Safari Ltd.: New for 2018

[Simon]

Damn, I only just now saw the Anzu. Definitely gonna snap up that sucker. Will probably pass it on Amargasaurus.

Doug Watson, did you do either of these?

No I didn't do either of these. So far the only ones of mine revealed are the Mastodon, Daeodon, Florida Panther, new colour version of the WW Jaguar, Muskox and Pygmy Hippo.

Glad to hear that Doug - because the Amargasaurus did not impress me too much.  Didn't look like it was up to the quality of your work. 

[Shonisaurus]

Of course the colors of the first dinosaurs are very bright reminds me of that in Papo, they may use a new paint varnish to prevent abrasions.

The amargasaurus is a brilliant figure that does remind a lot of Collecta deluxe but this one is improved by difference. As for the teeth that should not be desired I do not know about paleontology but for example there are dinosaurs like the incisivosaurus or the masiakosaurus whose teeth had them exposed.

As for the anzu is desired figure for several reasons among others that it is a new species commercialized in the world of the toys of dinosaurs and other prehistoric animals, on the other its detail of the feathers and finally its bright colors in the style of Papo that surely will make that figure (my greatest desire) be free of abrasions if a fall occurs. I want the prehistoric Safari animals to be painted with various varnishes of paints to at least avoid as I have already said paint wear by time or by falls.


The daeodon I have already ordered to dejankins and I am waiting for this beauty and will make a great pair with the one of Collecta. Other than that I thank Doug Watson for making larger prehistoric mammal figures than we were accustomed to, without thereby claiming that they are all his detailed and brilliant figures.

The American mastodon is a great figure and as possessor of such scoop I recommend it to any member of the forum who likes prehistoric mammals and even more of species as dark as this.


The said to me these figures are great. 

[Jose S.M.]

The style of the Amargasaurus reminds me very much of the Diplodocus, maybe it's the same sculptor.
I have to agree with Simon regarding the teeth of the figure, I didn't notice they were bare, I initially thought it was just that the mouth was open but after looking more closely nothing seems to get to cover them ever and that's weird, but the body sculpt, pose and color I do like them a lot.

[Irritation]

I'm definitely gonna get that Amargasaurus and I'll try to get other figures for comparison.
As for the Anzu, I wished that they made a Gigantoraptor, but I guess it works too.
Now, what do you think the rest of the teasered creatures could be.
Here are some of my suggestions:

Some kind of toeless sauropod.

Either a Centrosaurus or a Styracosaurus remake

The eye might not belong to a prehistoric creature, but maybe either a Lystrosaurus or Placerias

Argentinosaurus, The tiger-striped sauropod, or Dinheirosaurus

[Archosauria]

Oh how I wish Safari would make a Lystrosaurus or a Placerias.
That would be a dream come true.

[Minmiminime]

Finally, they've revealed some figures! They're both gorgeous...not perfect by any means, but bold, beautiful and interesting! I like 'em both and will get both of these. The head of the Amargasaurus could be much weirder/worse if it had been handled by a certain other brand *cough* Schliech Barapasaurus *cough* But enough of that...looking forward to the next reveals!

[Shonisaurus]

The amargasaurus looks great despite the reviews. As for the barapasaurus Schleich was a complete disappointment on my part is a figure that is not well made. The barapasaurus deserves a better representation in the toy dinosaur perhaps it can do Safari or Collecta to put two examples.

As for the new figures we will have to wait until next Friday, so until then we will have to speculate which figure will make the company Safari.

[PliosaurusK89]

That eye could belong to a prehistoric fish like Xiphactinus. I wonder why it's taking so long for companies to make a large sized Xiphactinus figure.

[suspsy]

Damn, I only just now saw the Anzu. Definitely gonna snap up that sucker. Will probably pass it on Amargasaurus.

Doug Watson, did you do either of these?

No I didn't do either of these. So far the only ones of mine revealed are the Mastodon, Daeodon, Florida Panther, new colour version of the WW Jaguar, Muskox and Pygmy Hippo.

Didn't think so. Thanks for the confirmation.

[Reptilia]

Ah dinosaurs, eventually! Glad I wasn't right on the Ankylosaurus being the next reveal.

Agree with Simon on the Amargasaurus, the bare teeth are off-putting, plus the way they painted the head makes it look like it's shrink-wrapped. Way too schleichy for my taste. I think it's better than that turquoise Diplodocus, but it probably needs a repaint to be acceptable.

Anzu on the other hand looks very nice, I don't understand where do you see a lack of detail in the head, it's just properly covered with feathers unlike most oviraptorid depictions, which stick to a shrink-wrapped appearance even when they have feathers. I'm surprised it's not by Doug Watson, as soon as I've seen it his feathered Velociraptor came to my mind. This one is actually a Safari model I might want to pick up, it doesn't have teeth so they can't go wrong with the paint app there. I'll see how the retail version will turn out and will decide, but I'm quite interested at the moment.

Does anybody see a suspicious similarity with Schleich's Oviraptor though? They both have the tail pointing down, the way how they are feathered is similar, and the Schleich model looks like something they wanted to paint like the Safari one but they stopped just after a splash of green on the back. Poor Schleich though, if their Oviraptor looked interesting before today, now it seems just the zombiesque knock-off version of the WS Anzu.

[DinoToyForum]

The close up on this sculpt points up an obvious deficiency to these types of sauropod head reconstructions in general:

The teeth are BARE.  This is, of course, anatomically ridiculous.  The teeth have to be protected from the elements so they do not dry out and crack, and there is no example of any living animal that doesn't have a teeth cover of some sort (lips in mammals, skin in reptiles).

