Staff of Ra Head Piece

[Duncanator]

Even stranger yet, my headpiece made of plastic resin (painted gold) has strange tail feathers too (although they're worse, but that may have been a mold issue with the piece). It also appears to have a separate wire braid attached to it and the "horse shoe wire" that wraps around the entire bird has a tiny bit missing just like my gold one, but on the opposite side! Tres bizarre!

(First two pics are plastic head piece followed by picture of the gold plated "ILM" one showing the same missing bit on the opposite side.

View attachment 1017379 View attachment 1017388 View attachment 1017387

Both of those resin ones look like they come from the dome casting lineage. You can see a dome shaped arc where the feather sculpting style changes.
The "horse shoe" around the bird's head looks like mold flash to me that wasn't cleaned up.

In an earlier post you asked if the braid had been a separate part on mine. Mine is a resin casting from the ILM mold and had the braid as part of the casting. Fans who are producing metal copies are likely adding the braid as a separate process, since the fine detail may be hard to achieve in a metal casting - and a real braid will just look cleaner anyway. Any production castings would have had the braid as part of the casting to simplify the process.

Knowing what I do about film productions, I would imagine that there was likely only one real metal head piece ever made (the hero or close-up) and any others (back-ups, stunts, etc..) would have been resin castings. I don't know this for certain, but productions companies prefer to spend as little money as possible - especially for unproven new films (which Indiana Jones was back then!). They aren't going to lavish money on anything unless it's absolutely necessary; and even then, they will try to go as cheap as they can.

 

[VonMagnum]

The "horse shoe" around the bird's head looks like mold flash to me that wasn't cleaned up.

No, I was referring to the little "terminal" wire end by the tail that wraps around the entire medallion to the other round terminal end. There's a tiny bit "stripped" from the gold one and the resin one on opposite sides (almost like whatever they used there was installed in reverse on one of them if they came from the same mold (don't know if that's something added on the metal ones or part of the casting itself as on the gold one there's some residue pool at around the bass that could have been glue or solder or whatever then coated or sprayed accordingly...I'm not sure how that part was assembled. The closeup of the "menora" on my gold one shows similar "grey" matter here and there in the photo that looks like the same stuff securing the braid, whether some dull looking solder or other adhesive or whatever).

In an earlier post you asked if the braid had been a separate part on mine. Mine is a resin casting from the ILM mold and had the braid as part of the casting. Fans who are producing metal copies are likely adding the braid as a separate process, since the fine detail may be hard to achieve in a metal casting - and a real braid will just look cleaner anyway. Any production castings would have had the braid as part of the casting to simplify the process.

So was the original Imam screen version using an soldered wire braid added after casting or is it part of the mold? I thought it was the former in all on-screen versions of that one. According to RM's message to me (discussing a slight issue with a spot on the braid area on the replacement/second "Raven Bar" medallion he sent me), that version has its wire wrapped around it before plating, not part of the mold itself. Again, I don't know what they did on the "Raven Bar" medallion for the on-screen version for sure, but I take it RM tried to make it the same way the original "hero" version was, at least according to the description.

Now whether further castings for stunt use or cast gifts were made differently, I guess they certainly could be. I thought that picture posted earlier of an example of a cast gift looked kind of like a painted resin version (i.e. almost too perfect on the surface to be gold plating and looks like my painted Resin version except for the tail feather area once again).

Did the cast members get resin versions or metal versions or were some of both made for various cast members or is this an unknown?

Knowing what I do about film productions, I would imagine that there was likely only one real metal head piece ever made (the hero or close-up) and any others (back-ups, stunts, etc..) would have been resin castings. I don't know this for certain, but productions companies prefer to spend as little money as possible - especially for unproven new films (which Indiana Jones was back then!). They aren't going to lavish money on anything unless it's absolutely necessary; and even then, they will try to go as cheap as they can.

