Vintage Kaiju Figures Thread

[Planetxman]

Indeed Sir.

[BandaiBandit]

So what would the Yamakatsu line be classified as?

NOT Vintage.

So if I've got this straight...in the mid-to-late '90s the Popy line was considered vintage even though it was barely 20 years old, but in 2013 Yamakatsu figures and the oldest Bandais AREN'T vintage despite the fact that they turn 30 this year?

I know some of us like to use "vintage" as a catch-all term that applies only to anything made by Popy or earlier. Using it that way elevates those toys above everything that came after and turns them more into "collectors items/status symbols" instead of toys. But I generally feel that "vintage" is a term that applies to age. If 20 year old Bullmarks were vintage in the '90s, why can't the earliest Bandais be vintage now? They're older now than the toys we considered vintage back then? Surely in another 10-15 years we'll be considering the '80s Bandais and maybe even the earliest '90s stuff vintage, right? Or will we always be putting Marusan, Bullmark and Popy on a pedestal?

Personally speaking, I will always put Marusan, Bullmark, and Popy on a pedestal?
Why, don't you Mike? Or did you just spend all that money on your collection to make a statement?
As I stated earlier, Bandai changed the way of making figures with its accurate sculpts.
Yamakatsu never made the cut either, they just pre-dated Bandai by a hair.
Mike you know damn well that the vinyl world has alway made this distinction in vinyls.
Age of the vinyl was not the case! Its been the maker and the design. Their reign was the 1960's thru 1970's!
Yes, there are alot of nice older toys from the 1980's! I agree with you that they should get more love!
Until there is a revelation in the Japanese vinyl collection world, its not going to be any different.
The Japanese collectors were really the ones have made these distinctions.
America came in late to the "Golden Age" of vinyl, maybe a better term for early 1980's would be the start of the "Silver Age".

[Planetxman]

Correct me if I am wrong but the first was Marusan, Second was Bullmark and the third was Popy, correct ? Did Yamakatsu come before Bandai ? I thought they both came out in 1983, so either way Bandai would be the 4th or 5th company to make Godzilla/Toho vinyls.
Very hard to put either Yamakatsu or Bandai in the same category as Bullmark.

[RedZillaKing]

I certainly count the Yamakatsu figures and older 1980s Bandais as "Vintage". Hell, even the early nineties stuff is getting up there. Gorosaurus is turning twenty this year. And if distinctions like stylized vs. realism/hyper realism makes a figure vintage, then why not stuff like hard vs. soft vinyl? Standard vs super articulation? etc. Naw, it's an age thing.

[Kaiju no Mura]

What books? When were these books written and released that are being referenced? A few years ago? Yuji Nishimura hasn't written a book in over a decade. What does Yuji Nishimura say now in 2013 or even 2012? Reference a Japanese book, mook, magazine, etc from at least 2011 to now that state 1983 Bandai Godzilla vinyls are not consider vintage or that they are vintage. This goes to both sides of the debate.

The Godzilla Toy Museum book was written in 1993 of course Takashi Kuraji and Yuji Nishimura didn't consider Bandai vintage then.

The Beautiful Book of Monsters is a reference book to Bullmark and Marusan. Of course there is no Bandai in that book. There are no Popy in the book either, does that mean Popy is not vintage anymore? (rhetorical)

I can reference an old Comic Book Overstreet Price Guide from the 1990s that give a definition of copper age and the years it pertains to. That definition would be out of date to todays guideline. So referencing old books doesn't help the definition that early Bandai are not vintage.

Bandais were always considered modern Godzilla toys. Now as time is going by and some of them are now around 30 years old, technically speaking, they would be considered Vintage.

Apparently the older Bandai from the 80s are no longer consider as modern to some and even some experience collector(s). Maybe someone should throw up a poll to see what collectors think is vintage now.

Now as time is going by and some of them are now around 30 years old, technically speaking, they would be considered Vintage.

You said it. Times are changing as can the definitions.

However we both know that when one is speaking in terms of Godzilla collectibles, Vintage refers to 60's and 70's vinyls. Not from 1983..

Many toys Japanese or non-Japanese from the mid to late 1980s are now being consider as vintage. Not by some random collectors but by notable auction houses and even collectible guides.

