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

[Motuxmen]

Just cracked mine open... been sitting in the box for too long from being too busy...
Really love the classic look this guy has. The ankle thing is really the only gripe I have... but picked him up for $200 shipped during the PC sale... so I'm a happy camper!

Hey can you answer a question for me. I see the ankle complaint listed a lot. But I am unsure exactly what the issue is..I mean I know "what" just not why. Is there some pose you can't do it is it just seeing everyone bring it up or what. Is there some pose that it can't do? I'm not arguing or picking a fight, I'm honestly asking.

 

[Pro Design]

heres the best way to describe it...

If you pull his legs apart outward... so imagine a wide "A" stance... there is no ankle tilt and he is standing on the insides of his feet. The outter portion of the feet are not touching the ground flat and are angled up. It looks kind of funny when viewed at eye level. Normal figures have some ankle tilt which will give you a flat foot stance with the legs apart.

So its not really that you can't get him set up... it just looks unnatural with certain stances since there is limited range of motion. And also if you are like me and don't use stands... it can create a little unstability in certain stances since he's not flat footed on the ground.

 

[Motuxmen]

That makes sense. Thank you.

Does it matter that the design and actual function of the 1:1 suit would be exactly like the figure? I know some figures have articulated those side skirts at the ankle..but that wouldn't happen on a 1/1 suit. And given it would be inside of a metal boot on top of those side skirts..the figure is realistic. Just asking.

But thank you for the explanation, either way.

 

[inigou]

That makes sense. Thank you.

Does it matter that the design and actual function of the 1:1 suit would be exactly like the figure? I know some figures have articulated those side skirts at the ankle..but that wouldn't happen on a 1/1 suit. And given it would be inside of a metal boot on top of those side skirts..the figure is realistic. Just asking.

But thank you for the explanation, either way.

I'm neither arguing or picking a fight, but as he answered, this pose for example cant be recreated properly.





And i´m not saying how a 1:1 suit would work. i´m saying that the legs of the figure should be posed naturally in this pose (not weird or extreme). Even more having older HT Iron man armors that can do it (better or worst, but definitely better than this one) like old mk3, mk4, mk5, mk6, mk7, mk42 and mk43 that i personally own. With a bit more tilt, would be possible.
Is a movie masterpiece figure, and should recreate as much accurate as possible the film suit, not an hypothetical 1:1 suit with all the limitations that would have an unexisting armor.
If we take a 1:1 as the reference, a landing pose, for example, would ever exist with this metal armor structure, dont you think?

 

[Pro Design]

^ what he said!

Doesn't have to be crazy Van dam style splits with flat feet, but a little ankle articulation would go along way here.

Btw Inigou I Love your custom work!

 

[Dave_W]

The Mk II AU has the exact same lack of articulation in the ankles and I never heard anyone make a big deal about it then. I guess people were expecting this Mk III to be more advanced.

 

[BZiggyZ]

Just cracked mine open... been sitting in the box for too long from being too busy...
Really love the classic look this guy has. The ankle thing is really the only gripe I have... but picked him up for $200 shipped during the PC sale... so I'm a happy camper!

Help me out- what was the "PC sale?"

 

[Bjjer]

Help me out- what was the "PC sale?"

Politically correct sale

 

[therealjondoe]

Help me out- what was the "PC sale?"

Pop Cultcha the Australian website

 

[lotus000]

Help me out- what was the "PC sale?"

Popcultcha. Australia?s largest online store of ?pop culture? merchandise

PC stands for Pop Cultcha. Its a store in Australia as large as BBTS. They ran a 20% off sale during Spooktacular. Something went wrong with thier web site, and for about an hour Almost all figures and statues were marked 20% off. When you added the figure to your cart you got an additional 20% off. Plus anything shipped to US was minus the 10% VAT. Anyway it lasted for an hour, but people kept ordering after the "glitch" was fixed because still @ 20% off the prices were cheaper than anywhere else.

