bugdozer Posted January 9, 2016 Posted January 9, 2016 I happened to take a closer look at this picture today: This is from page 261 of The Star Wars Chronicles by Deborah Fine. Not the best quality image, but it is interesting. It looks to me like you can actually see the bottom edge of the bund here, with the black flight suit showing between it and the top of the belt. It looks too dark just to be a shadow (compare with the shadow under the belt). This looks like if the cod is indeed separate, it might in fact attach to the inside of the belt rather than extending up behind the bund. I should note there is also a back view in the book taken from the same photo set, and there is no thermal detonator in the picture. So it's always possible this could be a prototype design, although it doesn't say so (the book is quite good at pointing out differences between the final and earlier designs).
Oblivian Posted January 10, 2016 Posted January 10, 2016 Was looking at the same image yesterday in the costume bible and noted that Sent from my XT1092 using Tapatalk
01Hawk Posted January 10, 2016 Posted January 10, 2016 For some reason, which I don't understand, people don't seem to find issue with this when considering accuracy. 2 mm off on your elastic? That is a problem. Completely incorrect one piece bund/cod when compared to the actual costume - that is ok. The reasoning it that it can't be seen so it doesn't matter.
Griffin-X Posted January 10, 2016 Posted January 10, 2016 I hear you. The problem is "ifs" and "maybes" don't buy you much. If you want to go Lancer, follow the Lancer standards - which have been based on years of research, discussion, debate, and compromise. If not, no worries and do your own thing as a Pathfinder. Some guys have done the split design and it looks pretty cool. That picture has been around for years and led to a lot of the discussions I mentioned. At the end of the day, until someone or anyone, provides definitive proof - we follow the rules of the road.
01Hawk Posted January 10, 2016 Posted January 10, 2016 Not sure if that was directly at me , and I say this totally respectfully, when it comes to how things look, I'm not sure there really is an " if or maybe" in this instance. The piece is clearly 2 pieces. From a Lancer point of view ( which isn't my personal goal), how could you not want this as a requirement? I know this has been discussed before since I posted the same pic when I got my Star Wars costume book and was like " hey check this out" and quickly shot down.
Oblivian Posted January 10, 2016 Posted January 10, 2016 Interestingly.. one also has them with a ribbed neckseal like TKs too.
Griffin-X Posted January 10, 2016 Posted January 10, 2016 It's more of a general statement. I've been here for many years and this is an ongoing debate. Everyone has an opinion but only the detachment command staff can or would alter the CRL based on definitive proof. My bund is one piece but the bund part is layered on top of the cod. So, looks exactly like the pic. You may be seeing a shadow -or- a 2 piece setup. Again, the pics referenced are not screen captures from the movie. So could very well be staged for magazines, etc. For example, the blu-Ray shows the holster on the left. Was it, nope.
bugdozer Posted January 10, 2016 Author Posted January 10, 2016 Not sure if that was directly at me , and I say this totally respectfully, when it comes to how things look, I'm not sure there really is an " if or maybe" in this instance. The piece is clearly 2 pieces. From a Lancer point of view ( which isn't my personal goal), how could you not want this as a requirement? I know this has been discussed before since I posted the same pic when I got my Star Wars costume book and was like " hey check this out" and quickly shot down. I think what's crucial is that there is no evidence of this difference in anything seen on screen. It might well be 2 pieces here but that could have changed when it came to filming. I agree that it's not enough to go altering the CRLs - in fact , the joined bund/cod system prevents gaps like this from appearing, which keeps it looking like the movie. If you get any slippage with this system, suddenly your scout doesn't look like the movie any more.
bikerscout73 Posted January 10, 2016 Posted January 10, 2016 Mine is two pieces and I love it...... It looks better and no camel toe. I made it myself 1
01Hawk Posted January 10, 2016 Posted January 10, 2016 Again, soley for conversation for people who haven't been here before and the sake of accuracy, in this picture - which appears to be screen used ( unless they beat the crap out of a test suit) the bund is clearly 2 pieces. There is no shadow, there no optical illusion- there is a distinct layer seen. 1
Griffin-X Posted January 10, 2016 Posted January 10, 2016 Again, soley for conversation for people who haven't be here before and the sake of accuracy, in this picture - which appears to be screen used ( unless they beat the crap out of a test suit) the bund is clearly 2 pieces. The is no shadow, there no optical illusion- there is a distinct layer seen. That is a picture from the blu-Ray. Look close, and you'll notice a TK under suit, not the jumpsuit. So, as I mentioned - no Bueno. Mickey's 2-piece is awesome and if anyone wants to do it, go for it! But until it's proven and someone approaches the command staff with a proposal to change things...
01Hawk Posted January 10, 2016 Posted January 10, 2016 I think the one thing that is definitely conclusive is my phone likes to make me appear to have the spelling skills of a first grader as I have had to edit my posts twice lol. 1
Griffin-X Posted January 10, 2016 Posted January 10, 2016 I think that's pretty conclusive. Not really.
01Hawk Posted January 10, 2016 Posted January 10, 2016 The inaccurate under suit is the deciding factor on a weathered outer piece? Is the theory they just had the 2 piece bund laying around and erroneously used it on this model?
Griffin-X Posted January 10, 2016 Posted January 10, 2016 The inaccurate under suit is the deciding factor on a weathered outer piece? Is the theory they just had the 2 piece bund laying around and erroneously used it on this model? Again, your missing the point. Show a picture that clearly has 2-pieces and the debate is over. That blu-Ray pic shows costume parts, some that may have been used, and others that were added to the mannequin for the pic (that's what I'm saying). It also shows the holster on the left boot. DO you propose that we move the holster because of the pic? I sure hope not! Also, the neck seal. No proof of that either. Oh, and let's not forget the upside down TD. So, let's just update that too.
Griffin-X Posted January 10, 2016 Posted January 10, 2016 Or how about the MotM exhibit. Heck, the biceps have no greebs. Or the RED square on the back of the tank? Anyways, you guys do what you want. That's your choice and the fun of costuming. I'm just providing the arguments that have been posted for the last several years. I have nothing to do with the CRL nor the Lancers. It's up to you how you proceed. Best of luck!
01Hawk Posted January 10, 2016 Posted January 10, 2016 Lol-- I have a new OLED tv I have been dying to watch ROTJ on and today may be that day! The holster, the detonator and even the flight suit can easily be explained as someone not knowing what they are doing and putting it together wrong ( which still shouldn't happen). And being PC - if a lefty needs his holster on the left side go for it ! I don't want to be descriminating on south paws! In the end , it is all about how the costume appears on screen so it really isn't an issue, especially to me. I have a one piece from CB and I'm sure I would have to wait at least 4 weeks for him to make me a 2 piece so I will just live with it. I will be looking close at screen caps though 1
01Hawk Posted January 10, 2016 Posted January 10, 2016 And since Dicky Beer was doing shows did anyone ask him? I am sure if someone was dressed up and showed him what we are talking about he may remember.
Griffin-X Posted January 10, 2016 Posted January 10, 2016 And since Dicky Beer was doing shows did anyone ask him? I am sure if someone was dressed up and showed him what we are talking about he may remember. That's a great idea Howard, or he might even have behind the scenes pics (hanging out, chill'n).
01Hawk Posted January 10, 2016 Posted January 10, 2016 Next con he is at on the east coast I am there and asking him! Nothing says cool like asking a man about his diaper. 1
01Hawk Posted January 10, 2016 Posted January 10, 2016 No shows listed on his Facebook so I messaged his booking agent. Figured I had nothing to lose .. 1
Griffin-X Posted January 10, 2016 Posted January 10, 2016 Next con he is at on the east coast I am there and asking him! Nothing says cool like asking a man about his diaper. Very cool, thanks for taking it on!
bugdozer Posted January 10, 2016 Author Posted January 10, 2016 Not really. It's conclusive that at least one biker scout suit was constructed with the cummerbund and codpiece as separate pieces. Did I say it was conclusive that suits of that design were used in the movie? No. See my earlier post where I suggest this design may be a prototype. If I was going to be really picky about this - I could say there's no evidence that tanks with red squares weren't used in the movie. We don't see the top of every scout's tank. There are all sorts of details on movie costumes that end up never being seen in any of the finished film, despite being present. There's a suggestion that rubber armour may have been used on the scout that Han grapples with. It would be wrong to assume that every scout trooper costume was the same, just because ours have to be.
Griffin-X Posted January 10, 2016 Posted January 10, 2016 It's conclusive that at least one biker scout suit was constructed with the cummerbund and codpiece as separate pieces. Did I say it was conclusive that suits of that design were used in the movie? No. See my earlier post where I suggest this design may be a prototype. If I was going to be really picky about this - I could say there's no evidence that tanks with red squares weren't used in the movie. We don't see the top of every scout's tank. There are all sorts of details on movie costumes that end up never being seen in any of the finished film, despite being present. There's a suggestion that rubber armour may have been used on the scout that Han grapples with. It would be wrong to assume that every scout trooper costume was the same, just because ours have to be. Whatever. Do what you feel is right with your scout. Idc, this is a tiresome debate. Howard has a good idea. Perhaps that will produce something useful. I sent a note to the CMD staff. Hopefully they will share some thoughts on this too.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now