Safari Ltd - New for 2022

[Flaffy]

All of you are so pessimistic, this is a new Dinosaur and sculpt.

The pessimism is not unwarranted. The 2022 "Rock Agama" was a very disappointing reveal. If Safari wanted to get more mileage out of that sculpt, they could've easily repainted it into the hundreds of morphs of bearded dragons in the reptile trade.

Dinoxels took the picture...

lol

Dinoxels took the pictures of the "Rock Agama"?

And my point was that other people, who don't have special insider info from Safari ltd, most definitely have reason to be pessimistic on any 2022 release based on the crudely repainted Bearded Dragon. Never did I imply that Dinoxels doesn't know what the new figures are, and I am well aware that they have all 3 new releases on hand as we speak. I responded to Dinoxel as to remind them that again, the pessimism from those know do not have the privilege of insider knowledge is not unwarranted.

[Pachyrhinosaurus]

Not mine.

Sorry. It does look well-researched and complements your style.

I think many here are taking for granted how accurate this figure is. The only things that I think should be different are the scale size and tarsal scutes, and the scale size is easily excusable since it looks more to be a stylistic choice.

[bmathison1972]

Not mine.

Sorry. It does look well-researched and complements your style.

I think many here are taking for granted how accurate this figure is. The only things that I think should be different are the scale size and tarsal scutes, and the scale size is easily excusable since it looks more to be a stylistic choice.

I actually also assumed it was Doug's; it does have his style :-D (which, is a complement in my book, since Doug is my favorite dino sculptor)

[GojiraGuy1954]

Not mine.

Sorry. It does look well-researched and complements your style.

I think many here are taking for granted how accurate this figure is. The only things that I think should be different are the scale size and tarsal scutes, and the scale size is easily excusable since it looks more to be a stylistic choice.

I actually also assumed it was Doug's; it does have his style :-D (which, is a complement in my book, since Doug is my favorite dino sculptor)

It's similar, but doesn't feel as authentic to me. Maybe because it's digitally sculpted.

[Faelrin]

Adding myself to the list that thought Doug did this because of its style I guess. Again I think the sculpt is really nice, whoever did it.

[Ikessauro]

It's a good figure, I think I like the sculpt and size better than the PNSO, and the price is much better.
Alwready a review from Andy's Dinosaur, cool but come on Andy, you could have compared it with the PNSO one :/

He probably could not have compared it to PNSO's by contractual reasons. If SAfari is providing you with early access figures to review, they are trading it for promotion of their brand (maybe even paying the content creator?). Including a figure from other brands in the same video would be a conflict. Not only you would be comparing Safari's figure with a better more realistic one, but also would be promoting PNSO for free in the same video. That is the problem with sponsored reviews. They aren't always as complete as they could have been.

In my opinion, I don't care Safari Ltd. calls it Nanotyrannus, just as I didn't care PNSO did it. What bothers me the most is that, with so many dinosaur species to make, ones that have interesting weird shapes and could be painted in quite creative colors, Safari decided to make the most famous species of dinosaur ever, T.rex, which has the most toys in the market. Also they gave it a boring paint job. Does not excite me at all. I would not be inclined to buy it so soon, not even for half the price it is listed on Safari's website. Would be a figure way down my list of priorities. I would only buy it for completeness sake, if I ever complete my Safari Ltd. collection.

[suspsy]

It's not so much "not trying to spoil it" as it is "encouraging children to go see it".

The movie goes into great detail about how dinosaurs that were once considered their own genus are now thought by many to be different growth stages of the same dinosaur.

It is teaching kids the exact opposite of what the people here are complaining about. The movie (and the figure) are encouraging kids to question the notion that everything is cut and dry, that the science of paleontology is set in stone (sorry for the pun), by showing that some dinosaur genera get folded into others as more knowledge comes to light.

Just because Nanotyrannus is not a technically valid genus, does all evidence of its existence need to be stricken from consciousness? As if paleontologists never named a dinosaur Nanotyrannus?

Or do we teach that sometimes paleontologists get it wrong, and encourage kids to ask questions?

I don't expect that anyone in this forum has watched the movie, it's a kid's movie after all. But these are kid figures. They appeal to collectors like us by and large because we grew up with them and learned from them and continue to learn from them. But they are still figures first and foremost designed for children, and the goal was to teach and inform them about the history of this genus.

