You are absolutely correct about the studios saving a some locomotives that otherwise would have certainly been cut up and lost forever. It was a very fortunate thing that the studios got them when they did.
Believe me, I have I am very thankful for what the studios getting ahold of them.
However, they saved the locomotives not out of a desire to preserve them, but rather because they needed a prop. When they were no longer useful as props, all of them got sold off within a couple years. If they were in to preserving this equipment they would have kept them and taken much better care of them than what they did.
Nevertheless, today studios still need props. And to fill that need they contact those of us who have the locomotives and other stuff. The problem comes up because those of us that have restored the locomotives and cars know of their historic value and want them to be treated better than they had in the past because of their history.
It is an issue that will arise whenever any type of historic artifact is involved in a picture. The irony of it all is that when we as lovers of railroad history look at a movie with a locomotive, or ship, or plane in it we do so because we want to see something historic rolling across the screen. We don't look at the locomotive as a prop, but rather the reason for even watching the film. Directors and such want it for background.....otherwise they would pay us $20,000,000 per films instead of some actor that didn't even write his own lines.
I guess it is just a matter of where ones priorities are. So, I guess I won't see the $20 million any time soon.....but then they wont be beating up the Eureka or Inyo either....Damn, history is expensive!
Dan
