Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Oo-Larr is jacked!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Shawn
    commented on 's reply
    We have a good idea of the inner workings of Mattel based on people who have worked in and around the company though. Also we have undeniable things like Trademark Laws, and supposition of how things are "generally done" by others who do the same thing. History and experience are important factors when having a discussion and formulating opinion. Everybody has two things: Opinions and and assholes. Facts tend to separate thous things from each other in my experience. To that, Anyone who has experience in trademarks, or toy making can say more on this topic then me or you.

    Toyguru notorious for spelling and grammatical errors. That isn't a judgement BTW, Just repeating a fact. (besdies, people who live in glass houses should throu stones,) Mo-Larr is WAY to close to Oo-Larr for me to believe that is coincidental. IIRC it was Scott, who is SUCH a fan of Robot chicken that he was the one who pushed to make Mo-Larr. He also wrote all the Bios at once, very early on. It would have to be a VERY BIG coincident.

    I don't think Oo-lar was sculpted a while ago. We can reach out the 4HM to settle that. But Short of that, the legs first used on Photog or Demo-Man IIRC, and like Bow, the tooling for NA he-man existed for years. so Indeed these things are WELL planned out in advanced. Other times, things are not so well planned out like the whole issue with 8back (duck) feet (Original Skeletor) vs vintage style 80's feet (Dragon Blaster skeletor) Lots of characters would have been better served by the later, but due to penny pinching Mattel took short cuts.

    I say all that to point out that either of us could be right. and that somethings are indeed answerable. Somebody could ask somebody else to verify what Toyguru is saying or it could be proven that it's another one of his pants on fire lies he often perpetuates.
    You make a great point about maintaining existing trademarks. As a kid I was bugged at Power Rangers for rpping off MOTU. LOL.
    Honestly the "Battle Chariot" is a curious trademark, the 200X Skeletor vehcile was "Battle RAM chariot" and IIRC, the "Battle chariot" was the name Mark Taylor gave that unpronounced Vehicle that ending up in He-Man and The Powersword (The "mini comic" which has "Oo-Larr's" first appearance...) which originally started on the drawing board as what became The Battle Ram in 1982. Flash forward Skeletor's Ram headed Chariot is called "The Battle RAM chariot". Flash forward to MOTUC the "Jet Sled" become the "Sky Sled" and that unnamed Windraider Pilot gets named Sky High. (which IIRC was first used by a fan online) and finally hear we are this year we are finally going to get The Battle Ram in MOTUC. SO WTF is this "battle chariot" that is on the back of some boxes? We DON"T have all the answers. All I'm saying Is I have a lot of questions about the answers we are given...

  • Guest
    Guest commented on 's reply
    Really, we don't know the inner workings of Mattel. Just because there's a coincidence in trademarking doesn't mean anything. You're allowed to speculate, but I don't buy it. Mattel trademarks stuff all the time that they have no intention of making in the near future (although, for all we know, Oo-Lar was sculpted and originally planned to be released a long time ago). The "Battle Chariot" is a perfect example. It's a 200x toy. There's no way they would actually make it in Classics. But they're keeping the trademark alive anyway - it's one of the random names that appears periodically on the back of mailer boxes. The bios were written and and the copy was approved years and years ago. It makes sense to trademark any names in the bios ASAP, otherwise you end up with Ninja Warrior and Double Mischief.

  • No-Ah
    commented on 's reply
    Yeah, I think it's the same head at a different angle in different light. It's certainly the same sculpt.

  • DrPAYNE
    commented on 's reply
    My org name is the same. What happened, I thought the sub was a lock? I guess it's just a conspiracy right?

  • Shawn
    replied
    Originally posted by SonOfHeMan View Post
    As for the name "issue" as to why they would sit on it for six years - simple. The same reason they would sit on ANY trademark for years. They didn't want anyone else to steal it. They came up with the name six years ago after they wrote the bios and had the copy approved. They've been sitting on a lot of trademarks with no plan to use them. Just because they trademark something doesn't mean we're getting a Battle Chariot any time soon.
    Didn't they already own the trademark to Battle chariot? 200X or the vintage Battle Ram or something else I can't recall. I think it might have been from the battle station? My point is they used (or will use) a trademark they already own...

    The simple fact is that Mattel trademarked the name SIX MONTHS before Mo-Larr was originally sold! and as MGM pointed out...

    Originally posted by MegaGearMax View Post

    Mattel used Oo-Larr in two bios way before his figure showed up. Oo-Larr first showed up in Gygor's bio and again in Battle Armor Skeletor's bio. That was 2011.

