Indiana Jones - 'Real World' Props

[Liberance]

I talked about this with MCINTOSH275 in a PM a couple of years ago. I pointed out the distances of the bottle relative to the Johnny Walker bottle and thought it was the 750ml bottle (4/5 Quart).

But he pointed out that the bottle sitting on the bar doesn't look like a 750ml bottle, but appears fatter at the base (1 Liter).

It was hard for me to argue with that because that's the biggest difference between the 750ml bottle and the 1 liter bottle. The 1 liter is slightly taller (I have one next to the JW bottle now and it sits closer to the neck of the bottle, but it's definitely wider looking than the 750ml bottle and to my eyes, at least, that picture looks like the 1 liter bottle. Given there are three bottles in the movie, it's also possible the one behind the bar is a 750ml and the one sitting on the bar that's broken later and used to set a fire is a 1 liter bottle. To my eyes, it looks like even in your own photo that the bottle from the movie is wider than the one you bought, but camera angles and lenses can be tricky things.

The 750mL sits at the bottom of the neck. The 1 Liter reaches almost to the bottle cap (cork) area. The "width" is less obvious with angled camera views. The shot glasses can be deceiving as well. Notice how the same shot glasses look larger against the 1 Liter Bottle (to the top of "Tennessee" whereas the shot glasses in the 750mL picture appear to be even with "whiskey" if you imagine them sitting next to it. But they are closer to the camera than in the other photo so this sort of thing has to be taken into account as your eyes can deceive you.

MCINTOSH and I know each other and I've been talking about this with him quite a bit as well—I guess the three of us are particularly interested in these bottles!

The one by the Johnny Walker could be 1 liter or 750ml, but it's hard to say and it's barely featured in the film. And I know what you mean by the shape and width, which is a reason to think they could be bigger. I reached out to the collectors because I wanted to hear from someone who can instinctively tell what these bottles are though, and they were adamant that the size is 4/5 quart or 750ml. The owner of Jack's Safe showed me a lot of side by side comparisons of different period bottles in his collection, as well as each next to shot glasses and Johnny Walker bottles. The exact year of manufacture is the hard part, but when it comes to sizes, he did not hesitate. It's not only the apparent scale, it's the label. Labels on 1 liter bottles don't quite look like the ones in the movie.

For reference, 1 quart 1978 bottle vs a 4/5 quart 1973 bottle vs the movie version. Both in the 4/5 quart and movie version the label covers more surface of the bottle and the writing and logos have a more similar placement:

At the end of the day, it doesn't matter all that much one or the other. Chances are the movie bottle is a replica once it gets broken, and replica label and bottle don't quite match exactly. Who knows. Personally, I'm gonna go with the recommendations I got from the Jack Daniels collectors, because I think their reasoning is sound. Other than that, I think it's perhaps more important to have a bottle with matching labels from the 1970s, if anything.

Oh by the way, you're right that there are three bottles in the scene. The bar one Marion offers to Toht is the same one Indy drinks from, but they move it around and Spielberg also changes the screen direction all the time, so the geography of the set gets confusing. It's just that one, the one on the shelf by the Johnny Walker, and the one on the table by the stairs that gets turned over.

 

[VonMagnum]

I'd say the label in the movie picture above is somewhere in-between the two, closer to the 750mL, but the bottle's geometry looks exactly like the 1 Quart bottle on the left to my eyes, not the 750mL bottle to my eyes. I originally thought it was the 750mL bottle too, but there's no denying the geometry and height differences even in your own picture above. The one on the right looks more like the bottle on the left to me. It doesn't appear to have any size markings on it, however while the period photos are absolutely visible (even cracked, they should still be visible), which is odd, making me wonder what year bottle it is even if it's got a retro label applied.

It's also possible all three bottles weren't identical in size (hard to tell from the isolated bits and camera angles, not to mention the incorrectly placed JW label behind the bar). If they applied a label themselves, I don't know if it's correctly placed given their own mistake in the same scene with the Johnny Walker bottle behind the bar. You can see from the Johnny Walker bottle they placed the label too low on the one behind the bar. I could find zero examples in the real world of the label placed low like that so I have to assume it was an error in the film of applying a retro label or it slipped or something.

