Jump to content

Old Joes vs New Joes....Serious Debate


imthebigdawg
 Share

Recommended Posts

"GOOD LORD ALMIGHTY!!"

 

f561124e.jpg

 

 

Start your own topic about "good fans verse bad fans" and "who's qualified to participate and who's NOT", and let this one continue on about the actual "TOYS" themselves, and who here likes which of the versions best out of any.

 

Please?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 251
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Okay. . .let's try the same thing from a different angle.

 

:erasing blackboard:

 

It's 1979. You're a member of Hasbro R&D. Your company is planning a new incarnation of GIJoe. All you've known is the original 12" Joes, Adventure Team, and Super Joe. There's an oil crisis going on that effects the cost of plastic and you really wanna compete with Kenner and their little 3&3/4" Star Wars figures. The profit maker is the space ships and playsets. So you want to incorporate all that into your new vision for GIJoe.

 

Based on the production history that you all have claimed to read in books, magazines, and interviews, what is missing from the above scenario and why?

 

-PJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All of this crap is stupid. Who cares, Obiwan? Seriously. You're bitching because some do see some figures as sucking as badly as other figures. I really don't care if you disagtree with their opinions either, and this over-analyzing of why some might not like something is ridiculous.

 

I agree. I don't have anything against you, Obiwanjacoby, but your posts are making this potentially really good topic almost unreadable.

 

I'm still very much on the fence with these figures. I honestly can't seem to get over the fact that some have double-jointed knees, some don't, and some have the much better ball-jointed knees. One thing I miss from old lines is the standardization. Sure there were some articulation improvements, but when they made them, the WHOLE LINE got them. I'm not talking about the odd exception, like Major Bludd or Golobulous, either.

 

Really, this is what bothered me the most about new Star Wars figures and I ended up selling all of them, so I'm wondering whether or not I'd do the same with the new Joes...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Judging these toys from an aesthetics standpoint and picking apart the good things from each and the bad, might help to show where I'm coming from in my complaints about the new figures and some of their issues (based on what we each individually would consider an "issue" at all)...

 

Looking at RAH figure Outback vs the newer version of him (Major Barrage basically) and the new Roadblock against the old one.. (Thanks to Fred and Justin for the images)

 

19811gx0.png

 

 

I would pick the style of arms on the DTC unreleased Outback over any of them pictured. Obviously it's an improvement in aesthetics to the old figures that had those rivets and comparatively, they look like crap now. However, something changed from the DTC Outback style to the new Roadblock style and the range of motion has been reduced on the Roadblock figure?? That would not be "better" imo.

 

I was iffy on the new style of head and neck connection on the DTC Outback and new RB, but I've since decided it's a pretty neat look for them, and although it has some odd appearances in some angles, it's still not as bad as that obvious gaping crack around the old necks, so both have issues in that regard, but the new style gives some better detail in the chest and neck area, however...something changed from the Outback to the RB figure, and the range of motion is lost on the new RB figure, with basically the same style connection? Not "better". :(

 

The swivel hands/gloves on the more recent figures is DEFINITELY an improvement over the 2 old figures, and a welcomed feature, but again, something went wrong here with it's implementation on RB versus Outback and the DTC Outback hands look better.

 

The lack of the O-ring, is a negative here, for the new figures. I know that war is lost and the debate for it's pluses and minuses is OVER, but my opinion on it will still stand as O-rings are better, both for range of motion and aesthetics of the figure. The DTC Outback wins on this feature over the new RB as well.

 

The added removable vests and belts/straps, working holsters etc.. on the new figures is an improvement and i do like the feature on them, so that's a plus for the new stuff over the old, and finally the knee's and ankle joints. While I wasn't sure on the knee's at first, I've seen what they can do and they don't look as bad on most the figures, like they do on the new CC, but I'll take them anyway for the articulation they add. This is a plus for the new figures for sure, and if the DTC Outback had them, with everything else on him remaining the same, this would be my ideal G.I.Joe 3 3/4" (or so) scaled, ARAH themed, action figure.

 

I still love all those early 80's and 90's figures and the various series from 2000 to current had some hits and misses in them as well, but if judging ALl these toys and figures against each other, I still pick the older stuff over the newer versions. Yes they're GREAT, spot on, remakes of the great characters from the early years of ARAH, paying great homage to them and definitely improving on the details immensely, but they gave up some things in the process that makes them a lesser action figure when compared to some other ones, like I've detailed here.

