Why does the Last Crusade jacket look so different?

Floribama Steve · Post by **Floribama Steve** » Sat Dec 31, 2005 12:32 pm

I'm always somewhat disappointed when I watch LC and see how formal Indy always looks, wearing a tie with all his other gear. But it's the jacket more than anything, is it just because it's darker or is there something else going on that makes it seem different? Anyone know?

IndyBlues · Post by **IndyBlues** » Sat Dec 31, 2005 12:34 pm

I believe it's because the distressing was done more,....uniform.
It has alot more highlights showing throughout, than in the previous films.
'Blues

Indycraze71 · Post by **Indycraze71** » Sat Dec 31, 2005 12:43 pm

It also appears to be a bit thicker or heavier than the previous movie jackets as well as having some different modifications on it like the snaps on the storm flap and a bigger collar. That said it's never really bothered me I like the jacket.

Sergei · Post by **Sergei** » Sat Dec 31, 2005 12:55 pm

Well the collar is quite substantial - 4 inches wide! The exterior cargo pockets were bigger to accomodate the grail dairy. Also Harrison went from a 40R(in Raiders) to a 44R in LC - with the jacket being cut to be slightly longer. Storm flaps are wider and there were "press studs" added to the storm flaps.

J_Weaver · Post by **J_Weaver** » Sat Dec 31, 2005 12:55 pm

One reason the jacket looks different is that when it was made Wested couldn't find the original patterns. As I remember it was pretty much made from memory. I always thought it fit kinda strange also. Another funny thing I've noticed is that the LC jacket looks more authentic brown then the Raiders jacket.

Kt Templar · Post by **Kt Templar** » Sat Dec 31, 2005 1:20 pm

It's cut slightly longer and looser than the previous 2 jackets. There was a little bit, erhm, more of Ford to cover.

. But if you look at the castle and subsequent bike chase sequence the thickness is consistent with lambskin, maybe goat, but definately not cowhide. Also look closely at the crossroads scene you can see it looks like it has a satin lining here.

His shirt and trousers are much newer and more pressed in this film in fact everything is more "idealised" and less gritty, you could see a similar thing happening in ESB and much more in ROTJ.

Flash Gordon · Post by **Flash Gordon** » Sat Dec 31, 2005 1:34 pm

It also looks like it has a black satin lining.

The distressing was always way too uniform on every seam for me. It looks like piping.

agent5 · Post by **agent5** » Sat Dec 31, 2005 1:43 pm

Also Harrison went from a 40R(in Raiders) to a 44R in LC

I honestly think this nails it. Harry just got wider. Thats all.

Shawnkara · Post by **Shawnkara** » Sun Jan 01, 2006 2:55 am

It's definately lamb. Check the scene on the beach, after Henry does the seagull trick. You can see the jacket flapping in the wind like a flannel! It would have to be thin to do that. And, yes, the distressing is VERY overdone, and not very well at all. The seams look like racing stripes, and you can actually see sandpaper scuffs across the back.

Skippy · Post by **Skippy** » Tue Jan 03, 2006 3:32 pm

Pictures of the original hero prop LC jacket sold last year at auction:

Now I could be wrong, but that lining to which the label is attached doesn't look satin.

It is a rubbish weathering job tho'

Kt Templar · Post by **Kt Templar** » Tue Jan 03, 2006 3:49 pm

Yes, the lining you posted definately looks like the cotton, the one above that I posted could be a trick of the light.

BTW, I remember standing outside that shop in 1978 (ish) and admiring the full sized Stormtrooper outfit they had on display in the bay window. *Sigh*

Hemingway Jones · Post by **Hemingway Jones** » Tue Jan 03, 2006 3:52 pm

Flash Gordon wrote:The distressing was always way too uniform on every seam for me. It looks like piping.

Very well stated. I agree entirely and have had the same problem with that jacket.