Hope this helps explain.

 

[rocbolt]

The Mk II AU has the exact same lack of articulation in the ankles and I never heard anyone make a big deal about it then. I guess people were expecting this Mk III to be more advanced.

Well it came out 3 years later and cost $100 more

 

[BZiggyZ]

Thanks!

 

[InebriatedGnome]

I think that sums it up pretty nicely, yeah.

It's a shame because (to me, at least) this is the best-looking classic IM design. I know it's been said a million times before, but: they should have pulled out all the stops on this guy, instead of compromising on the core and ankles.

 

[Motuxmen]

Long post..figures I'd try this instead of hearing the the whining about more then 150 letters

Spoiler

Well it came out 3 years later and cost $100 more

And what difference does that make? They did it this way becuase that's how the suit designers intended it to be. The price going up is just what happens.

Hot toys does not say these are super articulated or that articulation is the focus. They bring movie characters to life as 1/6 and 1/4 scale figures. Their main focus is realism, as much as is possible given the source material and medium(and budgets ect). There are plenty of lines that focus on articulation. But shouldn't it be enough that the figures are more flexible and articulated then the characters they represent?

I hear over and over about matching the screen stuff and being dead on. Until it's something the person doesn't like. Screen accuracy suddenly disappears. Lol

It's like with thanos and his throne. I see the "his feet are not flat" comment over and over. But in that position his feet would not be flat. It's not natural. And the reason, at least on the proto, that the foot rest was kicked out further, which meant no 90 degree bends at the knees..was so the armor and joints wouldn't get creases and issues from prolonged bending. A move directed to help customers. And all it ends up doing is getting slammed.

The ab articulation on this figure..the discusion cracks me up. When it was first shown that there would be bone(again, due to a marvel studios suit design) I asked what the big deal was. Why was no ab crunch such a big deal. And the only answer I got over and over was the ground punch pose. For months. Hot toys included a feature that addressed that concern head on, making this figure the one that actually does that pose better then any other figure...and people still harp on the ab articulation. It's never enough. To me it's a miracle hot toys does anything special. With all the complaining, no matter what, i wouldn't. The 1/4 43 is stunning and it's critiqued becuase to many switches. Lol

And it's like people thing they just forgot or don't see these things. Even though every little part of a figure is a choice. They do it all for a reason. It's not ever lazy or they forgot. Lol no one considers that they did the switches that way so they don't lose a 400 dollar figure to a return becuase of one switch or wire (if it's all centrally wired you can't have the consumer swap arms or legs or heads or feet) but can instead swap out one piece. Saving shipping, man hours, parts cost. Ect things like that.

Sorry for the rant...

 

[rocbolt]

And it's like people thing they just forgot or don't see these things. Even though every little part of a figure is a choice. They do it all for a reason. It's not ever lazy or they forgot. Lol no one considers that they did the switches that way so they don't lose a 400 dollar figure to a return becuase of one switch or wire (if it's all centrally wired you can't have the consumer swap arms or legs or heads or feet) but can instead swap out one piece. Saving shipping, man hours, parts cost. Ect things like that.

No one is saying there aren't reasons why they do the things they do, but that doesn't mean that it works out in the end. You know what? The 1/4 Mk43 scale looks excellent and the interior lights are a nice touch visually. You know what else? I will use that feature precisely once, when it arrives and I spend 10 minutes inserting batteries with a pair of tweezers to make sure it works. Then they'll come out, because let's face it- I am not going to climb a step stool to turn on half a dozen switches to admire the lights for 5 minutes at a time on a regular basis, until that day when it doesn't work and I come to find the batteries leaked. That may be the best they can do right now, but practically and chiefly because of its execution it is a feature that will hardly be used, if at all (but we do get to pay for it regardless).

