When there’s too much articulation, the figure is ruined. Too little, and posing becomes an issue. I really think Hasbro’s Star Wars have hit the mark 75% of the time, and that’s pretty good, when you think about it.

Ankle articulation is the worst thing in the history of action figure design -its an unncessary cost- and it causes many more problems than that extra little bit of poseability you get.. Aayla secura cans stand up because her legs are to thin and they tip over because of ankle articulation, so to combat women figures having this problem-we got cankles leia in the comic pack- because they needed to make them thicker to fit in the pin, and the third- most figures with that articulation- now cant have deep enough peg holes to use the stands– so this one “innovation” has effected playability, displayability and sculpt (not to mention paint (since sometimes the pins arent molded in the same color).

In this world where everyone demands vintage- I wish we really would get it– I have no problem with 5 POAs– in fact I relish them (however I do prefer the ball joints to the old cut joints (I will accept that innovation.)

But I will be honest- I would prefer 8-10 at max — I dont need 14 POAs

Maybe just ball joint shoulders, heads and hips, and a cut torso. I can accept elbows and knees but thats all we need…

Keep those figure costs down and stop demanding that C-3PO should be SA– he toy shouldnt have more motion than the actual character did.

All excellent points you’ve made, and thanks for reading the piece!

One thing I wanted to clarify, though, regarding us ‘going retro’ for 2010. I’ve said it in a couple of places already on the interweb, but just because we’re doing this for 2010, doesn’t mean those properties won’t get to dip in the pool again down the road a ways, in a different scale. For ‘Lebowski’, ‘FG’ and ‘Dexter’, we’ve already done other styles of figures in the 7″ and 8″ scales, so for those titles, we’re trying something new. And for the others (‘Twilight Zone’. ‘Venture Brothers’), we’re fully planning to explore other scales and possibilities. Particularly if we don’t get the momentum we’d hoped for. As it is, and as of now, pre sales are very healthy, across all of the properties, for the ‘retro’ figures, so we can breathe a sigh of relief that the “gamble” paid off, and we can plan ahead to the next batch of characters. Oh, and to clarify, in case there’s any confusion on your end, the ‘retro’ Ming and FG we’re doing are indeed movie accurate!

Oh, and I agree with you: if someone gets off their hinie and gives us Bond, I want all the “stuff” too!! Whatever the scale!

like the example you gave of the bond toys… five points of articulation would be OK for the figures, but i would buy a bond toy unless it was supported by a lengthy cast of characters and a ton of vehicles, weapons and playsets whether he has five points of articulation or 25. same issue on the scale, i don’t care if he was 1/18, 1/12, or 1/6, to be bond, we need the characters and the “stuff.” but on the other hand, when NECA first proposed the Shaw Brothers line, that’s a concept i immediately said “i want to see the articulation” for… cuz kung fu guys need to be engineered to do kung fu stuff.

as for the BBPs 2010 retro concept… i hope that works out for y’all, i truly do… but personally, i wouldn’t do that on a dare… cuz while it eliminates some headaches in planning, to be honest, i see it as disrespecting the individual properties that will be locked into that look. as you were saying, how great it was to get a ming that looked like the movie ming, imagine if somebody out there gave you a choice between the BBP ming you did and a mego ming… which do you chose? to me, like yourself, i’d go the movie accurate styling, the look for him would be more important than the articulation. i am however a collector on a budget… if i don’t get the toy i’m personally after, i don’t buy just “to fill the hole in my collection,” i wait until the toy i really really want gets made. that’s what separates my “adult collection” from the character/property based buying decisions my kids make. my tastes are specific and i’m a patient buyer.

But I’ve also found that as I’m a happy collector, I buy a lot less. I can remember wanting every toy under the sun and my cellar has the scars to prove it. I can remember a time where a Beetlejuice figure, in particular, would have been the bee’s knees, but nowadays, not so much. If I still wanted a little plastic Beetlejuice, I don’t think I’d pass on it because of articulation though. Even in my nitpicky days. I have The Mummy figures for crying out loud.

Specifically to articulation though? I don’t know. I really like knees, ankles, elbows, and I really, really love ball-jointed heads. I don’t care about toes, knuckles, and double-joints, so I maybe I’m simply floating around in the middle somewhere.