That's interesting, but it does beg the question about two of the medallions sold at auction, one with the red opaque jewel that claimed in the description to be the on-screen version the way I read it (I can't see how it was when no version on-screen I could see had a red opaque jewel in it, not the close-ups anyway, which I mentioned earlier in the thread that I think the guy who bought it was possibly auctioned something under false pretenses at like some exorbitant amount) and the one I posted a comparison picture of next to mine that also seems to share the same (or extremely similar) tail feather mold that sold for $60K at auction and claimed to be a cast member gift as well.

I've also read what implied Elstree versions had acrylic jewels in them while the "hero" version had a swarovski crystal (which aren't quite as "rare" as some descriptions would have us believe as they regularly appear in bulk on places like eBay for no more than a dollar or two each in quantity, but as you say, "cheap as they can" ?). My "ILM" gold one and the RM "Raven Bar" one look identical in terms of the crystal in them and how it behaves with a camera flash and held up to the light, but I can't be sure it's a real crystal. The "Acme" version actually sparkles noticeably more in photos and reflects light better from lamp-lit viewing angles, but looking closely I think it may have a partial mirror back (which is an option with or without normally on that version) still installed around the edges (and clear in the center) which would cause the light to reflect and refract more. The plastic resin one has a jewel that looks like cheap plastic (not very clear and nothing resembling a crystal-like sparkle to it). Of course, the Bam Box version has an opaque RED jewel in it. The 'German' "reel art" one (I bought used for the Landron base rather than the medallion) has an amber gem, but I have no idea what it's made out of. I'd guess acrylic by the looks of it.

Frankly, I'm rather fascinated by all these variations on the medallion (I guess I wouldn't own six if I weren't and I'm still thinking about the "German" RM one as it looks much nicer than the "reel art" one front and back, but seeing it wasn't in the movie, one can only guess what it might have looked like for sure. Given Toht's hand, I'd expect the detail to look a bit shabby at best (something the Reel Art version actually does 'well', IMO with its "dimpled" almost reverse-looking bird body, hollowed out feathers and lack of detail in the feathers). It's actually hard to sit upright even with a holder as the bird body is deep in the back for some reason instead of relatively flat (won't sit worth a darn on the Landron holder and barely makes it on the plastic 'dish' holders).

 

[Duncanator]

I can't speak to how the fan recreations/recasts are made (either metal or resin), but production-used versions would likely be cast as one piece - braid and all. There would be no assembly other than to put the gem in the eye. Remember; other than the close-up, hero version, all the background or stunt versions didn't need to be all that good. They could be full of bubbles and have mold flash, but because they were only intended to be seen from a distance or while moving, they didn't need to look good.

My guess is that when filming, there were only a couple really nice ones made of metal for the close-up shots. Those would be the only ones that might have had separate braid added after casting. Every other one was likely a resin casting with integral braid.

 

[KramStaar]

I agree with Duncanator if you look at the fire-damaged and Imam headpieces in the archives and also the Imam headpiece in the main house at Skywalker Ranch, the braid is built into the cast as one piece...

 

[VonMagnum]

My guess is that when filming, there were only a couple really nice ones made of metal for the close-up shots. Those would be the only ones that might have had separate braid added after casting. Every other one was likely a resin casting with integral braid.

I find the lack of consistency in major films disturbing. You just know some dude tells Spielberg those morons won't notice it's a completely different medallion in that scene! Or the robot idol head versus the eyeless stunt version. No one would believe you if you showed them a human eye idol in bright lighting because it looks ridiculous, like a caricature. And they'd be right. Other than a few fans, no one did notice those things. But in the search of perfection, I have to say Raiders disappoints a little since once you see these things, you can't unsee them. The wizard just isn't the same once you know he's really the old man behind the curtain.

But as far as displaying movie props goes, I don't know many that would prefer a one piece replica over a hero one given a choice since the closeup is what someone would likely look for digging out their smart phone. Several cubes were used in Hellraiser to animate it opening (no seamless cube would look anywhere near as good in static shots as a seamless one), but then you have a predicament as the first thing a fan will ask you when you show them even the best made reproduction is, "Does it open?" Show them one that opens and they'll say it doesn't look good closed. I think this is why people like to show things locked up under glass.

