Which movie toys have the most lasting appeal?

Money, violence, sex, computer graphics, scatalogical humor, racism, robots designed to be rednecks but given European accents, and maybe another sequel to the saga... what's not to love? TF m1, Revenge of the Fallen, Dark of the Moon and now Age of Extinction.
User avatar
JediTricks
Site Admin
Posts: 3851
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 12:17 pm
Location: LA, CA, USA

Re: Which movie toys have the most lasting appeal?

Post by JediTricks »

onslaught86 wrote:I'd cite Hot Shot as an example of another figure with car kibble arms, but he's not a good toy either. Stockade's kibble actually 'is' his arms, so it doesn't wreck the articulation.
Only if you don't mind the ugly and thoughtless design of the articulation. And the kibble also includes the window halves at either end of each arm and under the arm, which is just patented bullshit. http://www.tfu.info/2008/Decepticon/Sto ... otmode.jpg
He has a good range of motion in his shoulders, tho'.
In what manner?

I'm largely frustrated in how with a little more effort he could have been rad, but instead they left him a minicon with more kibble.
Another one I thought I'd hate and ended up loving, definite shades of Vehicon with that one, some elements of the admittedly superior (But damnit, he's one of the best TFs ever) Deluxe Jetstorm. The elbows and waist suck, I like what they did with the triangular look of the robot and the movable ears give him lots of personality, with the opening claws showing they cared more than they did with the horrible Armada Thrust toy (A mangling of a solid design). Overcast looks better, the jet mode's still really cool, and I dig the way it pops apart to reveal the VTOL turbine.
This is one that takes me back to when I wondered what kind of drugs you were sharing with O6. The ridiculous "head" is shit, movable ears or not, and has NO Personality no matter what you move, it just looks like someone broke a jet fuselage in half. The "claws" don't really make up for the way oversized forearms that are just lazy junk on shitty articulation sticks. The VTOL gimmick is kinda fun, but blocked by the figure's leg-bomb. It always amazes me when you guys will throw love out to a toy like this because of some fetishization of a singular gimmick or feature he has, thus ignoring all the glaring flaws surrounding said gimmick, and then stick with that opinion for ever and evers. I mean, fuck, even if you can get past the horrible arms and shitty head, there's still the puny and fucked up lower body that even Ben had to give the figure a thumbs-down over: http://www.bwtf.com/toyreviews/movie2007/dreadwing/
Needed a hand weapon, elbows were a bit wonky, head took some effort to turn acceptably. Camshaft got more points from me than Swindle for being more visually interesting, though the paintwork was sloppy. Door kibble worked better pointing down, and yeah, dig the transformation. Also liked the gimmick working in both modes, much better execution than many other gimmicks in the same line.
The vehicle sculpt is lazy and boring, slight deviations making it look almost silly, and then has panel alignment problems. The colors sucked (Camshaft had better bot colors, but a fuggo alt mode deco), the head movement sucked (it should have telescoped up), the arms needed to be rethought, the lower legs didn't really get the job done right, and the torso didn't hold together for shit. The gimmick often ended up dislodging the torso completely as well (although as we would find out in the next movie a la Chromia, apparently that shit doesn't matter, TFs are just a loose collection of parts that can do anything). There was a vaguely good idea buried somewhere DEEP in the evolution of this one, but the execution left it all behind.
Did you get Payload? That was one with great ideas and bad joint tolerances letting them down, still waiting on that redeco..
I did, I kinda liked him when everybody was hating on him for pop-off parts, but I wouldn't recommend him without heavy reservations, he's an interesting toy but between all the panel folding and the giant plunger sticking out his back, he's got issues. The plunger is so frustrating, if they had made it fold down somehow he'd be way cool. His camera head is so much better realized than Dreadwing or Swindle too.
He grew on me a lot over time, I still don't get your love for him though. That transformation ONLY works in vehicle-to-robot, those leg panels are a nightmare to get clipped back on, and I hate cramming the arms into his sides, feels like something will give and it's just a matter of time. Too many sprung parts in robot mode, things are hanging on by friction rather than locking in place. Those panels in the backs of the legs nullify most poses, there's not enough range in the arms or ankles to do a lot with him, and the head's blocked by the treads. He was a solid effort and much more akin to Prime than Megatron, I am very glad to be able to cite him as proof that the Super price point can churn out good toys that aren't Primes.
"A nightmare to get clipped back on", really? The whole thing behaves as I'd expect a quality deluxe to, I don't have the fears you do either. I'll give you that he's somewhat hampered in pose by various issues, but overall he's a big tank that turns into a big robot, and delivers a real bad guy to go against Leader Prime. When I look at my TFs, I think of them as a larger universe, and Leader Brawl looks like a true Decepticon baddy should, big, dangerous, well-armed, and transforms into something mean.

