PNSO: New For 2021

[DragonRider02]

Every time I look at that Iguanodon's face it reminds me of Squidward.

[Gwangi]

@Gwangi Yeah, but that was "just" a museum, I'm talking about someone who teaches geosciences at university. IIRC his research focuses are mass extinction events and paleoclimatology, so perhaps grass isn't interesting enough for him to keep his info up to date, or he didn't consider the sparse literature on the topic substantial enough to include it.

Yeah @Psittacoraptor , it may have been "just" a museum, but the guy giving the presentation was a professor with a PhD. 

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

Looks like they may have just became confused about what is an Iguanodon vs Mantellisaurus then?  Does it work as a Mantellisaurus body and all?   

[Thialfi]

I really hate how PNSO's artwork doesn't match their products.

https://www.facebook.com/814219578676241/posts/4556489717782523/?d=n

Came here to say this. It's so confusing. Don't get me wrong, I think the figure is beautiful, just not iguanodon beautiful I guess.

[Bread]

I really hate how PNSO's artwork doesn't match their products.

https://www.facebook.com/814219578676241/posts/4556489717782523/?d=n

Came here to say this. It's so confusing. Don't get me wrong, I think the figure is beautiful, just not iguanodon beautiful I guess.

Someone pointed out in the comment section that the artwork has cheeks but yet the model itself doesn't. Really weird how PNSO continue to do this. Its like they contradict themselves in a way.

[Arqueopterix]

It is curious that the previous images of the PNSO itself had cheeks.

https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=3217854331775814&id=2331852817042641&set=a.2343327995895123&source=49

[Duna]

Here's an comparison of the images Flaffy posted with the PNSO reconstruction
top left is the PNSO skull, top right is Iguanodon, bottom left Mantellisaurus, bottom right Iguanodon and Mantellisaurus.
It definitely looks closer to Mantellisaurus than Iguanodon.
edit: tried to post the picture, but it didn't work, so I'm linking the url to my the image.

Yes, it just looks like a Mantellisaurus skull with thin cheeks in an Iguanodon body.

[Flaffy]

Looks like they may have just became confused about what is an Iguanodon vs Mantellisaurus then?  Does it work as a Mantellisaurus body and all?

Unfortunately no. That is very much an Iguanodon body.

Mantellisaurus was far more gracile, especially apparent in the forelimbs. More spindly, and less adapted to bear weight. Thumb spike is noticeably less impressive on Mantellisaurus as well.

[Psittacoraptor]

Interestingly, G. S. Paul, the author who named Mantellisaurus as a separate genus, also named a second new genus in the same paper, Dollodon. The latter has been rejected by other authors who do not deem the material sufficiently different enough to make a distinction between Dollodon and Mantellisaurus. Paul also named the theropod species Albertosaurus megagracilis and Aublydson molnaris, which were later rejected and reclassified as juvenile Tyrannosaurus rex by other authors.

Just some food for thought, classification is not nearly as set in stone as the fossils it describes are. I guess my point is: l'll keep an open mind and look forward to the video that explains the creation process behind this model.

Maybe PNSO does these things as a PR tactic? Logan the Nanotyrannus/baby rex certainly got people talking about the brand. Perhaps Harvey will achieve the same.

[SidB]

This seems a bit of a pattern with PNSO (Allosaurus, new Triceratops)L another possible (likely?) chimera, as @Flaffy pointed out.

[ZoPteryx]

I share the general feeling here that the head is definitely atypical for Iguanodon proper, which is a shame because the body and coloration are superb.  Definitely resembles Mantellisaurus more.  It would make a fine generic iguanodont I suppose, if one can overlook the lack of cheeks.

[Sim]

The head of PNSO's new Iguanodon looks fine to me, excluding the lack of cheeks, when compared to the skeletal below which @Flaffy posted.  What doesn't look right to me is the partial pronation of the PNSO figure's hands, which has the added effect of hiding the thumb spikes in part.  Compare the PNSO figure's hands to that of the skeletal below or Scott Hartman's skeletal.

[SenSx]

I'm a bit lost, because there are pictures of Iguanodon's skull where it has some kind of bumb above the nose, and others where it looks exactly how PNSO portrayed it...(like the picture above).
Other than that, I find it weird the mouth openening goes so deep into the head, like it is able to open it entirely (sorry if my english does not explain that properly).
Which does not match the artwork at all also.

[Arqueopterix]

I would only buy this Iguanodon if I had the skill to resculpt the head. But it is unreasonable to pay dearly for a figure and still have to correct it.

[CARN0TAURUS]

No skull with this one? Pity.

I agree, you can't go from including bases and skulls in museum line to basically just saying, we're calling it museum line so we can make 33% off of a prehistoric line figure :0

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

Looks like they may have just became confused about what is an Iguanodon vs Mantellisaurus then?  Does it work as a Mantellisaurus body and all?

Unfortunately no. That is very much an Iguanodon body.

Mantellisaurus was far more gracile, especially apparent in the forelimbs. More spindly, and less adapted to bear weight. Thumb spike is noticeably less impressive on Mantellisaurus as well.

Ah, guess this one is a pass then.

[JohannesB]

I see people using different Iguanodon skull reconstructions (seemingly Mantellisaurus, Iguanodon, Dollodon..) as a reference for this PNSO model, some fitting badly, and some fitting nicely. I am confused to what PNSO themselves used as reference, and why they would possibly have made the mistake of putting the wrong skull on the right body-bauplan. I still think it looks beautiful. Not sure if I will go ahead and pay the Museum Line price for it :-(

[Leyster]

Dollodon is no longer a recognized genus (see Carpenter & Ishida 2010, McDonald 2012)

[Bread]

No skull with this one? Pity.

I agree, you can't go from including bases and skulls in museum line to basically just saying, we're calling it museum line so we can make 33% off of a prehistoric line figure :0

Agreed, but I can see why this one did not get a skull. A little hard to explain but Triceratops has a more attractive, or maybe a better word to use would be appealing, skull than Iguanodon.

[Thialfi]

Haha yeah, an iguanodon skull doesn't really have the shelf presence of that of an triceratops. The skull was just a little extra and that's fine as far as I am concerned. Don't really have a strong desire to own a iguanodon skull in this scale. I'd rather see those resources go to some extra paint for example.