First Look At A Playmates Star Trek Movie Figure |
jump to navigation

First Look At A Playmates Star Trek Movie Figure January 17, 2009

by John Tenuto , Filed under: Star Trek (2009 film),Toys , trackback

Today Playmates has revealed the first image from their extensive line of toys and figures for the Star Trek movie. Toynewsi got a first look at a 6" Kirk action figure. This new image also gives a look at the new Starfleet phaser (albeit a small look) Check it out below, plus more details on the rest of the Playmates line. 


ToyNewsi was sent this first look today of the 6" figure of Chris Pine as Captain James T. Kirk (called the "Kirk in Enterprise Outfit" figure), which will retail for around $10.

6" of Kirkness from Playmates
 [click to see larger at ToyNewsi]

[UPDATED] The Kirk in Enterprise Outfit figure is just one ten 6" figures from Playmates coming out in April. In addition to Kirk, there will be four other figures in ‘Enterprise Outfits’ (Sulu, Pike, Quinto Spock, and Scotty), plus three figures in ‘Cadet Outfits (Uhura McCoy and Chekov). There is also a Nero figure and a ‘Prime Spock’ figure (Nimoy Spock). Each figure comes with its own stand and accessories like communicators and phasers. You can pre-order the 6" set of ten now from Entertainment Earth for $86.64. Playmates is also doing a larger 12" line and a smaller 3 3/4" line of figures.

The 6 inch figure line from Playmates Toys is meant to satisfy those looking for more articulation and detailing than is allowed in the smaller sized (3 3/4") figures, but also those who do not wish the bulk or height of the 12" line which become difficult to display in larger quantities. As is seen in the photo, the Kirk action figure has a good deal of articulation in the arms, legs, hands, and feet. And unlike some toy lines, the accessories are scaled properly and can be held by the toys easily due to the hand design (try to get Indiana Jones to hold his whip, for example, in many of the Hasbro action figures).

This new Kirk image also gives us another glimpse of the new Starfleet phaser.

The new Starfleet phaser (as an accessory for a 6" action figure)

Playmates Star Trek movie Toy Line
The above 6" is just one of a line of 6" figures, which are just the tip of the iceberg of Playmates products for the new Star Trek movie. The first wave of Playmates movie products comes out in March and April.

Here is what you can pre-order now from Entertainment Earth (see links for more details):

A second wave from Playmates is expected around September, but not confirmed. Earlier reports indicated this set would include:

Thoughts on the new figures and the past and future of Playmates Trek
During the 1990s, Playmates Toys held the license for Star Trek feature films and television shows. Among other releases, Playmates Toys offered a line of 10 six inch action figures from Star Trek: First Contact, and comparing these figures to the Kirk image, it is obvious how much the technology has improved in the past decade. The new Kirk figure is more poseable (the Zefram Cochrane figure from the 1990s, for example, had almost no articulation) and the likeness is good. While some fans might be disappointed in the shirt, which is certainly a fair argument, it must be remembered that Star Trek toys are offered in a variety of sizes and prices for a reason. The 3.75" line will feature a great deal of variety and are scaled to the playsets. These are meant to be played with and detailing, while important, is less a concern than playability. However, the 6" line will likely feature better details and look great on display. The 12" line, or the Mattel Barbie figures (see below), will offer the best detailing, yet they of course cost much more. During 2009, Star Trek fans will get something they have not had for many years, action figures designs for all interests at varying prices, and varying sizes. Its IDIC time for collectors, and this Kirk bodes well for the Playmates Toy line. Now, we wait for more images and more details, so we could join Nero and say, "The wait is over!"

More Playmates images and news coming soon
The annual New York Toy Fair is in February and it is expected to Playmates to be showing off more of their Star Trek movie line there. In March ToyFare magazine will feature the StarTrek toys on the cover and have a full feature on them. You can pre-order ToyFare #141 now at for $3.99.

Mattel Barbie figures too
As noted above, Mattel will also be making figures for the Star Trek movie. TrekMovie previously reported on the line of three Barbie figures coming in May. This set of three collectible 12" figures can also be pre-ordered now for $151.19.

More Star Trek movie figures from Mattel’s Barbie line

Thanks to the many TrekMovie readers who sent in tips about the toynewsi article


1. CmdrR - January 17, 2009

Looks like Pine’s mom knitted his tunic.

I kidz, but I loves me some good Trek toys!!

2. ety3 - January 17, 2009

Is it just me or does his head look a little too small for that body?

As for the phaser, I’m reserving judgment, as most mini-accessories for action figures aren’t the same, detail-wise, as the actual prop. (Looks fairly close to TOS, from what I can see, though.)

3. Lousy_Canadian - January 17, 2009

Hope we see more soon! :D

4. Andy Patterson - January 17, 2009

Looks like the Pine doll has on Kirk’s outdoor boots that Shatner wore during outdoor action scenes. Or at least it has less heel than the ones they wore most of the time.

5. S. John Ross - January 17, 2009

It’s odd. The Playmates Kirk puts me in mind of a Simpsons interpretation of itself, without actually _being_ a Simpsons interpretation of itself. Something about the shape of the mouth, I guess.

Now I have the Simpsons theme stuck in my head. Thanks, Playmates :/

6. Nick Cook - January 17, 2009

Oh dear that figure looks awful!

7. Daniel Broadway - January 17, 2009

The detail in the shirt is a little much, and Kirk’s hair isn’t red, but it’s cool overall.

8. COOLPT - January 17, 2009

#1, Dead On! That was what I was gonna say! Looks like Grandma Kirk got out the ole needle and thread and knitted Jimmy a sweater for Christmas? That or he went to a Knights of the Round Table fair and purchased a chain linked tunic, then spray painted it Yellow! But I guess I will buy them all anyway…just havin a lil fun here.

9. danpaine - January 17, 2009

That looks horrendous.

10. Mr. Atoz - January 17, 2009

What in the hell is that? It looks like its made from clay?!?!?

11. Prologic9 - January 17, 2009

Looks shit. I you hate Playmates.

12. Can't Wait for May 2008 - January 17, 2009

Has a figure collector, this figure is UGLY!!! Im hoping this is a prototype. I would really like to see something that is a alot better looking then that. Hopefully the 3/4” and 12” line looks alot better then the 6”.

13. spider1981 - January 17, 2009

I just threw up in my mouth a little.

I had high hopes for these. I REALLY wish Diamond Select/Art Asylum would’ve gotten the license for the new movie to go along with their other Trek licenses.

14. Tony Dayoub - January 17, 2009

Art Asylum spoiled me pretty badly, I guess.

15. Lee - January 17, 2009

Looks like Benicio del Toro as Fenster in The Usual Suspects!

