What are your standards when it comes to the "perfect" reissue?

[GoktimusPrime]

5FDP: Fairy nuff.

The way I see it, a reissue is a re-release of the original toy. Therefore it should be as close as possible to the original. Naturally it cannot be an exact recreation so some differences will be present but regardless, the attempt should be to make it as close as possible to the original release.

^agree

Personally, I don't agree when people call a new re-color of a vintage toy as a re-issue. These includes E-hobby exclusives like Gadep, Sunstorm, the millions of G1 Prime repaints and the TF Club Piranacon. Sorry but to me those are new repaints, not re-issues. There was never a vintage toy sporting those colors so it's a new release altogether not a re-release (reissue) of a previous toy.

To illustrate my point further, the latest 'gold' Predaking is not a reissue to me but rather repaint. The previous Takara reissue to that which was faithful to the original toy colors is the proper reissue.

Just to be clear, I am not against repainted releases of vintage molds that aim to bring something new (like Sunstorm) or show accuracy (Like Ehobby Astrotrain or Telemocha Dinobot). I very much love those repaints and I think they are awesome but I would not call them re-issues.

I don't think anyone really considers repaints of existing moulds but marketed as new characters as reissues, do they? Hauler, Sunstorm and Road Rage are no more reissues of Grapple, Thundercracker and Tracks (respectively) than say Ruination is a reissue of G1 Bruticus or Universe Nemesis Prime is a reissue of Big Convoy etc. A repaint isn't a reissue unless it's explicitly marketed as being the same character - and even then, there probably needs to be a substantial period of time to pass before it's considered a reissue (e.g. Battle Steel Optimus Prime isn't widely considered to be a reissue of DOTM Optimus Prime).

Moulds that are re-released and explicitly marketed as being the same character do technically count as reissues I reckon - regardless of whether or not people individually like them or not. But the more similar a reissue is to the original toy, then the more accurate or faithful that reissue is as a reproduction of the original toy... I don't think anyone can dispute that. People may or may not like some of the toys that are less faithful reproductions - that's a matter of personal opinion.

Reissues that are different from the original do technically count as reissues, however I do agree that they are not as faithful reissues as those which are more accurate reproductions of the original. Toys which are less-accurate reproductions, to me, aren't as accurate reissues - but I do still count them as reissues. The only way I would discount a toy from being a reissue is if it's not meant to be the same character (e.g. GADEP -- totally _not_ a reissue of Omega Supreme).

But counting them doesn't mean I like them all... there are some reissues that, in my heart, feels like they shouldn't count - but because Hasbro's marketed them as a certain character, then they count. Two examples are:

+ Apex Armour Optimus Prime. This is a re-release of God Ginrai with a chromeless extended missile, and the Ginrai mould is quite different from Powermaster Optimus Prime... different materials, entirely different arms and hands, different colours etc. Also, Powermaster Optimus Prime never attached to Godbomber, oh sorry, Apex Armour <cough>. Seems like a cheap/lazy way to do a PM Prime reissue by just using the existing God Ginrai reissue mould rather than retooling it to become PM Prime (which I would have much preferred -- I skipped Apex Prime, but I might have purchased a PM Prime reissue if they did it "properly").

+ Hasbro Soundwave reissue - I'm talking about the one that was sold in TRU here... the blue repaint of Soundblaster, but they didn't bother retooling the chest/door to make it look like Soundwave. Blue Soundblaster =/= Soundwave to me. Needless to say when Encore Soundwave came out, I soon got rid of my Hasbro Soundwave in favour of Encore.

So to me I consider both reissues of Predaking as reissues, but the first reissue is obviously a far more faithful and accurate reproduction of G1 Predaking. I do still consider Goldaking to be a reissue of Predaking, but it is a less accurate repro of Predaking. Likewise Proto-Astrotrain is a less faithful repro of the actual Astrotrain toy that was released in stores, and the regular Astrotrain reissue is accurate to the G1 toy (in Japan). It's a shame Hasbro didn't bother to repaint their Astrotrain reissue to make it more accurate to the G1 toy released in Hasbro markets (again, cheap and lazy option).

