The TOS Enterprise's stand situation is partly about the wonky geometry from putting the stand on a pedestal under the ship instead of inside it. With the balance point so much lower, it meant it was harder for part of the ship to counterbalance other parts, so basically it was a much higher teeter-totter and the stand also had more to counter.It feels heavier than the TOS Enterprise so I definitely won't be trusting that even more flimsy looking stand. I think I may get some of those Eagle stands and use fishing line to secure them as well as bolt down the stand. If I ever get a large display made, that is.
Yeah, so true, they put in too many lines and it's not fun for the ship itself IMO, so it's a waste of the budget. Plus on this one, you can't even cycle through the sounds, you have to wait till the sound ends which can be really annoying - the original didn't have this.Honestly, I wish they didn't try to do sounds. I can understand the appeal of them but in cases like this, the sounds are such poor quality that I'd much rather see the money go towards paint, lighting and quality control. Sounds always turn out to be such a waste.
It does fit in the box with the nacelles on, but it's snug and their crap twistie/tray design means if it slides at all, they'll wear the paint down or even snap off.One thing that baffles me though is they reused the packaging design for the TOS Enterprises, but left the nacelles detached? Why? Since the packaging is designed for a ship with nacelles, the ship fits just fine when you place it in the box with the nacelles attached. So pointless.
That reminds me of another annoyance or 2... first off, the nacelles don't fit as neatly on the pylons, there's an awkward gap at the base (it's on the AA version as well, but to a lesser degree). And second, the back of the engineering hull and the nacelles are separate pieces and their decos don't match the parts they're glued to that well.
The Ent-E is frustrating because it looks good, but lacks all subtlety that AA would have brought without DST. The TOS Ent looks alright but is too simplistic in its sculpt and deco (again, this is an area AA wouldn't have scrimped).My Enterprise-E looks pretty good and my Classic Enterprise was OK.
Development costs, it's always that, that's the biggest cost and the Ent-A mold already existed, so they could revisit it without incurring huge development costs, but since there aren't guaranteed large number sales, they have to keep it on the cheap.I'd just like to ask them why they didn't release a Reliant to tie into the 25th Anniversary? That seems like such an obvious choice.
That's what DST did with the 40th anniversary, nearly all the 40th anniversary product came out the year after, totally frustrating.The starship combat was the highlight of the film. You MUST have a Reliant to display with a BD Enterprise. I'm really disappointed. They could always make one next year but that sort of defeats the purpose of celebrating the 25th Anniversary doesn't it? I'll still take one even if it is a year or two late. Better to have one than not have one.