Big Chief Studios James Bond Series

[Greggo]

The ones I have opened from stock have looked very similar to the prototype they do have padding in the shoulders. As they are all hand tailored there maybe some difference within the padding on the shoulders. For the prototype we actually had Connery's official tailor records from Saville Row when creating the prototype we actually made them slightly longer to give a more accurate look.

 

[Raymond F.]

This is what I think works well about the Moore body (from what I have seen in the prototypes) - I've stated this before here also:

They got the barrel chested element of his physique down and for the record a padded element over a base body is not a bad way to go about that. I'm not opposed to that as any of the big guns including and especially hot toys cut corners even with a wider variety of bodies they still tend to majorly miss the mark by limiting themselves to what they have already made part wise. padded suits are a more inexpensive way to use an existing base.

I could be wrong on how they did it but to my eye this is what it looks like.

What's apparent with the prototype are the existing issues with the base body. For starters the neck is way way too long. This is in part because the shoulders have so much steep that they have the ability to slip so far down. The way the very long neck length sitting so deep into the socket doesn't help either. then you throw on the fat suit which needs to connect around the neck area (I'm guessing) it adds bulk to the top, with the turtleneck and the already low steeping shoulders you get this weird bulk long neck/thick trap and low shoulder thing that makes the whole thing look a bit off. Wider and higher sitting shoulder pieces could help balance that.

The present issue about the shoulders being too narrow in general (already mentioned) and the hips being too narrow/hollow are really apparent here too.

I've said it before, if Big chief doesn't want to invest in a better base body they should redesign the thigh and shoulder area to balance out the proportions better.

I also recall how different the prototype pictures looked around the shoulder area for Connery so I really worry here especially knowing the body they used.

Editing because I have more points to make and I was asked explicitly for my opinion on the Roger Moore prototype images:

The hips are really apparent where you can see the issues. when he bends his legs you see the narrowness of the thighs and how they sink into the pelvis area. It looks inhuman. Which is a shame because the pants, accuracy of outfit and theism is there in the sculpt.

This one aside from any potential production paint issues, at least from a prototype standpoint, is a hair away from perfection if there was a different base body.

 

[Raymond F.]

Ray, you are an EXTREMELY talented guy. I think we ALL know that...I've asked you for advice before and you've always been very helpful. It's something I definitely appreciate, and I've worked some of your techniques into my own repertoire.

I'm not sure if this is what Greggo's getting at, or maybe it's just what I'm reading into (NOT presuming to speak for anyone else), but I think it's partially because you've been a bit of a broken record. The body isn't well-proportioned. Especially for Connery (though I DO think the joints are nice and tight and it moves well, which is a step in the right direction). I think we can all agree on that. I think it's that you've said it many times, and you do tend toward being harsh. That's all.

Again, not saying you're WRONG, just that perhaps you've stated it in a way that isn't exactly constructive (though your comment above was much more so).

Not intending to make you upset, just a third party viewpoint!

Of course, whenever we communicate in any way besides face to face, we tend to infer things about the intention and tone of the message that maybe aren't meant, so maybe you are trying to be helpful/constructive, and it's me that's not reading it correctly. That's possible. Just how it comes off to me!

Fair point, but the way I look at it is, he's engaging with it all and frustrated , which is not my intent per se but I see this as it's getting heard and I've said several times I don't mean to single out Greggo which is why o speak to the company as a whole and I like/respect him in general and stated before that I feel more assured with his involvement, so I'm not trying to bully. But I have no shame in beating a dead horse if it gets results.

But so far I don't see it. Meaning SEE that it's getting heard and the recent Connery reveal was proof of that (granted knowing it's just an early prototype, and I always said that, but I was fast and quick to point out how the base body was still an issue). So I don't see it or hear a plan that I will not have to worry about this in the future with new releases. They defend it, which I can understand out of frustration... but they haven't addressed plans to revisit.

Which I'm sure they don't want to, because they stated the biggest hang up and investment was because of the body redesign.

joint tightness while important, does not excuse a bad design and that's the issue here.

And I'm not the only one stating it several times, I may be the most articulate or passionate about it, but it's a sentiment that is shared. At least on this forum.

And anyways like I said while not ideal there are ways around it. They need to put shoulder pads in the suit anyways even if it were on a wider shoulder body. Doing that with the existing body would already be an improvement.

 

[Raymond F.]

The other issue here is that because the body is SO restrictive design wise as it pertains to the rest of the market it limits the use of other bodies in the market. I swap figures out to new bodies even with good bodies to make them look better but that's just me so I'm never going to hold a company at fault for that.

But basically it means, even if their tailoring has vast consideration to the original design or parts that work OK, it's not going to be improved on a new body either... which makes the whole thing a waste.