Hemingway Jones · Post by **Hemingway Jones** » Tue Jan 03, 2006 5:28 pm

Peter Botwright has said on several ocassions that all of the jackets for all of the films made by him were lambskin.

agent5 · Post by **agent5** » Wed Jan 04, 2006 11:34 am

Now I could be wrong, but that lining to which the label is attached doesn't look satin.

I think thats because they were all made using a cotton lining.

Peter Botwright has said on several ocassions that all of the jackets for all of the films made by him were lambskin

I'd say that's about as difinitive as you're going to get. It still amazes me that even after Peter has said time and time again, they were all lamb, that people still think it could be cow.

Bufflehead Jones · Post by **Bufflehead Jones** » Wed Jan 04, 2006 12:20 pm

Agent5, I agree. I don't know how they can not believe it when the guy that made the jackets just flat out tells them that they were all lamb.

I don't know if I posted this, but on Friday night at the QM, I had a nice little chat with Peter. He talked about the jacket in Raiders and how it came about.

He said that Berman and Nathan's had a jacket for Ford to wear. While they were doing some final tests with Ford, Deborah Nadoolman decided that she did not like the jacket.

Berman and Nathan's called Peter and asked if he had any jackets that might fit this type of character. Peter said that he did and he was asked to bring over several examples for Nadoolman to look at.

She looked at all the jackets and said that she liked a James Dean jacket and a military A2. She wanted to know if Peter could make a James Dean jacket but put the pocket of the A2 onto the James Dean jacket. She liked the military A2, but she did not like the elastic around the waist and sleeves.

Peter said that he could make a jacket like that. This was on Saturday. Deborah Nadoolman then told Peter that she would take ten jackets and that she needed them in France by Tuesday afternoon.

Peter said that he made all ten jackets and got them there on time. As great as we think this jacket is, I guess Peter didn't have a whole lot of time to make it.

SkyChief · Post by **SkyChief** » Wed Jan 04, 2006 1:25 pm

Are people still actually believing that this coat was used during The Last Crusade?

VP · Post by VP » Wed Jan 04, 2006 3:04 pm

Why not? It has the press studs.

agent5 · Post by **agent5** » Wed Jan 04, 2006 4:15 pm

Are people still actually believing that this coat was used during The Last Crusade?

I guess so.

I knwo that there are alot of people who still think that auction was completely bogus. I guess nobody could really give full provenance or something like that. Makes you wonder...

:

Peter said that he made all ten jackets and got them there on time. As great as we think this jacket is, I guess Peter didn't have a whole lot of time to make it.

Maybe that's why there were holes in the pockets of a 'brand new' jacket. Still, they completely served their purpose into Hollywood history.

Minnesota Jones · Post by **Minnesota Jones** » Wed Jan 04, 2006 5:53 pm

I'm sure it was a screen used LC Jacket in that auction.

Here is a couple picture of the LC Jacket in Chicago in the movie exhibit and the LC Jacket at the Smithsonian - both from May/June 2004.

Chicago-

Smithsonian-

agent5 · Post by **agent5** » Wed Jan 04, 2006 7:52 pm

I would like to point out the bottom seam and the pocket placement, particularly on the right side. The pics on both the Chicago and Smithsonian jackets are identical, however the pic on top is different than both. The collar shape is also much different in the top pic than the other two.

I dunno...

Just cuz' they say it's a LC jacket doesn't mean it is. Of course, it could be, but I recall talking with other non-gearhead prop collectors who said there was real trouble with quite a few of the other pieces up for auction at that same event. Apparently provenance was not 100% and that means everything, absolutely everything when spending the kind of money on high end props such as these.

SkyChief · Post by **SkyChief** » Thu Jan 05, 2006 10:10 am

VP wrote:Why not? It has the press studs.

So does my department store bomber jacket.

Minnesota Jones wrote:I'm sure it was a screen used LC Jacket in that auction. Here is a couple picture of the LC Jacket in Chicago in the movie exhibit and the LC Jacket at the Smithsonian - both from May/June 2004.

