During the night, an old hulking Smilodon had spotted a baby mammoth that had wondered away from its mother. It attacked the calf before mama saw what was happening. The mother charged at the cat making it scatter, but the damage was done, the calf collapsed to the icy ground succumbing to its injuries. The mother hovered over her fallen calf, making it dangerous for the cat to claim its kill. By the time the mammoth did move on, night had given way to morning, and the old fellow found it had found a new obstacle in its way.
The light of the morning revealed a huge muscular sabre-toothed cat standing next to his kill. It was Samson the strong, the slayer of Dire wolvers, the devourer of Mastodons, and he had come to claim the kill. He stood there like a giant boulder, with a thick shoulders, and powerful claws that packed the power to hook into and drag down large animals with ease. A fierce fire burned in his eyes and his mouth opened with a snarl. The legendary sabres gleamed in the morning sun. Around his head and neck was a tousled, curly, voluminous mane. The old fellow could only look upon Sampson with envy and fear as he had never seen a Smilodon like this before. “It’s gotta be the hair, he thought. It’s was beautiful, windswept and flowing. Smapson roared a warning, and swung its killer claws in his direction, which snapped him out of his trance. In its younger days the old fellow had met a short faced bear that fractured his jaw and knew a similar fate awaited him if he contested the kill. He turned and fled. A little ways away, he laid down and curled himself up next to a rough and fissured trunk of a fir tree. As he laid there, he was angry that his break feast was taken from him, and that he would never have hair on his head that would look that nice.
The 2017 Papo Roaring Smilodon is certainly a different take on this classic creature. When I first saw this figure I wasn’t sure about it. It is certainly dynamic but I had some concerns. First it has a mane. Secondly there was just something that looked wrong with the animal, but I couldn’t figure out what.
There isn’t any fossil evidence for a Smilodon having a mane or stripes, but I guess the absence of proof doesn’t mean that it didn’t have them either. Since this figure has a mane and lacks a shaggy coat it does looks a lot like a male lion! But I couldn’t help but wonder, was it a lion in disguise, with large sabers to mask its true identity? I could not make my mind up by looking at pictures online, I needed to hold it in my hands.
I finally found it in a local toy store. I took it off the shelf and held it in my hands for the first time. I turned it over, examined it from all angles, and my mind changed. I used be in sales so I know holding an object, feeling its weight, and having that physical connection to an item can help convince a person to buy it. I like to think this didn’t bias my opinion on why I started to like this toy but as I stood in that store, holding this figure, I noticed just how awesome the musculature was depicted on this animal. You could feel its raw power.
It stretches out at 6 in (15.4 cm) long from paw to paw and is 3.4 in (8.7 cm) high at the top of its mane. The pose is dynamic. Its legs are spread out with one paw reaching out to give you a hand shake or pull you into a hug. The head is up with the jaw wide open snarling at it rivals.
There are three species of Smilodon recognized today: S. gracilis, S. fatalis, and S. populator. Which one this is supposed to represent I do not know. My assumption is that it is modeled after S. populator.
The head with its wrinkled nose, snarling visage, and those gaping jaws are very nicely sculpted. The actual animal had a muzzle that was short and broad and it looks correct on this sculpt. Some people might think the large maxillary canine teeth extending from the mouth look too big, almost like bananas. The upper canines were slender on the real animal, and the ones on this model are a little wider, but I still think they look terrifyingly good. Moving down the animal and looking at the shoulders, limbs, and the flank, there is a sense of power, as you can see the immensely strong muscles under the animal’s skin.
Comparing it to fossil evidence, at first, I thought the back was too long and too extended, as the Smilodon had a stiff and shorter lumbar region. But on closer examination, I couldn’t help and wonder that it might have been possible for it to stretch out this far. If it had enough back flexion, its back would be able to dip down, if the body and limbs were stretched out. Which is what pose this figure is in. I haven’t seen any research that says it couldn’t. The paws might also be slightly larger on this model than in real life. The proportion seemed wrong to me at first glance but ended up matching up closer than I originally thought.
The paint job on the coat is plain dark tan with black fur on the arms and mane. A lighter tan is used on the underside. The stripes on the rump are a dark brown. The claws are a dirty yellow. The scrotum is painted grey. They missed an opportunity to really make this toy stand out. All they needed to do was add some highlights or dry-brushing to the mane, to really make it flow. It would have accentuated its face and body better than the flat base color they used. The same goes for the ball of fur at the end of its small tail.
As for the texture on this toy it is rather smooth. If you close your eyes you can really feel the muscle bulges and the skin where it is folded and bunched up. The long wavy mane on this model is rough to the touch but the rest of the body has very short, almost non existing fur with the exception of the forelimbs. It looks a lot like a lion on the savannah.
Overall: At first glance it looked more like a fictional character or mythical beast like the Nemean lion or Shere Khan than an accurate Smilodon figure. I even named mine after a person of legend. I named it Sampson due to the long flowing mane and the bulging muscles on its frame.
Despite my early trepidations about the figure, I think it is actually quite nice, even with the addition of the mane. I admit that I had to find alternate theories to make the anatomy work, and as I am not a Smilodon expert, these theories might not stand the test of time. This figure is not perfect, but it is nicely sculpted. There are some other good Smilodon’s out there, but in my opinion, this one by Papo has great detail and has been overlooked. If you like Smilodon’s then I think you’ll like this figure too.
Available at Amazon.
Disclaimer: links to Ebay and Amazon on the DinoToyBlog are affiliate links, so we make a small commission if you use them. Thanks for supporting us!
Every time I get that mess of a figurine in my line of site I get sick….Hey Papo, please stop trying to sculpt a Smilodon. You don’t have a clue.
