These are far more luxurious than I'd have imagined, mostly because the private aircraft in films aren't nearly so elaborate most of the time.
I find it interesting that Hollywood, which usually exaggerates things so enormously, seems to have underestimated reality in this regard. posted by Narrative Priorities at 3:16 PM on August 12, 2010 [4 favorites]
due to the private contractual nature of his photography, he will not disclose for the exhibition which aircraft belongs to which client.
Ernst Stavro Blofeld, Hugo Drax, Auric Goldfinger, Dr. Kananga, Emilio Largo, Francisco Scaramanga, Karl Stromberg. posted by fearfulsymmetry at 3:19 PM on August 12, 2010 [3 favorites]
Without the context of the owner, these images seem really neutered, albeit luxurious. I can't muster any outrage if I don't know who owns what, dammit. posted by quadrilaterals at 3:20 PM on August 12, 2010
Oh, well spotted mdonley! For a guy who liked to rename bits of the calendar in honour of his family, that's actually one of the less ostentatious interiors.
From the shape of the cabin, I think image 3 is the upper deck of a 747. That is really serious money - I imagine oil is somehow involved. posted by WPW at 3:22 PM on August 12, 2010
mostly because the private aircraft in films aren't nearly so elaborate most of the time.
Yeah, my first thought was "man, Tony Stark is gonna be jealous". posted by elizardbits at 3:27 PM on August 12, 2010
So the rich don't need seat belts for planes or are they tucked under the throw pillows? posted by NoraCharles at 3:32 PM on August 12, 2010
Very tacky. The all look like the inside of a 70's van, where price was no object. posted by doctor_negative at 3:39 PM on August 12, 2010 [1 favorite]
Either the pictures are from a small range of aircraft or there is some strange stylistic uniformity to the interior design. I guess that maybe there are only a small number of firms that do these customizations. posted by rongorongo at 3:46 PM on August 12, 2010
am I really the only one whos first thought was "star trek"???? posted by supermedusa at 3:53 PM on August 12, 2010 [1 favorite]
am I really the only one whos first thought was "star trek"????
Well, mine was "flying bordello"... posted by Skeptic at 3:59 PM on August 12, 2010
am I really the only one whos first thought was "star trek"????
Ah, now I have a good visual for all that sexy fanfic.
Good evening, Deanna. I need to have a word with you in my quarters... posted by chillmost at 4:09 PM on August 12, 2010
doctor_negative: "The all look like the inside of a 70's van, where price was no object."
If I could have one of these I might actually learn to enjoy flying. Well that an no wait on the tarmac. posted by dame at 4:37 PM on August 12, 2010
Big pimpin', indeed. posted by Thorzdad at 5:05 PM on August 12, 2010
From the shape of the cabin, I think image 3 is the upper deck of a 747. That is really serious money - I imagine oil is somehow involved.
Correct plane, but it's the main deck, looking forward at the nose area. The usable upper deck width is barely 11 ft. posted by crapmatic at 5:36 PM on August 12, 2010
Nutballs. posted by donovan at 5:39 PM on August 12, 2010
Dictators have tiny penises. Noted. posted by klanawa at 6:42 PM on August 12, 2010
Holy crap. That's insane and the owner should be carved to small pieces and fed to pigs. I had to stare this one for several seconds before I realized that it was a sink. I thought it was some kind of holder for a disfigured villain's metal face mask. posted by Burhanistan at 7:09 PM on August 12, 2010
Whilst the photos are fascinating I am more interested to know how Mr Gleis goes about making an approach to photo the private jets of dictators. Whilst I can understand their ego driven nature, how would a photographer navigate access to the Chinese head of state for example. posted by numberstation at 2:39 AM on August 13, 2010
mostly because the private aircraft in films aren't nearly so elaborate most of the time.
Yeah, within the world of private aircraft there is a huge cost variation. A Gulfstream costs a few mill. and maybe a few hundred k a year to maintain and operate. A 747 costs more than 200 million to buy, a totally different kind of rich, right there. posted by atrazine at 5:38 AM on August 13, 2010
Star Trek? My first thought was Barbarella! The 60's concept of the near future posted by Redhush at 12:23 PM on August 13, 2010 [1 favorite]
« Older Shane Harris of the Washingtonian looks at the inc... | You know that real-life Light ... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
BASTARD.
posted by elizardbits at 3:07 PM on August 12, 2010