16. rm10019 - January 17, 2009

Not impressed but I’ll reserve judgement until I see a final image and the toy itself

17. Darth Ballz - January 17, 2009

That looks like a kirk with down syndrome! This doesent’ look any better than the crappy likeness in the figures from 10+ years ago. Art Asylum should have got a shot at thease……..

Darth “Action figure” BAllz

18. JYHASH - January 17, 2009

So was the Phaser made by Apple? Or is it silver and the glare really bad on it? I dunno if the world is ready for a white phaser…They’re so hard to keep clean and stain so easily. You can’t really take it down on the landing party to Heinz’s Tomato Sauce planet, because you can’t get the stains out later…


19. allister gourlay - January 17, 2009

oh dear!

20. Lucas - January 17, 2009

17: what a disgraceful comment I hope you never have kids with ‘downs syndrome’ …

21. Lucas - January 17, 2009

18: If your taking that figure as literall I pity your sense of judgement, so going by what you said, kirk will also be wearing a 3 inch thick wooley shirt, and a JUMBO size utility belt?


22. Javier Lorenz Jr. - January 17, 2009

I hate to say it, but I think this 6″ figure looks awful. I’m really hoping that it’s simply a proto-type figure, rather than the finished product. The proportions of the phaser seem way out of whack, as though Pine’s Kirk is wielding a barcode scanner and heeding the call of “Mark down in aisle six!!. Comparatively, the proportions of the 12″doll’s phaser strike me as likely being more accurate to true scale and far more aesthetically pleasing. Never thought I would ever so much as think this…but, in this case, I’d rather have a Barbie!!!

23. SPB - January 17, 2009

Nice to see Starfleet has decided to pass out sweaters to their crewmen…

24. Capttravis - January 17, 2009

At least with that ‘sweater’ on he looks chubby like the Shat…

25. John Gill - January 17, 2009

I agree with #12, hopefully this is just a prototype…

26. Oregon Trek Geek - January 17, 2009

The hair color is rather odd, and there’s quite a bit of forehead there. I don’t think Pine is losing his hair yet, or dying it red.

27. thecrisper - January 17, 2009

Kirk looks high.

28. Shatner_Fan_Prime - January 17, 2009

Won’t be buyin’ that one!

29. Shatner_Fan_Prime - January 17, 2009

“Kirk” looks like Cornelius from Planet of the Apes.

30. Devon - January 17, 2009

Yeah guys good thinking, Art Asylum would have got the license then they would barely be available in stores! These are just toys people.

31. Unbel1ever - January 17, 2009

The Playmates figure seems just wrong. Looks nothing like Kirk. I like the phaser though.

32. The Laughing Spaceman - January 17, 2009

Don’t like that phaser…I hope it’s not a good reproduction of what’s in the movie. They probably should not have tried to reproduce the texture of the shirts on the action figure…as pointed out, it looks like a sweater…

33. BrF - January 17, 2009

Cable-knit Kirk! I’m waiting till the figure comes out in something a little lighter, maybe a nice merino wool v-neck.

34. The Laughing Spaceman - January 17, 2009

Forgot to say — the Barbie figures look better but Kirk looks like Napoleon Dynamite…

35. Jason - January 17, 2009

yeah the barbie figures look alot better

i wanna see the 3 3/4 figures

36. montreal paul - January 17, 2009

wow… I am usually more positive… but that is horrible looking! Playmates has never really impressed me anyway. I really hope this is a prototype.. but I doubt it. The Barbie figures look a heck of a lot better than that does. Art Asylum would have done a kickass job with them. too bad. Playmates dropped teh ball on this.

37. Ciarán - January 17, 2009

I was afraid of this. That thing looks TERRIBLE. This movie really NEEDS to get Art Asylum to make the figures. Oh God, this isn’t good at all.

38. marco - January 17, 2009

wow…these look……crap

39. noirgwio - January 17, 2009

I agree with the few posts I’ve read above… Firstly, that Kirk figure looks like it has the mid-section gerth of STGEN Shatner. And the head, the closest approximation I can come up with as far as who it looks like would be a ginger (that is red head) Elliot Gould… But I read Toyfare and collect figures enough to know this is (hopefully) just the prototype sculpt, and the final will look better.

40. Anthony Pascale - January 17, 2009

The article has been updated by JOhn to add more details on the line and more context

RE: barbie v playmates
The barbies are 50 bucks each. They are twice as big and five times as expensive as the 6″ playmates, and it is cloth v plastic. Playmates will have their own 12″ with cloth outfits line, but it will also cost less than the barbies.

41. Bryan - January 17, 2009

Ye gods, that thing is ugly. Where to start?

The likeness is shockingly off, looking less like Chris Pine than Hayden Christensen with a perm, the build is strangely stocky, and the bizarre design decision to emphasize the texture of the uniform pullover just makes it look like a woolly sweater. A stocky Hayden Christensen with a perm and a woolly sweater. Yeah. Dare I cling to the hope that this is a hastily-assembled prototype, and that the finished figure will be leagues better?

42. AdamTrek - January 17, 2009

The uniform tunic looks like it’s a sweater. Bad representation. It should be smooth. Just forego the textured delta shield print and just make them gold, blue, red, etc.

That’s my informed opinion, Playmates.

43. Devon - January 17, 2009

Just wondering if some here have ever seen what Playmates Toys look like, especially past Star Trek ones? They are hardly what you would call “Detailed Reproductions.” However, seeing as they are toys, that’s the kind of quality you will get. If A.A. had anywhere near the mass distribution and mass production that Playmates had, they would be the top winner. But if you want toys, several lines of them, and easily available at virtually any retail store (compared to AA/Diamond Select where you basically have to buy the stuff online,) then you need to go with Playmates.

This is in no way a slam against AA/DS who I absolutely LOVE, but you have to deal with the way things are with both companies and look at who will promote your product better.

44. Katarian Eggs - January 17, 2009

Ridiculous. It looks like Justin Timber-Kirk!!
I’ll stick with Diamond Select exclusively, thanks! Their figures actually look like the character they’re supposed to be!
Nice sweater!
Playmates is the perfect company to make lame figures for this lame movie!! What a perfect corporate partner ship! Their old figures suck too!

45. Bryan - January 17, 2009

49: I am keeping Playmates’ history in mind; I was an avid collector of their 5″ TNG line from the ’90s, which did not strive for exact representation in the same way an Art Asylum or a NECA would today, but which had pleasingly cartoonish and rounded likenesses that were always recognizable. This is nooooooowhere near that standard.

46. Katarian Eggs - January 17, 2009

#30 – Devon

Funny, I find the Art asylum/DST line easily, in Toys R Us, comic shops. In fact, they seem to be very capable of distributing widely.
What kind of back water podunk do you live in?

