Top 10 Most Reviewed Genera on the DTB

[suspsy]

Here are the top ten most reviewed genera on the DTB. Keep in mind that there may be a few reviews that haven't been properly tagged with the subject's name.

UPDATED 01/01/2024

1. Tyrannosaurus rex, 223 reviews.

2. Triceratops, 111 reviews.

3. Velociraptor, 84 reviews.

4. Stegosaurus, 76 reviews.

5. Spinosaurus, 57 reviews.

6. Allosaurus and Pteranodon, 56 reviews each.

7. Brachiosaurus, 50 reviews.

8. Parasaurolophus, 47 reviews.

9. Ankylosaurus, 39 reviews.

10. Apatosaurus, Dilophosaurus, Dimetrodon, and woolly mammoth, 38 reviews each.

Honourable mentions go to Carnotaurus (32 reviews) and Styracosaurus (31 reviews).

[Crackington]

Fascinating list Suspy, but interesting that Dimetrodon doesn't make the top ten or honourable mentions. Every company must have made one in their "dinosaur" sets. I guess it must be bubbling under in the blog reviews?

[suspsy]

Dimetrodon presently has 21 reviews, which is more than many dinosaurs.

[Shonisaurus]

Carnotaurus and ceratosaurus must already have a significant number of comments. I suppose.

[Halichoeres]

This serves as a good list of taxa to please stop making.

[suspsy]

This serves as a good list of taxa to please stop making.

Good point. Since there aren't any Paleozoic beasts or fish among the top ten or the honourable mentions, it would make sense to stop making them, as they clearly aren't popular enough! 

[suspsy]

Welcome to 2020! I've updated the list; the top four genera are still in place, but there have been some changes elsewhere!

[SidB]

This serves as a good list of taxa to please stop making.

Good point. Since there aren't any Paleozoic beasts or fish among the top ten or the honourable mentions, it would make sense to stop making them, as they clearly aren't popular enough! 

I find it interesting that Safari has taken both of these approaches/concerns into consideration in their marketing strategy. First, in their refreshing of their overall prehistoric line since 2015, they have put a major emphasis on the "big ten," and rightly so, without completely neglecting the minor notes. This made excellant commercial sense, as well as satisfying the wishes of the majority of their customer base. Now, for 2020, there is more of a niche focus on unusual figures, or at least ones outside of the top ten.

This was/is an effective way to maintain interest in and sustain "hopes and dreams" fror the Wild Safari line, IMO.

[Tyto_Theropod]

This serves as a good list of taxa to please stop making.

Good point. Since there aren't any Paleozoic beasts or fish among the top ten or the honourable mentions, it would make sense to stop making them, as they clearly aren't popular enough! 

Um, yes and no.  I'm all for bringing in more obscure species, especially given that there are so many fascinating prehistoric animals outside dinosaurs and the Mesozoic era.  I definitely agree that the Palaeozoic is under-represented - so too is the first half of the Cenozoic.  Personally, I'd love to see some Palaeogoene carnivores alongside the ubiquitous Smilodon!  At the same time, I have to admit that it actually rather annoys me when people say that companies should stop making these 'stock dinosaurs'.

Tyrannosaurus is an excellent example of why I have a problem with this attitude.  It's pretty much the most well-researched prehistoric animal there is (although some of that definitely owes to its over-representation in pop cult.  I acknowledge that there's a certain amount of feedback here).  New discoveries and theories about its palaeobiology come out all the time.  I really don't want to find myself wanting a nice, up-to-date model of this species, only for none to have been made in the last ten years because companies had run past an imaginary Tyrannosaurus quota.  Equally, I don't want children whose favourite dinosaur is Tyrannosaurus to only have old, outdated models and potentially toxic off-brand toys available to them.

Similarly, Velociraptor and Triceratops are known from extremely well-preserved fossils, which means that sculptors have a lot of material to work with when making a figure (and also really have no excuse to get something glaringly wrong!).  Even so, by virtue of their very popularity, 'stock dinosaurs' tend to have a lot of inaccurate toys representing them.  If our favourite companies stopped representing them, we wouldn't get refreshing corrections to this trend like the awesome Velociraptor figures made by Wild Safari and Beasts of the Mesozoic.  And as a result, the public's Jurassic Park-influenced idea of What A Velociraptor Should Look Like would be re-enforced.

