JULIEN'S TV Auction

Stairstars

Well-Known Member
JULIEN'S has announced a big TV auction for next week, and in perusing the catalog, I have noted a few boo boos that need correcting.

The Dale Evans is not from the TV show, but from an earlier film, RAINBOW OVER TEXAS:
Rainbow Over Texas.PNG

As you can see, it has alterations including the addition of the matador epaulets and the sleeve design.

The James Garner MAVERICK is not from the original WB 1950s TV series, but from the late 1970s reunion film or TV show.

The Gene Barry AMOS BURKE is not correct; it is actually from the film RED GARTERS:

Red Garters.PNG

The Robert Stack UNTOUCHABLES lot of several pieces are neither from that; in fact three of the offerings are not Stack's at all, but Robert Culp's:

RCulp.PNG


rick
 
No apparent updates so far (assuming you reached out). One minor note on the Rainbow Over Texas: Is the sleeve design altered? What's visible from the back in the second listing image seems at least generally consistent with that fence photo at a quick glance.

You are very good at spotting these discrepancies, especially in older titles. It's amazing how much gets listed where the piece itself may be fine, but the specific attribution appears to be either blind assumption, treating an uncorroborated label or memory as gospel, or mixing up versions of the same title – even in the face of evidence supporting a different (usually less popular) attribution. Granted, things can get reused, but evidence for that is handy.


If you'll permit the brief aside... one clear example that really bugged me was a studio-created replica chariot that Propstore listed in 2021. It was identified as a replica, so that wasn't the issue, but they advertised it as "based on those seen in" 1956's The Ten Commandments, despite the design having no resemblance whatsoever to those seen in the film. Instead, the design can be spotted quite prominently in Demille’s earlier Cleopatra (1934) and Samson and Delilah (1949), along with an obscure (and unfortunately shockingly-racist) 1936 comedy College Holiday.

misattributed chariot_sm.png


My guess is the fabricators' reference had become mislabeled over the decades, either mixing it up with Demille’s earlier 1923 Ten Commandments (from which chariots at least possibly could have been converted), or probably more likely, simply lumping it in by accident with the studio's most famous chariot film. After all, it seems as though practically every chariot prop documented in a museum or studio tour has become attributed either to that or to MGM's 1959 Ben-Hur. I even found a different style with multiple attributions to the 1956 Ten Commandments - complete with official display signs - that I identified in Samson and Delilah as well as Demille's earlier The Sign of the Cross (the man had a thing for chariots), but once again, nothing in Ten Commandments. I alerted Propstore three weeks ahead, yet they assured me of confidence, and when it came up, the auctioneer introduced it as an "iconic" piece in association with the film. Admittedly, not the biggest deal only being a replica, but I fail to fathom how they justified the specific attribution beyond some piece of paper that must have had that title written on it.


At least on the flipside, occasionally it's a perfectly understandable mix-up – even a deeply hidden gem. I picked up from Propmasters a set of three 1969, 1970 and 1971 scripts for I, Claudius initially attributed to the 1976 BBC TV series. But through a fair amount of digging in old biographies and newspapers, I discovered they actually came from an all-but-forgotten, abandoned Tony Richardson film adaptation, of which even the BFI wasn't aware. George C. Scott cast as Claudius, Jack Nicholson at least sought for Caligula after Mick Jagger had been considered, and Alec Guinness considered for Tiberius, before Richardson decided to first stage a 1972 West End play starring David Warner that closed after two months of mediocre reviews. As much as I love the '76 realization, it was nice to have a rare instance of misattribution that elicited excitement in place of disappointment and eyerolls.
 
I used to work full time for JULIENS - twice in fact, but the company has changed hands and I am informed they have no use for me, so I have not shared my findings.

Looks like you do a bit of researching yourself, so your point that many catalog folks attribute unknown pieces to the most famous role known for that performer rings true to me. We see it here as well.

Here is the back of the Evans:
DEVAN REV.jpg

I now concur with you, as I got caught up in the floral aspect and did not see it in the still. My bad. I will now go to my room without supper...:lol:


rick
 
Last edited:
I now concur with you, as I got caught up in the floral aspect and did not see it in the still. My bad. I will now go to my room without supper...:lol:
Oh, go ahead and have supper. But just this once!


Sad to hear of your Julien's experience. You seem eminently reasonable in your posts here, so I'm certainly inclined to raise my eyebrow at that kind of dismissal. I've never been a customer, but I've considered things from time to time in the past, largely on account of respect for Jason DeBord and a degree of trust in his association. I've wondered since his departure what, if anything, to make of that, but whether fairly or not, that uncertainty has made me a little more wary.
 
Stairstars Just as a real quick follow-up – and I suppose for reference of any future readers – I see where you were coming from regarding the washed-out floral patterns on the Evans. I think it's because the patterning is metallic. I skimmed through a decent-resolution copy on YouTube, and at least on that, I was amazed how despite a pretty lengthy stretch of screentime, the front floral pattern as well is almost invisible throughout; just hints here and there, with the open spiral patterns somewhat-oddly more discernible than the little dense leaves / buds (if that makes sense). A good example of a piece where someone replicating purely from the screen would likely create something markedly different.

Makes me feel bad for the costumers, though; all that embroidery work... and it just-about might as well have not been there!
 
Back
Top