    There is also trademarking stuff before other companies get their hands on certain names. We see names show up on the back of the packaging.
    ...and Gygor came out September TWO-MONTHS after Mo-Larr. http://www.itsalltrue.net/?page_id=6369

    So you see, Sonofheman, there is no "issue", safe for the apparent lie Toyguru perpetuates. Nobody talks about Ninjor not being named Ninjor. A rose by any name would still smell sweet, and even with the things Drego-Man brings up, The Original He-Man, is ****ing SWEET!
    Last edited by Shawn; 08-20-2014, 09:35 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • GREP-A-TOR
    commented on 's reply
    Oh, you are of the Conspiracy Theory ilk. What's your org name? Can I also say that I don't believe in Apologist Theories?

  • Draego-Man
    commented on Guest's reply
    I think you're being far too generous in your thinking.
    Last edited by Draego-Man; 08-20-2014, 04:42 PM.

  • Guest
    Guest replied
    The head looks fine to me. Of course, it's not going to look as good as the prototype, but it never does. The poor flourescent office lighting doesn't do it any favors, neither does the angle the pictures on Facebook where taken from. If you insist on comparing pics of the prototype where he's looking down and to the right, to pictures of the final figure where he's looking UP and to the LEFT, of course they're going to look different. But from the right angle, it looks just like the prototype to me:



    As for the name "issue" as to why they would sit on it for six years - simple. The same reason they would sit on ANY trademark for years. They didn't want anyone else to steal it. They came up with the name six years ago after they wrote the bios and had the copy approved. They've been sitting on a lot of trademarks with no plan to use them. Just because they trademark something doesn't mean we're getting a Battle Chariot any time soon.
    Last edited by ; 08-20-2014, 01:38 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest
    Guest replied
    Yup the "final" vintage head does look too shiny... On the other hand the other "Oo-Larr" head could be used, as a Filmation He-man head in my opinion.

    Leave a comment:


  • Shawn
    replied


    2009-12-05 NEW APPLICATION ENTERED IN TRAM (for Oo-Lar)

    2010-03-16 ASSIGNED TO LIE


    2010- July Mo-Larr & Skeletor was sold at SDCC.

    I guess that means They are legally obligated to lie to us about this? Now I DOUBT that is what that means, But it certainly made me laugh. The situation is beyond ridiculous. Evene if he wasn't lying, he still just make him look bad that he continues to even talk about this at all...

    Though I would LOVE IT if someone cataloged all of his statements on the topic, gathered and properly explained Trademark files to demonstrate how preposterous this whole thing is.
    Last edited by Shawn; 08-18-2014, 10:08 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Draego-Man
    replied
    This is a mis-registration of Mo-Larr no doubt about it. It was registered with just enough leeway time for Mo-Larr, which is all the proof one needs. Why that timeline for a figure coming out 6 years later? Does anyone really believe TG had this planned out all along in the bios given how piss poor and inconsistent they are? Sure Oo-Larr showed up in the bios, but only after he got the idea to use the name and cover his tracks when he wasted Mattel money on registering the wrong name. What TG is asking us to believe is that Robot Chicken somehow knew about the stupid Oo-Larr character name (which at that stage no MOTU fans had ever heard of) and named their character to meet the supposed naming conventions of the brand. Total BS. Mo-Larr is a stylized version of "Molar" to make it sound more MOTU, what is it, that is all. Oo-Larr on the other hand is a ridiculously stupid name, born of the brand manager's utter incompetence.

    Leave a comment:


  • MegaGearMax
    replied
    Originally posted by Draego-Man View Post


    Yeah, true but that doesn't change anything. It just means they used the name they mis-registered earlier. Remember he said 2009 and I call BS. No way, no how that this is a legitimate explanation. TG is flat out lying, but he is missing a golden opportunity, because if he just confessed it actually makes for a much cooler story (even if the name still is totally dumb). What a jackass.
    LOL! Either TG mis-registered it or he has trouble coming up with different sounding names, such as Vikor and Vykron. Oo-Larr and Mo-Larr could be a similar case.

    Leave a comment:


  • Draego-Man
    replied
    Originally posted by MegaGearMax View Post

    Mattel used Oo-Larr in two bios way before his figure showed up. Oo-Larr first showed up in Gygor's bio and again in Battle Armor Skeletor's bio. That was 2011.

    There is also trademarking stuff before other companies get their hands on certain names. We see names show up on the back of the packaging.

    Yeah, true but that doesn't change anything. It just means they used the name they mis-registered earlier. Remember he said 2009 and I call BS. No way, no how that this is a legitimate explanation. TG is flat out lying, but he is missing a golden opportunity, because if he just confessed it actually makes for a much cooler story (even if the name still is totally dumb). What a jackass.