And I think there should be a certain amount of choice.  I really like Parasaurolophus.  It was my childhood favourite dinosaur, and I really have it to thank for maintaining my interest in palaeontology over the years - and to a certain extent, my interest in biology as a whole.  And I know it's accurate, which I'm all for, but I just do not like the Safari figure.  I see nothing inherently wrong with it, but there's something about it that doesn't click with me personally.  Because there aren't many other options ATM, I currently don't have a 100% up-to-date Parasaurolophus on my display shelf - which really saddens me because of how much this species means to me in a silly, arbitrary, human way.  Having said which, this point is something I'm more prepared to sacrifice if it means we can have a more 'biodiverse' range of figures on the market!

So I say, don't stop making models of these dinosaurs.  Just scale down the representation a bit (or a lot!) so you can make room for other species.  And while you're at it, please do continue to us less well-represented 'stock dinosaur' contemporaries like Edmontosaurus and Protoceratops to go alongside them!

I'm sorry this post is a bit long!  More importantly, I know that a lot of people here disagree with me on this, so I really hope that by expressing my personal opinion I won't start any nasty drama.

[suspsy]

I fear you mistook my good-natured ribbing of Halichoeres at face value. I too am all for more focus on Paleozoic fauna, as well as Triassic and Cenozoic for that matter. At the same time, I believe that companies should continue producing new T. rex toys periodically for precisely the reasons you listed. As I've noted many times in the past, T. rex is to prehistoric life as Batman is to DC or Spider-Man is to Marvel or Darth Vader is to Star Wars.

[Loon]

Talk about expected. But I was shocked by how many more reviews Tyrannosaurus had to even the most popular species.

[Tyto_Theropod]

I fear you mistook my good-natured ribbing of Halichoeres at face value. I too am all for more focus on Paleozoic fauna, as well as Triassic and Cenozoic for that matter. At the same time, I believe that companies should continue producing new T. rex toys periodically for precisely the reasons you listed. As I've noted many times in the past, T. rex is to prehistoric life as Batman is to DC or Spider-Man is to Marvel or Darth Vader is to Star Wars.

I was really replying to both of you - I knew I should just have replied to @Halichoeres!  I did sort of see your comment as tongue-in-cheek, and as I say I hope that my response didn't come across as aggressive.  I guess exposure to this forum has just made me into an argumentative pedant, hee hee!

Your Batman analogy is very apt and I couldn't agree more.

[Halichoeres]

@Tyto_Theropod  Hyperbole doesn't come through well in text, but anyone with a regular presence on the forum can tell you I don't literally think that none of these popular taxa should ever be made again (even for Ty***nosaurus, I only propose a 90 year hiatus). In the last year or so, I've bought figures of 6 of the 12 genera listed in the first post.

I know that many people lament that their favorite dinosaur (or other prehistoric animal) doesn't have a really ideal, definitive figure, but to some extent the faults they find in existing versions are noticeable precisely because of those species' overexposure. When there are a dozen recent versions of a given dinosaur, and hundreds of fans scrutinizing them, armed with the persnickety criticism of various paleontology blogs, it's going to be really hard for any figure to measure up and satisfy everyone at a reasonable price. For my part, I'd rather have an imperfect figure of a new species that hasn't been the subject of umpteen cable TV specials than a new figure of a stock dinosaur that is a 2% improvement on last year's edition. I'm most excited when a new figure prompts me to learn about a clade, or ecological setting, or geological event, that I know little about. But that's just me, others have their own approach to collecting.

As for the Batman analogy, it doesn't really compute for me, because he is the protagonist of a story. Evolution doesn't have a protagonist, or if it does, it isn't a theropod that lasted maybe, maybe three million years. It's some crazy long lived plant genus like Equisetum or Metasequoia. The Cretaceous lacked Ty***nosaurus for 97% of its duration; the Mesozoic lacked it for perhaps 99% of its duration. Batman is in like every issue of Batman. If you just mean that it's the one kids recognize, well, maybe it's because it's the only one most parents bother to remember. (Parents on the DTF, of course, can be better than this )

[Gwangi]

