Official Sideshow Crimson Guards!

[thenammagazine]

Re: Offical Sideshow Crimson Guards!

I think you may have confused me with someone else, Khev. I've always been in accord with the updating / modernizing of the Joe Line...and this is the only 1/6 line from Sideshow that I collect. I pick up Hot Toys figures as well, but I'm not nearly as invested (for lack of a better word) in them as I am with the Joe line.



Khev, as Josh said, you're not raining on our parade. When I joined back in 4/09, I was happy to see a thread of like-minded Joe fans who's knowledge of the comic and cartoon were similar to mine. You were one of the biggest defender's of the Joe line, and when Firefly's pics were released, it seemed like the only ones defending him were you, me, and maybe Josh (my apologies if I forgot anyone). Since then (perhaps it was with Dusty), it seems you've taken a step back from Sideshow's line. I understand that you want them to be more faithful to the RAH line (specifically, in your words, the "card art"), but I know how much joy each subsequent Joe release gives me, and it's sort of disappointing that you (with the Duke avatar with your face on it) do't get the same feeling as the majority of us do.



Well, if that one thread that came out after SDCC is to be believed, V1 Snake Eyes will rectify this. It's been alleged that a sculpted V2 head will come with the V1 figure to allow uniformity.

Oops, my mistake, carry on then!

But even if you don't collect SW I hope you can appreciate that I wouldn't want a Luke Skywalker (or animated SW character) to be "modernized" with Justin Bieber hair or different shaped helmets and whatnot. Its exactly the same with Joes for me.


I hear you, and believe me, that's why I don't want to be the party pooper if you guys are still all into it. With each new SSC Joe release I kind of hope to get sucked back in so the jury isn't out permanently.

And I have been one of the few guys defending the Crimson Guard ironically enough.

Again, that makes no sense whatsoever. While there have been a few misses, for the most part, we've gotten figures that closely resembled the card art (or could be stripped down to do so). I would have 'd at a $90 figure of V2 SE in a black bodysuit, so the trousers made sense. SS was pretty much dead on. Cobra Commander wasn't that bad either, considering. The Cobra Trooper was perfection and the Officer wasn't bad either.When you get to Beachhead, anybody with any complaints needs to stick to the 3 3/4" toys. Stalker was a Home Run and hair paint aside, so was Flint. With that said, Firefly was a miss (though a great figure it wasn't a great "Firefly"), Dusty had a goatee and this red Bondage trooper would be the only exceptions. That red thing for SDCC doesn't count. And again, you're blatantly ignoring the fact that Sideshow said from the beginning that these would be modernized. They said nothing of the sort of Star Wars and if they suddenly started taking liberties with that, then I'd quit collecting them. If you had an issue with them modernizing the Joe line, you should never have started collecting them. I guaran____ingtee you, if Sideshow or HT re-release the Universal Monsters and they don't have the OG likenesses, I won't collect them.

 

[karamazov80]

Re: Offical Sideshow Crimson Guards!

In general, I agree with Khev's perspective on the Joes and see the defense of the Star Wars license's focus on the accuracy of source material and coinciding criticism of a preference for vintage looks over the free and loose perspective Sideshow has taken with the Joes as a bit of selective reasoning. While I can understand that there are different vintage incarnations of Joes, and that they can be "modernized" to reflect the contemporary military (where they apparently wear pleather red jackets, snow parkas instead of simple turtle necks, etc.), the same could be said for Star Wars. Those outfits from the original films were so 70s. Vader's helmet shape could be modified to look "modern," as could Han's wacky black vest. It's just completely subjective preference, and no one is more right or wrong for it.

I, too, would prefer for the Sideshow Joes to be as card art accurate as they could be, and barring that, as close to the comic, toy, or even cartoon incarnation as possible. Logically, there is zero difference between that preference, and someone preferring Star Wars figures to be exactly the same as they appeared in the films, in the concept art, in the Clone War cartoons, etc. Just because a larger percentage of the collectors of these respective lines would probably take Sideshow's perspective (i.e., don't ____ with Star Wars, modify the Joes liberally) doesn't make either perspective better or worse in an objective sense.

BTW, still don't like Siegie.

 

[lerath666]

Re: Offical Sideshow Crimson Guards!

to air my concerns about the pleather jacket:

I'm worried that after a while it might rot apart, and flake, becoming unusable.
I'm also worried the material might be too thick, and greatly hinder articulation.



IF it's a similar material to indy's jacket, i'm not too terribly worried. it's held up fine and doesn't hinder articulation to any noticeable degree.

 

[karamazov80]

Re: Offical Sideshow Crimson Guards!

to air my concerns about the pleather jacket:

I'm worried that after a while it might rot apart, and flake, becoming unusable.
I'm also worried the material might be too thick, and greatly hinder articulation.

I'm worried that it looks like poo

 

[thenammagazine]

Re: Offical Sideshow Crimson Guards!

