Day of the Dead Mask

Asp9mm

This is comedy gold. Cast off the original mould it says. Mould of what we have to ask, King Kongs skull. Absolutelly shocking. But at least they didn’t make the cranium cone shaped. If this is the final product, then er.. wow ) And you thought the cane was bad.

http://www.factoryent.com/James-Bond-SPECTRE-Day-Of-The-Dead-Mask-Limited-p/408319.htm

AugustWalker

I guess Indiana Jones was testing the prototype back in 2007 then...
And he already wasn‘t too happy about it

Asp9mm

I knew I’d seen it somewhere before

danjaq_0ff

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJzRpgXvM2I

I was under the impression that the mask was an off the shelf job customised by the prop makers for DC ?

Asp9mm

It was made by a well known movie mask maker. He made the Mask from The Mask.

danjaq_0ff

Asp9mm wrote:

It was made by a well known movie mask maker. He made the Mask from The Mask.

Somebody Stop Me

Factory Q-Branch

Asp9mm wrote:

This is comedy gold. Cast off the original mould it says. Mould of what we have to ask, King Kongs skull. Absolutelly shocking. But at least they didn’t make the cranium cone shaped. If this is the final product, then er.. wow ) And you thought the cane was bad.

http://www.factoryent.com/James-Bond-SPECTRE-Day-Of-The-Dead-Mask-Limited-p/408319.htm

Glad we made you laugh, but to be pedantic, what we actually said was "The molds for this replica were cast directly from the original prop in the EON archives" We did not claim to have any access to any original molds. EON lent us the original prop to study and we reverse cast it - people here should be fairly familiar with that process.

Not sure how much more accurate you can get? The OP had some hairs stuck in the 'tit-tape' that lined it.. we thought about tweezing them off, cutting them up and sticking a segment inside each replica... but decided that was going too far -{

The replica comes with a prop story that fully documents the story of the prop and the making of the replica, including the gentlemen who made the original, who is indeed one of the worlds preeminent theatrical mask makers.

Asp9mm

Without being cruel, the whole shape is off.

The eye holes are off
The nose ridge isn’t deep enough or pronounced
The brows have lost detail
The low and high surfaces have lost their definition.
The whole profile of the mask is wrong. From the side it’s massively off.

“The molds for this replica were cast directly from the original prop in the EON archives and each replica is hand made to exacting standards in order to create a museum quality facsimile of the original. “

I would have expected a more accurate representation that hadn’t lost quite a lot of detail if you cast your moulds from the original' and say it’s museum quality.

What happened with the cane too. That too is very different from the original prop.

It’s also a shame it’s not wearable. But the screen used ones don’t lend themselves to longevity.

ppw3o6r

Factory Q-Branch wrote:

Asp9mm wrote:

This is comedy gold. Cast off the original mould it says. Mould of what we have to ask, King Kongs skull. Absolutelly shocking. But at least they didn’t make the cranium cone shaped. If this is the final product, then er.. wow ) And you thought the cane was bad.

http://www.factoryent.com/James-Bond-SPECTRE-Day-Of-The-Dead-Mask-Limited-p/408319.htm

Glad we made you laugh, but to be pedantic, what we actually said was "The molds for this replica were cast directly from the original prop in the EON archives" We did not claim to have any access to any original molds. EON lent us the original prop to study and we reverse cast it - people here should be fairly familiar with that process.

Not sure how much more accurate you can get? The OP had some hairs stuck in the 'tit-tape' that lined it.. we thought about tweezing them off, cutting them up and sticking a segment inside each replica... but decided that was going too far -{

The replica comes with a prop story that fully documents the story of the prop and the making of the replica, including the gentlemen who made the original, who is indeed one of the worlds preeminent theatrical mask makers.

Perhaps FE could answer this question? The prototype you exhibited appeared to be an excellent representation of the screen prop where as ASP has most eloquently pointed out your final production replica most definitely is not and before you ask how would I know? an acquaintance of mine purchased the Day Of The Dead costume at the Christies SPECTRE auction! -{

JTM

Wow, I didn't really have high hopes regarding spot on accuracy, but I at least thought it would be wearable seeing as it is a face mask... 8-)

Spectre0072015

Factory Q-Branch, Ive just noticed the item has been removed from your website? is it no longer available?

Factory Q-Branch

ppw3o6r wrote:

Factory Q-Branch wrote:

Asp9mm wrote:

This is comedy gold. Cast off the original mould it says. Mould of what we have to ask, King Kongs skull. Absolutelly shocking. But at least they didn’t make the cranium cone shaped. If this is the final product, then er.. wow ) And you thought the cane was bad.

http://www.factoryent.com/James-Bond-SPECTRE-Day-Of-The-Dead-Mask-Limited-p/408319.htm

Glad we made you laugh, but to be pedantic, what we actually said was "The molds for this replica were cast directly from the original prop in the EON archives" We did not claim to have any access to any original molds. EON lent us the original prop to study and we reverse cast it - people here should be fairly familiar with that process.

Not sure how much more accurate you can get? The OP had some hairs stuck in the 'tit-tape' that lined it.. we thought about tweezing them off, cutting them up and sticking a segment inside each replica... but decided that was going too far -{

The replica comes with a prop story that fully documents the story of the prop and the making of the replica, including the gentlemen who made the original, who is indeed one of the worlds preeminent theatrical mask makers.

Perhaps FE could answer this question? The prototype you exhibited appeared to be an excellent representation of the screen prop where as ASP has most eloquently pointed out your final production replica most definitely is not and before you ask how would I know? an acquaintance of mine purchased the Day Of The Dead costume at the Christies SPECTRE auction! -{

To answer your question: The prototype mask we exhibited is the same as the final product. They are visually identical. The only changes made between the two were to the stand, plaque, the way the lining was applied and the addition of an elastic safety strap inside. That's it. Honestly we can't say whats putting some people off, but we can assure you that the prototype was used to finalize the only molds created in the process and we have matched it side-by-side with production pulls, its part of the approval process.

If people were happy with the prototype they should be delighted with the final product.

Its an odd item, take for example the 'pointy head' issue that's been debated .... the OP does indeed have a slight point to the top of the skull. However it looks much more exaggerated when photographed from certain angles, so much so that it often looks like an entirely different item from one image to the next. Some people will swear that it does not have any point at all based on certain images, and in others the same prop almost looks like Beldar Conehead. Its one of those things that's best appreciated by viewing in person.

This may be whats throwing people off? We cant say for sure, but we stand by our accuracy claims.

Factory Q-Branch

Spectre0072015 wrote:

Factory Q-Branch, Ive just noticed the item has been removed from your website? is it no longer available?

Its being given an exclusive window on 007.com... it will return to our website in 14 days. Apologies for any confusion

Factory Q-Branch

Asp9mm wrote:

Without being cruel, the whole shape is off.

The eye holes are off
The nose ridge isn’t deep enough or pronounced
The brows have lost detail
The low and high surfaces have lost their definition.
The whole profile of the mask is wrong. From the side it’s massively off.

“The molds for this replica were cast directly from the original prop in the EON archives and each replica is hand made to exacting standards in order to create a museum quality facsimile of the original. “

I would have expected a more accurate representation that hadn’t lost quite a lot of detail if you cast your moulds from the original' and say it’s museum quality.

What happened with the cane too. That too is very different from the original prop.

It’s also a shame it’s not wearable. But the screen used ones don’t lend themselves to longevity.

You can't please all of the people l all of the time I guess - sorry you feel that way, I seem to remember you having similar concerns with most of our items in the past. Sorry we keep failing you.

Not sure that there is much that we can do to change your mind, I wish we could show you the OP next to the replica so you could see just how good a copy it is. Remember that all of our replicas are personally approved by the EON archivist alongside the team at EON and it's something we all care passionately about. We will keep trying and value all feedback, positive and negative. One day we hope to win you round.

Factory Q-Branch

JTM wrote:

Wow, I didn't really have high hopes regarding spot on accuracy, but I at least thought it would be wearable seeing as it is a face mask... 8-)

Ok, so this is an area that's similar to 'Warning peanuts may contain nuts' and 'Caution coffee is hot'... collectively referred to in the biz as CYA

We are a business and produce consumer products, as such we are a target for potential litigation that somebody making one or two items in their garage for fun simply is not. Add in the fact that our product liability also extends to any retailer who carries our products.

So- if we tell you something is not to be worn and you chose to wear it - we have adequately protected ourselves. Make sense?

Just to reiterate and keep our legal counsel happy - We are not telling you to wear it with this reply - ;-) Hope that's clear?

Asp9mm

That’s not correct. I didn’t have ‘concerns’ over your other products in the past. Just accuracy claims. The major one was the Goldeneye device, yours was considerably smaller, thinner and had an idealised amber gem, and also clear panels whereas the prop was smokey. but I understand that it was an idealised product as the prop was quite shoddy. I mean the cover was held on with black gunk If I remember correctly. And I realise that most props are idealised due to this, props are generally crap. I just dislike terms like ‘museum quality facsimile’, and ‘Exact replica’ Which are terms that mislead. Generally museum quality replicas that actually go into museums are 100% accurate. It’s a term often used in the prop making community and is usually not correct at all as in this case.

I have nothing against your company or it’s products save for the breather fiasco which was never fully resolved despite you sending me loads of replacements and parts. You did try to put it right, it was just down to the QC at the factory oversees that let you down. I have quite a few of your items including the GE, which I love. But I had to call this one out as it looks awful in the pictures. And I’m not the only one that is saying this. You should see some FB discussions on this mask, they’d have you reaching for the Valium.

Hopefully the product that is released will fulfill expectations.

Factory Q-Branch

Asp9mm wrote:

That’s not correct. I didn’t have ‘concerns’ over your other products in the past. Just accuracy claims. The major one was the Goldeneye device, yours was considerably smaller, thinner and had an idealised amber gem, and also clear panels whereas the prop was smokey. but I understand that it was an idealised product as the prop was quite shoddy. I mean the cover was held on with black gunk If I remember correctly. And I realise that most props are idealised due to this, props are generally crap. I just dislike terms like ‘museum quality facsimile’, and ‘Exact replica’ Which are terms that mislead. Generally museum quality replicas that actually go into museums are 100% accurate. It’s a term often used in the prop making community and is usually not correct at all as in this case.

I have nothing against your company or it’s products save for the breather fiasco which was never fully resolved despite you sending me loads of replacements and parts. You did try to put it right, it was just down to the QC at the factory oversees that let you down. I have quite a few of your items including the GE, which I love. But I had to call this one out as it looks awful in the pictures. And I’m not the only one that is saying this. You should see some FB discussions on this mask, they’d have you reaching for the Valium.

Hopefully the product that is released will fulfill expectations.

We'll drink to that! -{ Thanks for being so understanding and supporting us

emtiem

Asp9mm wrote:

That’s not correct. I didn’t have ‘concerns’ over your other products in the past. Just accuracy claims. The major one was the Goldeneye device, yours was considerably smaller, thinner and had an idealised amber gem, and also clear panels whereas the prop was smokey. but I understand that it was an idealised product as the prop was quite shoddy.

Heh! That's true: I remember seeing it at some exhibition and being surprised that the 'metal' casing was clearly wood, grain and all!

Asp9mm

emtiem wrote:

Asp9mm wrote:

That’s not correct. I didn’t have ‘concerns’ over your other products in the past. Just accuracy claims. The major one was the Goldeneye device, yours was considerably smaller, thinner and had an idealised amber gem, and also clear panels whereas the prop was smokey. but I understand that it was an idealised product as the prop was quite shoddy.

Heh! That's true: I remember seeing it at some exhibition and being surprised that the 'metal' casing was clearly wood, grain and all!

The hero one was certainly aluminium. You may have seen a stunt which is cool as I have never seen that. I remember someone else saying they saw a wood framed one too. Cheers for confirming that.

emtiem

I'm not sure why they'd need a stunt one..? I guess there would be a few. Have you seen an aluminium one, then?

Asp9mm

emtiem wrote:

I'm not sure why they'd need a stunt one..? I guess there would be a few. Have you seen an aluminium one, then?

Yeah, the main one used in the film was aluminium. I thought the wooden version was a myth until you just confirmed it.

emtiem

Asp9mm wrote:

emtiem wrote:

I'm not sure why they'd need a stunt one..? I guess there would be a few. Have you seen an aluminium one, then?

Yeah, the main one used in the film was aluminium. I thought the wooden version was a myth until you just confirmed it.

You’ve seen it, then? How do you know it was ally?

danjaq_0ff

It is Aluminium 100%




Ive had it in my hands more than once

Higgins

and please don't ask what he has done with it that often.... 8-) 8-)

danjaq_0ff

Put it in the slot, like a credit card

Higgins

Charmed & Dangerous

) ) )

danjaq_0ff

He is just gutted it wasnt his slot

emtiem

danjaq_0ff wrote:

It is Aluminium 100%




Ive had it in my hands more than once

Okay, great: that’s the original? It’s hard to imagine they wouldn’t make it from metal- it’s not hard for these guys!

danjaq_0ff

emtiem wrote:

danjaq_0ff wrote:

It is Aluminium 100%




Ive had it in my hands more than once

Okay, great: that’s the original? It’s hard to imagine they wouldn’t make it from metal- it’s not hard for these guys!

That is actually a pic taken in the Archive, so yes 100% original.

thespyboys11

danjaq_0ff wrote:

Put it in the slot, like a credit card

OUCH!!!!