Bruce got the juice - Bruce Willis' Jacket

[jon z]

Point taken. It could also be argued that with those huge resources & technical know-how (recreating the Titanic for example) that producing a new jacket or two that looks old is not going to present any kind of problem.

 

[Marc Chevalier]

Point taken. It could also be argued that with those huge resources & technical know-how (recreating the Titanic for example) that producing a new jacket or two that looks old is not going to present any kind of problem.

There's a lot of stuff involved, including stars' egos.


.

 

[dr greg]

thank bruce

After going through some replies here about vintage vs repro, I decided to check one of my old beasts to try and imagine how to fake that look, and just as well, it's been really wet and stormy here for about a week and there was plenty of MOULD about!!!! So out into the open air they went and I've been busy with the vinegar all day....just as well I watched Bruce's dodgy movie eh? A close shave, unlike our hero....

 

[Seb Lucas]

Yes, it is vintage, but some people --especially those who crave one of their own-- refuse to believe this, no matter what. These naysayers insist on believing they can get one from Tony that's exactly like Bruce Willis's.


.

I would be quite happy to learn that the original is a vintage. But I have so far believed what I have read from Nowak. Besides, no one has yet proven the jacket isn't a Nowak. The best we can say here is that it appears to be a vintage jacket. That's not the same thing as knowing.

If I was to order one, I would ask Nowak to make it as a new jacket. I really dislike fake distressing.

I would love to learn exactly what the story is behind the original Surrogates jacket. If facts are available, let's have them.

 

[BellyTank]

Well- several people here, who WOULD and do recognise an original vintage leather jacket, have offered their opinions. Do you believe the "jacket manufacturer" over them? Has "he" actually said, or stated that he made the Willis jacket? Or is it just "marketing"- allowing you to believe that scenario.

The jacket on the stunt double is a different jacket- looks like a copy to me.
Stunt doubles wear stunt clothing. The two men are probably not the exact same size- so they would need to wear clothes that fit.

If there WAS someone producing perfect, exact, vintage-ified copies of classic
leather jackets, the vintage leather jacket fans would be the first to know.


B
T

 

[Baron Kurtz]

he he. I thought they'd got a damn good stunt man. lol Thanks for clarifying. Still, yes we agree.

The image I quoted/re-posted, above- the large, frontal, that's the Bruce, not the double.
That's a fur-real vintage jacket. All the different types of wear and character that you can't
get from the rocks and tumble dryer. I think you agree with me.

Baron.K, there are at least two other threads that have some movie-jacket fans fooled that it's
a costume repro, rather than vintage.


B
T

 

[Seb Lucas]

Well- several people here, who WOULD and do recognise an original vintage leather jacket, have offered their opinions. Do you believe the "jacket manufacturer" over them?


B
T

Yes.

 

[BellyTank]

Good to know.
Any reason why?
I think it would be nice to see a little evidence in favour
of the jacket manufacturer- Written, or visual.


B
T

 

[jon z]

I have no proof either way. That said I have had several years of experience with vintage leathers. There are some on here with a lot more & some with a lot less. However I would defy anybody to be fully confident that they could not be fooled into thinking a jacket is vintage which isn't merely by looking at pictures. Pictures showing no real detail & only the merest hint of the insides. To make a true assessment I would argue that you'd have to have the jacket in question to hand to examine in every minor detail. There's a long history of experts in all manner of disciplines being fooled into thinking fakes were genuine when having the item to hand, let alone a bunch of pictures, not particularly good ones at that. Cars, stamps, coins, bank notes, paintings, sculpture...the list goes on & on.

 

[BellyTank]

I am absolutely certain that the jacket being discussed is a vintage jacket.
It's a leather jacket, not a painting, or a banknote- just a leather jacket.
Vintage clothing and leathers are often used in the movies and this is just another. There are plenty of small details that can be seen in several of the photos- details which differentiate the vintage jacket from the repros and supprt that THE jacket is real vintage.

Believe me, I would LOVE to be fooled that this jacket has been treated
to look vintage. So I will still stay out on my limb and be 100% certain.


I say Vintage until proven stonewashed.


B
T

 

[Marc Chevalier]

.




Got your back, BT. :cool2:


.

 

[jon z]

BT: No it's not a painting or a bank note but a leather jacket as you so observantly point out. And by its nature a far simpler prospect for replication therefore, which was my point. A point that seems to have sailed way over your head. I think you are deluding yourself to think you can be 100% certain it's vintage. Also you offer no irrefutable proof to underpin your rather dubious verdict.

 

[BellyTank]

Mind how you go.

I am not deluding myself at all.
I simply don't like, that(although I haven't heard it directly) a businessman
is saying that he has created a jacket that is, quite clearly a vintage jacket.
It's really not so hard for me to be absolutely sure, I'm very familiar and quite
comfortable with vintage clothing.

To achieve the naturally aged look of that leather jacket would probably be a bit tougher than paintings and banknotes.
It's not something you need to see up close- that photo says it all. Photos can pretty much show you what you need to see,
if you know what you're looking at.
Apparently, this goes "way over the heads" of those who don't know vintage.
Apparently.

It would simply not be worth the effort and expense, for a costume maker to go to this level of detail for a movie jacket.
Look at the other jackets from the other photos and of the other jackets he's made- just not the same at all- not even close.

You can either see the Vintage, or not and you, apparently, cannot.
Personally, I don't need any more proof than what I can see.
Surely, it's up to someone else to prove that it's not vintage and the guy did make it himself.


B
T

 

[Marc Chevalier]

.



