I periodically check the Movie Prop Collectors forum for activity, in that there have been some discussions about me in the past (which the owner moved to an area for registered members only).
What follows is a new topic made by an anonymous member – the first post in the “Original Movie Props” forum in a month (LINK):
Just for clarification…
The context of the quote from the Movie Prop Forum is that it was my abstract reaction to comments made by another member, and perhaps more inspired by a prior dialogue with a dealer in regards to his experiences with other collectors in another topic (see MPF topic: The “Ultimate” COA? What Say You?) – both illustrating varying degrees to which some do not feel the need to pursue and/or keep the records/documentation supporting the provenance of the pieces in their collections, in the event that they knew/felt that those pieces were authentic. [This paragraph edited 10/28/07 for further clarification]
This anonymous member of the Movie Prop Collectors forum seems to have missed my point completely: the props are what they are, regardless of the owner, but that whoever does own the prop has, in my opinion, an obligation to keep documentation related to provenance with the prop.
Given that museums dedicated to preserving original props and wardrobes are nearly non-existent, that leaves individual hobbyist collectors with an obligation to care for and preserve these important artifacts from our popular culture. Part of that obligation, in my opinion, is to preserve the provenance and details and documentation and history of each piece, and keep it with each piece. Unless a collector plans to be buried with his collection, others will eventually own those artifacts and care for them. With every change of ownership, the risk in losing some or all of the details regarding provenance is great. In the event a piece is sold, I encourage the seller (whether dealer or auction house or private collector) to pass the provenance of each piece along with each piece.
The history is part of the prop – it defines what it is. Without the history, or with history lost, a prop or wardrobe piece can be transformed from “Authentic” (or “Original”) to “Inconclusive”. Without compelling facts and documentation, even if a prop is “Original”, if it cannot be proven as such, then there has been a failure somewhere in the chain of ownership. That, to me, is disrespectful to the prop itself, to the notion of collecting and caring for these important artifacts, and to the hobby at large.
Sometimes the loss of provenance is because of laziness or ignorance of the owner; sometimes it is about profit being of a higher priority (i.e. the risk of revealing a source).
This is yet another reason why I challenge the practice of the standard industry COA as being “good enough” when it is not (see “Challenging the Hobby: The COA & The Guarantee“, “Work in Progress: The Ultimate Original Prop COA, Part I“, and numerous other articles).
Having said all that, I do not understand the anonymous person’s gripe. Selling an item does not contradict my position that all provenance should accompany each piece with a transfer of ownership – which is exactly as I have done with that prop. I have made no pledge to keep all pieces I acquire – in fact, my collection is built upon periodically selling an existing piece to fund new acquisitions. So I am at a loss as to the anonymous person’s complaint.
To be specific, with the X2: X-Men United Hero Wolverine Claws that I sold at public auction via consignment (which itself creates a public record in the chain of provenance), they were accompanied by stellar paperwork affirming authenticity. What follows is part of the description from the Profiles in History catalog (Hollywood Auction 27, Lot 566):
These magnificent props have incredible provenance and paperwork. Lauren Shuler Donner, producer of all three X-Men films (as well as the upcoming Wolverine film currently under development), donated these props to her charity, Hollygrove, for auction some years ago. Shuler Donner is one of the most successful and prolific producers in
Hollywood. To date, her films have grossed approximately $2 billion and counting. The paperwork accompanying this set includes an official Certificate of Authenticity from Hollygrove (www.Hollygrove.org) signed by Lauren Schuler Donner as well as a personal letter from Shuler Donner, on The Donner’s Company letterhead, stating [t]hese claws were made for and used by Hugh Jackman as Wolverine in X2”.
Further clarification on comments made by the anonymous member of the Movie Prop Collector’s forum:
- The claws are from X2: X-Men United (not X-Men).
- The claws are not metal (per the auction description: “this pair is comprised of padded grips with studio writing, curved
metal and internal supports, and hard plastic/resin blades”). As I understand it, metal claws were only employed in the original film – a design abandoned and not employed the two sequels. - I didn’t buy them $15,000 – it was part cash, part trade – though the original list price was $15,000.
- They didn’t sell for $45,000 – they sold for $35,000 plus Buyer’s Premium.
As far as value (and the anonymous person’s insinuation that they are not worth the value realized at auction), that is in the eye of the beholder.
- These props were one of eleven lots in that event noted as a “Highlight” of the auction (alongside prominent artifacts from Gone with the Wind, The Wizard of Oz, The Seven Year Itch, Alien, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Superman, and Star Trek).
- They received a full exclusive page in the catalog.
- X-Men is one of the most popular comic book franchises of all time (rivaling Superman, Batman, and Spider-Man), with Wolverine being the most popular character from the series.
- The X-Men films have made hundreds of millions of dollars worldwide.
- There is a Wolverine film in pre-production development and slated for a July 2009 release (see X-Men Origins: Wolverine).
- The claws are arguably the most iconic prop from the most critically acclaimed of the three films in the trilogy.
- They were put into the collector’s market legitimately (i.e. they came directly from the producer of the film).
- They are accompanied by impeccable provenance.
- I started the bidding at $10,000 – below the previous list price I was assessed – and allowed the free market to dictate and determine the price (in other words, with the seller’s premium, I could have lost money on the proposition).
It’s unfortunate that this opinionated person, taking shelter in the refuge of anonymity, disparages the buyer of the prop as a result of disliking me and/or my opinions.
In any event, the topic has zero replies and, as of the time of this writing, 7 people have viewed it in the last three days (including me).
Though I have recently made my opinions clear on the prevalence of anonymous hobbyists making attempts to be active voices in the hobby (see Anonymity, Transparency, and the “Real World”), I think it can be productive to shine a light on ignorance from time to time, if only to illustrate that such comments can act as an opportunity to share facts and opinions of substance, which are openly claimed by someone who is ready, willing, and able to sign his name to them.
Jason De Bord