 

[Moviefreak]

I find the lack of consistency in major films disturbing. You just know some dude tells Spielberg those morons won't notice it's a completely different medallion in that scene! Or the robot idol head versus the eyeless stunt version. No one would believe you if you showed them a human eye idol in bright lighting because it looks ridiculous, like a caricature. And they'd be right. Other than a few fans, no one did notice those things. But in the search of perfection, I have to say Raiders disappoints a little since once you see these things, you can't unsee them. The wizard just isn't the same once you know he's really the old man behind the curtain.

You have to remember the era and the technology of that time period. VHS was only in its infancy and not every home had one, so nobody worried about people nitpicking props. Spielberg knew nobody would pick up on differences on the big screen when they couldn’t pause for still frames. Nobody, at that time, could predict that every home would have a machine like a VCR, and the ability to pause. And even when those machines became available to the masses, the video quality and paused image quality was horrible and you still couldn’t make out the differences. It was with the development of 4K and Blu-ray, and ultra hi-def television that has really opened up the world of nitpicking props to death. So when you look back at these classic favorites and find their lack of attention to details a little “disturbing”, just remember they did not anticipate the technology of the future.

And let us not forget that these prop makers back then were the pioneers of the field. They were making much of this stuff up on the fly as they were doing it for the first time. They didn’t have training from FX schools, or 3-D printers to ensure every stunt prop matched perfectly. They made stuff by hand, and sometimes more than one person was tasked to bust stuff out. Many builders in communities like the RPF can build much prettier props and higher quality props than most of those old film props because the bar has been raised so high today. Makers today have had years of making replicas to hone this craft. Just remember that those guys back then, learned and were inspired from reading old magazines about classic Hollywood. They would read Famous Monsters and realize that they too wanted to get into movie effects and props. They honed their craft mainly alone at home sculpting, without a internet to find reference photos and to ask questions of other prop builders. They worked alone from their imagination and if they were lucky, then maybe they got to be mentored by another artist on a film, and then working their way up. Times are so much more different today.

 

[VonMagnum]

Moviefreak - I suppose that's true, but on the other hand, I don't find anything particularly objectionable about the Raven Bar version of the medallion that they should have felt a need to redesign it after the fact for the close up scene (and then add insult to injury by again going back to the original (temporal sequence at least) for the map room. In fact, I find the original more consistent with Egyptian art (particularly hieroglyphic art) than the feathered variation. In other words, why change it at all?

The idol is easier to understand given the abandoned moving eyes thing (maybe that seemed too supernatural for a Judeo-Christian themed movie?), although certainly the Temple of Doom embraced a Hindu magical stone concept beyond the village just thinking it was good luck, although I do find it strange that Dr. Jones would believe that (time wise pre-Raiders even) enough to pull that "You betrayed Shiva!" line that made the stone too hot to hold.... I actually think that going too far with the supernatural/odd is one of the things that killed the Crystal Skull movie for me.

Even though I'm a fan of Ancient Aliens, the direction they took made no real sense at the end. Why would a bunch of skulls turn back into an alien and a somewhat hostile one at that? A repository for ancient knowledge is one thing, but a multi-dimensional live alien? Yeah, that was my "too hokey for me" moment. I also realized since then I generally don't care for Shia LaBeouf (awful in Transformers, but then they're awful period for the most part and I liked the cartoons). I don't think the refrigerator moment was bad like some think, but I think he would have been badly beat up and maybe stuck as they used to lock from the inside (no emergency release back then). But I'm getting off track....

 

[Moviefreak]

Moviefreak - I suppose that's true, but on the other hand, I don't find anything particularly objectionable about the Raven Bar version of the medallion that they should have felt a need to redesign it after the fact for the close up scene (and then add insult to injury by again going back to the original (temporal sequence at least) for the map room. In fact, I find the original more consistent with Egyptian art (particularly hieroglyphic art) than the feathered variation. In other words, why change it at all?

