Star Wars Helmets

I dont know anything about that. I think Nick did some cantina creatures but I dont know if they were used or not. Cheers Jez

Mark - he said the same thing to me many years ago, although my understanding is that it was Nick Pemberton who actually did the Tusken - not Andrew. Pemberton is important in all this since he effectively "sub-contracted" the work John Mollo sent his way to Ainsworth, to the extent that the original delivery invoices for the work AA did had Nick Pembrton as the client, not Lucasfilm. Cheers Jez

I agree with you both. Everyone seem to over-egg their involvement in it Cheers Jez

I agree with you Joey. But Ainsworth could have been responsibile for some aspects of the stormtrooper look (like Joe's said the ears) and also the black frown -which resulted from Ainsworths idea to split the face and back cap and needing something to bridge the gap. In addition he probably added something to the armor, although I'd agree with you probably little apart from some detailing including the updates from the Sandtrooper--->stormtrooper. For the other characters I dont know what level of involvement he had, and I dont think anyone truly does apart from the guys who worked on the movies themselves. He appears to have had quite a significant input in the TIE pilot character - although whether it was his idea to add the TK face to the Rebel XWing helmet is something we'll never know. Same with the other imperial characters like the DS Gunner, Imperial Fleet trooper, Rebel Xwing and Rebel Fleet Trooper. We know he was given the core helmets to work from - but then he clearly added "something" thats given us the helmets we now all know. However, again we none of us know how much that "something" was. Sorry to go OT Cheers Jez

Joey Its good that you defend Matt, but its entirely reasonable for people to complain if theyve had crappy service (or in some cases no service). There's another guy in this thread whose been waiting almost two years - is he a "dink" too? You and I both know that this same story has been going on for years and years now. Even if we ignore the multiple "retirements", its not unreasonale for people to expect delivery on stuff they've paid for. Matt needs to find a way to deliver on stuff within a "reasonable" timescale (say 3 months) . Doing that would be good for his customers, good for him and good for the hobby. Everyone wins. Cheers Jez

But they didnt. The ANH production team were in trouble in 1976 and for better or for worse they went to Ainsworth and that solved a problem for them. However they were lax and didnt gain any kind of contractural agreement and this bit them in the backside 30 years later when the UK judge agreed (mostly) with Ainsworth. AA added some "value" to the work he did on the production - although everyone will disagree how much this actually was. However, from a legal perspective whatever work he did do put him in a difficult position for lucasfilm - again because they didnt sort things out properly in 1976. As you know he didnt contest the US case as (wisely as it turned out) his legal team believed that if a US company wants to stop a UK business doing something then the UK court is the place where it should be heard. However I do agree with your final comment that he was stupid to take on LFL - however I do think that LFL was equally stupid to allow this whole issue to escalate without ever trying to resolve though dialogue first. The case will continue at the detrement to both sides which imo is madness. Cheers Jez

I didnt mean to mis-quote you TK-4205 if thats what you meant Cheers Jez

Agreed. Back to the recasting argument. Bottom line is if someone spends time, effort and a lot of cash replicating an original item, then it doesnt give someone else the right to buy one and knock off some cheap copies. To say that "its all recast" is a lazy argument, suggesting that everything is fair game. This road only stifles people prepared to invest in bringing something new to the hobby. Cheers Jez

QFT! I agree - whether "improving" or not, those recasting others work (and not inconsiderable investment) are deluding themselves if they say theyre only in it for the "good of the hobby". Theyre either after the cash or the kudos. Usually both. Cheers Jez

With respect to the owners of those Vader castings, they are not original pieces. IMO there is a huge difference between casting a 2nd generation piece and an original. Huge. Cheers Jez

I am sure your intentions are good but the reality is that there just isnt a consensus of opinion on this matter. One of the best quotes I heard over all the years was "its not recasting if it's me/my friend doing it" Bottom line is its one great big grey area and we all have our own views on where to draw the line between right and wrong. The only thin I would say from experience is that I've seen the supply of new replica props (cast off original props) dry up over recent years. Its just not worth the time, effort and cost of replicating an original prop to then just have some asswipe buy one and make loads of dupicates. I've heard all the stories about "doing it for the good of the hobby", "improving on what was previously done", "only covering my costs", "just making them for my mates", "only LFL owns this anyway". Ultimately its down to them trying to make cash or a name for themselves or both). Whatever it is IMO the laissez faire attutute in certain quarters has harmed the hobby as a whole. More stormtrooper helmets but less other helmets Cheers Jez

Aaron, the history to this is (and it doesnt need to be via pm) Ainsworth initially claimed that he sculpted the Helmet based on a "single RMQ drawing". He claimed that he sculpted most of the armor although said that the studio "had provided him with some clay sculpts of the body sections". THEN came the court case and he revised his position by saying that his associate Nick Pemberton had sculpted a clay Helmet but that his mould was not based on that (crazy!. He did agree that the armor was sculpted by the Studio (Brian Muir). Based on photographs of the clay helmet sculpt, and testiments from a number of people (including Liz Moore's boyfriend at that time), the Judge strangely AGREED that Pemberton sculpted the helmet and not Liz Moore - apparently based solely on the colour of the clay used. However I dont think anyone outside of the case actually believes this to be correct and I am sure LFL will contest this point again when the case goes back to court for the appeal. That issue aside (and I can understand peoples anger), I personally don't think that Ainsworth/SDS could be labeled "recasters", irrespective of the source of their armor moulds - when other replica armor makers are held in high esteem. However the issue of recasting is always one where people disagree so I suppose everyone's got their own views on this Cheers Jez