I don't have an oar in this either way, just sharing observations. I had both bottles at one point. It's more height than width in visual appearance at a glance, IMO and the movie doesn't provide head-on comparisons to the JW bottle and even a slight angle changes the apparent height of the shot glasses relative to the label, which is manually applied may be wrong as well (It looks a bit high in the photo above compared to the middle legit bottle and the JW label was way too low in the film). Personally, I'm displaying the bottle head-on so I'm not even worried about a retro label anymore and getting a period JW label is an expensive proposition for a bottle (or a hack job using a fake reproduction). I'd rather buy a quality bottle of whiskey, personally. My display is meant to evoke the movie (all my props are reproductions, which generally means some level of inaccuracy, however small), not recreate the bar or something.

 

[Liberance]

I originally thought it was 1 liter like you guys actually, not 750ml. But I've been shown there's a very good chance it's the other way around. It's not as clear as it seems.

Here's a vintage 4/5 quart and a vintage 1 quart bottle next to a regular shot glass provided by Eric from Jack's Safe. The 1 quart bootle looks huge. It just isn't that big in the movie. He also placed it next to a modern 1 liter Johnny Walker bottle to show even the shelf one could be 4/5, although that one is more unclear for all the reasons that have been discussed.

As for the shape, here are several 4/5 quart bottles with varying shapes. All vintage from roughly the same time in the 1970s. Some look taller at the neck, some slightly wider, some slightly thinner. Judging by shape alone can be misleading:

Now, at the risk of muddling this further I will say that I've seen at least one transition 1 liter bottle from 1980 that doesn't look as big as that 1970s 1 quart from Jack's Safe. How that can be, being the same volume, I don't know. Darn things are tricky. But the label didn't match the film anyway. The only bottles I've seen that have a matching label, overall shape and size are all 4/5 from the 1970s, and people who check these things for a living have said so as well.

Maybe they were oddly shaped 1 quart replicas with badly placed 750ml labels. But I think it's safer to assume an easier explanation. That said, I guess now there's plenty of info here about this prop for each person to decide their preference.

 

[VonMagnum]

I think if your bottle says 4/5 quart, it's automatically disqualified because the one in the film doesn't have it on the bottle. What's more important, the label or the bottle?

Yeah I'm being anal retentive because I already threw out the 750mL bottle in favor of the quart bottle because that's what nearly EVERYONE agreed on at the time.

Now you're muddying the waters with the obviously wrong bottle regardless of size by self-proclaimed "experts" whose only qualification as near as I can tell is they have bad taste in whiskey (Scotch every time over imitation bourbon or "Tennessee whiskey" as they call it because they can't follow the rules of bourbon making. )

Johnny Walker is a bit 3rd rate, being a mixed whiskey dependent on multiple real Scotch makers instead of a high quality single malt (I've got Glenmorangie 18-year old and Laphroaig 16-year old in my actual drinking liquor cabinet. I've got two bottles of Johnny for display purposes (Blade Runner 2049 and Raiders) and a full bottle of 1 quart Jack on display (had to mix the 750mL bottle with Coke to get it down). A good bourbon one is Knob Creek. A much better bourbon is Bookers.

Now I've got to drink that Jack swill again to get the right size bottle.... It'll be rough.

 

[Liberance]

I originally wrote a somewhat annoyed response because I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic in a malicious way or if you're just poking fun at the fact that we're here discussing these secondary props in a well meaning way. I'm just gonna assume the best.

Honestly, if you got rid of a 750ml bottle in the past and you now have a 1 liter one, who cares? It's not like you replaced Ra's Headpiece with a Chuck E Cheese medal. Both work fine.

And for what it's worth, I'm European, I would never pick Jack Daniels over a Scotch. Everyone knows that. That much we definitely agree on.

 

[VonMagnum]

Okay man, sure, it's "obviously" wrong. Experts are not experts either if you say so. Whatever you say.

