Jump to content

Benn

Members
  • Posts

    1,481
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    15

Everything posted by Benn

  1. I have faith they’ll find a way to mess up the face. They’re fine when it comes to fully masked figures, but I have yet to see any Select face look anything other than awful.
  2. This is all fair, but Hasbro gets a lot of grief for these distribution problems when there isn’t really anything they can do to prevent these particular problems other than stop making exclusives, which would A) mean the figures in question would never get made, rather than making them more accessible, and B) probably greatly reduce the other output of the line and/or the available outlets to purchase it. It’s totally fair for you not to care about the process and just want your toy, but it’s an extreme waste of everyone’s energy to target your frustration at Hasbro, when the only thing they’re doing to hamper availability of these toys is make sure that Walgreens shoulders all the risk of carrying them. Walgreens is otherwise responsible for every single shortcoming of the process, and no amount of screaming at the “Big Three” on the internet will make them more capable of handling it. I guess my frustration is less with people’s ignorance of retail processes, and more with them letting their ignorance drive.
  3. Probably the retailer who agreed to buy at least a designated minimum quantity in exchange for exclusive rights to sell it. If toys are a “minor concern at best” for Walgreens, they should stop soliciting Hasbro for exclusives or otherwise agreeing to the terms. Hasbro did the math to figure out how many they needed to sell to make it financially worthwhile, and Walgreens agreed to buy at least that many. If Walgreens doesn’t want to bother doing the work to anticipate demand and order accordingly, or to do the work of actually distributing their stock to their stores or through their website, what’s Hasbro supposed to do about it? They made the toy as part of an exclusive agreement, and Walgreens lived up to their end (ordering at least the minimum). Hasbro has to live up to theirs too, even if Walgreens just puts all the toys in a warehouse and decides never to sell them. Hasbro can’t sell to anyone else until the terms of the agreement expire. And to their credit, they have pretty consistently sold most recent Walgreens exclusives elsewhere once they could, focusing on popular under-stocked figures like Dani and the Cuckoos (and Walmart exclusives like Captain America, etc.).
  4. Yeah, it always blows my mind how little people seem to understand about the retail distribution chain. Hasbro’s not off the hook, because they refuse to accept any risk for unsold stock and will simply under-manufacture if retailers under-order, but when it comes to exclusives, it’s very simple. The retailer orders the number they want, then Hasbro manufactures that amount and delivers them. If the retailer realizes they underestimated demand, they can usually order more, but it takes Hasbro about six months to get a print run from “factory order” to “on shelves”, by which time nerd rage has set in and demand is usually much lower. At the end of the day exclusives are hard to find because the retailers underestimated demand for them and Hasbro either didn’t care to, or couldn’t, change their minds.
  5. Man, I’m not sure why you keep wanting to have this conversation, but this is a willfully ignorant, incredibly obtuse take that describes exactly zero people’s real opinions on the matter. I have never, ever, ever seen anyone on this board claim that all female figures need to be thin or flat-chested, or that depicting ladies accurately is over-sexualizing them. This is conservative talk-show host levels of paranoid victimization complex. Here are some of my real opinions that may be part of the foundation upon which this bizarre fiction is built. 1) There are widespread differences in the way that most characters’ bodies have been depicted in comics (rightly or wrongly), which have led to a variety of opinions—none of them inherently right or wrong—about whether a given action figure’s proportions are accurate. 2) Related to the above is the fact that the comics industry is recovering from a period (namely the 90s, and thereabouts) of intensely over-sexualized depictions of women. It may be tempting to read that statement as confirmation of some of your previous claims, so let me explain. If we were to pick ten ladies at random from any given property, you would expect a variety of body types. Some would be curvier, and others thinner, stockier, or more muscular. In the 90s, by contrast, virtually every female comic character was that idealized but unlikely blend of thin but muscular, while still being unimaginably curvy. There was no diversity, and they looked that way because a bunch of men chose to draw them that way. Now, whether that’s a good thing or a bad thing is theoretically up for some debate, but it’s the very definition of hyper-sexualization. These characters didn’t all always look like that, and—for a variety of reasons—many of them have subsequently ceased to look like that. There is now much more diversity in the way ladies are depicted in comics. Some of them (Rogue, Emma, etc.) are still quite curvy, others are thinner or more muscular. 