AA Summation for Newbies?

[Zenwalker]

Mverta, I would sum up your summation with the following edits:


1) AA produced the original helmets.
2) AA did not sculpt the original helmet. (not yet known)
3) All Current offerings deviate from the originals.
4) They(sic) SDS are among the most expensive offerings in the hobby.
5) There are reports of quality problems with ALL current makers' offerings.

 

[defstartrooper]

You should go back and read Jez's first post in this thread. Very informative.

Yes im aware of the stories and the alledged photo's but as yet they are just that stories and alledged photos.

 

[Qui-Gonzalez]

Yes im aware of the stories and the alledged photo's but as yet they are just that stories and alledged photos.

To us they are alledged, but to the people that matter in the UK, they are fact.

 

[mverta]

AA's claim (from his website):

He sculpted, fabricated and produced the original helmets used for the first movie in 1976 and using the same moulds and processes is doing the same again almost 30 years later.

Well, that couldn't be more clear; no ambiguity in his claim. As I asked in an earlier post - Has anyone else ever been named or come forward to dispute this claim? As you point out, only LFL, absent any public proof. I agree that it seems suspicious - given how thorough we are as a community - that if there was another person, we'd have overlooked him/her. We've even had people ask direct questions of possible candidates who've all said they didn't sculpt it.

I'd say your suggestion, absent definitive proof either way, is a good one.

So:

1) AA produced the original helmets.
2) AA claims to have sculpted the original helmet, but cannot prove it.
3) Current offerings deviate from the originals.
4) They are among the most expensive offerings in the hobby.
5) There have been reports of quality problems with current AA offerings.


Any other objections?

_Mike

 

[defstartrooper]

To us they are alledged, but to the people that matter in the UK, they are fact.

I like courts prefer to use words like fact to describe indisputable proof not allegations.
As i already said my personal belief on wether AA sculpted the helmet is irrelevent the only FACT is that to date it is unproven who sculpted the helmets..
I was under the belief that Mverta wanted to provide his friend with accurate and truthful information which i did not believe point 2 of the summation was.

 

[mverta]

And I agreed, so it's changed. My personal guess is that he did, simply because in 30 years absolutely no one else has ever come forward and said, "no, it was me." But cold, hard, fact-wise, he just can't prove it, unfortunately.


_Mike

 

[GINO]

Here's some info about what I believe the origin of AA's current run of helmets come from. This information comes first hand from conversations I've had with AA via phone.

After ANH was finished, AA had nothing but 'skins' left. Skins meaning unused left over vac formed pieces from the original production. He then set out to alter the helmet molds to make them more "production friendly".
I'm talking about the 5 piece helmet design with the serrated hose section in the rear, and the hero faceplate with the lack of undercut. Some of you have seen them.
Ainsworth said that he was improving on the design, asthetically as well as from a production standpoint. He thought that LFL would come back to him for the sequel so he wanted to be prepared. Because of the film's success, and because he was paid so little for his items from the first film, he felt entitled to a major payday for the sequel. When they didn't, he felt slighted which is why he has such issues with LFL. This was long before the lawsuit.
Some of these style of helmets were put it on Christie's along with some other items. They were there to raise capital for his new business as well as guage market value and demand for a new production of helmets.

Anyways, I believe wholeheartedly (as do a lot of other top trooper helmet enthusiasts) that his current run of trooper helmets were derived from molds of the 'improved design' helmet. It is believed that he took those molds, and tried his best to restore them to the way they looked for the original film helmets, but was not very successful. Thus all the differences between his current helmets and the original ones.
One look at the 'improved design' helmets and the current ones and you can clearly see that one was derived from the other.

I used to think that it was a possibility that he had the ORIGINAL molds and altered them, but I don't believe that could be a possibility anymore. Just new molds made from the new version helmets made post production.

Also, based on real evidence that hasn't been made public yet, it is clear that AA did not sculpt the helmet. Beyond the shadow of a doubt.

 

[mverta]

All that's possible, of course, Gino. And interesting info to add to the pile, post-summation. Certainly nothing there to refute point 3) Current offerings deviate from the originals. Plus, it would allow him to continue his claim technically. Yes they're the original moulds, he could say. (Just cleaned up, etc.) Odious if true, but so are most business practices.

So at this point, the 5 point summation still stands, I take it?



_Mike

 

[GINO]

I would say it is a safe bet to say that NO original 1976 molds (molds that were used to make the film props) were used in the making of his current production.
Not even altered original molds.

 

[lonepigeon]

And I agreed, so it's changed. My personal guess is that he did, simply because in 30 years absolutely no one else has ever come forward and said, "no, it was me." But cold, hard, fact-wise, he just can't prove it, unfortunately.


_Mike

Wasn't there speculation on here in one of the old threads that Liz Moore may have sculpted the helmet?

Rumor/hearsay is that the photos proving who sculpted it surfaced during research for the new Making of SW book. The book features a ton of never before seen early pics of C-3PO prototypes in clay.
Her style seen in the C-3PO forms seems pretty consistent with the Stormtrooper helmet.

Her death during production (1976) would explain why no one has come forward.
Didn't Brian Muir finish her work on C-3PO?
Muir also sculpted the Stormtrooper armor. Didn't he indicate he knew who sculpted the helmet, but wasn't allowed to say due to the impending lawsuits?

 

[Lord Abaddon]

AA's claim (from his website):

He sculpted, fabricated and produced the original helmets used for the first movie in 1976 and using the same moulds and processes is doing the same again almost 30 years later.

Well, that couldn't be more clear; no ambiguity in his claim. As I asked in an earlier post - Has anyone else ever been named or come forward to dispute this claim? As you point out, only LFL, absent any public proof. I agree that it seems suspicious - given how thorough we are as a community - that if there was another person, we'd have overlooked him/her. We've even had people ask direct questions of possible candidates who've all said they didn't sculpt it.

I'd say your suggestion, absent definitive proof either way, is a good one.

So:

1) AA produced the original helmets.
2) AA claims to have sculpted the original helmet, but cannot prove it.
3) Current offerings deviate from the originals.
4) They are among the most expensive offerings in the hobby.
5) There have been reports of quality problems with current AA offerings.


Any other objections?

_Mike

I think you've pretty much nailed it but would change this back to:

2) AA claims to have sculpted the original helmet.

He says he has proof which he will present in court in his counter-suit so, like LFL, we'll have to wait and see. And by saying "claim" that's still puts doubt, rightly so, on his claims.

We might end up using your "points" for any AA thread that starts up by a newbie to the issue! :lol

 

[mverta]

LA, if he proves it, then we should of course alter 2). But as of right now, I think your original point stands... it's not a fact he did, or didn't. It's a claim, as yet unsubstantiated. We are sticking only to facts, for example, nobody argues that AA manufactured the helmets. That's a fact. We don't have factual proof of who sculpted them. We also know that the new helmets deviate from the originals. Why is a question for another day and another topic.

Keeping the summation in mind, are there any doubts about the factual nature of these points:

1) AA produced the original helmets.
2) AA claims to have sculpted the original helmet, but cannot prove it.
3) Current offerings deviate from the originals.
4) They are among the most expensive offerings in the hobby.
5) There have been reports of quality problems with current AA offerings.


Let's save theories and hearsays, legitimate or not, for another thread. If there are no disputes about these facts, then the thread has served its purpose.

_Mike

 

[defstartrooper]

Yeah point 2 should say has not proved it, not cannot,it's a picky point but an accurate one.
Also as mentioned earlier in this thread the reported quality issues seem to relate to his earlier productions, the way point 5 is worded reads that the items he is currently offering suffer quality issues.
I'm gathering what you were saying is his current offerings as in since when he started producing and selling helmets to the public but it can be read differently.
Perhaps something along the lines of There have been reports of quality issues with the earlier produced helmets from his current line.

 

[mverta]

Well, I guess I'd rather be arguing language semantics than facts...

1) AA produced the original helmets.
2) AA claims to have sculpted the original helmet, but has not proved it.
3) Current offerings deviate from the originals.
4) They are among the most expensive offerings in the hobby.
5) There have been reports of quality problems with early AA offerings.


_Mike


P.S. That would actually be a valid topic to start: Quality issues with AA products. Just to get a poll going for how they're doing, especially at $1k. We saw that on an informal basis with MR offerings and it was extremely useful. Saved a lot of people a lot of money and headache. But for another thread....

 

[defstartrooper]

:lol i did say it was a picky point :lol but they were factual

 

[vaderdarth]

I think if I were discussing this with a new propster, I'd just approach it like LA and MVerta have, state what we know as fact, which is what both sides have asserted, then follow that up with, he's the original helmet maker, no question about that, He makes a pretty product, some of the folks who have one on this forum love it, some hate it, but if it makes you happy owning a bucket by the original bucket maker, then by all means get one. It's like alot of other fan helmets.......they all have their own issues to some degree. You can find fault with anything out there that isn't a screen used helmet if you catch my drift? If the nostalgia of owning one made and assembled by AA doesn't tickle your funny bone, then keep searching.

Dave

 

[mverta]

Yep. Somebody asked me if my "friend" was actually me, trying to get the story straight. Fortunately, it's not - I'd hate to be all the way back at the beginning again... but if I was starting out, this is indeed what I'd want: some solid facts to stand on, because two steps into the game it becomes a hurricane of info and opinions, sporadically laden with the debris of tiny men on tiny hills waving tiny pants-members at each other. Without some solid ground to stand on, you can get carried away in the destruction. I think it's great we've closed in so tightly on a consensus of any kind.

_Mike

 

[vaderdarth]

Amen to that Mike.

 

[yodasan]

There must be some trick here - this thread is simultaneously scoring high in all three dimensions of the interesting/civil/useful space.

 

[Lord Abaddon]

Yep. Somebody asked me if my "friend" was actually me, trying to get the story straight. Fortunately, it's not - I'd hate to be all the way back at the beginning again... but if I was starting out, this is indeed what I'd want: some solid facts to stand on, because two steps into the game it becomes a hurricane of info and opinions, sporadically laden with the debris of tiny men on tiny hills waving tiny pants-members at each other. Without some solid ground to stand on, you can get carried away in the destruction. I think it's great we've closed in so tightly on a consensus of any kind.

_Mike

:lol :lol

The best summation of the past threads ever!

Kudos to both sides for working on this in a civil fashion!

Does this mean cats and dogs can live together?