I was mostly joking man (see reason for smiley face emojis). Take it easy. Sheesh.

My point is it's not really possible to be 100% certain (especially given there's THREE bottles in the movie and no easy way to tell if they're all the same size) and that's OK because we're talking about 1/5 a quart difference here and most of us aren't taking recreated props quite that seriously to lose sleep over it (since NONE we are using were used in the actual movie). I'm not trying to recreate the bar either. But I would like to know what two of those bottles are in the bar I marked (where's the liquor expert on that sort of thing?). That would be far more interesting to me at this point than feeling bad about my terrible bottle on display.

Some of us had arguments on here before about which "patent" cap was the correct one to buy on the IMCO 6700 lighter that Marion was using in the Raven Bar in Raiders of the Lost Ark. The truth turned out to not really matter one whit because it turns out ALL of them are historically inaccurate. The only possible lighter that looks like the one she is holding is the pre-patent IMCO 4700 as it was the only real lighter available (in limited distribution, mostly to just Austria) in 1936 (however unlikely it would be for her to have one that was only sold in limited quantities in Austria that year). That, however does not mean that's the prop that was used in the movie. Given the visual proof I've seen, one can at best speculate that it's "likely" a 6700, but then which patent cap did it have on it? If one could find out for certain that all 6700 lighters made in 1980 had a specific cap, that might be the Occam's Razor choice to buy as a prop stand-in. But likely isn't absolute and without absolute proof, something is merely still a theory, IMO.

One may have to choose between real world accuracy or prop accuracy in some cases. Other times it's mere speculation (the flashlight) which one "should" have been used if they were using a real world flashlight form that year because obviously there's several they could have used, but didn't. So do we collect a real world flashlight that they could have used (but didn't) or the one that was actually used in the movie? Hey, people can collect whatever they like best. I'm simply pointing out it's not always as simple as some make it appear because of camera angles, depth-of-field, etc.

My real point is that limiting choices to A-D pretty much sucks the air out of the room, in my opinion and that's the only real point I was trying to get across. I'm glad you are excited to find out from a supposed expert our displays are wrong and yours are right. I don't quite share that enthusiasm for what should be obvious reasons and pointed out how/why some of us arrived at 1 Quart that visually aren't just completely explained away by some expert sharing their opinion. You can display whatever you want. I won't tell you that you're wrong to do so. I'm not certain if the bottle is 1 Liter or 4/5 a liter and frankly at this point I don't really give a damn as it's lost any "fun" factor it once might have had.

I don't know why you feel the need to come here to nitpick and second guess my posts with absolutes. I didn't say anything when you ignored the point of the flashlight one by bringing up your Tiger despite the fact that I had even linked to your own post about that, it's almost as if you didn't even read what I wrote and just wanted to bring the whole thing down to show how right your choices are. Now it sounds like you got rid of a 750ml bottle at some point in the past and someone saying "hey maybe it's actually that bottle" annoys you or something. I mean, really?

Did you want an accurate prop or a period flashlight they "might" have used were these real characters? That was my point there. I also pointed out one I have (Everready) that wasn't in your list. How the heck is that "ignoring" what you wrote when I provided another real world flashlight to consider that wasn't on your list? Are your posts just preaching or are others allowed to discuss them as well??? If you want a 750mL bottle have at it! No one is stoping you.

Now if you wanted to settle it once and for all, pointing out something along the lines of finding a "4/5 Quart" on a shot from the movie would be excellent proof, by comparison. I'm simply refuting the notion that just because you claim you talked to some "experts" (in drinking lots of Jack?) that doesn't necessarily mean they are experts in photography depth-of-field, which is why I pointed out how the shot glasses appear to sit higher on the taller bottle in my own photos (because they are closer to the camera). I simply think if some want to continue to use the 1 Quart bottle, I feel there is still visual evidence to support its use. I'm not sure which was used or that all three bottles were the same size as they are never sitting next to each other at the same depth. Angles versus shot glasses can be deceiving as my own photos showed because of depth-of-field. So until I see absolute proof, I'll not worry to death over whether the bottle should be 1 Quart or 4/5 Quart, which frankly are very similar in size to begin with.