When I first saw the screen captures, I though, "Cinematography can be deceiving. Maybe the jacket doesn't look so vintage 'in real life' as it does in the flick. Maybe it really is new."


Nope. Those 'real life' photos of Bruce Willis at Trader Joe's are clear and sharp enough. They say "used vintage" all the way. I have no doubt in my mind about this.


.

 

[jon z]

Mind how you go.

Right back at ya fella.

I am not deluding myself at all.

I'm sure you believe you're not.

I simply don't like, that(although I haven't heard it directly) a businessman
is saying that he has created a jacket that is, quite clearly a vintage jacket.

Just because you don't like what you've heard indirectly (now there's an infallible source in anybody's book!) doesn't mean the opposite is true.

It's really not so hard for me to be absolutely sure, I'm very familiar and quite
comfortable with vintage clothing.

So am I but I don't profess to be undeniably right.

To achieve the naturally aged look of that leather jacket would probably be a bit tougher than paintings and banknotes.

Absolute rubbish. I bet my life on it that without any experience of either I could far easier make a more convincing job of antiquing leather than I could of producing a forged work of art or bank note.

It's not something you need to see up close- that photo says it all. Photos can pretty much show you what you need to see,
if you know what you're looking at.
Apparently, this goes "way over the heads" of those who don't know vintage.
Apparently.

Of course you need the close up detail. Zips, labels, sleeve linings, button material, thread used, etc. Get real. I know cars for instance but NEVER are they exactly what the pictures in ads paint them to be. Neither are jackets. I've bought enough off eBay over many years to know that for fact. I do have a knowledge of vintage leather jackets but don't suffer with delusions that I know it all, cannot be wrong & no one knows better.

It would simply not be worth the effort and expense, for a costume maker to go to this level of detail for a movie jacket.

The effort & expense would be a drop in the ocean of the film budget. Of course there are many films featuring vintage leather jackets to support your rationale - Memphis belle for example where all the acting flight crews were wearing original jackets to save on the "effort and expense" of having repros made lol.

Look at the other jackets from the other photos and of the other jackets he's made- just not the same at all- not even close.

So that is proof positive that he can't deviate & make a non-typical jacket on commission. I think not.

You can either see the Vintage, or not and you, apparently, cannot.

I can see what appears to be vintage based on the experience & knowledge I have gained to date. I'm always learning & am the first to admit I can be wrong, unlike some.

Personally, I don't need any more proof than what I can see.

In that case you're fooling no one but yourself. Those pictures are not proof positive & any normal person wouldn't begin to think they are.

Surely, it's up to someone else to prove that it's not vintage and the guy did make it himself.

No. Because it's not proven it's not vintage doesn't make the inverse true.

Just out of interest how many pre-60s US leather jackets do you own?

 

[jon z]

.Nope. Those 'real life' photos of Bruce Willis at Trader Joe's are clear and sharp enough. They say "used vintage" all the way. I have no doubt in my mind about this..

Not one but two of you. You said it, "In my mind." That's about the only place where this jacket is vintage beyond all doubt.

 

[Seb Lucas]

Hey, it's just a jacket, lets not get into a brawl over it.

I would like it to be vintage, because I can't imagine how you'd age a jacket that well.

However, the only evidence (for what it's worth) is Nowak telling people over at COW that he made the original out of old leather.

I see no reason yet to doubt him, as he has a fantastic reputation. I know his address and what he looks like which is more than I can say for a group of annonymous 'experts' on Fedora Lounge like me who use fake names.

All I would say at this point is that I trust the maker. It's not proof either way but it's a bit better than 'knowing' it to be vintage by some pictures.

 

[feltfan]

Hey, it's just a jacket, lets not get into a brawl over it.

Agreed. Let's be civil.

I see no reason yet to doubt him, as he has a fantastic reputation. I know his address and what he looks like which is more than I can say for a group of annonymous 'experts' on Fedora Lounge like me who use fake names.

All I would say at this point is that I trust the maker. It's not proof either way but it's a bit better than 'knowing' it to be vintage by some pictures.

BT and Marc may be unfamiliar to you, but I've been reading their
posts for years. They have a track record you can review here.
Might take a while.

More to the point, they don't stand to make money on the outcome
of this debate, unlike "the maker". The maker's argument would be
stronger if he were to post pictures of his product on filmjackets.com:

http://www.filmjackets.com/FEATURES/feature_surrogates1.htm

While you're there, have a look at that Disclaimer.

Note that they are discussing the same confusion there:

http://www.filmjackets.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1155&start=45&sid=60e603cad84ca117d5a96782e305b738

In particular, I recommend this comparison between the Nowak
jacket and the one Willis wears, at the bottom of this page:

http://www.filmjackets.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1155&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=30&sid=6859fe4dd41633ca438f2299e6132f90

Man, is that leather different.

His own site does not claim that he made the Surrogates jacket:

http://www.tonynowak.com

This is what rings my "sleaze" bells. Is someone pulling a fast one here?
Though he does have a picture of it, among other jackets. He doesn't
claim to have made the original of any of the jackets. Why not?

 

[Seb Lucas]

Thanks Feltfan I did know most of what you've posted and am familiar with the other sites.

I agree with everyone who says the jacket appears vintage. I hope we find out something more definite.

By the way the fact that someone isn't getting money for their claim isn't all that significant. People have egos and that can be an even bigger incentive to adopt a position than cash. But I get what you're saying.

For those who think it is Vintage, a challenge. Find one exactly the same.

 

[tonypaj]

For those who think it is Vintage, a challenge. Find one exactly the same.

What if it is a tailor made once off vintage jacket? Hilarious conversation so far, leather jackets are apparently more than somewhat serious stuff...