Super 7 TMNT figures

I don't hate unpainted weapons just for the fact that sometimes the paint rubs off putting them into figure hands. My Mattel Panthro has a major issue with this and some of my recent Neca figures as well. Painted definitely looks better but at least I don't have to worry about paint coming off when they aren't painted.
 
This is a criticism of the blades though, not that handles. And the easy solution for paint rub is to just make the hands out of a softer, pliable, plastic. I do hate it when a figure that has weapons to hold has hands as hard as stone. That's when I break out the hot water, put the weapon in its place, and never touch it again. And for anything like a sword, sai, or even the bo, a break point also works really well. SHF usually makes the pommel of its swords removable to make it easier to slide the handle into a gripping hand from the top or bottom.
 
The grips aren’t that much of a problem with these figures they slide into the hands nice and easy and stay fairly secure. Unpainted blades however…I mean I guess you can make the argument that since Leonardo is carrying twin Ninjato instead of Katana, the blades are not even technically supposed to be forged out of hardened or sharpened steel since they are defensive weapons rather than weapons that are used to cut, slash or stab with. Though they are used in a far more violent manner in the television series, (because try and tell the subtle nuances to martial arts weapons to a writers room and see if they understand their purpose and accuracy vs “storytelling ”) I can still see Super7 understanding the subtle nuances between the two. I have a pair of Ninjato blades here at my home and the blades are just a satin black. Same finish as the guard
64d954cfd49b9f053d6fbd4718404967.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
That's all well and good, but not exactly relevant to the toy. We know what the sword should look like because it's from a cartoon series, and Super7 traditionally has painted the blades of past Leonardo figures, and these new ones are done in a manner inconsistent with that precedent. They look like something that would come with a Playmates figure and not a $55 one.
 
Misfit said:
They look like something that would come with a Playmates figure and not a $55 one.
Click to expand...
Precisely. Even if we assume Super7 was trying to achieve a specific look (they definitely weren't), the look we end up with is 'cheap.' Look at NECA, for example; they don't really do 'metallic' blades on the weapons in the cartoon line, but they do PAINT them, so that it's not translucent unpainted plastic that just happens to be sort of a greyish color.



Stoopid_Sandwich said:
Ninjato instead of Katana, the blades are not even technically supposed to be forged out of hardened or sharpened steel since they are defensive weapons rather than weapons that are used to cut, slash or stab with.
Click to expand...

...What? No part of that is accurate, I'm afraid.
 
Damien said:
Precisely. Even if we assume Super7 was trying to achieve a specific look (they definitely weren't), the look we end up with is 'cheap.' Look at NECA, for example; they don't really do 'metallic' blades on the weapons in the cartoon line, but they do PAINT them, so that it's not translucent unpainted plastic that just happens to be sort of a greyish color.





...What? No part of that is accurate, I'm afraid.
Click to expand...

It’s actually completely true. Remember, I own a pair of these. They feature no sharpened or cutting edges along the blade. They are strictly meant for parring and blocking. You could probably sharpen one yourself using an angle grinder if you were committed to making one more sword like, but you could also just spend $1000 on a nice Katana


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Stoopid_Sandwich said:
It’s actually completely true. Remember, I own a pair of these. They feature no sharpened or cutting edges along the blade. They are strictly meant for parring and blocking. You could probably sharpen one yourself using an angle grinder if you were committed to making one more sword like, but you could also just spend $1000 on a nice Katana


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I mean.. you own junk, my guy. Genuinely sorry if that comes as a blow and gives you any kind of emotional reaction. Sincerely. Someone sold you cheap (probably Chinese) crowbars and told you they are real historically-inspired objects. They lied. And I mean that as nicely as I can possibly say it. What you have aren't real in any meaningful sense beyond 'they exist as physical objects.' You may think they look nice, of course. That's great. Display them and enjoy looking at them if it makes you happy. Just don't mistake them for having any historical relevance.

Like, I can go to the mall and buy a 10 lb. 'medieval sword' with demon faces on the hilt and a stainless steel blade. That doesn't mean it was a real thing in history. To be clear, that doesn't make it -bad-. I try not to be one of those guys that shits on what are often called 'wall-hangers.' If people enjoy fake swords as art pieces to hang on their wall - that's super.

But nothing you said is accurate. Ninja-to, for example, aren't even real. There was no such thing as a 'ninja sword' in history. It's an invention of Hollywood, much like the all black pajamas. Ninja in Feudal Japan is a complex subject (that doesn't involve black pajamas and mostly doesn't even involve swords) that I won't go into unless someone really wants to hear about it. Suffice to say... the idea of the ninja-to, the idea of a "ninja sword" of any description, is completely a modern invention.

