Vintage Toy Art Debate

[SpaceCrawler]

So, in other words - artwork that left little to the imagination and spelled it all out for a kid with no imagination because he was now becoming more and more programmed by TV. The 1980s (and part of the later 70s) was the beginning of the end of good vintage toy artwork, in my opinion. Prior to that, particularly the 60s and early 70s, you had imaginative artwork that didn't sell an idea, necessarily, or whose purpose was to cross promote or make clear what the item was (if you didn't know you had bigger problems), it just sold a cool toy and inspired a kids imagination. Look at the early GI Joe ("your dad's 12 inch figures", according to this video- I didn't know many kids in the 80s who parents played with GI Joes in the 70s, but maybe this guy knew lots of sexually active 10 year olds). That early 12 inch GI Joe artwork was actually amazing (unlike the little Joes) and inspiring. Also, you didn't have everything spelled out for you. And the artwork made up most of the packaging rather than logos and descriptive wording and blank black space and "American flag colors" etc. Look at the Major Matt Mason boxes- amazing little sets with the toys set up. That's all that needed to be said, a whole world was in that box and you didn't need to spell it out for a kid. Hot Wheels play sets had AMAZING art, even when they used photos. These 80s GI Joe packages were very ugly, poorly painted, and minimal by comparison. This is hardly the standard by which to judge toy box art.

Sean

[Werewolf]

So, in other words artwork that left little to the imagination and spelled it all out for a kid who was now becoming more and more programmed by TV that he had no imagination.

This was supposed to be a fun light hearted thread and the RAH GI JOE cards are just one example of the diverse toy art from the late 70s to mid 80s era. The other example I mentioned, the hand painted fantasy art of the MOTU packages, was completely different from the RAH style.

[sprytel]

Great packaging, but that guy is full of BS , just for starters what kid would remember or care for his dads 12" joes ??

Look at the early GI Joe ("your dad's 12 inch figures", according to this video- I didn't know many kids in the 80s who parents played with GI Joes in the 70s, but maybe this guy knew lots of sexually active 10 year olds).

I was born in 1975. I grew up playing with hand-me-down GI Joes from my big brothers. I remember being super excited when my mom showed me a newspaper article that the line was coming back (even as it perplexed me how it would work in 3.75"). So kids like me would definitely remember or care... it just wouldn't be "your dad's" figures.

[El Hombre Nuclear]

I was born in 1975. I grew up playing with hand-me-down GI Joes from my big brothers. I remember being super excited when my mom showed me a newspaper article that the line was coming back (even as it perplexed me how it would work in 3.75"). So kids like me would definitely remember or care... it just wouldn't be "your dad's" figures.

Yeah, it's similar for me (I'm just slightly older than you). From '77 up through around '81, along with the brand new Super Joe stuff, there were TONS of leftover late release "orange box" Adventure Team sets sitting on the shelves. It may have been particularly prevalent in my area (NJ/NYC metro) due to the high density of toy and department stores, but I've talked to many others in my age range over the years (born early/mid '70s) who shared a similar experience. Big Jim was another line like that. Aside from this, a much older neighbor gave me all of his '60s action figures in the late '70s, so by the time RAH rolled around, I was a GI Joe veteran. Probably for younger people like the 3D Joes guy who made that video (born in the late '70s and beyond), they would have no memory of this stuff. There's always seemed to be a noticeable generational divide between people our age and those just a few years younger, and this would be yet another example.

[El Hombre Nuclear]

So, in other words artwork that left little to the imagination and spelled it all out for a kid who was now becoming more and more programmed by TV that he had no imagination. The 1980s (and part of the later 70s) was the beginning of the end of good vintage toy artwork, in my opinion. Prior to that, particularly the 60s and early 70s, you had imaginative artwork that didn't sell an idea, necessarily, or whose purpose was to cross promote or make clear what the item was (if you didn't know you had bigger problems), it just sold a cool toy and inspired a kids imagination. Look at the early GI Joe ("your dad's 12 inch

Sorry, but there's some revisionist history going on here. There was a great deal of explicitly licensed/cross promotional stuff released well before then. I mean, they were already putting out licensed Man From U.N.C.L.E. and Honey West figures (amongst others) within one year of the initial GI Joe launch, featuring images ripped straight from the TV shows. And that's not to mention all the licensed Marx sets dating back to the mid '50s. Hell, I think even my grandfather had official Buck Rogers toys in the '20s or '30s.

Not to mention that plenty of stuff from the era you're decrying had that "generic adventure" type of packaging. Take a look at Adventure People or early Playmobil sets for example, or many of the lines being released in Europe, where change in the toy industry was often slower.

As a rule, blanket "era bashing" based on personal nostalgic biases is not a great idea. I'm a Marx Toys enthusiast, and not only will many of my fellow Marx fans (who are mainly Baby Boomers) frequently tell me that the late era Marx stuff from the '70s that I grew up with is total crap, they'd also tell you that stuff like Matt Mason and GI Joe is as well. It's all in the eye of the beholder...