[kup]

I have heard the 'reissue' term thrown loosely around by fans. Most commonly to do with Ehobby releases using the general term 'Ehobby reissues'.

I still don't consider things like the latest Predaking, Piranacon (Club) and Ehobby Astrotrain as reissues. To me they are repaints as they were deliberately repainted to look different negating their 'reissue' status as the toy in this form has never been released before.

What I would consider to be a 'less than faithful' reissue but still a reissue nevertheless are releases such as the new Devastator and Bruticus. They are lacking in quality and some of the colors chosen are brighter than they should be but regardless, they are intended to be reproductions of the original toy not made to purposely be different with a new sporty paint scheme or with new funky gold highlights.

[GoktimusPrime]

The word "reissue" is a pretty broad term in itself anyway. It refers to the repeat issue of a product "which has been released at least once before and is released again, sometimes with alterations or additions." <--so a reissue with alterations or additions are still classified as reissues. Reissues are also known as re-release or re-editions, and certainly changes can be made between different releases or editions; hence why the edition of a book is often cited in bibliographies.

The Japanese term for reissue toys is "Fukkokuban" (復刻版) - "fukkoku" means "reissue" or "re-release" and "ban" means "edition" or "version." So it implies that there can/may be differences between it and previous editions (as with books etc.).

I think we need to delineate the difference between a reissue and a replica. It seems to me that your idea of a "perfect" reissue is one that is a near-perfect replica. Just out of interest, would you consider reissues with overlengthed missiles and/or stripped chrome missiles to be reissues? Because I don't consider these reissues to be quite unsatisfactory and displeasing replicas.

All replicas are reissues, but some reissues are better replicas than others. Some reissues don't even attempt to be replicas and have intentional changes made to them - so they do fail as being classified as replicas, but they would still technically count as being reissues methinks.

So for example:
+ First Predaking reissue = replicant reissue
+ 2nd Predaking reissue = non-replicant reissue

Blade Runner'd!

[kup]

The word "reissue" is a pretty broad term in itself anyway. It refers to the repeat issue of a product "which has been released at least once before and is released again, sometimes with alterations or additions." <--so a reissue with alterations or additions are still classified as reissues. Reissues are also known as re-release or re-editions, and certainly changes can be made between different releases or editions; hence why the edition of a book is often cited in bibliographies.

The Japanese term for reissue toys is "Fukkokuban" (復刻版) - "fukkoku" means "reissue" or "re-release" and "ban" means "edition" or "version." So it implies that there can/may be differences between it and previous editions (as with books etc.).

I think we need to delineate the difference between a reissue and a replica. It seems to me that your idea of a "perfect" reissue is one that is a near-perfect replica. Just out of interest, would you consider reissues with overlengthed missiles and/or stripped chrome missiles to be reissues? Because I don't consider these reissues to be quite unsatisfactory and displeasing replicas.

All replicas are reissues, but some reissues are better replicas than others. Some reissues don't even attempt to be replicas and have intentional changes made to them - so they do fail as being classified as replicas, but they would still technically count as being reissues methinks.

So for example:
+ First Predaking reissue = replicant reissue
+ 2nd Predaking reissue = non-replicant reissue

Blade Runner'd!

You are loosing me a bit. What I was referring to was my view of what a reissue is within the context of collecting Transformers not what I consider to be 'perfect replica or not' nor what the dictionary says on the broad use of the term.

I actually don't really care how perfect or not a reuse of a vintage mold may be as long as it's 'good'. I would prefer a 'modified' reissue instead of the vintage if there are improvements for example but as long as it still tries to be a recreation of the original release.

To use a particular figure like Dinobot for example, I care not for the original 'pink' release. I prefer the 10th anniversary color scheme better despite it's flaws and much, much prefer the Telemocha release but I do not consider them as re-issues and more of better show accurate repaints which I prefer to the original.

