Plastic Figure Showcase Part Seven September 2017

Plastic Figure Showcase Part Seven September 2017 is back after all the new figure news. We have an interesting mix of figures. I have an interesting Phantom Comic Strip figure. Next I have a few different western figures from Gem Models and others. I will showcase a T Cohn accessory. Plus we will have figures I have no idea who made them.

Plastic Figure Showcase Part Seven September 2017 Phantom

Plastic Figure Showcase Part Seven September 2017The Phantom comic strip was created in 1936 by Lee Falk. The strip is still being published  with its main audience being outsie the U.S. A number of figures have been produced in Europe. This figure I was believe made in Spain.

Plastic Figure Showcase Part Seven September 2017  Western

Plastic Figure Showcase Part Seven September 2017

We will look some western figures.  First one is  60mm Gem Models sheriff from the UK.

Plastic Figure Showcase Part Seven September 2017

This figure which is the 54mm Marx cowboy with rifle is actually a copy from Greece. I got it years ago on a blister card, but the card got damaged.  I remember the card had a couple Marx figures plus a mounted one piece figure I did not recognized.

Plastic Figure Showcase Part Seven September 2017Here is a a Hilco Cowboy standing firing a rifle.

Plastic Figure Showcase Part Seven September 2017

Not sure if I got this in a junk box, the figure is a mix of Britains swoppet  parts.  I kept him to do stories which I do not have room or time.  I just like the pose.

Plastic Figure Showcase Part Seven September 2017 T Cohn

Plastic Figure Showcase Part Seven September 2017

Plastic Figure Showcase Part Seven September 2017

T Cohn has several items people like one is the blacksmith. Another is the tin litho mound. The mounds were in the fort sets and are very popular.  The mound was done in all brown.

Plastic Figure Showcase Part Seven September 2017 Mystery Figures

Plastic Figure Showcase Part Seven September 2017 Our first mystery figure I found while cleaning the basement.  He is damaged and is about 30mm.

Plastic Figure Showcase Part Seven September 2017

Another Indian I have  is hard plastic and 54mm.

Plastic Figure Showcase Part Seven September 2017

Here is a 54mm soldier which I figure is from China

Plastic Figure Showcase Part Seven September 2017

Finally  a swoppet knight from Hong Kong. I got him with the lance, but he may had a sword.  He is 54mm.

This entry was posted in Plastic Figure Showcase and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

39 Responses to Plastic Figure Showcase Part Seven September 2017

  1. ERWIN SELL says:

    The Indian is Polish by PZG .
    The pose also resemble the JEM and Ludrev later cloned pose or Michel too but not quite it .
    I had seen others of same series around and part of huge polish produced western series .
    The swoopet soldier is from Argentina i think or HK generic.
    T Cohen ,marx tin rocks i have two from my former father collectio/toys ,I used to hide indians inside .
    The HK crude Britain knight copied is very common around.
    Not clue on indian damage 30 mm figure ,neither my scale so i will had skip it …

    • ERWIN SELL says:

      Forgot saying the PZG indians are parts of one rare set made to represent more central and south america indian with cerbatana(blowgun).Yet Cherokees used then x hunting but the indians are not dress as Cherokees.

      • ed borris says:

        He’s barely dressed at all, however from his chest it looks like he’s been working out on the bench press and the curls.

        • Erwin says:

          He still have a cover part plus feathers. 🙂
          I reffer to rest of set by dress depiction.The other 5 poses infact.
          Indians were more healthy .eat better natural food and make more exercise than most today .
          I bet they don’t need work bench to do what today modern people had to archive by using steroid, vitamins and avoid fatty food , sweets, beers else . ..
          My thoughts.

          • ed borris says:

            Well, I don’t know about that, most of the pictures I see of Indians they look kind of scrawny or they are fat, I have also met in the course of my life personally 40 or 50 Indians , granted it is the present time and I only met one that wasn’t either fat or scrawny. That’s my own personal observation for the number I have met. They were all from various tribes from the midwest and Canada. My opinion and observation.

          • ERWIN SELL says:

            I agree Ed,most indian today are not as already part of least 3/4 generation living not typical indian old style life and way more sedentary.
            The picture-photos of most taken if you look well are most of leaders-mid- old men,woman,or very young-teens -children and generally from very late XIX century till -1925 at reservation location after they were already been forced to live out their own lifestyle and out of warfare.
            Most young warriors were barely photograph during the last wars for fear or difficult to had then taken photos
            While you can notice the more accurate and real description with real drawing ,not painting by those studying then from much early with a different view.Included english settlers and officers as well french .
            Few indians photographed are chest naked or bare naked as well because many photographs did it in purpose or else