You can disagree with whether or not this is the most effective way to do it. That's fine. But I genuinely think some of the reactions here are quite hyperbolic.

Especially when, as was said, there was nowhere near this level of vitriol when PNSO - a company run by scientists who makes figures specifically for the collector market - released this same genus recently.

I get all that. But the flaw in your argument as I see it is that not everyone who buys this toy is going to bother watching the Dino Dana movie (which I have indeed seen, hence my earlier comment about wanting an Albertosaurus toy based on it) or checking the Safari website or even looking it up at all. A lot of children, parents, and even adult collectors are simply going to assume that Nanotyrannus really is a genuine dinosaur unto itself. Especially if this toy continues to be manufactured and sold years after Dino Dana is no longer a thing. There remain plenty of people out there who are surprised or even angered to learn that Velociraptor had feathers or that Spinosaurus had puny hind limbs, after all. As for the part of teaching kids, well, that's absolutely a noble intention, but the problem there is that you could swap out this toy with the examples I just cited or an Elasmosaurus with the head on the wrong end, and you'd have the same result. My concern is that you're presenting only one side of the argument by offering up a toy with "Nanotyrannus" printed on its tummy and a hope that buyers will indeed watch the movie or do the right research.

But I really don't care to harp on this matter any further. I've said all that I wish to say on it and for all I know, future research on the Duelling Dinosaurs specimen or some other specimen might well overturn the current thinking and restore Nanotyrannus as a valid genus. And if that does indeed prove to be the case, then perhaps I'll end up buying this toy after all if it's still available. Weirder things do happen.

That's all I'll say about it. There are still more dinos to reveal; if you don't like this one, hopefully you'll find something to like about those.

That is definitely what I am hoping. As I said, I'd love me a blue Albertosaurus toy!

One another note, the proportions on the offending figure look unusual. I'd be curious to know if this was based on an actual specimen, because compared to Jane--which the proponents insist is really a Nanotyrannus--the legs and tail appear too short and too chunky.

[Patrx]

Based upon a truly strange video from Safari's social media, I think tomorrow's reveal will be some manner of ankylosaur. Personally, I'm hoping for Zuul!

[Gwangi]

After mulling it over and getting over my initial disappointment in not getting a Gorgosaurus or Albertosaurus I have come around to the Nanotyrannus young Tyrannosaurus. I do think it is unfortunate that Safari went with calling it a Nanotyrannus. S @Shane's explanation as to why makes sense but I'm not sure how much critical thinking it will encourage vs. "oh hey, a new dinosaur for my kid" kind of a mentality. But it is a toy connected to a movie and specifically labeled as part of the Dino Dana Collection, not the Prehistoric World collection. Think of it as the Carnegie Collection. Made by Safari but another line entirely.

Being a father, I have seen the Dino Dana movie and the movie's big question is, "where are the kid dinos?" Dana mistakenly thinks the young Tyrannosaurus in the film is a Nanotyrannus and is confused as to why it hangs around with the adult T. rex. Stygimoloch and Dracorex are in the movie too. The science is used to also explore life in a blended family, but I digress. Nanotyrannus plays a role in the movie so including it in this line makes sense, regardless of what it is called.

Anyway, I'm quite liking the figure and although I generally don't collect growth stages of animals I might just make an exception for this one. Maybe I'll even review it for the blog. I will say this, it's odd that the Dino Dana adult T. rex is feathered and the Nanotyrannus young T. rex is not. It will make pairing this toy with the adult Safari T. rex kind of difficult. Also, that I like it so much makes me hope we do get an Albertosaurus from Safari too, especially since the one from Dino Dana is pretty cool looking.

@Bread, here is a screen shot of the Dino Dana Nanotyrannus. I had to take the picture with my phone so it's rather crude but you get the idea.


Lastly, I think the amount of backlash that Safari is getting over this is pretty harsh. Neither the Nanotyrannus young T. rex or Patagotitan are bad figures even if you aren't personally attracted to them and would have preferred to see something else. Safari didn't give us much last year but both the Daspletosaurus and Baryonyx were fantastic, long overdue figures. Safari is still ace in my book, unless they really do start repainting existing dinosaur figures and labeling them as something else. 

[Shane]

One another note, the proportions on the offending figure look unusual. I'd be curious to know if this was based on an actual specimen, because compared to Jane--which the diehards insist is really a Nanotyrannus--the legs and tail too short and too chunky.

