R2-D2 prototype

[Simply Sci-fi]

It is easy to get carried away with items such as this one, especially if a dealer or collectors shop has provided what appears to be some official seeming providence. The R2-D2 model however could have just as easily have been created by a talented amateur (perhaps as part of a college course) who based it on the Cliro bubble bath container. The small scale of the model could point to this, with the creator being restricted to a limited amount of materials. Also the overall shoddiness of the piece could point to an amateur individual rather than a professional prototype producer.

I don't believe that the model has anything to do with the production of Star Wars because it resembles the Cliro foam bath container too closely. The blue dome indicates that it was either used as a basis for Cliro product or was instead based upon it. There may well have been prototype models lying around at Cliro but it does not mean that you definitely own one of them. The letter writer is only saying that Graham Brand (no idea who he is) has expressed an opinion that the model was used for the filming of Star Wars.

There was a large fad in the U.K of creating R2-D2 models in 1978. Derek Dorking created a large size radio control version while at the Southend College of Technology. The reverend Malcolm Kitchen created an authentic R2-D2 for display in Nottingham city centre. Many other people made R2-D2s in various scales. A life-sized R2-D2 made from the sump of a drain was featured in Star Wars Weekly.

If it turns out that you own one of the many amateur produced R2-D2 models dating from 1978, it is still a rare survivor and a piece of Star Wars history that deserves to be preserved.

Craig.

 

[OTB Records]

HI Graig and thanks for your post.

The piece is definitely not a hobby creation. I have too many people associated with Cliro here in the UK and their merchandising company saying that it was with them or known of before production of the Cliro bubble bath container in 1977.

There is no doubting that it is related to the Cliro product but does seem to have a history before this according to many people I am speaking to. Christie's and another auction house believed it to be a filming maquette and some of the paperwork I have points in that direction also.

 

[fuzzybuzzytoys]

I guess it simply comes down to proof. If you can prove (backed up with paperwork and signatures) that it is a prop then you have a £5k item. Else you have a production piece as previously stated on rebelscum.

Good luck.

 

[OTB Records]

I guess it simply comes down to proof. If you can prove (backed up with paperwork and signatures) that it is a prop then you have a £5k item. Else you have a production piece as previously stated on rebelscum.

Good luck.

Very true. It all comes down to provenance but unfortunately that is where the difficult part starts - lol. Being over 38 years ago tracing people is problematic.

All I can say with certainty at this moment in time is that it is a very early three-dimensional representation of R2-D2 that was most probably created for reference (a maquette) in or around the early part of 1977 or even late 1976.

I truly appreciate all the comments and input from members of this forum.

Thank you

Kevin

 

[Simply Sci-fi]

I would not be so quick to dismiss this item as a hobby creation. It seems to have been made from a mould that has been fashioned from two halves. The maker did a terrific job on the actual sculpt but the seam between the mould halves is horrible. The bottom of the model is extremely rough looking. This does not seem to be the work of a professional.

All early design sculpts were made quickly from clay, plaster etc. They were not cast from moulds. This in itself would discount the item from being an early production piece. You would require documentation and/or photographic reference if you intend to prove that your R2-D2 is anything but an amateur piece.

Craig.

 

[OTB Records]

Sorry to disagree with you but this is defiantly not (in my opinion) an amateur creation. It has a solid provenance back to Cliro in 1976/77. In my (and many others opinion) it's a professionally made model for reference. The big question is was it just for the Cliro bubble bath container or for something else?

 

[OTB Records]

Craig, you state that: "All early design sculpts were made quickly from clay, plaster etc."

Companies make mock-ups, prototypes etc, from any material available. For example, Kenner's original mock-ups of the first intended figures were made from stock figures from another range they produced and some were even crafted out of polystyrene. You cannot generalise on what material should be used for such prototypes or the resulting quality and appearance. Some mock-ups, concept models (call them what you like) are very crude.

 

[PIGCITY]

Just my input. But isn't this thread going the same way as the one on Rebelscum went??? A lot of speculation and then disagreement. I'm sorry but without any real provenance thats all this piece has, a lot of speculation.

Sorry.

 

[fuzzybuzzytoys]

I have to agree with Piggy. Clearly you are convinced this is some significant piece, but you have zero evidence to back it up. Please dont quote an auction house's opinion or your own opinion as evidence. So far it only goes so far as 'someone who used to know someone from somewhere says its this'.

You seem a nice guy, but I'm really sorry, it seems the only person your going to agree with is the one who say "This is DEFINATELY a prop used in Star Wars and is worth thousands!"

Aint going to happen mate.

 

[fuzzybuzzytoys]

"Sorry to disagree with you but this is defiantly not (in my opinion) an amateur creation."

