Huh, weird. Looks like it's using Revoltech joints or a close approximation thereof. The 'porn-face' look of the alternate heads is a bit off-putting, though.
It's animation accurate in that respect. Her animation model had a very small nose. I would debate that. The hair is clearly in two pieces, I'd bet there is a joint in the middle so that the head can turn and the hair can be posed out of the way. Probably won't turn very far, but it'll still be poseable enough to avoid her forever being looking forward. At $135+ it's a bit pricey but I'm still tempted. One for the dedicated fan not casual fans, though.
Agreed. For $135 I will most likely pass, though it does indeed look very cool. Ginrai will be bought though
Yeah, I think the hair on the back will be static, while the upper head and hair will be on a ball joint and move independently. Compare the hair head to the helmet head. When I noticed that earlier today, I thought it was really cool, since my first thought was like yours, thinking it would be a pain in the ass.
I personally loved Super God Masterforce, and would love to get this..... but definitely not for that high a price. Looks pretty cool though. Very good representation of Minerva.
there is no such thing as official 3rd party. It's a 2nd party product. It's liscensed from the owners of the property, but not produced by them. Anything liscensed such as clothing, posters, cakes and this item is a 2nd party item.
one problem, i did a search on bbts for their other similar products, i assume this will be in the same line of their 'Gutto Kuru Figure Collection'. and they are going for up words of $130 dollars. each! how ever, since it is Minerva, I will probably buy one. only thing is i hope that second piece of hair comes off! as i'd rather see the headmaster head! though by the looks of it, there is nothing under it, so nvm
That is completely incorrect, and if you were in a college class right now, your professor would be scolding you.
No, you are the second party. Take for example, Video games. Console developer (Sony, Nintendo) = first party The players = second party Other developers / publishers (Activision, Square Enix) = third party. And fully licensed by the console developers to publish on their platform. It's been referred to as that for absolutely years by magazines and also in official documentation for things like Apple.
yeah, i was misinformed on that as well until the last time this came up. i hear it mostly used in video game journalism.
Huh, never knew that (and the Apple definition I googled said the consumer was the second party) but that makes a lot of sense too. Keyword here seems to be that it's a second party developer, even so it's interesting. Many thanks, you've taught me something new today