35 Anniversary Collectors ponies - Thread 3!

[Leave a Whisper]

What's character design got to do with it? And some random artist on DA making merch with regular eyes is different from a toy company reproducing a set that revolves solely aound a gimmick. If the Rainbow set doesn't work as an example then how about the Brush n Grows? Or the Glow n Shows? Or the Drink n Wets?

And people collect de-flocked SS ponies? So what? That's people deliberately altering a gimmicky toy.

You can say that you collect skinned furbys with their electronics gutted, but that doesn't mean a toy company is going to make reproduction old school furbys with no fur and the wires hanging out now does it?  It would not be a reproduction product anymore.

Which honestly is why I don't think BF is likely to do it, unless Hasbro gives up their secrets as to how to place the specially made rhinestones and the irridescent coating recipe.  Basic Fun has been very cautious about which sets they do. Multi-colored hair and glitter? Sure! Sets themed around species? They can totally do that no prob! Pearlescence and TAF? They totally went for it! And gave us a unique, creepy, eyeless, TAF, pearly Majesty.

One-and-done sets that require specially made parts and moulds? Maybe it won't be feasible to pull off.

[LadyMoondancer]

Is it confirmed we aren’t getting Powder and Sky Flier? I just thought they’d come later like Pinwheel and Starflower...

I don't think the company has outright said it, so in that aspect it's unconfirmed.  But also they aren't on the boxes (which Starflower and Powder were) and the company hasn't mentioned them even once, and in thaaat sense I think it's really unlikely we'll see them.  Which I do regret, they are lovely. <3

[Leave a Whisper]

Actually, given how over the top Her Majesty's Wallpaper was, TAFs and Pearly sets seem more likely then TEs.

[LadyMoondancer]

I'd love to see the TAF ponies and, you're right, TAF Majesty proves they know how to make them!

[Sunset]

What's character design got to do with it?

Someone who is a fan of a character, especially if they are a fan of the show, may not care about the gimmicks.  Fizzy is still Fizzy even if she doesn’t have the twinkle eyes.  Or maybe she gets flocking or twice as fancy symbols.  She’s still Fizzy.  And a lot of people would still want her. 

And some random artist on DA making merch with regular eyes is different from a toy company reproducing a set that revolves solely aound a gimmick.

? I wasn’t talking about random artists on DA?    Every piece of official Retro merchandise that I’ve seen for years has depicted Fizzy with regular eyes.

And people collect de-flocked SS ponies? So what? That's people deliberately altering a gimmicky toy.

People like that character and don’t like the flocking gimmick.  If they could buy a Bangles, for example, without the flocking then they wouldn’t have to alter the vintage one?  An example of the gimmick not being the be-all and end-all?


   I just meant for this to be a fun discussion.  My opinion doesn’t in any way effect what Basic Fun will or will not do.

[Taffeta]

What's character design got to do with it?

Someone who is a fan of a character, especially if they are a fan of the show, may not care about the gimmicks.  Fizzy is still Fizzy even if she doesn’t have the twinkle eyes.  Or maybe she gets flocking or twice as fancy symbols.  She’s still Fizzy.  And a lot of people would still want her. 

I actually disagree with this really strongly. The thing is that what makes this set special is the fact they have twinkle eyes. That is their core meaning, if you like. And most people who grew up with them as TEs are probably having a bit of trouble working out why you're arguing to remove that core gimmick.

Retro art is new. But the BF ponies are not looking at new. They've been looking at old consistently throughout this. Yes, they have made some cosmetic choices, but they aren't removing the core gimmick.

Removing the Twinkle Eyes is exactly the same as removing Rainbow hair. It's an integral part of the design of the original pony, and the core of their sales pitch. Retro art is both new, and lazy - it likes to reproduce pony images and it's easy to reproduce the same shape if you eradicate particular features. The same happened towards the end of the pony comic whenever they dragged up a TE pony from 'memory lane' for a story, long after the ponies were on sale.

However "Show" Fizzy has twinkle eyes. And you know how nuts people are about show accuracy. It would be one thing to amend the hair colours to match the animation - which we all know will never happen, because BF have been working from the original ponies, NOT the animation - but to remove the gimmick itself would be weird.

(And the animation is not as influential for people re G1 as it is for G4, of course - there will be some people strongly influenced by it as nostalgia and some who never saw it).

But for people who grew up with TE ponies, I figure everyone who would want Fizzy would want her with the TEs.

(Personally, the idea of glitter on the eyes is cheap, tacky and a no for me too.)