Depth of field tricks can REALLY make size appear out of proportion....

I've been in touch with a German restoration shop that specializes in the Sparklets syphons and was gonna share what I learned from them, but you know what, screw it. If this is what I get each time I come here, I'd rather keep it to myself. Anyone interested, feel free to DM me.

Let me guess. We all have the wrong Sparklets syphons, but YOU have the RIGHT ONE?

 

[JamesM242]

Liberance - thank you for your posts, I have enjoyed diving into the details and learning more about the bottles.

 

[Liberance]

I was mostly joking man (see reason for smiley face emojis). Take it easy. Sheesh.

Okay, no worries. Although perhaps there was no need to reply to my original post once I had decided to not go down that route.

Depth of field tricks can REALLY make size appear out of proportion....

Yes, I understand depth of field. I work as an animatics artist on film and videogames.

Let me guess. We all have the wrong Sparklets syphons, but YOU have the RIGHT ONE?

I actually don't, just like I don't have what I consider the ideal Jack Daniels bottle either. I have a syphon that doesn't match the film one in two aspects. And either way, I'm thinking about replacing it with an even more inaccurate one that'd look better on my display. But honestly—and please don't take this the wrong way, I just mean it as an observation—I think the only one coming off here like wanting to be right about their choices is you. It does look like me having showed up here with a couple of posts suggesting stuff felt like an attack. I appreciate you trying to cool it down now (I guess?) but the weird vibe is there. I don't know if this is some kind of unintentional gatekeeping specific to the RPF, since it's already the second time something along the lines happens to me here, but it doesn't feel very nice.

I've been collecting this stuff for over 25 years, I know a couple of the best Indiana Jones prop makers out there in person, I've always followed and learned from the stuff all you guys discuss regularly, be it here, the Club Obi Wan or foreign communities. I really respect the work, time and dedication that everyone puts into this. So it's obviously not the intention to barge in and go "hey you guys have no idea what you're talking about, allow me to illuminate you." However that seems to be how you're reading it. I don't know what to tell you about that.

Anyways, I'm leaving it here. This is certainly not how I wanted this thread to come back. If you still want to talk about this, clear the air or whatever, I suggest we do it in private cause at this point this is just off-topic stuff. Super good info from everyone here though, I'm still real happy this thread happened in the first place either way.

 

[Psab keel]

The David Morgan Bullwhip wasn't made specifically for Raiders as David had been making them for many years prior to 1981. Glen Randall happened to have one and that was the only reason why they went with Morgan's whips.

 

[VonMagnum]

Okay, no worries. Although perhaps there was no need to reply to my original post once I had decided to not go down that route.



Yes, I understand depth of field. I work as an animatics artist on film and videogames.



I actually don't, just like I don't have what I consider the ideal Jack Daniels bottle either. I have a syphon that doesn't match the film one in two aspects. And either way, I'm thinking about replacing it with an even more inaccurate one that'd look better on my display. But honestly—and please don't take this the wrong way, I just mean it as an observation—I think the only one coming off here like wanting to be right about their choices is you. It does look like me having showed up here with a couple of posts suggesting stuff felt like an attack. I appreciate you trying to cool it down now (I guess?) but the weird vibe is there. I don't know if this is some kind of unintentional gatekeeping specific to the RPF, since it's already the second time something along the lines happens to me here, but it doesn't feel very nice.

I've been collecting this stuff for over 25 years, I know a couple of the best Indiana Jones prop makers out there in person, I've always followed and learned from the stuff all you guys discuss regularly, be it here, the Club Obi Wan or foreign communities. I really respect the work, time and dedication that everyone puts into this. So it's obviously not the intention to barge in and go "hey you guys have no idea what you're talking about, allow me to illuminate you." However that seems to be how you're reading it. I don't know what to tell you about that.