And as for the treads blocking the head, yeah, the deluxe has it too. We just accept sometimes there's silly stupid shit in TFs, not unlike giant wings hanging off forearms on Dreadwing. :p At least Brawl's treads by his head can move and act as armor. AHM Megatron could have learned something from that. ;)

I don't really "love" him, it's just that he's the only Leader-class Decepticon worth a damn so he's the top of the heap, and he's also the best large tank-bot we've ever gotten (sorry Armada Megatron, maybe if you weren't a lazy H-tank I might have been kinder).
Image
See, that one's a camcorder, that one's a camera, that one's a phone, and they're doing "Speak no evil, See no evil, Hear no evil", get it?
User avatar
Onslaught Six
Supreme-Class
Posts: 7023
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 6:49 am
Location: In front of my computer.
Contact:

Re: Which movie toys have the most lasting appeal?

Post by Onslaught Six »

JediTricks wrote:It always amazes me when you guys will throw love out to a toy like this because of some fetishization of a singular gimmick or feature he has, thus ignoring all the glaring flaws surrounding said gimmick, and then stick with that opinion for ever and evers.
Are you kidding? That's like our main personality trait. (My God, it's scary that I'm referring to 86 and myself as if we're a dual entity. Like Venom or something. Oh man, Venom rules.) Seriously though, finding one cool trait in an otherwise cruddy toy is basically what I do as a defense mechanism, I think. "Well, he kind of sucks, but he has this one awesome part, so it's okay." It's almost like how suddenly Movie Skids is really cool to me because I connected "shooty fist" with 60s super robots and early G1.

That said, I don't like Overcast a whole lot. Better than Dreadwing, but still pretty cruddy. I suspect I'd like Breakaway more...
BWprowl wrote:The internet having this many different words to describe nerdy folks is akin to the whole eskimos/ice situation, I would presume.
People spend so much time worrying about whether a figure is "mint" or not that they never stop to consider other flavours.
Image
User avatar
Dominic
Supreme-Class
Posts: 9331
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 12:55 pm
Location: Boston
Contact:

Re: Which movie toys have the most lasting appeal?

Post by Dominic »

I can see JT's point here though. Why let one good part of a toy carry the rest of it?

Dom
-admits to having done this, but will not actually try to defend it.
User avatar
Onslaught Six
Supreme-Class
Posts: 7023
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 6:49 am
Location: In front of my computer.
Contact:

Re: Which movie toys have the most lasting appeal?

Post by Onslaught Six »

Because we are suckers and don't like to feel like we wasted money.

Or we're easy to please. I can admit to being far more apathetic than I should be about my quality standards.
BWprowl wrote:The internet having this many different words to describe nerdy folks is akin to the whole eskimos/ice situation, I would presume.
People spend so much time worrying about whether a figure is "mint" or not that they never stop to consider other flavours.
Image
User avatar
JediTricks
Site Admin
Posts: 3851
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 12:17 pm
Location: LA, CA, USA

Re: Which movie toys have the most lasting appeal?

Post by JediTricks »

Onslaught Six wrote:Are you kidding? That's like our main personality trait. (My God, it's scary that I'm referring to 86 and myself as if we're a dual entity. Like Venom or something. Oh man, Venom rules.) Seriously though, finding one cool trait in an otherwise cruddy toy is basically what I do as a defense mechanism, I think. "Well, he kind of sucks, but he has this one awesome part, so it's okay." It's almost like how suddenly Movie Skids is really cool to me because I connected "shooty fist" with 60s super robots and early G1.

That said, I don't like Overcast a whole lot. Better than Dreadwing, but still pretty cruddy. I suspect I'd like Breakaway more...
Venom does not rule. Carnage does not rule. Neither of you are Eddie Brock.

