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

[Motuxmen]

View attachment 152171

Why wouldn't ab articulation be a good thing?

Because it's not real articulation. It adds like millimeters of movement. If it where true articulation that's one thing. But it does not allow more then one or two (at max and then it does not hold that position) degrees of movement. How is that a big loss? Someone show me a pose that can't be done without this articulation?

 

[Invictus Sol]

Ground punch.

 

[third3ye]

I was under the impression that ground punch can be achieved w/o ab crunch, though probably looks better with ab crunch but still achievable. On the other hand, any sitting or bending forward poses would require ab crunch.

 

[Invictus Sol]

Can't see how it could look as natural with absolutely no ab crunch but really it's besides the point. I can live w/o it, especially on Mark III, but I'd prefer it to the underarmour circuit board. I'll never in a million years display it that way.

 

[Motuxmen]

Ground punch.

Show me. It can be done without it. You show me where you are required to use this magic ab crunch to do something that could not otherwise be achieved.

As I said...it does not effect the posability of the figure. Take the arms and legs off and then look at the torso. How much posability do you in fact have? Again...1-2 degrees tops. And even that only if you hold it. It won't stay flexed. Even that little amount.

I still don't get why everyone (or anyone) is so upset with the loss of something that does almost nothing. And what it does do you have to hold it in place...but what its replaced with can be displayed with no hands on and actually adds to the look of the figure.

 

[Invictus Sol]

You seem more upset than anyone, lol. As I said, I don't really care but would prefer to have it over the useless circuit board. Why do you care so much about it?

 

[Motuxmen]

I'm not upset about it. But I've seen this same type of comment about the ab crunch over and over. Even though no one actually uses it.

I'm trying to encourage hot toys to try new things with figures. Give them props for getting rid of a useless feature in favor of a better design. And I've seen hundreds of posts about how losing the ab feature totally ruins the articulation. But then those same people can't actually show anything that can't be done with out it. Or where they really need it.

 

[YankeesFanboy]

Given the choice, I'd take the ab crunch over the belly circuitry reveal every day of the week even though I'd likely make use of neither. But c'est la vie.

 

[Shawpaw]

I'm not upset about it. But I've seen this same type of comment about the ab crunch over and over. Even though no one actually uses it.

I'm trying to encourage hot toys to try new things with figures. Give them props for getting rid of a useless feature in favor of a better design. And I've seen hundreds of posts about how losing the ab feature totally ruins the articulation. But then those same people can't actually show anything that can't be done with out it. Or where they really need it.

I understand the notion of being tired about people complaining about ab articulation. I, being one who prefers it, also know it's not essential for a figure. People have been saying that the figure is ruined for not having it. That's definitely an exaggeration on people's part. It's still a really nice figure and doesn't require ab articulation to be good. I also appreciate that you want to positively reinforce Hot Toys for trying something different. I think that's cool of you and I also like when they try new things. But I have to cordially disagree in terms of the use of ab articulation. I use it quite often with my Iron legion as well as other figures. I like posing them in natural stances and abs are important for that. I respect your opinions though

 

[Motuxmen]

I understand the notion of being tired about people complaining about ab articulation. I, being one who prefers it, also know it's not essential for a figure. People have been saying that the figure is ruined for not having it. That's definitely an exaggeration on people's part. It's still a really nice figure and doesn't require ab articulation to be good. I also appreciate that you want to positively reinforce Hot Toys for trying something different. I think that's cool of you and I also like when they try new things. But I have to cordially disagree in terms of the use of ab articulation. I use it quite often with my Iron legion as well as other figures. I like posing them in natural stances and abs are important for that. I respect your opinions though

I understand where u are coming from. And your respectful in your point, which is amazing, and that allows the argument to be focused on what you said and not how you said it. Great job.

My point is though... Show me a pose you can't do without the ab articulation. Every pose I've seen done does not require the ab stuff. So if you have pose that does I'd love to see it. I have a Mk vi body mocked up so it can't use the ab articulation so I'd like to see if I can do it. I'm betting, they both do the same.