Further, there has never been any such thing as an edgeless/blunted sword for the purpose of parrying/blocking. That's antithetical to what a sword is. A sword with no cutting edge would still be a PHENOMENALLY poor defensive tool because swords are not particularly robust. The very idea of it is absurd on its face. It's like designing a really nice, difficult-to-produce firearm that you actually use as a club because it's not capable of firing bullets. Like.. what are you even doing, right?

There are metal objects designed for parrying and blocking, of course. Sai, jitte, tonfa, etc, are not entirely uncommon in (mostly Asian) history. But even an incredibly cursory examination of these items shows that they are wildly different in construction from a sword or knife. A baseball bat is not a golf club. You can whittle them down to 'it's pretty much just a stick,' but they are clearly different from each other in practically every way beyond being 'a stick' and have entirely different purposes and methods of use.

Jitte are metal, dagger-like objects partly for parrying and defensive actions (there's no such thing as a purely defensive weapon, by the way - sai, jitte, and tonfa are absolutely used for devestating striking). But beyond having a silhouette that's vaguely similar to knives/daggers, they are not similar in construction. Because a sword blade doesn't do 'defense and blunt striking' well. Like.. at all.

I swear I am not trying to rain on your parade or make you sad that you bought fake swords. Honestly. But as a lifetime sword enthusiast and martial arts practictioner, I'm just really fed up with people confidently saying blatantly untrue things about swords and their history - a subject I've spent more than 30 years studying. Forgive me if I get a little wordy about it.
 
@Stoopid_Sandwich , meet @Damien , formerly the Fwoosh's resident sword nut and man who will gladly explain any possible small difference between any given blades you could ever ask for.

<waves> Hi KD! ;)</waves>
 
Damien said:
I mean.. you own junk, my guy. Genuinely sorry if that comes as a blow and gives you any kind of emotional reaction. Sincerely. Someone sold you cheap (probably Chinese) crowbars and told you they are real historically-inspired objects. They lied. And I mean that as nicely as I can possibly say it. What you have aren't real in any meaningful sense beyond 'they exist as physical objects.' You may think they look nice, of course. That's great. Display them and enjoy looking at them if it makes you happy. Just don't mistake them for having any historical relevance.

Like, I can go to the mall and buy a 10 lb. 'medieval sword' with demon faces on the hilt and a stainless steel blade. That doesn't mean it was a real thing in history. To be clear, that doesn't make it -bad-. I try not to be one of those guys that shits on what are often called 'wall-hangers.' If people enjoy fake swords as art pieces to hang on their wall - that's super.

But nothing you said is accurate. Ninja-to, for example, aren't even real. There was no such thing as a 'ninja sword' in history. It's an invention of Hollywood, much like the all black pajamas. Ninja in Feudal Japan is a complex subject (that doesn't involve black pajamas and mostly doesn't even involve swords) that I won't go into unless someone really wants to hear about it. Suffice to say... the idea of the ninja-to, the idea of a "ninja sword" of any description, is completely a modern invention.

Further, there has never been any such thing as an edgeless/blunted sword for the purpose of parrying/blocking. That's antithetical to what a sword is. A sword with no cutting edge would still be a PHENOMENALLY poor defensive tool because swords are not particularly robust. The very idea of it is absurd on its face. It's like designing a really nice, difficult-to-produce firearm that you actually use as a club because it's not capable of firing bullets. Like.. what are you even doing, right?

There are metal objects designed for parrying and blocking, of course. Sai, jitte, tonfa, etc, are not entirely uncommon in (mostly Asian) history. But even an incredibly cursory examination of these items shows that they are wildly different in construction from a sword or knife. A baseball bat is not a golf club. You can whittle them down to 'it's pretty much just a stick,' but they are clearly different from each other in practically every way beyond being 'a stick' and have entirely different purposes and methods of use.

Jitte are metal, dagger-like objects partly for parrying and defensive actions (there's no such thing as a purely defensive weapon, by the way - sai, jitte, and tonfa are absolutely used for devestating striking). But beyond having a silhouette that's vaguely similar to knives/daggers, they are not similar in construction. Because a sword blade doesn't do 'defense and blunt striking' well. Like.. at all.

I swear I am not trying to rain on your parade or make you sad that you bought fake swords. Honestly. But as a lifetime sword enthusiast and martial arts practictioner, I'm just really fed up with people confidently saying blatantly untrue things about swords and their history - a subject I've spent more than 30 years studying. Forgive me if I get a little wordy about it.
Click to expand...

First off, I never said anything, anywhere about these being historical relics or swords that were used by real ninjas. I am aware of the origins of these blades and how they first came about in martial arts films in the late 60’s and proliferated in media since then, so it more of a stunt preformers invention than an actual practitioner’s sword. I get it. But the fact remains if Leo’s swords are based on these blades, they are highly inaccurate to how they are designed and that’s what I was trying to get at. There are scenes in the 03 cartoon where Leo straight up decapitates the Shredder while he’s wearing his armored costume. You can’t do that with a Ninjato. Even if that swing is backed by very powerful muscles, best Leo can hope for is that the sword shatters Saki’s helmet and doesn’t break on impact. A railroad spike and a mallet would do more damage than this type of sword


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Stoopid_Sandwich said:
First off, I never said anything, anywhere about these being historical relics or swords that were used by real ninjas. I am aware of the origins of these blades and how they first came about in martial arts films in the late 60’s and proliferated in media since then, so it more of a stunt preformers invention than an actual practitioner’s sword. I get it. But the fact remains if Leo’s swords are based on these blades, they are highly inaccurate to how they are designed and that’s what I was trying to get at. There are scenes in the 03 cartoon where Leo straight up decapitates the Shredder while he’s wearing his armored costume. You can’t do that with a Ninjato. Even if that swing is backed by very powerful muscles, best Leo can hope for is that the sword shatters Saki’s helmet and doesn’t break on impact. A railroad spike and a mallet would do more damage than this type of sword


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Okay... I'm not sure it's worth going over whether or not your post made it seem VERY much like you were treating these objects as having real historical provenance. You very much -did- say this:


Stoopid_Sandwich said:
the blades are not even technically supposed to be forged out of hardened or sharpened steel since they are defensive weapons rather than weapons that are used to cut, slash or stab with.
Click to expand...
So are they stage-acting equipment or 'defensive weapons?' They can't be both.

In any event, you'd still be wrong. They aren't real, but -within the fiction they exist in- they're supposed to be sharp swords. So I just don't know man.. you're somehow managing to be wrong from every direction at once and it's making my head spin a little. It seems like you've pivoted your argument to being that lightsabers are being used unrealistically in Star Wars, because in real life lightsabers that were used during filming actually can't cut anything? Like... ?


Dude, I don't know. Ninja-to are fake swords made up by Hollywood, but the conceit of their existence is that they are 'real swords.' So any fictional character using 'ninja-to' would, obviously, be using sharp swords. He'd simply be using sharp swords that never existed in history.

SalemCrow said:
@Stoopid_Sandwich , meet @Damien , formerly the Fwoosh's resident sword nut and man who will gladly explain any possible small difference between any given blades you could ever ask for.

<waves> Hi KD! ;)</waves>
Click to expand...
I missed you! Glad you came.
And also it's really important to note that I'm a mod here and that means NO ONE can stop me from talking about swords literally all the time. And I, sir, am gonna do it so hard.
 
Pretty good overview of the new turtles from TooMuchNewToys:

These seem like a pretty typical Super7 experience: solid to good sculpt, obvious signs of cost-cutting, some bad quality control. The only difference is that the bad quality control isn't showing up as loose joints, but in joints that are fitted too tight or not properly rounded off which leads to chewed up parts and scuffing. And there's just an overall lack of value. If these were $35 instead of $55 I don't think you see the same levels of criticism (though the scuffing sucks at any price point and shouldn't happen), but they are and ultimately they're not worth the price. You can still pay it and feel mostly okay or content with the product, but compared to what else is available at that price there's just no way to spin them as earning their price. And I say this as someone who did prepay for these things from Super7 (which still hasn't shipped them) knowing full well that this was the expected outcome. I also don't mean to kick someone when they're down, but the accessory load-out here sucks. That turtlecom looks useless and the bonus Leonardo head is some of the dumbest, laziest, crap I've seen.
 
I have a set of these arriving today. I think like just about anything else Super 7 makes, I got them because I wanted these versions of the Turtles on my shelf and Super 7 was the only company who could provide that. I don't know that many people buy from Super 7 because they are fans of the company or think their work is great. They buy because they are the only means to get a figure they want. Yes, that makes us part of the problem. My expectations are always extremely tempered when I open a new Super 7 package and usually I am okay with what they have made. Very few things they do reach "excellent" but I think most hover around "adequate" IF you don't factor price into the equation. Adding in that $55 or more then much of it drops to "needs improvement".
 
I think that's mostly true today, but as recently as a couple of years ago, I think Super7 did have a pretty dedicated, loyal, fanbase that bought a lot of what they put out. Either because of their past relationship with Mattel, unique licenses, or maybe people just liked the marketing and Brian, there used to be a lot of defenders online even as criticisms started to rise. I remember when wave 1 of the turtles showed up on some guy's YouTube early and he complained about the quality and collectors rushed to defend Brian and Super7. Turns out, that guy's experience was basically the same that everyone would have. Years of that kind of quality, cancellations, and rising prices seem to have eroded that brand loyalty and now you can shout all kinds of negative stuff about Super7 on social media and no one shows up to defend them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top