Hot Toys - MMS 106 - Alien - BIG CHAP collectible figure

[ExMem-LarjaThwei]

It's either not so great cases with awesome collectibles inside them, or a bunch of expensive acrylic cases with nothing inside them.

 

[Minimodel]

Many happy returns good sir!!Enjoy your Alien,and it wo nt be long until the Terminator gets to you now either.

 

[Dwibzle]

Accuracy or inaccuracy. I don't believe that the photos and spiels adamantly claiming that the details of the Hot Toys figure are inaccurate in some major way are correct. I think that many of the photos in this thread are of replica suits, pre-production trial suits, test photos and a mix of originals and modified and unfinished movie originals, who knows with the low resolution and no mention of where they are sourced from or what context they were taken and for what purpose etc. There simply isn't enough verifiable official photos and reference material available to the public to back up any claims that the Hot Toys figure is accurate or inaccurate beyond any doubt. That said, I think HTs should have painted the tongue white and the rear incisors need a slightly sharper profile and a more chromed appearance, but they are relatively easy and minor fixes - we are talking minor paint details and fractions of millimetres here and stuff that's not really apparent from any distance but only really when magnified.

Ridley constantly and very deliberately had the details of the suits modified during filming so that the appearance of the ALIEN was constantly changing so the audience couldn't get a fix on the shape and finer details - he wanted the viewers minds to fill in the gaps with what they imagined they saw, pattern recognition, everyone sees something different, you know... So I'm saying that there is no one version of the suit for any model to be based on that can replicate exactly what is seen on screen, simply because what is seen in the movie is a composite of all the alterations, variations and repairs made to the suits and biting FX head stand throughout the filming process. Moulds were made and remade, no two domes were the same, like the hands and tendons, details around the mouth, teeth, paint etc, etc, etc. The lighting, lenses and angles chosen for the shots played a huge roll in the Alien's overall appearance, that never gets given much consideration. I think it all comes down to what you think some of the proportions and finer details should look like - just as Ridley and Giger intended from the start.

The finer details of any figure or statue are pretty much up to the artist to interpret as he/she sees fit, the feeling they want to convey, their vision, and we see that in almost every photo posted here. But you and Sabres (and others) seem to be inferring that there is a single version of the ALIEN that all artists should adhere to and base their sculpts on, I don't think that's a fact, it really fly's in the face of the facts. Sabres, when you say that "there are those of us who know what it looks like in the light and up close. We know the details. And for us, this didn't measure up." just sounds so wrong to me. I think you guys have formed an image of the perfect ALIEN that appeals to you, I think we all have. If Joseph sat you guys down and started sculpting you an ALIEN, it probably wouldn't be too long before you guys started fighting with each other about your visions of what it should be, you wouldn't be able to agree, you both wouldn't walk away 100% satisfied at the end. My point isn't that that the Hot Toys ALIEN figure is accurate or inaccurate, but to say with absolute conviction that it's not accurate because of a few tiny details is mystifying to me. I think the claims about the lack of accuracy aren't a fact, it's an opinion that's shaped and based on the image you have created in your mind. I think it's all absolute proof of the brilliance of Giger and Scott and one of the reasons that ALIEN has continually thrilled new audiences and cemented it's place as a classic and a benchmark for other film makers, artists, lighting, FX etc, etc, etc. You will never be able to hold up any single figure and say that it is exactly what was seen on screen. Maybe you could if they release an official book that goes through all the mods the suits went through, you might be able to get a reasonably accurate set of figure and a stand for the biting FX head to satisfy the hardest of hardcore fans, but I doubt that there would be enough of a market to justify producing something like that, or if it something that's even really feasible after all these years.


Thanks for the reply. I don't think that I've deliberately ignored anything, I think have thoroughly reviewed every source I can get my hands on, but you seem to be ignoring many of the core points I made, and you are still revolving around the central argument that the HT's ALIEN isn't screen accurate and it's likeness doesn't represent what's seen in the movie; a generic version that Joseph created without giving it all that much respect in relation to the original. I think it is relatively accurate to the screen and Gigers' vision and sculpts, and I don't think that it's wrong to suggest. I don't think I'm the only one that can see things differently for you and the others. Why get hung up on the figure having to precisely imitate a particular facial expression that's seen when the ALIEN is visible? Do you really think that's it's possible without all the lighting and FX, or do you think they play no real part in the Alien's overall appearance in the film?