 

AGAIN....only in MY opinion, since I don't assume to speak for everyone else. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay. . .let's try the same thing from a different angle.

 

:erasing blackboard:

 

It's 1979. You're a member of Hasbro R&D. Your company is planning a new incarnation of GIJoe. All you've known is the original 12" Joes, Adventure Team, and Super Joe. There's an oil crisis going on that effects the cost of plastic and you really wanna compete with Kenner and their little 3&3/4" Star Wars figures. The profit maker is the space ships and playsets. So you want to incorporate all that into your new vision for GIJoe.

 

Based on the production history that you all have claimed to read in books, magazines, and interviews, what is missing from the above scenario and why?

 

-PJ

 

Three things are missing:

Articulation in the figures

A premise to make a new scale sensible.

A marketing theme to wrap around the whole thing.

 

 

The articulation was handled by designing the figures around a miniature strung version of the full-sized 12" figures. Adding POAs to the , neck, shoulders, waist, hips and knees made it an approximate minsitaure version of of the larger figures--thus it became playable.

 

The premise was borne because GIJOE had never really had a defined sets of enemies--unless one counts the Intruders or the foes of Superjoe. Since the Iranian Hostages had been released in 1980 (IIRC)m the idea of a defined foe made more sense. COBRA was created to be a non-specific non-national terrorist army. The larger-than-life leaders and mysterious masked minions provided the idea foils for GIJOE, who this time around would be individuals with specific names, backstories and militray specialties.

All the more reason to make all sorts of them....

The new smaller scale means less plastic used for the figures, and allows a large assortment of attractive vehicles to be made, plussing the appeal of the line. Its a mix of near-real-life military, superherorics, and science fiction--really an unbeatable combo.

 

Lastly, the marketing plan came from, of all things..........a hockey game.

The "miracle on ice" at the Lake Placid Winter Olympics brought about a wave of patriotism that swept the country, and Hasbro marketing folks took note. They wanted to capture that same essential spirit with the new GIJOE line. A theme song recording was made and presented to Hasbro brass, and it and the concepts and work-ups sold the idea. It set the right tone and gave the line an unabashed heroic flavour.

 

Yea, I know my toy history a bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Three things are missing:

Articulation in the figures

A premise to make a new scale sensible.

A marketing theme to wrap around the whole thing.

 

Thank you Arrow. I'm impressed. Almost gave up there.

 

The articulation was handled by designing the figures around a miniature strung version of the full-sized 12" figures. Adding POAs to the , neck, shoulders, waist, hips and knees made it an approximate minsitaure version of of the larger figures--thus it became playable.

 

Good, hold that thought for a sec.

 

The premise was borne because GIJOE had never really had a defined sets of enemies--unless one counts the Intruders or the foes of Superjoe. Since the Iranian Hostages had been released in 1980 (IIRC)m the idea of a defined foe made more sense. COBRA was created to be a non-specific non-national terrorist army. The larger-than-life leaders and mysterious masked minions provided the idea foils for GIJOE, who this time around would be individuals with specific names, backstories and militray specialties.

All the more reason to make all sorts of them....

 

Good!!! GREAT!! Run with that! Now who came up with that idea?

 

Lastly, the marketing plan came from, of all things..........a hockey game.

The "miracle on ice" at the Lake Placid Winter Olympics

 

You mean in 1980?

 

brought about a wave of patriotism that swept the country, and Hasbro marketing folks took note. They wanted to capture that same essential spirit with the new GIJOE line. A theme song recording was made and presented to Hasbro brass, and it and the concepts and work-ups sold the idea. It set the right tone and gave the line an unabashed heroic flavour.

 

Yea, I know my toy history a bit.

 

Okay, but how did they "capture" that same essential spirit? You're saying a theme song and that's it all the way up to the '82 release?

 

We're still missing something very obvious here.

 

-PJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought this site had an interesting take on the whole "oil crisis" thing, behind the end of the era regarding 12" G.I.Joe...

 

http://www.adventure-gear.com/atclassic/end.htm

 

 

Makes sense though. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Three things are missing:

Articulation in the figures

A premise to make a new scale sensible.

A marketing theme to wrap around the whole thing.

 

Thank you Arrow. I'm impressed. Almost gave up there.

 

The articulation was handled by designing the figures around a miniature strung version of the full-sized 12" figures. Adding POAs to the , neck, shoulders, waist, hips and knees made it an approximate minsitaure version of of the larger figures--thus it became playable.

