1/6 Hot Toys - Iron Man 3: MMS197D02 Mark XLII Diecast Series Official Spec/Pics

[Gully Foyle]

Now I just have to sell my Mark VI to clear some shelf space...

I personally couldn't fathom selling a Mk. 6 (at least the battle damaged from IM2) to get this armor.

Aside from the inferior design (IMO), the added diecast (and cost!) seems like a hollow gimmick.

Yes, it should feel heavier in hand, but more heft seems like a questionable attribute . . . does anyone walk around with these figs in their hands? After a new pose or adjustment, they sit in display, right?

Waiting on in-hand pics or a final production review before I buy in to HT's zinc alloy hype.

Your mileage may vary!

___

 

[7166charlie]

just looking at the bases on these looks like they are going for the hall of armours from the trailer??? means hell of a lot more money haha

 

[Mix Master]

Mark III 2.0

you mean 4.0 right? as the III was launched 3 times before

 

[SkyIScrape]

you mean 4.0 right? as the III was launched 3 times before

I tend to think of the 1.0/2.0 designation referring to more complete reworkings of a figure rather than what you're talking about, which are more like variants on the original.

I don't even think the new one will be called Mark III 2.0 like the new Mark I was. It'll likely be called the Mark III Diecast.

 

[Mix Master]

I tend to think of the 1.0/2.0 designation referring to more complete reworkings of a figure rather than what you're talking about, which are more like variants on the original.

yeah i see now, the other variants were still the first model. where the diecast III will be a complete upgrade

 

[FeMan]

Is it me... or is the "Battle Damage" a little half assed? I'm assuming that those parts are die cast, hence why you loose the detailing ability... but come on. If you're expecting me to pay $300 for a toy, it better come packing... which this currently is not.

 

[Darkseed]

My dilemma

Wife: honey your thinking about something care to share?
Me: ah my toys are going over $300 now, I think I may need to leave the hobby soon.
Wife: why
Me: I cannot fathom dropping $300 on a toy
Wife: do you complain when I spend $200-300 on a purse or clothes.
Me: No
Wife: then buy your figures and enjoy.

Abridged version of course but one of the many reason I love my wife. Bearer of wisdom

 

[lerath666]

The problem with Marvel is that due to existing contracts in terms of licensing anything "East of the Mississippi" is owned by Universal for life, which means that Disney cannot put Marvel into their parks except for some merchandising. That is where they have the most room to expand. They are allowed to do things abroad and in California but in CA they've run out of room for the most part and are in process of expanding DCA for newer projects. If there were a Marvel ride in one of the parks, I would bet that their gift shop would have a couple of Marvel HTs in there to try and get impulse vacationeers who would have seen it nowhere else.

I'm wondering how long universal will continue to pay those liscensing fees to Disney, however. I can't imagine they like knowing that some of their dollars go into the pocket of the mouse. Aren't they in the process of phasing out islands of adventure anyways?

Keep in mind that they make 1,000, 000 a day. I really don't see ssc and ht getting renew.

They will. Mark my words.

 

[Gipetto0812]

My dilemma

Wife: honey your thinking about something care to share?
Me: ah my toys are going over $300 now, I think I may need to leave the hobby soon.
Wife: why
Me: I cannot fathom dropping $300 on a toy
Wife: do you complain when I spend $200-300 on a purse or clothes.
Me: No
Wife: then buy your figures and enjoy.

Abridged version of course but one of the many reason I love my wife. Bearer of wisdom

Haha that is awesome my friend!

 

[FeMan]

My dilemma

Wife: honey your thinking about something care to share?
Me: ah my toys are going over $300 now, I think I may need to leave the hobby soon.
Wife: why
Me: I cannot fathom dropping $300 on a toy
Wife: do you complain when I spend $200-300 on a purse or clothes.
Me: No
Wife: then buy your figures and enjoy.

Abridged version of course but one of the many reason I love my wife. Bearer of wisdom

Oh. My. God. You have the perfect wife.

 

[SkyIScrape]

Is it me... or is the "Battle Damage" a little half assed? I'm assuming that those parts are die cast, hence why you loose the detailing ability... but come on. If you're expecting me to pay $300 for a toy, it better come packing... which this currently is not.

I agree, but I'm biased - I think every figure with battle damaged parts looks half-assed, almost like the figure represents the second after the exact moment the damage occurred. Like the mark III, V, VI, and VII. Battle damaged plates but the rest of the figure, particularly the abs, forearms, top of the shoulder, and most of the legs - are completely fine? I prefer my BD figures to be BD - like the new Mark VII. Looks amazing.

