Jump to content

Old Joes vs New Joes....Serious Debate


imthebigdawg
 Share

Recommended Posts

As always, you're putting more drama into an innocent situation or comment.

 

Much less dramatic than others I'm sure. You see my post containing any dramatic photoshop comments or cartoon caricatures? Cartoon-critique-banners? Giant inch-high bouncing smileys?

 

Nope. I'm all good here.

 

-PJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 251
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

As always, you're putting more drama into an innocent situation or comment.

 

Much less dramatic than others I'm sure. You see my post containing any dramatic photoshop comments or cartoon caricatures? Cartoon-critique-banners? Giant inch-high bouncing smileys?

 

Nope. I'm all good here.

 

-PJ

 

I LIVE for the visually DRAMATIC! Comics, caricatures, signatures, emoticons, Avatars you name it, it's all good with me, adds to the site and the discussions, just like a post about a new custom or new figure is sometimes deemed "worthless" without the accompanying PIC! I LOVE the visuals! :)

 

Emotionally dramatic is what you're being right now. There's a difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Emotionally dramatic is what you're being right now. There's a difference.

 

Different medium, same effect. BTW, you're still baiting and taking the thread OT.

 

-PJ

 

 

Oh sure, and your lengthy convoluted trip around the merry-go-round in trying to give credence to why my opinions don't have any merit, as well as claiming my participation here in these discussions has no real purpose or useful contribution, because what....I like the toys over they mythos, and THAT'S keeping on topic? @hmmm@ I'd clearly call it baiting, but that's not for me to decide, obvious as it may be.

 

I didn't care about the Storm Shadows sandals issue and I put more importance on the actual toys over the mythos of ARAH, and you lose your ever lovin' mind and go on these rampages, under the disguise of only trying to shed some light on my erring ways?

 

It's not personal Paul, stop taking it as such, and drop the campaign already.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

 

Okay, so we have an assertion.

 

 

 

-

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

 

Without Archie Goodwin and Marvel comics ( and I think Archie was one of the more cagey heads to ever walk through Marvel's doors. I miss that man)--cannot argue with that.

 

-

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.

 

Well, that is YOUR assertion, okay. The conflict part of GIJOE is its core element, but I personally do not feel that its necessary just to debate "old vs new". When the discussion comes to that, I think we are talking about veneers because the concept remains GIJOE VS COBRA. Its understood, and not necessary to address the conflict concept--because that has not changed at all. Its been constant for 25 years now.

 

 

- 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.

 

 

Hmn........I don't think its quite full circle.

There's a LOT of differences here. The product is aimed at a different demographic, the marketing plan is a lot less ambitious and nebulous. There's no TV advertisements of the comics, nor is there a specific cartoon being aired. The current product is just a nostalgic homage that is seeing a bit stronger interest and thus has some legs beyond its "homage event". This hasn't come full circle in any respect, its just the latest incarnation.

 

 

- 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 don't think the concept is as pervasive as you believe.

Good and evil are underlying concepts with a lot of properties--they are kind of a stock concept, if you will. I think what drove the line more was how it addressed "good and evil"--namely the veneer, the looks and aspects of the toys.

Seeing a toy jeep that's kinda like what Dad ( or Uncle, or the neighbour) drives, or is a bit more advanced strikes the fancy of a kid. The conflict is ALWAYS going to be there, so much so that its taken completely for granted. Kids like surface gloss and GIJOE had a lot of that. It was military fantasy and at the time, nothing like it had been done before.

 

 

 

- 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

 

Honestly, I don't care WHO is right. LOL!

 

My own mental objectivity has been laid out for all to see and judge. Its my most mature, honest opinions on how I see the toys I collect. Now if that makes me "dishonest" in your, or anyone elses eyes, , then phooey on you. Phooey on the toast you ate this morning too.

 

Its like telling me I'm collecting for the wrong reasons.

Okay, that's what it sounds like to me.

 

And if it is the case, then let me.

Let me collect for the WRONG reasons, because THAT is what makes me happy.

Not you.

Me.