            At NYC indian museum there a display of 1871-1889 photos where show some real examples of warriors.Many early films as well 30 till 40 using extras as indians from last former generation reserves(most younger) showed then in very healty body shape build as well.
            I’m not talking about few actors native american more from 60s till now .So definitely unless you are in active typical wildlife as indian were the body from any young age man till mid age would-need be in good shape .
            Indians specially the nomads tribes had hunger famine a lot and that is why were so few often in numbers ,this also indicate ,nomads indians often were in bad health versus non nomads .
            Young male well appearance was a typical aspect for then as competition and show of masculinity as well.
            So that indian were in good shaped body in most males is definitely a reality in many back in their time by logic and description in books.
            That those seen today are not is just they are living in modern world and unless go to gym or do exercise would not do it with exception of few actors used recently in films suck 1990s last of mohican ,dance with wolves and others .
            About muscle tone configuration in figures ,even Marx tone it very well in their figures.Skin 60/65 mm indians show it clear in some of the poses .That some makers exaggerate a bit is just a point of artist to either bring attention or else .
            Just my thoughts.

  2. ed borris says:

    Well, they have been in some semblance of fit, those that lived beyond 15 ears old anyway. However, I doubt they were the muscular adonis’s we portray in art and plastic figures. They lived a harsh life and while this may make them tough, it does not necessarily make them muscular, they had a life expectancy average of less than 40 years old and this was before the Europeans came over and introduced them to all sorts of fun diseases. They probably ate healthier than their European counterparts , more out of necessity than anything else. I suspect they were rather fit and wiry as opposed to those chiseled images we usually see portrayed. Just as I imagine the Vikings weren’t these monstrous muscular beasts that we see in drawings and figures.

    • TDBarnecut says:

      What was most striking about the vikings to most people who encountered them was their height.

      • ed borris says:

        It was reputed that Harrald Hadrada was 6’6″, which indeed would have been huge back then, I imagine that average European probably stood around 5’6″ if not shorter. I would imagine Vikings were pretty fit and perhaps more muscular than the average European, they had a rough life too, Building permanent structures out of wood and rowing them darn ships would seem to keep them in some kind of shape.Toy soldiers sculptors seem to have a way to make their figures more muscular and intimadating looking than they may be in real life.

        • ERWIN SELL says:

          Yes,that is true and correct base in era sources and description.
          I had not see a picture-photo of viking yet. And of course no one will ever see it .
          Era source describe-written then as tall and robust people .
          The sole fact they spend most their life since young age rowing (A typical perfect exercise that naturally enhance your torso body and define muscles or arms,back and chest with abdomen as well )clearly indicate they were very good in body strong build shape .
          Adding warfare and cutting woods all time to build houses,shelter,ships else made then perfect for that definition as well.
          In ancient times and by roman era historian -writers books conserved .Germanic ,Gauls and Celts are described as well as robust tall people often in battle with their bare chest showing their strong body .

          Anyway, the average German warrior actually was, on average, taller than his Roman counterpart, as Archaeological finds can confirm. Proven from armor and personal effects found in the grave uncovered in Holland of 6 males warriors of different ages was 6-′4.
          However, the average Roman soldier, legionary, Praetorian and Auxilia trooper, was heavily muscled from labor, training and constant marching in heavy armor and pack. This, combined with superior nutrition, likely caused the average Roman to be natural healthy resistant stronger, even if he was actually shorter.

          The following is extracted from Caesar own account description of one Germanic tribe people he encounter and fought too as well .

          The nation of the Suevi is by far the largest and the most warlike nation of all the Germans…. They do not live much on corn, but subsist for the most part on milk and flesh, and are much [engaged] in hunting; which circumstance must, by the nature of their food, and by their daily exercise and the freedom of their life (for having from boyhood been accustomed to no employment, or discipline, they do nothing at all contrary to their inclination), both promote their strength and render them men of vast stature of body as well the tone of their muscles. And to such a habit have they brought themselves, that even in the coldest parts they wear no clothing whatever except skins, by reason of the scantiness of which, a great portion of their body is bare, and besides they bathe in open rivers……
          Their whole life is occupied in hunting and in the pursuits of the military art; from childhood they devote themselves to fatigue and hardships. The strongest young compete with their body for the woman as animals males animals does with their beauty. Those who have remained chaste for the longest time, receive the greatest commendation among their people; they think that by this the growth is promoted, by this the physical powers are increased and the sinews are strengthened…

          Greeks in ancient and classic era did practice the adoration of body perfection and introduce athletics,,gymnastic ,sports to western civilization. Their armors intentional show and portray the perfect male chest body part .So they did practice body tone perfectionism a lot .
          It is reflected in arts painting,cultures and else as well.
          The same era in body tone perfectionism -image was again brought back in painting and cultures in Europe by XV-XVI centuries in Italy primarily.
          In medieval times it become not much practiced and by XVI-XVII with introduction of massive fire arms plus many other invention the people in western primary become more sedentary till late XIX and early XX centuries when sports ,gymnastic and athleticism plus gyms become re introduced in large scale around.
          My personal view and thoughts.