 

Good, hold that thought for a sec.

 

The premise was borne because GIJOE had never really had a defined sets of enemies--unless one counts the Intruders or the foes of Superjoe. Since the Iranian Hostages had been released in 1980 (IIRC)m the idea of a defined foe made more sense. COBRA was created to be a non-specific non-national terrorist army. The larger-than-life leaders and mysterious masked minions provided the idea foils for GIJOE, who this time around would be individuals with specific names, backstories and militray specialties.

All the more reason to make all sorts of them....

 

Good!!! GREAT!! Run with that! Now who came up with that idea?

 

Lastly, the marketing plan came from, of all things..........a hockey game.

The "miracle on ice" at the Lake Placid Winter Olympics

 

You mean in 1980?

 

brought about a wave of patriotism that swept the country, and Hasbro marketing folks took note. They wanted to capture that same essential spirit with the new GIJOE line. A theme song recording was made and presented to Hasbro brass, and it and the concepts and work-ups sold the idea. It set the right tone and gave the line an unabashed heroic flavour.

 

Yea, I know my toy history a bit.

 

Okay, but how did they "capture" that same essential spirit? You're saying a theme song and that's it all the way up to the '82 release?

 

We're still missing something very obvious here.

 

-PJ

 

 

not to get too political ,but Ragean, the Iran Hostages being released, The Space Shuttle, etc.. etc.. there was a HUGE WAVE of patriotism in the 1980's, starting at the turn of the decade. I remember it well. GI Joe was able to in part create and in part ride that wave..

 

But are we still comparing the New stuff to the old stuff here ? I feel like the topic is heading into some far out there idealogical debate on the merits of ones belief to another and whether someone is "qualified". I generally could care less, but I haven't met the person yet that can set the bar for what person can or cannot have an opinion and its almost narciscistic (sp?) to even go there, and I mean that in the clinical sense not the popular definition of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree. I don't have anything against you, Obiwanjacoby, but your posts are making this potentially really good topic almost unreadable.

 

See above. I made a change-up in tone, so now everyone can participate in a more relaxed manner.

 

-PJ

 

 

like that comment, you have some good points, but your the one that tried to set the tone that was leading to the off topic debate and then you change your statement and you seem to be saying to peopel that they should or can relax now.... its a little weird, no offense, but if someone creates a situation where there wasnt one and then takes it upon themselves to "save the day" from a situation they created, its like the "hero sydrome"

 

Wouldn't it jus be easier to NOT GO THERE in the first place?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, we're still on-topic. This will all snap back into focus just fine if I can get a fan to answer my easy question without me arm-twisting or making anyone feel icky or uncomfortable.

 

And it will land on an objective non-idealogical point if I'm given half the chance and not prematurely banned or something.

 

-PJ

 

not to get too political ,but Ragean, the Iran Hostages being released, The Space Shuttle, etc.. etc.. there was a HUGE WAVE of patriotism in the 1980's, starting at the turn of the decade. I remember it well. GI Joe was able to in part create and in part ride that wave..

 

But are we still comparing the New stuff to the old stuff here ? I feel like the topic is heading into some far out there idealogical debate on the merits of ones belief to another and whether someone is "qualified". I generally could care less, but I haven't met the person yet that can set the bar for what person can or cannot have an opinion and its almost narciscistic (sp?) to even go there, and I mean that in the clinical sense not the popular definition of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can one say the CHARACTERS from all that is known in the mythos of ARAH from all the Joes to all the Cobras, was an excellent selling point for these toys, and not contradict their earlier admission that they didn't have the same "emotional attachment" to the characters over the action figures because they were slightly older and removed from that kind of passion for them?

 

It's not a knock on the kids who do love these CHARACTERS and grew up with Snake Eyes and Cobra Commander, reading the comics, watching the cartoons and developing a fondness for the characters, like what I did growing up reading Captain America, Iron Man, Sgt. Rock and Sgt. Fury comics and wanting to collect memorabilia of them in most any form of print and plastic. I appreciate that passion and that emotional attachment, I'm not insulting it, I merely mentioned that I don't share it.....as passionately. I STILL think those characters were awesome and the details put into creating and describing them...ALL COOL!

 

I still look at it from a different angle as an older collector. I do put more emphasis on the actual toy representations of them, and I'm picky about it, even though the characters are great, i want the toys to be great as well. Many believe that these new ones are just that..the GREATEST ever. I'm not pooping on that feeling they have, just expressing my opinion that's less enthusiastic.

