Safari Ltd - New for 2022

[Gwangi]

Bet the next one's gonna be Troodon

You joke but Troodon plays a big role in the series, it wouldn't surprise me.

Seems like they're trying not to spoil the punchline of the movie they're promoting. I dunno, mildly questionable? But "slap in the face?" That's completely over the top.

It's a two year old movie, I think anyone wanting to buy the merchandise for it has already seen it. But you could be right.

[GojiraGuy1954]

@Dinoxels Are the other figures going to be based on this movie? Or are they for the main line?

[Pachyrhinosaurus]

Looks great! There haven't been any good juvenile or baby dinosaur toys lately. I can tell it's a Doug piece, and I like how he approached the transition between the legs and torso. I'll certainly be adding this piece to my collection when it's available.

On calling it Nanotyrannus, I don't see why it's such a big deal. It's wrong, but I can get past it. I just hope a non-feathered tyrannosaurus is in the works to go with it.

[Shane]

Seems like they're trying not to spoil the punchline of the movie they're promoting. I dunno, mildly questionable? But "slap in the face?" That's completely over the top.

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.

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.

[Duna]

Bet the next one's gonna be Troodon

LMAO ... I was just thinking the same ... I almost drowned with my coke ...

[GojiraGuy1954]

Seems like they're trying not to spoil the punchline of the movie they're promoting. I dunno, mildly questionable? But "slap in the face?" That's completely over the top.

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.

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.

If the movie itself disagrees with the validity of Nanotyrannus why market the figure as Nanotyrannus

[Shane]

If the movie itself disagrees with the validity of Nanotyrannus why market the figure as Nanotyrannus

Because it is referred to as such in the film, and over the course of the movie the nature of its relationship to Tyrannosaurus is discovered and discussed.

Again, I know nobody here has seen the movie, or will likely see the movie, but that is basically the point of the movie.

[GojiraGuy1954]

If the movie itself disagrees with the validity of Nanotyrannus why market the figure as Nanotyrannus

Because it is referred to as such in the film, and over the course of the movie the nature of its relationship to Tyrannosaurus is discovered and discussed.

Would the figure not appeal to fans of the movie, though? Who would already know what the twist was?

[bmathison1972]

Seems like they're trying not to spoil the punchline of the movie they're promoting. I dunno, mildly questionable? But "slap in the face?" That's completely over the top.

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.

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.

As usual Shane you are a voice of reason here .

I have no problem with Safari calling it Nanotyrannus, as I saw it as an educational experience, rather than Safari passing it off as a valid taxon. Glad you confirmed that.

I am just not getting it because a single adult Tyrannosaurus (which I have) is all I need, given the current focus of my collection.

[SenSx]

I think I'll get that figure for sure now.
I was a little bit disappointed at first because I expected something big like Gorgosaurus / Albertosaurus, but this one is still a must have imo and they are keeping other surprises, maybe for the best.
Glad I did not buy the PNSO one, it was way too expansive for its size, and I like the Safari better, I like its head more, and it's bigger.

[Shane]

Would the figure not appeal to fans of the movie, though? Who would already know what the twist was?

As I said you can disagree about the effectiveness of naming it this vs. "Juvenile Tyrannosaurus Rex".

But calling it T. rex outright would be less likely to promote the discussion that the figure (and movie) is attempting to encourage.

I understand the naming is controversial, but if it were "just another juvenile T. rex figure" the discussion about the history of the genus, including its eventually folding into T. rex, would likely not happen.

[GojiraGuy1954]

Would the figure not appeal to fans of the movie, though? Who would already know what the twist was?

As I said you can disagree about the effectiveness of naming it this vs. "Juvenile Tyrannosaurus Rex".

But calling it T. rex outright would be less likely to promote the discussion that the figure (and movie) is attempting to encourage.

I understand the naming is controversial, but if it were "just another juvenile T. rex figure" the discussion about the history of the genus, including its eventually folding into T. rex, would likely not happen.

Could have put the "Nanotyrannus" in Parentheses

[Concavenator]

Oh boy, I wonder what Safari's new dino reveal today is! I'd better check their Facebook page...







Uh oh...