I think the short tail is largely a result of the angle of the photo. If you look at the photo on the site where the figure is facing the opposite way, you can see a more accurate proportional photo of the tail.

As far as chunkiness of the legs, there are compromises that need to be made for stability's sake.

It also needs to look on model to the Dino Dana design, which is even chunkier than the figure.

[CARN0TAURUS]

Beautiful figure!  And I agree with the guys, when I first saw it I also assumed it was one of Doug's sculpts too.  Whoever sculpted this was definitely channeling Doug's mojo...they say imitation is the most sincere form of flattery and there is someone out there that likes Doug's style and wants to replicate that in their sculpts.  I can only hope Doug is flattered by this...

I collect theropods and this is a beauty, I will not be able to resist this.  As for the color issues, I like tweaking the paint on some of my figures and I'm going to have a blast toying around with this one...can't wait to add this awesome figure to my collection!

[Sim]

Well, that's two figures so far from Safari and both have been disappointing to me.  I'm prepared for this year's Safari figures to be even more disappointing than 2018's, which I didn't think could happen.  The Nanotyrannus doesn't look very accurate to me, it has too few teeth, its skull's shape doesn't match Jane's or the Nanotyrannus holotype and its legs are too short.  I can understand that the shortness of the legs was to aid stability, but then, why not just make another dinosaur that didn't need this like Albertosaurus?  I find it weird PNSO and Safari both decided to make a Nanotyrannus as there are better choices for species and Nanotyrannus has never been popular or requested, has it?  I haven't seen much demand for a baby Tyrannosaurus either.

[Concavenator]

Based upon a truly strange video from Safari's social media, I think tomorrow's reveal will be some manner of ankylosaur. Personally, I'm hoping for Zuul!

Now that would be exciting!!

Regarding the Nanotyrannus case, it doesn't matter what excuse Safari comes up with. That name is simply invalid, so whatever they say in order to justify the name are just excuses. Safari is theoretically a company who sell their figures as educational and who pay attention to accuracy. If that's the case, they simply shouldn't have named it like that. As someone mentioned earlier, it's like they released an Allosaurus figure and called it Antrodemus just because that name was used at some point. Or if they came out with a kangaroo Iguanodon because it was believed to look like that back then. To me, this isn't too big of a deal but it's definitely an inaccuracy and it will also create confusion and misguide people. Frankly, I'm not interested in it just because it's a juvenile Tyrannosaurus, and I don't care for having one. Though if they released a Troodon, jokes aside, and also being aware of the invalidity of the name, I would probably still get it just because troodontids are extremely rare in figure form and I like them.

Though out of the two cases, PNSO and Safari, at least as S @Shane mentioned, Safari is trying to remediate the situation by presenting the possibility of it being a juvenile Tyrannosaurus, so I guess this makes PNSO's case worse. Also, not sure the difference in reactions to the announcements has been massively different, both cases were (justifiedly) criticised.

I find it weird PNSO and Safari both decided to make a Nanotyrannus as there are better choices for species and Nanotyrannus has never been popular or requested, has it?  I haven't seen much demand for a baby Tyrannosaurus either.

Completely agree. 2 Nanotyrannus (lol) figures in less than a year, and plenty of other tyrannosaurs still in the dark. And there are other theropods (and dinosaurs!) that are not tyrannosaurs that are even more in the dark.

[Fembrogon]

Well, that was a dramatic few pages of reading.
I admit I'm a little underwhelmed by the choice of Nanotyrannus for a new sculpt - especially if it was instead of a more unique tyrannosaur genus - but I appreciate the input as to why this figure was made, and I do think the result is looking pretty good.
I will most likely still add this one to my collection once it's available. I'll be delighted to see tomorrow's reveal as well!

[Renecito]

I personally don't care about the controversy or drama what I do really care about is the quality of the figure and I honestly like this figure a lot.
S @Shane I would like to thank Safari for releasing other's sculptures work as well this year.

[Grimbeard]

I personally don't care about the controversy or drama what I do really care about is the quality of the figure and I honestly like this figure a lot.
S @Shane I would like to thank Safari for releasing other's sculptures work as well this year.

Same, quite like the sculpt and paintjob. The only thing i dont like are actually the eyes, they look a bit too...shocked?Scared? Something looks off about them, but Im quite particular about figures eyes anyways.