Chicago
Smithsonian

When looking closer at the details it appears the only thing these coats really have in common is overdistressing.

agent5 wrote:I would like to point out the bottom seam and the pocket placement, particularly on the right side. The pics on both the Chicago and Smithsonian jackets are identical, however the pic on top is different than both. The collar shape is also much different in the top pic than the other two.

Just cuz' they say it's a LC jacket doesn't mean it is.

Very true. The details don't jive. The Chicago and the Smithsonian coats are darn near identical, as far as I can tell. But this "Auction" coat is like a black sheep. It has way too many differences.

Here's one of the original threads about this coat, addressing its discrepancies.

Anyway, didn't mean to hijack the thread, Floribama.

Bjones · Post by **Bjones** » Thu Jan 05, 2006 12:40 pm

Maybe I'm not the only one who's noticed this, but I'm finding it a bit ironic how many negative comments are coming in about the distressing on the film jackets. Its part of what we all like about the films. I'm not a huge fan of distressing, so you won't hear me object to those looking "overdone", but the jackets have been sitting around for awhile(dryed out a bit?), and as we can all see they do look different on film, so why worry about it?

Flattery · Post by **Flattery** » Mon Jan 09, 2006 12:54 am

Are people still actually believing that this coat was used during The Last Crusade?

...just to chime in: I've studied the distressing of the LC jacket intimately, and I can assure you that the jacket in question was not the LC jacket. It may've been used in a stunt performance, but the distressing that appears on this jacket does not appear in the movie long enough to be noticed.

SkyChief · Post by **SkyChief** » Mon Jan 09, 2006 1:55 am

I'd put money on the fact that this coat had absolutely nothing to do with any of the movies, especially Last Crusade.

Swindiana · Post by **Swindiana** » Mon Jan 09, 2006 5:00 am

Maybe the distressed areas were leather lotioned to dull them down and it has dried out since?
I haven't seen the jacket or many pictures of it up close of course, but that's just a theory of mine in case it actually is THE jacket.

Regards,
Swindiana

Hemingway Jones · Post by **Hemingway Jones** » Mon Jan 09, 2006 8:22 am

I don't think that any Hollywood studio would defraud the Smithsonian! Imagine if that one got out. The Smithsonian is rigorous with their checks on an item; carefully checking its provenance. If the Smithsonian says it was a screen used item, it was. They are a serious museum, not a Planet Hollywood.

SkyChief · Post by **SkyChief** » Mon Jan 09, 2006 10:15 am

Hemingway,

I can't speak for Flattery, but I think he is referring to the same jacket that I am referring to, and that isn't the one from the Smithsonian or the Chicago movie display, it's this one, from a recently publicized auction. There are more photos of it here. Its details simply do not match those of either the Smithsonian coat or the Chicago coat, let alone any of the coats I see in the movie itself. For this reason, like I said, I would put money on the fact that it is not what it was advertised to have been.

Hemingway Jones · Post by **Hemingway Jones** » Mon Jan 09, 2006 12:38 pm

SkyChief wrote:Hemingway,

I can't speak for Flattery, but I think he is referring to the same jacket that I am referring to, and that isn't the one from the Smithsonian or the Chicago movie display, it's this one, from a recently publicized auction. There are more photos of it here. Its details simply do not match those of either the Smithsonian coat or the Chicago coat, let alone any of the coats I see in the movie itself. For this reason, like I said, I would put money on the fact that it is not what it was advertised to have been.

I think you're right about Flattery, and, being the foremost authority of your own opinion, I'm sure your're right about yourself as well.

Though my post above was created after a misread of the material that preceded it, it still stands as the academic background it was mant to be.

I would imagine that someone had to offer this item for auction or was it anonymous?

SkyChief · Post by **SkyChief** » Mon Jan 09, 2006 1:46 pm

Hemingway Jones wrote:Though my post above was created after a misread of the material that preceded it, it still stands as the academic background it was mant to be.

