The Bantu Wind discussions

crismans · Post by **crismans** » Sat Jun 06, 2009 5:54 pm

I don't think it's natural to be this excited over something like this.

If it is the same jacket, then this would be a major discovery and would explain a great many things.

Mac · Post by **Mac** » Sat Jun 06, 2009 6:05 pm

Indiana Holt wrote:Mac; same pocket and same distance from the bottom of the jacket. a perfect match.

I was hoping someone else would see the same thing I did.

If they are the same jacket, and the Wilsons jacket was modified to have a "mock" pleat for the truck drag, then why does the jacket have a working action pleat on day one of shooting?

- Mac

Yojimbo Jones · Post by **Yojimbo Jones** » Sat Jun 06, 2009 6:26 pm

Perhaps the "mock" pleat was there from day one? Where did the story of it being modified for the truck drag come from? Were the type of modifications listed very specific?

Kt Templar · Post by **Kt Templar** » Sat Jun 06, 2009 6:29 pm

I think I need to be convinced.

IMHO The Bantu is a smooth semi shiny leather, the Leonard Truck is a matt slightly rough one.

Post by **Holt** » Sat Jun 06, 2009 6:32 pm

maby Kt, but the jacket can give a total differetn look with all the distressing, sand, oil, sunlight.etc.

RCSignals · Post by **RCSignals** » Sat Jun 06, 2009 6:32 pm

This is where we need better photos.

It has been said that the Wilsons was modified for the truck drag. Maybe it was modified using the Bantu Wind as a model? the Bantu Wind doesn't seem to be used in scenes after the first dockside, so might have been available?
We need to 'what if?' and 'so what?' it to death

Yojimbo Jones · Post by **Yojimbo Jones** » Sat Jun 06, 2009 6:34 pm

Agreed KT, I noticed the Bantu jacket looked more textured too. That could be put down to all Holt mentions.

Kt Templar · Post by **Kt Templar** » Sat Jun 06, 2009 6:35 pm

Indiana Holt wrote:maby Kt, but the jacket can give a total differetn look with all the distressing, sand, oil, sunlight.etc.

Lol I know! I know!

Joyce's jacket is a testament to that.

Yojimbo Jones · Post by **Yojimbo Jones** » Sat Jun 06, 2009 6:38 pm

RCSignals wrote:This is where we need better photos.

It has been said that the Wilsons was modified for the truck drag. Maybe it was modified using the Bantu Wind as a model? the Bantu Wind doesn't seem to be used in scenes after the first dockside, so might have been available?
We need to 'what if?' and 'so what?' it to death

Yeah, makes sense. As does the idea that each was a different submission by different vendors that had similar specs.

Post by **Holt** » Sat Jun 06, 2009 6:48 pm

Ok my theory. what I think is that the non showing pleat is just an optical illusion.

I think the pleat is busting at the seams due the extra padding under it so it looks really flat.

I mean. I do see a pleat seam in this picture, but again only really flatt.

Look at the picture with Ford hanging on in the middle, now look at Terry's picture to the left, almost no pleat seam is shown in both pictures. Now look at the picture of terry to the right, you clearly can see a pleat seam......

The jacket Fords wear has the same effect as the Terry picture to the left. almost no pleat seam is shown, but we all know it has a pleat.

see what I mean?

Post by **Holt** » Sat Jun 06, 2009 6:53 pm

RCSignals wrote:This is where we need better photos.

It has been said that the Wilsons was modified for the truck drag. Maybe it was modified using the Bantu Wind as a model? the Bantu Wind doesn't seem to be used in scenes after the first dockside, so might have been available?
We need to 'what if?' and 'so what?' it to death

Yes, I agree. this could very well be it.

Dutch_jones · Post by **Dutch_jones** » Sat Jun 06, 2009 7:00 pm

Indiana Holt wrote:Ok my theory. what I think is that the non showing pleat is just an optical illusion.

I think the pleat is busting at the seams due the extra padding under it so it looks really flat.

I mean. I do see a pleat seam in this picture, but again only really flatt.

Look at the picture with Ford hanging on in the middle, now look at Terry's picture to the left, almost no pleat seam is shown in both pictures. Now look at the picture of terry to the right, you clearly can see a pleat seam......

The jacket Fords wear has the same effect as the Terry picture to the left. almost no pleat seam is shown, but we all know it has a pleat.

see what I mean?

