Controversial opinions on dinosaur toys

[Lynx]

Some smaller takes:

- Safaris 2010 Apatosaurus is overrated and just plain fugly but has charm. Both Papos and Safaris Great Dinos versions are better IMO. With the posture of the neck, I am confused as to how many people think it is the best figure of the genus.

- Even REBORs older figures weren't that bad. And before anyone pulls up an image of the Rebor Yutyrannus, I really don't care about the whole debate.

- The whole Papo giganotosaurus situation was inflated, for me, the figure's pose just doesn't ruin it.

- Detail and overall care put into the model > scientific accuracy.

- PNSO models are incredibly same-y, and while they have scientific accuracy, the colors are boring, and the designs uninspired. BOTM manages to have some of the best color schemes while also not losing accuracy. I think PNSO can risk a couple people complaining about the colors not being brown, green, and dull yellow.

- Safari LTD still continues to be, in my opinion, at the top of the pyramid when it comes to companies producing prehistoric figures. They are usually extremely accurate, while still having artistic flare and playability. PNSO, while I hate to compare its almost statue-like models to Safaris toys, falls behind in the grand scheme of things, with its lack of originality and striking inaccuracies.

- Playability is an important factor that many figure collectors choose to ignore.

I'm sure some of these takes, mainly the PNSO ones, will be a bit controversial around these parts. 
-

[Shane]

I actually don't think that PNSO take is too controversial. Their figures are largely brown and I think that's a common criticism of the brand, despite the overall positive view most folks seem to have of them.

I know Safari has also been accused of sameness in its color schemes, with greens, browns, yellows, etc. which is all valid, but it's worth noting that when there's a more daring color scheme, the criticism doesn't go away, and it mostly just pivots to the color scheme too weird, unrealistic, etc.

This is true of PNSO too, I recall their Lambeosaurus getting some criticism back in the day for its giraffe-like color pattern.

It's kind of a can't win situation. You really can't please everybody.

[Dusty Wren]

I know Safari has also been accused of sameness in its color schemes, with greens, browns, yellows, etc. which is all valid, but it's worth noting that when there's a more daring color scheme, the criticism doesn't go away, and it mostly just pivots to the color scheme too weird, unrealistic, etc.

Exactly. For every person talking about the same-y brown color schemes in the PNSO or Safari threads, there's another person in the BotM threads saying that the ceratopsians' colors are too bright and flashy for large herbivores.

Color is a deeply personal subject. Honestly, I think most collectors would benefit from learning to repaint their figures, even at a basic level. A new paint job can change your opinion on a figure dramatically.     

[Lynx]

I actually don't think that PNSO take is too controversial. Their figures are largely brown and I think that's a common criticism of the brand, despite the overall positive view most folks seem to have of them.

I know Safari has also been accused of sameness in its color schemes, with greens, browns, yellows, etc. which is all valid, but it's worth noting that when there's a more daring color scheme, the criticism doesn't go away, and it mostly just pivots to the color scheme too weird, unrealistic, etc.

This is true of PNSO too, I recall their Lambeosaurus getting some criticism back in the day for its giraffe-like color pattern.

It's kind of a can't win situation. You really can't please everybody.

This happened with the 2022 Albertosaurus, where people claimed it looked like it was 'scribbled on with a child crayon'. It's definitely sad that it's a can't-win situation, especially since the creativity in many of the 'strange' color schemes is lovely.

From the Carnegie Carnotaurus and its striking patterns to the PNSO lambeosaurus with its bold colors, these figures show care went into the designs. They stand out on shelves filled mostly with various browns, and from my perspective, that's a good thing.

[Faelrin]

@Lynx I wouldn't say choose to ignore playability per se. It just isn't applicable or important to many if they are having their figures on display on a shelf, don't have kids, etc. I don't see anything wrong with anyone playing with their figures though. I know there's some here who do for one reason or another, if not others that were here in the past. Some may even be kids still too. Something I also realized is that better playability could lead to better durability. How well something can take a beating before breaking would be valuable to collectors, if the worst case happens of a figure falling and getting damaged. Maybe applicable to how well paint is sealed so it doesn't chip as easily too.

Honestly I fiddle around with some of my Mattel figures here and there, and it is part of the reason I enjoy articulation on figures other then to pose them with. Not sure if it's really playing per se, and more something to keep my hands busy, particularly if I'm bored for some reason. I'm also autistic so that might be another factor.

I agree with the takes on PNSO and Safari Ltd's colorations, though likely not controversial. Things like the Albertosaurus and Deinocheirus really stand out because they are a break from the sea of yellows and browns. It's true that not every coloration will be received well, but I think people may need reminded from time to time that it is subjective, and simply just isn't their cup of tea. Though I do also understand coloration can make or break a figure for some folks, even with an otherwise really good sculpt.

