Statue Gandalf the Grey Maquette - Order NOW, Link in 1st post!.

[Entropy]

I don't know if the following will make any sense but I love the piece but hate the pose...

I would have preferred a more classic/less extreme type of pose. And while I understand the hat being tilted back in order to better see the face, it's definitely not in character with Gandalf.

I really like the base, too.

I think many also feel this way. I really wanted to love this one but the video just confirmed that it is too 'dynamic' for my tastes. It's beautifully done, I just don't care for that pose and presentation for GtG. It's like they cranked the wind machine and every bit of him was made to billow and ripple. While I understand what they were going for, and it is something we haven't ever quite seen before, I find the cape, hair and overall pose a little cartoonish. While not as extreme, it's too much like the 'let's show Jedi Luke as he's never been seen before' Unleashed figure and not enough of a museum piece for me. But yeah, the base is cool.

 

[Karma]

high resolution pic

 

[the angry orc]

awesome video. the detail on this piece is amazing.

 

[Deadly Dagger]

Looks great...too bad there is no more room for GtG in my collection.

 

[P.Neng]

I've already opened this line...and I hope Legolas is coming soon.

 

[LOTRFan]

Borrowed from the Shadow and Flame -

My two right feet?!

 

[Blu Falcon]

Two right feet.

It matters not. I'll still keep my order. I'm committed to this line since there won't be any other SSC lines to be committed to before too long.

 

[The Ringer]

Anyone else not digging the way they shoot the BP videos? Putting the piece closer to the camera to give the illusion of being bigger.

 

[The Craw]

how can i get access to High Res pics?

 

[The Josh]

Guarantee the feet thing get fixed in production. This is just a sample all.

 

[The Craw]

looks like a left foot to me.

 

[Valarauko]

how can i get access to High Res pics?

It's easy! In the address box @ the top of a page, type the following:

www.sideshowtoy.com/prod_photos/jpg/(type in the item #)_press01(02,03,whatever the pic # is).jpg

For example, the GTG maquette (regular) would be:
www.sideshowtoy.com/prod_photos/jpg/300017press01.jpg

Go to the next pic by changing the 01 to 02 and so forth.

 

[Eyelidsz]

Damn. I think this Glandalf the Grape looks pretty GD good. I nabbed one.

 

[woodsy]

Woo-hoo, another thread, another chance for Woodsy to have a go at Weta!Sideshow are doing the same thing with their price hikes. I'm not complaining about the price at all, i know these things are going to cost more than a few years ago. It's up to the company that makes them to decide their price point.
As to the likenesses, well Sideshow have made just as many duds as Weta ever did. Wiki LSB, GTW PF, Galadriel PF, Legolas PF and LSB.... the only likeness from Weta that i'd say was bad is Aragorn and Legolas. And this GTG statue does not look like Ian Mckellen, the Weta one does, so i don't get why you want to suddenly out of nowhere bash the Weta one. But continuously pointing this out is getting tiresome, but if some people want to continue it....
Yes, the exclusives may not cost much, but in my opinion alot of them are bizarre.
As for great-looking bases, well this may be just me but i prefer normal blank bases so it DOESN'T take away from the character, these aren't dioramas

Well hopefully I won't disappoint you FE. I know some people have issues with the pose...or the price, but I guess you haven't been paying much attention to the scorecard on this one 'cause it appears you're pretty well on your own as far as those who don't see Ian McKellan in this sculpt, and to say this one doesn't look like McKellan and the Weta one does.....we'll that's just crazy talk. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt however, and put it down to a recent head trauma you must have suffered. All I need to know is where do I send the get well card?

I'm also going to attribute that same recent head trauma to your bizarre "bashing Weta" comment because other than agreeing with an astute board member and his accurate "Weta owned again" comment the only thing I've said in this thread was " Finally a 1/6 scale GTG statue that actually looks like Ian McKellan ". I'll put that one down to a difference in perspective 'cause what you call bashing, I call a statement of fact. Sorry, the weakest link in the SSW Gandalf statue has always been the likeness, and nothing you say is going to change that.

And let's see if I have this straight. You accuse me of bashing Weta, while simultaneously bashing SS's version describing it as : "awful", "laughable", "too cartoony", "lacks expression" "a BIG fail", not to mention the show tune comment. Plus you've accused SS of "milking the collector" for the horrible crime of giving collectors the option of having both of Gandalf's staff's for an earth shattering $10 more. Does that about sum it up??? That's hilarious. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black! I don't mind you criticizing me for bashing Weta......but next time, could you actually wait until I do bash them before you pull out the knives. And if you don't want to look like the world's biggest hypocrite perhaps you should make sure you're not doing the exact same thing you're accusing others of doing.....just sayin'.