YES! I have always thought this as well !!!
This shot of terry walking after the truck drag scene does show pleats in my eyes.

crismans · Post by **crismans** » Sat Jun 06, 2009 11:40 pm

Dutch_jones wrote:Show me pictures of this "coopers" jacket. No i am not I'm someone who prefers logic over advertising

Here it is:

If you don't believe it after all the information from here: http://www.indygear.com/igjacket-ToD.html and elsewhere, I'm not sure if there is enough proof for you.

Dutch_jones · Post by **Dutch_jones** » Sun Jun 07, 2009 12:40 am

crismans wrote:
Dutch_jones wrote:Show me pictures of this "coopers" jacket. No i am not I'm someone who prefers logic over advertising
Here it is:

If you don't believe it after all the information from here: http://www.indygear.com/igjacket-ToD.html and elsewhere, I'm not sure if there is enough proof for you.

NO indeed !! I meant the A2

)

crismans · Post by **crismans** » Sun Jun 07, 2009 12:59 am

Ah, got you.

RCSignals · Post by **RCSignals** » Sun Jun 07, 2009 1:16 am

Indiana Holt wrote:Ok my theory. what I think is that the non showing pleat is just an optical illusion.

I think the pleat is busting at the seams due the extra padding under it so it looks really flat.

I mean. I do see a pleat seam in this picture, but again only really flatt.

Possible. If it has a true pleat it had to have been made that way, otherwise a jacket without one would have to be completely reconstructed.

IF that is indeed the cowhide Wilson's which by all reports it was, and it is a real pleat it may indicate the pattern of the Wilson's jacket was not as 'plain', and far more advanced than previously thought/believed.

RCSignals · Post by **RCSignals** » Sun Jun 07, 2009 1:21 am

the pockets of the Cooper A2 are 6" W x 6.75"H

Post by **Michaelson** » Wed Jun 17, 2009 9:57 am

Well stated, _.

By the way, I really like that blue plaid jacket you're wearing in your avatar.....or is it green?

HIGH regards! Michaelson

Post by **Michaelson** » Wed Jun 17, 2009 10:50 am

Post by **Mike** » Wed Jun 17, 2009 11:03 am

I see pink bunnies and bubbles.

PLATON · Post by **PLATON** » Wed Jun 17, 2009 11:59 am

With all due respect, you mean to say that if you say

Harrison Ford can be quoted as remembering that it came off Martin Grace's back because the script supervisor stopped the shoot for those scenes as Ford was not going to wear a jacket initially.

or if you say

Harrison Ford can be quoted as remembering that it came off Terry Leonard's back because the script supervisor stopped the shoot for those scenes as Ford was not going to wear a jacket initially.

it will make a difference to those people?
and the webmaster will be asked to remove the offensive lies?

If I recall correctly it has been said that the Martin Grace is the jacket copied by TN. (correct me if I am wrong)
but if the Martin Grace jacket is the Bantu Wind jacket then why the yoke of the bantu meets the arm seams and
TN's don't.

Sorry if this has been answered before but this forum and these threads are getting so big lately that it's really hard to keep up.

Regards,

CairoIndy · Post by **CairoIndy** » Wed Jun 17, 2009 12:17 pm

I don't really want to contradict HF,but his recollection just doesn't make any sense.Why would Martin Grace be there on the first day of filming in full costume(with no stunts involved)?.
Also,we have a pic of HF wearing the jacket in daylight-before the Bantu wind scene was shot(at night).If he wasn't originally supposed to wear a jacket in this scene then why would he be wearing it earlier?..and if he wore it just for this photo,was this Grace's jacket too?,if not,then why wasn't he just given his own jacket later on when they shot the scene?

CairoIndy · Post by **CairoIndy** » Wed Jun 17, 2009 12:35 pm

_,this doesn't make sense either.In the making of book there is a clear picture of the filming of that night scene,labeled-'last day of filming in LaRochelle France-june 26 1980'.There are pics and descriptions of spielburg directing that scene.No pics or descriptions of re-shoots of this scene at Elstree(..the only Raiders set that has never been photographed?!)

CairoIndy · Post by **CairoIndy** » Wed Jun 17, 2009 1:13 pm

_ wrote:
CairoIndy wrote:No pics or descriptions of re-shoots of this scene at Elstree
LOL! Do you think they took pictures of everything?