You cannot be "right" inside of the threshold of my own choices--they are MY choices after all.

Enjoy the thing your own way, I'll enjoy it mine.

If I ( okay, substitute "anyone") want to justify my ( their) likes in a skewed illogical manner, so be it.

 

 

What is the puzzle is WHY that needs to be discussed at all--it really makes not sense.

( or have I missed the point completely...........again.........)

 

The discussion has been each individuals own take on the stuff, which is something that is going to be unique to each of us. The only common ground we can expect to share is that we LIKE GIJOE is some way.

 

 

And with that, I troddle off to find that bottle of Excedrin.....me thinks I need it now......

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

I subbed Crazy Legs for Sneak-peek and didn't correct the periscope line. Was originally going to mention Sneak-Peek but Crazy Legs fit my thought better.

 

Honest mistake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ken summed it up nicely, so I'm done, before I'm toast in all this mess. #US1#

 

Over an out!

 

 

 

@hmmm@ err.... of this topic!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, guys. I'm tired of my inbox filling up with complaints about this thread. STOP the bickering and little remarks. For the last time, place each other on IGNORE and be done with it! You guys are ruining this thread for everybody. We really don't want to have to suspend people or lock threads, so PLEASE stop trying to have the last word. Any further problems will result in suspension, so it would benefit you to drop it NOW.

 

Lucky for me, I finally found some of the single packs today so I can see what I think of them myself. #US1#

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I have said in the past, the idea of comparing the RAH figures to the Modern 25th Ann figs is not a fair comparison, in my opinion. RAH always had the cartoon, which was awesome, I actually was thinking about the cartoon today as I was making a Serpentor custom, the whole Serpentor storyline was so rich and so complex it brought the figure to life for me. It was like all of sudden I saw Cobra Commander as less of insecure, bumbling, over bearing, small minded idiot dictator who imposed his petty and one sided view on his troops, and he became a slick, intelligent, coniving and brutal advisary as he sought to supplant the superior Serpentor. And thus when I played with my figures, I attatched that same feeling to my play, it opened my play world up.

 

With any of the current Joes, I dont have the same support of a storyline nor the many hours of leisure time to actually enact complex scenarios and situations, so I guess the fact that they have more detailing, better sculpting, more articulation and look more realistic helps me overcome the things that arent there.. great stories, lots of time to play and being a kid.

 

So, for me RAH will always be the land of oz, the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, the hidden treat, RAH in short is my childhood and EVERY time I see them, I feel that way, they are forever special and therefore nothing truly will compare to them for me.

 

But, in the real world, where what I see and feel are at the forefront, the newer figures are AWESOME !!

 

But RAH will always be a class unto itself for me...

 

I guess what I am really saying, tomato or tomotto... its still pretty sweet...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, guys. I'm tired of my inbox filling up with complaints about this thread. STOP the bickering and little remarks. For the last time, place each other on IGNORE and be done with it! You guys are ruining this thread for everybody. We really don't want to have to suspend people or lock threads, so PLEASE stop trying to have the last word. Any further problems will result in suspension, so it would benefit you to drop it NOW.

 

Lucky for me, I finally found some of the single packs today so I can see what I think of them myself. #US1#

 

I'm gonna step in too and agree with JASE, You guys need to put each other on ignore.. no more personal attacks and tiny little stabs at each other.. one more quote where you guys pick each other's posts apart and you're getting a suspension!

And this comes from the Big kahuna himself... not just us little peon mods

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The other thing is , I kind of prefer the new o-ringless approach, its feels tighter and looks more natural, but that is just me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