Now you are well within your right to prefer the SSW bases, but ask yourself this. If you have a collection of artwork you want to hang on your walls, are you going to take them to a framer and have them all framed using the exact same moulding and mattes, regardless of the subject matter or the variety of different colours used in each print? Or are you going to individually select mouldings and mattes that compliment each print? Hopefully, you would do the latter and that is exactly the same function a base has in relation to a statue. I would defy you to give me a single instance where a SS LOTR PF or maquette base has ever "taken away" from the character. Not only have SS's bases not taken away from the character, they've done the exact opposite. They have created bases that compliment the characters, bases that are an extension of the very characters themselves. The SSW bases may not take away from the characters....but they also don't add anything either. To me the SSW bases, and the more recent SS LSB bases, are functional and cost efficient....nothing more. But they are certainly not my idea of something that's artistic or creative. And no, intricate bases are not the exclusive domain of diorama's....never have been, never will be.

Now remind me again how this one looks like Ian McKellan :

....and this one doesn't :

 

[Hecubus]

I dont see Ian McKellan at all in this new one. And I'll say it again - the pose is terrible... looks like an action figure with his arms rotated up. I'll take the Weta one over this any day.

The only thing that has nailed his likeness so far is the PF, IMO...

 

[FrodoEyes]

Well hopefully I won't disappoint you FE. I know some people have issues with the pose...or the price, but I guess you haven't been paying much attention to the scorecard on this one 'cause it appears you're pretty well on your own as far as those who don't see Ian McKellan in this sculpt, and to say this one doesn't look like McKellan and the Weta one does.....we'll that's just crazy talk. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt however, and put it down to a recent head trauma you must have suffered. All I need to know is where do I send the get well card?

I'm also going to attribute that same recent head trauma to your bizarre "bashing Weta" comment because other than agreeing with an astute board member and his accurate "Weta owned again" comment the only thing I've said in this thread was " Finally a 1/6 scale GTG statue that actually looks like Ian McKellan ". I'll put that one down to a difference in perspective 'cause what you call bashing, I call a statement of fact. Sorry, the weakest link in the SSW Gandalf statue has always been the likeness, and nothing you say is going to change that.

And let's see if I have this straight. You accuse me of bashing Weta, while simultaneously bashing SS's version describing it as : "awful", "laughable", "too cartoony", "lacks expression" "a BIG fail", not to mention the show tune comment. Plus you've accused SS of "milking the collector" for the horrible crime of giving collectors the option of having both of Gandalf's staff's for an earth shattering $10 more. Does that about sum it up??? That's hilarious. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black! I don't mind you criticizing me for bashing Weta......but next time, could you actually wait until I do bash them before you pull out the knives. And if you don't want to look like the world's biggest hypocrite perhaps you should make sure you're not doing the exact same thing you're accusing others of doing.....just sayin'.

Now you are well within your right to prefer the SSW bases, but ask yourself this. If you have a collection of artwork you want to hang on your walls, are you going to take them to a framer and have them all framed using the exact same moulding and mattes, regardless of the subject matter or the variety of different colours used in each print? Or are you going to individually select mouldings and mattes that compliment each print? Hopefully, you would do the latter and that is exactly the same function a base has in relation to a statue. I would defy you to give me a single instance where a SS LOTR PF or maquette base has ever "taken away" from the character. Not only have SS's bases not taken away from the character, they've done the exact opposite. They have created bases that compliment the characters, bases that are an extension of the very characters themselves. The SSW bases may not take away from the characters....but they also don't add anything either. To me the SSW bases, and the more recent SS LSB bases, are functional and cost efficient....nothing more. But they are certainly not my idea of something that's artistic or creative. And no, intricate bases are not the exclusive domain of diorama's....never have been, never will be.

Now remind me again how this one looks like Ian McKellan :

....and this one doesn't :

Okay, first off, with the 'head trauma', that's just blatant rudeness. There's no need for that.
Next, nothing i say is going to change the fact that the SSW GTG doesn't look like Ian mcKellen, but the new one does? So just because you say it looks like Ian McKellen, it does? I refer you to the post straight after your long ranting one, that agrees with me, and there are a few others if you care to look for them. It's mostly going to be positive feedback because we're on a Sideshow forum, on other forums the reaction has been pretty much the same as mine.
Yes, i bash some of Sideshow's products, but i also adore others. With you it just always seems to be bashing, and rather childish and unrelated comments.
Comparing statue bases to framed art is being a bit desperate Woodsy PERSONALLY i prefer blank bases as it allows for a better character study. The focus is on the character, nothing else.

As for the photos you use, i notice when you're trying to win an argument you find the WORST photos you can of something you want to bash, and for something you want other people to see as better you use a large, high-definition professional photo. Yeah, that's subtle.

I'm quite happy to keep this dialogue going Woodsy, but only if you're going to be mature about it and talk to me rationally. I'm far used to past aggresive forum members to bother about having needless arguments over statues with you. Anyone remember Smaug's Fury?

 

[Darth Waller]

I'm far used to past aggresive forum members to bother about having needless arguments over statues with you. Anyone remember Smaug's Fury?

There's a name from the past.

 

[The Josh]

Don't say his name though. He might come back.

 

[FrodoEyes]

Don't say his name though. He might come back.

I'm starting to think he has

 

[furystorm]

There's a new fury in town!