47. Robert Saint John - January 17, 2009

Awful. Awful sculpt. Looks nothing like Pine. Other toy lines (for example, Character Options “Doctor Who” line) have come so far. Playmates processes are firmly stuck in the 90s. One less thing to collect.

Nice phaser though.

48. The Bear - January 17, 2009

Oh No! I was afraid this is what we were going to get from Playmates. They’ve not changed figure quality one bit since the ’90’s.

This doesn’t bode well for the movie Phaser and things that they are doing as well. The Phaser and the rest of the gear will probably be undersized just like their previous offerings.

Art Asylum should have gotten the license.

49. Lucas - January 17, 2009

Ok lets have more people posting who they think it looks like..WE GET IT. THEY ARE BAD.

50. Lucas - January 17, 2009

Having said that, the producers or marketing should have made SURE that the ‘better’ figures & toys get their pictures released FIRST. It doesn’t help anything when they show pics of sub-quality products that are supposed to represent a multi million $$ movie. Now people have that bad quality taste in their mouths I hope it doesn’t rub off onto the movie.

51. 750 Mang - January 17, 2009

Not good.

Looks like Kirk’s wearing a sweater.


52. Lucas - January 17, 2009

The Phaser looks closer to the ST3 one than TOS btw

53. Darklighter - January 17, 2009

Ditto with those who are disappointed. That said, the Barbie figures look excellent, particularly the uniforms. Hopefully the Playmates 12″ line will look more like those.

54. Darth Ballz - January 17, 2009

Lucas – January 17, 2009
17: what a disgraceful comment I hope you never have kids with ‘downs syndrome’

I wasen’t making fun of people with down syndrome, get over it!

Darth “Corkiet” BALLz

55. NimoyDog - January 17, 2009

Yeah, this looks like something I’ll throw my dog. He could use a new chewtoy. This figure looks bigger than a 3rd season Shatner.

56. I am not Herbert - January 17, 2009

Does not bode well for the Phaser:

Does not appear to have Type I / Type II separability…

Appears to have overly stylized “swooshy” look…

Man, it better not be “iPod White”…

So far looks like Nintendo Wii Blaster… =(

Did I hear that the Tricorder is going to be white? Please NOOOO!!!

57. Devon - January 17, 2009

#46 – Yeah, I’m suuuure you do.

58. Katarian Eggs - January 17, 2009

When I heard Playmates was getting this contract, I wept like Spock for V’ger!!

I knew they’d do this. Their previous line was so bad! Multi-coloured equipmeent & cartoonish sculpts…I see nothing has changed!

This looks like a marionette!!

Seems like we’re all on the same page, Playmates should, at least partner with DST/AA & get them to do the sculpts.

Even though I knew these would suck, I’m still shocked at how bad this is!

Considering how bad the photos of the new Enterprise look, I can’t wait to see how terrible it looks when produced by Playmates!!


59. ManBearPig - January 17, 2009

dumb playmates…

60. I am not Herbert - January 17, 2009

Let’s hope that the “Kelvin Era” stuff is not so heavily influenced by iPod / Wii aesthetic…

…and that the movie focuses more on USS Kelvin…

…and we only see the iPod / Wii stuff at the very end…

61. Richard Daystrom - January 17, 2009

I hope that’s a prototype ! I don’t even collect figures and that looks like total crap.

62. HoochaHoocha - January 17, 2009

With that sweater, the Playmates Kirk looks a little soggy ’round the mid-section. Must have modeled the body after modern Shatner my mistake.

63. Daoud - January 17, 2009

#54 You’re an offensive little bastard. Telling us you think something looks like someone with Downs Syndrome, is indeed offensive, and as a disabled person, it’s folks like you who say ‘well, I wasn’t talking about “people with X”‘ who need to cut out this sort of crap.

How about just saying the 6″ figure is butt-fugly. Gets the point across just as well, and doesn’t mock anybody in particular.

64. Elise - January 17, 2009

Wow. I’ve liked everything until now. But this? Not at all. But if this is my only disappointment with the movie, I will be very happy.

At least the Barbies are pretty.

65. Weerd1 - January 17, 2009

Here’s hoping the 3 3/4 inch are better. They REALLY need to scale back the texture. Though he looks warm and snuggly for the ice planet…

66. I am not Herbert - January 17, 2009

#63: Please cool it. You are taking it further than it needs to go.

67. Mark Lynch - January 17, 2009

Horrible figure. But at least we got a look at the phaser.

68. Vulcan Soul - January 17, 2009

Well, from what i’ve seen so far, the prop designer deserves to be shot alongside the interior designer ;)

69. Mark Lynch - January 17, 2009

I think that #63’s response was actually quite restrained, considering.

70. I am not Herbert - January 17, 2009

#68 I’m very worried also, but let’s “keep hope alive”… LL&P

71. I am not Herbert - January 17, 2009

#69 we don’t need name calling here

72. BrF - January 17, 2009

@54: Whether or not you meant to make fun of Down Syndrome, you were using it as a punch line, which is understandably seen as disrespectful by people who really have to deal with it. There are other, funnier ways to make the point.

73. Quarksbartender - January 17, 2009

I hope the new enterprise is at least up to art asylums quality in the design department there ships are so much better than most of the old playmates ships.

74. Jackson Roykirk - January 17, 2009

I must agree with some of the negativity here. The 6″ action figure looks more like Bruce Lee than Chris Pine. This is supposed to be an Enterprise action figure, not an Enter the Dragon action figure!

And the Barbie 12″ figures look kinda like the Thunderbirds TOS marionettes.

But really, they’re supposed to be toys, not historical documents.

75. Ampris - January 17, 2009

Huh. Maybe my taste in the action figure department has been blunted from sticking to only figures I can afford (i.e., the ones that barely resemble the actors and crop on eBay for dirt cheap), or it could be that pesky inability to recognize faces, but I don’t see anything too horrible about this. I mean, I’ve seen those old TNG Playmates figures and they were much, much worse (though, granted, they were a little smaller). And I actually like the knit shirt. That’s what they looked like in the trailer… well, okay, maybe not so very sweater looking, but that was still my first thought, that they’ve incorporated the arrowhead weave into the figure. Not a huge deal.

So, I might get a few of this 6″ figure line, depending on how the other toys look. You know, whichever ones looks the best, whichever are on sale. I’m not really a connoisseur of toys. lol. I’ll probably even get a BK toy or two. :P

BUT. On a much less ‘happy’ note, WTF is up with McCoy not getting an Enterprise uniform figure?! Seriously, this is not cool. I mean, Sulu? He’s cool and all, but WHY would there not be a McCoy in his blue uniform. Now *that* really sucks. :(

76. SB - January 17, 2009

Having once worked in the licensing department of an entertainment company whose name everyone here would immediately recognize (it wasn’t Paramount), I’d like to note a few things…

Licensed toys generally go through many, many rounds of changes before the toy is “locked” and enters the manufacturing phase. The toy company creates a design; the design is sent to the license holder for approval; the license holder generally returns the design with requests for alteration; the design is changed and sent out again. This process can take quite a few rounds before everyone’s happy, the license holder signs off on it, and it’s ready for the assembly line.