here is what it comes down to me. 25th figures, superior looking toys, bar none, without a doubt, no questions asked. RAH, from concepts to the scope of the toyline and corresponding media and importance to the action figure market, is not only superior to 25th but is probably the greatest line of action figures of all time, bar none, without a doubt, no questions asked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is the one thing thing that I do not get about the what people are saying about the story/history behind RAH vs 25th: that they are somehow different. Whatever story/history/cartoon/etc is behind RAH, it is behind the 25th. Therefore, the WHOLE purpose for this topic was to see why people prefer RAH to the new 25th or vice-versus. Some really gave valid points toward both sides. However, anyone who talks about the story/history/cartoon benind/attached to RAH seems to forget that it is also attached to 25th. Hell, the files cards almost (maybe even exactly) the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is the one thing thing that I do not get about the what people are saying about the story/history behind RAH vs 25th: that they are somehow different. Whatever story/history/cartoon/etc is behind RAH, it is behind the 25th. Therefore, the WHOLE purpose for this topic was to see why people prefer RAH to the new 25th or vice-versus. Some really gave valid points toward both sides. However, anyone who talks about the story/history/cartoon benind/attached to RAH seems to forget that it is also attached to 25th. Hell, the files cards almost (maybe even exactly) the same.

 

 

I kinda wondered about that as well?

 

I took your question literally to mean old style Joes, (pre 25th) to the new style Joes of the 25th line, as in comparing toy to toy, action figure to action figure and which ones we think are "better" per sculpting, details articulation features, accessories and whatnot. As far as the characters and their personal details, it's the same for both, so the debate isn't between any back story of ARAH, just the actual, physical action figures themselves.

 

Any other type of comparison wouldn't really be a fair comparison. I mean, it's ALL based on the mythos of ARAH, and everything prior to the 25th line, has two tons MORE to it, as far as vehicles and multiple characters galore, over all those years, so you can't debate on which had more stuff, or better vehicles and whatnot, the 25th has 15 figures to it's name and that's it, so I was going on figure to figure, for an answer to your question. ^_^

 

Was that right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey gang

 

I'm new to this forum, so go easy on me. I thought a great deal about both lines and if I had a choice between the two ,I'd definitely choose the new 25th ann. line over the originals.

 

Don't get me wrong, I love the original figures, they were great for their time and I had many fond memories of what I went through just to collect them. Back then, Toys'R' Us wouldn't let you in the store unless you were with your parents, so I had to sneak in behind strangers as though I was their child just to get in.

 

Then one day I sold everything, figures, headquarters, Tomahawk etc and never looked back.

 

But looking at this new 25th ann. line, I gotta say has really got me excited all over again. I'm going to rebuild my collection with those 25th ann. figures. when I look back at the originals now, they look like some cheap knock off walgreens brand. Except for the vehicles, those things will always rock, unless Hasbro has some plans for retooling those too.

 

In other words don't expect to see me on ebay hunting for the originals, I'll be driving around looking for the 25th ann figures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep...you said it perfectly......

 

I politely disagree. I almost fell in with you, but I nearly forgot my original point entirely.

 

The 25th captures the mythos more through the sculpting details, accessories, and paint masks.

 

Sure, the 25th got a few points off for range of motion and maybe a face or two (which is telling), but I think if someone itemized the entire list of attributes of the 25th line without ignoring any single aspect, you would then find the 25th figures of a much superior quality because they (more closely) mirror the details brought out by the comic and original card art that the initial 80s figures could not duplicate.

 

Does that make any sense? I'm really not trying to talk over anyone's head.

 

Example: Snake Eyes version 1 is designed and "supported" by high quality card art and a fictional background to sell a very good figure for it's time. See the subtle shading of the card art, the dynamic pose, and the pointed finger. The figure can't do that. If all we knew about was the figure and nothing else, we wouldn't even know he was mute.

 

But the "ideal" version of Snake Eyes surpasses the version 1 figure, because comic and animation artists get to improve on it. Consequently, the mythos of the character improves as well. . .helping to create the ever popular version 2.

 

But still the actual figures themselves remain static because they are fixed; tangible representations of an idealized concept. This is why customizers tend to impress us more often than not, because they can re-create the original into something closer to the collective mental picture of what that particular hero should look like.

 

Picture the perfect Baroness that you could ever imagine Hasbro to create. Now, whatever you imagined her to look like, I guarantee it's not the '84 original (being an improvement and all), or else you're blinded by nostalgia. Furthermore if you're creative enough, the more that Baroness will reflect the idealized version that comic artists and writers have been trying to represent through simpler; more aesthetically striking means.

