Watts offered the blaster to Propstore before going to Pawn Stars (according to scottjua). I would think that if he showed the photo to Pawn Stars and he's shown it to RIA, he logically should have shown it to Propstore too, no?

Oh. Interesting.

I had not heard that it was offered to PropStore!

The fact that neither PropStore or PawnStars wanted it is a bit telling...

Any other info about the PropStore offer?

I wonder if it was offered to Joe Maddalena at Profiles in History.? I'd like to hear comments from PropStore and Joe about this. From the episodes I have seen of PoH, Joe places huge value on barn finds and unrestored items.