|
Post by Blade-of-the-Moon on Dec 13, 2011 22:05:09 GMT
I'm sure it's been said before, but these are just TOYS.
If you want the best and most accurate seek out artists like Shane and Galileo, I have and they are far superior to all figures thus far, that said I still collect the toys as well...but I digress before I start another argument of some kind.
|
|
|
Post by Horridus on Dec 13, 2011 22:09:20 GMT
I'm sure it's been said before, but these are just TOYS. This is true. As I've said before, Papo don't claim to produce 'museum quality' figures or 'scale replicas' (and even this T. rex is better than either Schleich Replica-Saurus incarnation). However, there's still no harm in people criticising them, as long as they take this into account. We are giving our opinions as nerdy collectors; they might not ultimately matter, but the discussions are fun, and that's why this forum exists. ...On the other hand, while Papo don't claim to make 'replica' quality extant animal figures, you probably wouldn't buy (for example) an elephant with too-long forelimbs and a disfigured jaw. You'd say it was a bit of an ugly-looking elephant toy. Just sayin'. (Mwahaha...)
|
|
|
Post by sepp on Dec 13, 2011 22:09:42 GMT
I... don't like the new Papo rex. I don't mind the skinny look, I don't mind the haunting eyes... I like most of Papo's figures, I definitely do not have anything against the company itself. It's the disfigured and bulbous lower jaw that I just hate I don't like my toys to be ugly XD I won't be buying this one... Unless one of the dinosaur toy customizers on the forum can figure out a way to switch out the cancerous lower jaw with the green rex's lower jaw and repaint it Or even substitute the whole head, if need be, though the skull of the new rex is not what I have an aversion to. I'd definitely throw money at that.
|
|
|
Post by sbell on Dec 13, 2011 22:22:06 GMT
Would have posted this earlier, but Proboards wouldn't let me. Still, I like my argument too much to throw it in the bin. In that case, dinosaur movies don't exist. And if we apply this same argument to dinosaur figures, they don't exist either since all dinosaur toys are based on scientific speculation and we'll never know for sure what they look like, so reality will always remain nonexistent in the case of dinosaur figures and only the effect of these being dinosaurs (or poor decision making) remains. Dinosaur toys are just as much a fictional construct as dinosaur FX in movies. That's why none of the same species of dinosaurs' toys look alike, compared to, let's say, elephant figures. We know full well what an elephant looks like, so the number of accurate elephant toys is much higher than the number of accurate dinosaur toys. Of course, some dinosaur toys are more accurate than others, but a fully accurate dinosaur toy will never exist. To those collecting only the most accurate of dinosaur toys, the number of toys you should own, is: none. Now shut up, paleontology nerds! ;D Couldn't say it better, especially the last sentence ;D ;D As i always say, when it comes to prehistoric animals, real accuracy is just a myth... Bear in mind, this doesn't justify truly flat-out WRONG restorations still passed as "scientific" or past misconceptions of a certain species (as much as i LOVE the JP raptors i'd never say that Deinonychus Antihrropus really looked like that), but sure as hell it'd make all the "purists" think deeper when it comes to criticize a certain dinosaur restoration To Sbell: i'm pretty sure Roselaar wasn't trying to mock you, getting all angry for just a post in an internet forum is not very professional, IMHO... Here, i guess, we are all enough intelligent to talk about our hobby without ruining the fun of it, am i right or what? And if I wrote, at this point, "Shut up, JP Toy fans" or "Shut, people who have no educational/practical experience" I'm willing to be bet that, regardless of intent, there might be a few people taking me to task. But when you phrase it as science-mockery (because who needs people that know stuff?), it becomes funny (apparently). So for a while, I will leave this particular (you know, revealing new 2012 releases) thread to the people trying to justify a badly designed toy to themselves (and others).
|
|
|
Post by amanda on Dec 13, 2011 22:22:01 GMT
Ok. Well I just looked again at the dinostorius descktop rex, and it has fairly long arms as well. Now. **deep breath**
I think the Paporex looks way cool. Not accurate, just cool. I am not sure, really, why there is disappointment. All through these last few years, all I heard about the older version was pleas to change it's posture. "if only it were walking, not squatting". Well, ta-dah. What do I hear abut the newer Rex statues put out lately. Wow, it looks old and worn, so cool. Ta-dah. "I wish more figures were battle worn, or had more character. I wish they looked gnarlier...ta-dah.