 

My point being either you're arguing for the version 1 of everything, or you're arguing for an idealized concept that maybe only a customizer can achieve with alot more expensive materials at hand.

 

-PJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep...you said it perfectly......

 

I politely disagree. I almost fell in with you, but I nearly forgot my original point entirely.

 

The 25th captures the mythos more through the sculpting details, accessories, and paint masks.

 

Sure, the 25th got a few points off for range of motion and maybe a face or two (which is telling), but I think if someone itemized the entire list of attributes of the 25th line without ignoring any single aspect, you would then find the 25th figures of a much superior quality because they (more closely) mirror the details brought out by the comic and original card art that the initial 80s figures could not duplicate.

 

Does that make any sense? I'm really not trying to talk over anyone's head.

 

Example: Snake Eyes version 1 is designed and "supported" by high quality card art and a fictional background to sell a very good figure for it's time. See the subtle shading of the card art, the dynamic pose, and the pointed finger. The figure can't do that. If all we knew about was the figure and nothing else, we wouldn't even know he was mute.

 

But the "ideal" version of Snake Eyes surpasses the version 1 figure, because comic and animation artists get to improve on it. Consequently, the mythos of the character improves as well. . .helping to create the ever popular version 2.

 

But still the actual figures themselves remain static because they are fixed; tangible representations of an idealized concept. This is why customizers tend to impress us more often than not, because they can re-create the original into something closer to the collective mental picture of what that particular hero should look like.

 

Picture the perfect Baroness that you could ever imagine Hasbro to create. Now, whatever you imagined her to look like, I guarantee it's not the '84 original (being an improvement and all), or else you're blinded by nostalgia. Furthermore if you're creative enough, the more that Baroness will reflect the idealized version that comic artists and writers have been trying to represent through simpler; more aesthetically striking means.

 

My point being either you're arguing for the version 1 of everything, or you're arguing for an idealized concept that maybe only a customizer can achieve with alot more expensive materials at hand.

 

-PJ

 

I hear what you are saying, but I think your post deals with two different ideas: (1) the 25th anniversary is a better representation because all the work that went into "creating" the characters (different than producing them physically) is better demonstrated by the new sculpts. Am I correct in this summary?....you continue then onto another point (2) which "version" best represents the character? If I am right, and this is what you are trying to say, then the ideas are both extremely valid, just different and I think deserve different arenas to avoid confusion....Now the flip side to all this is that I completely missed your point all together and dont know what i am talking about. Could you clarify because I think you have some valid points regarding both topics?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Going with the topics originator (imthebigdawg) and the question for "debate" he was presenting...

 

 

 

 

 

I can still remember the first time I saw Gi Joe....1982...Child's World in Totowa, NJ. They were, by far, my favorite toy growing up. However, as I got older, my Joes were passed onto my little brothers and then slowly disappearred. Before I got into collecting Joes as an adult, I feel I "romanticized" the old RAH. However, when I really looked back with an "objective" eye, the figures are not only lacking detail, they ugly by todays standard. Therefore, I wonder why so many people are still so hooked on them. I admit that I am not nostaligic. If you can take something old and make it better, then do it. I just picked up the new figures and really find very few flaws with them. If they changed nothing, i would still be extremely happy. Just curious what other people thought.

 

 

I think the point of issue, is how well the new figures LOOK, when compared to the old figures. imthebigdawg is expressing that looking BACK at the old ARAH figures, and doing so with an "objective eye" and discarding ANY "emotional attachment" to the old figures, for any of his OWN personal "nostalgic" reasons in favor of them, (in otherwords...he's making it clear he's not trying to be biased in his opinion, because of some emotional need to favor the toys he played with over anything new) he's claiming the new figures LOOK much better, more detailed and he finds "very few flaws" in them, as compared to those earlier versions, most specifically the earliest ORIGINAL versions that these news figures are being made to pay homage to.