I would imagine that someone had to offer this item for auction or was it anonymous?

"...Profiles in History will be auctioning off memorabilia from the archives of filmmaker Gary Kurtz on July 29th. Included in the collection is one of the leather jackets worn by Harrison Ford in Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, which comes from another private collector. Just to clarify, the jacket is not from the collection of Gary Kurtz, but from another collector."

This isn't a very detailed description about the origins of the coat. But "private collector" doesn't exactly instill a lot of trust in me, especially not when the coat itself is riddled with inconsistencies.

Hemingway Jones · Post by **Hemingway Jones** » Mon Jan 09, 2006 2:32 pm

SkyChief wrote:
Hemingway Jones wrote:Though my post above was created after a misread of the material that preceded it, it still stands as the academic background it was mant to be.

I would imagine that someone had to offer this item for auction or was it anonymous?
"...Profiles in History will be auctioning off memorabilia from the archives of filmmaker Gary Kurtz on July 29th. Included in the collection is one of the leather jackets worn by Harrison Ford in Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, which comes from another private collector. Just to clarify, the jacket is not from the collection of Gary Kurtz, but from another collector."

This isn't a very detailed description about the origins of the coat. But "private collector" doesn't exactly instill a lot of trust in me, especially not when the coat itself is riddled with inconsistencies.

"Private collector?" Not very specific at all, is it? The funny thing about screen used props is, it could be a stunt jacket or a long shot or it could be the jacket he was wearing when he rode off into the sunset at the end. How would you know?

SkyChief · Post by **SkyChief** » Mon Jan 09, 2006 3:22 pm

Hemingway Jones wrote:The funny thing about screen used props is, it could be a stunt jacket or a long shot or it could be the jacket he was wearing when he rode off into the sunset at the end. How would you know?

'Tis a very good point, indeed. Heck it could even be the coat that Ilsa wore during the "Mickey Mouse" scene. Label says 'Ford,' so technically it was "his" jacket, but worn by another character. The loopholes could be endless. Because of this, the idea of purchasing something that is claimed to be "screen used" scares me. This jacket was expected by some to sell for upwards of $40,000 (although I never did hear how the auction turned out), so any serious bidder would've been quite a wealthy individual. I'm guessing somebody who had $40k lying around to spend on something that most people would deem "frivolous," probably wouldn't take the time to do their homework, and find out if the item was really all that it was advertised to be. They'd just sign the check and receive what they assume is a piece of movie history.

Bottom line to me, though, the basic design of this auction coat completely differs from any other Last Crusade jacket that I've seen. Hero jacket, stunt jacket, crew jacket, they all would've been created using the same basic design. Now maybe this jacket was made by somebody else, in which case it could very well be legitimate. However I'm basing my view on the fact that it's believed Peter (and what is now Wested) made all the jackets for Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade. If he didn't, then this coat might be the real thing. If he did, though (and I have absolutely no reason not to believe him), then this coat doesn't jive with any other Last Crusade jacket, in which case I sure wouldn't plunk down $40k.

Jorenz · Post by **Jorenz** » Mon Jan 09, 2006 4:53 pm

SkyChief wrote:
Hemingway Jones wrote:The funny thing about screen used props is, it could be a stunt jacket or a long shot or it could be the jacket he was wearing when he rode off into the sunset at the end. How would you know?
'Tis a very good point, indeed. Heck it could even be the coat that Ilsa wore during the "Mickey Mouse" scene. Label says 'Ford,' so technically it was "his" jacket, but worn by another character. The loopholes could be endless. Because of this, the idea of purchasing something that is claimed to be "screen used" scares me. This jacket was expected by some to sell for upwards of $40,000 (although I never did hear how the auction turned out), so any serious bidder would've been quite a wealthy individual. I'm guessing somebody who had $40k lying around to spend on something that most people would deem "frivolous," probably wouldn't take the time to do their homework, and find out if the item was really all that it was advertised to be. They'd just sign the check and receive what they assume is a piece of movie history.

