1/6 1/6 Hot Toys - MMS 452 - Star Wars: Episode V ESB - Darth Vader

[RiggsMcClane]

The truth is out there. In a galaxy far far away.

 

[Jbeltram4]

And this picture makes me want to cancelView attachment 423807

You don’t like Tiny Hand Vader?

 

[canofhumdingers]

I hesitate to suggest things to add to the list because some here seem to be getting really irritated with criticisms, but one thing I think might be agreed upon by most is that the nose is too small (both in height and width).

Below is a cropped and rotated helmet pic from one of the shots posted yesterday, with an ESB movie helmet from the Costumes book on the left and a grainy shot of movie Vader on the right. I'd love to use a higher-quality photo of the helmet from a movie capture, but I don't have a better straight-ahead shot without the head turning slightly more to one side or the other.

View attachment 423800

I think the undersized nose is pretty clear, but I'll let everyone else dispute that if they feel like it.

This side by side shot is very illuminating. I actually think it shows that the face is more accurate than it first appears. I think it is the tusk angle throwing the whole thing off. The fact that they angle down makes the whole upper mount triangle look too elongated. But if you ignore the tusks, and actually look at the mouths triangle itself compared to the real helmets on either side, it looks pretty darn close.

I agree the nose looks a smidge too small, but it seems pretty minor and isn’t drawing my eye the way the mouth does.

I don’t see anything wrong with the eyes.

I wonder how hard it would be to remove the tusks and re-attach them at the correct angle. The tusks should follow the angle of the lower tube, but it seems they made the tusks on the figure follow the steeper angle of the upper tube.

Here’s what I mean by the tusk making the mouth triangle look too long/tall.





And yes, I agree with whoever said, the quick glance gut reaction comes first. If it looks like the character, then that’s awesome. It’s when the initial gut reaction is that something’s off that the ridiculous over-analyzing (like I’ve just done above ) comes in to figure out WHY it doesn’t look right.

 

[generalgrevious]

so as it stands the kaiyodo mask is still the best 1/6 Vader mask out there. that`s sad something which was done almost 30 years ago with not even near the technology we have now did it better then the two big companies have done up to this date.

 

[Lord Valefor]

This side by side shot is very illuminating. I actually think it shows that the face is more accurate than it first appears. But if you ignore the tusks, and actually look at the mouths triangle itself compared to the real helmets on either side, it looks pretty darn close.

well if you take THIS frontal picture with different lighting focusing more on the triangle it looks somewhat more accurate and not so bad, plus the dome looks really good in this picture ..so I dunno, now I'm leaning more to keep it

 

[Adam1138]

I’ve said this time and time again with these releases. Is there any reason why HT or SSC can’t use 3D scanning technology to absolutely nail these helmets first time every time??! Boba, Stormtrooper, Vader, Scout... all hit out of the park and NO ONE would be able to complain as they would be scanned from the originals. Surely this is a financially viable options these days??

 

[Lord Valefor]

Here's heads from a few Vader figures I own:

1-Left: Kotobukiya RotJ "Final Duel" 1:7 ; Terrible
2-Middle: Kotobukiya 1:7 ANH: Beyond terrible
3-Right: Disney Elite15$ figure (slightly modified by me) Actually this would look more screen accurate than this new Hot Toys ESB if it wasn't made from cheap plastic

 

[Lord Valefor]

I’ve said this time and time again with these releases. Is there any reason why HT or SSC can’t use 3D scanning technology to absolutely nail these helmets first time every time??! Boba, Stormtrooper, Vader, Scout... all hit out of the park and NO ONE would be able to complain as they would be scanned from the originals. Surely this is a financially viable options these days??

one day Disney is going to make a figure doing this..I predict it

 

[rayeknor]

You people are nuts, cancelling or keeping orders based on photos, if not see it in hand at least look at some decent shot videos

 

[generalgrevious]

what videos have not seen many on here or you-tube

 

[Lord Valefor]

Now I can't sell my Rogue One Vader since the special cape has become a priceless item I might need

 

[svnmelter]

Here's heads from a few Vader figures I own:

1-Left: Kotobukiya RotJ "Final Duel" 1:7 ; Terrible
2-Middle: Kotobukiya 1:7 ANH: Beyond terrible
3-Right: Disney Elite15$ figure (slightly modified by me) Actually this would look more screen accurate than this new Hot Toys ESB if it wasn't made from cheap plastic

View attachment 423812

3-Right: beyond terrible

 

[davejames]

well if you take THIS frontal picture with different lighting focusing more on the triangle it looks somewhat more accurate and not so bad, plus the dome looks really good in this picture ..so I dunno, now I'm leaning more to keep it

View attachment 423811

Yeah going through the pics again it does seem to look better either from a distance or when the head is angled down somewhat.

Although with that long face I suppose you could always think of it as being more of a Rebels Vader.

 

[Asta]

In certain photos it looks a little off, but not a deal breaker.

 

[Lord Valefor]

3-Right: beyond terrible

it is, but what I meant is the proportions are generally correct

 

[RebelSpy007]

Someone posted a pic of this in-hand on Facebook, and it fits in a Detolf stand and all.

 

[DarkChocobi]

I’m lucky I don’t have OCD to the point where I notice this stuff, such as dome height on a 1/6 scale figure. Or I just don’t give a **** about details that minute.

One of the two.

bless both of us

 

[ajp4mgs]

I took another of the in-hand photos that was posted here recently and matched it (more or less) to a movie photo. This is the one that best illustrates the problem with the tusks, imo.



You can clearly see how the movie tusks follow the orientation of the bottom tube (as canofhumdingers pointed out earlier), while the figure tusks follow the top tube (thus pointing them down way too much). That's one key difference that alters the appearance of the mouth. But also, the small nose plays an arguably bigger factor in lengthening the mouth. It's not just the silver/inner part of the nose; more importantly, it's the black outline around it that is smaller. The smaller outline changes the dimensions and scale of the triangle that forms the mouth. Together, the tusks and nose combine to create a distorted mouth shape. Then the grill being too vertical, and not jutting out at the bottom, compounds the problem.

And just to save time: yes, there is lens distortion going on in the figure photo. And yes, I know that the angles aren't an exact match. But none of this plays a role in how the features are disproportional to the movie helmet in terms of the basic structure. Every photo shows the same problem with tusks being aligned wrong, nose being too small, and mouth/grill not having enough slope.

There's also a fundamental problem with the cheek structure, but that's another OCD story for another OCD day.

 

[RebelSpy007]

Do Marvel/DC Hot Toys get the same level of analysis? Just curious. ;-)

From the pics I saw on Facebook, with it posed in a Detolf, it looked awesome.

 

[sithocan]

If tusks were smaller, their angle wouldn't be so apparent.