 

imthebigdawg even claims that because of his lack of "nostalgic" emotions for the old toys, he can't understand why some fans are "STILL so hooked on them?" but in that statement, I think it's clear he's recognizing that the answer to that MIGHT still be that other fans ARE nostalgic about this, and do still like the older stuff better for that reason alone, and that reason is just as good as any, as no reason for liking this stuff at all, should ever be considered WRONG.

 

I attempted to add my thoughts on the question he posed, by admitting to mine own lack of "emotional attachment" or nostalgic driven biases to the toys, because I was too old to be as much a part of the play factor with them, or to take in the cartoons and comics at the same level and mentality of a child in the 80's would have, and although I enjoyed these toys in an almost vicarious manner along with the kids of the 80's and appreciated (and envied) what they were privy to, ABOVE what I was able to enjoy as a kid, with my G.I.Joes (all that encompasses the ARAH mythos) I could never have developed the SAME level of emotional attachment and nostalgic bias towards these toys, to affect the opinion I was about to give imthebigdawg on them. Sorta thought it was just a disclaimer, so that when I knocked the new Joes, i wouldn't be charged as being just biased against them, because I feel some sense of devotion to my old toys I had as a kid.

 

Does that make sense? ^_^

 

So bearing that "disclaimer" I went on to suggest what I thought was the good and the bad about these toys, and still asserted I like some of the older stuff better.

 

It's not ARAH characters against Star Wars characters, and which storyline is the best!

 

It's not a question of which ARAH figure BEST represents it's character in details!

 

So going back to imthebigdawgs comments and question..

 

If you can take something old and make it better, then do it. I just picked up the new figures and really find very few flaws with them. If they changed nothing, i would still be extremely happy. Just curious what other people thought.

 

You can't make the mythos of ARAH "better"..it is what it is, as it WAS first created for the characters, and it's still the same story today. The only thind DIFFERENT is the toys they're making of them, and that I believe is what the focus of the debate was geared towards.

 

Snake Eyes the character is set in stone. Snake Eyes the action figure toy has MANY versions and appearances and styles in his molded design and articulation features. Which one do we like the best?

 

Pick a character, ANY character that we have so far from the 25th line, and out of those, which previous version of that character do each of us think is the best, in detail & articulation? If the comparison imthebigdawg was going for is more condensed than even that, then compare the 25th figure with it's predecessor (the version it was made to look like) ONLY.

 

On that note, I posted earlier (on JayC's posted side-by-side comparisons of them) that some of the new ones DID in fact outdo the originals, but others didin't. The new Destro is very cool and a much better looking toy than the first one. Commando Snake Eyes? The new one looks much better than that very first one in '82. V2 Snake Eyes? @hmmm@ mmmm..I'm giving that one to the original! Same with Gung Ho and Duke! Scarlett V1 loses BIG time to the new Scarlett, and Storm Shadow V2 in the 25th line loses BIG time to the original! ^_^

 

Somehow, I think the jist of what imthebigdawg was wanting to go with here, in this debate, got lost along the way, but hopefully I've got it back on track with all that? ;)

 

It's the TOYS ladies and gentlemen...just the TOYS!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's the TOYS ladies and gentlemen...just the TOYS!

and there are numerous elements to the toys as well to be discussed.

 

visually, yes, the 25th figures are superior to RAH in sculpting and detail, but for toys that are being produced 25 years later far more advanced technology, that should be expected. any debate on this aspect is moot IMO and will probably just be an emotionally driven arument from either side. I don't like the 25th figures, but even I agree the sculpting and detail is superior to any RAH figure. of course it is, toy design has advanced significantly in 25 years.

 

aesthetically is where you enter debate territory, as you examine articulation points. RAH fans will swear that the articulation points on RAH figure are far more aesthetically pleasing and less obtrusive to the form of the figure than the 25th figures, which have diaper crocthes and chest joints that disrupt the look of the human figure. is there a right and wrong to this preference? I don't think there is, it is preference.