So I see the body as the most urgent issue to address with future releases.

to edit with more clarity:

They are taking into account detailed tailoring considerations (which is a good thing) on a very bad base, so it's throwing everything off and making it a moot point.

 

[spindrift]

in other words replace the body of a $250 figure and spend MORE money to get it managable! I'm not...

 

[Hobby-Galaxy]

in other words replace the body of a $250 figure and spend MORE money to get it managable! I'm not...

I had almost the same comment word by word when the Sherlock set came out

 

[Wor-Gar]

I spent $205 on HT Leia... and I'm spending another $150 on her damn dress.

There was really only two things HT needed to get right: the sculpt and the dress.

 

[gido]

All companies have kind of issues.Better and worse products.I'm not calling bc liars at all, I don't say they're garbage makers, I don't think figures are bad.I have not so much figures as many of you, but my customs are high standards peaces with mostly perfect tailoring from Yunsil or Geewhizz and I know, how real even 1/6 suits could looks on the figures.
And I see then new line Bond suit is good tailored, but for body which isn't success full for 3 peaces suit like is gray Connery outfit.
Body gives wrong feeling then shoulders are not wide enough, jacket is too much up, collar of jacket goes over collar of shirt.It gives figure some cartoony looking, which could be possible to escape with tailoring for other ,more wide and other shape body...
And then it could looks really equival to high level custom outfits.
Second thing- more care about eyes paintup.
And please- not Ray or me ,or other collectors- Bond lovers - are trying to humiliate company ,or do not evaluate your efforts- we just see ,how you could improve products to statisfied even more selective collectors and wants to help you to rich top of this business.
Thank you ,Gregg ,and all Bc for yours work, but please trie to listen suggestions of those ,who see things very well and also knows how they could be

Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L21 using Tapatalk

 

[jimminy]

I got my replacement jacket and it's much better. No weird creases or dimples, and the collar even sits below the shirt collar at the back of the neck.

I tried putting in tight expanders but they were too tight in the pants and looked funny. Lost a button on the pants taking them down and up, or at some unknown point previously (I didn't even know there were buttons there until I tried taking the trousers off), and I creased the pants a bit. The buttons are hidden under the waistcoat so you never see them and I have the replacements for when I get round to it.

I bought a $5 Dragon Walther PPK from ebay and gave that to him.

I'm happy enough with my Bond for now. I am glad to have a Sean Connery on my shelf. It comes across better in person than it does in the photos. The niggles people have about the body size, shoulders, head, snaps on the chest, etc, still stand, but this looks much more like the prototype now so I have gotten what I expected. I'll consider pre-ordering Moore, because even if another gets made it will be years away.

 

[DVD1]

Pleased to see you’re pleased with Mr. Bond.
I was messing with mine again today, and playing with the lighting effects some more ...

Here’s the pose I finally ended up with for now, and how he stands in the shelf.

 

[Wor-Gar]

Where did you get the replacement jacket from?

 

[Tom Day]

The head looks smaller in DVD1's shot than in Jimminy's, which is interesting. Last year I did some comparison shots of the four BW ghostbusters to see how the head size compared. Can anyone do some comparison shots of the Connery head with some heads from other BCS figures?

 

[DVD1]

Okay dokay


A quick, no frills pic of Mr. Bond flanked by two HT figures.

I have not found the head to be incorrectly proportional at all. And, I think he holds his own against these two HT guys.

 

[superado]

Okay dokay


A quick, no frills pic of Mr. Bond flanked by two HT figures.

I have not found the head to be incorrectly proportional at all. And, I think he holds his own against these two HT guys.

Junior!

 

[jimminy]

Where did you get the replacement jacket from?

Sideshow

The head looks smaller in DVD1's shot than in Jimminy's, which is interesting. Last year I did some comparison shots of the four BW ghostbusters to see how the head size compared. Can anyone do some comparison shots of the Connery head with some heads from other BCS figures?

Yeah I just can't take good pictures of him. One small change of the camera angle seems to transform the figure. I need to up my skills.

 

[Raiders March]

Junior!

Thats for blasphemy..

 

[DVD1]

On that note, and a quick change of clothes (so to speak)



Cheers !!

 

[jimminy]

The head looks smaller in DVD1's shot than in Jimminy's, which is interesting. Last year I did some comparison shots of the four BW ghostbusters to see how the head size compared. Can anyone do some comparison shots of the Connery head with some heads from other BCS figures?

I was trying to take some pics of all my sixties era fig together and they didn't really turn out because they're a it blurry, but at least you can use the images to compare head sizes, sort of.

 

[matrix69]

Fantastic line up jimminy

 

[Wor-Gar]

Yep, that's awesome.