The Force Awakens Millennium Falcon Projects

I did notice that,....but didn't like to say,.....me being all humble and all that,.....but I don't know, theres something very familiar about that part......

http://i1119.photobucket.com/albums...Falcon/Screen Shot 2015-11-01 at 17.42.37.png


....nooooooo!.....dont do it....that one was spot on!!......do another one

J


I'm thinking about my Revell snap kit Falcon that I diced up and modified, Not the 6 month MPC build! That one is gold on the shelf. I never was happy with the Revell ship though.
 
I'm thinking about my Revell snap kit Falcon that I diced up and modified, Not the 6 month MPC build! That one is gold on the shelf. I never was happy with the Revell ship though.

Phew,....Gold it is.....love that paint job......

J
 
So is the bandai kit the most accurate?
Well, the fine molds falcon is pretty accurate in terms of details to the 32".... But the shape is wrong.

The shape of this is pretty identicle to the five footer, but the sidewalls are quite different. However, this appears to be close to the digital falcon of the new film. So there's that.


But dang, the curvature of this thing makes up for anything.
 
So is the bandai kit the most accurate?

When it comes to the Falcon, there are so many versions that the only way to be "accurate" is to pick one specific version and try to replicate that. Here are the different versions: (studio miniatures) 5-footer (ANH version), 5-footer (TESB, ROTK version), 3-footer, various low-detail models used for long shots, ANH full-scale set, TESB/ROTJ full scale set, SE digital model, PT digital model (with "Stellar Envoy" paint job), TFA digital model (based mostly on 5-footer with TFA full scale set details), TFA full scale set. Once the Han Solo stand-alone movie is made, we'll likely get yet another version of the Falcon to show the pre-ANH ship.

What Bandai finally gets right is the hull curvature. Ever since the original MPC kit, Falcon models have been flawed by a too flat hull shape that required designers to make the side walls too tall to compensate. That makes for a 'hockey puck' shaped Falcon when the shape should be more like a clam shell. or a hamburger.
 
So if I want to replicate the tfa falcon I should go with the fm kit? And that would be the 1/144 or the 1/72, which one?
 
Last edited:
So if I want to replicate the tfa falcon I should go with the fm kit? And that would be the 1/144 or the 1/72, which one?

The Bandai kit is the closest to the TFA Falcon. Hands down. Both the 1/72 and 1/144 Fine Molds kits have inaccurate proportions to any of the physical or digital models in the films. Go with Bandai. It's also far cheaper than the FM kits, so its a win-win.
 
Like many Falcon lovers out there I was scanning every inch of the Bandai Falcon for new details and guests what Jaitea, they're using the same radar disk base as the Ralf McQuarrie version. Like the one you've build.
http://i1222.photobucket.com/albums...e Uploads/IMG_20151030_124449_zpsz4om3tvh.jpg

I think that the dish looks a lot like the dish on the Tantive IV as well.

TantiveIVFinal.jpg
 
Ok,...some images of my Hunk a Junk inspired FM modification:

nK9YN7e.jpg

mIEDyRB.jpg

22Hib9Y.jpg

O3T3Y1R.jpg

LOMa12y.jpg


Oh,....almost forgot,....I got a parcel today from Tenso:
WRDyO7s.jpg

w0OZ0kM.jpg

Yr3FPaL.jpg

70DIQv8.jpg


The parts are BEAUTIFUL,....very fine & fantastically detailed

J
 

Attachments

  • nK9YN7e.jpg
    nK9YN7e.jpg
    912.2 KB · Views: 194
Last edited:
Ok,...some images of my Hunk a Junk inspired FM modification:

http://i.imgur.com/nK9YN7e.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/mIEDyRB.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/22Hib9Y.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/O3T3Y1R.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/LOMa12y.jpg

Oh,....almost forgot,....I got a parcel today from Tenso:
http://i.imgur.com/WRDyO7s.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/w0OZ0kM.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/Yr3FPaL.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/70DIQv8.jpg

The parts are BEAUTIFUL,....very fine & fantastically detailed

J

Looking really nice John :thumbsup and yes, Bandai make us all very happy. :lol
 
One thing that might be challenging for us on this one is the paneling colours. The fact is, unless the studio released the digital images for us to look over, most of our references will come from film stills.

Unlike years of model references from books and displays

There might be a lot of debate going on about this.

Which is why I will probably wait a while before picking one of these up. And who knows? if a 1/72 version comes out, I may just skip this
 
Logically it should have the same exact panelling/colors as the studio 32" ESB model with maybe a few extra added color panels and blast marks/scuffs but again we always get surprises.

GFollano
 
Logically it should have the same exact panelling/colors as the studio 32" ESB model with maybe a few extra added color panels and blast marks/scuffs but again we always get surprises.

GFollano

One would think, but are the panels the same as the 32"? I always thought that the paneling of the two studio models were quite different.
 
Logically it should have the same exact panelling/colors as the studio 32" ESB model with maybe a few extra added color panels and blast marks/scuffs but again we always get surprises.

GFollano

I really think we should use the 5 footer as a guide,....there are no elements of the 32" stunt Falcon on TFA CG asset

I'd say the 32" is retired

There are a few areas on TFA Falcon that are weathered differently,....Portside mandible for eg

J
 
This thread is more than 3 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top