 

The characters in ARAH is what seperated the 80's Joes from it's predecessors, and that was very cool. #US1#

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Judging these toys from an aesthetics standpoint and picking apart the good things from each and the bad, might help to show where I'm coming from in my complaints about the new figures and some of their issues (based on what we each individually would consider an "issue" at all)...

 

Looking at RAH figure Outback vs the newer version of him (Major Barrage basically) and the new Roadblock against the old one.. (Thanks to Fred and Justin for the images)

 

19811gx0.png

 

Well... Design-wise, the DTC Outback just doesn't do it for me. There's something about the first half of RAH that is very aesthetically pleasing, when it came to the character designs. I'm not sure what it is, to be quite honest. They probably just need to do more real-world military research.

 

Roadblock is a good example of having these new figures still appear like GI Joes without the o-ring. If they all looked like this, I'd like them a lot more, but then take a look at Cobra Commander... Roadblock's face sculpt also doesn't seem as sharp as it should be. It's bland... RAH face sculpts weren't perfect but they always looked sharp, well-designed, and unique, with a lot of character.

 

EDIT: Oh yeah, and I forgot to say Roadblock's shoulders look ridiculously out of proportion. Are the arms backward or something?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

like that comment, you have some good points, but your the one that tried to set the tone that was leading to the off topic debate and then you change your statement and you seem to be saying to peopel that they should or can relax now.... its a little weird, no offense, but if someone creates a situation where there wasnt one and then takes it upon themselves to "save the day" from a situation they created, its like the "hero sydrome"

 

Wouldn't it jus be easier to NOT GO THERE in the first place?

 

Not unless I was given a fair chance to prove that this connected directly to the old vs. new debate. And it does. . .if I am given the opportunity to state my case.

 

-PJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

In 1976 the combination of flat sales and the OPEC oil embargo and resulting "oil crisis" in the US caused Hasbro to redesign GI Joe's body. At this time, Mattel's Big Jim doll was amongst Joe's competitors. At eight inches tall, Big Jim was a full four inches shorter than Joe, but he had smooth arms that when bent, bulged at the bicep. This feature, along with a successful advertising campaign, affected children's perception of Big Jim's size. In market tests, researchers would show children a Big Jim commercial and a GI Joe commercial; they would then show the children a Big Jim doll and a GI Joe doll and ask which was bigger. With the dolls directly in front of the children, they would still answer that Big Jim was bigger (Michlig 179). Even with his twelve inch frame, Kung Fu grip and life-like hair, GI Joe was having a size crisis that led Hasbro toy designers to believe that making Joe smaller in order to use less plastic and keep cost down was going to have an adverse result on already low sales.

 

 

So was it "low sales" or the "oil crisis" that ultimately ended the era of 12" G.I.Joe?

 

I would think the flat sales was the biggest killer. In trying to cut costs on a product that's not selling as well anymore, they went with cheaper alternatives and it made the product worse, cheaper to make, but it didn't bring up the sales for it, so it finally killed it.

 

Like mentioned in my link, other companies weren't affected by the rising costs of oil and even flourished with their product, but their product never slumped in sales like Joe did, to even have to FIND an excuse for changing it. If I'm a delivery man, and my business starts to slump and I don't do enough work to justify the expense of putting the increasingly expensive fuel in my delivery truck, and I have to fold, was it the fact my business was hurting to begin with, or the cost of gas?

 

Just another take on it is all. I thought the guys points made some sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Keeping with Arrow's train of thought here.

 

When ARAH was first in the R&D stage, they had:

 

- A basic figure design and scale to compete with Kenner (that's you profit angle).

 

- An articulation and sculpting angle to try to surpass the quality of Kenner.

 

- A marketing plan that had to compete with Kenner.

 

So now the question is. . .

 

1. What exactly was that marketing plan, and who's responsible for its success?

 

2. Moreover, who in that marketing group came up with Cobra? Since GIJoe was all Hasbro could think of. Hasbro never invented Cobra.

 

-PJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So was it "low sales" or the "oil crisis" that ultimately ended the era of 12" G.I.Joe?

 

You're ignoring your own quotes. . .

 

In 1976 the combination of flat sales and the OPEC oil embargo and resulting "oil crisis" in the US caused Hasbro to redesign GI Joe's body.

