TheArrow

The unofrtunate thing about a lot of people attempting animtion using CGI or A.I. is that they don't know HOW to animate. They don't understand any of the principles, or the timing involved in animation, about so whatever they produce looks like sludge. A very sad irony is that Disney build their empire on those principles and have now foresaken them.

Saw that the First-Appearance Rogue and Destiny was less than $30 on Amazon. .ca, so I jumped on it. I really just wanted Destiny to complete my Mystique-led Brotherhood of Evil Mutants, and Rogue is just trade-fodder. I MIGHT track down the 2nd version of Blob, as I have the BAF, but I'm not feeling very urgent about that.

I ain't missing out on Warbird this time--put my preorder in.

The quickest answer for that is to watch for reviews of it when it debuts in-hand. I would say that it probably scales comparaitvely to other Mezco superhero characters, who, if I recall, tend to scale slightly smaller to ML et al. Now, that being said,the Hulk typically sizes a bit larger than most heroes, AND some of his earlier looks have him bigger, but not by that much. My guess is that he's a safe bet in scale with ML figures, for what he's supposed to be.

Okay, I've been itching to write this "review" for a couple of weeks now, and the film is out on streaming, so.............with the following caveat, I'm having at it: SPOILER ALERT You cannot say you were not warned. I have three basic problems with FF: First Steps, one is story, one is character and one is performer. Story: Sue Storm dies. And is brought back to life. ( I warned you!) She dies in Fantastic Four: First Steps. She also dies in Fantastic Four: The Rise of the Silver Surfer. And is brought back to life. Both movies feature a Surfer and BOTH feature a villain named Galactus. You can sort out which one is which for yourselves, In terms of moviemaking, this is a lame LAZY rehashed story-point, that tries to up the stakes, but becomes redundant because we've seen it before. If a movie is to be its own thing, it needs to step away from past interations. The Abrams Star Trek movies commited this sin by duplicating the Wrath of Khan plot point, but groaningly putting a telegraphed spin on it. Kirk dying instead of Spock. When I pays my money for a movie i want to be SURPRISED with something unexpected, because that is entertaining--and not the rehash of an old script. And it's even worse when it is not even done well. An aside: I have a colleague who storyboarded on Rise of the Silver Surfer. He was in the meeting, in the room, when the decision was made to make Galactus a "space cloud". The reason?? The head of 20th Century Fox couldn't accept the look of Galactus, as Jack Kirby drew him, thought the whole idea was stupid, and shot it down by saying " there will NEVER be a **blanking** giant robot man in MY movie!!". For reals. Hollywood, eh?? Character: The Thing. Well, they got him right in looks, performer was good, good voice, ideal-enough personality. But he was a prop. No real arc for him, no tragedy to him. That he's a "monster" is ignored here, that aspect is not addressed at all. He is, as John Byrne once cited of the Thing in the 1970's, a "big teddy bear". His whole thing in the movie is about his catch-phrase. You could have taken him completely out of the film and it would make zero difference. So he's a prop, and going forward that makes him damaged goods as a character. He cannot make a turn to a monstrous/angry persona in the 616 Universe without being saddled with a villainous tag---we've already seen him as cuddly, so a "bitter" Thing just won't fly. There's no impetus for a change of heart now. This was a mistake. Performer: Pedro. Hey, Pedro Pascal is chic........he's flavour of the moment everywhere and everyone loves him. I get it. Pedro's stache.................<sigh> Look, I'm petty in this. I openly admit it. When I see who is supposed to be Reed Richards in this movie, I don't see Reed....I see Pedro. As a viewer ( and reviewer) I cannot get past that. It's like Dwayne Johnson as Roadblock in GI Joe Retaliation. He was shoe-horned into that movie because he was "The Rock" and there's no overlookng it. It was elevating a secondary character into a position in the story that was all about marketing not about abiding by any of the character's history. People roll their eyes about this one, but its a bad Hollywood trope to do this, especially for a headlining role in a film, based on a long established portrayals. I'm going to see the character, not the performer. And y'now what?? You can shave off a moustache and it WILL grow back in about 4-6 months. There, them's my thoughts.

Just reported today that NOV 5th, the movie releases on Disney + for all subs to see. And if no-one objects, on Nov 6th, I'll post my spoiler-ish critiques.