[Shane]

Though I do also understand coloration can make or break a figure for some folks, even with an otherwise really good sculpt.

Yeah, this is something I see quite often. For every "oh great, another brown/yellow figure?" you have "what a great sculpt! I'd surely get it if not for that outlandish coloration!"

It's extremely subjective. One recent example is the Safari Cryolophosaurus. I love the paint on it - it's "different" without being overly unlikely in real life, a nice counter-shaded blue and orange, with some striping on the tail and a touch of red on the crest.

To me it strikes a nice balance, not falling into the sameness of browns and yellows, but not going overboard with bright vibrant colors and patterns.

But I've still seen people knock the figure for the color choices. It just goes to show, you really will not be able to please everyone.

[Fembrogon]

I also sympathize with criticisms of same-y colors or sculpts; I've voiced such opinions myself before. I imagine there might be a budgetary issue which factors in sometimes (ie, more complex patterns/hues cost more to reproduce), but that's just speculation. I can say for sure some of my favorite figures from both Safari and PNSO have been the ones with more unusual colorations or poses: Lambeosaurus, Gryposaurus, Zhuchengtyrannus (it's on its toes and it stands!!), Deinonychus, to name a few.

I also appreciate playability, even if I don't typically "play" with my toys anymore. Perhaps another way to phrase it could be handleability; there are some figures I find myself coming back to more than others, because they're simply more enthralling with their design somehow. Sometimes it's the pose, as mentioned already; other times it's texture, where the fine details of the sculpt lend an extra textile experience that make me WANT to actively hold the toy over looking at it on a shelf. Even gimmicks like the moveable jaws we see so often can indeed make a difference for me, if done right - since receiving my PNSO Zhuchengtyrannus I've been playing with the jaw nonstop, due to how well-designed and aesthetically pleasing it is for me.

[Faelrin]

@Fembrogon That's another good way of putting it. Sometimes tactile satisfaction is just as pleasing as visual. It's another way to appreciate a sculpt's detail.

[Concavenator]

R @Remko and @suspsy :

Check this post and also this one out to see what I'm talking about.

[ceratopsian]

I don't worry too much about colour schemes (though I'm one of those who really doesn't mind PNSO largely sticking to a similar palette!  And equally, I love the brilliant, blaring colours of the BotM ceratopsians.)  If I like a toy but I don't like the colours, I can simply get it repainted into something I prefer.  It's actually rather a good excuse to hire someone to paint for me, which I enjoy doing.  I've done this fairly regularly through my collecting life, for both Safari, CollectA and occasionally for PNSO output.

[suspsy]

R @Remko and @suspsy :

Check this post and also this one out to see what I'm talking about.

Yeah, I've been well aware of both of those posts, what with having been following Scott Hartman's blog. The chimera accusation has never, ever been conclusively demonstrated.

[Remko]

Talking about PNSO, and talking as a "PNSO Completionist", I have to say I don't find the colors on their figures aren't as same-y as stated by others at all.
There's quite a bit of variation, although I agree, they could be a bit more extravagant here and there.
But as they usually feature only larger animals, bright colors won't look good.
 
And it's also not strange to see big animals in a brownish color. Eventhough dinosaurs, unlike most mammals, could see colors quite well, that doesn't mean even the biggest sauropods or ceratopsians would have been flashy rainbows.
Also, colors of animals make sense.
It's to warn of predators, hide from predators, attract mates and ward of rivals.
Tiger stripes on an adult T. rex or other large theropod might look great, but don't make sense. Tigers have them because they live in dense jungles with tall grass where they can easily hide. But a tiger is only a meter or so tall.
A 4 meter tall T. rex won't be able to hide in the grass. Brown and green would be better, if it was an ambush predator, to hide between tall trees.
Young tyrannosaurs might be helped with stripes, because they are much smaller animals.

For ceratopsians, the heads with their large billboard frills would probably be very colorful, especially if there was a mating season. The rest of the body would probably be much more uniform in color.

Feathered theropods, and possibly Ornthischians, might have had summer and winter colors.

As for the BotM raptors, most of them are based on extant birds, while the Ceratopsians are based on extant reptiles.
I have to say, the raptors look great, but giving a 5 to 10 tonne ceratopsian the colors of a small lizard, seems off. Even though they still look good.

But that's just my personal opinion.

[Lynx]

For me, most of their figures are the following when it comes to the designs, give or take:
- Brown, dull green, or yellow of some degree
- Stripes, usually of a darker shade
- The exact. same. pose. on every theropod, besides a couple of course.

Nobody here is suggesting that they make an Argentinosaurus neon blue, red, and yellow, but more variation would be welcome. Hell, even just different patterns besides that exact same striping pattern will be welcomed with open arms from me.