Great post! As Paul said, even though the horse has bolted lets at least have some respect for others work. Whereas some people have invested time and money in the helmets and armor they have produced, others have merely ridden on their backs. Cheers Jez

I agree - that photoshoot always bothers me. Ive seen 2 slightly different photos but unfortunately only Vader's position changed wth the right trooper staying in almost the exact same position. Without seeing it from a different angle I'm just wondering whether it could be one of the 6 ANH Hero's - even though I admit from the angle its taken it looks odd. Although the ANH Hero's with most screen-time had 3 teeth I dont know if one could have ad four - Ainsworth admitted that they were pretty random. I do think that the SF came first with the RF after. And I suppose it could make sense that one if cast off the other - however IMO the fact that David/omp_uk has had both types side by side carries a lot of weight with me. Joe/Keith - when youre saying youve looked at moulds based on both helmet types are you saying that one of the moulds was cast off the unfinished/production made helmet. If so then with respect (and I genuinely mean that) it may not be the best source since its way softer tha any Jedi stormtrooper anyway.... Cheers Jez

Joe - great we have agreement on almost everything. The only thing up for debate is therefore whether theyre both from the same moulds. Though Ive handled both helmet types I've never personally had the two types side by side at the same time - so cant really comment further. Cheers Jez

Hi Keith Ive spent a lot of time recently looking into this issue so am a little confused by your comment over "background" and "hero" helmets. So that we can all use the same terms, let me just reiterate what my understanding is regarding RotJ helmets 1) Rounded-Frown Helmets - these were all manufactured out of normal ABS. As their name suggests they had rounded frowns, new RotJ declas, Alu Mic Tips, HH Liners. These are illustrated in the L and R columns above 2) Square-Frown Helmets - These were manufactured from Haircell ABS, have squared-off frowns, ESB decals, Recast Hovi-mix resin mic tips, foam-padding. These are illustrated in the Centre column above Looking through hi-def screen-grabs as well as on-set phographs from RotJ I'm having a problem seeing anything other than the RF (1) helmets above - so if anyone has any photos of the Square-Frown in RotJ I'd be very interested to see them. Maybe as Paul said they were just used in ESB. Now omp_uk has had 2 RF(1, above) and 2 SF(2, above) helmets in front of him at the same time and is confident that theyre from the same moulds given certain tells on the inside surface area. So Keith (and Joe) are you saying that having also examined both types of different helmets (RF and SF) you believe the tells tell you that they are from DIFFERENT moulds? Cheers Jez

If you're saying that TE2, AP, GF, DL etc. are all cool with this then you're right, who am I to complain? However, I didnt know that they had said it was okay! Cheers Jez

I thought this was worth quoting since I'm in agreement with Daetrin on this. QFT IMO there's a huge difference between someone buying a set of moulds off a guy who's cast them off an original set (irrespective of how many times he did this), and some low-rent recaster who buys a set of (say) TE2 armor and replicates it to make himself some cash and "big-up" his profile. Cheers Jez

I too have never seen anything to suggest there were two different sets of moulds for the face and back/cap. I too have handled a fair few RotJ trooper lids. I can agree on the ears since they were always a problem (e.g. on ANH). The moulds were just not robust enough for volume vac-forming so had to be rebuilt - hence I could believe the same for RotJ. Cheers Jez

I know PIH stuff sells high but that is just an amazing price given it was one of around 50 RotJ helmets made - and a fair few of which survived the movie and are in private hands. IMO thats double the price you would have expected to pay just 2-3 years ago. WOW! Cheers Jez

Hmmm - good points Nazgul Cheers Jez

I think I may have originally said that as was told by someone linked to the production (not Mollo) - however having handled a couple of the originals in person I just cant see it myself. Like Paul said there';s still glue knocking around there so I recon they just worked on the detailing and used the best 7 for most of the shots. Then when Gary Kurtz saw the remaining few that they needed for the Carbon Freeze scene he wasnt happy so got them to either make new ones or improve the few remaining ones. Cheers Jez

Thats the texture of the HDPE material after its been heated and vac-formed - not aging. Nazgul - this IS an ANH helmet, its just been reused for ESB. I dont even think they were stripped and repainted, just maybe touched up Cheers Jez

Patch-trooper - I thought so. In which case here are some photos of the same helmet from a few years back when I was asked by Christies to authenticate it. Photos of Original (patch) ESB Stormtrooper Helmet Cheers Jez

TBH When I said acrylic I'm going on what Ainsworth said for the ANH lenses (which were grey). I asked him once how he made them and he said that he heated them up and then "hand blew" them over a cutout of the shape he needed. Note that it was a cutout so the part you look through never touched anything so would be more transparent. He once told me the exact brand that came from Germany - and that it was no longer available I hope I didnt get the acrylic part wrong! Paul - thanks for that, and for continually pushing. You were right to. I dont know if John will find anything else out since we did go though all his books at length. We need a new source now, like someone who worked in the Art Dept at Elstree in 1979. Cheers Jez