For the sake of argument (the expression, not actually trying to argue here
), one thing that's been bugging me is this. Here's the Big Game cover on which this statue is based:
And here's one with a more modern coloring job, just to cover all the bases:
The Prime 1 statue doesn't really look like either of these. The skin pattern is completely different, the gauntlet lights are different, the netting is completely different (funnily enough, Prime 1's netting pattern is not only smaller than the film's, but the cover's too), and we never even see the unmasked head in these drawings.
Now, they obviously included the unmasked portraits and film accessories so this would work as a stand-in for the Jungle Hunter, but that brings me to my point: the comics argument doesn't hold water the way Prime 1 probably hoped it would.
The prototype reads as a movie statue and the final product reads as a rushed movie statue. If they truly cared about recreating the cover art or making it "stylized", they would have matched the coloring and design more closely. But they didn't. It's just a label to hide behind and a poor one at that.
Heck, look at how the loin cloth billows in the wind on the cover. Look how it's tattered. This is an effect they've done on so many of their Batman statues and they easily could've done it here, but they opted to make it look like the film instead. They swung with the intention of getting a homerun, then backed off to third base and we're acting like they always planned on stopping there.
Objectively it's a nice piece and kills most of the competition out there, but at the same time, it's not what it was marketed to be -- by either film or comics standards. It's ok to enjoy it and still acknowledge that. Prime 1 doesn't need anyone making excuses for them.