Yes!(or at least documented SOMEWHERE)-Raiders was exhaustively documented-every single day-and photographed(and this information is availble to fans-except this re-shoot).
Anyway,if this true then we are talking about 2 Bantu wind jackets-the daylight/nighttime exterior jacket(France)-low yoke etc and the Elstree re-shoots with Grace's jacket(Hawai jacket).

PLATON · Post by **PLATON** » Wed Jun 17, 2009 1:22 pm

_, don't leave.
You have become more scarce than Ford himself.

I recall that during the boarding scene we could see the Bantu Wind vessel on the left of the screen.
Well, since the vessel couldn't have been on the soundstage then it meand there was a film editing there.

But since the Bantu Wind was docked in France and we see her in the daylight pics, then why wouldn't they shoot the scene there? What made them prefer the soundstage? The pier does not work at night

and I can give you details from the Guide to Port Entry

La Rochelle
Normal working hours for stevedoring are: 9000 - 1200 hrs and 1400 - 1800 hrs. 2 hours overtime may be worked from 1800 - 2200 hrs. When a quick despatch must be given to a vessel, an 8 hour shift can be arranged from 0500 - 1300 hrs. and 1400-2200hrs. during the week and 0500 - 1300hrs during the holidays.

Since the Bantu was chartered by the film producers it is unlikely that she had any crago operations at the time.
Also, in 1981 there was a deep crisis in shipping (10 times worse than the recent crisis) and ships around the world were laid up inactive due to lack of employment.

Of course, the above is for the sake of discussion and I don't claim that they did film on site because I have no evidence. Just asking, why not shoot it there...

Post by **Michaelson** » Wed Jun 17, 2009 1:30 pm

Well, for the sake of discussion, it could have been weather related. As I recall, it states in the 'Making of Raiders' paperback book, they had a very small window of opportunity to shoot the scene using the ship and the sub, as the sub was the 1:1 mockup model they used for Das Boot, and it really wasn't all that sea worthy. They experienced a LOT of rough water and chop, and had only a day to get that single scene in the can due to the bad weather. That would also factor into any port shots as well.

That said, unless you've been involved in field production work, there's NOTHING more 'uncontrollable' than trying to shoot a scene on location....ESPECIALLY if you're dealing with a lot of dialog....and yes, I've personally done a lot of field production. Anytime I could, I used a controlled area when those scenes came up. I'm sure that's why they used a set for the dock scene. More controllable area, and your sound is a LOT better in the long run. No redubs involved, and you can do retakes all day long, or night for that matter, as your set lighting remains the same.

Regards! Michaelson

crismans · Post by **crismans** » Wed Jun 17, 2009 1:46 pm

When I refer to Martin Grace, I am assuming this crowd knows I'm referring to the "phantom" Bantu Wind jacket. Martin Grace was at Ellstree. His jacket was the only "hero" left after everyone left Tunisia, and it made the trip to Hawaii... Lucas took the "Nadoolman Hero", Vic took his and TL took his (later - very MUCH later - returned to LFL).

Okay, this isn't exactly questioning but more of a clarification. If Grace's jacket was the one on Ford in the night Bantu Wind scenes and the one that went to Hawaii, are you saying that this is the jacket Tony copied? Because (and yes I'm going from pictures here), there seem to be several differences between the jackets that would indicate they were different (yoke location, for instance).

RCSignals · Post by **RCSignals** » Wed Jun 17, 2009 2:30 pm

None of this clears up anything.
The 'Bantu Wind' jacket is still not answered, that is what was it? It looks like none of the other jackets Ford is seen wearing in the movie, and if it was Martin Grace's jacket, and Ford wore that same jacket in Hawaii, it does not look like the Hawaii jacket. Unless Grace had two jackets and the Hawaii jacket is Grace's second jacket.
Then there is the appearance of a jacket or jackets, (one without a back pleat that could be the altered Wilson's, involved in the truck drag scene,) apparently worn by Terry Leonard, that resemble the Bantu wind jacket. Not the jacket we see on Ford. I would accept that the only jacket we see on TL in those scenes is an altered Wilson's. Why would it not be? If he wears more than just altered Wilson's at least one may be the Bantu wind because of the construction we see.
Screen grabs and photos may be deceiving, but the Bantu Wind jacket due to it's differences in construction is fairly easy to identify.

It would be interesting to know which jacket Nadooman personally distressed. It seems she distressed only one jacket. Was it the jacket we see in the Bantu wind scene, or one of the other jackets we see Ford wear?

