VFTF1

Yeah - Robotmaster Victory Saber is the only Robotmaster I have. Although I kinda miss the other guys - the seekers were nice, as were the little Beast Wars Lio Convoy and such - but ultimately I prefer MP seekers and the original BW Lio Convoy, and reissue Takara Primal/Megatron (Reborn two pack of course) Damn -I'm glad I got that sucker Dag. My Transformers collection is BIG again. It used to be small. Now it's funkin' gianormous - and I don't have ANYTHING from Beast Machines-RID-Armada-Energon-Cybertron or the Japanese equivalents... and yet the collection is still gianormous I swear - this stuff is like pokemon. Just so much of it It's worse than Gundam Pete

Is "Tamashii" synonymous with Bandai? Why does that site always refer to Tamashii SOCs and Tamashi DX chogokin from Macross Frontier and Tamashii this and Tamashii that? Pete

Really love those shots of Vermillion Team. I'm kind'a curious though as to who else was on Skull Squadron. Maybe Yamato could actually make them for us Pete

But see - to me it's kinda wierd to knock anime for copy-catting too much, complain that there's nothing fresh out there, and then come out and say that the last mecha anime you enjoyed was...Gundam Seed. Particularly since the Mecha in Gundam Seed, IMO, were actually not that great. The only difference was in the level of animation - the SEED anime managed to be better animated than the original UC MSG. But the Mecha itself from MSG was solid and could stand up design-wise to SEED any day (IMO). But even if I'm wrong - the fact remains that SEED is a copycat I dunno. I guess we just have to wait for the next big mecha/anime revolution to hit. Hopefully it wears pink lingerie, is fully poseable and comes in 1:1 scale Pete

Star Saber is my all time favorite Autobot. Good job. Pete

I don't know why people are so down on the 19. Well - yes I do. Because it came out like a million years ago when compared to all the stuff we're getting now. It was the first real accomplishment on Yamato's part that ushered in the "modern age" of mecha products that we love. Everything after was made possible because the 1:60 19 was created. But it's not as bad as people make it out... I'd love a fleet of ten pete

Mpchi: What can I say? Congrats to Hasbro for getting at least ONE of the Transformers pretty darned right. Optimus Prime looks great. Pete

Wait a moment while I gather up all the fragments of my shattered hopes and dreams... Pete

WHAT THE ?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Am I blind or did EVERYBODY MISS THE FRICKIN' VF-19 Kai in 1:48 scale in that picture!?!? Where can I get that! When is it coming out!? Pete

I'm mainly gonna see it so I can join a new religion that apparently incorporates those cute girls Pete

So that's what happened Dag... Him and Sarah went to the Protoculture then? Pete

I'm guessing we're gonna get Gamlin's VF-17. I would love M7 valkyrie. Pete

Sweet! So happy to see Revoltech taking up the slack for the total LACK of Gurren Lagann figures that was hitherto the case I remember that dude. It was in the one of the very last episodes - that was the final form of the Gurren Lagann that broke out of the Sea of Despair It has Gao Gai Gaogar (spelling?) written all over it - but I still like it Pete

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: IV Oh - wait... there was a new Ninja Turtles movie a year or so ago... CGI I think... Pete

Thanks guys. 14 episodes sounds very nicely manageable I'll check it out for sure Re-watcing old anime I have never been one to keep up. The only anime I ever watched as it was made was Macross Frontier. I'll admit that was fun and exciting and wonderful - but generally I tend to watch things years after they've been released And the gate way drug is always the toy, figure or model Pete

My only knowledge of this series is limited to the Revoltech Mikuru Asahina figure - which I love. I take it I should check this series out? How many episodes in total? Any general recomendations and non-spolerish yet tantalizing things you can say to encourage me? Pete

I guess my taste is the same as Gubbaba - I can't watch random episodes from a series that are "my favorite" because the dramatic impact of particular scenes always exists because of what came before and what might follow. This kind of question is kind of like "what do you prefer - tits, ass, legs, a nice face?" Generally - I prefer (in order of preference): 1. Face 2. Ass 3. Tits 4. Legs But on the whole - I like a woman who has all of these elements, not just some of them, going for her. And if the question is: "You don't have time to enjoy the whole woman - so what part would you sleep with?" The answer is: HUH? Same with Macross series and just about any other anime series. You can't enjoy just a part of it fully on its' own. Best to watch through the whole series. If you don't have time for a marathon - don't do one. Just watch one episode per day. Pete