I've also never had a conversation with anyone outside pony who thinks TE eyes are creepy. Mostly because people outside pony don't know what TE are, but I've had conversations with people outside pony who think they're beautiful *shrug* so it really is subjective. I don't think you can say most people, I think it's just personal preference.

There is also the fact that since that comic story about the gemstone mine went inexplicably viral, the Twinkle Eyes have a little bit more cult status because of this misconception that comic story is their actual origin.

I can't imagine any circumstances under which BF would not make TE ponies with actual Twinkle Eyes, and I can't imagine why the vast majority of people who grew up with Twinkle Eyes would accept that either.

Especially since most of the meaningful ponies from the set seem likely to be excluded.

@LM - you are probably right, that is probably what happened. They got a list of nine and so chose the ones they thought would work at random. I understand the rationale behind the pegasus ponies, although it makes me sad. But it makes no sense not to at least have Galaxy because that's not making an extra pose.

For me it's even more unnatural since Sky Rocket belongs to an entirely different year here ><. We didn't get her till 1987. And part of her appeal for me is her curly hair, which, of course ,BF seem to be bypassing.

[Lilja]

I'd love to see the TAF ponies and, you're right, TAF Majesty proves they know how to make them!

A potential problem with the first TAF set is that it's five different molds that BF hasn't made yet. It seems like at most they can do two new molds for each set at a time. The only exception so far was the first Rainbow set when they introduced three molds at the same time (but all of those could be reused in later sets). They do have 4/6 molds ready to go for the second TAF set, but I'm guessing those are not as iconic as the first set even if they are very beloved by collectors.

I wonder if BF is leaving Galaxy out of their first TE release, so they can include her later if they do a second set of four? Then their second TE release can be Galaxy, Speedy, Masquerade and Sweet Pop, leaving only Whizzer out.

[Aflame]

but I love whizzer! she was my first TE

[SunPony]

I'd assume they would do the actual twinkle eyes on them! 
 I've taken one apart before and if I recall correctly it was just one piece (the "gem") shoved in the eye socket, not too complex...I wonder if the price might go up a bit though?

That said, if they don't do the gem eyes I won't personally be tooooo disappointed, and with pandemic-related impacts who knows.  I would like to get Fizzy, out of the first set, and like someone else said, whether or not she had the gem eyes isn't a deal breaker for me.  She'd still be visually the same for the most part.  The gems don't have any particular meaning to me, though I'm sure some people are more attached to them.  Oh if they do Tic Tac Toe with regular eyes I would totally get her...

[Taffeta]

I'd love to see the TAF ponies and, you're right, TAF Majesty proves they know how to make them!

A potential problem with the first TAF set is that it's five different molds that BF hasn't made yet. It seems like at most they can do two new molds for each set at a time. The only exception so far was the first Rainbow set when they introduced three molds at the same time (but all of those could be reused in later sets). They do have 4/6 molds ready to go for the second TAF set, but I'm guessing those are not as iconic as the first set even if they are very beloved by collectors.

I wonder if BF is leaving Galaxy out of their first TE release, so they can include her later if they do a second set of four? Then their second TE release can be Galaxy, Speedy, Masquerade and Sweet Pop, leaving only Whizzer out.

Actually, that sounds weirdly plausible. Although it would be a shame not to see Whizzer, as aflame mentions, she is the one off pose in the group. And it's not a common pose so not easily reuseable unless they plan for Paradise and Wind Whistler down the line. Which I wouldn't complain about (and those COULD have no flocking, since one was released as a regular pony and the other at least projected, they're not dependent on the gimmick in quite the same way as the TES and Rainbows) but which seems a long way from likely at the moment.

It just seems unnatural to split Fizzy and Galaxy, but then again here in the UK the 1987 set had Sky Rocket and Fizzy, also Sweetie - but no Galaxy :/ So maybe it's not that unnatural. I dunno. We can hope, I suppose?

It would be lovely to see Sweet Pop here, as she never has been, and my sister is grumpy now about this release since the four they are projecting are the four TE ponies she already owns xD.

I think that for most people who grew up with TE ponies, the eyes are non-negotiable, but I can't legislate for newer pony fans. Still, BF has gone to great lengths to represent these ponies as they were meant to be, even if there are minor cosmetic changes. I would like to hope they won't betray that trend by eradicating the eyes. If they want to do that, then they should just skip the set entirely and look at another set instead.