3) There are a lot of people (read: not all) on here who lament virtually every female figure failing to be on the Moonstone body. These people are not interested in body diversity. They are interested in hyper-sexualized depictions of women. That doesn’t mean that you fall into this category, but some people on this board do. Maybe some of these people only read comics in the 90s, but that doesn’t really change anything. See above. 4) Hyperbole about “every” female figure being “rail thin” or having the “body of a teenager” serves nobody. I wholeheartedly agree that Hasbro should have more body diversity in the sculpts available to them (especially for women), and I agree that their depictions of ladies lean a little thinner on average than they probably should, but the vast majority of ladies they release are clearly adults (though I’d believe most of them haven’t had kids), and it demeans rather than serves your argument to maintain otherwise. It’s tempting to believe that a lot of people on here just have really unrealistic ideas about average female proportions. For instance, there are plenty of figures sporting what I would call big chests that I routinely hear decried as flat-chested. 5) Hasbro sometimes gets things wrong, whether by mistake or for budgeting purposes (see Cyber). I can’t speak to the example with Salma Hayek because I’ve never closely studied her proportions, and I don’t really care about the movie figures. I’ll take your word that it’s a bad representation of her body. On the other hand, I can say at a glance that the face-sculpt they gave her bears little resemblance. Do you think that was an intentional decision on Hasbro’s part? If not, why would you assume the body was somehow a calculated inaccuracy? It’s likely they just blundered it. 6) Loudly and publicly obsessing over the anatomy of female figures is a direct barrier to more interest and participation from women in this hobby, which I think is a huge bummer. This is another easy opinion to mischaracterize, so let me try to be clear. I’m not saying women don’t do this too, and I’m also not saying that all women will be put off by this. I’m merely saying that many women who stumble upon boards like these, in the budding days of their interest in a hobby like this, will read these types of posts and immediately pick up on the loud but unspoken message that this a dude’s club where they aren’t welcome. This isn’t extrapolation, conjecture, or speculation. This is the message I hear from women in my life every single time I talk with them about their clear but unrealized interest in geeky hobbies. I’ve owned a game shop for nearly thirteen years, so please believe me when I say that my sample size is immense. By all means, proceed with your crusade, but please stop mischaracterizing people’s complaints (or lack thereof). Nobody takes issue with curvy women or accurate depictions in action figures. “Curvy” and “accurate” are just extremely subjective concepts in this (general, not specific) context, and the idea that every woman needs to be depicted as ultra curvy but also perfectly thin-fit is a lot more prevalent than you seem willing to admit.
  6. I didn’t comment when I voted, because I’m sure anyone who cares already knows, but I my collection is 99% comic-based X-Men. However, I also have a very small contingent of symbiotes, the Maximum Carnage cast, the Winter Guard, the Logan/Xavier movie set, and a few additional random heroes I always liked in my favorite look for them (to date, McFarlane black-costume Spider-Man, classic Moon Knight, armoured Daredevil, and Cloak & Dagger).
  7. I would love to see a great more full-figured replacement body for Moonstone, and this definitely could’ve been a candidate for it. I would love to see more diversity in the sculpts. I just hate that particular weird, malformed, fragile body. I think this figure looks great, though, despite being a lot of re-use. I’m excited for it.
  8. Yeah, I think most people in the US who already have Quasar ordered theirs from Canada or the UK or Hong Kong. I think Zavvi or Robot Kingdom or something has been selling overseas Quasars to Americans for a month or two now, at a premium. Everyone I've seen asked online about it has said they ordered internationally to get it, and paid $35 to $40. EDIT: Yeah, you can get him here https://www.robotkingdom.com/f02235l00.html for $30. Shipping seems to be like $20 for just one copy to where I live, though, so it would end up at least double the American MSRP.