    Leave a comment:


  • MegaGearMax
    replied
    Originally posted by Draego-Man View Post
    The other part of this is, why the hell would Mattel copyright Oo-Larr 6 full years before we are actually getting the figure? It's not like anyone knew the name and would be jumping to use it. They missed the boat on other figures like Ninjor and Double Trouble, which clearly people actually were familiar with, and in the case of all other figures in the line they haven't filed trademark notices until about a year before the figure comes out... this is one of the key ways people have been accurately guessing what figures we will be getting.
    Mattel used Oo-Larr in two bios way before his figure showed up. Oo-Larr first showed up in Gygor's bio and again in Battle Armor Skeletor's bio. That was 2011.

    There is also trademarking stuff before other companies get their hands on certain names. We see names show up on the back of the packaging.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest
    Guest replied
    Originally posted by _RZ_ View Post
    With the last set of pictures Draego-Man posted, I can see it.

    I thought maybe it was just that the whites of his eyes are painted (which often makes vintage he-man look "wrong"), the angle of the photograph, or maybe the gloss of the head molded in-color vs. painted. But no, He-Man's head is just too thin and looks like a different sculpt.

    It has a similar feel to the sculpture that NA He-Man or Jitsu have, rather than the Alcala Skeletor head / 1982 style/feel which the prototype had. The hairpiece looks the same, but the head looks really different. It's like his jaw isn't square enough, and his eyes are too close together.

    I don't think it's a "conspiracy" (one of the most ignorant things to say IMO) or that Draego or anyone else was "looking for something, anything, to pick on." It's there if you look at the pictures, it looks like another bait and switch, and it sucks. If you don't see it, don't agree, or aren't detail oriented enough to notice or don't care, fair enough. I didn't see it at first, and we won't know "for sure" until next year, but look at the eyes and jaw and you'll see it's definitely not the same as what we were shown at SDCC.
    If there are differences between the prototype and final production (due to materials shrinking, paint and the processes used etc.) then is this not something intrisic to ALL action figures, Frosta included, and therefore not even worth complaining about?
    Last edited by ; 08-17-2014, 08:27 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mechanizor
    replied
    Originally posted by Draego-Man View Post

    Total bullshit. Scooter is such a liar. Why can't he let this go? We all know the truth. Someone needs to ask Robot Chicken where they came up with the name Mo-Larr, and if they say "we wanted to name the character after an obscure character that no one had ever heard of". Then TG is not lying. But what they will say instead is that they thought Mo-Larr (as in 'molar') was a funny take on the MOTU brand, but the name needed to be stylized slightly for people to get the joke. Seriously, I'm so sick of this *******'s lies. Why can't he fess up for once that he screwed up and then rather than waste the misfiled copyright, he decided the name might work for this character? If he was honest about it, that is actually a much cooler story (except for the fact that Scott is so unlikable has a human being).

    The other part of this is, why the hell would Mattel copyright Oo-Larr 6 full years before we are actually getting the figure? It's not like anyone knew the name and would be jumping to use it. They missed the boat on other figures like Ninjor and Double Trouble, which clearly people actually were familiar with, and in the case of all other figures in the line they haven't filed trademark notices until about a year before the figure comes out... this is one of the key ways people have been accurately guessing what figures we will be getting.

    The only conclusion that any reasonably intelligent person could make of all this is that Scott is flat out lying. Yet he continues to lie instead of coming clean. Why? Because he and Mattel have made it abundantly clear over the past few years that they think their fans are a bunch of idiots who lack any reasonable intelligence. Funny thing about that is, when it comes to the ORG, they've just about got it right.
    I actually wanted to post about this yesterday, but then again I was too tired and said to myself; why bother, TG's lies will never end... Anyhow I'm glad that you brought it up so others can see how Neiltlich's brain is mangled with crap!

    Leave a comment:


  • Draego-Man
    replied
    1. Barbecue17: Oo-lar was one of the best reveals at SDCC and one of my most anticipated figures in this line. So where does the name come from? I've heard rumors that it was originally a misspelling of Mo-larr that fans jumped onboard with. Is that true or is there some other source for origin the name?

    Despite the persistent rumor, the "jungle/mini comic He-Man" (who is clearly NOT Prince Adam!) was always named Oo-lar for Classics and his bio/name was written back in 2009. The name comes from looking for a "jungle" like name and is a bit of an homage to popular Jungle hero screams and jungle noises animals make. His only relationship to “Mo-Larr??? is that both characters naturally use the MOTU naming convention of adding a “ar??? or “or??? at the end of the name. Quite a lot of figures have this. But Oo-Lar was named by Mattel and Mo-Larr was named separately by Robot Chicken in their sketch years ago. There is no other relationship other then both being “MOTU names??? using MOTU naming conventions.
    Total bullshit. Scooter is such a liar. Why can't he let this go? We all know the truth. Someone needs to ask Robot Chicken where they came up with the name Mo-Larr, and if they say "we wanted to name the character after an obscure character that no one had ever heard of". Then TG is not lying. But what they will say instead is that they thought Mo-Larr (as in 'molar') was a funny take on the MOTU brand, but the name needed to be stylized slightly for people to get the joke. Seriously, I'm so sick of this asshole's lies. Why can't he fess up for once that he screwed up and then rather than waste the misfiled copyright, he decided the name might work for this character? If he was honest about it, that is actually a much cooler story (except for the fact that Scott is so unlikable has a human being).