Really, in a LOT of ways, the new Rex is exactly what many have claimed to have wanted in a theropod toy. It will go well with the Allosaur, which is very similar, and well received despite the flaws. i really dunno why anyone is surprised by this new fig.
Now, it is not accurate, no. Duh. But it is a cool figure. I suspect the lower jaw size is due to the articulation, and it's being a toy. perhaps--**perhaps** it was felt that the lower jaws of the first figs did not hold up to rougher play the way they were meant to? And the arms, while wrong, do look similar to many representations out there, even among "accurate" paleoart sites. They just do.
Bottom line, it is a toy meant to appeal first to kids. I do not really think that collectors are formost in Papo's minds, really.
I do feel a little sad reading all this negativity continuously popping up over a toy. We are all s'posed to be (at least casually) friends, right. Why all the adverse comments over something like this. Not liking it is more than understandable, the...attitude towards each other not so much. Like I said, it is a coool looking toy, kids will love it, Papo will sell tons of it, so likely, will make more figs in this vein.
|
|
|
Post by Horridus on Dec 13, 2011 22:25:32 GMT
Like I said, it is a coool looking toy, kids will love it, Papo will sell tons of it, so likely, will make more figs in this vein.
|
|
|
Post by amanda on Dec 13, 2011 22:27:13 GMT
So, if it is not "accurate" it is a BAD toy, and we have to "justify" liking it?
It is a bad representation of a Tyrannosaur, yes. But it will be a good toy.
Two different things, remember/
|
|
|
Post by itstwentybelow on Dec 13, 2011 22:28:03 GMT
Well I am certainly pleased to see that CollectA finished strong and that the marvelous Mapusaurus won't be too undersized!
As for this new Papo rex, I have mixed feelings. That left lateral shot of it looks pretty d**n awesome, but the main thing for me is how big the lower jaw is. It's just stupidly big and out of proportion. I am willing to accept the large arms and chunky teeth, but the jaw throws it ALL off. I guess the Pachyrhinosaurus was just a false alarm as far as suggesting that Papo might start sticking to fairly accurate sculpts.
|
|
|
Post by Horridus on Dec 13, 2011 22:31:32 GMT
So, if it is not "accurate" it is a BAD toy, and we have to "justify" liking it? It is a bad representation of a Tyrannosaur, yes. But it will be a good toy. Two different things, remember/ Yes, you're right. But we're discussing it in the context of being adult collectors. What sells to kids and what us weirdos like are often very different; just witness the gift shop in the Natural History Museum, filled to the brim with awful tat. I'm personally just a little disappointed that Papo have gone down this road rather than producing something a little closer to the real creature. Their Styracosaurus is the best one available, mainly because they got so much right about it; this T. rex is one of the best-detailed, but is way off anatomically. Shame.
|
|
|
Post by amanda on Dec 13, 2011 22:44:18 GMT
It is a disappointment on that vein, yes. I agree. But, not entirely surprising. The Styraco is good, probably the best current one, yes. I do like Battat's a bit better overall. The Pachyrhino was really good. It seems that their non JP inspired dinos are closer to the real things. But, I am disappointed generally that they did not do a different theropod. I would really have liked a cerato, with the gnarliness of this new Rex. But, ah well.
I have no beef against a good debate, of critique. But I do like to think we are capable of doing so without it getting so personal.
|
|
|
Post by Horridus on Dec 13, 2011 22:50:15 GMT
I have no beef against a good debate, of critique. But I do like to think we are capable of doing so without it getting so personal. Well, quite. And I do admire your own civility. Re the Styracosaurus, it is (for whatever reason) one of the very few to get the hands right.
|
|
|
Post by dinodinkies on Dec 13, 2011 23:04:42 GMT
Is it known what common animals papo has next year?
|
|
|
Post by stoneage on Dec 13, 2011 23:36:43 GMT
So, if it is not "accurate" it is a BAD toy, and we have to "justify" liking it? It is a bad representation of a Tyrannosaur, yes. But it will be a good toy. Two different things, remember/ Yes, you're right. But we're discussing it in the context of being adult collectors. What sells to kids and what us weirdos like are often very different; just witness the gift shop in the Natural History Museum, filled to the brim with awful tat. I'm personally just a little disappointed that Papo have gone down this road rather than producing something a little closer to the real creature. Their Styracosaurus is the best one available, mainly because they got so much right about it; this T. rex is one of the best-detailed, but is way off anatomically. Shame. ;D You have to remember that some weirdos and adult collectors are really just big kids emotionally! It seems to me that a very large majority are going to end up buying it, even those who are critical of it's shortcomings.