The argument is that Bandai is not consider vintage because they are more realistic and the manufacture process is different than Marusan and Bullmark? If I understood that correctly. So if another company comes along that is more realistic with better processing that will make these older Bandai Kaiju vintage now? Companies like X-Plus and Bandai S.H.MonsterArts aren't more realistic than those 1980s Bandai Godzilla? How about companies like M1? Marmit? They are non-realistic (retro) and still using the old vinyl process of slush molding on how 60s and 70s Marusan and Bullmarks were made. Are they automatically vintage because of the out of date style and process?

Disclaimer: Not causing a fight or trying to troll. Just throwing out questions to hear the opinions of collectors and to educate myself more in this wonderful world of kaiju toy collecting.


*Greg, though Yamakatsu and Bandai put out Godzilla figures in 1983. Yamakatsu was able to get theres out first by a few months or more.

[Planetxman]

The Beautiful Book Of Monsters came out in 2008. A great reference book that focuses on VINTAGE. And you are right, no Popy toys are in that book. I wish someone else would put another book out.

[Kaiju no Mura]

The Beautiful Book Of Monsters came out in 2008. A great reference book that focuses on VINTAGE. And you are right, no Popy toys are in that book. I wish someone else would put another book out.

It focuses on vintage Bullmark with Marusan. Not vintage overall kaiju toys. Kazunori Saitō-san the author is known for his outstanding Bullmark kaiju collection. Books that are being referenced without understanding the actual text isn't proving any facts that early Bandai kaiju figures aren't consider vintage now or not. I can reference Japanese kaiju books also that show mix of Bullmark and 1983 Bandai kaiju toys on the same page or same picture. That doesn't mean anything unless the actual text states these are consider vintage.

When I think vintage kaiju toys my first thought is to the toys in the 60's and 70's like Marusan, Bullmark, Daikyou, Popy, Yonezawa, etc. So do I consider the early 80s Bandai kaiju toys as vintage? Maybe, maybe not. Guess that's the whole point of this discussion now is to define where the line draws as vintage or do we keep it alittle blurred for alittle longer.

[terrypierson]

Vintage when used in the common selling tongue relates to the age of an item. Clothes from the 70s are called vintage. Old comics, whether they are Silver Age or Golden Age are considered vintage. There's frickin vintage tupperware. In reality vintage by definition relates to wine. It's really not applicable to general selling at all. But sellers use the term all the time to express a non-standard subjective measurement of time. If something is old enough and collectible, but not at the 100 year mark that as I understand it qualifies it as an antique, it is commonly marketed as vintage. If the term is all relative to what collectors designate by some superficial standard, than one could make the case that MonsterArts have made Bandai vinyls vintage by the same logic that says Bandai's realism made earlier vinyls vintage. If collectors want to come up with a niche term to classify pre-Bandai toys, that's fine, but the use of a universally applicative word like "vintage" doesn't change just because of some collectors. I'm not disputing that it is universally accepted and published in Godzilla collecting corners that only pre-Bandai qualifies as vintage, I'm just saying that it doesn't prevent others from using the term in the commonly understood way.

[Planetxman]

I like this idea, but TK is probably too narrow a collector sample, as would be VKL, CT or the Godzilla Collector's group taken on their own. To mean anything, we'd need involvement from multiple outlets.

I said this specically because I bet only a few here actually are familiar with 60's/70's Vintage in any way shape or form.

[Orgasmatron]

planetxman i like you, i think youre a really cool guy and envy you in so many ways

but a lot of times you just make yourself out to be superior to everyone

[Planetxman]

planetxman i like you, i think youre a really cool guy and envy you in so many ways

but a lot of times you just make yourself out to be superior to everyone

Stating the obvious is not out to make myself look superior. I don't see how people who have no experience with Vintage collecting are the ones we should ask about in rergards to the subject.
There are various groups online including FB who I would say are comprised of people who know a little more about the subject. I'd be more apt to listen to what they have to say than on a board like this that has very little Vintage activity.

[Planetxman]

Owning vintage is simply a matter of having enough money and being willing to spend it. Buying a Bullmark doesn't magically grant you special knowledge about what is and isn't vintage.

In other words, "I have more vintage than you" is a weak way of dismissing arguments instead of responding to them. Kaiju no Mura's thoughts largely echo my own, but I'll add this post of mine from Legion's collectors group, as I think it begins to sketch out a useful way for thinking about this topic:

With all due respect, you have limited experience on the subject. That's not a putdown or any intention to be disrepectful. But many collectors have been dealing with these type of toys for many years. I've been around enough Vintage Collectors and have been in the hobby for long enough to know that there is definitely a seperation between 60's/70's collectibles and Yamakatsu and Bandai.