Ideally, this process would be all finished before the toy company begins sending out promotional photos of the toy. In practice, it rarely happens that way. Quite often, the approval process is still going on — and has several rounds to go — when it comes time to start sending advance pictures to various retailers and news outlets.

This being the case, it’s entirely possible that the Kirk figure we see here is still acting as the ball in the game of Licensing Ping-Pong; even now, a Paramount licensing executive may be scribbling “THE SHIRT LOOKS TOO MUCH LIKE A SWEATER” on a tag attached to a prototype. Or, maybe not. The point is that, like so much of what we’ve seen about the movie, it’s way too soon to start complaining about it.

One more note: this kind of thing has happened before in the world of Playmates Star Trek merchandise. Anyone remember the STAR TREK: GENERATIONS action figures? They were designed wearing a new version of the Starfleet uniform that was created especially for the movie. The design was sent to the toymakers far in advance of movie’s production date. Then, at the very last minute, Rick Berman and David Carson decided not to use the new costumes… far too late for Playmates to make any changes, since the toys were by then already rolling off the assembly line.

So, as I have said before, and will no doubt have occasion to say again many times before May… chill out.

77. max - January 17, 2009

It doesn’t resemble Pine in the least. The hairline is all wrong.

78. Brady - January 17, 2009

#6…WOW you and I actually agree on something…peace in the middle east before you know it ;)

79. I am not Herbert - January 17, 2009

Maybe now we have “Away Team” sweaters instead of jackets! heh!! =D

…those boots also say “Away Team” to me…

80. DavidJ - January 17, 2009

Wow, compared to that figure, the Barbi looks like a freakin Sideshow Collectible!

I’m just amazed that any sculptor worth his or her salt would actually try to duplicate a subtle shirt pattern like that at SUCH a small scale. You might as well put tiny skin pores on his face too. lol

81. The Laughing Spaceman - January 17, 2009

#76 — Speaking for myself, I am quite chilled.

However, the shirt DOES look like a sweater.

Just an observation. I don’t want to send the CEO of Playmates to the gallows for it or anything like that.

It just looks like a sweater…and as such: it’s not accurate and I won’t buy it.

Simple as that. ;-)

Oh…and as “Max” points out in #77 — the hairline is wrong to boot!


But…I say this with perfect “chill” in thought and voice…and keyboard.

PS: I liked the uniforms on the Star Trek: Generations figures and was disappointed when I saw the film and noticed they didn’t use them.

PS#2: I liked the old Playmates line of toys and figures but I DO believe the Art Asylum stuff was more accurate. However, that Kirk screaming “KHAAAAAN” figure is creepy.

No, scary…but I digress…

82. Izbot - January 17, 2009

Yikes! Why did Playmates get the contract again? Ick.

No bellbottoms?! NOT CANON!! (Kidding!!!!)


83. THX-1138 - January 17, 2009

This is yet another reason that I’m glad I stayed away from the action figure collecting. Give me the ships and gizmos.

And Darth Ballz:

Dude, your comment was out of line and insensitive in just about the extreme. Sorry you can’t see it for what it is. Anyone that is surprised that it would elicit a a venomous response is deluding themselves.

84. Nostalgic G - January 17, 2009

This looks kind of disappointing.
Usually the first figure images that get revealed from a big movie tie in line are the best looking ones. If this is the best we’ll get I’ll take the Art Asylum uneven leg figures that can’t even stand properly any day. At least those look great.
I’m more excited about the role play toys, ships and the playsets for the smaller scale figures. They should take a cue from hasbro’s 3 3/4 figure lines on those.
Playmates 90s trek line was amazing so I still have some hope for these. Hopefully the next images we see are better. Kirk looks like he’s wearing some thick knit sweater in this image.

85. Scott B. here. - January 17, 2009

My son and I buy action figures and toys occasionally — mostly superhero related — but it’s nice to know I won’t need to fork over any money for these. The above figure has the articulation of a 3-3/4″ figure, not a 6-inch figure. It’s wayyy below the current standard for mass market action figures, in terms of likeness, sculpt, proportions and articulation. If the 6-inchers look this bad, woe betide the littler figgers.

I thought Playmates did a pretty creditable job with their props and ships in the ’90s, but their AFs were almost always disappointing. I was hoping that they’d step it up some 10-15 years later.

Scott B. out.

86. Will H. - January 17, 2009

Those are pretty brutal looking, and yes, they do look like they’re wearing grandma’s knit sweaters. Also Kirk looks like, by the toy, that he’s been played by…not sure, but its not Chris Pine. Almost looks like James Dean or something, but yeah, gonna go ahead and say FAIL on those.

87. fred - January 17, 2009

Oh, now i REALLY hate that phaser design. I really, really, do.

88. NimoyDog - January 17, 2009

Wow. On second glance this is the Johnny Knoxville doll….

89. noirgwio - January 17, 2009

I recently was in my local toys r us and got my hands on their TOS Kirk, Spock, TMP Two pack of Kirk & Spock and the Khaaan!! Kirk from WOK… I love’em! I really wonder how Playmates will get near that quality. I don’t think that’s the aim here though… I think thier goal is to make figures for kids. Youth that experiences Trek for the very first time. I am only 30, my first Trek figures were the 3′ TNG ones and the small diecast ENT-D. I liked them, then took a mallot to Geordi’s head. Then I had multiple figures, the 5′ ones, TNG, DS9 etc. And lastly the 6′ First Contact ones… (I might have the sizes off.) I lost or donated most of’em, wish I kept more. But I’m happy with my Archer and T’pol, Green tunic Kirk, and those mentioned above. So be honest, would you buy one of those DS/AA ones for a little kid? Or one of these smalk, kinda crappy ones? Trek is for all ages, colors, makes and models… And if they break, so what? At least it wasn’t one of the really good ones!

90. Enterprise - January 17, 2009

Kirk looks like Conan O Brien,

91. Katarian Eggs - January 17, 2009

Leave Darth Ballz alone!

Yes, he’s an idiot, but if that’s how he chooses to express himself, then who are you to judge?

Any good Trekkie should be above being so sensitive words & be more empathetic to those beneath them, which clearly this guy is!

“We’ve each learned to be delighted with what we are”

Have you people learned nothing? It’s 2009 & those are just words, if you are sensitive to words then don’t read, go online or leave the house! Someone might say something you don’t like!! Boo -hoo!