We can’t know the reasons. Perhaps they didn’t intentionally make a change. Maybe, due to production schedules, two different makers were tasked with making a hero prop based upon a concept sketch, and each interpreted the design slightly differently or added their own personal flair to the piece. They might have chosen to have two hero props because they needed to film two scenes with closeups of it, and knew that they might not get one hero prop to both sets in time. But when the makers turned them in, they were different. What should they have done, spent more money to have one of the makers go back and make another one to match their version? Time and money spent on an accurately duplicating an item that most people won’t even notice - at least that is what they would have thought, as explained in my last post about technology. Fact is we will never know the reasons there are two different versions. It is what it is and just gives insight into the history of prop making.

 

[Duncanator]

You seem to be under the misconception that movies are fully planned and thought out before they are made, and have the luxury of all the time and money they want to make everything perfect. That's just not the case, even today. Film making is a business - emphasis on the BUSINESS. We are always compromised by the budget and time constraints of production. You have to keep costs down and get it done on time, or you won't get a chance to do a second film.

The artists are fully capable of making beautiful work, but are hamstrung by having to keep the cost down and get it done on ridiculously short timelines. (These artists do amazing work on their own time, when they don't have to rush.)

Hobbyists on the other hand can take months or years to make sure every detail is perfect. That don't fly in the film world. We had hobby model makers apply to ILM with beautiful portfolios, and told us proudly about how they had spent hundreds of hours to make it look so accurate. They were shocked when we asked if they could do it in two weeks, because that's how much time we had.

And Moviefreak is right about the advent of 4K, etc... giving the audience a peek behind the curtain that never existed when these films were made. Not to mention, no one had any idea which films would become classics and which ones would be relegated to the back shelf of history.

For instance: We were convinced that the first Pirates of the Caribbean movie was going to be a flop. Disney had just come off the Haunted Mansion movie failure, and it looked like they were just trying to turn another park ride into a movie. And I mean, come on - Johnny Depp as a pirate? Please!!? When it was a hit, Disney threw more money at the second one, but things still changed between films. Even the Pearl itself was different from the first film.

Movies just aren't that consistent. It's the nature of the biz.

 

[VonMagnum]

I thought I read somewhere someone wanted to show more detail for the close-up shot and so they made a more detailed medallion. I didn't assume they couldn't find or remember what it looked like or something as is being suggested.

I suppose it really doesn't matter. Shows like Big Bang Theory and Red Dwarf contradict themselves and previous episodes all the time. Some fans like me HATE that (like how is it a casual fan remembers Charlie Sheen made Huevos Rancheros on a previous episode of Two and a Half Men, but the script writers who are paid to know this stuff make an episode seasons later where he's desperately trying to learn how to make just scrambled eggs for his girlfriend to get what he wants in bed and Alan says he's never seen him go near the stove except to light his cigar when he also makes incredible black out Chili and Alan knows this. I get irritated at stuff like that because the writers should know the show better than me and I'm just going by memory.

 

[Duncanator]

I thought I read somewhere someone wanted to show more detail for the close-up shot and so they made a more detailed medallion. I didn't assume they couldn't find or remember what it looked like or something as is being suggested.

I suppose it really doesn't matter. Shows like Big Bang Theory and Red Dwarf contradict themselves and previous episodes all the time. Some fans like me HATE that (like how is it a casual fan remembers Charlie Sheen made Huevos Rancheros on a previous episode of Two and a Half Men, but the script writers who are paid to know this stuff make an episode seasons later where he's desperately trying to learn how to make just scrambled eggs for his girlfriend to get what he wants in bed and Alan says he's never seen him go near the stove except to light his cigar when he also makes incredible black out Chili and Alan knows this. I get irritated at stuff like that because the writers should know the show better than me and I'm just going by memory.

You're right. But the teams of writers are always changing members, so the new guys might not be aware of all the things from previous writers who've left the show. Also, each episode may be directed and written by different teams of people, that may or may not be aware of every nuance of what the other teams are doing. They are all working as fast as possible, so continuity sometimes gets missed. And sometimes they intentionally deviate for entertainment purposes.

