New DC Multiverse Wonder Woman 1984 from McFarlane Toys

very cool figures love the gold armor Armor

On the standard figure the costume looks great and really pops but the face looks way way off.

Ok, I am sorry but this is inexcusable, legs that have no shape wtf ? From fricking McFarlane? Company that revolutionized figure sculpting ? And they release figure of Wonder Woman who has legs that are just cylinders ? How mighty have fallen. Shame. Whoever is sculpting these eitherdoesnt know how to do it or more likely has some ridiculoustime constraints. Either way they need to improve, for this license and And this company this is really bad look.

6 hours ago, lordtom said:

Weird legs. Rocky start by McFarlane on the DC stuff

Waiting for all the excuses for this....all of it driven by being star-crossed by McFarlane, but not judging the product on its merits. That is very amateurish piece of work and should've been done way better.

That Wonder Woman still kind of looks like Sarah Silverman to me and those legs.. ugh!

?...All I can say is....uugh...? The gold WW looks better...I guess.

On apositive note, WW's colors are nice and bright. I was afraid they'd mess it up and go with thegrittier, mutedcolors ofthe first movie. Also, the lasso is nice. I'm glad the included it. On the other hand, the likeness is terrible, the hair is too light, and the legs are badly sculpted.I didn't think I'd say this, but Mattel's movie WW was better. I'm okay with the gold WW, she looks fine.

Im liking these a lot. They are way better than what Mattel was giving us. The long legs are weird but Im fine with them. Im not like the face on the regular Diana face though. The gold armors face is a little better.

Who the hell is that? Not Gal Gadot

We finally got that goldar figure we wanted.