Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Benn

  1. Yeah, he definitely has autism. It took them nearly 60 years to canonize it (check out Marvel’s Snapshots: X-Men #1), but a lot of people suspected it for a long, long time.
  2. Well, I don’t think they’ve been super specific about the nature of Cyclops’s autism. I wouldn’t say he’s a textbook study in Asperger’s, but he’s definitely got some characteristics.
  3. Just got a notification that Excalibur is shipping a month early, on December 1st! Stoked!
  4. I would be very surprised if they didn’t put it back up for sale at some point, possibly even before it releases domestically. They pretty much always do with non-convention Pulse exclusives.
  5. Toad is confirmed happening next year as an anniversary figure! I'd love to see all those figures too, though, other than Stryfe, who I already have.
  6. Whoa. I literally thought this morning “now that Disney has their paws on the X-Men, I wonder how long it will be until we get a new cartoon?”, for the first time. Crazy.
  7. She was $12 on Amazon for 24 hours last week (along with a bunch of other Legends), during which time Amazon sold out of her! I picked up a replacement Darkstar during the sale, and strongly considered another Nimrod set at $47, which I definitely didn’t need.
  8. It’s mostly the missing ‘k’ I was referring to. It’s just sort of disrespectful to have recycled this copy pasta so many times without having noticed. It’s literally the first word of each of these posts too.
  9. I also have high hopes for this one. It’s great to see Armor and Tempo getting a bit of spotlight for once. I know a lot of people were bored with Tini Howard’s Excalibur, but I mostly really enjoyed it, so we’ll see. Armor, especially, has suffered from really, really bad characterization every time she’s been utilized in the last few years, so I hope they turn that around with her here.
  10. Do you mind if I ask why you always bill this reviewer as “GeeHangover”? It’s “Geek Hangover”, right?
  11. She was no older than 15 when she joined Excalibur, and listed as something like 5’2” or 5’4” at the time!
  12. They were out of order when I first looked at it, but after logging in, they reoriented to alphabetical. Not sure what the story is there.
  13. I was at a Target last week that had exactly one of every Eternals figure in stock, including Sprite and Kingo, so they’re definitely around. I don’t think there’s any consistency to it. My store gets our lone case of assorted Eternals early next week, so they’re also definitely coming in assortments (as well as single-figure cases).
  14. For what it’s worth, the rumoured number of anniversary figures (13) exactly corresponds to the total number of figures in the first three Toy Biz waves, which were the only waves to release in 2002. I have a hard time believing Affleck Daredevil would get a figure, but who knows?
  15. 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.
  16. 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.
  17. 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.).
  18. 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.
  19. 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.
  20. 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).
  21. 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.
  • 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