In general, I agree with Khev's perspective on the Joes and see the defense of the Star Wars license's focus on the accuracy of source material and coinciding criticism of a preference for vintage looks over the free and loose perspective Sideshow has taken with the Joes as a bit of selective reasoning. While I can understand that there are different vintage incarnations of Joes, and that they can be "modernized" to reflect the contemporary military (where they apparently wear pleather red jackets, snow parkas instead of simple turtle necks, etc.), the same could be said for Star Wars. Those outfits from the original films were so 70s. Vader's helmet shape could be modified to look "modern," as could Han's wacky black vest. It's just completely subjective preference, and no one is more right or wrong for it.

I, too, would prefer for the Sideshow Joes to be as card art accurate as they could be, and barring that, as close to the comic, toy, or even cartoon incarnation as possible. Logically, there is zero difference between that preference, and someone preferring Star Wars figures to be exactly the same as they appeared in the films, in the concept art, in the Clone War cartoons, etc. Just because a larger percentage of the collectors of these respective lines would probably take Sideshow's perspective (i.e., don't ____ with Star Wars, modify the Joes liberally) doesn't make either perspective better or worse in an objective sense.

BTW, still don't like Siegie.

You two must be sharing the same hookah.

 

[karamazov80]

Re: Offical Sideshow Crimson Guards!

And again, you're blatantly ignoring the fact that Sideshow said from the beginning that these would be modernized. They said nothing of the sort of Star Wars and if they suddenly started taking liberties with that, then I'd quit collecting them. If you had an issue with them modernizing the Joe line, you should never have started collecting them. I guaran____ingtee you, if Sideshow or HT re-release the Universal Monsters and they don't have the OG likenesses, I won't collect them.

From what I've read, no one is disputing what Sideshow said they would do. Whether or not they said they would do this or that with a license from the beginning isn't part of the argument. Frankly, I collect the Joes because I am a Joe fan and the figures are almost always "good enough," and often are very excellent, despite mods and "updates" (I do dig Firefly). But that doesn't mean someone can't still prefer that Sideshow focus on vintage looks, and hope that they would lean more in that direction with their various releases. And that perspective is just as legitimate as saying the same about Star Wars.

 

[The Josh]

Re: Offical Sideshow Crimson Guards!

Nobody can fault people for wanting them to lean that way but don't get upset when they're not spitting images of the card art. As I've said for me I really like the changes that have been made. They took the toys I had as a kid and made them better/cooler for me. So that's why for me I can't get behind people wanting them to more look like the card art.

 

[thenammagazine]

Re: Offical Sideshow Crimson Guards!

From what I've read, no one is disputing what Sideshow said they would do. Whether or not they said they would do this or that with a license from the beginning isn't part of the argument. Frankly, I collect the Joes because I am a Joe fan and the figures are almost always "good enough," and often are very excellent, despite mods and "updates" (I do dig Firefly). But that doesn't mean someone can't still prefer that Sideshow focus on vintage looks, and hope that they would lean more in that direction with their various releases. And that perspective is just as legitimate as saying the same about Star Wars.

Yes and no. Wishing is one thing. Ranting at them for not making figures accurate to the card art, when they never said they would, and actually having said to the contrary since before the first release, is complaining for the sake of doing so.

 

[saintsyn]

Re: Offical Sideshow Crimson Guards!

Okay, here's a question for you guys.... Do you think this is how the Iron Grenadiers (if they get that far) will be done? Makes more sense to have those guys in leather....

 

[ProgMatinee]

Re: Offical Sideshow Crimson Guards!

I give them that, SE was their first figure, my bad. I know mistakes will be made while trying something new(Stupid ratched knees). And I understand moving forward, but how is the idea of using the original 3/4 design on some, DD on others and creating a new look for others still, moving forward. When I say inconsistency, I meant what they represent, Storm Shadow looks close to the original 3/4, Firefly opposite end. As someone said earlier (Im not sure if its accurate or not) SS claimed they were not going to use original designs, yet they did.

I can't really use Firefly to defend the issue, as I agree with you that the original design would be bad ass and sell, but I think for some figures it is arguable that a redesign could improve the sales of a figure.

I don't think nostalgia trumps all in terms of what would make for the best/most succesful figure. Unlike Star Wars, I personally think Joe should have a bit of slack in order to update/change the design. Not TOO far mind you, but to some extent, they should.

 

[ProgMatinee]

Re: Offical Sideshow Crimson Guards!

I think the earlier discussion of taste vs execution can apply to Snake Eyes perhaps. Since he's suited up from head to toe, nobody was going to argue against the fabric suit. It was the execution of it that was flawed.

Looking at Hot Toys recent Spider-Man, it's certainly possible to create a Snake-Eyes that looks good. With G.I.Joe, I think I would prefer fabric masks and hoods to balance the overall look but I also understand the difficulties and challenges that would place on delivering a quality product.