As for the Batman analogy, it doesn't really compute for me, because he is the protagonist of a story. Evolution doesn't have a protagonist, or if it does, it isn't a theropod that lasted maybe, maybe three million years. It's some crazy long lived plant genus like Equisetum or Metasequoia. The Cretaceous lacked Ty***nosaurus for 97% of its duration; the Mesozoic lacked it for perhaps 99% of its duration. Batman is in like every issue of Batman. If you just mean that it's the one kids recognize, well, maybe it's because it's the only one most parents bother to remember. (Parents on the DTF, of course, can be better than this )

I get what you're saying, but how many stories is there a T. rex as a protagonist or antagonist? The general public is not interested in T. rex in the context of evolution or natural history, they like it for the same reason they like Godzilla. T. rex is as prevalent in any media relating to dinosaurs as Batman is in DC comics. And I don't think we really need to go into the hows and whys T. rex is popular to begin with, I'm sure you've read the E. O. Wilson quote. But here it is anyway...

"We are not afraid of predators, we're transfixed by them, prone to weave stories and fables and chatter endlessly about them, because fascination creates preparedness, and preparedness, survival. In a deeply tribal way, we love our monsters..."
— E. O. Wilson

Metasequoia or Bothriolepis don't quite capture the imagination in quite the same way. Those of us interested in prehistoric life, evolution, natural history, biology etc. are in the minority compared to people that just like big, fierce, predatory things. Unfortunately.

[suspsy]

As for the Batman analogy, it doesn't really compute for me, because he is the protagonist of a story. Evolution doesn't have a protagonist, or if it does, it isn't a theropod that lasted maybe, maybe three million years. It's some crazy long lived plant genus like Equisetum or Metasequoia.

Honestly, dude? That's as irrelevant as pointing out that Batman is 100% fictional. None of the children or the adults who adore him care that he doesn't really exist. Similarly, no one who adores T. rex cares all that about when precisely it evolved or how long it lived. Such details don't affect its lasting popularity or its status as a cultural icon in the slightest.

And besides, as Gwangi already pointed out, T. rex has frequently been portrayed as a protagonist. Let's start with cartoons and comics. There's Grimlock from multiple Transformers continuities, Buddy from Dinosaur Train, Ty from Dinotrux, Super Dinosaur from Image comics and the accompanying cartoon, Devil Dinosaur from Marvel, and also the Starbrand T. rex that was recently revealed to have been the very first superhero in Marvel continuity. Film-wise, there's Chomper from the Land Before Time franchise, Rex from the Toy Story franchise, Rex from We're Back! A Dinosaur's Story, Mama from Ice Age 3, and the rancher trio from The Good Dinosaur. And then there's good ol' Rexy, who's clearly been portrayed as an antihero in three JP/JW films now. Oh, and we can't forget about Barney. And all those Zords from the Power Rangers franchise.

And that's not even taking into account all the portrayals of T. rex as an antagonist, hence why it's also comparable to Darth Vader or Hannibal Lector.

If you just mean that it's the one kids recognize, well, maybe it's because it's the only one most parents bother to remember. (Parents on the DTF, of course, can be better than this )

Speaking as both a parent and an educator, I believe I can confidently say that you are mistaken. I've encountered hordes of young enthusiasts who can name obscure as well as popular taxa, yet the majority of them still name T. rex as their favourite because it was "the coolest" or "the toughest" or simply "the king of all dinosaurs." And my own son isn't even three yet, but T. rex is his favourite as well. Not his favourite toy (that would be a knockoff of the Schleich Parasaurolophus that he calls "Grampa"), but still his favourite dinosaur. It's also presently the only one he immediately recognizes on sight.

As I've noted in the past, I absolutely get why some folk are annoyed by the constant stream of T. rex products, but at the same time, I think hoping for a moratorium or a total end to T. rex products is as unrealistic and pointless as hoping for an end to Batman products in favour of the Crimson Avenger or the Phantom Stranger or the Question (who are all pretty cool superheroes in their own right). It is what it is.

[Tyto_Theropod]

Okay.  I really don't want to come across as aggressive, but do think I need to clarify some things.

@Tyto_Theropod  Hyperbole doesn't come through well in text, but anyone with a regular presence on the forum can tell you I don't literally think that none of these popular taxa should ever be made again...