I saw FF:FS for the first time a couple of weks ago, and while I "liked" it, I have some major criticisms about it. The thing is, I don't kniw if I can discuss them here because one of them is a considerable spoiler, and not everyone reading will have seen the movie themselves.

Hawkeye to Wanada: "Hey, look at me. It's your fault, it's everyone's fault. Who cares? Are you up for this? Are you? Look, I just need to know. Because the city is flying. Okay. Look, the city is flying, we're fighting an army of robots, and I have a bow and arrow. None of this makes sense. But I'm going back out there because it's my job. Okay? And I can't do my job and babysit. Doesn't matter what you did, or what you were. If you go out there, you fight, and you fight to kill. Stay in here, you're good, I'll send your brother to come find you. But if you step out that door, you are an Avenger. "

Actually, the retailers make a lot of these assortment requests, in conjunction with Hasbro. After all, it's about getting wallets in their stores. Sometimes though, an exclusive has a sell-through window where it is exclusive to a specific retailer for a period of time, and then gets a secondary wider release through other retailers. Occasionally, when that happens, the figure is slighty different ( running-change paint apps etc) to distinguish it from the exclusive in a minor way. The key thing to remember is that retailer exclusives HELP the brand because the retailer bears the costs of any new tooling, thus adding to the tooling library Hasbro has. That means that you WILL likely see that given figure ( or at least parts of said figure) again at some point.

I had this discussion with a pal a couple of days ago. Some characters are kept aside because the consensus is that there's not enough draw to them--Hasbro really wants to avoid more Misty Knights. Marvel has LOADS of obscure characters--for every Iron Man or Spider-man variant, there's Marrina or Baldur the Brave, There may be some interest in the latter examples, but is there enough enticement?? So, Hasbro essentially has their fingers up our noses and is leading us around the room. Cost-object is the biggest concern because new tooling is so expensive. They have to milk what they can get from existing tooling, but it can't seem to obvious or there will be consumer backlash. so they salt a wave with re-use and new tooled figures. It's a bit of "Malibu Stacy w/ Hat" and a bit of "Oopsie" in play here. Oopsie?? Yeah, deliberate "mistakes". Not colouring boots, missing or wrong sideburns, weird additions or omissions--that kind of thing. These are NOT accidents, they are built into their game plan. Why do I say that?? Well, if they had done this years back, I would have chalked it up to not getting reference out to the designers/sculptors, BUT THEY KEEP DOING THESE MISTAKES. All this reference material is there at their finger-tips. they can point to specific images and looks with those details--key issues and stories. Consumers call out for DEFINITIVE versions of certain characters and Hasbro draws out not-quite-fully giving them that to milk the line. And frankly, it works because we are collectively suckers for it. As a collector, I feel baited, that it is a ruse of "modern marketing". The ploy is always that they are "doing us a favour" by filling our wants--and every once in a while, they do just that. But the rest of the time............it does feel like their fingers are up our noses. 😞

Not for long, shows as SOLD OUT, as of 9 AM, CST.

I've been asking for that for a long time, and as you described. And, imo, Jarvis is as essential as any of the Avengers themselves--no Avengers collection will truly be complete without him.

I think with the tooling for the comic, and the tampo for each, Hasbro could have reprinted the actual full-sized comic related to the character, in colour, with cross-sell on the back cover, just like the old ToyBiz reprints. If they pared down the accessories on the figures, just a analyzer for ROM, no extra hands etc--that kind of thinking--then ( I think) it would have costed out.......and we'd still have a tremendously appealing figure set, with very good value-for-the-dollar. I mean, what's the draw here to offset the production cost?? Rom, as an example is a sought-after character, the spoken response has been very good......so why not make a few more to anticipate covering that interest and make up for actual printed comic?? Are the dollar numbers that spread out that they cannot take a reasonable gamble?? I don't know....

I kinda like the Mini-comic subline...........but just not the comics, or the price hike. I think it's a good catch-all means of bringing out characters that don't really fit well in other waves. ROM is a great example of this, and its one of the best figures done this year.

Expect to pay them going forward, but keep paying attention to the news. Everything about cross-border commerce is fluid, and changing literally every week. I got an order in from BBTS a couple of weeks ago, paid $30 GST/PST on $110 CDN value ( and I assume some tariff fees, I haven't check the declaration slip). It arrived from USPS/Can Post. A week after that got two orders from Amazon.com that came by Purolator, I have not gotten an invoice for added fees.............yet.