When companies have been around for a long time, the opportunity for remaking it arises. In prehistoric species, the better for it, as new information can completely change the look of an animal. And with the announcement of a new model of Paraceratherium, many were thrilled. I was especially, as it is one of my favourite prehistoric mammals. The reaction to the initial photos was not great however. With the actual model in hand, how did it turn out? Let’s take a look!
Before tackling the giant rhinoceros in the room, let’s look at the rest of it. The sculpting details are fantastic, leagues above it’s more cartoonish predecessor. Colouration is better too, greys with brownish hair. The pose is a great walking pose, with mouth wide open. Maybe warning a rival male (this model is clearly male) or maybe it’s just going for some leaves, it is whatever your imagination wishes. I really didn’t expect it to be this big, far larger than it’s predecessor, a whopping 9.2″ long and 6.3″ high, it’s a huge one!
Now to the real bedbug that most find with this model: the hair. I get the idea, Asian elephants do have hair on them in a similar colour, and if the Gobi desert was as cold as it is today, it would certainly help. The execution, however, is quite poor, patchy and haphazardly placed on the model. I have to agree with many of the people on the forum, it looks like mange. A real detraction, and not a good one.
With that out the way, let’s look at accuracy. A lot is good, general body proportions, thick neck and body with a slight hump, and great skull shape, clearly seeing it’s well sculpted teeth. The trunk is a more modern idea, that they may have had a trunk similar to a modern tapir. It’s well done, but I personally prefer the rhino prehensile lip, as the skull shapes aren’t too far apart, so why would it be a trunk? This is only my opinion though, and you are free to disagree with me. The neck may be a little short, but it isn’t too terrible, but I feel the legs should be thicker, they seem a little slim to me, and I will again let people disagree with me on that.
There are a lot of things for and against this model. On the one hand, it is well sculpted and painted, more lifelike than the original, has a great size to it and shows new theories in palaeontology to children and collectors. On the other hand, the execution of the hair and certain anatomical questions make it harder to want to go for. I put the two CollectA models in front of a couple of friends, asked which was better, and got two different responses, so it is hard to say which is superior. I don’t regret getting it, but not sure I can totally love it. If you do want it, plenty of retailers, online or otherwise, will have it. Perhaps actually holding it will change opinions, but will have to see for yourselves.
Disclaimer: links to Ebay and Amazon on the DinoToyBlog are affiliate links, so we make a small commission if you use them. Thanks for supporting us!
The trunk and large ears are ideas of Donald Prothero that haven’t been supported by other researchers, Darren Naish specifically has questioned those features on his blog.
It’s a unique and never before (at least in toy form) seen take on this animal that reflect some of the more current reconstruction including the short trunk.
I like this model a lot at will definitely grow on you after the initial reaction to its unique appearance. It could be the direct lighting, but your photo make the red stand out more .
It’s 1:35 scale size fits it nicely with the Eofauna elephant and makes for a great display.
This figure seems to come in around 1/35 scale over against the 1/40 of the original, the extra size being appreciable. It fits in well with a 1/35ish group of Cenozoic mammals, compared to the iToy colossus, appropriate to a 1/20th scale collection in contrast.
Honestly, it is a good figure, although in my case it does not completely convince me (although I will receive it in days) I am much more convinced by its iToy counterpart (in size and sculpture), however I am a fan of prehistoric mammals and prehistoric animals are not dinosaurs as much or more than their dinosaur counterparts and it will be well received in my house.
The neck and limb proportions of this figure are in keeping with the most recent restorations of Paraceratherium as far as I can tell. And the trunk hypothesis has been embraced by a number of experts, including Mark Witton and Donald Prothero, who wrote an entire book on indricotheres that features a Paraceratherium with a trunk on the front cover.
https://www.amazon.ca/Rhinoceros-Giants-Indricotheres-Donald-Prothero/dp/0253008190
As for the red fur, I don’t love it, but I reckon CollectA was seeking to make their toy look less dull than all the other flat grey renditions out there.
So yeah, I’m really fond of this toy.
Well said; I love this figure! Nice review Sireniaaahhh…Indoyus 😉
Paleontologist (and paleoartist) Mark Witton also had a good post on new ideas about what Paraceratherium might have looked like, including the anatomical arguments for a proboscis, at http://markwitton-com.blogspot.com/2016/08/trunk-or-no-trunk-short-or-giant-ears.html
As for the hair, there was a comment on the dinotoyblog forums that the patchy hair was probably inspired by the Sumatran rhino, seen here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sumatran_Rhino.jpg
It might not be the ideal (affordable) model people hoped for, but I do appreciate Collecta for being one of the most reliable companies for good prehistoric mammals. I should definitely pick this one up sometime!