Controversial opinions on dinosaur toys

[postsaurischian]

This brings me to the carnegie collection which is praised way to much, when alot of there theropods had tripod stances ,were shrink wrapped and boring...sure they had a few good figures ,but total garbage such as the ultra boring 2012 t rex which was the most boring t rex figure of all time from a major company...in my view and alot of other reviews as well..forest rogers was hit and miss with the sculpts and to many of them were shrink wrapped and had skinny tails and lower legs were to thin and weak,it seems to me forest took inspiration from forest rogers who did the same thing with the dinosaurs..but at least now doug watson is a better sculptor than forest rogers and thats for sure..and whoever is on the safari team is far better than the last few years of the carnegie collection sculpting team....

I agree with the Carnegie Collection being over rated. However, I think "total garbage" is a bit harsh to label some of their products.
To each their own opinion, though.

Not only is it a bit harsh, it's simply wrong and can only be said by someone who has never seen Forest Rogers' sculpts of Miragaia, Carnotaurus, Spinosaurus, Tylosaurus or Caudipteryx for example.
https://forestrogers.com/home-journal/?category=Carnegie+Dinosaurs
Since dyno77 is critisizing her as a sculptor, one should have a look at the original sculpts which are simply great for their time (I for one think they still are). I cannot help anyone who's not able to see this. Sorry .

[Bread]

This brings me to the carnegie collection which is praised way to much, when alot of there theropods had tripod stances ,were shrink wrapped and boring...sure they had a few good figures ,but total garbage such as the ultra boring 2012 t rex which was the most boring t rex figure of all time from a major company...in my view and alot of other reviews as well..forest rogers was hit and miss with the sculpts and to many of them were shrink wrapped and had skinny tails and lower legs were to thin and weak,it seems to me forest took inspiration from forest rogers who did the same thing with the dinosaurs..but at least now doug watson is a better sculptor than forest rogers and thats for sure..and whoever is on the safari team is far better than the last few years of the carnegie collection sculpting team....

I agree with the Carnegie Collection being over rated. However, I think "total garbage" is a bit harsh to label some of their products.
To each their own opinion, though.

Not only is it a bit harsh, it's simply wrong and can only be said by someone who has never seen Forest Rogers' sculpts of Miragaia, Carnotaurus, Spinosaurus, Tylosaurus or Caudipteryx for example.
https://forestrogers.com/home-journal/?category=Carnegie+Dinosaurs
Since dyno77 is critisizing her as a sculptor, one should have a look at the original sculpts which are simply great for their time (I for one think they still are). I cannot help anyone who's not able to see this. Sorry .

Yeah, I found some of their criticisms to be wrong or just simply harsh. After all, they are old figures but still hold up well even to today's standards. I noticed how dyno77 edited his comment, but I believe they stated that Safari lacks imagination, which I find wrong as well.

[postsaurischian]

This brings me to the carnegie collection which is praised way to much, when alot of there theropods had tripod stances ,were shrink wrapped and boring...sure they had a few good figures ,but total garbage such as the ultra boring 2012 t rex which was the most boring t rex figure of all time from a major company...in my view and alot of other reviews as well..forest rogers was hit and miss with the sculpts and to many of them were shrink wrapped and had skinny tails and lower legs were to thin and weak,it seems to me forest took inspiration from forest rogers who did the same thing with the dinosaurs..but at least now doug watson is a better sculptor than forest rogers and thats for sure..and whoever is on the safari team is far better than the last few years of the carnegie collection sculpting team....

I agree with the Carnegie Collection being over rated. However, I think "total garbage" is a bit harsh to label some of their products.
To each their own opinion, though.

Not only is it a bit harsh, it's simply wrong and can only be said by someone who has never seen Forest Rogers' sculpts of Miragaia, Carnotaurus, Spinosaurus, Tylosaurus or Caudipteryx for example.
https://forestrogers.com/home-journal/?category=Carnegie+Dinosaurs
Since dyno77 is critisizing her as a sculptor, one should have a look at the original sculpts which are simply great for their time (I for one think they still are). I cannot help anyone who's not able to see this. Sorry .

Yeah, I found some of their criticisms to be wrong or just simply harsh. After all, they are old figures but still hold up well even to today's standards. I noticed how dyno77 edited his comment, but I believe they stated that Safari lacks imagination, which I find wrong as well.