 

. . .and it's taking the thread :OT:

 

All I was saying to begin with was this was the reason Hasbro stated for reducing the figures. This has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not Hasbro was using the oil crisis as a convenient lie to justify their motive to re-scale.

 

-PJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well... Design-wise, the DTC Outback just doesn't do it for me. There's something about the first half of RAH that is very aesthetically pleasing, when it came to the character designs. I'm not sure what it is, to be quite honest. They probably just need to do more real-world military research.

 

this is something Hasbro was well aware of.

back when he was Brand manager, I had a few email exchanges, prompted by one Derryl Depriest.

I was rattling on in a newsgroup about my idea that GIJOE should be the figures that have a more modern, extrapolated/realistic militray theme to their design and COBRA should have the wilder colours and free-for-all kinds of themes.

Derryl agreed whole-heartedly.

Now, he's no longer involved with the brand, but i get the sense that some of that philosophy was a work in the lines.

 

The Jungle Strike/ Nightops Hummers are part of it............items like the Quickstrike and Ice Saber fall in line too, and figures like Rollbar, Footloose, Sgt Bazooka, Barrel Roll etc and smack dab on with this.

Someone like Salvo, in the original version and the DTC re-do........stretches things a bit. He's colourful.......superheroic in some respects, but also goofy in some others.

The barrel chested, T-short wearing look is just a bit over the top.

Now......my tastes lean towards something more realistic, but I'm not everyone. V2 Snake-eyes is arguably a VERY unrealistic look, military wise--but he's also rguably the most iconic of the Joes. The 25th V1 Snake-eyes re-do is very much in line with the modern "commando" counter-terror SAS/SEAL/DELTA look.

Which of the two is more appealing to the community here??

 

I think having a fanciful element--carefully wrought--is smart to take with this line. But just where is the line drawn? People used to rip Psyche-out and Crazy Legs a new one every time they were discussed, and the former is really quite outlandish.

The latter actually is almost a reasonable pararescue/scout type figure, with the big periscope, and his uniform styling.

I liked them both,because they had intricate features and were 'different"

 

By the same token, I also liked Hit&Run, and Shockwave--because they represented a much more realistic looks.

 

When I look at the the figures back then, I see a lot more archetypes at work than I see in the modern figures. Barrel-Roll, for example--its decoed as a SEAL Boarding Party trooper, complete with protec and vest. But he's decribed as a sniper, and code-names as if he's a pliot.

If they called him "Shooter" or "Double-tap" or some other "SEAL" term......he'd be spot on AND archetypical. Unfortunately, his whole presence as a figure is convoluted because its unclear WHAT he is.

 

I think the earlier figures held closer to a more specific idea of so-and-so is a sniper, so he should look more like this, and a Ranger looks more like that etc...

This allows some characters to have a more heroic, less "military" kind of deco--like the early Bazooka.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So now the question is. . .

 

1. What exactly was that marketing plan, and who's responsible for its success?

 

2. Moreover, who in that marketing group came up with Cobra? Since GIJoe was all Hasbro could think of. Hasbro never invented Cobra.

 

I gave the answers off the top of my head, but I cannot recall the specifics of who and such.

 

Sorry.

I'm too lazy today to do research--so I'll pass the torch to someone else with more clerical zest than I.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, since I don't have all day and I expected the "fans" to get this alot quicker, here--I'll let you read my crib notes.

 

http://www.banned/modules.php?o...cle&artid=7

 

The late great Archie Goodwin came up with the name COBRA at the very first meeting that Marvel had with Hasbro. They only had the ten Joe figures designed at the time and the first question we brought up was, "Who do they fight?" and all we got were blank stares. I asked, "What are they going to do, march around in parades and polish their belt buckles?" After some moments of awkward silence, Archie piped up that perhaps there should be a para-military terrorist organization-- let's say we call it Cobra.

 

http://www.yojoe.com/faq/hama.shtml

 

I did the file cards from the very beginning. In fact, it was my idea to do the file cards. I never actually intended them to be printed on the backs of the packages, I just did them (much more detailed!) for my own reference.

 

My assertion then is this:

 

The ARAH line was initially a joint product of both Hasbro and Marvel. Hasbro brought their scaled-down everyman without a name and Marvel made the myth. Hasbro was trying to make another Star Wars concept. . .only without the movie.

 

- I am saying you wouldn't even have a single Cobra Viper without the Joe mythos.

