bransen2099
Super Freak
Well Hot Toys always made the MK III that size.
Here with the older MKII and the MKI 2.0. I'm to lazy to pull out my BD MKIII but they're the same height too.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
1/6 1/6 DIECAST Iron Man 2 WAR MACHINE
- Thread starter HeubertMichael
- Start date
Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:
Well Hot Toys always made the MK III that size.
Here with the older MKII and the MKI 2.0. I'm to lazy to pull out my BD MKIII but they're the same height too.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Well Hot Toys always made the MK III that size.
Here with the older MKII and the MKI 2.0. I'm to lazy to pull out my BD MKIII but they're the same height too.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Those are the older releases from HT. All the new DC figures, with the exception of the DC MKIII seem to be in a newer larger scale. That's the problem. The DC MKIII looks fine with the plastic figures, and next to the previous MKII's & MKIII's, but is too short with all of the other newer DC figures.
bransen2099
Super Freak
The MKIII is smaller tho. The MKIII is listed at 6'0" and the MK43 as an example is 6'5".
I just used Iron Man wiki thru a quick google search
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2007
- Messages
- 375
- Reaction score
- 2
I have one for sale if anyone is interested. Brand new, nver opened or inspected. PM me
yacobschlomo
Super Freak
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2015
- Messages
- 681
- Reaction score
- 88
That wouldn't make any sense though. It's the same guy in the suit. The boots are the same and the suit can't stretch out someone's body to make the 5" difference.
That's just dumb on Marvel's part, and perhaps even HT to follow them. Most armors should be relatively similar heights, other than some of the big guys, which we never actually saw Tony wear nor perhaps was he meant to (like Igor, Gamma, Stryker, Peacemaker, and Red Snapper). It's the same guy in the armor. But still, they just don't look right together (the older plastic with new DC). But whatever, nothing we can do about it except make it work, or just don't purchase them. I keep them in museum poses, so it would bother me.
bransen2099
Super Freak
Believe me guys, I had the same complaints when the DC MK III was rolling out but I've just kinda accepted it is what it is.
The only reasoning I can come up with is that Tony just made his suits taller as he built more. With the 43 it had to fit over his clothes and shoes so it could slap onto him (and Pepper) at any moment as the MKIII he kinda used a skin suit with the gantry.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The only reasoning I can come up with is that Tony just made his suits taller as he built more. With the 43 it had to fit over his clothes and shoes so it could slap onto him (and Pepper) at any moment as the MKIII he kinda used a skin suit with the gantry.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I think that's the problem... We use "reason"!!
We're not as naive as we get older. We tend to question more (ignorance is bliss 
).. And that ruins storytelling if you cant suspend your disbelief. But the armor would have to have some body conforming adjustments built into it to to be dependent of what he is wearing underneath anyway. Whether he's in boxers or a suit it would still have to fit him when he needed it to.
enzolt
Super Freak
Let's not crowd this thread with the terrible DC IM MkIII.
More pictures of DC War Machine MkI please!!
More pictures of DC War Machine MkI please!!
bransen2099
Super Freak
I think that's the problem... We use "reason"!!
It also needs to fit Pepper and she's definitely a different body type.
But yeah, can't use reason when it comes to the Iron Man suit
Tony's inner organs should be mush from all the sudden changes of acceleration he does while in it i.e. the sudden stops/crashes and the beatings he takes.Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It also needs to fit Pepper and she's definitely a different body type.
But yeah, can't use reason when it comes to the Iron Man suit
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
yeah.... It must be lined with bubble wrap too so he doesn't constantly cut himself or break the suit from the inside all by himself from friction.
Motuxmen
Super Freak
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2014
- Messages
- 12,312
- Reaction score
- 118
Yeah people seem to dislike the figure because it's accurate. It was supposed to be smaller, less advanced, and less mobile (articulated). Why that is an issue I don't get.
bransen2099
Super Freak
It a representation on how the armor evolved thru the movies and I'm the end I think they accurately portrayed that, despite my initial hostility when it was first released.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Motuxmen
Super Freak
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2014
- Messages
- 12,312
- Reaction score
- 118
Yes it's the same guy in the suit. The suit changes sizes on screen. Making sense has little to do with it. If it was done to make sense it wouldn't happen...or at best it's a scaled down version of the stunt suit..meaning a guy wearing parts of the upper body and a green screen suit. And even then it would have to be a Robert Downey version scaled to fit a 5ft 8inch man then one scaled to fit the stunt performer that in im1 and 2 was 6ft 3 inches tall. The two Chris's are 5 inches taller then rdj but iron man and stark at about the same height or taller.
And a suit could absolutely add 5inches in height. My ex wife is 5ft2 and at our wedding she wore these gigantic heels that added 4inches to her height so she didn't look so small in the pics. Lol
Motuxmen
Super Freak
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2014
- Messages
- 12,312
- Reaction score
- 118
Yeah it's not the best figure they have made. But it does accurately reflect the on screen suit. Which I think is the main point of hot toys figures. Every choice they made (and it's all done on purpose) has a justification in the film. From torso articulation to ankles and height. Not perfect, but correct.
bransen2099
Super Freak
The main complaint I had was the lack of torso articulation but I realized in order for it to look like it did in the movie, they had to sacrifice movement. How they got the MKIII to move and look the way it did in film was taking liberties with the CG model and in no way they could replicate that in physical form.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
yacobschlomo
Super Freak
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2015
- Messages
- 681
- Reaction score
- 88
I'm thinking consistency between the suits not real world realism. There's no way the 43 adds 5 inches in height over the 3. I understand this is not an issue for some, but scale is an issue for me. And I don't believe that the Mark III's height is screen accurate in comparison to the new diecast figures that are coming out (War Machine I, Mark IV, Mark VI) - those are all going to be significantly taller than the III and they shouldn't be if they were screen accurate.
sixxshooter
Super Freak
That's really tough to answer . Hot toys Battle damaged IRON MAN MARK Vi ( still after all these years . A magnificent piece ) , Hot toys Battle damaged Terminator 1 & 2 ( both are awesome ) , Hot toys P2 Elder Predator 2.0 ( Without a doubt the best predator ever made by them ) and this 2.0 Diecast war machine . I think it could be either 1 of those .
melkorjunior
Super Freak
Eh. I'm not trying to justify it or rationalize it to myself, I realize it's not the same size as later suits, but I honestly don't have a problem with Iron Man being noticeably shorter than Thor and just slightly shorter than Cap. It makes sense to me, more sense actually than a 5/8" guy somehow managing to look as tall as Chris Hemsworth. And if I was that much of an **** retentive stickler for accuracy I wouldn't have a Christoper Reeve head on my Man of Steel Superman figure. Which I do. And it's awesome.
Similar threads