 

and lastly there is the relevance of the toys themselves, which is an evaluation of the entire toyline. from concept to execution to impact. RAH set the standard for action figures that action figures have built off of to this day. 25th isn't setting any standard in toys, simply replicating what has been done before by other toys. RAH was ingenuitive, 25th is simply replicating RAH ideas with modern toy techniques of other toylines. this element isn't a matter of preference, it is ismply an objective analysis of the two toylines and not a matter of opinion. sure, the 25th is young, but does anyone really expect it to take significant strides as far as ingenuity from where it is? probably not.

 

so, with the three criteria presented, you have:

visually: 25th

relevance: RAH

aesthetically: matter of opinion

 

that is 1 for each and a matter of opinion, which leads us to...there is no right answer for which is the better toy! opinion is the tie breaker, and opinions are biased, wishy-washy and subject to change, so there is no absolute answer to the question. and that is okay.

 

of course, if anyone feel sthere are more elements to the figures themselves that should be considered beyond the three I pigeon holed them into, by all means, ammend my argument.

 

***EDIT***

 

throw in functoinality. 25th figures can assume a proper kneel down position, but can't sit, hold their weapons in both hands or even hold their weapons at all. I think again, this is a matter of preference.

 

and then there is a matter of how you weigh the importance of each element.

 

so for a 25th fan, you can look at it as relevenace only weighs 10%, and can even admit that RAH function better but only weigh it at 10%, but prefer the 25th sculpting at 50% and 25th aesthetics at 30%, and that is why you prefer the 25th figures.

 

this is just my little analytical diatribe into the subject.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's the TOYS ladies and gentlemen...just the TOYS!

and there are numerous elements to the toys as well to be discussed.

 

visually, yes, the 25th figures are superior to RAH in sculpting and detail, but for toys that are being produced 25 years later far more advanced technology, that should be expected. any debate on this aspect is moot IMO and will probably just be an emotionally driven arument from either side. I don't like the 25th figures, but even I agree the sculpting and detail is superior to any RAH figure. of course it is, toy design has advanced significantly in 25 years.

 

aesthetically is where you enter debate territory, as you examine articulation points. RAH fans will swear that the articulation points on RAH figure are far more aesthetically pleasing and less obtrusive to the form of the figure than the 25th figures, which have diaper crocthes and chest joints that disrupt the look of the human figure. is there a right and wrong to this preference? I don't think there is, it is preference.

 

and lastly there is the relevance of the toys themselves, which is an evaluation of the entire toyline. from concept to execution to impact. RAH set the standard for action figures that action figures have built off of to this day. 25th isn't setting any standard in toys, simply replicating what has been done before by other toys. RAH was ingenuitive, 25th is simply replicating RAH ideas with modern toy techniques of other toylines. this element isn't a matter of preference, it is ismply an objective analysis of the two toylines and not a matter of opinion. sure, the 25th is young, but does anyone really expect it to take significant strides as far as ingenuity from where it is? probably not.

 

so, with the three criteria presented, you have:

visually: 25th

relevance: RAH

aesthetically: matter of opinion

 

that is 1 for each and a matter of opinion, which leads us to...there is no right answer for which is the better toy! opinion is the tie breaker, and opinions are biased, wishy-washy and subject to change, so there is no absolute answer to the question. and that is okay.

 

of course, if anyone feel sthere are more elements to the figures themselves that should be considered beyond the three I pigeon holed them into, by all means, ammend my argument.

 

***EDIT***

 

throw in functoinality. 25th figures can assume a proper kneel down position, but can't sit, hold their weapons in both hands or even hold their weapons at all. I think again, this is a matter of preference.

 

and then there is a matter of how you weigh the importance of each element.

 

so for a 25th fan, you can look at it as relevenace only weighs 10%, and can even admit that RAH function better but only weigh it at 10%, but prefer the 25th sculpting at 50% and 25th aesthetics at 30%, and that is why you prefer the 25th figures.

 

this is just my little analytical diatribe into the subject.

 

 

It's actaully a very GOOD "analytical diatribe" though! ^_^

 

You summarized everything perfectly imo! The only thing I'd add is that "visual" and "aesthetic" could almost, kinda, sorta be considered one in the same, and that they both could almost, kinda, sorta, be a matter of opinion.