 

- I am saying you absolutely cannot debate "old ARAH vs. new ARAH" without factoring in the mythos. And in the case of Cobra, some of you are doing it without even knowing it. :rolleyes:

 

- I am saying that The 3&3/4" line has now come full circle. Over the past ten years it slowly tried to veer away from it's Marvel comics roots. . .but now it's returned full circle.

 

- I am saying that ARAH wouldn't have even made it 3 years past '82 without the mythos that many of us don't give a crap about. It's what drove the success of each wave.

 

- I am saying that the 25th is a fusion and absolutely cannot be separated without your fan loyalty, fan knowledge of the product itself, or your own mental objectivity coming into question.

 

That's it. If anyone wants to run to the mods crying to have me banned, go ahead. But you know I'm right.

 

-PJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So was it "low sales" or the "oil crisis" that ultimately ended the era of 12" G.I.Joe?

 

You're ignoring your own quotes. . .

 

In 1976 the combination of flat sales and the OPEC oil embargo and resulting "oil crisis" in the US caused Hasbro to redesign GI Joe's body.

 

. . .and it's taking the thread :OT:

 

All I was saying to begin with was this was the reason Hasbro stated for reducing the figures. This has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not Hasbro was using the oil crisis as a convenient lie to justify their motive to re-scale.

 

-PJ

 

 

As always, you're putting more drama into an innocent situation or comment. With the recent news regarding 12" Adventure Team Joes returning to retail at Walmarts, I've been doing a lot of searching for Adventure Team info and sites, looking for images I'd like to use later.

 

This article (I linked) stuck in my head, and you made mention of it (about the oil crisis) and I shared it as a "matter-of-factly" type thing. You didn't come up with the oil crisis reason behind the fall of 12" G.I.Joe, you merely repeated what is commonly stated and thought on it, so if I posted something to the contrary, it's not aginst YOUR opinion at all. Just thought it interesting, although off topic yes.

 

So BACK to ARAH tutorial 101! ^_^

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think having a fanciful element--carefully wrought--is smart to take with this line. But just where is the line drawn? People used to rip Psyche-out and Crazy Legs a new one every time they were discussed, and the former is really quite outlandish.

The latter actually is almost a reasonable pararescue/scout type figure, with the big periscope, and his uniform styling.

I liked them both,because they had intricate features and were 'different"

 

Crazylegs came with a. . .periscope? :blink:

 

-PJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, since I don't have all day and I expected the "fans" to get this alot quicker, here--I'll let you read my crib notes.

 

http://www.banned/modules.php?o...cle&artid=7

 

The late great Archie Goodwin came up with the name COBRA at the very first meeting that Marvel had with Hasbro. They only had the ten Joe figures designed at the time and the first question we brought up was, "Who do they fight?" and all we got were blank stares. I asked, "What are they going to do, march around in parades and polish their belt buckles?" After some moments of awkward silence, Archie piped up that perhaps there should be a para-military terrorist organization-- let's say we call it Cobra.

 

http://www.yojoe.com/faq/hama.shtml

 

I did the file cards from the very beginning. In fact, it was my idea to do the file cards. I never actually intended them to be printed on the backs of the packages, I just did them (much more detailed!) for my own reference.

 

My assertion then is this:

 

The ARAH line was initially a joint product of both Hasbro and Marvel. Hasbro brought their scaled-down everyman without a name and Marvel made the myth. Hasbro was trying to make another Star Wars concept. . .only without the movie.

 

- I am saying you wouldn't even have a single Cobra Viper without the Joe mythos.

 

- I am saying you absolutely cannot debate "old ARAH vs. new ARAH" without factoring in the mythos. And in the case of Cobra, some of you are doing it without even knowing it. :rolleyes:

 

- I am saying that The 3&3/4" line has now come full circle. Over the past ten years it slowly tried to veer away from it's Marvel comics roots. . .but now it's returned full circle.

 

- I am saying that ARAH wouldn't have even made it 3 years past '82 without the mythos that many of us don't give a crap about. It's what drove the success of each wave.

 

- I am saying that the 25th is a fusion and absolutely cannot be separated without your fan loyalty, fan knowledge of the product itself, or your own mental objectivity coming into question.

 

That's it. If anyone wants to run to the mods crying to have me banned, go ahead. But you know I'm right.

 

-PJ

 

 

All THAT, just to say..

 

"Viper Hunter doesn't know what the hell he's talking about, when he claims to not have the same emotional attachment to the ARAH mythos"??? :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Find Action Figures on Ebay

×
×
  • 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