Thinking about it, I don't think Snake Eyes in particular was flawed, rather SSC realized that they couldn't execute the fabric for Storm Shadow's eyelet properly.

 

[thenammagazine]

Re: Offical Sideshow Crimson Guards!

Okay, here's a question for you guys.... Do you think this is how the Iron Grenadiers (if they get that far) will be done? Makes more sense to have those guys in leather....

Pleather, yes. Shiny pleather, no.

I can't really use Firefly to defend the issue, as I agree with you that the original design would be bad ass and sell, but I think for some figures it is arguable that a redesign could improve the sales of a figure.

I don't think nostalgia trumps all in terms of what would make for the best/most succesful figure. Unlike Star Wars, I personally think Joe should have a bit of slack in order to update/change the design. Not TOO far mind you, but to some extent, they should.

The SAW Viper would be a perfect example of someone who'll need tweaking when they get to him. Skin-tight purple outfit and silly helmet anyone?

 

[karamazov80]

Re: Offical Sideshow Crimson Guards!

Yes and no. Wishing is one thing. Ranting at them for not making figures accurate to the card art, when they never said they would, and actually having said to the contrary since before the first release, is complaining for the sake of doing so.

Who's ranting at Sideshow? We're voicing opinions. I suppose you could argue that any critique of a figure is just complaining for the sake of doing so when the chances it will matter are infinitesimal. But. . .y'know, toy discussion forum and whatnot.

 

[ProgMatinee]

Re: Offical Sideshow Crimson Guards!

It's not selective reasoning on SW vs Joe.

The truth is NOBODY would buy an ANH Luke if it was dressed other than exactly like the movie.

The difference is that people DO buy the Joe toys with the changes.

I can honestly say I don't think I'd buy a Grunt figure if it was as plain looking as the 3 3/4" figure. After having kit bashed my own I realized its a BORING and plain toy. I think Rock N Roll would look awfully boring and plain as well without all of the pouches they are giving him.

 

[karamazov80]

Re: Offical Sideshow Crimson Guards!

It's not selective reasoning on SW vs Joe.

The truth is NOBODY would buy an ANH Luke if it was dressed other than exactly like the movie.

The difference is that people DO buy the Joe toys with the changes.

You're talking about sales potential, not validity of an opinion. Some Star Wars fans would, I would bet my house, buy a "re-imagined" Luke. Many more would buy "EU" versions, many scores of them would buy the McQuarrie concept versions or whatever. But yes, most would buy screen accurate versions.

And I think Sideshow's perspective is a good one in terms of maximizing their sales, because of the above, and because I know there are lots of modern military aficionados out there that would probably not be purely vintage incarnations of Joes but will buy the ones with fancy new gear and weapons. But that doesn't mean preferring the vintage look in their 12" figures is an invalid opinion.

 

[thenammagazine]

Re: Offical Sideshow Crimson Guards!

You're talking about sales potential, not validity of an opinion. Some Star Wars fans would, I would bet my house, buy a "re-imagined" Luke. Many more would buy "EU" versions, many scores of them would buy the McQuarrie concept versions or whatever. But yes, most would buy screen accurate versions.

And I think Sideshow's perspective is a good one in terms of maximizing their sales, because of the above, and because I know there are lots of modern military aficionados out there that would probably not be purely vintage incarnations of Joes but will buy the ones with fancy new gear and weapons. But that doesn't mean preferring the vintage look in their 12" figures is an invalid opinion.

Did they start out by saying, "We'll be moderinizing the Star Wars license to produce contemporary versions of the Star Wars characters?"

 

[teemu]

Re: Offical Sideshow Crimson Guards!

ordered!!!

 

[lerath666]

Re: Offical Sideshow Crimson Guards!

ordered!!!

how? has the newsletter been posted?

 

[onethousandmasks]

Re: Offical Sideshow Crimson Guards!

It's not selective reasoning on SW vs Joe.

The truth is NOBODY would buy an ANH Luke if it was dressed other than exactly like the movie.

The difference is that people DO buy the Joe toys with the changes.

I can honestly say I don't think I'd buy a Grunt figure if it was as plain looking as the 3 3/4" figure. After having kit bashed my own I realized its a BORING and plain toy. I think Rock N Roll would look awfully boring and plain as well without all of the pouches they are giving him.

But if you strip down RnR he would look like the "boring" original, which is my point. I'm all for modernizing the character. But not to the point where it doesnt make sense. Why give CG a bright red shiny jacket. Like NAM said, give him a matte finished one, and he would look alot better. Why give him pleather at all.
case in point, when CC came out, I changed the boots to some Dragon pleather ones. I just noticed that the boots have started to crack at folds around the ankles. My concern is that this will happen to the CG jacket over time.

 

[Emperor]

Re: Offical Sideshow Crimson Guards!

how? has the newsletter been posted?

I was wondering the same thing. As of right now he isn't up on the site.