64 replies to this topic

[Ridureyu]

OMFG figures are totally inaccurate to Looney Tunes. They look nothing like Bugs Bunny.

[PimpNugget]

MIMP=Based on thousands of years of myth and legend
Muscle=Based upon crazy nonsence fiction from the Japanese.

You lose. Good day to you sir.

Please point out the correct version of cerberus.
http://www.google.co...20&bih=817&sei= tGWrTtrFDqHw0gGiqrCXDw

Please point out the correct version of tengu
http://www.google.co...Dw&ved=0CFIQsAQ

Please point out the correct version of hydra
http://www.google.co...ved=0CBQQ_AUoAQ

Edited by PimpNugget, 28 October 2011 - 06:42 PM.

[TheRiddler]

Just a question here....I like both as I stated above. and I dont know much about the monsters from MIMP, but dont alot of the monsters exist in many religions/countries/whatever and didnt they all have their own representation of what each looked like?.....I mean these weren't real anyway so is there really one specific way they should look..... Not agreeing or disagreeing with anyone here just a serious question/curiosity.

[PimpNugget]

Just a question here....I like both as I stated above. and I dont know much about the monsters from MIMP, but dont alot of the monsters exist in many religions/countries/whatever and didnt they all have their own representation of what each looked like?.....I mean these weren't real anyway so is there really one specific way they should look..... Not agreeing or disagreeing with anyone here just a serious question/curiosity.

I agree with you. Who's to say how they should look is my point.

However some peeps in here think they should look a certain way.

Edited by PimpNugget, 28 October 2011 - 06:40 PM.

[Ericnilla]

I grew up with Muscle and still prefer it to the main lines like MIMP (I think i love most Keshi rubber and design more ).

I think its cool to hears peoples reasons for likes one line over another. Everyone prefers one thing or another obviously... Mainly MIMP collectors Prefer certain aspects to them and the same with MUSCLE or BB/LB's. Does it come from a nostalgia base from childhood or just individual preference to size, color, detail and design~?

Is there anyone here that loved one line as a kid, but prefers a different line now as a collector~?

Edited by Ericnilla, 28 October 2011 - 06:43 PM.

[Ridureyu]

Well, if you';ll notice, Tengu always have that odd nose-deal, or more birdlike features. Show me any traditional japanese art where they look exactly like the MIMP.

So, are you admitting that MUSCLEs look like Kinnikuman characters, then? Okay, cool. They did their job. Unfortunately, the vast majority of mIMPS... really don't resemble their own monsters. Now, if you were to READ the myths, you might notice that the Lernaean Hydra is a serpent with nine heads. It is a specific creature from a specific myth. Even other weirder Hydras in popular culture at least resemble a dragon, if not a serpent. There are a few variants here and there, but nothing that declares it to be a feathered peacock beast. So, again...

MUSCLE - looks like the source material.

MIMP - rarely looks like its source material.

Here, have a look at a Haniver. The Haniver looks like this. The only source are these weird constructed things people made and claimed to be real creatures:
http://farm5.static...._a071921ea5.jpg
http://www.zymoglyph...es/haniver1.jpg

Now, are you arguing that the monsters can look like absolutely everything? Okay, then. Try to explain to anybody who studies mythology that the Hydra is a pink elephant with wings, and see how far you'll go..

Edited by Ridureyu, 28 October 2011 - 06:44 PM.

[PimpNugget]

I grew up with Muscle and still prefer it to the main lines like MIMP (I think i love most Keshi rubber and design more ).

I think its cool to hears peoples reasons for likes one line over another. Everyone prefers one thing or another obviously... Mainly MIMP collectors Prefer certain aspects to them and the same with MUSCLE or BB/LB's. Does it come from a nostalgia base from childhood or just individual preference to size, color, detail and design~?

Is there anyone here that loved one line as a kid, but prefers a different line now as a collector~?

I didn't like Muscle as a kid. I prefered Transformers and He-Man.

I was older when MIMP came out and never had any of them.

[Ericnilla]

well yeah i prefered Transformers and he-man as well... But, i meant regarding LRG lines, not other toy lines.

like you grew up loving muscles, but prefer mimp now, or vice versa.

