Sideshow: The Clint Eastwood Legacy Collection (1:6 figures)
- Thread starter Shoo
- Start date
Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:
Alright I finally caved and ordered Munny from Underground figures, since it's the only place that still had him for under $300 shipped.
Some of these more recent pics have convinced me the figure might have some potential. And plus the whole reason I even bought Blondie and Preacher was so I could eventually have them standing next to Munny.
Some of these more recent pics have convinced me the figure might have some potential. And plus the whole reason I even bought Blondie and Preacher was so I could eventually have them standing next to Munny.
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2009
- Messages
- 6,454
- Reaction score
- 1,060
It's quite likely the only worthwhile Munny we'll get. I can imagine a high-end limited release, but that's about it.
chalor
Super Freak
Since we're probably gonna have to settle for Redman Toys Stranger from High Plains Drifter, what are your guys's thoughts on Sideshow doing Hang 'Em High, Two Mules for Sister Sara, or Joe Kidd? If any of those, Joe Kidd has gotta be the obvious choice. A rare Western where it takes place in the 20th century...and Eastwood uses a badass Mauser broom handle machine pistol, complete with wooden stock/holster. We obviously need a few more (non-western) figures from Kelly's Heroes, Where Eagles Dare, Firefox, Heartbreak Ridge; but do you think Joe Kidd is iconic enough to warrant them making one?
Attachments
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2009
- Messages
- 6,454
- Reaction score
- 1,060
Unlikely. I think, though I could be wrong, that the Eastwood line is gone as far as it's going to go with the films/roles chosen for figures and statues. And I'm a life-long Eastwood fan.
chalor
Super Freak
I think we're all familiar here with the movie regarding the town whores intent with wanting to be ravaged by the stranger. Knowing that being seductive probably won't get you what you want, so you put on these theatrics of bumping into him, smacking the cigar out his mouth, and verbally insulting him. So putting all that aside with the context, and just looking at it as a rape scene...I don't fully understand Sideshow's hesitance to make the figure.
Maybe I'm really naive, but I can't see online protestors trying to get Sideshow Collectibles canceled for making the Stranger. With all the things they've made that would be considered controversial, I don't see a decline in sales or a tarnishing of their image if they made it. I'm just now realizing in real time that the Preacher was the placeholder for the Stranger (because the two movies are a yin & yang of each other). I don't think Pale Rider is on the same level as the other movies/figures made, which is why Redman Toys never made them.
And same here, lifelong fan of Clint Eastwood...remembering how much time I spent as a kid and teen watching all these movies on TV back in the '80s and '90s. I'd love for the line to keep going, but all the figures have come out, and not one new announcement. Other than the reissues, it's safe to say it's dead
.
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2009
- Messages
- 6,454
- Reaction score
- 1,060
Which is why when CultKing offered their Stranger years back, I ordered it without hesitation. Personally, High Plains Drifter is one of Clint's best, and certainly one of the best "weird" westerns. I still remember renting it on VHS and hearing that haunting score as soon as the movie starts. With that said (and not the controversial, albeit intentional scenes in it; Kitty Genovese anyone?), It's probably too niche, or god forbid, too "old" to be relevant anymore. That's fine. I'm just glad they were able to finally release an official line approved by the man himself.I think we're all familiar here with the movie regarding the town whores intent with wanting to be ravaged by the stranger. Knowing that being seductive probably won't get you what you want, so you put on these theatrics of bumping into him, smacking the cigar out his mouth, and verbally insulting him. So putting all that aside with the context, and just looking at it as a rape scene...I don't fully understand Sideshow's hesitance to make the figure.
Maybe I'm really naive, but I can't see online protestors trying to get Sideshow Collectibles canceled for making the Stranger. With all the things they've made that would be considered controversial, I don't see a decline in sales or a tarnishing of their image if they made it. I'm just now realizing in real time that the Preacher was the placeholder for the Stranger (because the two movies are a yin & yang of each other). I don't think Pale Rider is on the same level as the other movies/figures made, which is why Redman Toys never made them.
And same here, lifelong fan of Clint Eastwood...remembering how much time I spent as a kid and teen watching all these movies on TV back in the '80s and '90s. I'd love for the line to keep going, but all the figures have come out, and not one new announcement. Other than the reissues, it's safe to say it's dead
I reckon so.
For me it began with Rowdy Yates.I think we're all familiar here with the movie regarding the town whores intent with wanting to be ravaged by the stranger. Knowing that being seductive probably won't get you what you want, so you put on these theatrics of bumping into him, smacking the cigar out his mouth, and verbally insulting him. So putting all that aside with the context, and just looking at it as a rape scene...I don't fully understand Sideshow's hesitance to make the figure.
Maybe I'm really naive, but I can't see online protestors trying to get Sideshow Collectibles canceled for making the Stranger. With all the things they've made that would be considered controversial, I don't see a decline in sales or a tarnishing of their image if they made it. I'm just now realizing in real time that the Preacher was the placeholder for the Stranger (because the two movies are a yin & yang of each other). I don't think Pale Rider is on the same level as the other movies/figures made, which is why Redman Toys never made them.