The guy calls himself Darth on a Trek site & Ends it with Ballz!! What do expect from someone like that?!

Get over yourselves!.

92. Brett Campbell - January 17, 2009

With all the derogatory comments about Shat and weight, maybe it should required that all posters submit photos of themselves in order to post.

My bet would be that a lot of the hecklers wouldn’t necessarily be “Slim-fast” models in the “after” photo column themselves — especially since some of us post so much that it’s not hard to imagine we’re leading fairly sedentary lifestyles.

The final frontier of prejudice seems to be against people who are overweight. A lot of people tend to gain as they age, and a number of people are genetically predisposed to it.

Could we maybe start being a little less cruel to other people on this site? At least try to! I will not insult today. Just try it for one day. It might help someone else feel better about themselves, and that someone might even be you.

93. AdmNaismith - January 17, 2009

Did Wynona Ryder knit him a Space sweater? WTH is up with the texture of his shirt?

94. FredH - January 17, 2009

That Uhura needs to eat something! She looks like Ahsoka Tano…

95. Kirk, James T. - January 17, 2009

Hmm, yeah i think I’m gonna wait for DST or someone with an eye for making cool figures – this is a toy made for small kids to play with. Why CBS didn’t give DST the license to make figures for the older fans – i dunno.

I hope the 12 inch figures are better because all i’ll be getting is the Enterprise if they’re not.

96. Imrahil - January 17, 2009


Oh man is that ridiculous…oh Playmates. Why do they allow you to even make toys?

97. Stanky McFibberich - January 17, 2009

Glad I don’t want any of this stuff.

98. I am not Herbert - January 17, 2009

He looks like Dwight from “The Office”…

99. Darth Ballz - January 17, 2009

Daoud – January 17, 2009
#54 You’re an offensive little bastard. Telling us you think something looks like someone with Downs Syndrome, is indeed offensive, and as a disabled person, it’s folks like you who say ‘well, I wasn’t talking about “people with X”‘ who need to cut out this sort of crap.

How about just saying the 6″ figure is butt-fugly. Gets the point across just as well, and doesn’t mock anybody in particular.

And Darth Ballz:

Dude, your comment was out of line and insensitive in just about the extreme. Sorry you can’t see it for what it is. Anyone that is surprised that it would elicit a a venomous response is deluding themselves.

The guy calls himself Darth on a Trek site & Ends it with Ballz!! What do expect from someone like that?!


How can anybody be offended by me saying a plastic toy looks like it has down syndrome? Really? I guess it’s ok to call someone a bastard or expect something “like that” from me? Comments like that are made directly to me and I could care less, I don’t know YOU enough to make “retarded” comments like that. opps! , offended again…..

Darth “stupid people make me laugh” Ballz

100. screaming satellite - January 17, 2009

44 “Justin Timber-Kirk!!” PHAHAHAAHAH

that Phaser looks a cross between the Trek III (which was the closest to TOS phaser) and Trek V phaser…maybe abit of the Trek II one too

101. TOG - January 17, 2009

Playmate _ What the @&#% is that? Texture Romulan garment from TNG…
And Playmate FUMBLES…

102. Brett Campbell - January 17, 2009

Whoa. Just saw some of the other comments on here. Thought it was bad enough that overweight people were getting picked on. But the cruel comments about mental disabilities and the appearances that sometimes accompany these take things even lower still.

Come on, people. Love one another, despite any and all imperfections. IDIC.

103. Capt. of the USS Anduril - January 17, 2009

Okay. The phaser that the 6″ figure is holding looks mis-molded. Look at the phaser that the Uhura Barbie has. They barely look alike. The one that “Kirk” is holding is deformed whereas the Barbie phaser is fairly straight. And those are silver, not Wii white.

Guys, even if Star Trek goes “white”, it won’t be the first sci-fi to go white. Think Kubrick people. White is futuristic, apparently. and even if the technology is Wii or Apple inspired, what the heck’s wrong with that? Would you rather the Enterprise computer be running Windows 2340? Or be PS3 black?

And as for people claiming the Enterprise design as “blasphemy”, you people really have no idea what you’re talking about. The basic shape of the Enterprise is correct. The saucer should be that big to attract attention. If you’re designing a ship with a large unknown threat in mind, you want the bigger target to be the part of the ship that doesn’t contain a highly volatile and explosive matter/antimatter reactor. The engines and their pylons, by being moved further forward, are closer to the ship’s center of gravity, especially since the saucer has been moved backwards a little. The neck is no longer a fragile connection that could be severed by a torpedo. The entire ship flows rather than being a few cylinders and a dinner plate held together by sticks. As for the detractors of the additions of the weapons, you need to remember that Matt Jeffries wanted more detail on the ship hull, but Roddenberry and the budget wouldn’t allow it.

So far this is the only thing about the movie that makes me want to throw up. If the starship model follows Playmates’ past work, then either I’ll buy it and leave it unadorned because I can’t stand stickers, or I won’t get a model of the Enterprise until Hallmark does an ornament.

104. McCoy - January 17, 2009

Wow! Awesome!

This new phaser design will surely add more people in the theater seats! No way the old design would have done that!

Glorious change for change sake! Woop! :o(

105. Kuvagh - January 17, 2009

There’s something disturbing about the phrase “six inches of Kirkness.”

106. BrF - January 17, 2009


I’ll repost! What I said earlier was: Whether or not you meant to make fun of Down Syndrome, you were using it as a punch line, which is understandably seen as disrespectful by people who really have to deal with it. There are other, funnier ways to make the point.

You were trivializing something that’s a big deal to a lot of people. Get it?

107. Katarian Eggs - January 17, 2009

Finally, someone sees it too!

Darth, I was defending you.
Perhaps you’re the one with mental health issues.
C’mon, you’re on a Trek site using Darth. This is Trek, not Wars!
Go disrespect a Wookie!

108. Morty - January 17, 2009

Do kids play with Star Trek toys these days?

109. I Am Morg Not Eymorg - January 17, 2009


110. noirgwio - January 17, 2009

Someone better get Troi or Dr. Phil in here STAT… Going from toys to physical/mental ailments/predjudices. Is that the 3rd or 4th step to the 7 required to reach Kevin Bacon? Or pure stupidity. This will never be a 60s love-fest, and hateful or spiteful Tellarite-types should be expected. I live next to an alcoholic one… Bite your lip and move on, sometimes it is better to defuel thier statements with no response at all, instead of spurring them to continue with retorts.

111. Katarian Eggs - January 17, 2009

103. Capt. of the USS Anduril

I respectfully disagree:

The ship doesn’t have a centre of gravity, it’s in space.
Which is where it should be built, since it’s way easier to manipulate huge pieces of metal in a weightless environment. The pylons have been moved back, not forward making it look shorter & more squat. Much like the bell bottom intake manifolds & fatter neck section do.