[PimpNugget]

Well, if you';ll notice, Tengu always have that odd nose-deal, or more birdlike features. Show me any traditional japanese art where they look exactly like the MIMP.

So, are you admitting that MUSCLEs look like Kinnikuman characters, then? Okay, cool. They did their job. Unfortunately, the vast majority of mIMPS... really don't resemble their own monsters. Now, if you were to READ the myths, you might notice that the Lernaean Hydra is a serpent with nine heads. It is a specific creature from a specific myth. Even other weirder Hydras in popular culture at least resemble a dragon, if not a serpent. There are a few variants here and there, but nothing that declares it to be a feathered peacock beast. So, again...

MUSCLE - looks like the source material.

MIMP - rarely looks like its source material.

Here, have a look at a Haniver. The Haniver looks like this. The only source are these weird constructed things people made and claimed to be real creatures:
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4012/4372302077_a071921ea5.jpg
http://www.zymoglyphic.org/blog/uploaded_images/haniver1.jpg

Now, are you arguing that the monsters can look like absolutely everything? Okay, then. Try to explain to anybody who studies mythology that the Hydra is a pink elephant with wings, and see how far you'll go..

Dude, you're crazy.

When I get done explaining my position with "anybody that studies mythology" I need you to please explain to them M.U.S.C.L.E.

Contrary to what you you believe M.U.S.C.L.E has no place in history. It's nonsence that has no explanation and doesn't require one. It's media trash, invented to sell crap.

You're right they look exactly like the comic that is based on....? Nothing!

I'm sorry MIMP don't look like how you precieve they should. You keep talking about Hydra, would you please please look at the scupt. Hold it, study it for a second and you'll see it isn't a peacock. I apologize that MEG couldn't pick up a comic and have the EXACT look of the sculpt to use.

In 3 thousand yrs. people aren't going to be studying M.U.S.C.L.E and the meaning behind it because there isn't anything there. It was a marketing campaign that found a small niche of people that would follow it. On the flip side you can't argue the historical value of the basis for MIMP.

[Ridureyu]

People aren't going to be studying MIMP in three thousand years. The rubber will have long since deteriorated.

But they will be discussing creatures like the Hydra. And who knows, they will probably point out the weirdo-inaccurate versions, like the MIMP chicken-peacock whatever thing. Look, I recently showed the figure to somebody who studied mythology, and asked him if he knew what monster it was. He said:

"A peacock? A giant chicken? What is this?"

When I said it was a Hydra, he looked confused.

MUSCLE is not based on ancient traditions, just a simple comic book. And it represents thew comic book. MIMP, on the other hand, represents traditions that date back thousands of years, and it royally screws many of them up. Horrendously so. Especially in cases where we have great descriptions or pictures - the Beast in Revelation is very clearly described. Jenny Hanivers are in museums. There are ancient greek urns with paintings of the Hydra. It's really not rocket science to say "perhaps the multi-headed snake should not look like a bird." My entire point is that MIMP takes way too much of an artistic license - even the acceptable variations for these monsters are nowhere near the craziness with some MIMP sculpts.

When I said this about MIMP, you jumped up and claimed that MUSCLE looked nothing like '80s wrestlers. Well, MUSCLE isn't about '80s wrestlers, it's about a specific Japanese comic. However, MIMP is about mythology. it claims to be accurate. The little descriptions for the monsters even reference myths and their locations. And yet somehow the imagery is really, really off. it's so far off that it made it harder for me to investigate some of the monsters themselves because I was going off the MIMP imagery. You can't tell me that the MIMP Tengu looks anything like this:
http://upload.wikime.../1/1d/Tengu.jpg
That's a traditional Tengu mask. It's a really big part of Japanese culture and folklore. Making it look like the MIMP thing would be like depicting Bigfoot as a snake. It's just not the same. Do you know anything about mythology?


Here's another one. The Harpy. A Harpy, according to Greek Mythology, is a bird-woman. That's it. A bird-woman. The MIMP is a weird twisted snake thing. It looks cool, but it is not a harpy. Even Dungeons & Dragons, which modifies mythological monsters, keeps harpies as bird-women. Harpies are not snakes.


