New Elstree Studio documentary with discarded Graflex.
- Thread starter Skelatorious
- Start date
I should also note that, prior to disassembly and reassembly for the Elstree documentary, the parts were oriented just as we’ve always known them to be—clamp at 9:00 (instead of the 3:00 of the toe pic and ESB props), d-ring bracket facing away from the clamp box, etc.
If there was a variant which had the bracket rotated and the rounded end facing toward the clamp, then it seems to have only appeared in the cave scene, and nowhere else.
Pretty much every good photo (and now this Elstree prop) sticks with the accepted onscreen orientation of the parts. The only real questions in my mind would be the length of the bracket (which would determine how centered or off-centered it was on the heroes), and how many rivets were used on the onscreen heroes. The majority of found-parts contenders (be they Graflex case d-rings or picture-hanging kits) for the hero bracket are around the same length, and have a single rivet hole.
Note that the Elstree prop is really unusual, in that the two rivets are arranged in a perpendicular fashion, instead of on the long axis of the (very, very short) bracket, unlike the ESB Kobold and even the old Icons ANH replica, which had two screws running across the long axis, and were aligned with the clamp box.
If there was a variant which had the bracket rotated and the rounded end facing toward the clamp, then it seems to have only appeared in the cave scene, and nowhere else.
Pretty much every good photo (and now this Elstree prop) sticks with the accepted onscreen orientation of the parts. The only real questions in my mind would be the length of the bracket (which would determine how centered or off-centered it was on the heroes), and how many rivets were used on the onscreen heroes. The majority of found-parts contenders (be they Graflex case d-rings or picture-hanging kits) for the hero bracket are around the same length, and have a single rivet hole.
Note that the Elstree prop is really unusual, in that the two rivets are arranged in a perpendicular fashion, instead of on the long axis of the (very, very short) bracket, unlike the ESB Kobold and even the old Icons ANH replica, which had two screws running across the long axis, and were aligned with the clamp box.
Are those drive rivets (set with hammer) or pop rivets? If hammer set, could explain the damage around that region on the end of the tube. Not having used drive rivets before, I don't know if it's possible to get the mandrel out after setting that type of rivet, but it does seem to be missing.
These are examples of drive rivets:
On the topic of why two rivets instead of one -- if I'd made a bracket from super thin sheet metal like that, and in that configuration, I'd definitely want as much reinforcement as possible to hold the thing down and prevent it from deforming. Two would seem better than one (in concert with my earlier question: drive rivets do not clamp as well as standard pop rivets).
Edit: added drive rivet image
These are examples of drive rivets:
On the topic of why two rivets instead of one -- if I'd made a bracket from super thin sheet metal like that, and in that configuration, I'd definitely want as much reinforcement as possible to hold the thing down and prevent it from deforming. Two would seem better than one (in concert with my earlier question: drive rivets do not clamp as well as standard pop rivets).
Edit: added drive rivet image
Last edited:
Exactly. If the heroes used a dedicated mounting bracket from some found item, the brackets would already be tough enough to suspend some weight from a d-ring. A handmade, thin piece of metal designed to simulate a found-part d-ring bracket for a stunt prop might have needed some extra reinforcement.
Drew Baker
Sr Member
Tom, could you explain that?
I recall the idea being tossed around that the bottom of the Wampa Cave saber became the Dagobah saber became the Ranch Saber, but that was debunked because the stampings are different (New York vs. Folmer with patent). I don't remember any actual crossover between bladed stunt and belt hangar in ESB.
Thanks!
Dont you think the saber has a lot of dents, scracthes and hits, for being discarted with no film use?
Could it had been discarted after having many use or damage, in tunisia perhaps?
Could that weird welding work in the head had been done after use and being discarted?
Tunisia shooting begun on march 22 and ended april 4. Johns stears and his team were in Tunisia.
The ben cave scenes with the saber was not filmed until april 26, and other in may 6. May 7 was lukes training.
There was a month between ending filming on tunisia, and the day the stunt saber was needed.
Could it had been discarted after having many use or damage, in tunisia perhaps?
Could that weird welding work in the head had been done after use and being discarted?
Tunisia shooting begun on march 22 and ended april 4. Johns stears and his team were in Tunisia.
The ben cave scenes with the saber was not filmed until april 26, and other in may 6. May 7 was lukes training.
There was a month between ending filming on tunisia, and the day the stunt saber was needed.
