Playmates TMNT Remastered

I didn't know this was happening... But if you were buying the Remastered figures, there's this set with a previously not out Rocksteady. But it's battle damaged deco. So is that going to be the only way to get him? What about Bebop? Playmates is so weird.

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles Classic Remastered Raph vs. Rocksteady 2-Pack by Playmates Toys

713KdlYG8HL._AC_SL1500_.jpg


81JsCR50HTL._AC_SL1500_.jpg
 
I have to imagine a Bebop 2pk is imminent. I ordered this one. After Bebop I can be done. Probably won’t be my choice!
 
Instant order!

I do remember seeing 3D mock-ups of Rocksteady and Bebop in the remastered line like a year and a half ago somewhere on IG. Also saw an in-hand photo of this Raph and I think Donatello a few months ago.

I’m still holding out hope there’s some more ‘87 goodness coming out of Playmates. Really hoping for an Android Krang. The prices on eBay for the originals are insane.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
There were some battle damaged deco Leonardo figures on Ali so it's assumed he'll be coming with Bebop.
 
Detrimental Fig said:
I just saw this, wasn't real sure where to post it but I guess Playmates is attempting to...do...something? They apparently feel like they've been cheated.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2054373341767643201
Click to expand...

I thought that the non-Mirage figures from the ‘87 line were created directly by Playmates or Mirage creators in some sort of work arrangement with Playmates. Also, the action figure looks/styles themselves could be arguably attributed to Playmates.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
My guess it has something to do with that. Perhaps they're content to lose the master license, but feel they should be able pursue a general license that allows them to retain control of their own work in some capacity in the event Mattel intends to do something similar in style to the vintage toy line.
 
I was looking at this last night and it's so weirdly vague as to almost look fake. What could Playmates even -hope- to accomplish here? They'll get outlawyered for sure, so they need a rock solid case for.... what? Are they going to claim stewardship of TMNT and claim that they were 50% or more responsible for TMNT's success and all of its identifying features?

Kind of like spending 20 years mowing the neighbor's back lawn and then going to court and claiming that you own it (which you can absolutely attempt to do)?

Or are they just going to try to claim ownership of anything they designed for the brand?

Either way, this reads like the flailing of a spurned ex-boyfriend and it definitely has nothing to do with all their flowery language about protecting the brand. And if they were to win, let's say, and be considered the sole or partial owners of a bunch of TMNT designs, do they really think the fans are going to be behind them on that? People already hate Playmates just for the -assumption- that they fucked up the last few waves of Super7 Ultimates. Think fans are going to react positively to a public announcement that Mattel can't make a bunch of their favorite designs or characters because Playmates is throwing itself a pity party?

What a pile of stupidity.
 
Like many corporate lawsuits, I doubt the intent is to win here. It's possible their agreement didn't technically expire at the end of 2026 and instead Paramount is using language in the contract to end it prematurely. Maybe they feel the contract language allowed them some sort of privilege, like the right to match any offer, and they were denied that. Or, and perhaps more likely, they feel they own certain looks and characters and are just looking for compensation for such. Unless the lawsuit is just total bananas and they're claiming something else entirely, I would guess that Paramount cuts them a check (or allows them to continue in a smaller capacity like continuing their reissues) and this thing is all settled out of court.
 
Misfit said:
I would guess that Paramount cuts them a check (or allows them to continue in a smaller capacity like continuing their reissues) and this thing is all settled out of court.
Click to expand...
I really don't know about that. Paramount is several orders of magnitude bigger than Playmates. Settling with them will invite anyone and everyone to sue Paramount in the hopes of just getting some crumbs. Paramount may see it as a requirement for their operations to utterly crush this lawsuit and put it's head on a pole outside their main office as a warning to others.
And don't forget arrogance. They're not going to take some upstart little toy company challenging their legal rights to the thing they own with any kind of grace.
 
This feels like it is in the same vein of a work-for-hire comic book creator suing for the rights to their creations. Playmates came up with the different colored bandanas, so they want a percentage every time a blue, purple or orange bandana is used on a product, something like that…

What I find interesting is that they chose to use an image in the letter that doesn’t really reflect any of their contributions to the brand.

And why this very vague statement, and why now…. What does putting this statement out for public consumption accomplish?

This seems like nothing more than an interesting footnote in history of Playmates and TMNT.
 
Raph and Rocksteady arrived today. Raph is same as the previous box set version but with battle scuffs crosshatched on.

Rocksteady is nice. Sculpt is great, which hasn’t really been a problem for Playmates. Paints are also battle scuffed and bruised. Articulation is added, but still not enough. No bicep swivels, elbows are just hinges, ankle cuts like the Turtles. It’s better than the vintage but not even close to current standards. But all existing articulation is functional, no really dumb decisions. Comes with the machine gun, knife, and sewer cap shield like the original.

I like it for what it is, and I hope Bebop is coming just as quickly.
 
Damien said:
I was looking at this last night and it's so weirdly vague as to almost look fake. What could Playmates even -hope- to accomplish here? They'll get outlawyered for sure, so they need a rock solid case for.... what? Are they going to claim stewardship of TMNT and claim that they were 50% or more responsible for TMNT's success and all of its identifying features?

Kind of like spending 20 years mowing the neighbor's back lawn and then going to court and claiming that you own it (which you can absolutely attempt to do)?

Or are they just going to try to claim ownership of anything they designed for the brand?

Either way, this reads like the flailing of a spurned ex-boyfriend and it definitely has nothing to do with all their flowery language about protecting the brand. And if they were to win, let's say, and be considered the sole or partial owners of a bunch of TMNT designs, do they really think the fans are going to be behind them on that? People already hate Playmates just for the -assumption- that they fucked up the last few waves of Super7 Ultimates. Think fans are going to react positively to a public announcement that Mattel can't make a bunch of their favorite designs or characters because Playmates is throwing itself a pity party?

What a pile of stupidity.
Click to expand...

This entire argument already failed when playmates tried to sue Neca for infringing on their brand. And now they’re trying it again against the world’s largest toy company? Do the folks at playmates have some kind of collective short term memory loss or some other cognitive disorder? This is literally poking the bear. I think I’ll do an impression of how this might go in court:

Prosecution: So tell us Playmates? How do you as a corporate entity decide that you get to keep this license in spite of the fact that your parent company, Viacom/Paramount Global decided to sell the intellectual property that they own and maintain the rights to do whatever they wish with them?

Defense: My client sold over 100 million units of the Teenage Mutant Turtle action figure brand back in 1991, decades before Paramount Global had any control over the TMNT license. So we don’t feel like they should have a say in our ability to sell toys that have continued to make us money over the past 3 decades.

Prosecution: I see. And how many TMNT figures have you sold since 1991? Has the average amount of toys sold in stores maintained around 100 million units?

Defense. We have seen diminishing returns.

Prosecution: Ah, so you admit that you have seen far less demand from the consumer in spite of your boisterous claims. You do realize that this gives your argument very little merit?

Defense:: Yes

Prosecution: No further questions Your Honor


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top