[Planetxman]

It's true, I have only a couple years experience in the hobby, and I don't actively seek out vintage. No disrespect taken.

However, I think my reasoning is valid, and while not *every* experienced collector agrees, several do, so I'm not talking out of my ass here.

I can agree that there's a distinction between '60s and '70s vinyls and Bandai and Yamakatsu that came after, but I don't agree that it's simply vintage vs modern anymore.

I collect all different Godzilla/Kaiju toys so it is not like just Vintage for me. That's just my passion. But until some group all agree on specific denominations, I feel that 60's/70's G Toys cannot be put in the same category as anything from 1983 and beyond.

[U-Tom]

I love 60's/70's bullmark kaiju! I had a few including Gaburan/Galvan but sold him a few years back. A few I'd like to own would be Sartan, Snowgon, Roboenzu, Kanedoras, Alien Karly, Dally, U-TOM, Brocken, and Mirrorman Tighe worth $2000-$3000 just to name a few lol.

Great figure but his horns are SUPER fragile, usually it's the left one that falls off.

[AWMGodzilla62]

The early Bandai's from the 80's in regard to age are probably old enough to be considered "vintage" now. But that said, the term "vintage" for Godzilla collectors/dealers have always referrenced the Marusan, Bullmark, and Popy figures. If I went into the dealer room at G-Fest and asked a dealer if they had any vintage figures, I wouldn't expect them to point to their early Bandai figures, I'd expect them to show me a Marusan, Bullmark, Popy, or else tell me they don't have any at all. It's not to say the 80's Bandai figures aren't old now, its just the lingo collectors such as myself use for referrencing the 60s and 70's pieces.

Here's some pics of my vintage stuff!

[terrypierson]

^Seriously awesome collection!

[Planetxman]

INCREDIBLE Collection 2 posts above !!

[BandaiBandit]

Kaiju no Mura wrote:
"The argument is that Bandai is not consider vintage because they are more realistic and the manufacture process is different than Marusan and Bullmark? If I understood that correctly. So if another company comes along that is more realistic with better processing that will make these older Bandai Kaiju vintage now? Companies like X-Plus and Bandai S.H.MonsterArts aren't more realistic than those 1980s Bandai Godzilla? How about companies like M1? Marmit? They are non-realistic (retro) and still using the old vinyl process of slush molding on how 60s and 70s Marusan and Bullmarks were made. Are they automatically vintage because of the out of date style and process?"

Maybe you just missed my point? Collectors changed direction in collecting because Bandai's toys looked very accurate.
Collectors wanted them, and the older companies were gone! The 1960'-1970's toys becoming vintage over years. Also, the fact that these older toys were played with by kids and were not collectors items as much as people have done with Bandai. There are alot of factors other than time here. Collector factors like paint sprays, availability, wear/rubs, rarity, variances. These factors are not a major issue in 1983-1984 Bandai Godzilla figures, as they are in the earlier companies. Yes, nice condition of a early Bandai does raise the value(w/tag especially). However, the factors are not as dominant in early Bandai as earlier companies. Alot more people collected Bandai as a collectors items, compared to the 1960's-1970's!

Jomei wrote:
"Owning vintage is simply a matter of having enough money and being willing to spend it. Buying a Bullmark doesn't magically grant you special knowledge about what is and isn't vintage."

Have money helps alot! Its not cheap!
However, experience in vintage vinyl is not gained over night on a computer either!
Its alot harder than you think, plus there is always people with deeper pockets then you in collecting vintage!
Knowledge in vintage is gained over time and there is volumnes to be learned from a hands on approach!
Experience in vintage can help you understand what should be vintage compared to what isn't!
Not saying totally that early Bandai isn't, but they shouldn't be categorized same class/group as early companies!

[eabaker]

Not saying totally that early Bandai isn't, but they shouldn't be categorized same class/group as early companies!

Which is why the word "vintage" shouldn't be used as an adjective at all without qualifiers.

[BandaiBandit]

Not saying totally that early Bandai isn't, but they shouldn't be categorized same class/group as early companies!

Which is why the word "vintage" shouldn't be used as an adjective at all without qualifiers.

I pointed out factors that most vintage collectors go by to collect.
Time/age is only one factor!