I disagree with the accusation of lack of originality. I mean - read over the hundreds of pages of reaction to Macross Frontier on these boards. Then consider that the reactons to each episode and the discussions sparked by each episode COULD NOT POSSIBLY BE WRITTEN ABOUT ANY OTHER MACROSS SERIES. Now - is it possible to generalize and say A is similar to B? Yes. But if you're seriously about putting forth an argument that it's not just similar, but also unoriginal and ripped off, then the argument has got to be more intricate. Especially since we're talking about a genre where giant robots and giant boobs are the norm. Your criticism is, in my view, along the same lines as the following: "There's really no difference amongst all the world's famous paintings because all of them were made using some form a paint." Also - I think this kind of discussion sets up a bit of a trap - because it's near all impossible to talk about "everything" - and how are we seriously supposed to defend the uniqueness of NGE or Macross Frontier or other series when we would have to reference EVERYTHING to do so? So it kind of becomes a bit of a conversation about nothing. Just to take one snippet: Yeah, well... The badass kid with glasses flew a RED Valk in the previous Macross series. As for Ozma having "the same looking valk" as Roy Fokker - um... you probably mean the yellow highlights, but that hardly qualifies as the "same looking valk." Then the argument that it was less of a continuation and more of a reboot makes little sense, particularly when it isn't backed up with an attempt at an argument. It sound like a gutt reaction... which is fine - but it's not enough to get me to think "yeah man, this Macross Frontier thing really insults my intelligence" Again - I don't find it necessary to demonstrate how it is that Macross Frontier is unique - just go into the TV show thread and dig out the million page conversation threads for each individual episodes. If it was just a boring rip off reboot people wouldn't have so much to talk about, there wouldn't be so many interesting ideas and reactions flying around.... So - I would put my opinion like this: I don't mind repetition in anime, I don't think it's possible for certain elements common to the genre not to be there and I don't get the feeling that a bad anime is ever bad because it's a rip off of something - usually the thing just can't stand on its' own merits... Pete

I love sequels. Sequals ALWAYS have the potential for the making of a really bad movie. And there's nothing better than a bad movie. Therefore - please make: Godfather IV: Godfather vs. Sopranos Turf Wars Transformers vs. GI Joe: Live Action Movie Star Wars VII: Children of the Force (Incest Version) Rocky Balboa II: Hearts on Fire Alien VI: Infestation Earth hmm... I'm sure I could come up with more. Sequel away I say Pete

That Michael a few posts up is the best I've seen. The guy has the perfect face for it. Pete

Kakizake TV - first. Then - at some future date - probably Kaki DYRL, since I'm generally in love enough with the v.2 to get them all eventually. Pete

Well, to be fair - I'm kind of also in a win-win situation personally because my parents live just outside the city, own a huge plot of land and a house that can pretty much fit five generations of family in it... So granted - if I ever break both legs, get cancer of the liver, my business goes bankrupt, lighting strikes and paralyzes me from the waiste up - I will still not be homeless and not have to migrate in search of work so I can survive. Also, my girlfriend "owns" her apartment ("owns" in apostraphes because she pays off a mortgage). My parents are in the classically perfect situation.They bought the land for pennies on the dollar, and built the house themselves when they could afford it. Now - they have zero debt. All they pay is 100 USD per month in real estate taxes and elecriticty bills...and the garderner...and the cleaning lady... maintenance is not cheap - but it's also some what optional (aka you don't HAVE TO have the cleaning lady come once a week and you can do gardening and mowing yourself once in a while). I think it's pointless to treat the rent vs. own debate in terms of looking for one rational outcome because it does all depend on context - and even if we all concluded that "in general" renting were better "in general" - then who's to say that in the particular case of Macrossman - he's right and he made the smart move getting his house? However - there are a couple of misconceptions out there due to a lack of perspective. In terms of the appreciation of the value of real estate in the USA - between 1900 and 2000 housing prices rose on average about 3% per year (not adjusted for inflation). Between 1950 and 2000, when the basic loan/mortgage infrastructure took hold in the market - housing prices rose about4% (again not adjusted for inflation). However, check out the 10-City index for housing prices in major cities from 1997 to 2006 shows housing prices going up 19.4% a year which is a significant departure. So - for about 97 years you had appreciation of 3 to 4%. Then suddenly within the span of 9 years you have almost 20% appreciation. How did this happen? Simple: when government policy pays banks to give people essentially free money to buy houses - they are essentially subsidizing houses. When you subsidize an industry you send an artificial signal that there is higher demand for that product. What happens to prices when there is higher demand? Prices go up. Knowing that all this money was flooding into the housing market - is it any wonder developers raised their prices time and time again? Is it any wonder that potential buyers were willing to pay outrageous money for houses and apartments since IT WASN'T THEIR MONEY. I mean - look - if someone says - "hey - this apartment costs 200 thousand dollars" and the bank just told you that you can have it for 1000 USD a month even though you work a temp job and have two credit cards that are maxed out - will the 200 thousand dollar price tag really compel you to negotiate DOWN? No. Because you're thinking "yeah - whatever - 200 or 300 thousand - whatever. I'm paying a thousand bucks a month." It's the same with other industries where policy has been driven by the "pride of" or "right to" philosophy. Look at how much college tuition costs. It's ridiculous. Why does it cost this much? Because the state keeps throwing money at the industry. The solution is not - of course - to artificially limit the rise in prices because that will just lead to "gas lines" in the industry - to shortages. The solution is exactly what is happening now - a massive depression. A bursting bubble when reality comes back in control and people realize that all those green pieces of paper are pretty much the equivalent of monopoly money. Speaking of which - that has been one of the side effects of this crazy housing bubble: You might think "yeah - I got this great deal on my real estate" but on the other hand - look at how many dollars you need to buy a VF-1 from Yamato? Now look at how much other things cost that are produced overseas or have parts produced overseas. Now consider that the purchasing power of your dollars and your savings has essentially been whiped out. Look - under normal circumstances - the "renter vs. owner" debate is really all about preference. It's like debating "1:72 model or DC chogokin?" There are pros and cons. But - if the government were paying banks to give loans to Macross fans on the condition that they bought DX chogokins and not 1:72 models --- guess what would happen to the price of DX chogokins? 300 USD per piece - 500 USD per piece - it is concievable. And guess what Bandai would do? MAKE MORE. And guess what would happen in the end? The value of that 300 or 500 or eventually 1000 USD that you'd be willing to spend on a DX - willing because it's just some digit on your credit card bill and the "real" cost "for you" is - say - 13 USD a month plus 1 buck in interest - would finally PLUMMET. And that huge collection of DXs you built up (kind of like all those houses and apartments people bought up) -- you think you'd get out of debt by selling those off? No. Because it will turn out that Bandai made too many of them - because they didn't (couldn't) tell the difference between artificial demand generated by cheap credit backed by government and REAL demand generated by REAL value created by REAL work and savings over time translated into the purchase of something for which there is authentic demand. Under those circumstances - the debate gains a new dimmension. It's no longer "DX or 1:72" it's "1:72 or believing the lie thast you can own 50 DXs without having three jobs and a tonight's winning lottery ticket." I guess that's how I looked at the question. Naturally - some one will always pop up with a legit "well I do X and I'm doing great" and "I do Y and I'm doing great too" story. Doesn't take away from the general analysis of the situation though. Pete