[Lilja]

Actually, that sounds weirdly plausible. Although it would be a shame not to see Whizzer, as aflame mentions, she is the one off pose in the group. And it's not a common pose so not easily reuseable unless they plan for Paradise and Wind Whistler down the line. Which I wouldn't complain about (and those COULD have no flocking, since one was released as a regular pony and the other at least projected, they're not dependent on the gimmick in quite the same way as the TES and Rainbows) but which seems a long way from likely at the moment.

It makes some amount of sense, doesn't it? If BF is open to the possibility of releasing two TE sets of four, they may as well mix it up a bit.

While it's possible Hasbro gave them a list of "1986 Twinkle Eyes" which contained all nine and they just picked four out of them, I find it unlikely that's all there is to it. If you look up original card art and information online it's very hard to miss that the TEs were originally a set of six, with three more added later. And it seems to me like someone at BF is looking at fansites, since among other things they've used "Earth Ponies" as a set name which didn't exist in the toyline back in the '80s (pretty sure the term came from the cartoon, and collectors have used it to distinguish sets that were originally just sold as "My Little Pony").

And yeah, I guess they could do Whizzer too if they're able to introduce two new molds for the potential TE follow up set (but if it's a set of four someone has to be cut). And I would really like them to do Wind Whistler and Paradise without flocking as well. Either as a "Movie Star" set or just make it another Unicorn/Pegasus set (maybe with Wind Whistler, Paradise, Buttons and Ribbon). Probably extremely unlikely though.

[Ponyfan]

I am behind on BF releases.  I still need Gusty's set and part of Confetti's set. 

The only TEs in my childhood ponies were Party Time and Sweet Pop.  I am surprised that Sky Rocket was chosen over Galaxy, Masquerade or Whizzer.  Has BF done a pony in Masquerade's pose yet?  I think this is only time we've seen 3 Earth ponies in a set. 

I'm excited to get a Fizzy and Sweet Stuff/Sweetie     

I think Applejack's set ending up being named Earth ponies because that's what they were and BF didn't know what else to call the set since they had the Collector's set, Rainbow pony set and Unicorns and Pegasus set.   


Ponyfan

[Carrehz]

Making Twinkle Eyes without their Twinkle Eyes would just be stupid, if I can be blunt for a second. Can't see any logic in that at all.

Her Majesty's Wallpaper

[Pokeyonekenobie]

I'd assume they would do the actual twinkle eyes on them! 
 I've taken one apart before and if I recall correctly it was just one piece (the "gem") shoved in the eye socket, not too complex...I wonder if the price might go up a bit though?

That said, if they don't do the gem eyes I won't personally be tooooo disappointed, and with pandemic-related impacts who knows.  I would like to get Fizzy, out of the first set, and like someone else said, whether or not she had the gem eyes isn't a deal breaker for me.  She'd still be visually the same for the most part.  The gems don't have any particular meaning to me, though I'm sure some people are more attached to them.  Oh if they do Tic Tac Toe with regular eyes I would totally get her...

I could be okay without twinkle eyes on some of them, too--even though I really like the twinkle eye sets.  It would definitely differentiate them from the original releases.  I guess I would see it kind of like how some of the beddy-bye eyed babies were released with regular eyes in other parts of the world.

[Leave a Whisper]

What's character design got to do with it?

Someone who is a fan of a character, especially if they are a fan of the show, may not care about the gimmicks.  Fizzy is still Fizzy even if she doesn’t have the twinkle eyes.  Or maybe she gets flocking or twice as fancy symbols.  She’s still Fizzy.  And a lot of people would still want her. 

And some random artist on DA making merch with regular eyes is different from a toy company reproducing a set that revolves solely aound a gimmick.

? I wasn’t talking about random artists on DA?    Every piece of official Retro merchandise that I’ve seen for years has depicted Fizzy with regular eyes.

And people collect de-flocked SS ponies? So what? That's people deliberately altering a gimmicky toy.

People like that character and don’t like the flocking gimmick.  If they could buy a Bangles, for example, without the flocking then they wouldn’t have to alter the vintage one?  An example of the gimmick not being the be-all and end-all?


   I just meant for this to be a fun discussion.  My opinion doesn’t in any way effect what Basic Fun will or will not do.

All the Twinkle Eye Characters have jewels in the show. Sorry, you're contradicting yourself on that one. Get a custom done if they want a pony without its gimmick. But removing the gimmick "just cuz" and not for a valid reason, like it being severely damaged, is not the same as remaking a reproduction set. BF should eiher do it right, or not at all. And the TEs are very popular for being pretty and unique.