Also, it has been said that according to TL, he turned in his jacket to wardrobe at the end of filming. He did not keep his jacket. So if the jacket assigned to him disappeared for a time, who had it?

Was TL also in Hawaii? I've read in the archives that he was. Sorry I didn't save it to quote and I probably won't be able to find it again easily.

gwyddion · Post by **gwyddion** » Wed Jun 17, 2009 4:21 pm

So, let's see if I can make sence of the info that was posted today:

When in La Rochelle they planned to shoot the harbor scene and this is where the picture came from. But for some reason (bad weather, too much noise, some error they noticed when watching the dailies, alien invasion or whatever) they had to do a re-shoot on a soundstage and this is what we see in the movie. The jacket we see in that scene was the Martin Grace jacket, a jacket later re-used in the hawaii shots.

Have I got that right?

So, nobody knows if Peter's jackets were done when they took that picture, right? They could have been delivered later during shooting at La Rochelle (E.G. when they were shooting at the submarine base, a nice shooting location when the weather's bad).

Now if this is right, it could be that the jacket Ford is wearing in that picture is indeed the Wilson jacket, as some members have theorized. This would explain the low yoke in that picture. It would however be of no significance whatsoever because no material shot in La Rochelle while he was wearing that jacket ever made it to the film.

Do I make any sence?

Regards, Geert

Mac · Post by **Mac** » Wed Jun 17, 2009 4:31 pm

CairoIndy wrote:In the making of book there is a clear picture of the filming of that night scene,labeled-'last day of filming in LaRochelle France-june 26 1980'.

The scene in Raiders, from the time Indy and Marion appear on the docks, through Sallah's embrace, to boarding the gangplank, is a single camera shot, with no cuts.

It seems clear, even if it was entirely re-shot on a sound stage, the plan had been to shoot the night scene on location with Ford wearing the jacket.

- Mac

mark seven · Post by **mark seven** » Wed Jun 17, 2009 4:58 pm

Yes,no cuts in this scene.

I would be interested to know when this re-shoot took place.It would have been an enormous set to build,with the Bantu wind and all the extras..which stage was it built on? and what day was it filmed?..every other scene is well-documented and photographed(even down to the little pick-up shots like Will Welch as Indy walking through the jungle for the titles).Every single day of the Raiders shoot was documented..why not this one?

Post by **Michaelson** » Wed Jun 17, 2009 5:02 pm

Like anything else, who know? In my conversations with one of the propmasters back 'in the day', he told me there was no record of anything used from day to day regarding costumes or props but the firearms. Those they HAD to keep track of due to BATF requirements in the States, and contract agreements then had with the rental companies Otherwise, they just grabbed what they needed any given day/moment and went with it. That's why there have been so much seen in the way of continuity problems.

No records of items used? Made no sense, but he said it wasn't all that uncommon. Pickup shots or reshoots aren't necessarily cataloged either.

Regards! Michaelson

crismans · Post by **crismans** » Wed Jun 17, 2009 5:10 pm

If it was shot on a soundstage (and not disputing that it was) then it seems that a jacket with the lower yoke was used (Holt posted these earlier in the thread):

This jacket with the low yoke doesn't match up with any other jacket Ford wore (to my knowledge) but it does match up with the jacket he was wearing at La Rochelle:

Now, again, I'm not disputing what _ is saying but I am having a hard time getting my head around it. IF (and I know it's a big if when it comes to pictures), the pictures aren't lying, then they photographed Ford wearing the jacket with the lower yoke at La Rochelle, then went to Ellstree and (re)shot the boarding sequence using a jacket with a lower yoke, even though, all the other sequences shot at Ellstree seem to feature jackets with the higher yoke. Nowhere else (to my knowledge) is a jacket featured that has this low yoke except the jacket at the Bantu Wind (the Wilson's jacket also seems to feature this, but I'm not frying that kettle of fish here). While it's certainly possible that they happened to grab the same jacket that was featured in the Bantu Wind photo for the reshoot of the boarding scenes, doesn't that seem a bit fortuitous?

Yojimbo Jones · Post by **Yojimbo Jones** » Wed Jun 17, 2009 6:18 pm

IMO all evidence points to it NOT being a soundstage. It just doesn't make sense.

Reading between the lines, I think what _ is trying to say is "nothing to see here..."

Yojimbo Jones · Post by **Yojimbo Jones** » Wed Jun 17, 2009 6:42 pm

_ wrote: Then I thought "What the f--- am I doing burning personal capital for something that is really kinda silly..."

