Recent Posts1
Masks and Busts / Re: Jack Pierce Frankenstein reference head
« Last post by MrDark1 on Today at 11:11:35 PM »Well, from looking at his video, and studying frame grabs, with original stills, that I’ve had help posting here for all UMAs to study over too, I think it is the true head.
I understand your concerns Dr Terror, but with my understanding of the process then, I’m not sure Pierce, and the makers of this original head mold would be able to pour up another copy then.
I think molding materials, and methods then allowed for one positive pull, as they would have to destroy the mold to get their positive out. Other wise why didn’t Pierce just pour up another copy for Bride make up, other than rework this original head. Yes, no true proof he did, or not, but going on how I think the materials then could, or not be used.
Pierce did not pour up new make up pieces from molds on the 1st make up, as this was an unknown process then. He later refused to use this process when it did become a known technique, but that was his choice. The owners claim that this head was sculpted by Mrs Stuberg of Madame Tussaud wax museum could be, but how was this reached?
This head does look like manikin heads of this period, and the paint, like the pinkish color in the nostrils etc really reads of that period, as other heads I’ve seen of that time. Which adds to its correct time line, I believe. Very interesting that you don’t see, nor hear others talking about this “find”, I sure would love to see what Rick Baker, and other top make up pros think of this.
Like me then, Rick also lost access to the original Pierce Bride dummy, now with the V/A museum of London, I still moan that piece slipped through my fingers.
I understand your concerns Dr Terror, but with my understanding of the process then, I’m not sure Pierce, and the makers of this original head mold would be able to pour up another copy then.
I think molding materials, and methods then allowed for one positive pull, as they would have to destroy the mold to get their positive out. Other wise why didn’t Pierce just pour up another copy for Bride make up, other than rework this original head. Yes, no true proof he did, or not, but going on how I think the materials then could, or not be used.
Pierce did not pour up new make up pieces from molds on the 1st make up, as this was an unknown process then. He later refused to use this process when it did become a known technique, but that was his choice. The owners claim that this head was sculpted by Mrs Stuberg of Madame Tussaud wax museum could be, but how was this reached?
This head does look like manikin heads of this period, and the paint, like the pinkish color in the nostrils etc really reads of that period, as other heads I’ve seen of that time. Which adds to its correct time line, I believe. Very interesting that you don’t see, nor hear others talking about this “find”, I sure would love to see what Rick Baker, and other top make up pros think of this.
Like me then, Rick also lost access to the original Pierce Bride dummy, now with the V/A museum of London, I still moan that piece slipped through my fingers.