 

[Darkseed]

Haha that is awesome my friend!

I am very blessed and thankful......now I need to get over myself

 

[vodoun]

I personally couldn't fathom selling a Mk. 6 (at least the battle damaged from IM2) to get this armor.

Aside from the inferior design (IMO), the added diecast (and cost!) seems like a hollow gimmick.

Yes, it should feel heavier in hand, but more heft seems like a questionable attribute . . . does anyone walk around with these figs in their hands? After a new pose or adjustment, they sit in display, right?

Waiting on in-hand pics or a final production review before I buy in to HT's zinc alloy hype.

Your mileage may vary!
___

Definitely not. Most of my figures are still sitting in their shelves with the same pose from 6 months to a few years.

Bbts doesnt charge an nrd.....all you cheap bastards have taken bbts and cornerstore from me...patiently waiting on alter ego......

I nearly choked with laughter skimming through the posts. That was funny.

My dilemma

Wife: honey your thinking about something care to share?
Me: ah my toys are going over $300 now, I think I may need to leave the hobby soon.
Wife: why
Me: I cannot fathom dropping $300 on a toy
Wife: do you complain when I spend $200-300 on a purse or clothes.
Me: No
Wife: then buy your figures and enjoy.

Abridged version of course but one of the many reason I love my wife. Bearer of wisdom

Lovely wife if thats true.

 

[7166charlie]

the only thing with these pics is the ab area to me looks off, there is almost a gap and also between his legs there is 2 big gaps anyone else notice??

 

[Mix Master]

Is it me... or is the "Battle Damage" a little half assed? I'm assuming that those parts are die cast, hence why you loose the detailing ability... but come on. If you're expecting me to pay $300 for a toy, it better come packing... which this currently is not.

dude you do understand that HT is saving the BD XLII for the Avengers 2 movie promo edition right?

 

[Rotfish]

And how much will a high-end 1:4 scaler be by then? Its all a bit absurd. These things better be impervious to all forms of damage at the price they're getting to.

I'd pay half a grand for a 1/4-scale Predator if it looked the part, diecast armor or not. Already did that with EB's BD T-800 (and I'd never call any of EB's products impervious to all forms of damage ).

Then again, Termies, Preds, and Aliens are my priorities.

I will pass for this one, and wait for the "Movie Promo" Battle Damaged Mark 42 that will be announced soon:

I always found this poster odd because if you look at his left arm, the layer of armor was damaged all the way to his skin and is quite thin. Compare it with his right arm where you have all these layers of tech and wiring to go through.

 

[Darkseed]

Lovely wife if thats true.

Every bit of true and she is .......

I am the biggest obstacle in the hobby. I can't justify some of these prices to myself

 

[Spanbauer]

I personally couldn't fathom selling a Mk. 6 (at least the battle damaged from IM2) to get this armor.

Aside from the inferior design (IMO), the added diecast (and cost!) seems like a hollow gimmick.

Yes, it should feel heavier in hand, but more heft seems like a questionable attribute . . . does anyone walk around with these figs in their hands? After a new pose or adjustment, they sit in display, right?

Waiting on in-hand pics or a final production review before I buy in to HT's zinc alloy hype.

Your mileage may vary!

___

I sold the Mark III to get the Mark III Battle-Damaged, then I sold that to get the Mark VI. At that point, I became no longer interested in Hot Toys Iron Man offerings until something drastically changed both in terms of how the figures are built and how the figures look. For me, the Mark XLII Die-Cast addresses both of those issues.

I found their past Iron Man figures to be an unpleasant experience, due to their frail plastic hollow bodies and parts falling off left and right should you so much as look at them. Compared to say a Batman figure - where the suit feels like how it looks - or one of their Predator figures - which have an impressive mass to them - the Iron Man figures have always been disappointing. Sure you don't touch them all that much, but the experience one has the first time they take one of these things out of the box should be an enjoyable one. Die Cast should, in theory, go a long way in addressing my complaints.

I didn't care for the XLII suit originally, but it has grown on me considerably; it's so vastly different that there's no mistaking it for another suit. Plus, they finally ditched that godawful stand for something substantial.

 

[Darthgothikus]

Darkseed: You need to timeshare that wife.

Blade: It's that Damned Artistic Licence screwing with our brains!

 

[spindrift]

I hope this whole diecast thing gets done with HT. I agree level of detail will SUFFER because diecast CAN NOT outdo plastic as far as fine detailing and delicacy.
I'm not saying this figure will be bad, I'm saying I prefer regular PLASTIC MMS releases. Proof in the pudding- when you can, in hand, compare BD detailing on Mk VI to 42 when it comes out.