Anyways, I'm leaving it here. This is certainly not how I wanted this thread to come back. If you still want to talk about this, clear the air or whatever, I suggest we do it in private cause at this point this is just off-topic stuff. Super good info from everyone here though, I'm still real happy this thread happened in the first place either way.

I don't know which size is correct with absolute certainty (particularly with 3 different bottles in that one scene). I was simply offering opposing evidence/arguments as I threw out one bottle already based on prior arguments that went the other direction.

I also didn't realize this was a deadly serious matter and I couldn't have a little fun with it in the process (being a hobby and not a museum, after all).

I run a historical lighter restoration and movie memorabilia thread on here and I must have at least one or two regular readers and even they joked it's turned into my lighter addiction/obsession thread not the lighters used in movies thread it started out to be. I didn't bite their heads off and stomp off to PMs only for not showing proper holy reverence for the subject matter, however.

Look, I don't want to stand in the way of 2 or 3 people being able to obtain the information to have the most accurate replica prop Indy bottle collection possible (I can hear the angry voices, smell the fires on their torches and see the tips of the pitchforks coming for me) so please provide the Sparklets information for them and I'll leave the thread permanently and you can write your expert level diatribes unopposed. I like to have fun with hobbies and this type of interaction clearly isn't it.

 

[chazzychaz]

Indy's hand gun in Raiders of the Lost Ark is a Smith and Wesson M1917 (two versions used in the movie; the military version has a slightly different aiming sight).

View attachment 1342446

Don't forget he also used a Browning hi power 9mm

 

[VonMagnum]

Don't forget he also used a Browning hi power 9mm

Indiana Jones - 'Real World' Props

The map room brush origins have been debated for a while. You can sometimes find vintage 1960s or 70s decorator's brushes made in the UK that convert easily and have the right proportions.

www.therpf.com

 

[kevin926]

Dial of destiny flashlight. Ever Ready Space Beam Torch...

Screen grab photo and the stripped photos are the ones I took, While the painted red flashlight is not mine but shown as a reference.

Another flashlight surfaced as a twin. Excide is the brand--not my photo!

 

[RaidersLight]

Hi. I leave here the my flashlight from DoD. It is the Space Beam model from the 70's, manufactured by multiple companies depending on the country and year. Mine is a Tudor (made in England), but there are other brands such as Twin, Ever Ready, Exide, etc. They are originally red. They are relatively easy to find second hand, although most are usually with rust. In the film it appears in air metal color, probably with colorless varnish. To make a replica you have to use a stripper product and use a metal brush. You have to apply the product several times because the paint is powdered and baked, so it is very embedded and hard to remove, but with patience comes out. It uses a battery of 6 volts.

 

[kevin926]

Hi. I leave here the my flashlight from DoD. It is the Space Beam model from the 70's, manufactured by multiple companies depending on the country and year. Mine is a Tudor (made in England), but there are other brands such as Twin, Ever Ready, Exide, etc. They are originally red. They are relatively easy to find second hand, although most are usually with rust. In the film it appears in air metal color, probably with colorless varnish. To make a replica you have to use a stripper product and use a metal brush. You have to apply the product several times because the paint is powdered and baked, so it is very embedded and hard to remove, but with patience comes out. It uses a battery of 6 volts.

View attachment 1727888

View attachment 1727889

View attachment 1727890

That bottom photo is much clearer and really does appear to have the space beam markings for the Ever-Ready version. The Excide version doesn't have raised markings.

 

[Soloruben]

Hi. I leave here the my flashlight from DoD. It is the Space Beam model from the 70's, manufactured by multiple companies depending on the country and year. Mine is a Tudor (made in England), but there are other brands such as Twin, Ever Ready, Exide, etc. They are originally red. They are relatively easy to find second hand, although most are usually with rust. In the film it appears in air metal color, probably with colorless varnish. To make a replica you have to use a stripper product and use a metal brush. You have to apply the product several times because the paint is powdered and baked, so it is very embedded and hard to remove, but with patience comes out. It uses a battery of 6 volts.

