December 9, 2016 at 10:28 am #26949
Dear Forum Members,
It has been brought to our attention that several builders had expected the finished model would include covers for the landing legs of the craft. Unfortunately, these are no longer planned as part of this build. They were omitted from the final design after consultation with the licensor, Disney, due to complications arising from the use of different models in the filming of the original trilogy.
The prop that we based our model on was designed for the numerous flying shots that occur in the films, and consequently, only had legs attached for a brief sequence when the ship lands on an asteroid. These legs were only modelled temporarily, as they were barely in the shot, and were therefore not available as reference material when our model was being designed. In fact, there is very little documentation or illustration in the archive material relating to the legs.
Also, in order to include doors that would have covered the recesses containing the retracted legs, we would have had to drastically alter the design of our model. This was not authorised by Disney, since it would have compromised the ship’s canonical accuracy.
Due to this complication, it was deemed that the most faithful way to replicate the ship as it appears in the films was to omit this detail, despite the “functional” issue that this would present.
We would like to apologise for any disappointment this may have caused.
DeAgostini AdminDecember 9, 2016 at 11:07 am #26950
So…as this replica is based on the flying model, why supply landing legs or an opening ramp?December 9, 2016 at 12:37 pm #26955
Translation: We overlooked the doors and had to come up with an excuse for not putting or adding them later once these difficult die hard fan builders started questioning it. Disney is known to be hard to work with so we’ll put it on them.
Honestly, I’d rather you say sorry, we didn’t think about it til it was too late and leave it at that. But this whole filming miniature accuracy excuse has zero weight when you’ve added so many thing not even remotely on the filming model. I don’t blame you guys for not adding a them at this late point in the game. But com’on, Disney said no?
BillDecember 9, 2016 at 1:32 pm #26960
“most faithfull way to replicate the ship” would be to provide an accurate cockpit canopy, but meh, that ship sailed long ago.December 9, 2016 at 6:35 pm #26973
correct deagostini i agree that there would not have been enough reference shots of the esb falcons legs to go off but if you had maybe looked at the special editions and maybe the other wealth of material available which most of your customers found ?? you wouldn’t have come up with such a pitiful excuse also as for the retracted legs excuse for the doors on them the supplied closed panels are fine for displaying in flight mode i think what people were after was the addition of maybe clip in or glue on leg doors for displaying the inaccurate model in landed mode which isn’t a stretch considering someone on shapeways did it furthermore you have the licence from disney to sell this model as such you sold it you built it its up to you to rectify your mistakes not them .
i am believe it or not actually very happy with the ship but due to lack of replies from yourselves on this issue and other problems which have risen in the past i am reluctant to go near the r2d2 or any other model in the future until customer service issues are dealt with in a manner befitting a company of your size .December 9, 2016 at 8:24 pm #26977
Customer service is everything.
What we have received in terms of responses to our concerns and honouring of promises has been substandard.December 9, 2016 at 11:42 pm #26994
…well that’s c!eared the landing leg door scenario from DeAgostini’s point of view…I await with baited breath as to the outcome of the missing greeblies…
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.