And I never said I took you 100% literally, though I admit my reply probably made it sound as if I did.  I admit that I haven't been on here much as of late, so I'm not entirely as clued-up as I might have been.  I'd love to have a more regular presence on the forum like I use to and am trying to get back into the swing of it again.  Unfortunately my life didn't really allow for that last year!

For my part, I'd rather have an imperfect figure of a new species that hasn't been the subject of umpteen cable TV specials than a new figure of a stock dinosaur that is a 2% improvement on last year's edition.

I did not think my argument in any way implied that I wanted frequent releases of new, improved figures.  If anything, quite the opposite because I specifically said that I'd like to see less of the same species over and over again, to make room for some more obscure ones.  Also, for the record, I'm perfectly okay with a few inaccuracies in what is, after all, a toy.

I'm most excited when a new figure prompts me to learn about a clade, or ecological setting, or geological event, that I know little about.

I can relate to this entirely. This is something I also find appealing, and I think it's a big part of how prehistoric animal toys can educate children.  Heck, Olorotitan was news to me when CollectA's came out back in the day.  That rather goofy little figure got me really interested in how diverse Lambeosaurines are, and what the evolutionary reasons behind that might ave been.  But I personally also love me my Velociraptors!  

In general I find it hard to get sick of overexposed species when we're still learning new things about them (e.g. Triceratops), although I admit that *ahem!* the large theropod that offends you so much has also tried my patience more than once - so you're not alone there!  At the same time, I must admit that without the popularity of *ahem!* said theropod, I doubt as many people would develop an interest in palaeontology.  I'm sure that without it, many of the best palaeontologists we've been lucky enough to have over the last few decades might well have gone down very different career paths.  So yes, it's annoying when it overshadows other taxa and periods, but the fact remains that this species is an invaluable poster child for just how goshdarned awesome the history of life is.  Personally I feel that that position should really have gone to something a bit more weird and wonderful (Estemmenosuchus, anyone?), but such is life, and people do love their giant murdercrocobirbs.

Evolution doesn't have a protagonist, or if it does, it isn't a theropod that lasted maybe, maybe three million years... The Cretaceous lacked Ty***nosaurus for 97% of its duration; the Mesozoic lacked it for perhaps 99% of its duration.

As a biologist, I sort of agree, but I think @suspsy also has a point.

Anyway that all being said, 'm going to be a hypocrite and end by saying I think it's about time we moved onto something else.  I really don't want to start another needles fight, and I already feel a bit guilty for having posted in the first place.

[Mirroraptor]

I hope that you will stop arguing about Tyrannosaurus, and look at a remarkable fact: after Kenner JP09, before Safari Feathered T.rex, we have not obtained any accurate Tyrannosaurus figures for almost 15 years. Indeed, in this process, PAPO, CollectA and other manufacturers are continuously producing T-rex models, but they all have various problems, far from being excellent. (I occasionally praise PAPO T rex, it's just because it excels in compared with something even worse figures of the years, 'better' is a relative concept.)
Today, Tyrannosaurus Rex is welcoming its second spring in the toy market. We have Safari Tyrannosaurus, PNSO Wilson and Kaiyodo Sofubi Tyrannosaurus. In the area of Jurassic Park style, Nanmu Studio and W Dragon are continuously introducing their outstanding New product. This should be a good phenomenon, and we can see that many nascent manufacturers such as Rebor and PNSO have succeeded by launching the Tyrannosaurus figure, and gradually mature. Many of them will turn to the unpopular species you need after making money and growing through famous species such as Tyrannosaurus and raptors.
Therefore, I am not anxious for the continued top of the Tyrannosaurus. On the contrary, this shows that the prehistoric toys market is still dynamic and continues to grow.

[Halichoeres]

Well I guess we're all learning that what we think we're writing is not the same as what other people think they're reading. I, for example, have rarely perceived comments that you've directed at me or other members as good-natured ribbing, @suspsy. In the other direction, evidently I have cultivated the impression that I'm some sort of delusional lunatic convinced that it is actually achievable or desirable to have 0 toys of a popular dinosaur. I think both of us have been taken differently from the way we intended.