|
|
|
Post by ankylosaurus54 on Dec 13, 2011 23:48:49 GMT
I'm a huuuge Papo dinosaur fan but I'm not even buying that Faux-rex! It's head is weird and it's arms and feet are oversized. Just because I'm a fan doesn't mean I have to accept what comes down the line. I have standards that must be met.
|
|
|
Post by primeval12 on Dec 13, 2011 23:55:51 GMT
I like the Rex allright but 26.99 is a bit expensive for kid.
|
|
|
Post by primeval12 on Dec 13, 2011 23:57:19 GMT
It reminds me of the one from Primeval though.
|
|
|
Post by fooman666 on Dec 14, 2011 0:08:27 GMT
why can't we just agree to disagree?
those who want to buy it will buy it, those who don't won't. that's their decision. but that doesn't give the people who won't buy it the right to make those who will feel bad about their choice.
|
|
|
Post by tanystropheus on Dec 14, 2011 0:20:34 GMT
I like the Rex allright but 26.99 is a bit expensive for kid. It's actually $19.99. It is $26.99 in Canada. I've been fortunate to have picked up the original Papo T-rex for the reasonably low price of $14. It's a great deal---If the new Papo T-rex was released a decade ago, enthusiasts would be experiencing nerdgasms! We tend to demand exponentially more detailing, and accuracy with time due to our collective desensitization (and our corresponding environmental sensory overload) from being constantly presented with premier entertainment replicas (with exceptional production values) for budget prices. I'm going to get flamed for the following statements, so don't be alarmed. The CollectA Mapusaurus, despite its universal acclaim, looks like a cartoon, when compared to the new Papo T-rex. The Papo T-rex is much closer to the WS T-rex design, than the Mojo Fun and Schleich rexes that it has been consistently compared to. However, if you were to take the WS T-rex, pump it with steroids (do you see the bulging veins on its tail, and underbelly?), and give it pro-psychotic medications (the meds that supposedly increase dopamine neurotransmission selectively in the brain), you get the .....Papo T-rex. ;D Despite its inaccuracies, the Papo T-rex is based on the WS T-rex. There, I said it.
|
|
|
Post by tanystropheus on Dec 14, 2011 0:31:23 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Seijun on Dec 14, 2011 0:48:23 GMT
The forearms of Tyrannosaurus ARE known, though. It's not a matter of conjecture or open to artistic license as to how long they were. Sure, it USED to be...prior to about 1989 THIS! There IS such a thing as scientific accuracy. For many dinosaur species, including t-rex, much of the skeleton IS known, so there are definitely limitations to the animal's proportions and how and where certain body parts can be positioned. If you make huge deviations from that, then the reconstruction is NOT accurate. Artistic license can be taken in many cases regarding such things as color, texture, feathers/scales, and muscle bulkiness. Different artists can make reconstructions of the same animal that can all be considered accurate, but which all look very different because they have taken artistic license in these different areas (Shane Foulkes Apato vs Sideshow Apato). However in Papo's case, the rex's arm's are three or four times longer than the arms of any know rex specimen, and I believe are even longer than the arms any known close rex cousin. Trex arm length is known, and it is a fact (we aren't dealing with spinosaurus here!). So please, stop saying accuracy is a myth And yes, it IS just a toy, but we are collectors here, and many (most?) of us are treating these toys AS collectables. We critique literally everything. The blog is about nothing else but critiques. Without all this, we wouldn't have much of a community. The critiques don't have to be accuracy based, but they tend to be since that is what so many of our members are interested in. You are more than welcome to critique these figures as "just toys" and I don't think anyone would fault you for that. The papo rex is a great toy. I looks cool, stands on its own, is large, and has a movable jaw. On the other hand, the collecta dioramas are probably NOT very great toys, because they are small with no moving parts, and they are all stuck to a base so they can't be made to do anything else except what they have been sculpted doing (gathered in a group, eating). So yeah.. Let those of us who are interested in scientific accuracy critique figures based on that criteria, because that is what interests us. If you are not interested in accuracy and want to critique based on play-ability and toy-quality, or just how cool something looks, go right ahead! I don't see any reason why these two "sides" can't coexist here. It all comes down to what YOU value in a plastic figure. For the record, I haven't seen anyone personally criticize anyone else (or try to make anyone else feel bad) for liking the trex (or not liking the trex), unless I missed something. Also, I am not talking about any specific person here when I say "you".
|
|