He asked a legitimate question though, you literally used screen accuracy as the basis for criticizing InArt and yet you and others here have obviously never seen the print on screen.
If you'd simply said, I like having the print because it looks cool or its part of the official costume etc. then it wouldn't have invited that question and you could have kept your blood pressure down lol
"One thing is that Inart decided to not have the print on Gandalf's pants."
"So I appreciate ASMUS' being screen accurate that way"
My blood pressure isn't up, thanks to all for their concern about my health.
And I could also ask "define criticism" versus an observation. I generally view "criticism" as potentially including comments that can be construed as negative. (I could also OBSERVE that at least one version of Gandalf's robes had self embroidery along the edges and apparently holes here and there, which I OBSERVE that ASMUS version does not have, but at the same time it seems there are various versions of Gandalf's robes. And staffs.).
It's been openly stated in various forms that it's a non issue by various folks.
While normally I'm more inclined to chat, as I stated before, I've no interest in going around and around with some InArt fans, who (some) seem to be really INTENSE. Anyone can go look up screen shots, research if they are really interested.
What's the end goal of all this interest in pants, anyway
? Either the pants showed up on screen - however briefly - and are part of versions of the original costume - and what then? Are folks gonna toss their InArt figs out the window, or turn around and say "well, it doesn't matter, this fig is awesome!"
Without that reference, the detail is as irrelevant as what underwear a character was wearing or if they have a hairy back.
Er, if it's "irrelevant" to you, why are there even comments about it? And it's not irrelevant to ME, for the reasons I stated. They are great pants
- ASMUS even has the drawstring like the original.
What's more puzzling is not that InArt forgot but the licensor who approved the figure without the print on the pants forgot?
IMO not really. LOTR films are what, over 20 years old. Reference material lost. Even WETA drops the ball at times with their statues. And it may have been something that didn't matter to InArt. Every step you don't have to do in production is money saved. InArt folks did get a light-up staff tho.