The Energon Pub

News Credits: 60 · Sat Mar 10, 2012 10:03 pm

@ lady bug

If you thought this thread sounded stupid, well take a look at this:

cm-s-corp-headmaster-minerva-and-ginrai-images-t84353s90.php#p1356710

News Credits: 3 · Sat Mar 10, 2012 10:17 pm

dolls

...and when I get a really crappy one, I blow it up with firecrackers. So those ones I call blow-up dolls.

News Credits: 60 · Sat Mar 10, 2012 10:53 pm

Blow up dolls, now that is hilarious!

Sat Mar 10, 2012 11:20 pm

According to international trades, the tariffs on marvel toys are not dolls, they're action figures. Toybiz won this case, since the toys they sell are non-human creatures. I can't see transformers falling into the realm of dolls at all. They're clearly non-human creatures. They don't always transform into humanoid things for that matter. Some of cassettes for example. So, I guess action figure could apply. The figure part is not specific to the humanoid figure.

Sat Mar 10, 2012 11:39 pm

They are neither. If anything they are more closely related to "action figures" but I offer this- I firmly believe Transformers are their own thing, much like legos. People could call those action figures/action sets or whatever else but they're not, they're legos. That's just what they are. Transformers are Transformers, robots that transform into cars, trucks, guns, animals, etc. I think they're unique in that respect.

News Credits: 387 · Sat Mar 10, 2012 11:48 pm

They aren't dolls or action figures... They're my... fRiEnDs...

Don't they speak to the rest of you?

News Credits: 1 · Sun Mar 11, 2012 10:21 pm

If you can brush it's hair, it's a doll. If you can't, it's an action figure.

News Credits: 1 · Sun Mar 11, 2012 11:07 pm

They're not dolls. Sometimes it's not clear cut as to whether something can be called a doll or an action figure. There's some overlap. The original GIJoes were dolls for boys. And then there's the She-ra toys which were doll-like action figures. But both modern incarnations really escape being dolls. I think the lack of "hair" and changeable clothes is really the key here. There's also the overall look of the figure as well; while making a text definition can be tricky you'd never mistake a doll for an action figure (or vice versa) in modern toys. It just wouldn't happen. The overlap doesn't exist much today as boys shun anything viewed as "girly" so people make dolls more dollike and action figures more .... action figurey.

TFs, by and large, can't really be put into the doll category. Too inhuman, too hard and angular, and you really don't play with them in the same way we you'd play with a Barbie. You'll really have to go for an antiquated, outdated usage of the word to fit the average TF into the "doll" category.

News Credits: 1 · Mon Mar 12, 2012 1:56 am

If they are meant to invoke some kind of parental response, it's a doll. Dressing up, cleaning up, combing etc. Does your humanoid toy train you to be a parent? Doll.

News Credits: 2 · Mon Mar 12, 2012 11:20 am

Doll can be hugged.

News Credits: 11 · Mon Mar 12, 2012 11:46 am

Nekoman wrote:They aren't dolls or action figures... They're my... fRiEnDs...

Don't they speak to the rest of you?

DISCHARGE wrote:I would like to thank my daughter's Barbie for lending Terrosaur this fabulous outfit
010.JPG

dinojack86 wrote:They are neither. If anything they are more closely related to "action figures" but I offer this- I firmly believe Transformers are their own thing, much like lego. People could call those action figures/action sets or whatever else but they're not, they're lego. That's just what they are. Transformers are Transformers, robots that transform into cars, trucks, guns, animals, etc. I think they're unique in that respect.

This actually makes the most sense to me. But for the purpose of classification, I would call them action figures. Of course, the argument that the term 'action figure' is a made-up marketing word is entirely valid. But even though modern transformers with their many points of articulated ball-joints are defnitely action figures, TFs didn't really find their origins in action figures per se. As we all know, G1 toys bear more resemblance to die-cast cars, if anything. And a further argument that they are not dolls would be vintage toy robots, the old plastic tin-type robots wouldn't really be considered dolls, in my opinion.

News Credits: 1 · Mon Mar 12, 2012 12:03 pm

Legos aren't entirely their own thing. They are building blocks. They've become sophisticated, but at their core they still are the same as their wooden ancestors with letters carved into them. Nowadays Lego doesn't even have full rights to their own design. Not with Mega blocks and Kre-o and any other block you can toss in there. You may even be able to cross Legos with model building, but they aren't entirely their own category.

TFs relating to car models ... I can buy that to a point. Certainly the original line had some of this, and then there's alternators, the MPs, and the movie lines that further this. But nowadays I think it's pretty incidental.

Mon Mar 12, 2012 12:26 pm

Wow... I'm rather impressed that this thread has lasted more then two posts, never mind four pages! I'd have thought that the second post would have said, "Action Figures," and that'd be the end of it. Kind of like the website to tell us if the Large Hadron Collider has destroyed the world yet.

For those jokingly suggesting that things like the City Commander armor, or the various armor packs for Macross Valkyries would make them dress-up dolls... That really makes me wish I had been able to get this pretty rare accessory set for Max's Valkyrie:

And for those that would argue that the phrase "Action Figure" was a marketing ploy designed to sell dolls to boys... Well yes, that may have been the original etymology of the phrase, but I think it has been in the lexicon for a sufficient period of time now to stand well enough on its own by now.

DISCHARGE wrote:I like the Transformer dolls that cry and wet themselves.

That'd be Starscream. You can even dress him up in his Coronation outfit.