The original has a graceful look, created by the thinner connection points, as if gravity wasn’t a factor…cause it’s not… It’s space.
Additional hull detail takes away from the smooth round edges that Rodenberry envisioned. Hence, he didn’t allow Jeffries to mess up his baby & that should have been respected here.

The more I look at the original Enterprise, the more I realize that it still looks perfectly futuristic & believeable as a space ship. All that was needed was a CG facelift to add a bit more defintion & photo-realism.

I appreciate your enthusiam for what these guys are trying to do, but as a life time Trekkie, I just don’t share it. They’ve gone too far in messing with the gospel here & it’s starting to show more & more. When Orci felt it was necessary to get online & defend his plot to fans, that was a sure sign of what i’ve feared all along; that this Trek will boldy ignore everywhere we’ve gone before.

Hell, even the toys are screwed up.

This is my nightmare!!

112. fred - January 17, 2009

Okay, comparing that weird “melting droop” look of the phaser here with the back of the phaser visible in the screen capture of the one on Spock’s belt, the one on the belt doesn’t have that downward slope. So maybe it’s just a bad tiny toy and not like the actual one.

113. Frank - January 17, 2009

It is AMAZING how bad this toy is given that Playmates had an additional 4+ months to tweak this baby because of the push back of the original movie release date.

Playmates has clearly stated there intention to bring Trek to the mass market and unfortunately they plan to do so at the expense of the collectors. If the movie has 8 and 10 year olds running around there schools playing “Star Trek” they will see a return on their investment. If not, I expect the figures be gather dust on peg hooks across America.

Our only hope now is that the Enterprise and Role Playing toys do not suffer the same fate….

114. Deebo Shanks - January 17, 2009

This is an awful figure!

115. Kirok Fan - January 17, 2009

The Barbie Kirk looks great, but the Playmates Kirk looks absolutely awful. It reminds me of some awkward high school kid who is being picked last for a game in Phys. Ed. class. And worse, the position of his head suggests confusion – as though he is shocked that no one would want him on their team.

And maybe it’s just the angle, but it almost looks a bit overweight in the midsection.

116. thebiggfrogg - January 17, 2009

Wait. Wait. This is an absolutely ACCURATE reproduction. This is the part where Finnegan says to Kirk, “Nice sweater mama’s boy! Did she give you the perm too?!” and kicks his a**. So don’t worry, this is reproduced exactly as it will occur in the movie.

117. thebiggfrogg - January 17, 2009

115. Wait one damn minute Kirok: we are Trek fans, 99% of us were the awkward kid pick last for the game, so watch the insults.

“We’re Americans! Do you know what that means? It means our forefathers were kicked out of every decent country on earth!” Bill Murray, Stripes.

118. thebiggfrogg - January 17, 2009

. . . and dare I say, we were picked last, but we STILL looked better than this Kirk doll from Playmates!

119. The Laughing Spaceman - January 17, 2009

I rolled my eyes when I read all the crybaby coments about Darth Balz’ comment earlier and tried to avoid saying anything — BUT:

I agree! Leave Darth Balz alone!

He has a right to his opinion…and to state it or type. I knew as soon as I read it some little idiot was going to get his “feelings hurt” (fragile as they are!).

Now some of you need to “put on your big girl panties” and get over it.

I am so tired of all this PC BS — thought police BS — from some people!

I don’t know about Darth, but I tend to say whatever I damned well please. If it pissed anyone off — too bad!

Hang in there, Darth…not all of us are overly sensitive little wussies who walk around with a chip on our shoulders looking for a comment to get upset over…

I support your right to free expression and speech.

120. Kareem Owete - January 17, 2009

You’d think Kirk would have a big 10 inch

figure, given his reputation and all

121. thebiggfrogg - January 17, 2009

#103 Ha! “Barbie phaser!” Sounds like another Finnegan insult.

122. Adam Cohen - January 17, 2009

I’m glad to see most of us agree this is a fugly action figure. Back in the day, I was a collector of the Playmates line. But the toymaker apparently hasn’t improved with the times.

123. The Laughing Spaceman - January 17, 2009

By the evidence presented in the pictures above, they’ve gotten far WORSE since they last produced Trek product…

124. NX01 - January 17, 2009

I don’t think that this figure is real. It looks like something a fan made, it looks hand made or something. I also don’t think that it looks like Pine, my friends I think this might be a haox

125. Lord Garth, Formerly Of Izar - January 17, 2009

Ron Weasleys Mom made the sweater -shirt-jersey for Kirk

126. Darth Ballz - January 17, 2009

Well retard jokes aside,

At least the new figs don’t look like the Generations action figures. A cross between a gay salior and something from the Love Boat…..

All aboard

Darth “Exciting and New” Ballz

127. The Laughing Spaceman - January 17, 2009

The Love Boat soon will be taking anotherrrrr run…

128. Anthony Pascale - January 17, 2009

warning for trolling…your comments are inapropriate, especially 126

Daud / 63
warning for flaming

no more need to discuss what was or was not offensive, this is an article about toys

comments to

129. SciFiMetalGirl - January 17, 2009

I am going to be laughing so hard if Kirk comes out in a knit gold sweater at some point during the movie!

130. Fleet Captain Kor'Tar - January 17, 2009

Terrible looking figure . I have been a collector of Trek figures for years , and even I will save my money on these by not buying them , even when they wind up in the bargin bins .

I do hope their toy of the Enterprise at least looks a bit like what is depeicted on screen or playmates will never see another one of my hard earned dollars .

I feel sorry for everyone who preordered these boxed figure sets without seeing them first .

131. McCoy - January 17, 2009

OMG. Why would anyone have pre-orderd a new Kirk doll anyway?

132. The Laughing Spaceman - January 17, 2009

#129 — If he does, I’m walkin’ out! :-)

133. Sean4000 - January 17, 2009

I’m seeing a very faint resemblance to Wesley Crusher.

134. Iowagirl - January 17, 2009

Perfect! The figures look exactly like I thought they would…

135. The Angry Klingon - January 17, 2009

Heres hoping this is a prototype and they didnt REALLY try and turn a 2 dimensional textile pattern in to a 3d knitted nightmare. Head looks too small for teh body.
Should have let DST handle these…Playmates should stick to the turtles.

136. DJT - January 18, 2009

Action Figures. Zzzzzzzzz. Where’s Rosario Dawson these days? She in the movie yet?

137. sebimeyer - January 18, 2009

You just don’t get it: the sweater is an early prototype of the Starleet-issue 80’s sweaters we later see Wesley wear.

138. Devon - January 18, 2009

Playmates… Meet the Fanbase. Fanbase, meet Playmates.