With that flowing mane and all those bulging muscles, this figure strikes me more as . . . the Nemean Lion or some other feline out of Greek mythology. I get that Papo was going for something new and unique, but I really do think this is the silliest prehistoric figure they’ve ever made. Not the worst though (that’s still the Tylosaurus), and certainly not the worst Smilodon I’ve seen either.
It does make you wonder what they were thinking when they signed off on this one. As for new and unique, I am not sure about that as they did copy the lion blueprint and tried sticking it on Smilodon body. I wonder if there were even parameters outside of make it look “cool”. I like it due to the details and power in the figure, not for its accuracy.
To myself, even Schleich’s Smilodon is better than this new Papo one. I believe it is NOTHING like what Smilodon would of looked like. For myself, it is the most disappointing Sabertooth figure I have ever laid eyes on.
A well written and outstanding review…. I really had to smile about “old feelow’s” thoughts on his counterpart …. “that hair” 😀
For the figure itself though, I feel this one is just too much for me…. too strechted, too bulged, too aggro, too much adornment with mane and stripes…. just too “IN YA’ FACE!!!”. After I added the Kaiyodo Smilodon a while ago (which is more or less perfect, but somewhat unfortunately very small and brittle) I got the Safari Smilodon a few months back, but I really got happy when I received the Carnegie Smilodon few weeks ago.
Thank you. Congrats on the Carnegie Smilodon, it is a “classic”.
I agree about Charles R Knight. His renditions to me are very accurate for the body morphology of Smilodon Fatalis.
My biggest problem with this figure is one we both seem to agree with… making it very similar to a modern day lion. Smilodon’s body type was VERY different than any extant cat’s morphology. You mentioned a hyena profile. I am somewhat in agreement with that. This figure, however, is nothing like a hyena profile. This figure has a very athletic and modern cat-like profile , not the primitive, prehistoric awkward profile that Smilodon had with very stocky frontal extremities and more diminutive rear areas.
In his dotage, Scar from the Lion King got really big dentures.
I think this is hands down, the WORST, most ridiculous Smilodon ( I can’t even call it that) I have EVER seen. In my eyes, there is NOTHING accurate about it. I too have seen it in person, and I actually dislike it even more. It is impossible for me to take this figure seriously as a Smilodon. I cannot understand how any mainstream company in this day and age would mold a Smilodon that way. What a total mess. I believe nearly 95% of all Smilodon figures out there are not scientifically accurate, but this new Papo one to myself is just terrible. This figure truly looks like a fantasy figure , not a Pleistocene Smilodon
The figure is very detailed and well made but it is totally unreal. I like to have it in my collection but luckily smilodon in real life I understand that it was not like that figure.
In any case, I respect the artistic licenses of Papo, which in this case are still quite curious and striking, with all the respect I have for that company that has given me so much joy as a collector.
Quite so, on both accounts. As a facsimile, it’s basically and largely preposterous. However, as a fantasy figure and artistic venture, I find that it has a place. The DTB reviews look at a variety of products designed for a wide range of intended audiences and varied market. This one has its place, though not as a realistic sculpt, because of it’s extreme styleization.
Thanks, Laticauda, for engaging this rather unique “Smilodon” representation in a review.
Your welcome. At least it is a conversation piece!
Thank you for your thoughts on the figure. Just because you don’t like how something looks, doesn’t mean it is the WORST ever. My first take on it was similar, the apparent over bulging the muscles, the flowing mane, the extension of the back, I too thought it was fantasy. Papo does over stylize their products. As I stated looking at reconstructions, skeletal, and muscle, it matched up fairly well. As for the worst, have you seen the Schleich Smilodon, lets be real here. My question is what do you find inaccurate? Maybe you saw something that I have missed, or do you just find it ugly?
To myself, it truly is just about the worst Smilodon I have seen. I agree, the Schleich one is also quite ridiculous but at least the Schleich one doesn’t try and look just like a modern day lion with a zebra stripes. I dont think Papo’s Smilodon matches well with skeleton reconstructions. I think the old Carnegie Smilodon matches well with reconstructions.and is much more scientifically accurate. Smilodon had a shorter back, shorter more powerful front limbs, huge neck and shoulder muscles, and its rear areas were more diminutive than its front areas..all these things are very evident in the old Safar Carnegie figure.. And to answer your question, yes, I find in very ugly as a Sabertooth figure. In real life I don’t think Smilodon Fatalis or Populator would of looked anything like a modern day lion, yet this figure by Papo looks extremely close to a modern lion,but with alot of added fantasy.
I do agree that by following the look of a lion was a poor choice. As to comparing it to reconstructions is where it gets interesting. My general idea of what Smilodon looks like comes right out of a Charles Knight painting. In a way the profile of a Smilodon seems similar to that of a hyena with the long neck and the sloping back In fact many reconstruction follow that blueprint. When I look at the Papo version, it doesn’t match at all to my preconceived idea of what it should look like. But then does it have to?
When I start looking at the limb ratios, I am not saying it is spot on, especially the paws which are too big, but they come rather close as far as I can tell. The back looks longer because of the stretched out nature of the sculpt. If you re-position the limbs
underneath, the back isn’t as elongated and should slope. The front limbs are tough because I agree they should seem shorter, but due to the stretched out nature and the movement allowed at the shoulder, it might have been able to extend its arm out that far. The neck and shoulders seems big and thick on this figure, of course the mane does make it hard to tell. The rear might be fine depending on if Smilodon could extend its spine back that far. I think the way its sculpted makes things look wrong when they are not necessarily incorrect. It would also be easier to do ratios if Papo mentioned which species they tried to make as there are some differences between them. Of course, maybe I am trying too hard to defend the sculpt and seeing excuses where there are none! 🙂