Toys Images of Transformers Alternity Bumblebee & Cliffjumper

Highbeam wrote:These look nice but I was shocked the other day when I discovered those things are so small...not even Alternators sized. Very disappointing.

Crystal Rodimus wrote:Wish they would've found a way to collapse the chest more.....looks like they need lipo just to see their feet.

Orthobotrex wrote:the other thing I don't like is the spindly thighs.. I wish they were a little bulkier! I wonder what Mr. Thew has to say?

Sabrblade wrote:All of the Alternity figures follow the naming standard of being called "(name) - (something) (color)", so why should these two be any different?

Blurrz wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:All of the Alternity figures follow the naming standard of being called "(name) - (something) (color)", so why should these two be any different?

Suzuki Swift Bumblebee - Champion Yellow
Suzuki Swift Bumblebee - Red Pearl (aka Cliffjumper)

Sabrblade wrote:What are the real names of these figures? I mean, is the red one really called "Cliff", or are they both "Bumble - (something) (color)"?

All of the Alternity figures follow the naming standard of being called "(name) - (something) (color)", so why should these two be any different?

mandingo_rex wrote:
What bothers me the most is the turd of a car they turn into. Not sure how popular that car is in Japan, which was probably the deciding factor, but it's not even remotely a car that should have a toy made of it in the first place.

Diem wrote:Swifts are popular here (though Cubes are way more popular). I'm not sure what you'd call this breed of car - saloons? mini-SUVs? - but they are incredibly popular as cars. As toys of cars? I'm not so sure.

But I can easily agree with Takara's decision to use the Swift. It looks way different to the other Alternitys, which is a big plus and, more importantly, it strongly resembles the super-deformed, Choro Q G1 versions while at the same time being a real, accurately-proportioned car.

mandingo_rex wrote:

Diem wrote:Swifts are popular here (though Cubes are way more popular). I'm not sure what you'd call this breed of car - saloons? mini-SUVs? - but they are incredibly popular as cars. As toys of cars? I'm not so sure.

But I can easily agree with Takara's decision to use the Swift. It looks way different to the other Alternitys, which is a big plus and, more importantly, it strongly resembles the super-deformed, Choro Q G1 versions while at the same time being a real, accurately-proportioned car.

I'm assuming "here" not being the United States, correct?

Here, they're non-existent on the road, really. I live in California, and I've never seen one in the wild. It's apparently coming to the U.S. in 2010, so we may see them soon enough. That could also be a deciding factor in Suzuki allowing the license... It gives them more market recognition, however small a toy's sales may be. I've seen smaller marketing attempts just to get "the brand out there".

I didn't think about the "Choro Q" shape, but it does mimic that slightly, you're right. Odd little car. Still, it's not a car I'd think a lot of kids would be clamoring for as a toy, but it works for the bot mode well enough.

Mykltron wrote:Looks like it has great articulation and I love the leg design but the big belly is off-putting. I guess I'll see how much I want it when I see a price.

Diem wrote:there's no reason why a top-range collector's model worth 4000 yen should be slaved to a twenty-five-year-old $3 toy.

Deathsanras wrote:

Diem wrote:there's no reason why a top-range collector's model worth 4000 yen should be slaved to a twenty-five-year-old $3 toy.

Like being yellow, for example. Or having four wheels. Or being a small car instead of maybe an aircraft carrier. Or being an Autobot instead of a minion of Unicron. Damn stuck-in-the-past toy designers...

mandingo_rex wrote:Still, it's not a car I'd think a lot of kids would be clamoring for as a toy, but it works for the bot mode well enough.

Convotron wrote:

mandingo_rex wrote:Still, it's not a car I'd think a lot of kids would be clamoring for as a toy, but it works for the bot mode well enough.

It's a good thing Alternity isn't a line made for kids...

mandingo_rex wrote:The point was that it's a car that I don't see in high demand for having a miniature, collectible, playable, etc. version made of it. But I'm assuming that they sought out a manufacturer willing to sell the licensing, and a car that fit, and somehow the JDM appeal of the car combined with all that mixed into them making the decision.

Diem wrote:Yeah, you're missing the point. G1 Bumblebee wasn't potbellied because it was some kind of awesome design choice, it was because of limited toy technology and budget at the time. Hence why his animation model was a hell of a lot taller, trimmer and sleeker, and his Action Master figure was the same way. Even his Classics body was stocky rather than tubby. When they made Masterpiece Optimus Prime, they didn't slavishly replicate his G1 toy's ape-like arms, stumpy legs and box body. No, they created a more idealised version. So don't patronise me for pointing out a legitimate problem with the new figure.

Deathsanras wrote:

Diem wrote:Yeah, you're missing the point. G1 Bumblebee wasn't potbellied because it was some kind of awesome design choice, it was because of limited toy technology and budget at the time. Hence why his animation model was a hell of a lot taller, trimmer and sleeker, and his Action Master figure was the same way. Even his Classics body was stocky rather than tubby. When they made Masterpiece Optimus Prime, they didn't slavishly replicate his G1 toy's ape-like arms, stumpy legs and box body. No, they created a more idealised version. So don't patronise me for pointing out a legitimate problem with the new figure.

Mmyeah, unless you were actually on the G1 design team, you don't actually know that. The Mini-Bots are penny racers. They have squat designs because they're 1:1 scale. Which, by definition, is a design choice rather than your "limited toy technology and budget at the time." Esp since you don't know the budget from Takara's original Microchange project.

And you've clearly chosen to high-jump over my point. Which is that tagging it as just decadently "slavish" and being fixated on a single element of supposed-slavishness, when again, you have no idea of the background, whether Suzuki made them do it, whether a mechanism to collapse the chest wouldn't fit or blow out the cost of the figure, is just stupid. Or in other words, fine, it's a flaw in your opinion. So call it a freaking flaw, don't play this ridiculous card where Takara's the crazy uncle who's "at it again".

Your opinion is your own, but don't pretend to be an expert and present it as fact, when it's patently not.