139. Gen - January 18, 2009

Jesus. How depressing. Just because the movie is meant to emulate the sixties, does not mean the production standards should too. It in no way looks like pine. The top makes it look like he gained about 40 pounds of belly fat. Its like some kind of fail engine.

140. Jeffrey S. Nelson - January 18, 2009

I’m optimistic for a rousing Trek film and hope it’s a blockbuster. But, for the first time in decades, I don’t plan on buying any toys, with perhaps the exception of Prime Spock as he’s called. Shatner and Nimoy are it. Period. Nuff said.

141. Deebo Shanks - January 18, 2009

Much like those who share videos of car crashes and police chases to see a disaster in progress, I was unable to stop myself from showing the new Star Trek toys to my Trek-fan sister who I shall, for the purposes of this message board, refer to as Ashole Shanks.

Her response: Why does Kirk look like a fat Judge Reinhold with yellow chain mail? Oh! Look! Trek Babies got Trek Barbies!

I laughed heartily and died a little inside.

142. mikey_pikey (Ireland) - January 18, 2009

emm, haha whats up with wooly jumper man, the head is too small, kinda makes his body look like a modern day william shatner’s, i think i’d rather buy a barbie thankyou very much :)

143. captain_neill - January 18, 2009

as I thought no were near as good as the Art Asylum figures. I cant wait to get my Motion Picture Kirk and Spock duo

144. captain_neill - January 18, 2009

I am sticking with the proper kirk and spock when it comes to figures. I will be going the movie and I hope to love it

145. Alex - January 18, 2009

They should stick to making the smaller ones. No problem with not looking 100% accurate ther; but this thing is butt-ugly. (Sadly, same can be said for most of the newer diamond select figures)

146. Crewman Darnell - January 18, 2009

Yeesh! If the store version of this action figure is actually like the preview, I can anticipate saving a few Quatloos. The same can be said for the role-playing size iCommunicator and medical scanner/tricorder/pepper mill thingie.

147. trekboi - January 18, 2009

i like it but the detail on the top is a bit too much

i will get all the 6′ figures but will have to get the smaller ones just to put them in the bridge playset

148. The Laughing Spaceman - January 18, 2009

…Pepper Mill…


Very true!

149. T.U.M. - January 18, 2009

The Uhura figure has the closest resemblance to the actor, but then again, Ms. Saldana has such classic, regular features that it’d be kind of hard to mess that one up.

150. MC1701B - January 18, 2009

To all the Art Asylum DST worshippers out there:

Remember those wonderful Enterprise and Nemesis figures? The ones with the (in scale) five-foot-long torsos? The ones that actually drove Trek out of the regular toy stores, along with the NX-01 that sheds its nacelles when you look at it?

Be careful what you wish for…

151. Mr. Bob Dobalina - January 18, 2009

Well….yeah. That figure pretty much sucks. Phaser is cool though.

152. Slick - January 18, 2009

UGLY!!!!!!!!!! With a capital U. Who would buy that??? and I mean that!!!

153. Kaiser The Great - January 18, 2009

He looks like a Huxtable…

154. SDK - January 18, 2009

Not impressed. At all.

Calls to mind the oppressive mediocrity of past Playmates output…

(As a point of reference, compare Playmates TOS phaser to Diamond Select’s TOS equivalent.) And I’m not a Diamond Select apologist, though detail is generally great for the figures, their body sculpts and likenesses are uneven.

Why Paramount would give Playmates the license is beyond me…

Why not Sideshow? Or even Diamond Select exclusively?

155. bgiles73 - January 18, 2009

When did Chris Pine join the Wiggles?

156. McCoy - January 18, 2009

Well, this is a bad angle and appears more elongated than it really is. Don’t worry, they’ve built a good doll for you. The designer wanted to stay true to Kirk by using 2 arms and 2 legs. Cuz, when people look at it, they should see Kirk.


157. McCoy - January 18, 2009

Oh…and the designer wasn’t always a doll fan, more of a knit sweater fan. Still, he wanted to stay true to dolls by making sure it can articulate. That way the spirit of a doll still comes through.

This doll would have looked different, but someone went back in time to destroy the real doll factory. So this is not a “prime” doll as much as it is a doll from an alternate timeline. The original factory is still relevant but co-existing in a parallel universe.

158. screaming satellite - January 18, 2009

why is it wearing Shatners hair from Star Trek V?

have to agree with the majority here – dosnt look very good…same goes for the PM Terminator 4 figures – and i think they are one of the reasons doubt hangs over the R rating…(i read its probably going to be PG 13 due to the toy deal with PM or something…..a PG 13 terminaor!!!)

as someone mentioned – you only have to compare the PM phaser with the DS one to see the difference in quality..same goes for the action figues

McFarlene and DS and hottoys are the best toy companies

159. Pat Payne - January 18, 2009

The whole figure looks wretched. Whoever it was said that it looks like Hayden Christensen (or worse the guy playing the vampire from Twilight) is spot on.

Wouldn’t it have been easier to have just applied the pattern as a paint coating, rather than carve it in in a ridiculously not-to-scale detail job?

160. Garner - January 18, 2009

The playmates figure is hideous, at least the barbie figures look more star-trekish

161. Demode - January 18, 2009

I like the MATTEL figures. They look great. Playmates… no so much.

162. AJ - January 18, 2009

I have to chime in and say that Playmates has dropped the ball. Perhaps Abrams should take a lesson from George Lucas, and take some control of merch for a “piece of the action.”

I purchased a “Mace Windu” 3-inch doll from a bargain bin a few years ago, and it looked exactly like Sam Jackson as Mace Windu. Kirk here looks nothing like Chris Pine, and is several levels down from what Mego was producing 30+ years ago. The “Barbie” stuff looks good, but is way too expensive.


163. Devon - January 18, 2009

#154 – SDK – Why Paramount would give Playmates the license is beyond me…

Why not Sideshow? Or even Diamond Select exclusively?”

I think I had already explained this. If AA would have gotten it, then about the only people who would have known about it is Trekkies probably. These are TOYS to appeal to the mass market. AA simply does not have the distribution/market power that Star Trek does.

10-12 years ago when First Contact was in full swing, you could go down and see half an aisle at Wal-Mart or Target dedicated toward Star Trek stuff from Playmates. Please tell me the last time you saw that for an A.A. line? You likely never have.

So as far as marketing, what sense would it make to get AA involved versus Playmates? They seem to appeal to two different markets. Playmates seems to target the toy market vs. AA who seems to target the collectors market. Who do you think has a bigger demographic? Exactly. Who is this movie (and Trek of the past) trying to appeal to? THE MASSES.

Folks, please actually THINK about this. I’m not saying Playmates is the absolute best but as far as putting toys on the shelve and marketing goes, Playmates is simply going to win. They will get the job done. Just some of you were spoiled by AA is all but aren’t looking at the big picture is all. So it probably would have been stupid for them to go with AA instead of Playmates for MASS marketing purposes.