I love these photos, we've only seen an old Bubble Strip in the flesh on that MPP that surfaced not too long ago. Never seen an old one one legit stuffed into a Graflex clamp on a prop!
This extensive damage COULD be from being in the backlot or a dumpster. It just seems so specific (one side of the bottom rim, only the thin emitter is folded, one piece of the bubble strip, etc. But it could very well be from that, thanks for keeping us on point. The welded plate is def an "on purpose" thing.. weird..
Also, Drew,
GINO posted a photo (a version he was allowed to share) and explained that he had proof of a Dagobah belt hanger with a bolt visible. i'll pm you the shot so we don't hijack this thread too much
This extensive damage COULD be from being in the backlot or a dumpster. It just seems so specific (one side of the bottom rim, only the thin emitter is folded, one piece of the bubble strip, etc. But it could very well be from that, thanks for keeping us on point. The welded plate is def an "on purpose" thing.. weird..
Also, Drew,
GINO posted a photo (a version he was allowed to share) and explained that he had proof of a Dagobah belt hanger with a bolt visible. i'll pm you the shot so we don't hijack this thread too much
AnubisGuard
Master Member
The bottom damage looks an awful lot like what happens when a flash tube is dropped on asphalt. (Don't ask me how I know...) It tends to accumulate around the edge just like that.
There is an awful lot of it, though. It would require dropping the flash a number of times.
There is an awful lot of it, though. It would require dropping the flash a number of times.
Could it be marred from something like the teeth of a vice or pliers?
newmagrathea
Sr Member
My guess is that Mark Hamill would hold the lightsaber like a cane Graflex end down between shots, that would explain the damage to the bottom. I want to say that I've seen a photo of him doing exactly that. It makes sense that they would tell him to not put the blade end down so the reflective material would not get dirty.
I guess you mean this photo. But that was in ESB
Its a great point anyway.
I dont think the damage is provoked because a hammer putting the rivets. A dozen hits would had been enough, these are a lot more, and very small and Sharp. Its very interesting that could be provoked as being scrubbed to the ground, as someone has pointed as well.
Could had been used as a reherasal between Guinnes and Prowse? the only photo I found is this one , they are using John Stears prototypes. Could had used the elstree saber when these ones broke?
Last edited:
The damage at the bottom is all focused in that ONE area, right where the D-ring is mounted.
I don't think this is from random drops or drags, unless it was one very long drag along some concrete or something, and the flash wasn't rotated at all during that one long drag.
The heat from the welding of the washer at the emitter end could've deformed the S curve.
The D ring bracket most DEFINITELY looks hand made, and in a hurry, with some really thin gauge aluminum or steel sheet. The two small rivets make sense for the amount of room there is on the flat area of the bracket. That's a really minuscule D ring bracket, downright TINY. MAN, what a shoddy bit of work! Still, not terribly surprised.
Y'all know how I feel about Roger Christian. Totally untrustworthy. I don't think I could believe anything that comes out of his mouth regarding these props, not anymore.
Very cool to see these pics, thanks for sharing them! It really is amazing and exciting when things like this truly surface. It gives me hope that there's still so much more to come!
And I don't care whether one or ALL the Graflex hilts had two rivets in the bottom. I like the clean look of just the one rivet, and the bracket butted up against the lip of the outside edge.
Anyone who's gonna switch out their brackets, just send them all to me (the ones with the single hole). I'll take good care of them.
One more thing, if ANY of you actually REPLICATE this thing, with the bent-to-hell emitter end and welded washer (and attempt to match every ding and scratch and dent on the bottom edge), I will personally drive/fly out to your place of residence and slap you upside the head for your utter lunacy!! And I'll bring a bunch of random people to line up behind me, it'll be just like that scene in "Airplane!"!!
I don't think this is from random drops or drags, unless it was one very long drag along some concrete or something, and the flash wasn't rotated at all during that one long drag.
The heat from the welding of the washer at the emitter end could've deformed the S curve.
The D ring bracket most DEFINITELY looks hand made, and in a hurry, with some really thin gauge aluminum or steel sheet. The two small rivets make sense for the amount of room there is on the flat area of the bracket. That's a really minuscule D ring bracket, downright TINY. MAN, what a shoddy bit of work! Still, not terribly surprised.
Y'all know how I feel about Roger Christian. Totally untrustworthy. I don't think I could believe anything that comes out of his mouth regarding these props, not anymore.