Some of us do that a lot when buying yet ANOTHER of the same jacket! I thought we were past THAT realisation!

(Ahhh, that OTHER kind of personal capital!)

Dutch_jones · Post by **Dutch_jones** » Wed Jun 17, 2009 8:10 pm

Well it could be a continuity thing, the truckdrag is right before the Bantu Wind;) ?

maboot38 · Post by **maboot38** » Thu Jun 18, 2009 12:30 pm

_ wrote:
neutronbomb wrote:This isn't phantom. It is clear this is the same jacket. [/img]
The fact that you can so clearly and confidently state this completely discredits your position. Don't you understand this? These are pictures. These are jackets made to look alike. This is almost 30 year-old footage. It has been squished in panaflex cameras, edited, digitally manipulated probably dozens of times over the years as it is "remastered" etc... You simply cannot hang your hat on 99% of these pics. About the ONLY pic I've ever put faith in is the Star's shot. That was catalogued and is well documented - and was shot using high-speed slide stock so it can be enlarged until the cows come home...

But, my friends, don't you understand the folly of this "analysis" of yours? A play of light and shadow tells somebody "I see pleats" or another that "the yoke is clearly lower"...

Aw, why do I try... I hear they are serving jello today with the thorazine...

My, this thread is merging quite nicely with this one:
viewtopic.php?f=27&t=41219

Raider S · Post by **Raider S** » Thu Jun 18, 2009 1:34 pm

_ wrote: About the ONLY pic I've ever put faith in is the Star's shot. That was catalogued and is well documented - and was shot using high-speed slide stock so it can be enlarged until the cows come home...

Which photo is the "Star's shot"?

It would likely be a low-speed (low ASA) film stock if fine grain/big enlargements were wanted.

Post by **Mike** » Thu Jun 18, 2009 1:51 pm

I've oft-posted this shot, but will again. This is what we refer to as the "STARS" shot as it was included in a book/calendar of that name.

gwyddion · Post by **gwyddion** » Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:07 pm

_ wrote: NB, et al... Look at those stills on location. Look REAL GOOD. Watch the sequence from Raiders REAL GOOD. There are gems you're not catching. When they were pointed out to me, I did not know how I missed them. When I pointed them out to others knowledgeable about this stuff they gave me a big "duh" like I had just fallen on the stupid stick. The footage on-screen? It's a soundstage, my friend... It is a soundstage as sure as the day is long and as sure as Michaelson drinks coffee...

You mean things like the clouds in the background not moving the entire scene?

Regards, Geert

Post by **Michaelson** » Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:19 pm

...that, or a stationary front just moved in.

And yes....I do drink coffee!

Regards! Michaelson

Dutch_jones · Post by **Dutch_jones** » Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:22 pm

Just for the record it is not uncommon to shoot night scenes during a day, its called "day for night shooting" And that is clearly the case of the Bantu Wind;)

Post by **Michaelson** » Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:31 pm

...that, or they just turn off the lights on the sound stage and film with set lighting.

(this is starting to sound like a scene from the filme 'The Princess Bride'

"...and it's clear I can not chose the goblet in front of you!"

)

Regards! Michaelson

RCSignals · Post by **RCSignals** » Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:34 pm

_ wrote:
neutronbomb wrote:Well in all fairness...

NB, et al... Look at those stills on location. Look REAL GOOD. Watch the sequence from Raiders REAL GOOD. There are gems you're not catching. When they were pointed out to me, I did not know how I missed them. When I pointed them out to others knowledgeable about this stuff they gave me a big "duh" like I had just fallen on the stupid stick. The footage on-screen? It's a soundstage, my friend... It is a soundstage as sure as the day is long and as sure as Michaelson drinks coffee...

In the location publicity shots? Maybe that is a Wilsons. It very well could be, but I'd be surprised.

As to the shots on-screen - I'm sticking to the collective recollections of the people who were there. It was not just one person who remembered it. The star, the director, the stunt double and the script supervisor all remember it the same way... I'd call that pretty reliable - better than gear jockies with screen grabs... That's why this string and all the insistence on this ridiculous story line is so hilarious and frustrating at the same time.

Sources: Harrison Ford, Steven Spielberg, Martin Grace, Pamela Francis (Mann)

Note to Admin: We need to update the credits in the Raider's jacket section...

