And even before I started on this post, I already flubbed it up. I have some 1992 figures in the mix with the 1993 figures. I also had a few of my 1994 figures in a different location when I was pulling things out for this group photo, so they didn't make the cut.
The usual method of operation for me these days, when I have time (and I was sent home from work early today), I usually hang out in my corner downstairs. That's where the inspiration really isn't, but my Joes are. Anyway, downstairs, I'm limited to printed guides. The guide I was looking at had "battle corps" tags on the '92 figures (mainline) so that's why I popped them in the photo (I thought it seemed out of place...). Then to get to the internet, after I put everything away downstairs, I share some pictures and thoughts here for you.
Over the last couple years, I've taken out all the figures from certain years and set them all up together. Just GIJoe or Cobra, and just the one year, and for the most part, just the main line offerings.
I've found some new perspective on my figures doing this. And then comparing year to year in pictures is kind of fun, too.
And you know, for the most part when I've done this, I usually stop at 1990. I don't have many "group-year" pictures for anything past. So, I thought this would be a good time.
For some reason, I don't think of '92, '93, or '94 as solidly as I do the other years. For example when I think, "Crankcase," I think, "1985." When I think, "Battle Corps Beachhead," I think, "Battle Corps Beachhead." Not 1993 v1.
But, even still with the added 1992 figures, and the absence of the 1994 figures (it was Flint and Shipwreck), I think there's still something to look at here.
I don't generalize the Battle Corps under the blanket term of the "neon '90's," either. In many ways, the Battle Corps were a solid addition to my collection from back in the day. If you check out other posts of old pictures with the figures in action, you'll probably see some Battle Corps figures.
But like in the picture below, this half of the figures really isn't out there in terms of bright colors, in my opinion. Whether or not Gung-ho would wear a red vest and move his tattoo is a different matter. But even Bazooka is no further "out there" than his 1984 figure in a red football jersey.
But, yeah, there is the other half of the figures here that have some bright highlights. So, perhaps in this picture below are the very culprits that caused all things past 1986 to be cast under the umbrella of too far out there on the neon spectrum?
The recolor of Barricade is really one of the worst offenders. And I don't mind Leatherneck as is, but is he going for a new animal force motif since he never got Tiger Force stripes?
I really do like these just as well as the rest of all the other years. Lots of good points and lots of not so. The sculpt and designs are very, well, rich. Making plastic look like fabric clothing and adding on the depth of detail with straps, ammo, and pouches, overall, the relief in detail is there. Right down to Colonel Courage's tie.
Also, consider how many of these figures are new renditions of old favorites from years past. Even Backblast from 1989 made it out in the line up. But the rest are from 1983 to 1987.
And then there's the new guys. I guess Big Bear shouldn't be there, but still, 5 new main line Battle Corps people? And then, 3 of those were possibly intended as a continuation of the 1992 D.E.F. group?
The Battle Corps shoot didn't go the way I wanted, but, at worst there's some pictures for you to look at.
What do you think about the Battle Corps?