Films work similarly: The first unit is off shooting one thing, while the second unit is shooting something else, and the effects guys are doing their shoots apart from everyone else - and the whole film is shot out of order with each unit making changes along the way. Then they try to pull it all together later in the editing room. It's amazing that it works at all.

It's no wonder that it drives fans crazy. It's a crazy business!

 

[VonMagnum]

I think if I were hiring new script writers for a #1 show like Two and a Half Men used to be, I'd make them watch all the episodes first at a bare minimum. You'd think at least ONE person would remember Charlie already knows how to make scrambled eggs.... sheesh. It's that disrespect of the fans that bothers me. A LOT of money was on the line for that show and they just treated the fans like they were imbeciles. Big Bang Theory is even worse in that regard (I stopped watching in three seasons ago as it ceased to be funny around Season 4 or so when they started writing for the mass public (it basically turned into "Friends" at that point) instead of actual nerds. The IT Crowd from Britain (which at least some think gave them the idea for Big Bang Theory as it came out first and ran concurrently for awhile) at least played it correctly the whole way through even if it had a fraction of the number of episodes (and never ceased to be funny as a result).

But when it comes to movies...I dunno. Harry Potter bugged me when they suddenly made the Hogwarts grounds MUCH larger after Chris Columbus stopped directing them. I realize that made certain things easier, but I had really hoped for better continuity from that series (let alone how movies deviate from books so much to begin with, but having never read those books it probably doesn't bother me the same way it does those who have). Yeah, I probably never noticed changes to The Pearl in Pirates of the Caribbean. It wasn't really the ship that interested me there. I actually hated the second and third movies so it's probably why I never really noticed. I liked the fourth and especially the fifth movie and I more than a little put off the way the news controls whether a movie gets made or not (I couldn't care less about some personal spat between Depp and Amber Heard. They worked out their lawsuit so make the flipping final movie already.... The worst thing they could do is end with a cliffhanger that never resolves. Did I mention I hate cliffhangers for that reason? Then there's the Divergent Series. Let's be greedy and split the final movie, not follow the book that well to begin with and then never finish it because the last book was HATED to begin with and since we got greedy and didn't film it back-to-back, now it will NEVER be resolved (certainly not with the original actors). Sometimes, I think Hollywood is ruined by sheer GREED. How many films got edited for time that ruined the story? Highlander 2 was goofy enough without cutting scenes left and right. Heck, even Commando cut THREE lousy minutes (it was not a long movie to begin with) that made a world of difference in how the main characters (especially Rae Dawn Chong's character) are perceived.... Ugh.

The latest thing is to neuter many home movie releases so they have no deep bass (filter below 30Hz) and vastly reduced dynamic range. BD/UHD was supposed to make home theater better, but several studios (Disney especially) seem to be catering for tiny sound bars and built-in TV speakers rather than let them adjust to a full range signal. Lovely. I've got a 11.1.6 home theater that had better sound on some laserdiscs (Jurassic Park DTS comes to mind). Most of those discs can carry multiple soundtracks, so why they don't throw a cheap stereo sound bar mix on there and let Atmos and DTS:X (and poor Auro-3D) do their magic RIGHT is beyond me. You're right. It's all about MONEY. Cater to the masses instead of the actual cinema fans.

 

[VonMagnum]

Meanwhile, eBay decided to side with that guy that sold me the defective amplifier he claimed was just inspected and in excellent condition and barely used at all (I was planning to use with my bi-amp Carver AL-III ribbons speakers) and didn't want to pay the return shipping and I can't understand their foreign customer service line to contest it properly (no email/written option). So I get NOTHING now, not even the $100 partial offer. Great. I will think twice about using eBay in the future as their 'buyer guarantee' apparently means NOTHING. Hopefully, I'll be able to repair it myself (I'm an Electronic Engineer so I'd rate my chances as reasonably good in that area, although amps aren't my area of expertise).