[enyawd72]

So, in other words - artwork that left little to the imagination and spelled it all out for a kid with no imagination because he was now becoming more and more programmed by TV. The 1980s (and part of the later 70s) was the beginning of the end of good vintage toy artwork, in my opinion. Prior to that, particularly the 60s and early 70s, you had imaginative artwork that didn't sell an idea, necessarily, or whose purpose was to cross promote or make clear what the item was (if you didn't know you had bigger problems), it just sold a cool toy and inspired a kids imagination. Look at the early GI Joe ("your dad's 12 inch figures", according to this video- I didn't know many kids in the 80s who parents played with GI Joes in the 70s, but maybe this guy knew lots of sexually active 10 year olds). That early 12 inch GI Joe artwork was actually amazing (unlike the little Joes) and inspiring. Also, you didn't have everything spelled out for you. And the artwork made up most of the packaging rather than logos and descriptive wording and blank black space and "American flag colors" etc. Look at the Major Matt Mason boxes- amazing little sets with the toys set up. That's all that needed to be said, a whole world was in that box and you didn't need to spell it out for a kid. Hot Wheels play sets had AMAZING art, even when they used photos. These 80s GI Joe packages were very ugly, poorly painted, and minimal by comparison. This is hardly the standard by which to judge toy box art.

Sean

Well, wasn't THAT just a ray of sunshine.

[Marvelmania]

^^^^^^ was thinking the same thing

[palitoy]

As a rule, blanket "era bashing" based on personal nostalgic biases is not a great idea. I'm a Marx Toys enthusiast, and not only will many of my fellow Marx fans (who are mainly Baby Boomers) frequently tell me that the late era Marx stuff from the '70s that I grew up with is total crap, they'd also tell you that stuff like Matt Mason and GI Joe is as well. It's all in the eye of the beholder...

Oh yeah, in the 80s I constantly got told all the Adventure Team, Mego and Big Jim figures were "total crap" by people ten years my senior. The best era for toys is when you were eight, the argument whose era is better is about as interesting to me as whose dad can beat whose dad up.

[Werewolf]

I don't really get it. I appreciate toys from many eras whether I personally collect them or not. So, I'm not going to try to rain on someone else's toy happy place. I was just hoping people would join in and talk about the toy art they liked from the late 70s and early 80s.

[SpaceCrawler]

Well, wasn't THAT just a ray of sunshine.

Sean

[SpaceCrawler]

Sorry, but there's some revisionist history going on here. There was a great deal of explicitly licensed/cross promotional stuff released well before then. I mean, they were already putting out licensed Man From U.N.C.L.E. and Honey West figures (amongst others) within one year of the initial GI Joe launch, featuring images ripped straight from the TV shows. And that's not to mention all the licensed Marx sets dating back to the mid '50s. Hell, I think even my grandfather had official Buck Rogers toys in the '20s or '30s.

No, there is nothing revisionist about what I wrote. I'm surprised that anyone would consider what I said controversial (unless you're completely biased to your own era- which actually I am not having grown up in the 80s while I collect toys from the 50s through 90s). I never said 100% of toy packaging from the 60s and early 70s was perfect. I was talking about how much the art differed between the eras for some of the most popular toys - since the video holds up 80s GI Joe packages as the perfect example of toy art, which to me is controversial since I think it sticks and is amateurish compared to earlier Joe art, I offered my opinion. I wasn't aware it would make anyone upset. So if it did I'm sorry. If you can tolerate discussion on a discussion board then kudos to you! :D

I was also commenting on how, as the 70s turned into the 80s, toys were increasingly becoming nothing more than product based on cartoons or kids TV shows (shows that were made to sell toys, incidentally, unlike Man From Uncle toys, which you mention. That was just a show and happened to spin off some toys). Prior to the 80s when these TV toys dominated stores we had a majority of toys based on nothing, really, though some may have had a theme like space, or sports or adventure, etc (Big Jim, GI Joe, Major Matt Mason, Zeroids, model kits, Johnny West, Marx type play sets, etc, etc). These were totally original, for the most part. Most had no TV shows to base them on or tell you how to play, etc. That's what I meant. Unlike all the He Man and little GI Joe nonsense that came later, some of the biggest toys or earlier eras were original ideas or generic things (cowboys, spacemen, etc) that allowed you to use your imagination.

Not to mention that plenty of stuff from the era you're decrying had that "generic adventure" type of packaging. Take a look at Adventure People or early Playmobil sets for example, or many of the lines being released in Europe, where change in the toy industry was often slower.

Again, I never said 00% of the packaging was great. I said most was better than the packaging that came after, where packaging got simplified.

As a rule, blanket "era bashing" based on personal nostalgic biases is not a great idea. I'm a Marx Toys enthusiast, and not only will many of my fellow Marx fans (who are mainly Baby Boomers) frequently tell me that the late era Marx stuff from the '70s that I grew up with is total crap, they'd also tell you that stuff like Matt Mason and GI Joe is as well. It's all in the eye of the beholder...

I only responded to the assertion that an 80s GI Joe card was a prime example of the best of toy packaging one could comment on.

Sean

[Werewolf]

Good grief. I give up.

[palitoy]

yay, a preference war.

[PNGwynne]

Evidently some kinds of cross-promotion and cultural influences are more "pure" than others, who knew?

At any rate, de gustibus non est disputandum.

[HardyGirl]

Since the first GIJoes came out in 1964. If a kid was 8 years old then, by 1984 when the RAH Joes were out, he could have been 28 and had a kid or 2. So it's perfectly reasonable that they could have been "Your dad's GIJoes".

("your dad's 12 inch figures", according to this video- I didn't know many kids in the 80s who parents played with GI Joes in the 70s, but maybe this guy knew lots of sexually active 10 year olds).