Simple: If you are buying a house with your own money, and paying 100% in cash OR you are paying a significant amount (say 70-80%) in cash and loaning the remaining 20 or 30% from the bank AND you are buying a house TO LIVE IN AND ENJOY instead of buying another house to gamble with on the retail market then... YES - you are right - buying a house makes sense. However, if the proportions are reversed - if you are paying 10 to 30% of the value in cash and loaning 70% from the bank - then you're NOT putting money in your own pocket. You are effectively still renting - only you're renting it from the bank. You're also renting under a permanently binding contract. You can't just move out if you suddenly experience financial difficulties or if you get a better job offer in another state or country. If you want to move out -you have to either rent or sell the property. Renting is not easy - it's a part time or even full time job. It's not something you can do lightly either. Selling the property - isn't this obvious - is clearly not going to bring you as much as you paid buying it. So - you'll likely end up owing the bank. This leaves you trapped living their, paying rent to the bank - only it's not called rent it's called "mortgage and loan payments" and of course you technically can sell the place or rent it - but trust me - that isn't easy to do. On the other hand - if you are a renter - you have more flexibility. You can move faster- you're more mobile. If the market changes - you can make the appropriate reactions without risking your future. You have more negotiating power. People have this wrong idea that being a renter means that you work for your landlord - they have this feudal/serfdom stereotype where the renter works and the landlord just laughs on the way to the bank. Not true. Just because you rent doesn't mean you're poor. In fact - the majority of people who now have trouble paying off their debts on real estate are middle class families which took huge loans for apartments and houses they couldn't afford. Rich people are usually rich because they DON'T spend more than they take in and they engage in savings and capital accumulation. So - just because you rent doesn't mean "cheap stinky studio" and it doesn't mean you can't have other property or savings in the bank. Again - it's not an iron rule. If you have a loving wife, three kids, and a dream to live the vast majority or entirety of your life in place X and you find your dream house and you can afford it and you don't go too much into debt - then yes - of course - buy it. But - if you're young - even a young couple - why jail yourself? Why make the mistake of buying into the "home ownership" propaganda when all you're doing is renting from a bank? And on terms that - in the case of a change in the market- render you helpless? This is why I think that renting puts more money into your pocket: because it traps less money in an over-priced piece of real estate you might regret having gotten in the first place. Pete

I agree with the mystery of the missing breasts. That's not Sheryl - that's Alto with tissues under his bra reliving his kabuki heyday. Pete

Yep - most definitely something like that Pete