It probably doesn’t matter that I posted this, as some are going to just repeat the same thing. But this is here for reference.

164. Shatners_Bassoon - January 18, 2009

Playmates in their time actually did some pretty decent 5 1/2 inch figures (like dathon, the nausican or commander Koloth) but they also came out with a few disappointing clunkers (tiny arms captain pike or action pose kieko o’brien)

This I’m afraid falls into the latter category

And am I the only one wondering why, if they are releasing the regular figures in two scales, dont they release figure that are in the same scale as the previous releases. It might have tempted me back into collecting.

165. Dr. Image - January 18, 2009

At least the guys from Robot Chicken will really put them to good use!

PS- I’m for freedom of speech, personally…

166. John from Cincinnati - January 18, 2009

At least they got the rank braids right.

167. will - January 18, 2009

No one can blame DST or AA for the big chains decision to cut back on action figures. At the time that Toys R Us dropped their figures, TRU was closing stores left and right, dropping toy products, and focusing on the Babys R Us. At least we got some good sales out of it as they sold off the last of the Enterprise figures (which were fantastic by the way — AA has never gotten the face sculpts as accurate as they did then).

TRU is slowly moving back into carrying action figures, and DST/AA product is back, but in this economy it will probably again be true that the only place to get action figures, other than online, is at record stores.

168. Smittmaestro - January 18, 2009

Despair not boys and girls that is a raw prototype.

I guarantee when it hits stores it will bare little resemblance to that.

I stake what little reputation I have on it!


169. TheRifter - January 18, 2009

I’m a comic book publisher/writer, a long-time toy collector, and someone who’s grown up with Mego “dolls”, Galoob 3 3/4″ figures, Playmates first shot at this license and am now under the influence of AA/DST’s product even with its mix & match quality issues.

As such I’ve had the honor of attending the US Toy Fair and other comic trade shows and have met and chatted with the presidents of Art Asylum, ToyBiz, SOTA, and am currently coming close to the end of my multi-year contract with Shocker Toys (no figures to speak of yet, but waiting patiently). While I hope that this is indeed a prototype I also fear that it’s not. I’m hoping to see these in person next month at the upcoming show. To answer the question of WHY Playmates got this license it’s an easy one:

They paid the highest royalties for it. Plain and simple. I’ve seen some back-end deals in the comics business and regardless of product quality, the level of the artwork or story, or the actual retail sales numbers it ALWAYS comes down to the highest bidder. So Playmates HAD to offer the most money in licensing and to be able to produce mass market figures with a decent profit margin and they had TRU back them up to bring them to market in the only major retail chain still standing and having the license before could only have helped them. IMHO

170. AJ - January 18, 2009

Just like with Iron Man, Hulk and Batman, half this stuff will be in the bargain bins by Christmas. The window these days seems only a few months after a film’s release.

Also, TRU exclusivity simply means fewer units of sale at full price because the customer base is shopping at Walmart during the recession, especially as TRU is shedding points of sale.

I still do not see why stupid corporate boardroom decisions must result in a sh*t product. I assume there is savings in not using the actors’ likenesses for the faces, but otherwise, these are products better avoided by the aficionado, at least until they are $1.99 on clearance.

171. richpit - January 18, 2009

I think the figure is horrendous, but I don’t really care about figures all that much.

I want to see the communicator, phaser & tricorder “role play” toys!

Show me pics, yo!

172. Spock's Brain - January 18, 2009

If I cant say anything nice…

173. Al Hartman - January 19, 2009

It looks like a prototype, using a Wesley Crusher head with resculpted hair.

I’d wait to see production figures on a blister card before making a final judgement.

174. Star Trackie - January 19, 2009

Holy cow..if he had dumbo ears he’s look like Alfred E Neman. And what’s with the very exagerated texture on the shirts? IF the texture would even be noticable at that scale, it should only be a faint pattern of a slightly darker yellow printed onto the plastic. I know these aren’t aimed at adults….but when is the last time you ever saw a child playing with Star Trek toys?

Playmates really should’ve tried harder at a better figure that collector’s would want as well. If they had done that…maybe, just maybe..IF the movie is a rousing success and IF kids dig it….they just might have killed two birds with one sculpt.

175. Sam Belil - January 19, 2009

He looks more like Howdy Doody than he does Wesley Crusher!
This BETTER be the prototype! The Barbie versions 9I hate to see it) look SO MUCH BETTER!!!

176. Captain Dunsel - January 19, 2009

#2, #135 & #142

The head is not too small for the body on the Pine/Kirk figure. You’re just used to seeing the SWELLED ones on the Shatner figures.

177. T.U.M. - January 19, 2009

Does anyone else remember the Play-Doh Fuzzy Pumper Barber Shop™? That’s what it looks like they used to mold Kirk’s hair.

178. SDK - January 19, 2009

#163 – Devon: “Folks, please actually THINK about this. I’m not saying Playmates is the absolute best but as far as putting toys on the shelve and marketing goes, Playmates is simply going to win.”

I see your point. (But I still think that AA has enough access to different outlets to be competitive. Note their recent Toys R Us contract.)

The problem I have with your position is that I DON’T CARE about Paramount’s bottom line. If they want to pursue a Star Wars-like scorched earth policy of carpet bombing the world with Trek tie-ins & memorabilia, the least they can do is hold themselves to a high level of quality. Filling the Paramount coffers is not this fan’s number one priority. Quality over quantity, I say. Playmates is simply an inferior producer.

179. Dr. Image - January 19, 2009

I guarantee you the props are going to be either under or oversize.
What a shame after AA/DSTs excellent phaser and phase pistol, which are canon, BTW.
(Ironically, his has been the most entertaining topic in quite a while.)

180. Kirk, James T. - January 20, 2009

I feel Hot Toys should have a license too – their “Dark Knight” figures are just some of the best.

181. Kirk Lives!! - January 20, 2009

“Kirk on the cob” (instead of “corn on the cob”)?

That shirt texturing is awfully… bumpy.

182. bgiles73 - January 20, 2009

I sure hope someone from Playmates is reading these boards and they do a little modifying to these figures. I was so looking forward to these.

183. Devon - January 21, 2009

#178 – So you want them to promote the movie to the masses by just pandering to the fans? Makes sense.

184. Aaron - January 21, 2009

What’s the point of letting Playmates make the figures if they aren’t even going to match the scale they used in the 90s?!! I was hoping this was a sign I could continue my collection from way back when.

185. Jacob Lo - July 15, 2009

I actually like the figure, although I have to admit that he is not an attractive figure to look at. He looks like Anakin Skywalker from Star Wars Episode 2. is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.