This isn't a bias of what's a perfect recreation or what isn't and more of what I designate to be a reissue. As you say, reissues have variations and no re-issue is the same but I stop calling it that when a deliberate change has been made to make it considerably different to the original even if it's representing the same character. To me, that's a repaint.

In regards to re-tooled Hasbro 'reissues'. They are a grey line as they are intended to be reissues but modified to conform with contemporarary child safety standards as they were officially marketed to that demographic (I know..). They are intended to be 'reissues' and created to be so despite the retooling and skimping on materials (chrome). They are more of inaccurate or retooled editions to me as if it wasn't for the forced child safety or budget cutting, they would have been made as accurate as possible to the original like Takara reissue counterparts. However this is a very different situation to say Ehobby Astrotrain or the repainted vintage BW mold repaints.

[sideswipes brother]

I think the word 'perfect' in some cases may just be a throwaway term and not meant to be taken literally or measured against varying degrees of perfection. It's quite possible that when someone refers to a reissue as being perfect, they are just merely expressing their love / joy in owning a character that they have been longing for. This is the first time we've seen Devastator reissued in 18 years so I can understand why someone would be overjoyed (myself included )

This. When i made that comment i was just so pleased that i had a brand new Devs in my hand, and finally had one full stop, that i could have used any word to describe my pleasure and 'perfect' is what was typed at the time.

Of course its not 'perfect', my Scavengers feet keep popping off during transformation! But, im not the kind of person who is affected by something so small. Im just disappointed as to all the hate for this figure when i am over the moon about having a new one which displays beautifully!!!

[kup]

I don't think there is hate for this figure. People are just observing and reporting it's defects which is a reasonable thing to do.

Overall people seem excited about it and I am happy it has actually been reissued!

[5FDP]

This may be it's own topic, but does anyone know the reasons behind the 18 year wait for Devastator? We've all heard in the past that the mould may have been damaged beyond repair and the cost of rebuilding it was not an option.

The reason I ask is that most would know that many of the KO's produced actually used official moulds left behind when the factories were vacated by Takara.

I've heard a rumour that Takara reacquired some of these moulds, one of which was Devastator, and this was used to make reissue Devastator. This would also explain some of the reported QC issues because the mould was actually being used and would have suffered from the same degradation as the mould used for the Combaticons.

[liegeprime]

This may be it's own topic, but does anyone know the reasons behind the 18 year wait for Devastator? We've all heard in the past that the mould may have been damaged beyond repair and the cost of rebuilding it was not an option.

The reason I ask is that most would know that many of the KO's produced actually used official moulds left behind when the factories were vacated by Takara.

I've heard a rumour that Takara reacquired some of these moulds, one of which was Devastator, and this was used to make reissue Devastator. This would also explain some of the reported QC issues because the mould was actually being used and would have suffered from the same degradation as the mould used for the Combaticons.

see if that were the case, wouldnt/ shouldnt they have run a few test figures first to see all the bugs then fix the faulty moulds? After all it isnt good business sense to release faulty merchandise but then QC is something that has been slipping nowadays ei in TakTom ever since the merger.... could be a lax in the managements "interference" with the production end...

[GoktimusPrime]

AFAIK the mould was never lost/damaged. In 2000-2001 Takara got lots of requests for Devastator, but the KOs were already really popular and Takara released a statement saying that they did not want to reissue Devastator as they didn't want to compete with bootleggers. They never cited mould loss or damage as the reason for not reissuing it sooner.

[5FDP]

AFAIK the mould was never lost/damaged.

http://transformers.wikia.com/wiki/Mold

Rumored lost molds:

Original Rattrap
Sunstreaker
G1 Constructicons

In 2000-2001 Takara got lots of requests for Devastator, but the KOs were already really popular and Takara released a statement saying that they did not want to reissue Devastator as they didn't want to compete with bootleggers. They never cited mould loss or damage as the reason for not reissuing it sooner.

I remember reading this somewhere as well but I have never a source specified, Takara or other.