All of the statues and figures out there are sculpted in positions and exhibit facial expressions and artistic licence that doesn't represent what's seen in the movie, all of them. Where do you draw the line and accept that there isn't a single figure that can represent every scene that we see because there were many suits and heads used that were all built with slight differences. You don't seem to factor that in or acknowledge it in any way.

The nature of the suits and heads constructions, maintenance and repair dictated varying degrees of subtle differences; like the domes shape, ribbing and finer facial details and arrangements etc. The Rambaldi head had a different appearance than the other five or so heads, so using that particular head design would accurately represent the total ALIEN III design that we seen in the film, and it wouldn't have the overlook of the design that majority associate with it, it would look totally different that any statue we've seen out there so far.

As far as I'm aware, Giger made a polyester statue that was formed from a rough plaster cast of Balajio. Then he created his basic design over the polyester form and the basic plaster and cork chip negatives were created from that. The moulded components were cleaned and trimmed before being extensively customised and modified with other latex details, convoluted tubing etc.Finally being painted and airbrushed etc. Other elements and details of the suits and heads were also cast using plaster and plasticine components that Giger carved and sculpted for the hero and stunt suits; like the feet, glove and finger elements etc. The plasterers would make an accurate cast of the polyester masters and then carve and refine the basic and finer details as accurately as the moulding process they were using at the time would allow for. All the latex was hand painted in to the mould in a laborious process that slowly built up layers until the desired thickness in all the areas of the mould was achieved. That same process was used to produce various components of the suit that were also tailored to Bolaji and the stunt-men Eddie Powell and Roy Scammelland for the specific requirement of the days filming.

There were at the very least 6 heads production heads made, one mechanized, one half mechanised, two unmechanized and a few more made of foam rubber etc. for the stunt-men. The plaster moulds used were only capable or reproducing a fairly basic representation because of the complex curves and shapes involved, and most of the fine detail was added using plaster and plasticine, glued on rubber tubes, detailing etc. and thus, no two heads were constructed identically, they all had variations with the shape of the domes and muscle and tendon details around the mouth. Various artist were involved because of critical time restraints. But Giger.would ultimately supervise and help shape and paint all of them to insure that most of the heads stayed fairly faithful and accurately represented his vision; constrained with the limitations of the materials available in the day that were required for the various tasks, and Scott and Co's artistic crimp.

As the heads and suits were patched up and repainted, those minor individualities and peculiarities would obviously become more apparent. But I think that was fine with Scott in light (forgive the pun) of his various comment about wanting the audience to experience a constantly changing ALIEN so they didn't get a fix on the exact shape and details for the purposes of suspense; so we would use our imagination to complete and add additional layers to terrifying images; heightening the fear and suspense surrounding the creature. It wouldn't interfere with what he want to achieve, and ultimately contributed in immeasurable ways to the overall effect.The Alien was rapidly growing, ageing, changing.

The mechanical heads were created using other techniques and Giger would have made sure that those heads were as faithful as possible to his art; fitted it in with the overall look of the other heads as best as possible. Again, those slight differences in the dome and other facial features appearance and dimensions were perfectly and completely compatible with Scott's film vision. Giger originally intended to go in a more organic direction with the set and the ultimate Alien III design but Scott and Co ultimately had the final decision witht he designs and the rest is history.

The mechanized heads minus the lighting, camera lenses/shot angles, FX and tons of KY jelly etc. wouldn't have anywhere near the impact they do without them. His head was the ugliest of the lot, it had a different appearance to the rest because of the extra mechanical features etc. Scott and Co worked very hard and would have gone through many different angles, perspective and lighting arrangement to achieve the final version we see in the film, you can't separate them; they all very much essential to each other. That's why I have to laugh a little when I read people saying that it looks nothing like the shots we see in the film, what else can you do.