I feel you. I was anticipating an Albertosaurus or Gorgosaurus only to find out about this... I feel as I've been trolled. Using the Nanotyrannus name is scientifically invalid, but so is the case with Dracorex and Stygimoloch yet people don't get so triggered by those, when they are equally as wrong. I will never understand this.

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

This comment clearly didn't age well.

Onto the figure, the sculpt is good (though the scale detail is a step back from last year's Daspletosaurus and Baryonyx, the body scales are too large) but the paint app is easily the sloppiest I have seen from Safari in recent years. I do think it beats the PNSO version though, and not just for the price.

I must say I hate how between PNSO's, this new Safari, and the upcoming BotM, there are more quality juvenile Tyrannosaurus figures than there are Albertosaurus or Gorgosaurus (and many more tyrannosaurs). This is a pass, but I'm looking forward to see what else is shown.

[Shane]

Could have put the "Nanotyrannus" in Parentheses

As I said, you are free to disagree with the methodology.

It just strikes me as strange that Safari is being quite forthright about the status of this genus and is using the name as a jump-off point for further discussion, whereas PNSO simply released a Nanotyrannus without context and - as you stated - faced far less of a backlash from this community (not firing any shots at PNSO, just commenting on the striking difference in reactions).

But I feel like I'm repeating myself, so again, I understand and appreciate the criticism, but I've said what I think there is to say on it.

[Carnoking]

Seems like they're trying not to spoil the punchline of the movie they're promoting. I dunno, mildly questionable? But "slap in the face?" That's completely over the top.

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.

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.

This seems a reasonable take

[ceratopsian]

I'm all in favour of children being introduced to the idea that science is mutable as theories are tested.

The only reason I won't be buying this Safari model is that I bought the PNSO - and I don't want two juvenile Tyrannosaurus/Nanotyrannus.

[stargatedalek]

I feel you. I was anticipating an Albertosaurus or Gorgosaurus only to find out about this... I feel as I've been trolled. Using the Nanotyrannus name is scientifically invalid, but so is the case with Dracorex and Stygimoloch yet people don't get so triggered by those, when they are equally as wrong. I will never understand this.

Not the same situation at all. Nanotyrannus as a name currently exists only to hype up and glorify privately owned specimens. And there is still a great deal of uncertainty regarding the degree to which Dracorex and Stygimoloch are Pachycephalosaurus, Dracorex seems like a mostly sure thing, but there are some Pachycephalosaurus specimens similar in size to Stygimoloch, as well as the two being separated by (not an extreme amount of) time while Pachycephalosaurus and Dracorex coexisted.

A solid case could be made for sinking Stygimoloch into Pachycephalosaurus as a new species in the genus, but it's not likely to be a growth stage.

While some people are definitely being weirdly nasty about this, I don't think PNSO exactly got off much easier on this front. If they did, it was because a handful of people immediately became angry and rather... intimidated people out of complaining about it at the time. Ironically, PNSO seems to have less fans (here) who care about accuracy than Safari does, and more who blindly follow them.

Regardless, well made as it is I don't tend to go for bald Tyrannosaurs, though I get they didn't have much (if any) control over the design, since it's from a movie.

[Doug Watson]

I can tell it's a Doug piece

Not mine.

[Bread]

I tried googling some images of this Dino Dana "Nanotyrannus" or Juvenile Tyrannosaurus and I couldn't find anything. Anyone got some image comparisons of the film vs. figure counterpart? 

I haven't really given my opinion nor really have one. Similar to PNSO's in my opinion, I felt "meh" about it and this is the same thing for me.

It's not a bad figure. It can be classified as a good figure, but debatable.

[Faelrin]

After catching myself up to speed on what S @Shane and others have posted, I'm gonna be honest I'm still disappointed it's sold as Nanotyrannus, and ditto for that Dino Dana movie using it. As a juvenile Tyrannosaurus the sculpt looks okay. Not gonna pick this one up though since it won't work with my existing feathered T. rex or the upcoming Rebor one I ordered.

So hoping for a non dinosaur next, or a dinosaur that doesn't get enough recognition like Herrerasaurus, etc, but again keeping my expectations low. I guess the upside with being disappointed or uninterested for any reveals this year means I can just focus on getting caught up since I'm still behind on many older releases that do interest me (Camarasaurus, Edmontosaurus, Shringasaurus, etc).