 

[Invictus Sol]

The thing is, it may be very minor, but having even a few degrees of abdominal movement can make for a more nuanced or natural pose. It's also an engineering thing for me. It's simpler for HT to remove something like that, but it's neat in-hand (WM MK II is very cool,in this respect, for example) and what's the benefit of removing it at all? To be replaced with what? As for pictures, I'm not going to troll through the threads to find you something. It just makes sense to have it than not, IMO.

 

[hokietwo]

Show me. It can be done without it. You show me where you are required to use this magic ab crunch to do something that could not otherwise be achieved.

As I said...it does not effect the posability of the figure. Take the arms and legs off and then look at the torso. How much posability do you in fact have? Again...1-2 degrees tops. And even that only if you hold it. It won't stay flexed. Even that little amount.

I still don't get why everyone (or anyone) is so upset with the loss of something that does almost nothing. And what it does do you have to hold it in place...but what its replaced with can be displayed with no hands on and actually adds to the look of the figure.

As usual you are talking out of the wrong end.

Try these.

 

[YankeesFanboy]

Thanks for the pics, hokie.

I've always assumed that the original Mark III and BD Mark III had ab articulation. Now I'm not quite sure. The figure does, however, appear to get brighter with each release.

 

[hokietwo]

Thanks for the pics, hokie.

I've always assumed that the original Mark III and BD Mark III had ab articulation. Now I'm not quite sure. The figure does, however, appear to get brighter with each release.

It's funny though the mark III BD is way to bright red and looks the most rediculous of all the armors in hand. The torso articulation is bad on the mark III BD as well, huge gap at the abs to give the illusion of an crunch for a ground pound, but it's not close to being able to achieve it.
The original mark III HT suit color is actually quite spot on. It depends totally on the light source. Hopefully this new DC one isn't as red as it appears.

 

[Shawpaw]

Yeah I was hoping for a more maroon-ish color. Oh well. I'll end up buying this.

 

[Motuxmen]

Yep....wow. Can't do any of those without ab crunch. Not at all. The only pose you couldn't duplicate is the taking a crap pose. And that one you could do just without the ab crunch.

Show me which one can't be done without the ab crunch? Yes it may be altered a bit, but not so much that it can't be achieved.

And no to the person that asked, the original mark three does NOT have any ab articulation.

It's funny how somehow I'm always wrong (though please go back and re-read out disagreements and I'm correct. Every time)...but you are basing your opinion on pure speculation and your years of collecting, while mine is on first hand knowledge, from sets to studios, to marketing and management agency, to actually working for/with sideshow. But hey, your years of collecting toys make you way more qualified. (Not that I have not collected nearly as long on top of the other stuff..). So which one of us is talking out his arse?

Funny how some people can disagree and make a point without being a bag of Richards, and others can't help but do so. And can't read. (Ya know the part where I said couldn't do a pose, at all...not that a pose would be altered..but hey. And when compare the mk3 v1 or bD to the diecast there is zero loss of articulation as the originals didn't have it...and that's what this new one should be compared to)

But hey, sorry you can't do a proper pose on the can. That's a huge loss for the world. I'm in morning. Got my black arm band ready to use.

 

[Motuxmen]

The thing is, it may be very minor, but having even a few degrees of abdominal movement can make for a more nuanced or natural pose. It's also an engineering thing for me. It's simpler for HT to remove something like that, but it's neat in-hand (WM MK II is very cool,in this respect, for example) and what's the benefit of removing it at all? To be replaced with what? As for pictures, I'm not going to troll through the threads to find you something. It just makes sense to have it than not, IMO.

Great points. I get it. But it's not such a big deal that I see it changing the figure. And the original mk3 didn't have it anyway. And the same panty thing on the mk42 or wm won't work because of the design of the mk3.

I can get preferring it. Or wishing they added it. But it's not a huge deal...and frankly ab crunch wouldn't function on a real suit anyway. But that's not the real point I know.

 

[Dr. Odd]

Mourning

 

[Motuxmen]

Thanks. Always wanted an assistant to proofread my drafts. I'm so glad there are so many on the forums.

 

[hokietwo]

Do. Not. Feed. People. Gremlins are out before midnight.