Screen-Used Mummy Shotgun?

PHArchivist

Master Member
Or not...?


Years ago I acquired a cast copy of the Winchester Model 1897 used by Rick O'Connell in The Mummy (pics coming later).

I don't remember when I got, who I got it from, or its lineage. But have always understood it to have been sold as a replica.


However...

The finish work on this has all the hallmarks of a production-produced "B" prop, or stunt prop:
--Almost complete lack of effort to remove seam lines
--Many pock marks due to casing flaws / bubbles
--"Blocky", crude, "quick & dirty" paint work
--Clear evidence of clay used to fill the gap between barrel and magazine tube


Except, it is cast in resin...


I'm not claiming to be an expert.

Nor am I clueless to screen-used props juxtaposed to replicas.

But per the "quick and dirty" finish work alone, I'd swear this was a screen-used prop.


Had this been cast in foam, no one here would think otherwise than it was screen-used.

And no one here would ever take 'pride' in creating (and selling) a replica with such shoddy finish work...


So...


Did (or does) the industry use resin casts for background firearms?

I've always been largely of the impression that for "B" props or stunt props for firearms, they were almost exclusively cast in foam.


Now...

Where's RobStyle when I need him!?
 
Last edited:
Will have pics up soon...

And further commentary on the finish:
--It is not what I would view as "amateur", or absent of skills
--It does appear to be absent of attention to detail, and finesse in fit & finish
--It appears to be rushed, yet nonetheless seems to reflect an artistic eye

Overall, (to me), it bears that unique "finger print" that is so common across screen-used props (background props in particular).

The finish work (again, to me), reflects a combination of artistic talent, and knowing how an item will "read" on camera and when not under close scrutiny.

And it seems to fit the paradigm of film props, where as there is not the time nor the need to "sweat the details" (like seam lines).
 
Did (or does) the industry use resin casts for background firearms?
It would certainly seem so judging by what comes to market. Look at Propstore, etc.; a fair number of resin firearms.

And I know at least on occasion they skip rubber - either foam or solid - altogether. I have a stunt "taser crossbow" from Dirk Gently (not technically a firearm, but close enough) with resin bow limbs where the heroes had aluminum. I got in touch with a member of the show's props team, and despite a fair bit of screentime and action, they surprisingly confirmed that no rubbers were made; they just continuously repaired the resins on the fly as they inevitably broke getting tossed around and dropped, even adding acrylic plates to my example for an extra bit of make-shift durability.

Of course, not that that necessarily gets you all that far in terms of authentication.

Another possibility to keep in mind is it could be a genuine prop, but used in a different film, either cast from the Mummy mold or an unused Mummy casting that was later painted and repurposed. My brother has a urethane background gun attributed to Ted 2 that was very likely a leftover unused casting from Showtime (the gun that went on to become Jayne's "Vera" in Firefly) that found its way into an armorer's random general inventory.
 
It would certainly seem so judging by what comes to market. Look at Propstore, etc.; a fair number of resin firearms.

And I know at least on occasion they skip rubber - either foam or solid - altogether. I have a stunt "taser crossbow" from Dirk Gently (not technically a firearm, but close enough) with resin bow limbs where the heroes had aluminum. I got in touch with a member of the show's props team, and despite a fair bit of screentime and action, they surprisingly confirmed that no rubbers were made; they just continuously repaired the resins on the fly as they inevitably broke getting tossed around and dropped, even adding acrylic plates to my example for an extra bit of make-shift durability.

Of course, not that that necessarily gets you all that far in terms of authentication.

Another possibility to keep in mind is it could be a genuine prop, but used in a different film, either cast from the Mummy mold or an unused Mummy casting that was later painted and repurposed. My brother has a urethane background gun attributed to Ted 2 that was very likely a leftover unused casting from Showtime (the gun that went on to become Jayne's "Vera" in Firefly) that found its way into an armorer's random general inventory.

You may be on to something, as the stock on my piece varies slight from this screen-used sample:

Mummy-Shotgun1 (1).jpg
 
The Mummy version also appears to have featured several extra inches of barrel.

You could always do a peruse of the Internet Movie Firearms Database and see if you can find a film that used that semi-distinctive stock form. For better or worse, that shotgun model has been used in a ton of movies and shows.
 
The Mummy version also appears to have featured several extra inches of barrel.

You could always do a peruse of the Internet Movie Firearms Database and see if you can find a film that used that semi-distinctive stock form. For better or worse, that shotgun model has been used in a ton of movies and shows.
LOL you may be recognizing some unwanted customization...

I somehow managed to break off about three inches of the barrel!

I still have the piece, and the breakage / seam is perfect, so will be easy enough to re-attach.
 
Any more thoughts on this?
Unless you can find some reference for that style of stock in the film (screenshots I found on a quick search seemed to be more consistent with the framed example you posted), I'd have to conclude it's in-all-likelihood not from The Mummy, regardless of the barrel.

That doesn't rule out the possibility that it's an original prop from something else, but I'm not aware of another good avenue besides IMFDB.
 
Unless you can find some reference for that style of stock in the film (screenshots I found on a quick search seemed to be more consistent with the framed example you posted), I'd have to conclude it's in-all-likelihood not from The Mummy, regardless of the barrel.

That doesn't rule out the possibility that it's an original prop from something else, but I'm not aware of another good avenue besides IMFDB.
All makes good sense...

I'm sure this model weapon was used in other films. Heck, even Mummy Returns used the same model shotgun as Terminator 2 (possibly even the same one?).

Would you agree that the crudeness of the finish is far more in line with a production-used piece opposed to a replica created by a caring artisan?
 
If the IMFDB listings of films in which each individual model / variation were used are accurate and comprehensive, then it is definitive my sample was not used in The Mummy.

But as you suggested, Tommy, there is plenty of "opportunity" that it may have been made from another film (assuming it is in fact made for a production).
 
Would you agree that the crudeness of the finish is far more in line with a production-used piece opposed to a replica created by a caring artisan?
I suppose. I do get what you mean regarding crudeness; I have several props of confident authenticity that exhibit air pocket flaws, obvious seams with remnant flashing, and/or slapdash paint, suggestive of a rushed maker saying "good enough." But I pretty much only collect production-unique or very obscure designs as opposed to common, off-the-shelf real-world forms, and even then, generally ones for which I find corroborating reference imagery and no online evidence of similar replicas, as that limits the possibilities. I'd guess that your example could just as well have been a stage prop, for instance.

I've also seen crude replicas; I have a resin replica Raiders revolver that I guess was okay for the price, but far less worthy of pride than the vendor's listing images suggested.

IMFDB has generally struck me as surprisingly comprehensive, but I'm also nowhere near an expert in firearms ID. Undoubtedly there are gaps and mistakes as with any Wiki-style resource; I just treat it as the most efficient starting point.
 
I suppose. I do get what you mean regarding crudeness; I have several props of confident authenticity that exhibit air pocket flaws, obvious seams with remnant flashing, and/or slapdash paint, suggestive of a rushed maker saying "good enough." But I pretty much only collect production-unique or very obscure designs as opposed to common, off-the-shelf real-world forms, and even then, generally ones for which I find corroborating reference imagery and no online evidence of similar replicas, as that limits the possibilities. I'd guess that your example could just as well have been a stage prop, for instance.

I've also seen crude replicas; I have a resin replica Raiders revolver that I guess was okay for the price, but far less worthy of pride than the vendor's listing images suggested.

IMFDB has generally struck me as surprisingly comprehensive, but I'm also nowhere near an expert in firearms ID. Undoubtedly there are gaps and mistakes as with any Wiki-style resource; I just treat it as the most efficient starting point.
Agree...

And of the 20 or so productions listed on IMFDB that featured this Chinese version, only five or so are notable (e.g. The Untouchables; Young Indiana Jones; Magnum Force - maybe; a couple or few others).

 
Back
Top