That's right! One the one hand dyno77 wants scientific accuracy and on the other hand imagination. That's truly controversial. So this is the right thread .

[Carnoking]

Papo has done some interesting figures on their own as of late. Of course, they're still largely unoriginal designs, but few and far between offerings like the chilesaurus are welcome additions. And I can agree that repaints are certainly less necessary than new sculpts for my collection, but they do in some way still pay the bills for Papo.

[Carnoking]

Also, I think Carnegie peaked in the 21st century. But maybe that's just me.

[Stegotyranno420]

Also, I think Carnegie peaked in the 21st century. But maybe that's just me.

By peaked, you mean they were at their best, right? If so, i 100 percent agree

[Carnoking]

Oh yeah, I think their best offerings came closer to the end rather than the inception.

[Stegotyranno420]

Oh yeah, I think their best offerings came closer to the end rather than the inception.

Yeah. The Giganotosaurus, carnotaurus, Spinosaurus, STyracosaurus, Camarasaurus, 2014 Velociraptor and T rex, Cryolophosaurus, Miragaia, Icthyosaurus, Concavenator.
The only old ones i like are the (really) big Brachiosaurus and 1995 rex, mainly because they are nostalgic, and the brachio is the only one thats in 1:40

[Bread]

For years papo have gotten away with any real criticism ,despite some reviews of their spinosaurus and giganotosaurus,but id say they deserve it because they have been getting lazy in recent years with boring repaints that no one asked for apart from diehard collectors...
Papo has a problem with their dinosaurs and if they dont fix it they will probably slip away just like bullyland and schleich...
The boring and unrealistic poses, releasing the same dinosaurs other companies have released and presenting them as great when they are not accurate at all...
The only thing papo has is good sculptors ,something mojo and schleich dont have...but this insistence on using weird stock images for reference or jurassic park references is a sorry excuse for the line existing...papo from what iv read arent releasing any dinosaurs this year only prehistoric animals ..which in my view is cowardly way out...they know their dinosaurs arent up to standard ....

I don't think Papo has gotten away with any real criticisms. If you have read throughout Papo threads, their figures usually receive some heavy criticisms. Not all of it is criticism, but they certainly do receive some. Not saying these criticisms are wrong, but to say they have gotten away without any is incorrect. I agree with Papo slipping away, but Schleich is not. I am not a fan of Schleich (although some of their figures do interest) but they are certainly not vanishing any time soon. I could even see them out lasting the majority of any company (maybe this is a controversial opinion of mine yes?). They release a handful of figures every year and their products are probably the easiest to get a hold of. For me at least, here in the states they are easy to find in stores and sometimes push out Safari, even though Schleich is German (please correct me if I am wrong). I can't comment on Bullyland since I do not know much about the company.

I've noticed you put similar statements in another thread (eofauna specifically) about papo. I don't know what you are trying to get at here with bashing Papo. I am not a fan of their products, but I still think some of your comments are somewhat repetitive and aggressive. Just my thoughts, I don't want to start anything here, but I can't be the only one who hasn't noticed this?   

[Gwangi]

Also, I think Carnegie peaked in the 21st century. But maybe that's just me.

I agree that Carnegie's best offerings were in the 21st century, but that's also when the competition started showing up. Papo, CollectA, even Safari itself. When I say they were legendary in the 90's it's not because that's when they produced their best stuff, it's because that's when the dominated. Few other companies offered what Carnegie was offering. I think 2011 was their last good year, with the Carnotaurus and Miragaia, but then they declined afterwards. I was not impressed with their Brachiosaurus, Concavenator, Tyrannosaurus, or Velociraptor. Those were their last 4 releases, over a span of 4 years.

[Gothmog the Baryonyx]

You're not impressed with the 2012 Brachiosaurus? I'd call that a controversial opinion, not in the same category as some but still

[John]

Also, I think Carnegie peaked in the 21st century. But maybe that's just me.

No,it's not just you.
I've been a fan of the Carnegie Museum line since I first saw them in 1990.But the 2000's is when the sculpts had really started to get resin model quality.

[suspsy]

You're not impressed with the 2012 Brachiosaurus? I'd call that a controversial opinion, not in the same category as some but still

After nearly a decade, it's still the very best toy of Brachiosaurus.