Sound stage or not a sound stage doesn't matter. It's about the jacket. What jacket is that in that photo? It's not one we see Ford wearing anywhere else and the only jacket that comes close is in some of the truck drag scenes, being worn by Terry Leonard. Which is not to say the truck drag jacket has to be the same jacket.
If that jacket being worn by Ford in that photo is Martin Grace's jacket then Martin Grace's jacket isn't the same jacket as the Hawaii jacket given to TN to copy, unless MG had two jackets.

That is what is so hilarious and frustrating at the same time in this string.

Post by **Michaelson** » Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:38 pm

Sound stage or not a sound stage doesn't matter.

Actually, it does, as folks have tossed this photo and those seen on screen of the dockside scene as being one and the same. They're not. That's what got everyone to this point. Until that point can be clear in everyones mind, you'll continue run round and round the barn chasing this information.

Regards! Michaelson

mark seven · Post by **mark seven** » Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:44 pm

RCSignals wrote:
Sound stage or not a sound stage doesn't matter. It's about the jacket. What jacket is that in that photo?

It does matter,because if this scene was re-shot at Elstree then that is NOT Martin Grace's jacket(Hawaii/TN jacket)in that daylight photo._ said Ford wore the Grace jacket for the re-shoot.

RCSignals · Post by **RCSignals** » Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:53 pm

Michaelson wrote:
Sound stage or not a sound stage doesn't matter.
Actually, it does, as folks have tossed this photo and those seen on screen of the dockside scene as being one and the same. They're not. That's what got everyone to this point. Until that point can be clear in everyones mind, you'll continue run round and round the barn chasing this information.

Regards! Michaelson

Sorry Michaelson, but if that's the case you and _ are missing the point. It's about the jacket in that photo, not about the location of the scene.
Either the information about that jacket is simply not known, or the information has been kept from surfacing for whatever reason.
The other photos for Bantu Wind may or not be the same jacket, although they all appear to have the same low yoke. They were tossed in by someone to say that jacket with the low yoke does appear in other Bantu Wind scenes on screen not just the sitting on the dockside shot.
It's still about the jacket in the photo.

It's been said it was Martin Grace's jacket. Again, if that jacket being worn by Ford in that photo is Martin Grace's jacket then Martin Grace's jacket isn't the same jacket as the Hawaii jacket given to TN to copy, unless MG had two jackets.

RCSignals · Post by **RCSignals** » Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:57 pm

mark seven wrote:
RCSignals wrote:
Sound stage or not a sound stage doesn't matter. It's about the jacket. What jacket is that in that photo?
It does matter,because if this scene was re-shot at Elstree then that is NOT Martin Grace's jacket(Hawaii/TN jacket)in that daylight photo._ said Ford wore the Grace jacket for the re-shoot.

Post these 're-shoot' photos please.

Post by **Michaelson** » Thu Jun 18, 2009 3:03 pm

Sorry Michaelson, but if that's the case you and _ are missing the point.

Nope, as you just read, we're not missing a thing, my friend.

Regards! Michaelson

RCSignals · Post by **RCSignals** » Thu Jun 18, 2009 3:11 pm

_ wrote:Some thoughts and statements of what I think I can safely call facts...

Deb Nadoolman is sorta full of herself. Maybe that's why we hit it off so famously? (grin) Now, Ford has confirmed that Deb did the Swiss knife thing by the pool. But was all this done in time for him to be wearing it on the dock? Discounting Deb's ability to deliver is not a huge step for me, so I'll make the leap to saying it would no longer surprise me to learn that Ford wore a Wilson's jacket while waiting for the wind to die and the equipment (crane) to work while sitting dockside. Because none of that came to pass, a matte with stationary clouds was located (grin) and a set prepared for a soundstage shoot (off the schedule to avoid the prying eyes of budget conscious studio execs). There are several other give-aways in that sequence - like that "Where's Waldo?" game...

By the time shooting began at Ellstree, all the Westeds were in place...

The only thing actually shot in France that made it into the can was the sub/Bantu sequence. No jackets...

All is in balance, because that dockside/still jacket should look like Terry's "drag" scene... Sorry, Terry...

Did I miss anything?

Well you've summarised what some of us have been asking.

The dockside/still jacket does most resemble the jacket worn by TL for the truck drag sequence (as well as on horse back which I consider part of the sequence) The only discrepancy is the jacket worn in the dockside/still does appear to have a real back pleat, quite different from the jacket TL is wearing.