Very cool to see these pics, thanks for sharing them! It really is amazing and exciting when things like this truly surface. It gives me hope that there's still so much more to come!
And I don't care whether one or ALL the Graflex hilts had two rivets in the bottom. I like the clean look of just the one rivet, and the bracket butted up against the lip of the outside edge.
Anyone who's gonna switch out their brackets, just send them all to me (the ones with the single hole). I'll take good care of them.
One more thing, if ANY of you actually REPLICATE this thing, with the bent-to-hell emitter end and welded washer (and attempt to match every ding and scratch and dent on the bottom edge), I will personally drive/fly out to your place of residence and slap you upside the head for your utter lunacy!! And I'll bring a bunch of random people to line up behind me, it'll be just like that scene in "Airplane!"!!
I don’t believe a single thing Christian says anymore.. he’s said he made 2 before then shipped them straight to Tunisia, then he’s said 3, and now last interview he said 5, with some left in his personal storage..
As logic though.. we know for one thing.. the view of the bottom of the screen used sabers are practically impossible to see on screen lol
Chris posted a excellent deleted scene with Luke holding the graflex end at the screen but we can’t really see the details with it so far away
As for “why” the prop team did some with 1 rivet and some with 2
We can’t truly say they did.. we don’t know and have not 100% confirmed the graflex’s on screen have 1 rivet.. they could have 2 or even 3, because we have never seen it
My personal belief is the on screen ones have 1... but this is my belief as of right now
But I can tell you how the prop company’s work.. time is money.. and back then time was even more important because these guys weren’t making crap for a living!! They were all starving artists kit bashing and super gluing battleships together..
Movie studio says we need it now!! You bang it out before they go ask another shop.. which is pretty common practice even up today.. what ever shop can make it the fastest and cheapest.. and Lucas needed cheapest back then, gets the job
It’s most likely not 1 man making these.. like other photos we have of other prop builders building other props.. it’s a group of guys in a small room with large tables with piles of crap.. literally junk..
Who’s to say Shaw (who I truly believe assembled them) was working on 1 and gave the other 2 ( IF they truly made 3) to 2 other guys working for him to assemble
If Shaw and john had 1 large rivet in there took boxes, but Gary only had small.. Gary would probably just use the small rivets since your not going to see these details on screen and 40 years later guys won’t be obsessing over it
Another reason why I say Christian never assembled these is because of all the crap he was talking about the empire strikes back graflex’s..
At the time of ESB Roger was not working with Lucas.. I believe he was on aliens? (Someone can confirm this with me?)
And people have asked what he thought of the changes the graflex went through.. now my quotes aren’t 100% but he basically said
“The lightsaber is suppose to be Excalibur.. they made it look very ugly with the alterations they made, the rivets in the d ring really looked ugly, and that’s why I prefer a screw”
(This is BEFORE the Robertson screw comments, and people started using hex cap screws)
He also made comments on how the notched grips and circuit board were ugly, the 7 smooth grips and bubble stripped look more elegant..
I wish I could find that interview but the comments he made we very nasty.. to the point of jealousy..
So.. long story short... if he commented and said rivets were ugly on the ESB saber, why would he have used them on this discarded saber if he built it himself?
I will still stand today saying, Roger found the boxes of graflex’s... but he didn’t assemble them..
Unfortunately everyone who worked with him has passed away and it’s only his story to tell now.. but his words and these artifacts don’t match up at all..
His behavior of taking graflex’s, dressing them up with replica parts off eBay then trying to pass them off as lightsabers he’s had in storage for 40years... that isn’t someone I can take credible.. and that goes on anything he says
Who’s to say that didn’t happen in the scrap piles out back? That’s what I figured about the bottom tube
The shroud itself looks like pliers have been held in places and hits with a hammer...
But I think the bottom tube damage is from being in a scrap pile.. the way the d ring is attached kind makes me think it was attached to a perfectly round bottom and then damaged later
Exactly tom, you nailed exactly how those things are attached!!
Thanks for thinking a like, I think these are just standard 3mm rivets like Roy’s. I have been all over my area, and to a company that is house in a 1500ft long warehouse, all they carry is fastening products..
I went threw all their rivets, even airliner rivets! And non of their profile matches the kind roy sells
That’s why I believe Europe has a different profile of rivet
If Roy scales these I wouldn’t be surprised if his 3mm rivets are a dead match