[SidB]

You're not impressed with the 2012 Brachiosaurus? I'd call that a controversial opinion, not in the same category as some but still

After nearly a decade, it's still the very best toy of Brachiosaurus.

Absolutely, without a serious doubt. Another Forest Rogers gem.

[Gwangi]

You're not impressed with the 2012 Brachiosaurus? I'd call that a controversial opinion, not in the same category as some but still

Yeah, I guess that is a controversial opinion from the looks of it. Let me explain myself.

The sculpt itself is fine, but you have to put yourself in the mindset of many collectors in 2012. At that point Carnegie was still going strong, and everyone was looking forward to new sauropods in 1:40 scale, replacements of their classic sauropods from the 80's. They had already released a fantastic 1:40 scale Diplodocus, which is one of my favorite Carnegie models, so we were expecting the same from the Brachiosaurus. And we didn't get that. It's wasn't in 1:40 scale, it had the same overdone paintjob that Carnegie was known for, and the pose itself was disappointing, with the neck awkwardly bent and curving down. It would be a solid model from any other company, but I expected better from Carnegie and was disappointed by it. 

[Lynx]

A few unpopular opinions I have:
-  Papo has not been very appealing. I feel like a lot of their models are quite shrink-wrapped and have bland colors. To me, a lot of their recent releases have been a little disappointing.

- Eofuana is also pretty overrated. While I do love their new triceratops, the rest of the stuff does not appeal to me. The giga is quite overrated when their are plenty of other excellent models that may not succeed in accuracy, but look better paint wise. Another thing is the sauropod they made, which also seems to be quite overrated as well. I do not actually own the figure, but from the reviews/pictures I have seen, the paint job looks a bit sloppy and the coloration is a little funky.

- Safari was disappointing this year. While the spino was alright, the rest of the stuff I was not a huge fan of. An armored T rex? Seriously? I hope they do not continue with the medieval dinos.

[Bread]

- Eofuana is also pretty overrated. While I do love their new triceratops, the rest of the stuff does not appeal to me. The giga is quite overrated when their are plenty of other excellent models that may not succeed in accuracy, but look better paint wise. Another thing is the sauropod they made, which also seems to be quite overrated as well. I do not actually own the figure, but from the reviews/pictures I have seen, the paint job looks a bit sloppy and the coloration is a little funky.

There is another. I too do not find Eofauna figures appealing, however, I've been told they are better in hand than in photos. I've been tempted to pick up an Eofauna figure (most likely the Atlasaurus) to see if this is true.

Controversial opinion of mine (or so I think it's controversial): I do not like hatchling figures. Some are okay, but they are usually out of scale compared to my other figures. An example of these are PNSO's two hatchlings.

[Carnoking]

I don't think it's at all controversial to say that Safari's armored dinosaurs were a miscalculation

As far as EoFauna goes, I'll agree that the giganotosaurus has an underwhelming paint scheme, easily the weakest of the gigas on my shelves, but in my eyes it's one of those figures that is a dinosaur model in every meaning of the phrase. It's not exaggerated or flashy, it is simply a model depicting an animal to the best of our knowledge, and that's what makes it so unique and likable to me. I still think the Vitae offering is my personal favorite, but EoFauna is a close competitor. As far as the Atlasaurus goes, I don't know, maybe I just got lucky, but the paint job on mine is superb. It's everything I love about the giga but with an even more intricate color scheme and details, which I love. I'll have to see the trikes in person before I decide which is my favorite so far, but I am on board with EoFauna's dinosaurs all the way. Now I'll admit that their proboscideans may be objectively better, but I don't collect those so I'll always favor the dinos.

And again, having issues with Papo is not at all uncommon!

[Lynx]

Those are actually three very common and agreed upon opinions, but I still think that figures should be judged more by the sculpt than the paint work.

For me, I would prefer an inaccurateish model with a good paint job over an accurate figure with a bland or bad paint job. (By "inaccurateish" I mean something like the carnegie giga)

[Lynx]

I don't really understand that because paint jobs are the easiest aspect to get fixed.

Trust me, if I could, I would. Honestly, I suck at painting. However it is not just the paint that is bothersome. The sculpt is way too smooth for me- there is no texture on most of the figure. Sure, it has some wrinkles, but it feels at if this creature is an amphibian. But I get your point.