  9. I get that. I just want people to remember it's an option. My store also marks up a little above MSRP, because it's frankly impossible to make money on the line otherwise, but I've seen much worse. We used to charge $21.50 when the MSRP was $19.99, and now that it's $22.99 we charge $25. The comic shop across town charges $30-$35 or so per figure. It's funny you mention the glorified personal collection, because that's legitimately really the only reason I carry toys; not to show off my collection, but to obtain it. I carry the line so I can get the figures I want reliably and cheaply, and I order a little more for the shelves to make it more available locally. From a business perspective, carrying the toys I do at the prices I do is really, really stupid, but I do it for me. To justify its footprint, I really should be charging $30 to $35 per figure, because those prices hold the margins to compete with everything else I carry for precious limited floor space. If people won't pay those prices, I should stop carrying the line. So, ironically, your local comic and game shops charging way too much money are the ones that really want to be selling the toys. Idiots like me who charge anywhere near MSRP are the ones showcasing their vanity projects or otherwise embracing loss leaders.
  10. It's all well and good to want every character to get the best rendition possible, but it's not going to happen at this line's price-point. If people start being okay with $40 or $50 figures, I'm sure Hasbro can squeeze in plenty of extra accessories and make sure every character gets a uniquely tailored sculpt, but to get the $20ish price-point, sometimes sacrifices have to be made. I don't like it either, but it is what it is. That doesn't necessarily specifically address the concerns here, as I'm pretty sure this did get a uniquely tailored sculpt and most of the other complaints are pretty subjective (and not really related to costs), but--in general--it's true.
  11. I’m just gonna keep pointing out that fan channel also means your local brick-and-mortar non-mass-market retailers.
  12. It’s one of the Pulsecon exclusives. It will be available to purchase during Pulsecon in a week or two.
  13. I ended up with an extra copy of this set if anybody is looking for individual figures from it. I have a trade list over on the trade board.
  14. I think he meant to put a comma after “price of oil”, as in the cost of shipping from China and the cost of oil have both gone up, which is true.
  15. I'm not dying for replacements on most of my figures, and probably wouldn't upgrade just for pinless. That said, there are definitely some figures I'd look forward to seeing revisited, and if pinless is the impetus to get us there, I'm okay with it. I honestly think Hasbro has many, many, many years worth of characters and costumes to explore before the line gets stale and needs to lean heavily on re-dos. Even just with X-Men alone, which is my focus, there are hundreds of not-yet-done (at least in the modern era) characters and looks I'd be happy to see.
  16. She is literally punk Storm with a new head and a pair of armbands. They’re identical sculpts otherwise.
  17. I don’t know what to tell you. I could be wrong, but in nearly every picture I see parts where it appears the paint line doesn’t perfectly match the sculpt line, leading me to believe the entire bikini is sculpted.
  18. Her clothes definitely appear to be sculpted. Look at the neck line, and look at the teeth on the side of her bikini bottom. Those aren’t painted on.
  19. Yeah, totally! Heimdall falls somewhere between Omega Red and Colossus for height, and his body type is probably closer to that of Colossus. He might need a whole new sculpt, though, because of his armour. The typical flat, spandex suit wouldn’t be a great fit for him. Probably the same goes for Skurge. This is, incidentally, why I think so few of Thor’s supporting cast has been made so far. It’s not that Hasbro doesn’t want to do the figures. They just don’t want to spring for unique sculpts for each of them, which they would likely have to do for most of them. I agree that heights are often going to need to be rounded, so to speak. Cyber was bad re-use, though. Colossus is both wayyyyy taller than him AND a totally different body shape. They used the body because of the plated arms, but it was a bad fit.
  20. It’s the Colossus body from the Warlock wave. They also used it for the new Cyber. It’s too big for Cyber, as well as most of the stuff you listed, and arguably even for this Sabretooth.
  21. Yeah, I know, and I’ve considered it. In-hand, I can see why it wasn’t done that way, though.
×
×
  • Create New...







Sign Up For The TNI Newsletter And Have The News Delivered To You!


Entertainment News International (ENI) is the #1 popular culture network for adult fans all around the world.
Get the scoop on all the popular comics, games, movies, toys, and more every day!

Contact and Support

Advertising | Submit News | Contact ENI | Privacy Policy

©Entertainment News International - All images, trademarks, logos, video, brands and images used on this website are registered trademarks of their respective companies and owners. All Rights Reserved. Data has been shared for news reporting purposes only. All content sourced by fans, online websites, and or other fan community sources. Entertainment News International is not responsible for reporting errors, inaccuracies, omissions, and or other liablities related to news shared here. We do our best to keep tabs on infringements. If some of your content was shared by accident. Contact us about any infringements right away - CLICK HERE