I have seen Giger's concept drawings and photos showing the leg "grills' in positions that closely mirror the design of the HTs figure, but again, there really isn't enough material out there to say if the position and features are totally correct or incorrect. The Giger statue argument isn't all that convincing to me because it was only a guide for the moulds and isn't representative of all the positions details on all the suits I've seen. It's not even really known if it was the exact sculpt the ALIEN III is based on, but I think it probably was. I think Joseph wouldn't have been able to avoid it as a reference, I can definitely see elements in his sculpt.

I don't have any real problems with the small paragraph of Hot Toys claims, that probably has more to do with the marketing department than anything Joseph would have claimed. I think he's smart enough to know that it's not something you can claim with any single ALIEN figure, you would need a set of them, and because you would need to recreate the lighting and FX that were used in the original film to achieve that perfect film look, and that's obviously totally impractical in the real world, even for the hardest or hardcore fans. But I basically agree with the asertion that the figure is the best 1/6 scale posable Giger ALIEN available.

I think many sculptors get fixated on recreating the biting scenes and try blending the mechanized heads with the other head shapes and designs, but to me it makes the heads look like they are all mouth, like the NECA and Marmit etc. They have slightly overly exagerated features proportions and details to me. They exaggerate and overemphasise the fierceness' of the monster by playing with proportions and elements of the sculpts and paint. Something for everyones imagination, I guess.

I like them all for different reasons, but I'm realistic enough to know that I'll never be able to own any one version of the ALIEN that encomapses everything that's seen in film. I have many versions, but nothing that will ever perfectly capture what's seen on screen - never. I'm cool with that because I have a good understanding about the techniques use to create what's seen on screen. Even if it is possible, you would still require a set of figures, not a single one.

If you can honestly say that you think the HTs ALIEN doesn't represent; isn't based on Giger's concept and what's seen in the movie then who am I to argue with your perception and imagination etc. I tend to look at things holistically and don't get hung up on minor details that may or may not have been part of the movie used suits and heads. We don't have enough high resolution photos and detailed reference materials available to do that with any real clarity or certainty.

I don't want to get drawn into a hopeless debate over our individual visions and versions of the ALIEN, it's pointless when everyone sees something different. There are certain constants, but they have more to do with the overall shape of the creature, rather than the absolute specifics of the finer details. I don't want to get bogged down in a conversation about the dimensions of convoluted hoses and the relative positions of abstract shapes and element used in the suits and heads design; life is just too short for all that... Well, maybe for a while if we were discussing it face to face.

I'm sure your opinion of the figure will change when you receive it and see it in 3D, I think you'll be happier with it because you've probably only seen 2D photos of it on the web. You would think it's just a giant ugly mouth with many of the pics commonly used to criticise it. That's my take on all this.

Thank you for posting that. QFT.

 

[Dwibzle]

You're talking rubbish that just doesn't stack up, try posting what you're saying on an FX adult forums and you would be completely ignored. I've obviously offended you and you'll have to deal with that, but don't try and play the innocent and pretend that you and your buddies behavior in this thread has been anything more than trolling. You ask me to provide you with proof because you're too lazy to research the subject for yourself, you want me to write you a thesis and do all the work for you and that's not the way life works, I'm afraid.

You'll stick to your misinformation and hostile interpretation of what others wrote that like this figure to support your irrational and childish view of, what is at the end of the day, men in rubber suits from a film that was made long before you were conceived. Sorry, but it's up to you to support your argument with something a little more than with crappy undocumented photos and unsupportable assertion and supposition, inaccurate (by your own reasoning) statues and figures, etc.

If you had any experience with the topic that was discussed (not you and your buddies getting all defensive), you would understand all the dynamics of what was written, but you don't, so further 'conversation' would only erupt in further argument and foolish insults; you probably want that, though. It's pointless to continue, and why would I want to educate you anyway. Take it as a win, do a victory dance and revel in your own ignorance. Because that's what you're doing as far as I and any person that's really serious about film and special effects design are concerned. Enjoy justifying your existence with your collection and forget about everything else. Imagine the creature is real and a symbol of your life or whatever it is you do with it . . . .

Oh boy! So much for my empathetic twinges for fellow human beings who consistently fail to live up to their opposable-thumb, overdeveloped-frontal-lobe heritage. But there's room for everyone. those that do and those that don't. But don't think you boys are fooling anyone because you're good a at browbeating people on some forum. LoL!