Being slightly frustrated or otherwise mentioning that reality is not a personal attack on you, Mox. Its a comment. Its criticism. Its not spitting, angry, destructive condemnation for the sake of being mad, and its not a reason to get so sanctimonious about why you know just how much everyone else is wrong wrong wrong. We like this stuff, we all want it to be good, and we will always want it to be better. Without that dialogue this entire board could just be replaced with some product photos with captions that say "Its the best they could do" "They wanted it to be this way" "They had their reasons" "Gotta problem? Go soak your head" "$450 Available May 2016" with a bunch of "like" buttons.

 

[YankeesFanboy]

Well said.

 

[InebriatedGnome]

It's always a little surprising when someone brings up 'realism' regarding an Iron Man suit. Yes, the suit design wouldn't allow for the ankles to rotate. But Iron Man holds poses in the movie which totally ignore that physical limitation because ultimately it's a CG suit that can do anything. When that's your subject, total realism is automatically out the window. Instead, we should be thinking in the confines of the movie/fiction, and talking about 'accuracy' over realism. And I'd argue that there are two types of accuracy here: complete faithfulness to the aesthetics of the suit, and complete faithfulness to what it can do on-screen. Every HT design is a balance between the two.

The Mark III's ankles are one part of that suit design that really makes HT's job hard, because staying aesthetically accurate means making a figure that can't replicate many of the movie poses while still standing stably. They decided to make that decision for one kind of screen-accuracy over another. Defending that decision as 'more accurate' without qualifying why this accuracy > that accuracy is facetious.

These are all valid design decisions but depending on your criteria when judging action figures, some of them can still be bad decisions. I'm firmly in rocbolt's camp here--we should be able to debate them. It's bad enough that almost every major figure reviewer seems to turn off their capacity for judgement and basically runs an applause machine for the length of a YouTube video.

 

[Dave_W]

Well it came out 3 years later and cost $100 more

The MkII AU came out after the MkIII BD and cost more as well and it still had the same ankles and didn't have ab articulation...so sorry, that argument doesn't stick.

 

[skizzoid]

It's always a little surprising when someone brings up 'realism' regarding an Iron Man suit. Yes, the suit design wouldn't allow for the ankles to rotate. But Iron Man holds poses in the movie which totally ignore that physical limitation because ultimately it's a CG suit that can do anything. When that's your subject, total realism is automatically out the window. Instead, we should be thinking in the confines of the movie/fiction, and talking about 'accuracy' over realism. And I'd argue that there are two types of accuracy here: complete faithfulness to the aesthetics of the suit, and complete faithfulness to what it can do on-screen. Every HT design is a balance between the two.

The Mark III's ankles are one part of that suit design that really makes HT's job hard, because staying aesthetically accurate means making a figure that can't replicate many of the movie poses while still standing stably. They decided to make that decision for one kind of screen-accuracy over another. Defending that decision as 'more accurate' without qualifying why this accuracy > that accuracy is facetious.

These are all valid design decisions but depending on your criteria when judging action figures, some of them can still be bad decisions. I'm firmly in rocbolt's camp here--we should be able to debate them. It's bad enough that almost every major figure reviewer seems to turn off their capacity for judgement and basically runs an applause machine for the length of a YouTube video.

Pretty sensible post for an inebriated gnome.

 

[Motuxmen]

I know realism is not an easy pair with iron man...but common sense is. He has shoes on. Inside of a metal boot. That has a rocket engine in he sole. With some sort of power assist. All surrounded by a metal shield(the outer flared metal). Realism or not...iron man or not...they have to make a choice which way to make it. If they make it with articulation or not. On screen it's not articulated. In real life there's zero chance he has side to side articulation. But somehow both realism and screen accuracy is the wrong argument. Funny how that works. Outside of wanting it, what exactly is the justification for articulation?

Please explain to me how this suit should have articulation in th ankles. We have seen on screen the skeleton of the suit. Here's the toy version. But let's all just agree with th guy that's not me, becuase he's not me. And his argument is...I erred in using realism as a basis. Lol

And these are without the skins. And that outer shield that extends past the ankle joint.