    The other part of this is, why the hell would Mattel copyright Oo-Larr 6 full years before we are actually getting the figure? It's not like anyone knew the name and would be jumping to use it. They missed the boat on other figures like Ninjor and Double Trouble, which clearly people actually were familiar with, and in the case of all other figures in the line they haven't filed trademark notices until about a year before the figure comes out... this is one of the key ways people have been accurately guessing what figures we will be getting.

    The only conclusion that any reasonably intelligent person could make of all this is that Scott is flat out lying. Yet he continues to lie instead of coming clean. Why? Because he and Mattel have made it abundantly clear over the past few years that they think their fans are a bunch of idiots who lack any reasonable intelligence. Funny thing about that is, when it comes to the ORG, they've just about got it right.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mechanizor
    commented on 's reply
    Sky Runner, no need for the unnecessary education, a bunch of us are artists and are a bit aware of the lightning techniques, thank you.

  • Battle Ram Man
    replied
    I'm not seeing the issue. Final is always a little less awesome than prototype. Sculpt is the same. Unfortunately the face is shiny. Paint isn't as expertly applied, but that's the difference between the assembly line and the lady who does paint for the 4HM

    Leave a comment:


  • _RZ_
    replied
    With the last set of pictures Draego-Man posted, I can see it.

    I thought maybe it was just that the whites of his eyes are painted (which often makes vintage he-man look "wrong"), the angle of the photograph, or maybe the gloss of the head molded in-color vs. painted. But no, He-Man's head is just too thin and looks like a different sculpt.

    It has a similar feel to the sculpture that NA He-Man or Jitsu have, rather than the Alcala Skeletor head / 1982 style/feel which the prototype had. The hairpiece looks the same, but the head looks really different. It's like his jaw isn't square enough, and his eyes are too close together.

    I don't think it's a "conspiracy" (one of the most ignorant things to say IMO) or that Draego or anyone else was "looking for something, anything, to pick on." It's there if you look at the pictures, it looks like another bait and switch, and it sucks. If you don't see it, don't agree, or aren't detail oriented enough to notice or don't care, fair enough. I didn't see it at first, and we won't know "for sure" until next year, but look at the eyes and jaw and you'll see it's definitely not the same as what we were shown at SDCC.
    Last edited by _RZ_; 08-15-2014, 04:09 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • He-man121
    commented on 's reply
    Hey Barnster,there are flaws in every figure.....like them all

  • He-man121
    commented on 's reply
    I see where Draego-mans coming from as well,we can argue about angles and lighting all day but the final product head is a lot narrower,the mouth itself is smaller and narrower,the cheek bones are flatter,the eyebrows are terrible and the face is a lot shinier compared to BA He-man's arms and legs.

  • Draego-Man
    commented on 's reply
    Exactly. Thank you.

  • Shawn
    replied
    I can kinda see what Drego-Man is saying. It does seam a little bit "off" or different. Certainly some of it is just imperfect lighting, odd angle and general photography skills. (I'm not the best at taking toy pics either for what that's worth) Some of the differences can be attributed to the standard hand painted prototype VS Final mass produced figure.

    IMO The 2nd (Final?) face looks thinner and the hair bigger then the proto face. I would guess this has to do with the cutting of the tooling pattern and the Design Team playing around with the digital 3D scan of the 4HM handmade sculpt. Like they where trying to "correct for shrinkage" of the tooling pattern? I'm no expert mind you. That's just a guess based on what little I understand of the action figure making process.

    Is it flaming pitch forks and Smores at the brunt lot in El Sugendo time? No. It's just It's irksome...it's annoying. It is kinda like Frosta, because once again we have NOT 4HM Mattel design team screwing up 4HM prototype perfection for the millionth time.



    Another possibility is that it's an optical illusion caused by a smaller head on the body of a figure we are use to seeing a larger head on? If your not familiar with Smaller head Syndrome, look at a 2009 figure's head compared to a 2014 figure's head: notice the difference in proportions? This just might be that. :-/
    Last edited by Shawn; 08-15-2014, 05:43 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • DrPAYNE
    commented on 's reply
    OK sure, if you say so. I'm not much of a conspiracy theorist. ...especially when it comes to toys.

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
Working...
X