That's probably an oversimplification. Some modern animals (crocs, elephants, walrus) have exposed teeth/tusks. Plesiosaur and pterosaur teeth were almost certainly exposed to the environment, too. The situation in sauropods is not completely cut and dry (pun intended )

[BlueKrono]

Aww, no webbing on the Amarga... Makes it a lot less appealing to me just from an aesthetic standpoint, though I think that's the more widely accepted look nowadays. Will still probably pick it up just for my Amargasaurus collection. The colors at least are great!

[Reptilia]

Some modern animals (crocs, elephants, walrus) have exposed teeth/tusks.

Well, elephants and walruses have only tusks exposed, the rest of the teeth are not. Crocodiles spend most of their time in water or wet environments, so their teeth are always wet. Considering that sauropods were terrestrial animals, and that their teeth should have been used to chew, it's reasonable to think they were protected from some sort of lips. As most of other dinosaurs' teeth, I guess.

[Minmiminime]

Some modern animals (crocs, elephants, walrus) have exposed teeth/tusks.

Well, elephants and walruses have only tusks exposed, the rest of the teeth are not. Crocodiles spend most of their time in water or wet environments, so their teeth are always wet. Considering that sauropods were terrestrial animals, and that their teeth should have been used to chew, it's reasonable to think they were protected from some sort of lips. As most of other dinosaurs' teeth, I guess.

It's a curious one and this ain't the thread for it, but sauropods didn't chew; the teeth were there simply to grasp and rip, as rapidly as possible, and they were replaced very quickly (approx every fortnight in the case of Diplodocus for example), unlike the mammalian condition. I'm not certain they were fully exposed like this new model, but it's "food for thought"

The highlighted fenestrae and blacked eye socket are a tad irksome, giving the model a slightly ghoulish look, but are a simple fix if required I suppose

[Silvanusaurus]

The Anzu is a nice surprise, it's a solid feathered figure but I don't personally care for the abrupt changes in feather-types (the legs look very strange) and the colour scheme doesnt ring true somehow. Funnily enough the Amargasuaurus uses pretty much the same colours but I think it works a lot better, probably because of the gradients and patterning. There is something ghastly about the face though.
Neither figures are that exciting to me, which is absolutely fantastic as i have no money left.

[Reptilia]

It's a curious one and this ain't the thread for it, but sauropods didn't chew; the teeth were there simply to grasp and rip, as rapidly as possible, and they were replaced very quickly (approx every fortnight in the case of Diplodocus for example), unlike the mammalian condition. I'm not certain they were fully exposed like this new model, but it's "food for thought"

Didn't know that, curious indeed. Whatever the function was, for sauropods and other dinosaurs' teeth, I believe that's reasonable to think dinosaurs and other prehistoric animals had lips. Among modern fauna exposed teeth are exceptions, so why among prehistoric animals should be different? I'm just going by logic here, I don't know if there's actual evidence of most dinosaurs being lipless, but for what I recall it is only some kind of heritage of Greg Paul and other paleoartists' work from the 80s. I'd love to see more dinosaur models with lips though, just to have a different perspective.

[Brontozaurus]

It's a nice looking Amargasaurus, but I'm happy with my Carnegie toy.

I'm 5000% here for that Anzu though.

[stargatedalek]

The highlights on the Amargasaurus skull bug me, that kind of shrink-wrapping highlights just don't turn out well generally.

Anzu is pretty good, fingers are wrong but of course they are, they always are.

Loving the frogfish and the cardinal isn't bad either, hammerhead mini is ok too.

The close up on this sculpt points up an obvious deficiency to these types of sauropod head reconstructions in general:

The teeth are BARE.  This is, of course, anatomically ridiculous.  The teeth have to be protected from the elements so they do not dry out and crack, and there is no example of any living animal that doesn't have a teeth cover of some sort (lips in mammals, skin in reptiles).

That's probably an oversimplification. Some modern animals (crocs, elephants, walrus) have exposed teeth/tusks. Plesiosaur and pterosaur teeth were almost certainly exposed to the environment, too. The situation in sauropods is not completely cut and dry (pun intended )

Hate to drag this out but it really isn't an oversimplification. Every animal with exposed teeth has very specific, easily detectable, reasons for having those exposed teeth. Crocodiles have exposed teeth because what would otherwise be lips and gums is instead hardened skin, walrus have tusks for display and intraspecific combat, same for elephants, Crocodiles, pterosaurs, and plesiosaurs also are aquatic, primarily aquatic, or at the very least hunt underwater, heavily lessening the effects of the environment and of food becoming caught.

[Sim]

The anzu's really great, too. I was also hoping for an anzu since we already have quite a few oviraptors and citipati. It's about time their North American counterparts are represented in toy form.

From the head shape it's quite clear that the Schleich Oviraptor, CollectA Oviraptor, Kaiyodo Oviraptor, Colorata Oviraptor, Safari Dino Discoveries Oviraptor, both versions of the Carnegie Collection Oviraptor, and all three versions of the Nakasato Citipati, all represent the famous 100/42 oviraptorid specimen which currently doesn't have a scientific name.  So there isn't any figure that is actually of Citipati.

I'm very happy to see an oviraptorosaur figure that isn't labelled Oviraptor or Gigantoraptor.  It's really good to see oviraptorosaur diversity being better represented with this Anzu figure.

[Joey]

Honestly the Amarga isn't too bad, the head kinda bothers me though I don't know what it is about it, I think its the eyes.
The Anzu on the other hand is pretty darn good maybe the only nit pick I have is how the back feathers look too much like fish scales.
Also one if my other cons for the Amarga is that its very large, way too large in fact for my, 1:35 to 1:50 scale collection because its 16 inches long and in 1:40 scale that would equal to 16 meters which is way too big since (correct me if im wrong) a fully grown Amarga should be only 10 meters long.