Those of you who are interested in politics might be familiar with the Overton Window, which refers to the range of opinions that are considered acceptable to the mainstream at a given  moment. One can move the Overton Window by expressing opinions that are just a little bit beyond its edge, which is how policies that seemed unthinkable a generation earlier can be taken for granted now. I think of the dinosaur market the same way. We shape it, in a very small way, with our purchase decisions, and we shape each other's purchase decisions--again, in a small way--by our discussions here on the forum. Obviously that effect is dwarfed by pop culture currents and the whims of children, but I can't do much about those things. What I can do is call attention to and agitate for weirdo taxa here on the forum, so I do! I'm just trying to shift the prehistoric Overton Window in this tiny corner of the Web where I spend too much time. I don't actually have any beef with fans of popular dinosaurs, even if I get bored with the dinosaurs themselves. I would never dream of disparaging mgaguilar's collection of rexes or triceratops83's old collection of Triceratops, or BlueKrono's array of every Kronosaurus ever. Those collections are cool in their own way.

I still don't really find the Batman analogy compelling, but I'm realizing that we obviously think about prehistory in vastly different ways, which I probably ought to have gathered from the vignettes and nicknames in so many of your reviews. That's fine, of course, there's no one right way to think about it.

@Tyto_Theropod : Welcome back. No hard feelings. Only maybe check the dates before you reply to comments; this was 11 months dormant.

@Gwangi  Thanks, that was a thoughtful response that helped me understand where folks are coming from.

[suspsy]

Well I guess we're all learning that what we think we're writing is not the same as what other people think they're reading. I, for example, have rarely perceived comments that you've directed at me or other members as good-natured ribbing, @suspsy. In the other direction, evidently I have cultivated the impression that I'm some sort of delusional lunatic convinced that it is actually achievable or desirable to have 0 toys of a popular dinosaur. I think both of us have been taken differently from the way we intended.

That's very true, sadly, our tones can be lost as mere text. I suppose that, since I consider this to be an ultimately frivolous topic, I assume that other people aren't taking it all that seriously either. I've honestly always thought of our exchanges on this as harmless fun. Again, I respect and understand your position even if I don't agree with it.

I still don't really find the Batman analogy compelling

It doesn't have to involve superheroes or movie characters. Let's consider the African lion instead. It's not even the biggest cat, let alone the biggest land carnivore alive today. And as far as predators go, it's not the most intelligent, the most effective, or the most fascinating (in my own humble view). And yet the lion is immeasurably more famous, more beloved, and more revered in human culture than the tiger, the polar bear, the wolf, the cheetah, the fox, the spider, the centipede, or any other predatory animal walking the planet. To name but a few examples, there's Sekhmet, Daniel in the lion's den, Richard the Lionheart, Aslan, the Cowardly Lion, the Lion King franchise, Leo the MGM mascot, Leo the zodiac sign, and God knows how many lion guardian statues scattered across Asia. And toys, of course. Heaps and heaps of toys of all persuasion. Go Voltron Force!

The fact that the real lion is just another animal and is neither noble nor kingly doesn't mean squat as far as its iconic status is concerned. It'll always be the king of beasts and the most popular wild animal. I see Tyrannosaurus rex as being no different.

but I'm realizing that we obviously think about prehistory in vastly different ways, which I probably ought to have gathered from the vignettes and nicknames in so many of your reviews. That's fine, of course, there's no one right way to think about it.

I grew up watching wildlife documentaries where the subjects were frequently given dramatic-sounding names or titles like Motsumi, N'twadumala, the Matriarch, and the Princess, or just simple old names like Flo, Faben, Figan, Fifi, and Flint. I've always believed that entertainment and education can go together most beautifully. I even have a name already picked out for the BotM T. rex, which doesn't actually exist yet!

[stargatedalek]

If you're going to lump all spiders together they are leaps and bounds more famous than lions. I'm having trouble following much any of this, but that is just a strange statement to make. Spiders as a group are much better known, as are snakes, lizards, fish, birds, etc. Part of that is because they are disproportionately immense groups in comparison, but I stand by them being better known if you're willing to stand by equating them to lions.

Nor would I say the lion is a sure in as the most "popular" wild animal. "Best known individual genera that is not kept in captivity by individuals" is possible, but I highly doubt Leo is holds more positions as favorite than Tursiops.

As for the "list of animals to stop making" comment, I rather vehemently disagree, if only because I feel a truly definitive version of all of these genera has yet eluded us. Potentially sans Dimetrodon and Ankylosaurus.