[Flaffy]

From Safari ltd's marketing and S @Shane 's messages, it seemed that the Dino Dana movie tie-in is an important aspect of the figure... so I decided to sit through the entire 1 hour and 16 minutes of it. Honestly, it's a surprisingly educational movie and also tackles with some unexpectedly mature subjects.

These frames here pretty much sums up the entire movie for those who aren't watching the film, with all 3 major growth stages - Hatchling, Juvenile and Adult (don't ask why the juvenile is going through a bald phase, they don't address that in the film):



The sculpt definitely resembles the movie's character design rather than specific specimens that are most commonly touted to be Nanotyrannus, hence the lack of resemblance and proportional discrepancies to specimens like Jane and Dueling Dinosaurs. I think the Dino Dana design leans more towards a young subadult look for Tyrannosaurus given how bulky it is.


However, the movie makes it VERY clear that Nanotyrannus is considered a juvenile Tyrannosaurus. So as to why Safari decided to market this as the former instead of the latter is entirely beyond me. I feel that marketing the figure with it's proper title would be more consistent with both the "Nanotyrannus" character in the movie, and with modern scientific consensus.

I'm certain it'll stir up a lot of confusion, or worse, spread misinformation among those who don't watch the movie, or are entirely unaware of the Dino Dana tie-in; be it parents buying dinosaur toys for their children, or collectors looking to fill some imaginary gap in their Hell Creek collection by pretending it's a separate genus (like how some fossil collectors pass their Tyrannosaur tooth fragments off as "Nanotyrannus"). I did not agree with PNSO's marketing of their juvenile Tyrannosaurus, and I certainly won't make exceptions for Safari. No matter the intention behind the naming, the fact of the matter is that it's got "Nanotyrannus" stamped on the belly of the figure, and will forever be known as a figure of a dubious (invalid even?) genus.

[Flaffy]

Addressing Shane's questioning on why the Safari figure is supposedly receiving different treatment compared to PNSO's offering:
The PNSO Nanotyrannus also received flack, and plenty of people pointed out that they should've just sold it as a juvenile Tyrannosauurs. However, possible explanations for why the criticism was less noticeable could be due to:
1) "Logan" being buried among the countless other figures PNSO was releasing/revealing every other week. Keeping conversations fresh and attention spans short.
2) Other criticisms like it's overly high price were also dominant in the thread, as a noticeable shift in pricing occurred around that period of time.


For Safari ltd on the other hand:
After a 3 month long drought, with much anticipation from the community, and much teasing from Safari themselves; Safari kicks off their reveals with... a dubious/invalid genus from a children's film tie-in. The spotlight's smack dab on the "Nanotyrannus" figure, so it's natural that it's getting a lot more attention than "Logan" ever did. The figure is the only prehistoric Safari's revealed in a long time, and subsequently it's the only thing to talk about.

I personally don't find the figure terribly exciting. As I usually don't collect juvenile dinosaurs, nor do I particularly need another scientific Tyrannosaurus in my collection. I don't know if Andy's seeing the same figure as I am, but I personally find the paint job of the figure to be incredibly dull, and pales in comparison to both the intricate spotted deer-like patterning of the film design; and with the far superior paint apps of previous Safari figures. It really feels like a cheap Wild Republic bulk-bag figure rather than a proper Safari ltd offering.


The sculpt itself is good, nothing to write home about, but definitely competent in it's own right. The scales are indeed oversized, but works in conveying detail. I do enjoy the clearly defined scutes and scales on the individual digits too, a subtle detail that's often obscured during the moulding process as seen with a few recent Safari ltd offerings. Well, save for the heavily blunted teeth that might be too few in number. The goofy oversized teeth reminds me of Mattel's weaker offerings (e.g. Moros), though to a notably lesser extent.

All of you are so pessimistic, this is a new Dinosaur and sculpt.

@Dinoxels New sculpt sure, but new dinosaur?

[Flaffy]

Based upon a truly strange video from Safari's social media, I think tomorrow's reveal will be some manner of ankylosaur. Personally, I'm hoping for Zuul!

An actual reveal? Or just a teaser. Safari said that reveals would start on the 2nd, but ended up revealing the actual figure on the 3rd instead.

[PrimevalRaptor]

Would have preferred a Gorgosaurus or Albertosaurus over a juvenile T.rex (there's been said enough on the naming) but I do gotta say, the sculpt is really nice, I like the different scales and face texture, great work in that department!