  3. Andy says:

    I would guess that every race of people contains the basic ectomorph (thin), mesomorph (muscular), endomorph (heavy set) body types and military would
    include a higher proportion of muscular types, just by natural selection. Farmers would probably be more muscular than teachers or clergy, etc.. Related to toy soldiers, it would be more realistic to mix in more citizen types to balance out all the rootin’ tootin’ shootin’ John Wayne, Clint Eastwood types. As far as Indians go, the Hekawi (almost Fugawi) tribe from F Troop are my favorites!! But seriously, they probably reflect the appearance of an average tribe more so than a bunch of body builders. Any outdoor lifestyle would contribute to more muscularity than any sedentary lifestyle. I guess our toy soldiers are too homogenized in appearance & we need more tall, short, fat, and skinny ones to be historically correct.

  4. Len Hardt says:

    And all of this discussion comes from a plastic toy figure. I wish the sculptor, who probably cared little about accuracy, but simply made a figure from his imagination (inspired by kids’ books, cartoons, and TV) could read all the discussion that his toy “Indian” inspired.

    • Andy says:

      He probably hated his job and was just collecting a check….

    • ed borris says:

      Yeah he probably didn’t give that crappy sculpt much thought at all. A rare turd is still a turd.

    • Erwin says:

      There always fun to discuss here.
      But certainly I did not start this one.
      Is always something in a figure to find not right by adult collector s
      always forgetting these were made x children back them.
      I will look more w clinic eyes those made today x our hobby.

  5. ed borris says:

    I guess the happy median would be average all around, instead of Indians that look like they should be chippendales. I would think in ancient times particularly your function in the army would depend heavily on your body type. I mean you’re not going to have your 5′ 2′ 105 pounder weilding a heavy axe or a big heavy pike, he’d be a archer or a slinger or something else that didn’t require the girth and muscles. Human sacrifice maybe.

  6. Andy says:

    The Universal Soldier
    “He’s five feet two and he’s six feet four
    He fights with missiles and with spears
    He’s all of thirty-one and he’s only seventeen
    He’s been a soldier for a thousand years….”

  7. Greg Liska says:

    Ok, Hell, I’m pitching in! Every nomadic people I’d had contact with were thin and wiry. The pics I’d seen of most N. American Injuns would be the same. No processed foods, no processed or very little of any other kind of sugar. Largely eating meat, the protein would permit some decent muscle, but not huge mass. The difference between the body types would be less pronounced and leaning to the thinner side. I believe drawings to be of limited use as examples, as the artist may want to idealize the subject.

    • ERWIN SELL says:

      Photos of most Indians see are very late era and most from reservation or not warriors in clothing .
      Made from late 1860s till 1889 when only the few last Indian wars were fought and those in photos are either from reservation,retired or old warriors .

      Yet in case of toy figures I bet if makers start depicting then with out muscle ,skinny bone showing or big fat belly the collectors would be screaming (What in hell are those) .
      If would had been done as that in time when made x children ,i bet children would not like then either.

      So the best bet and perception of every single artist making toy figures is portray then in very good shape body ,from early composition Elastolin to Marx and all rest most are made slender to strong muscle braves in figures. Now and then .
      Yet the figures made by artist were not at all far from reality …

      Regarding the description made by those who travel and studied Indian tribes and live among them is better to read their description than use any illustration often made by those that never saw them.
      interesting characteristic samples are those in this link that is base in several books made by experts and anthropologist who had studied the American natives. In it an small section indicate well build chest body .it read as ..
      (“The body as a rule is of good proportions, symmetrical, and, except in old age, straight and well nourished. The chest is of ample size, especially in men. The abdomen, which in children is often rather large, retains but slight fullness in later life. The pelvis, on account of the ample chest, appears some what small, but is not so by actual measurement”)

      Extracted from this link with bibliography below at the end.

      Twice in small paragraph the author and observant who study then clearly indicate of “ample chest” observation with small abdomen=(lack of belly ) in adults males ;with normal pelvis least that appear smaller.
      I think that is very clear Indians in their time were not flat body or skinny or else but natural well body muscular formed in typical warrior.
      my thoughts.

  8. ed borris says:

    Granted ample can have many connotations, as in you have ample room to perform a task, one would have to interpret the context of how it was used. It can mean overly large too, but it can also be used for sufficient. When one is in evaluating bone structure I would think adequate would describe sufficient. That’s my take yours is obviously different, however that does not make either of us correct as we cannot assume the context of the word and what the user meant exactly.