 

But you're are absolutely correct though, in that a "debate" such as this, has no real right or wrong answer. There's no ruling on it, and a FINAL conclusion to be held up as the most appropriate position to take for future reference. ;)

 

It's like when they remake a classic Sci-Fi movie, and can use better FX by todays standards. It's very visually stunning to watch now, but is it reeeeeally a better version than the original? How many remakes can claim that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know what all the bickering is about. Why can't we all just appreciate the hobby for what it is and that the G.I. JOE Extreme figures were the best? ;)

I think that we all pretty much agree that Extreme was so far superior to any Joe product EVER that there is no need to debate that, but with other lesser versions of Joe, such as RAH and 25th, there is no easy consensus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's the TOYS ladies and gentlemen...just the TOYS!

and there are numerous elements to the toys as well to be discussed.

 

visually, yes, the 25th figures are superior to RAH in sculpting and detail, but for toys that are being produced 25 years later far more advanced technology, that should be expected. any debate on this aspect is moot IMO and will probably just be an emotionally driven arument from either side. I don't like the 25th figures, but even I agree the sculpting and detail is superior to any RAH figure. of course it is, toy design has advanced significantly in 25 years.

 

aesthetically is where you enter debate territory, as you examine articulation points. RAH fans will swear that the articulation points on RAH figure are far more aesthetically pleasing and less obtrusive to the form of the figure than the 25th figures, which have diaper crocthes and chest joints that disrupt the look of the human figure. is there a right and wrong to this preference? I don't think there is, it is preference.

 

You summarized everything perfectly imo! The only thing I'd add is that "visual" and "aesthetic" could almost, kinda, sorta be considered one in the same, and that they both could almost, kinda, sorta, be a matter of opinion.

 

But you're are absolutely correct though, in that a "debate" such as this, has no real right or wrong answer. There's no ruling on it, and a FINAL conclusion to be held up as the most appropriate position to take for future reference. ;)

 

It's like when they remake a classic Sci-Fi movie, and can use better FX by todays standards. It's very visually stunning to watch now, but is it reeeeeally a better version than the original? How many remakes can claim that?

 

 

VH, you're right on the money with that last statement, and gscbr, you're right on when it comes to the third category you mentioned. The bit about functionality, too, is important, as it leads into what I have to say about the visual and aesthetic elements.

 

I'm still not sure that "visually" these are better than RAH. They do not have more "realistic" proportions - they look like comic superheroes. They do not have faces that are any more "realistic" either. There's a bit more detail, especially when it comes to the hands, but not any more detail in the equipment or facial elements. It's DIFFERENT, yes, but not any better in any real way other than a matter of personal opinion. In some instances (a notable example that comes to mind are the thigh holsters, but there are others) the detail is LESS than what we've seen in RAH.

 

The reason I say this is related to your note on functionality is because we're not seeing anything BETTER in a visual sense - they're just done in a more MODERN style. Fans seem to like figures that can be posed nicely on the shelf - they don't seem to care as much about putting them in a vehicle. They like comic-book hero proportions that we've seen in popular series like Marvel Legends, but that's not any BETTER than the realistic proportions the old GI Joes had. (Most soldiers are not muscle-bound Supermen.) In the real world, someone with RAH Sgt. Slaughter's proportions would be HUGE, but it's not enough for a toyline/comic nowadays.

 

I'm talking about the line as a whole here - figures like the V1 Snake Eyes and Storm Shadow are awesome, no doubt about that. The Snake Eyes is visually better than the original, but I can't say that about the rest. RAH and 25th V1 Storm Shadow are about equal, I would say. Scarlett is close but I don't see that her cartoony head (ironically, not at all like the one in the cartoon) is any better than the original. Maybe she's just supposed to be a bit homely? (This is the army, after all.)

 

V1 SE and SS give me a bit of hope, though, but like I said in other posts, I got out of SW because of a lack of consistency. If every figure was as good as the VOTC Stormtrooper, I would probably still be collecting them. Somehow I have a feeling it'll be the same with the 25th Anniversary Joes.

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