Maybe I am biased as Pinacosaurus is my favorite dinosaur, but the PNSO Pinacosaurus is one of my favorite models from them as while being their 'normal colors', they have a unique pattern that makes the figure stand out. R @Remko

All colors we have found on dinosaurs thus far (which isn't saying much as most are quite small) have been surprisingly vibrant, with the largest of which being a surprising redish color, unlike any mammals we have really seen.

It doesn't have to be brown to be plausible (not referring to you, just in general)

[ceratopsian]

I tend to see detail. I see a lot of variation and gradation within the colours of PNSO models. I do not believe for a moment that living ceratopsians sported the wild colour schemes of the BotM models. But I love them as artistic works of imagination. I collect different models for different reasons with very fluid criteria for my choices. The fixed criterion that governs all my purchases: I like the toy enough that I will enjoy repeated viewings. But there might be many different reasons as to why I like - or conversely dislike - something.

[Lynx]

I tend to see detail. I see a lot of variation and gradation within the colours of PNSO models. I do not believe for a moment that living ceratopsians sported the wild colour schemes of the BotM models. But I love them as artistic works of imagination. I collect different models for different reasons with very fluid criteria for my choices. The fixed criterion that governs all my purchases: I like the toy enough that I will enjoy repeated viewings. But there might be many different reasons as to why I like - or conversely dislike - something.

No doubt there is a lot of blending and polishing in the models that PNSO produces. I can't argue with that at all. No matter how much I dislike how PNSO chooses their designs, effort goes in. I just wish they could show this off better with something a little more different.

I can also relate in a way. The reason I like one thing may be the reason I despise another, and the reason I don't like a model may be the reason I absolutely adore another.

[Remko]

All colors we have found on dinosaurs thus far (which isn't saying much as most are quite small) have been surprisingly vibrant, with the largest of which being a surprising redish color, unlike any mammals we have really seen.

It doesn't have to be brown to be plausible (not referring to you, just in general)

I see what you mean. And as a fact, PNSO's Borealopelta has the exact color found on the actual fossil. Same goes for their Microraptor.

But the colors of the dinosaurs we know, are the colors of those individuals. And inferred as that.
Especially for Psittacosaurus it may have been stated in the press or other popular works, that this is the way the real animal looked while being alive.
But it was only a single individual.

If you like popular scientific books on dinosaurs, I would like to suggest David Hone's "The Future of Dinosaurs". He dedicates a whole chapter about how they looked and why the suggested colors of the animals we know might not be their actual colors after all. Or at least not representative for that particular species.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/1473692261/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?ie=UTF8&qid=&sr=

[triceratops83]

Here's my controversial and no doubt unpopular opinion - I confess that I prefer old school tripod Theropods.

[Lynx]

All colors we have found on dinosaurs thus far (which isn't saying much as most are quite small) have been surprisingly vibrant, with the largest of which being a surprising redish color, unlike any mammals we have really seen.

It doesn't have to be brown to be plausible (not referring to you, just in general)

I see what you mean. And as a fact, PNSO's Borealopelta has the exact color found on the actual fossil. Same goes for their Microraptor.

But the colors of the dinosaurs we know, are the colors of those individuals. And inferred as that.
Especially for Psittacosaurus it may have been stated in the press or other popular works, that this is the way the real animal looked while being alive.
But it was only a single individual.

If you like popular scientific books on dinosaurs, I would like to suggest David Hone's "The Future of Dinosaurs". He dedicates a whole chapter about how they looked and why the suggested colors of the animals we know might not be their actual colors after all. Or at least not representative for that particular species.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/1473692261/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?ie=UTF8&qid=&sr=

Very interesting. I will pick that book up for the holidays.

[Halichoeres]

This is going back to one of your earlier opinions, @Lynx, but I think the reason people make fun of Schleich so much is less about their actual quality and more about their salience and the value for the money. When I say salience, I mean that Schleich is a company that's been around for decades, they have a large share of the market, and they are often the closest thing to a premium brand that you can find in a brick-and-mortar store. So we're just confronted with their products a lot more than the truly awful no-name figures you find on the bottom shelf at Walmart. Combine that with the fact that they clearly have the ability to make excellent figures but don't seem to want to bother, and the fact that they can coast on brand recognition to strong sales even of their most lackluster products, and you've got multiple sources of frustration that are going to make Schleich a ready punching bag for adult collectors.

If we want to be technical here, Wdragon was producing unofficial JP inspired models before they acquired the license.

That's true, although they also made really nice non-licensed figures like the Giraffatitan and Allosaurus. I guess you could argue that the Giraffatitan was still capitalizing on JP connections, but they made it much more accurate than the JP design. I really wish Nanmu had gotten the license so that W-Dragon could have continued down that path, now it's just two companies devoted to nearly-identical products, only one is official and the other is not.

[suspsy]

As I've noted before, Schleich is the McDonald's of prehistoric toy companies.