Random minifig of the day: sw1104
Posted by Huwbot,
Today's random minifigure is sw1104 AT-AT Driver - Dark Red Imperial Logo, Cheek Lines, Frown, a Star Wars figure that was first produced during 2020. It can be found in 3 sets.
Our members collectively own a total of 95,631 of them. If you'd like to buy one you should find it for sale at BrickLink, where new ones sell for around $4.70.
Image and minifig data courtesy of BrickLink.com
51 likes
26 comments on this article
I've always wondered if the AT-AT drivers would have the same weakness at the AT-AT's themselves.
I was surprised when I moused over the fig number and saw I had the fig, because I don't have any minifig-scale AT-ATs, then looked at the sets it's been in, and saw that he was in a Microfighter two-pack that I'd forgotten about owning.
Rides them from when they're barely big enough to carry one person, all the way until they're big enough to handle 43.
The only minifigure from 2020-2022 I don't own... somehow
hey, i know that guy! that's TK-1981! we met at a Smash Bros. invitational in Everett. he was a Link main. totally owned me in the semi-finals. we had fun, though. i wonder what he's up to nowadays...
Funny enough: The AT-AT driver is one of favorite imperial designs, just below the Scout Trooper; and yes I know: he's basically just a 'pallet swapped' T.I.E. Pilot, but still...(even painted a T.I.E. Pilot miniature for an AT-AT driver for an old Star Wars RPG:))
@Randomness said:
"I've always wondered if the AT-AT drivers would have the same weakness at the AT-AT's themselves."
Well, I'm sure if you wrapped cables around their legs, they too might fall over.
Again, looks pretty studly to me.
@brick_r:
The helmets look similar, but they're not quite the same. On a TIE Pilot, the hoses attach to the front. On an AT-AT Driver, they attach at the rear. The chest boxes are also different.
@brick_r said:
"Funny enough: The AT-AT driver is one of favorite imperial designs, just below the Scout Trooper; and yes I know: he's basically just a 'pallet swapped' T.I.E. Pilot, but still...(even painted a T.I.E. Pilot miniature for an AT-AT driver for an old Star Wars RPG:))"
I also have a weird affinity for AT-AT drivers and Scout Troopers. AT-ST pilots, too. I don’t know why.
I guess I just find “support” troops endearing. They’re not on the front lines, but they’ve got important jobs and they’re getting them done! Engineers are cooler than commandos.
@WemWem said:
"Engineers are cooler than commandos."
Speaking as someone whose favorite Star Trek character was always Scotty, I agree with you.
@560heliport said:
" @Randomness said:
"I've always wondered if the AT-AT drivers would have the same weakness at the AT-AT's themselves."
Well, I'm sure if you wrapped cables around their legs, they too might fall over."
Also if you slice open their stomach and throw a grenade in it.
@TheOtherMike said:
"I was surprised when I moused over the fig number and saw I had the fig, because I don't have any minifig-scale AT-ATs, then looked at the sets it's been in, and saw that he was in a Microfighter two-pack that I'd forgotten about owning."
Ahh, good fig. You've gotta love the chiba-pet, horned gerbil from that set.
Target, maximum firepower!
I prefer the old design with white and dark bluish gray. Always looked more accurate to me.
Lego Star Wars fell off when they started giving the troopers faces.
Must get cold necks. I hope the cockpits of All-Terrain Armored Transports are well insulated.
@J0rgen said:
"I prefer the old design with white and dark bluish gray. Always looked more accurate to me."
There's some photos out there of one of the original AT-AT pilot helmets, outdoors in soft natural light. It's very grey, and while colour in photos obviously always has to be taken with a grain of salt, it actually looks really close to Lego LBG.
Finally a minifigure I actually own!
@Rob42:
At first I read that as dark-bley, and thought you were crazy (there's a shot with Veers in the background, wearing two shades of grey that are each much darker). Light-bley, on the other hand, I could see. The AT-AT cockpit isn't brightly lit in the films, and the driver helmet and armor are the lightest shade in view. Our eyes are not entirely truthful in what they convey to us. They naturally white-balance based on the available light, which not only affects how we perceive light and dark, but can also skew our color sense. Still, it seems less jarring than seeing the color difference between the on-screen version of Han's parka and what the real coat looks like now. In that case, I have to wonder if the coat hasn't faded, accidentally creating the confusion. That one is just hard to accept as being just a trick of the camera.
Glad got the 2015 version which is virtually the same except with the angry face. And it came in a micro fighter 75075 when it was still $10.
@PurpleDave
The site that has said photos (http://starwarshelmets.com/original%20atat%20helmet.htm) suggests maybe the grey colour was picked because the costumes would be filmed in a the fairly brightly-lit cockpit set, and would have the bright snow scenes composited into the window. The helmets already look white in the film, if they'd been painted white (like most other Imperial armour), they'd probably have looked pretty washed out and lost a lot of detail on screen.
As for Han's parka, there is the notorious blue colour grading over all of ESB, which apparently only got worse with the Special Editions. The Hoth scenes in particular make that obvious with a lot of blue-ish snow.
It doesn't help that there is never really a clear, well-lit shot of Han wearing the parka: He is mostly seen the dim light of the Echo Base hangar or in a snowstorm at night when rescuing Luke. When they're picked up in the morning, he's backlit by the snow and sun. The best look is probably when he's shooting the probe droid, but even then the light is subdued, and the rest of the frame is bright snow, which makes Han fairly dark.
I reckon the (more noticeably blue) jacket he wears for much of the rest of the film has also influenced how people remember and picture this one.
Ultimately, it's the whole question of what is the "true" appearance of a thing: The way the prop looks in real life, the way it ends up coming across in the finished film (after filming, post-production, colour grading, etc), or something else that feels right?
Same thing as with Star Destroyers (which were painted a warm white, but are universally depicted and thought of as being grey), or X-Wings.
@Rob42:
Given how different the Hasbro action figures turned out (very dark blue vs a pukey shade of brownish-purple), I don't think you can blame it all on color grading if it didn't make everyone but Chewbacca look like Smurfs.
I think going by movie appearance rather than what the prop looks like backstage is better. Like how Han's parka and the TIE Fighters are clearly blue.
@J0rgen:
TIE Bombers and TIE Interceptors have a blue tint to them, but the original TIE Fighter and Vader's TIE look neutral grey.
@Zink said:
"Lego Star Wars fell off when they started giving the troopers faces."
How so?