And same here, lifelong fan of Clint Eastwood...remembering how much time I spent as a kid and teen watching all these movies on TV back in the '80s and '90s. I'd love for the line to keep going, but all the figures have come out, and not one new announcement. Other than the reissues, it's safe to say it's dead
Yeah looks like they'd rather rerelease the previous figures than make any new ones.
I would absolutely love all mentioned above
I have the iminime Stranger, but would def like to see another version attempted by someone cause that figure was made years ago. I don’t even think it came with a whip.Attachments
dominishin
Super Freak
"Limited Edition" tag on these rerelease figures. The amount of ******** in this hobby is getting annoying.
The only real limited Editions is us my friends.
I think Sideshow referenced this particular moment in A Fistful Of Dollars for their Blondie head sculpt.
This is right before he shoots the Baxter’s boys at the beginning of the film, and it’s a significant moment for the character because it’s the first time he reveals his true nature to both the Baxters and the audience. The Man With No Name archetype has gone on to influence numerous other characters in Hollywood, and seeing how this iconic scene was when it all started, it’s also extremely important to the history of cinema. I understand why they would pick his facial expression right here for the head sculpt.
The problem is it’s a very specific expression for a very specific scenario. That, coupled with the upward camera angle & probably a below-the-face, dramatic lighting set-up, does not help in capturing how MWNN (or anyone for that matter) usually looks like. Even more problematic is that Sideshow’s rendition of MWNN is supposed to be from The Good, The Bad & The Ugly, not Fistful.
I still love the figure. It’s the best figure of any scale you can get for this character... But here’s hoping Sideshow will re-release another version of him with a more neutral expression, better likeness, and to justify the re-release, perhaps have that version wear the white duster outfit he wears at the beginning of GBU.
This is right before he shoots the Baxter’s boys at the beginning of the film, and it’s a significant moment for the character because it’s the first time he reveals his true nature to both the Baxters and the audience. The Man With No Name archetype has gone on to influence numerous other characters in Hollywood, and seeing how this iconic scene was when it all started, it’s also extremely important to the history of cinema. I understand why they would pick his facial expression right here for the head sculpt.
The problem is it’s a very specific expression for a very specific scenario. That, coupled with the upward camera angle & probably a below-the-face, dramatic lighting set-up, does not help in capturing how MWNN (or anyone for that matter) usually looks like. Even more problematic is that Sideshow’s rendition of MWNN is supposed to be from The Good, The Bad & The Ugly, not Fistful.
I still love the figure. It’s the best figure of any scale you can get for this character... But here’s hoping Sideshow will re-release another version of him with a more neutral expression, better likeness, and to justify the re-release, perhaps have that version wear the white duster outfit he wears at the beginning of GBU.
I reckon so.
It does look good in hand. At first I was like wowzers way off, but when I got it in hand I was very happy with the sculpt.
I am hearing no new releases though....shame, they have the license and still a few Eastwood movies they can capitalize on.
I am hearing no new releases though....shame, they have the license and still a few Eastwood movies they can capitalize on.
I don't think they were using any particular reference for this. Looks like they were just aiming for a generic cartoonish Blondie sculpt.
WhoaItsJBot
Super Freak
The mouth and jaw are just bad, regardless of what frame they were aiming for.
Considering they're the only company with the official Eastwood license, that never should've gotten the production approval.
Considering they're the only company with the official Eastwood license, that never should've gotten the production approval.
Maybe. I can only speculate.
The reason I believe they used the above Fistful reference for the 1/6 figure is because it looks very different from the sculpt they used for the 1/4 premium format Blondie statue, which arguably is their definitive version of a cartoonish generic Blondie look.
Putting the 2 head sculpts side by side, there seems to be a deliberate attempt to lean the 1/6 version towards that Fistful screenshot expression. Notice how on the 1/4 version, his squinting eyes are of relatively the same shape, but on the 1/6 version, his right eye is less “round” than his left, matching the eye shapes in the screenshot. He’s looking towards his left in that shot, and while Sideshow might have referenced the eye shapes, they moved his pupils to the center (works better for an action figure), creating a slightly “off” expression where the eye shapes and eyes themselves communicate different things.
Clint does have pretty symmetrical eye shapes when viewed at a normal angle, even when squinting. To have his left eye rounder and slightly bigger than his right, you gotta view them at a specific angle when he’s doing a specific stare.
Or maybe I’m just over-analyzing hahaha…
screamingmetal
Super Freak
The first screen capture you posted has Eastwood looking slightly off to his left, the bulge of the eye lenses have an effect on the shape of the eye openings, it's subtle but it's there with everyone. That's why his eyes are looking more asymmetrical in that image and less in the second screen capture.
I agree that the Sideshow GBU 1/6 sculpt is slightly off, it still looks good in a optimal lighting setup. I hope Sideshow isn't done and gives us more Eastwood figures soon and revisits GBU with a new sculpt.
Similar threads