You see, you say 'definately not' then immediately follow up with 'in my opinion'. So, its your opinion it's not. And someone else's opinion it might be.

'It has a solid provenance back to Cliro in 1976/77'

Seems feesible as it looks like the bubble bath mould.

'In my (and many others opinion) it's a professionally made model for reference'

Again, opinions. Some maybe more valid than others.

'The big question is was it just for the Cliro bubble bath container or for something else?'

So far, most of the collectors are saying its Cliro Bubble Bath. I have to agree with them from the evidence I have seen.

 

[SublevelStudios]

Having followed this on both RS and here now, and reserving judgement until now I have to agree with both Pig and Fuzz.

It would be great if what you had was used in the first film but there's no proof, and obtaining any is very unlikely. It looks nothing more than an engineering/product mock up and I would settle for that.

It's a cool item but if someone offered me nearly £3K for it I would snap their hand off

 

[OTB Records]

Thanks once again to everyone for their input - much appreciated. I'm sorry if I come across in a direct way but it's not intentional and just one of the drawbacks of communicating via the internet

I totally agree that it is just speculation and conjecture at the moment when it comes to placing this piece in the realms of film production but that is why I posted here to get people's views and hopefully even find someone who knows exactly what its original purpose was.

Personally I don't mind what the final result is as I'm not currently in the market to sell it. I have been offered in the region of £3,000 for it but this is not the driving factor at the moment. I just want to find the history to this piece.

I have been in collecting for well over 40 years and professionally for over 20 years so I understand how provenance etc. works. However, even written provenance from respected companies/auction houses etc. can be totally worthless and false. I have come across this many times in the past. I would rather have spoken to and taken note (verbatim) from someone who was there at the time than rely on a written statement from someone I have never met or spoken to. This is the main problem with any area of collecting - provenance is king but provenance can be in some cases worthless. A catch-22 situation

I will continue to research this piece and enjoy it for what it is.

 

[OTB Records]

'Fuzzy'. You stated the following: "Please don't quote an auction house's opinion or your own opinion as evidence. So far it only goes so far as 'someone who used to know someone from somewhere says its this'."

I'm sorry if I haven't made it clear in previous posts but I have spoken to marketing people related to Cliro Perfumeries from the 1970s who have confirmed that the piece does have a direct connection with production of the Cliro bubble bath container. I have at least three people from that period who worked directly with Cliro confirming this in writing etc.

However, all of them say that this piece was in existence well before production of the bubble bath container and actually came over from America. Now my understanding is that Cliro Perfumeries was a UK based company and therefore any masters/prototypes/mock-ups etc. would most likely have been produced here in the UK. So why is this piece seemingly originating in America? Coupled with this I have the letter from the original seller stating that to their knowledge the piece was related to film production.

Because of the above I am only wondering if there is a history to this piece that predates the Cliro bubble bath and that is what I am trying to uncover.

 

[fuzzybuzzytoys]

*Sigh*, please dont pull me into a argument because I don't agree this is what you think it is..

Look, I know mate. I have read two threads on two different sites of you saying this.

So when I say, and I quote myself...

"So far it only goes so far as 'someone who used to know someone from somewhere says its this"

...how is this a contradiction to what you have previously stated?

 

[OTB Records]

Hi Fuzzy. Perhaps I have misinterpreted your reply as I thought you were saying that the trail of information was weak because it was, quote: "'someone who used to know someone from somewhere says its this".

I'm just trying to say that the provenance is more direct and solid than rumours or hearsay through various people but actually comes directly from people who worked with Cliro at the time.

 

[Bootyhunter]

I wondered if they had planned to produce a bar of soap
which would explain the smaller size version of the bottle ?

 

[Robstyley]

I wondered if they had planned to produce a bar of soap
which would explain the smaller size version of the bottle ?

Yeah that's what I thought because of the gap between the legs being filled in and the size. It could be a proto for a solid object like soap :?:

 

[PIGCITY]

I wondered if they had planned to produce a bar of soap
which would explain the smaller size version of the bottle ?

http://forum.rebelscum.com/t949261/

 

[Bootyhunter]

Thanks for the link, so we can rule that one out
definitely a different sculpt..

 

[Palifan]

I wondered if they had planned to produce a bar of soap
which would explain the smaller size version of the bottle ?

http://forum.rebelscum.com/t949261/

Nice find and although the R2 doesn't match the one from this thread it could be what their UK sculptors based it on? Still doesn't show where the piece originated from if it did come from the US but I don't think it's worth dismissing it as a possible artifact connected to filming just yet. Without doing the research it's hard to know where this thing came from and although it may never come to light it's a bit of fun trying to.

All the best with getting some new leads through posting it on here.

Ian