Remember the McFarlane rule...If it has at least ONE point of articulation, it's an action figure [img]tongue.gif[/img]
Printable View
Remember the McFarlane rule...If it has at least ONE point of articulation, it's an action figure [img]tongue.gif[/img]
That reminds me.
I think it's time to pack up some of the older figures to make way for the Soldiers. [img]graemlins/thumbs_up.gif[/img]
I think many people misunderstand the term "action" in action figure. It's not referring to the toy having action or movement but rather to the character being portrayed as a person of action like a superhero or whatever.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Still inapropos in the case of many McFarlane figures. I mean, all these mutilated, bonded, tortured folks can't really be up to much "action" of any kind...Quote:
Originally posted by Andyman:
I think many people misunderstand the term "action" in action figure. It's not referring to the toy having action or movement but rather to the character being portrayed as a person of action like a superhero or whatever.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Still inapropos in the case of many McFarlane figures. I mean, all these mutilated, bonded, tortured folks can't really be up to much "action" of any kind...</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">True. But the term "action figure" is a pure marketing concept which makes "Ultra-action Figure" pure hyperbole. [img]wink.gif[/img]Quote:
Originally posted by -Dark Angel-:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Andyman:
I think many people misunderstand the term "action" in action figure. It's not referring to the toy having action or movement but rather to the character being portrayed as a person of action like a superhero or whatever.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">See, here's where I keep getting stuck--your metaphors are weird. "Plan-B's stuff looks like old 5" basic 5-point articulation compared to..." etc. etc. When I read that, I think that you're suggesting that McFarlane has a LOT of articulation, which, of course, is patently untrue.Quote:
Originally posted by Artist formerly known as me.:
[QB]But what you say about plan-b's stuff holding up is shinola. I have quite a few, and they look like old 5" basic5 point articulation compared to what i've seen of the new mcmilitary toys.
As for the notion that McFarlane is so much better than everything else on the market that it shouldn't even be compared to it--as the only representative here of OAFE, to that I say, "give me an effin' break."
McFarlane has arguably the best sculpting, but everything else about their toys--from the poses they're placed in to the lack of articulation--are decisions they make in crafting a toy, and reviewers (and consumers) have every right to decide how much they like those decisions.
Look at it this way. The New Yorker reviews movies for a very select audience, and therefore, David Denby (their reviewer) will negatively review movies like Batman Begins because he's comparing it to every other movie ever made--not just movies like it. He's also grading on the assumption of a select audience that will always prefer the small art-house movie to any Hollywood film.
Roger Ebert, on the other hand, reviews a movie like BB with the general public in mind, and when he gives it four stars, he's grading it in comparison with similar films--not against, say, Citizen Kane. If you told him to provide an "objective" star rating between the quality of BB and Citizen Kane, I'm sure BB wouldn't get four stars.
MWC (and OAFE, and the Toy Pirate) review for everyone, just like Ebert. And thus, we review McFarlane figures for McFarlane fans as well as the general public, and we have to try and walk a fine line between the two.
Personally, I find your beef with reviews to be a little silly. No offense--you seem like a cool guy--but no toy is so excellent as to be above my snooty critical eye [img]wink.gif[/img]
<font color="#cd6600" size="1">[ July 12, 2005 08:58 AM: Message edited by: Poe Ghostal ]</font>
Well wrote Poe...you snoot! [img]wink.gif[/img]
Seriously, I liked your comparison to movie critics.
i like his pants [img]smile.gif[/img]
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Poe's, Me's or the military dude's?Quote:
Originally posted by Joranthalus:
i like his pants [img]smile.gif[/img]
If anybody cares....
Way back when (like 10 years ago) when I started buying McF figs I thought they were the absolute best toys in the world.... because they simply were. The sculpts were amazing, the ideas were fresh and the lack of articulation wasn't an issue for me because most toys with articulation were friggin' ugly.
In the past couple of years there are companies making awesome toys with awesome sculpts and the newer methods of articulating a figure have become a mostly non-intrusive spectacular bonus. For those other companies that don't use the articulation they are including extra hands and heads to make up for it.
Although McF is still one of the best toy manufacturers they are no longer the best. A beautiful sculpt doesn't fly for me anymore as a sole selling factor. Everybody is producing great sculpts.
If I put a McF toy beside my ToyBiz or Mezco figs I see McF falling behind. The track they are on has been well worn and I think it's time they added some new rails.