Bottom line to me, though, the basic design of this auction coat completely differs from any other Last Crusade jacket that I've seen. Hero jacket, stunt jacket, crew jacket, they all would've been created using the same basic design. Now maybe this jacket was made by somebody else, in which case it could very well be legitimate. However I'm basing my view on the fact that it's believed Peter (and what is now Wested) made all the jackets for Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade. If he didn't, then this coat might be the real thing. If he did, though (and I have absolutely no reason not to believe him), then this coat doesn't jive with any other Last Crusade jacket, in which case I sure wouldn't plunk down $40k.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I think it ended up being $80,000 for the final bid.

That's just $79,700 too much for me.

SkyChief · Post by **SkyChief** » Mon Jan 09, 2006 11:53 pm

**Request for the moderators**

Would it be possible to split this topic from my first post on down, and make a whole new thread with it? Or maybe merge them onto the end of this thread?

It seems the focus of the thread has shifted from Floribama's original intent. And for future reference it would be easier to find the posts dealing with the auction if they weren't attached to and unintentionally hijacking Floribama's thread.

Thanks.

(if it is possible to do this, please delete this post after)

Doug C · Post by **Doug C** » Tue Jan 10, 2006 11:47 am

I can not for the life of me see a larger than normal collar on any of these LC jackets that we've been told that had. To me the collars in these pictures look the same size as RoTLA and TOD, but I think I've seen it and could tell a slight difference in the actual LC movie. not sure these pockets look any larger either. Also, one thing to remember is that the specific details of these jackets aren't as important to anyone, except our group so who knows which one the Smithsonian actually got or which one actually got auctioned..when it comes down to it, it could just be a guess from someone that should have known.. but to them it was just another movie prop - you know what I'm sayin'?

Doug C

SkyChief · Post by **SkyChief** » Tue Jan 10, 2006 2:28 pm

Doug C wrote:...the specific details of these jackets aren't as important to anyone, except our group so who knows which one the Smithsonian actually got or which one actually got auctioned..when it comes down to it, it could just be a guess from someone that should have known.. but to them it was just another movie prop - you know what I'm sayin'?

You lost me. You're right though, we care way more about the details than any normal individual does. This is why most people, even most fans here, it seems, have never questioned why this auction coat looks very, very different than the others. The proof is in the photos. It's as simple as those "One Of These Things Is Not Like The Others" games we all played as kids. I'm a bit amazed that Indy fans in general can scrutinize and discuss the most microscopic of details, yet most seem to have missed this (or just don't care, which I can totally respect).

Gater · Post by **Gater** » Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:48 pm

It would seem presumptuous to dismiss credibility of a jacket because the distressing is not the same as other costume jackets. It would be difficult to distress multiple jackets identically. Not only would it be difficult, but it would not be chronological. The distressing increases as a movie progresses, but since not shot chronologically, distressing has to be estimated...so just cuz the auctioned jacket has more/different distressing than the Smithsonian/Chicago jacket does not alone make it a fraud...imo.

rick5150 · Post by **rick5150** » Tue Jan 10, 2006 4:04 pm

You can split a topic off at any point, but you cannot cull out individual posts from a thread and only move them. For example, you can decide from which post forward you want to split, but you could not choose every other post and turn that into a new thread. If I understand the "split topic" limitations correctly...

I have found no modifications or hacks to allow that either. Not yet...

SkyChief · Post by **SkyChief** » Tue Jan 10, 2006 4:45 pm

rick5150 wrote:You can split a topic off at any point, but you cannot cull out individual posts from a thread and only move them. For example, you can decide from which post forward you want to split, but you could not choose every other post and turn that into a new thread. If I understand the "split topic" limitations correctly...

So it is possible to split a topic and create a new topic with the part you split off? That's all I was asking above, that this topic be split from my first post on (seems I'm the culprit behind the hijacking

).

