MMS Diecast - Iron Man: 1/6th scale Mark III Collectible Figure

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Sigh

I was hoping I'd like it better in person, but I hate the color. It is such a bright red it makes the figure just look completely off to my eye. And I am not demanding the full burgundy Mk3 (although I'd be fine with that), but it is brighter cherry red than any other figure, it makes it look like solid plastic. Its a bit difficult to photograph, I might have better luck in natural light tomorrow, but on the shelf it is completely distracting.

Compare to the Mk7, which isn't a dark armor but has a deepness to the red
943iYfz.jpg


iMk5tSI.jpg


The completely fused torso also adds to the cheap plastic look
kpZyIF4.jpg


Even the Mk43 red has a darker, more metallic shade. The color looks like dyed red plastic, like a Toys r Us toy. If it wasn't so heavy there is no way you'd think it was diecast. The gold on the biceps has a metallic look at least. I honestly thought the 43 had a toyish look when comparing it to the 1/4 version, but it is a work of art compared to this.
aVAeXFi.jpg


There is hardly anything different shape wise compared to the Mk2AU, which looks fine to me. It must only be the color that is making the Mk3 look so lumpy and strangely proportioned. Mk2AU cost me exactly half as much as the Mk3.
B1DXFIM.jpg



I have no idea why this is diecast. Its got the diecast tax at $310, heavy and needs the gigantic stand, the legs at least have some diecast machinations to it, but the torso is a joke. A choice between a fused arrow straight torso that looks like it was carved out of one solid chunk of plastic or a single completely twisted torso piece, neither looks good. That seems like a choice a different company would have made on a much cheaper figure, or a really old figure. Hot Toys knows how to do this by now. This is far too expensive for what it is, I'll keep staring at it over the weekend but I think I have to send it back.

And I mean I keep my 43 in the ground punch pose, I straightened him out for this quick shot
aVAeXFi.jpg


and re posed him right after and I didn't need to get out the box to find the other part and break the figure into 3 different pieces to do it. Damn shame.
 
Woah, thanks roc for the pics.

That is kinda surprising the red isn't deep, thought the fixed that from the original MKIII release...

Hopefully it won't bother me much when I have him with the other Armors.
 
Far from a perfect homerun release, I still like it. First Mk3 in my collection. Now pleeeeaase make the Avengers Mk6 in diecast next!

ImageUploadedByTapatalk1440829210.512771.jpg
ImageUploadedByTapatalk1440829227.380357.jpg
 
Very well written review!

Indeed, Thanks rocbolt. I was on the fence about this figure. But after hearing a few negs about the articulation and now color, I think I made my decision. The original mark 3 and the construction version of the mark 3 are enough for me. Im putting my money on a different hot toy. I say if you dont have any version of mark 3 then without a doubt get this. Otherwise pass and save the money for the many new iron man suits to come ;) Civil war...Im looking at you!!!
 
The idea that the mk3 is supposed to be some dark red or burgundy is not really the whole story. The majority of the darker red shots of the suit are CG or lighting. The practical suit was a rich red. It's painted over a bright silver base. The suit was designed and supposed to be a flashy red, shiny and in your face. The stunt suit had a darker red becuase the material was dark and rubber often takes on a deeper tone unless you seal and prime it a lot. Which for a stunt suit it doesn't get.

image.jpg
image.jpg

The color on the figure might not look exactly the same but it is by no means outrageously off base. It looks very close.
 
rocbolt, thanks for the detailed photo comparison! I've been on the fence about keeping my order, so it helps to get some honest, critical thoughts about the figure. Please let us know if your thoughts change in a natural light setting!
 
Good lord... why is he THAT much shorter than the Mark 43?
Guess they used the AU Mark II as the primary source of parts, but I hate that height difference.

He looks short and frumpy there.


The 43 also has its torso extended. I think that has something to do with the height discrepancy.
 
I think the 43 is listed at 12.2 inches while the 3 is 12. And despite its shortcomings it is still an incredible, highly detailed figure. IMAG0591_1.jpg
 
Good lord... why is he THAT much shorter than the Mark 43?
Guess they used the AU Mark II as the primary source of parts, but I hate that height difference.

He looks short and frumpy there.

Its mark 43 thats not accurate, RDJ is short guy. Mark 43 should little shorter than Capt , Thor should be taller than iron and cap. But they all on same height
 
I still don't like the limitations but I'm a museum poser anyway, so this figure is pretty much made for someone like me. The details and red color are fantastic. Mine arrives Tuesday, can't wait see it in hand.
 
As for Sideshow shipping charges, I talked to my LCS that gets Hot Toys for me, and he said he is getting charged $11.00 for shipping two Hawkeyes. So, it's obvious they WAY overcharge the consumer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Back
Top