And ANOTHER one: The "Dinosaur." What precise dinosaur is it supposed to be? it's certainly not a T-rex, as it has four fingers in a humanoid fist. Paleontology is a pretty precise field, you know, and they debate fossils to this day. So what real-world dinosaur is that thing?

Edited by Ridureyu, 28 October 2011 - 08:09 PM.

[NamaNiku]

Make us proud Rid!

[PimpNugget]

I know nothing about the M.U.S.C.L.E or Kinkyumann lines. But I can imagine that when there is ONLY 1 source to know what brickman looks like, its really tough to deviate from it. You win on that front. Comparing Muscle to 80's wrestlers wasn't accurate (although I see little to no difference) being that those wrestlers aren't based upon those wrestlers.

I can't say anything about MEG claiming to be historically accurate. I would need to see where they claimed they were historically and physically accurate. But for you to dismiss MIMP as being wrong, wrong, wrong is wrong. They didn't have only one source to pull from and the sources are thousands of years old. Revelation has been written over and over and over. I'm quite sure that portions are missing or embelished. Ever play telephone as a kid? By the time the statement got to the end it wasn't the same as when it started. I fail to see where you or anyone can say what MEG made was completely wrong when there is no proof either way and then to dismiss collectors that like them because they use mythology is as narrow minded as one could be. I don't belive they are as far off as you believe.

They were called MONSTER In My Pocket NOT Mythology In My Pocket. I'd say they made a monster with the guy that looks like a dino.

Edited by PimpNugget, 28 October 2011 - 08:32 PM.

[imperfecz]

Brojo.....


that is all.

[PimpNugget]

Brojo.....


that is all.

I miss having him here.
He was fun to have around.

[Ridureyu]

Revelation 13:1-4 (NKJV, since posting an old Greek manuscript wouldn't help):

1 Then I stood on the sand of the sea. And I saw a beast rising up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and on his horns ten crowns, and on his heads a blasphemous name. 2 Now the beast which I saw was like a leopard, his feet were like the feet of a bear, and his mouth like the mouth of a lion. The dragon gave him his power, his throne, and great authority. 3 And I saw one of his heads as if it had been mortally wounded, and his deadly wound was healed. And all the world marveled and followed the beast. 4 So they worshiped the dragon who gave authority to the beast; and they worshiped the beast, saying, “Who is like the beast? Who is able to make war with him?â€￾


This text hasn't been telephone-gamed at all. Revelation is written int he style of Jewish Apocalypticism, which used far-out metaphors in its prophetic events - hence why the Beast is generally interpreted as a ruling council witht he Antichrist at the head. However, that description is pretty dang specific. Also, watch what you say about the telephone game - ancient Jewish swcribes were INSANELY anal-retentively specific about copying texts as closely as possible, only surpassed by the monks who took up copying the Bible through the middle Ages. There are textual variants on a lot of things, but not to that extent - in fact, your average bible will list variant readings in little footnotes. You can actually count them. We have sources as old as the Dead Sea scrolls that have barely any variation from newer manuscripts, which is pretty impressive. So yeah, I think that one description is pretty good.

Next up is the Haniver. The Haniver is a specific kind of cryptid made from the body of a skate. We have a lot of them. They're like Jackalopes. Would you be happy if a Jackalope toy looked like a dragon, and not an antlered rabbit?

And again, when it comes to things like the Hydra and Harpy, they do have descriptions right ther eint he mythology. A harpy is a bird woman, not a snake. There are no snake harpies. There were none until MIMP came along. MIMP did not portray a harpy correctly. Let me puyt it this way: if somebody made a toy of Bigfoot that looked liker a goldfish, wouldn't you say "But that's not what Bigfoot is supposed to look like?" Of course.

And finally, about the dinosaur: Dinosaurs are real. We find their fossils everywhere. The MIMP one... isn't a real dinosaur. At all. You wanted a real-world example? Show me the real-world dinosaur that looks just like it. I';m using your own words here, can you prove that the MIMP dinosaur is accurate to real dinosaurs? No? Not at all? You can't say "well, they made a monster from the real thing," because they wanted to depict the real thing. They evencame back later and made some more-accurate dinosaurs in a later series! It is IRRE$PONSIBLE to claim that you are accurately representing a myth, or story, or historical event and then proceed tobotch it up completely. This is why I can't stand most "historical" movies, like The Untouchables, which had people dying thirty years too early, for example.

[TOPHER]

Wrestling represents traditions that date back thousands of years,
and is found in some form or another and variations worldwide.
M.u.s.c.l.e. and their comics are just that,invented stories by people
with vivid imaginations who like wrestling and pushed the boundries.
As for myth-ology,really don't know how Frankie got in there,but then again
that was Shelly's story.
Ya I agree with you that some most of the MIMP are,like what the......
doesn't look even close to some of the mythological creatures.But hey some
kids vision of these legedary creatures are from MIMP and are imprinted on
thier minds as what they should look like.They grow up,become artist and
voila!a whole new breed of Tegu or whatever creature.
In 3 thousand years from now,people could be saying(through brain implanted bluetooths)
Wow! ancient humans actualy used their mouths for comunicating....can you upload the
nightmare you said you had last night,I want to see it.

.

[89cpe]

How long was mimp around? How long was kinnikuman around? Yep

[PimpNugget]

Show me where MEG Claims to be historically accurate, please.
Creative license is a right they have.
Their line is BASED upon mythology not exact replicas.
And if what they made got you to dig and learn a bit more about mythology, did they really do something so terrible.

There are a few descriptions of Harpy here.
http://www.theoi.com...s/Harpyiai.html

Haha. Yea MEG's Dino was wwaaaayyyy off.
Infact until you told me what it was, I had no idea.
http://www.google.co...38&bih=566&sei= tYmrTpWfEYbZgAf92MXzDw

Lastly. I don't believe everything I read, especially when someone says this is from the bible.
You do understand that religion is a business, right?

[Ridureyu]

That link from theoi is pretty good - Harpies are bird-women. Maybe they just havew ings, or maybe their lower half is birdlike... but the snake-slug MIMP just isn't there anywhere. It's a cool figure, but it's by no means a harpy.

The ones that actually got mEG in trouble were the Hindu deities, particularly Ganesha and Hanuman. Kali at least looks like a few idols, and calling her a "monster' matches the Thuggee cult (although not all of her worshippers). But Ganesha? Hanuman? Fairly friendly deities turned into raging monsters? Ganesha looks okay, but its inclusion caused controversy in Europe. Hanuman is just way, way... way off. People got offended because their patron deity, the happy-go-lucky monkey, was depicted as a slavering baboon beast.

Edited by Ridureyu, 28 October 2011 - 09:19 PM.

[imperfecz]

I miss having him here.
He was fun to have around.

Really? Guess you never had him stalk you and leave you creepy messages as himself and under the guise of being someone else.... guess he never went all weird on you. I miss him like bleach in the pee hole.

[PimpNugget]

Really? Guess you never had him stalk you and leave you creepy messages as himself and under the guise of being someone else.... guess he never went all weird on you. I miss him like bleach in the pee hole.

He never went all weird on me. It was fun to watch everyone here freak out every time he posted something.

[imperfecz]

Yeah I had fun pushing his buttons and what not, but that was after a long time of his stalking me outside of this place as himself, contacting me as if he was someone else, threatening me, trying to blackmail me... and on and on... after awhile he was about as fun as keistering a couple pounds of broken glass and then eating a bunch habaneros....

Basically dealing with that nutjob... was like the opposite of nostalgia... had the opposite effect of what remembering M.U.S.C.L.E. from childhood did for me... and this went on as I was just discovering the line. I still think they're kinda cool to a point... but I get a mental picture of that greasy haired creep when I think of mimp.

Since you miss him... here you go....




Now you can visit any time you want.

[TheRiddler]

I wanna party with that guy!!...and his cat!

[SmokinGun]

Eff MIMP's. They suck! Period.