09-04-2005, 09:30 PM
Quote:This is going to way off topic, but, if you compare the pictures of that prototype to the screen used mask pics, there are some things that are different, and I don\'t mean in the paint. The main thing that catches my attention is the vent hole on the right side of the mask directly next to the six mouth holes. It looks like it\'s too high. I don\'t think the masks in the earlier films is like that either. Don\'t take this as a criticism. I could be wrong. And if I am, someone plese post a movie still of the mask that will show it for me. Anyway, sorry to hear about all the recasting problems.You are wrong. These blanks are unaltered, first-gen pulls. Perfect, perfection, perfect-o-tastic, perfectorama, Mr. Perfect. This is the SAME thing that Ken Tarallo is now selling, and the SAME thing that was used in Part 6. There are only two differences in Ken\'s masks and our masks:
[post=\"105674\"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]
1.) Ours are painted and drilled with the best paint job available, whereas Ken\'s blanks are uncut, undrilled, and unpainted.
2.) Ours (will) cost $150 LESS ($250 ) than Ken\'s masks, even though - as stated above - they\'re finished copies from the same mold generation.
And yeah, we\'re thinking $250 now instead of $300...Although C.J.-autographed, strapped copies would still run around $300.
And as for this whole thing about recasting, that\'s utter bullshit. Why flood the market like that? All we want to do is help create the best replicas available for collectors. Our big advantage over the competition is that Mike offers the BEST PAINT AVAILABLE on part 6 hockey masks at this point in time. No matter who recasts us or Ken, Mike will still have an edge over the competition. That is why I came to him in the first place.
Ryan