Don’t know if you are serious. The scale is off in your comparison, look at his left fist and also the angle is slightly more turned to the left for the figure.
Don’t know if you are serious. The scale is off in your comparison, look at his left fist and also the angle is slightly more turned to the left for the figure.
The angle and the position of the arms is different, but the shoulder/head ratio is what seems off to me.Don’t know if you are serious. The scale is off in your comparison, look at his left fist and also the angle is slightly more turned to the left for the figure.
True.I think that’s an incredibly minor difference.
Pattinson is also wearing the cape in that shot - which makes him look more imposing, and bigger overall as the cape visually “blends” with the suit. I think the reason you never see Keaton’s Batman without his cape while wearing the suit is because he’d look tiny as hell.
Some Batman or Darth Vader figures don’t look right until they have their capes on.
I think a comparison of him without the cape would be more accurate.
It doesn't even look that bad.At this price point, this set does not have the right to look this bad, even in a crapy "photo setting".
I mean, how much better do you think it's going to look out of the box? Sucks as I paid for this already.
Get your facts straight but this standalone figure isn’t $1k.for 1K, it does.
I would be the one to do that, but I’m not getting this sadly.All we need is one good pic in decent natural lighting with the cowl on.
I mean it’s not bad definitely. But it is definitely not inart standard as of now. Might be better or might be worse in hand. Just wait for a week probablyAt this price point, this set does not have the right to look this bad, even in a crapy "photo setting".
I mean, how much better do you think it's going to look out of the box? Sucks as I paid for this already.
He mentioned about the set. So i guess he is right about itGet your facts straight but this standalone figure isn’t $1k.
what is inart *standard* because this looks to be the standard to me. inart joker is not a good figure to me but maybe gandalf set the bar high for many aside from the figure base QC issues and the reverse magnet wrist pegs that people seem to frequently get.I mean it’s not bad definitely. But it is definitely not inart standard as of now. Might be better or might be worse in hand. Just wait for a week probably
Likeness. Joker is a stunning figure and i can see Heath from every angle. Many reviews hailed it as best 1/6 figure ever until Gandalf released. Gandalf is probably the best 1/6 figure of all time.what is inart *standard* because this looks to be the standard to me. inart joker is not a good figure to me but maybe gandalf set the bar high for many aside from the figure base QC issues and the reverse magnet wrist pegs that people seem to frequently get.
Get your facts straight but this standalone figure isn’t $1k.
Ha, it is - I wonder if InArt is regretting some of their decision making if they knew how many ahem "suggestions" would fly their way.The panic in here is hilarious.
I’d wait and reserve judgement until you see everything. Piggybacking on what @Raleig.h said, this figure is getting unreasonably bashed by people who simply might not know what it’s supposed to look like/hating just to hate.I bought the set, it was 1K. And I'm not seeing 1K worth of goods here.
It’s for sure not 100% accurate, but to call it bad doesn't make sense without telling us why. This is majority or fb and maybe Reddit. “Headsculpt is bad” “HT is better” Inart can’t catch a break..At this price point, this set does not have the right to look this bad, even in a crapy "photo setting".
I mean, how much better do you think it's going to look out of the box? Sucks as I paid for this already.
Enter your email address to join: