After much thought and consideration, Rylo brings up some good points. Perhaps my use of the word "lie" was harsh and not a true interpetation (which implies that they intentionally made the cricket innacurate, which in fact may not be the caseat all). EFX does indeed make solid props (many of which I own) and I'm sure I am assuming too much. Truth of the matter is we don't know WHAT EFX used for reference material, we are only speculating. It's possible they just used screen grabs, a stunt piece or even a modified piece that has been handled by many people over the years. My apologies for jumping to conclusions.
With that being said, I stand firm that the blue lighting they used is still not correct, though it may not be intentionally their fault.
The bottom line is the blue lighting isn't accurate. But the cricket itself if gorgeous. All of this debate really isn't worth it. Ifit bothers you that much change out the lighting port or just leave it the way it is. 90% of the people will never know the difference anyway.
Can we just leave it at that?
With that being said, I stand firm that the blue lighting they used is still not correct, though it may not be intentionally their fault.
The bottom line is the blue lighting isn't accurate. But the cricket itself if gorgeous. All of this debate really isn't worth it. Ifit bothers you that much change out the lighting port or just leave it the way it is. 90% of the people will never know the difference anyway.
Can we just leave it at that?