    • Erwin says:

      Yes.sure !!!
      Ample woman chest mean…just ample right?

      • ed borris says:

        Fine if that is how you want to interpret the context of the way the word is used good for you.

        and it’s whatever, not werever.

        • ERWIN SELL says:

          First and about all my two last post from last night with links are not direct to you
          Sorry !!!
          But in general as personal perception view and research after last post from Greg and others .

          Second you need take any discussion less personal please…
          Not as you are right and/or I’m wrong. Chill out please..

          Third I had not used extreme exaggerated words comparison such Arnold or Adonis.
          Nor I had had say the figures (you ,not me says ) did went to work bench is correct or not .
          But I had say figures of Indians in toy soldiers are not far from reality versus what anthropologist mention .
          Meaning they are/were in general Not -(from words lastly used exaggerated as well biases.) such-fat ,”scrawny”=need connotation and meaning clarification here please , skinny or else.
          4th-Ample mean excess of something more than general normal=
          in all others meaning definition dictionary .
          But apparently Anthropologist use the word to say they have normal chest-Right!?

          And probably/wish next generation figures of braves will specifically made for you skinny ,fat and scrawny..hoping every body will love and accept then as realistic .

          And last I’m very sorry for writing and have my cellphone self “incorrect “ the word “ whatever” to you but definitely you got the message I guess!!
          It is not first time will happen from me ,neither sometimes most here spelled wrong a words and not be corrected as well by others
          But I apologies for so much …

  9. Greg Liska says:

    I think there is decent evidence they had tails. Not shown in any pictures of the day because of strict Victorian morals, for fear that they would be mistaken for a phallus. We would also have to consider the connotations of the word ‘mistaken’ as it could be construed as ‘used repeatedly as…’. Just my thoughts that I will doggedly defend as absolute truth long after this thread was of any use.

  10. ed borris says:

    Well, you should to listen to your own advice. I am not upset, I’m just pointing out that you are taking a word, “ample” to only mean excessive, it can be and is used in in other forms, as in “you should have ample time to complete the task” which means adequate, it doesn’t always mean excessive. My original comment was only from that chest he must have used the the bench press to be that muscular and you re the one that took it beyond what I would consider a reasonable response. I think you take it personally when anyone has the gall to dispute anything you say. Evidenced by the lengths you have gone to try and prove your point. Anyway, I am through with this discussion because besides being pointless, it is taking up valuable space.

    • Erwin says:

      On my first response
      I clear the undress part comment that was refering to rest of figures in set and not the figure above u clearly miss I guess.
      And point my view (personal thought) about indians.
      From there it all start.
      I did not dispute any of you at first ….
      But to every one his opinion…..
      I don’t like interprete definitions already clear by dicctionary.Not point on it.It is very obviously …

  11. Len Hardt says:

    Now let’s discuss the accurate/not so accurate sculptures of the Marx cavemen (stature, hairstyles, attire, etc.) – followed by my favorite figure, the big-eared alien from the space sets.

    • ed borris says:

      Can’t I have never met any cavemen nor any big eared aliens with tails. Also, never met a troll, pixie or goblin either. Now I could swear I have met many Neanderthals.

      • Len Hardt says:

        I expect to see many live Neanderthals in one week (OTSN) – myself included.

        • ed borris says:

          I’ll drink to that.

        • Don Perkins says:

          Yes, there are plenty of Neanderthals running around at OTSN, which is probably why I always fit right in at that event.

          And unfortunately, I can’t attend this year, which is probably why I’m not feeling my normal stress leading up to it, when I usually get antsy wondering if the start date for the festivities (for me that would typically be the Thursday or Friday before) will ever arrive.

          But for Ed, Len, Gary, and whoever else on this site is attending this year, I wish you all a full weekend of toy soldier fun.

    • Erwin says:

      Sure on caveman.they sll looks like a baseball team player set by poses
      I dubth on aliens till some one find one I guess.!!!!
      But my favorite aliens are by starlux, elastolin and Britain plua few Millers.
      My thoughts

    • admin says:

      I think we enough has done this topic. These figures were made under standards of the time. Today we have different standards and information with figures having to be more realistic and historical correct. The big ear alien may have been on the Tom Corbett show. Marx reused the aliens while Marx changed the spacemen to make them more correct. Today if you would do realistic aliens based various stoires they would be the grays

  12. Erwin says:

    Oh …and just in case.
    I mean (all, doubt, plus)…:-):-)

  13. Greg Liska says:

    It’s my theory that the grey Indians from the Rin Tin-Tin sets were really Aliens. The shade of grey is inaccurate though. There should be a touch of green to it which would account for all the reports of little green men that came in the 50’s. That’s why they were ‘skinny’ Indians. Proof can be found here, at this link:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *