dougc
Temple Guard
Posts: 181
|
Post by dougc on Sept 4, 2008 14:11:20 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Ragingblues on Sept 4, 2008 14:44:40 GMT -5
Yes, I see them.... because they were there. I've heard of a recent argument to the contrary elsewhere, and have to laugh at anyone who thinks they had Peter make a special jacket without action pleats for this one scene.
Not only does that make no sense whatsoever, the pleats can clearly be seen in photos and stills from the DVD. They just opened the pleat up to allow for the padding needed for the stunt.
I guess the simple truth about most of this Indy stuff doesn't leave enough room for certain people to continue to inflate their egos. Oh yeah.... and they just get to harshly insult people who disagree without being punished for it?
Nothing like that will happen here, I promise you.
Ken
|
|
|
|
Post by lump on Sept 4, 2008 14:50:43 GMT -5
I find them quite obvious. It's just all the padding underneath opens them all the way and flattens them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kaplan on Sept 4, 2008 14:56:26 GMT -5
plain as day!  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2008 15:29:49 GMT -5
I see them plain as day. Probably because they ARE there.
Cheers,
John
|
|
|
|
Post by Kt. Templar on Sept 4, 2008 15:35:17 GMT -5
Yes, they are just opened up like a lot of those jacket do naturally.
In some of those pics definitely from the padding, in the second pic with him in profile there may also be wind billowing out the jacket.
|
|
dougc
Temple Guard
Posts: 181
|
Post by dougc on Sept 4, 2008 15:49:05 GMT -5
I don't want to color anyones opinion, give it the way you see it.
just a note though - this jacket is supposedly a jacket made by Wilsons. They traded the Wested out for the cowhide Wilson for this scene, the Wilson..which (from the same article) was nothing more than a modified A2 that was without cuff and waist knits and was also devoid of any detailing to the back.
I whole heartedly and with the utmost spirit of fare play invite any and all to participate in this discussion. Post screne caps, pics or just opinions...
Doug C
|
|
|
|
Post by Kt. Templar on Sept 4, 2008 15:52:28 GMT -5
Well it is obvious that the jacket seen is not a A2 minus knits. The old theory that it was a slightly mis-proportioned hero, is still the simplest and most likely answer.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2008 16:11:24 GMT -5
I really don't care if the jacket was made by Magic Pixies or the Keebler Elves. It has wide open pleats most likely due to the safety padding underneath. Period.
Cheers,
G-MANN
|
|
dougc
Temple Guard
Posts: 181
|
Post by dougc on Sept 4, 2008 16:47:36 GMT -5
Oh, I agree but I wanted everyone to understand what has been written (literally) in the anals of gear history - reader beware. hehe, I just got a visual of Indy being forced to drink the blood of Kahli  Doug C |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2008 16:56:51 GMT -5
Well that wouldn't be the first time false info has been turned into history. And HE spelled Kate wrong in his braggart announcement.
Cheers,
John
|
|
|
|
Post by themechanic on Sept 4, 2008 20:02:58 GMT -5
I must agree, there are pleats and that is a regular style Indy jacket.
And yes HE did spell Kate's name wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by alden405 on Sept 4, 2008 20:53:48 GMT -5
No doubts in my mind,never was.
There is a lot of padding on Leonard
|
|
|
|
Post by GCR on Sept 4, 2008 21:07:52 GMT -5
PLEATS! I see PLEATS dammit!!! ;D I guess I must have missed all the hub-bub over at the bovine venue. Is someone trying to claim that the jacket in these pics does NOT have pleats? I don't get it...  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2008 21:14:14 GMT -5
PLEATS! I see PLEATS dammit!!! ;D I guess I must have missed all the hub-bub over at the bovine venue. Is someone trying to claim that the jacket in these pics does NOT have pleats? I don't get it... Yes. Apparently somebody has missed thier last 100 optometrist appointments. ;D Cheers, John |
|
|
|
Post by New Yorker Jones on Sept 4, 2008 21:47:10 GMT -5
Well that wouldn't be the first time false info has been turned into history. And HE spelled Kate wrong in his braggart announcement. Cheers, John I thought he meant Cate Blanchett  ;D |
|
dougc
Temple Guard
Posts: 181
|
Post by dougc on Sept 4, 2008 22:05:53 GMT -5
GCR wrote:
Well, yes... if you read the "great jacket right-up" the author writes that Wilson made jackets that were basically A2s that had a plain back detail (no pleats, etc) and they were basically A2's with the knits removed. Later in the write up he says the Wilson jacket was used by the stunt man during the truck scene. That can not be true since the photos show not only vent pleats but also buckles and straps. The Wilson A2's would not have had those. Not to mention that historically accurate A2's would not have a back yolk like Indys (they were one piece backs per gov. contracts).
Doug C
|
|
dougc
Temple Guard
Posts: 181
|
Post by dougc on Sept 4, 2008 22:09:32 GMT -5
It's funny, last night I could not buy an agreement. Nobody saw pleats. Mechanic I thought you were one of those people who said no pleats, my mistake. Of course my thread got deleted because of patterson's vulgar remarks.
Doug C
|
|
|
|
Post by themechanic on Sept 4, 2008 22:18:05 GMT -5
You were correct all along Doug. I hadn't paid close enough attention to those photos. Seeing them all together should make a believer out of anyone with 2 eyes and/or half a brain.
|
|
|
|
Post by New Yorker Jones on Sept 5, 2008 7:49:56 GMT -5
Funny thing, I was banned for supporting your thread and supporting a truth not the truth as it is pointed out by "THEM". I was asleep so I didn't see what Patterson posted after that. But I saw the thread gone in the morning and thread by him was new.. YES the Truckdrag jacket was a Wested( and there are Pleats) ! There was no Cooper in TEMPLE, nor was there a Stetson... They where products of LICENSING ! Don't explain that though, your voice will be silenced;) All this hard work on the "write ups"! Riiiiiiiigh.... Has anyone read the Temple write up? There is simply NO information in there. Its basically consists of this : there was a lawyer involved but he wouldnt talk to us. He did confirm he was involved. I laught everytime I read it. There's no facts in that. Its just Hear say. You were banned for just that?!?  |
|
|
|
Post by Havana on Sept 5, 2008 10:08:56 GMT -5
I'm a little late in getting this news and am confused by it. I know A-2's and can see nothing remotely resembling an A-2 in those pictures. People seem to enjoy crafting fantasies about certain things so they can then gloat over "their discovery" or deny genuine discoveries. Anybody remember something about no grey hats? I'm fascinated at how some people will passionately tell you that you're not seeing what you're clearly seeing. I think they take that Jedi mind trick a little too seriously. "This is not the Wested you're looking for. This is only an A-2. Move along."
You must always be careful of what you read and say in certain circles. Hearsay is often treated as fact and true facts are often treated as heresey.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sapito on Sept 5, 2008 10:39:28 GMT -5
Please tell me who Kate is...  |
|
|
|
Post by Ragingblues on Sept 5, 2008 10:57:18 GMT -5
Kate Capshaw... as in Spielberg's wife. The same guy who was claiming there were no pleats on the jacket also claimed he was heading out to dinner with Steven Spielberg and Kate Capshaw. Would you believe anything else he had to say about this hobby?
I didn't think so.
Ken
|
|
|
|
Post by themechanic on Sept 5, 2008 11:15:33 GMT -5
His attack on DougC was really disgusting as well and completely uncalled for. He treats people like something he has to scrape off his shoe.
|
|
dougc
Temple Guard
Posts: 181
|
Post by dougc on Sept 5, 2008 11:29:50 GMT -5
dutchjones, I'm sorry to hear they booted you too, thanks for your support though. I wrote them immediately asking why I had been banned - here's a caption from their reply: quote - "talking back, arguing, mocking, and baiting various staff members and a
former staff member who is still linked to this site—all which kept the
ToD jacket thread off track and led to the author's request to close it
down."
The talking back thing made me laugh when I read it, I though it was a joke. I got banned first time for opposing Michaelson's suggestion to apply pecards to new jackets...just my opinion, the second time for reminding Holt (a moderator) of COW's reputation for getting details correct, after he indicated that SA details did not matter - in a thread about SA details. Now, banned for no real reason... I didn't invite patterson to answer my observations, did not return insults to him, I even politely asked him to stop with the insults - and I got banned. That group deleted two of my recent posts - one called "TofD jacket clarification", why it was deleted I have no idea, the second was "Wilsons jacket not under the truck??". I immediately posted a thread asking why the deletions... it got shut down and deleted. Funny thing though someone else tried to start my Wilson discussion back up, that thread was shut down too but NOT deleted - it had two or three post that agreed with patterson's POV, big surprise... Sorry, I'll cut this out.. just needed to vent.
Doug C
|
|