News Credits: 1 · Mon Mar 12, 2012 12:43 pm

I don't think clip-on armor or Starscream's coronation parts is in the same vein as putting on cloth clothes. Again, it bears similarity on paper, but in practice it's quite different.

News Credits: 1 · Mon Mar 12, 2012 1:18 pm

Gauntlet101010 wrote:I don't think clip-on armor or Starscream's coronation parts is in the same vein as putting on cloth clothes. Again, it bears similarity on paper, but in practice it's quite different.

Okay.

How?

Mon Mar 12, 2012 1:25 pm

Gauntlet101010 wrote:I don't think clip-on armor or Starscream's coronation parts is in the same vein as putting on cloth clothes. Again, it bears similarity on paper, but in practice it's quite different.

If you were replying to my comment... Well, I did mean it in jest, of course... But to play Devil's advocate for a moment, I must ask: what of the cape that is part of his Coronation outfit?

News Credits: 1 · Mon Mar 12, 2012 1:32 pm

Yotsuyasan wrote:
Gauntlet101010 wrote:I don't think clip-on armor or Starscream's coronation parts is in the same vein as putting on cloth clothes. Again, it bears similarity on paper, but in practice it's quite different.

If you were replying to my comment... Well, I did mean it in jest, of course... But to play Devil's advocate for a moment, I must ask: what of the cape that is part of his Coronation outfit?

*sigh* I take jesting comments way too seriously sometimes. #-o

Well, if I'm taking it seriously, may as well say that a cloth cape is not the same as an entire cloth outfit that a proper doll would have. And the official cape isn't cloth anyway; we'd have to look to the 3rd party guys for that.

News Credits: 3 · Mon Mar 12, 2012 2:24 pm

*yearn* I wish for the days capes come back into style. I can see it now, men, women and children of all ages struttin' around the mall in cool capes.

News Credits: 5 · Mon Mar 12, 2012 2:59 pm

As for Starscream's cape: Is he considered naked without it? And Ultra Magnus: Despite the commonly used term "Naked Magnus" for a white Optimus repaint, he is not considered indecent without it, merely incomplete. The only TF that I consider to be wearing something for decencies sake is TM2 Blackarachnia with her sports bra but that's a double edged sword. It's only an issue because they put the bra on her in the first place.

News Credits: 767 · Mon Mar 12, 2012 3:03 pm

zodconvoy wrote:As for Starscream's cape: Is he considered naked without it? And Ultra Magnus: Despite the commonly used term "Naked Magnus" for a white Optimus repaint, he is not considered indecent without it, merely incomplete. The only TF that I consider to be wearing something for decencies sake is TM2 Blackarachnia with her sports bra but that's a double edged sword. It's only an issue because they put the bra on her in the first place.

What, she nwears a bra?
Never noticed...

Reading this thread kinda makes me wish I had clothes to put on my TFs, I think Bludgeon would look fabulous in a nice hot pink dress and highheels. :-?

Mon Mar 12, 2012 3:25 pm

zodconvoy wrote:As for Starscream's cape: Is he considered naked without it? And Ultra Magnus: Despite the commonly used term "Naked Magnus" for a white Optimus repaint, he is not considered indecent without it, merely incomplete. The only TF that I consider to be wearing something for decencies sake is TM2 Blackarachnia with her sports bra but that's a double edged sword. It's only an issue because they put the bra on her in the first place.

I think it is a terrible double standard when a male robot can walk around naked and no one cares, but a female robot has its chest plate showing and everyone throws a fit. The female robot chestplate is not something to be feared.

Mon Mar 12, 2012 3:32 pm

If it's intended to play house with, it's a doll.

If it's intended to pew pew KAPOWIE biff pow SPLAT it's an action figure.

News Credits: 3 · Mon Mar 12, 2012 3:33 pm

Yotsuyasan wrote:
zodconvoy wrote:As for Starscream's cape: Is he considered naked without it? And Ultra Magnus: Despite the commonly used term "Naked Magnus" for a white Optimus repaint, he is not considered indecent without it, merely incomplete. The only TF that I consider to be wearing something for decencies sake is TM2 Blackarachnia with her sports bra but that's a double edged sword. It's only an issue because they put the bra on her in the first place.

I think it is a terrible double standard when a male robot can walk around naked and no one cares, but a female robot has its chest plate showing and everyone throws a fit. The female robot chestplate is not something to be feared.

News Credits: 767 · Mon Mar 12, 2012 3:43 pm

DISCHARGE wrote:
Yotsuyasan wrote:
zodconvoy wrote:As for Starscream's cape: Is he considered naked without it? And Ultra Magnus: Despite the commonly used term "Naked Magnus" for a white Optimus repaint, he is not considered indecent without it, merely incomplete. The only TF that I consider to be wearing something for decencies sake is TM2 Blackarachnia with her sports bra but that's a double edged sword. It's only an issue because they put the bra on her in the first place.

I think it is a terrible double standard when a male robot can walk around naked and no one cares, but a female robot has its chest plate showing and everyone throws a fit. The female robot chestplate is not something to be feared.

Liberate the robo-boobies!
:michaelbay:

Mon Mar 12, 2012 7:59 pm

DISCHARGE wrote:*yearn* I wish for the days capes come back into style. I can see it now, men, women and children of all ages struttin' around the mall in cool capes.

I think we're on the verge of "fashion capes" trending now.

I need one just like Starscream's.