Dominic wrote:I can see JT's point here though. Why let one good part of a toy carry the rest of it?

Dom
-admits to having done this, but will not actually try to defend it.
Pretty much. There should be a balance to these things. A figure that's $12 shouldn't be $11 of suck and $1 of vaguely keen, but when that is the case, certainly that $11 of suck should outweigh the $1 of keen.

Onslaught Six wrote:Because we are suckers and don't like to feel like we wasted money.

Or we're easy to please. I can admit to being far more apathetic than I should be about my quality standards.
That's willful blindness though.

It seems like you guys make a bigger deal out of it than most, that's my real point. I can understand liking Armada Sideswipe's cool flip-around motorcycle minicon reveal, but I can't understand showering him with elation and praise for that alone.
Image
See, that one's a camcorder, that one's a camera, that one's a phone, and they're doing "Speak no evil, See no evil, Hear no evil", get it?
User avatar
Onslaught Six
Supreme-Class
Posts: 7023
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 6:49 am
Location: In front of my computer.
Contact:

Re: Which movie toys have the most lasting appeal?

Post by Onslaught Six »

JediTricks wrote:Venom does not rule. Carnage does not rule. Neither of you are Eddie Brock.
Venom was the first antihero I ever liked, so I have an attachment to him. I was also five or six, tops.
Dominic wrote:Pretty much. There should be a balance to these things. A figure that's $12 shouldn't be $11 of suck and $1 of vaguely keen, but when that is the case, certainly that $11 of suck should outweigh the $1 of keen.
I wouldn't say it's $11 of suck and $1 of vaguely cool. TFs have...an inherent cool factor about them, to me, I guess, that kinda prevents them from sucking *that* hard. A cruddy toy becomes a good toy when you pay less for it, for example. I got all my deluxes so far for $9, so that's already a start.

Come to think, the fact that most of Universe 2.0 was only $7.77 for me is probably why I'm more lenient on them about stuff.
That's willful blindness though.
Ignorance is bliss, my friend.
It seems like you guys make a bigger deal out of it than most, that's my real point. I can understand liking Armada Sideswipe's cool flip-around motorcycle minicon reveal, but I can't understand showering him with elation and praise for that alone.
I don't own ArSwipe, so I can't comment on his...flippy bit.

One thing, though, is that usually it's not that the rest of the figure totally sucks. I mean, I fully understand that Demolishor isn't a toy for everybody, but I like him.

Then there's guys like, say, the original Cheetor. That's just...an iffy toy. A bunch of different little annoyances add up to a mediocre, if not bad, figure. It's sad.

It's also late and I need to get to bed.
BWprowl wrote:The internet having this many different words to describe nerdy folks is akin to the whole eskimos/ice situation, I would presume.
People spend so much time worrying about whether a figure is "mint" or not that they never stop to consider other flavours.
Image
User avatar
Dominic
Supreme-Class
Posts: 9331
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 12:55 pm
Location: Boston
Contact:

Re: Which movie toys have the most lasting appeal?

Post by Dominic »

Somebody had to mention Armada Sideswipe's flippy bit. (All hail the flippy-bit!)

I can only give so many points for a sale-price. A bad toy is a bad toy. I got that rhino guy in "Cybertron" for cheap. He still sucks. I got "Cybertron" Mudflap for $5. It was worth a shot for $5. And, the toy did grow on me. But, it is the fact that toy grew on me, not the fact it was $5 that makes me like it.

Along similar lines, I try not to take off too many points for removed features. At the end of the day, we are buying the product as it is released, and it makes no more sense to compare it to an idealized proto-type than it would to compare it to a wholly imagined ideal of a toy.

Dom
-remember that "Green Jelly" song about Carnage.
User avatar
Onslaught Six
Supreme-Class
Posts: 7023
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 6:49 am
Location: In front of my computer.
Contact:

Re: Which movie toys have the most lasting appeal?

Post by Onslaught Six »

Hey, that Green Jello tune was awesome...as an instrumental. They used it as the theme for Maximum Carnage, the SNES/Genesis game, after all.

Backstop is great.
BWprowl wrote:The internet having this many different words to describe nerdy folks is akin to the whole eskimos/ice situation, I would presume.
People spend so much time worrying about whether a figure is "mint" or not that they never stop to consider other flavours.
Image
Post Reply