View attachment 1727888

View attachment 1727889

View attachment 1727890

Thank you very much for the tip. I've bought one second hand, but it's in red colour, so it'll need to do the same as you did. And I expect the great effort to take away the painting... That's the price for a good prop sometimes... ;-) Maybe they chose the most shiny version for the film due to the setting lightining. In other finishings the torch might be more difficult to appreciate by the audience.

 

[Soloruben]

By the way, I've got a question for you all. Is there already a thread for items which are not really props but which could perfectly fit the character and the settings? (I mean things from the period that would go with Indy or his father (even the "Young Adventure Chronicles") if they ever existed as real people). As a typical example to illustrate this would be the famous "Fase President lamp" -from his desk in "Crystal Skull", being this example one appearing in the film-, or maybe it could be a postcard or any other object not appearing in it, but which would be plausible to have "existed" in the imaginary inventory as they are from the time depicted... Is this very thread for this too, is there one already made, or should I create one for that purpose -if anyone interested...-?

 

[kevin926]

By the way, I've got a question for you all. Is there already a thread for items which are not really props but which could perfectly fit the character and the settings? (I mean things from the period that would go with Indy or his father (even the "Young Adventure Chronicles") if they ever existed as real people). As a typical example to illustrate this would be the famous "Fase President lamp" -from his desk in "Crystal Skull", being this example one appearing in the film-, or maybe it could be a postcard or any other object not appearing in it, but which would be plausible to have "existed" in the imaginary inventory as they are from the time depicted... Is this very thread for this too, is there one already made, or should I create one for that purpose -if anyone interested...-?

I personally have purchased WWI items. Set of binoculars and a copycat compass. I also just got my hands on an Eagle Scout medal seeing how Indy was one at the beginning of TLC. The sky really is the limit seeing how we are talking about a non-fictional based character using real world everyday items. Yes -props are another story but the majority of the backgrounds are filled with tons of everyday, accessible, ordinary items. I also went to a few thrift stores and bought some metal chalices to sit with my Grails. Books are great options as well seeing how we are talking about a professor . This real-world thread is loaded with great ideas and a lot of these can be found on the cheap at flea markets and thrift stores.

 

[VonMagnum]

By the way, I've got a question for you all. Is there already a thread for items which are not really props but which could perfectly fit the character and the settings? (I mean things from the period that would go with Indy or his father (even the "Young Adventure Chronicles") if they ever existed as real people). As a typical example to illustrate this would be the famous "Fase President lamp" -from his desk in "Crystal Skull", being this example one appearing in the film-, or maybe it could be a postcard or any other object not appearing in it, but which would be plausible to have "existed" in the imaginary inventory as they are from the time depicted... Is this very thread for this too, is there one already made, or should I create one for that purpose -if anyone interested...-?

Given that could be literally anything from the 1930s or earlier, potentially going back dozens, if not hundreds of years given Indy's father's own predilections, that could be one giant thread.

Or you can try going to an antique store. That's an actual hobby from what I hear. Or so the lady at work that wants to go out with me keeps telling me, saying it's something that we could do together, after seeing my lighter collection and somehow thinking that means I'm interested in every junky thing imaginable just because it's old rather than just lighters specifically.

 

[Liberance]

By the way, I've got a question for you all. Is there already a thread for items which are not really props but which could perfectly fit the character and the settings? (I mean things from the period that would go with Indy or his father (even the "Young Adventure Chronicles") if they ever existed as real people). As a typical example to illustrate this would be the famous "Fase President lamp" -from his desk in "Crystal Skull", being this example one appearing in the film-, or maybe it could be a postcard or any other object not appearing in it, but which would be plausible to have "existed" in the imaginary inventory as they are from the time depicted... Is this very thread for this too, is there one already made, or should I create one for that purpose -if anyone interested...-?

I suppose what you're talking about here is more specifically display ideas. There's a long thread with people sharing displays already, but I guess it's not exactly what you mean? I'd say that's probably the closest place for that conversation if there's one though. My understanding of the purpose of this thread is to list objects that do appear in the movies and can be found in the real world without having to build them from scratch.