Maybe the new thread could be called something like "Last Crusade Jacket: Profiles In History Auction."

Indiana Gater wrote:It would seem presumptuous to dismiss credibility of a jacket because the distressing is not the same as other costume jackets. It would be difficult to distress multiple jackets identically. Not only would it be difficult, but it would not be chronological. The distressing increases as a movie progresses, but since not shot chronologically, distressing has to be estimated...so just cuz the auctioned jacket has more/different distressing than the Smithsonian/Chicago jacket does not alone make it a fraud...imo.

I'm not sure what/who you are referring to, Indiana Gater. I didn't see anybody question the legitimacy of the auction coat based on different distressing. Although maybe I missed something.

Captain D · Post by **Captain D** » Tue Jan 10, 2006 6:03 pm

I think that I recall that the jacket (the one that was auctioned off), may have been used during the scene where Indy is hanging onto the barrel of the tank....Someone posted some screen grabs for us to look at and the amount of distressing looked remarkably similar to that particular scene.

It has been awhile since I had seen those screen grabs, or watched the Last Crusade, to really get a good look at it. I think that the collar being so "pointed" kinda looks peculiar. In fact, it's not even rounded, it's a straight point as opposed to the Chicago and Smithsonian jackets

.

And, I find it hard to believe that throughout the entire movie of Last Crusade they would have Ford's collar so relaxed, and then, all of a sudden put this jacket towards the end of the movie and have a "like new" collar confixture....I'll hafta take a look at that scene, where Indy is hanging off the barrel of the tank, to see how relaxed the collar is.

If it's not Ford's jacket, then in my opinion, it's gotta be a stunt jacket seeing how they didn't pay that close attention to the collar. In addition, perhaps the reason why they went overboard on the distressing is because, seeing how it was a stunt jacket, they wanted the jacket to "stand out" so-to-speak as "distressed" but not as a "close-up" hero jacket. But, who knows

....

Just my hypothesis,
Captain D

SkyChief · Post by **SkyChief** » Wed Jan 11, 2006 12:17 am

Captain D wrote:I think that I recall that the jacket (the one that was auctioned off), may have been used during the scene where Indy is hanging onto the barrel of the tank....Someone posted some screen grabs for us to look at and the amount of distressing looked remarkably similar to that particular scene.

Here is that image. Although I definitely see a satin lining above. The auction coat had cotton. If these coats are the same, that means they switched the lining at some point from satin to cotton. Stranger things have happened I guess.

Captain D wrote:I think that the collar being so "pointed" kinda looks peculiar. In fact, it's not even rounded, it's a straight point as opposed to the Chicago and Smithsonian jackets .

I think this photo makes the collar on the auction coat look more pointed than it actually is. However you are right, it's not as rounded as the other collars, very good eye. And in going back and looking closer at the collar you made me catch another discrepancy in the heft of the collar border itself. Take a look, the border seams on the collar are huge, way larger than in the famous close-up photo of Ford, Spielberg and Lucas from the cover of Premiere magazine in 1989, and way larger than on Westeds (grab your coats and compare).

I'm really curious as to the real story behind this auction coat. Check out Lee Keppler's Leather Concessionaires (Wested) jacket ("circa 1990"). The heft of the seams on the collar, the storm flap and the bottom of the coat look A LOT like what we see on this auction coat.

Could it be that the initial run of Last Crusade jackets were designed one way (like what we see on screen and in the Smithsonian and Chicago museum displays), but perhaps more jackets were needed later on in the shoot, so Peter and the crew made up some extras based on memory? Then Peter later used this style on the coat that Lee Keppler received? This might explain why the auction coat has a cotton lining rather than satin. Maybe they opted for cotton on the extra coats because the satin proved too warm. This explanation would also mean that all three coats, Smithsonian, Chicago and this auction coat were indeed legitimate, and it would solidify the claim that Peter supplied all the coats (for Last Crusade, at least).