Thanks go to RM who gave me no such issues in returning the defective Raven Bar medallion and covered the return shipping without asking. The second one isn't quite perfect, but has a tiny spot with a "drip" of gold plating for some odd reason on the braid (see second photo). I showed RM the photo and he offered a full refund to return it or a partial to keep it with the slight flaw. I chose to keep it so it's settled.

Like he pointed out, a 3000 year old medallion probably isn't going to still look perfect anyway (shown is perfect side and the slight gold 'drip' on the second photo; as you can see it's pretty tiny. I don't know if it could be dremel filed down slightly to minimize it even further or not; I guess it depends on whether it's all gold or pewter underneath. I probably don't want to find out and will just display it perfect side forward like in the first photo, which as you can see is quite lovely. The other side is perfect too except that one tiny spot which my hand found rather quickly, but you have to look pretty closely to see it).

 

[VonMagnum]

I'm surprised no one has made a recreation of THIS version (i.e. the 'real' original the movie based it upon):

 

[VonMagnum]

Anyone buy/see the "McGuffin #1" version from Etsy? It's the most detailed "resin" version I've seen (based on the picture, which the colors don't seem to match the actual product from what a reviewer said as they claim it's the right shade of gold in reality). It supposedly has a copper wire braid on it. It's about 1/3 the price of the RM gold coated pewter version, but of course you'd always know it's made of plastic, especially when you pick it up.... I seem to want to collect one of every version I can find for some odd reason now (save the really bad ones).... I'm becoming addicted.

 

[Moviefreak]

I'm surprised no one has made a recreation of THIS version (i.e. the 'real' original the movie based it upon):

View attachment 1019183

It has been discussed here before in older threads... but I think the consensus was that "it was the inspiration" for the prop and not actually in the film, so most people didn't feel it was worth pursuing. You can invest a lot of time and money into making one, molding it, and then doing a run in metal... only to find a handlful of people interested in buying one. You could lose a lot of money that way, so many prop makers just said it wasn't worth the effort.

 

[VonMagnum]

It has been discussed here before in older threads... but I think the consensus was that "it was the inspiration" for the prop and not actually in the film, so most people didn't feel it was worth pursuing. You can invest a lot of time and money into making one, molding it, and then doing a run in metal... only to find a handlful of people interested in buying one. You could lose a lot of money that way, so many prop makers just said it wasn't worth the effort.

With the advent of 3D printing, maybe it'll eventually become easier to make molds based more on photo editing where something like this one wouldn't be that difficult to create a mold for and then make whatever kind (resin, pewter, bronze, etc.) without that much difficulty. It'd probably have to be hand-painted either way to match the original, though. It does remind me of of the "Raven Bar" version on the bird's body, only painted with color than the "feathered" Imam variant, though. It actually reminds me very much of Navajo artwork when I was last out in Arizona, especially the colors, probably a result of using natural based colors, which I'm sure is all the Egyptians had access to.

 

[VonMagnum]

I'm surprised no one has made a recreation of THIS version (i.e. the 'real' original the movie based it upon):

View attachment 1019183

I just ordered an Egyptian made necklace that's a reasonably close approximation of the same image (enough to show the similar origin of the Phoenix/Bennu/Horus medallion anyway since I was unable to locate a full recreation of the original; sadly I didn't notice the left Ankh arm was missing before I ordered it, but then the next nearest price similar piece was $250-1200). This was a relative bargain by comparison, though. The "gem" is on its head (the sun) instead of the eye, but that makes more sense really. The feet little red versions just would need to create the wrap around dimensional part indicating we're living in a fake world/simulation (sandbox ring) of real life that the medallion version has.

 

[VonMagnum]

Ok, apparently it's NOT "broken" on the left Ankh but how the real necklace was found when they dug it up with supposedly no indications it broke...odd. Better for me, I suppose.

 

[VonMagnum]

I've got two more Staff of Ra headpieces on the way.... (#7 and #8) and thinking about two more still. I can't stop!