I agree with the majority of what you're saying, but it's just not worth taking these kids so seriously. Maybe you haven't noticed, but most of the threads have serial complainer, haters, and know-it-alls that get a kick out of trolling threads to increase their post counts or whatever. It's the status of having a large post count, they think it automatically validates everything they say. It's the way most forums of this kind work. You obviously hit a raw nerve to get some of the responses you did, so enjoy the fact that you managed to upset some trolls that thought they were trolling you. Trust me, this thread wouldn't get this many hits if people weren't interested in this figure.

 

[abake]

Way to start to New Year!

 

[Dwibzle]

What's wrong with Blade's review? Got good production values imo.

<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="https://www.youtube.com/v/1FcyYLtk3FI?fs=1&hl=en_US&rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="https://www.youtube.com/v/1FcyYLtk3FI?fs=1&hl=en_US&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>

Who said there was anything wrong with it???

 

[a-dev]

Everyones a troll these days apparently, on both sides of any given debate.

 

[Macularius]

<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="https://www.youtube.com/v/1FcyYLtk3FI?fs=1&hl=en_US&rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="https://www.youtube.com/v/1FcyYLtk3FI?fs=1&hl=en_US&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>

Who said there was anything wrong with it???

Naw, I think you were just making fun of his apparent young age. For some strange reason.

 

[a-dev]

Naw, I think you were just making fun of his apparent young age. For some strange reason.

as do I. Which makes the troll rant a tad ironic.

 

[GDZILLA95]

I agree with the majority of what you're saying, but it's just not worth taking these kids so seriously. Maybe you haven't noticed, but most of the threads have serial complainer, haters, and know-it-alls that get a kick out of trolling threads to increase their post counts or whatever. It's the status of having a large post count, they think it automatically validates everything they say. It's the way most forums of this kind work. You obviously hit a raw nerve to get some of the responses you did, so enjoy the fact that you managed to upset some trolls that thought they were trolling you. Trust me, this thread wouldn't get this many hits if people weren't interested in this figure.

Kinda like what you are doing.

 

[Sabres21768]

I agree with the majority of what you're saying, but it's just not worth taking these kids so seriously. Maybe you haven't noticed, but most of the threads have serial complainer, haters, and know-it-alls that get a kick out of trolling threads to increase their post counts or whatever. It's the status of having a large post count, they think it automatically validates everything they say. It's the way most forums of this kind work. You obviously hit a raw nerve to get some of the responses you did, so enjoy the fact that you managed to upset some trolls that thought they were trolling you. Trust me, this thread wouldn't get this many hits if people weren't interested in this figure.

Why are you talking to yourself?

 

[Rotfish]

Naw, I think you were just making fun of his apparent young age. For some strange reason.

I could think of so many trollish things to say to him at this particular point, but I'll keep quiet. If that is what he's doing, his actions alone are enough.
Kind of a lame last resort, though. Pettiness is the true mark of a troll. Guess that means we won't be seeing him much longer. I'm only curious as to how he came back.

Why are you talking to yourself?

 

[RagingBull]

I personaly can't see any issues with it but were all entitled to an opinion but I love it & I'd be gutted if I missed out on this.

 

[Sabres21768]

I could think of so many trollish things to say to him at this particular point, but I'll keep quiet. If that is what he's doing, his actions alone are enough.
Kind of a lame last resort, though. Pettiness is the true mark of a troll. Guess that means we won't be seeing him much longer. I'm only curious as to how he came back.

He came back because he screwed up and logged on as Dwibzle instead of Sandman.

I mean, seriously, he expects us to believe that as soon as Sandman gets called out as Dwibzle, that Dwibzle just MYSTERIOUSLY shows back up after a 7 month absence?

They're both the same guy and .

 

[Rotfish]

I actually thought Dwibzle was banned.

 

[Master Wayne]

This thread needs to die. It's like Cher. Still going when it shouldn't be.

 

[karamazov80]

ALIEN(s)

 

[S. Griffin]

Everyones a troll these days apparently, on both sides of any given debate.

Now you're just trolling.

 

[Darth Waller]

ALIEN(s)

Finally a post worth quoting!

 

[Boba Ben]

I want one, but I haven't gotten around to it yet.

I got around to it this past weekend.