Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 31
  1. #1

    Tonnika sisters figure excuse seems flimsy

    You know how the generally-accepted reason for why we don't have action figures of either of the Tonnika sisters is because the actresses never gave LFL license to use their likeness this way? I never really thought much about this before although it didn't seem very realistic to me (like Lucas would forget JUST those 2), but then I realized the other day that it makes even LESS sense when you consider that Galoob indeed did make a Brea Tonnika action-fleet figure in the relatively common Battle Pack #3 "Aliens & Creatures" (the one with the Bantha). I'm not saying I have the answers, but the current reasoning doesn't seem to hold up IMO.
    Darth Vader is becoming the Mickey Mouse of Star Wars.

    "In Brooklyn, a castle, is where dwell I"
    The use of a lightsaber does not make one a Jedi, it is the ability to not use it.

  2. #2
    Maybe when the galoob figure was made some sort of deal was struck. Or maybe the figure was unlicenced by the actress which led to some payoff having to be made, making sure that they would never be made again.

  3. #3
    The likeness of the galoob figure isn't very accurate of the charecter. Othen then the outfit, all she had was a flesh colored face. The Hasbro figure would actually somewhat look like the charecter, that's where they are gonna run into the problems.

    And it's quite possible that likeness rights for the other characters in ANH were negotiated later, but the actresses that pllayed the Tonnika Sisters wanted to much money.

    Just look at McFarlane, when they went after the rights to Linda Blair's face for to do a Exorcist Movie Maniac figure of her and she wanted some ungodly some. I know it was a few million. So a deal was never struck.

    The same thing could have occured in this case. The best thing for Lucas and Hasbro to do, is when they do the DVD Boxset of all 6 movies is to yank those two chicks out of there and replace them with a couple Lucasfilm/Hasbro interns in similar outfits.

    MTFBWY and HH!!

    Jar Jar Binks
    THE SPY. THE SPACEMAN. THE GODDESS. THE ROBOT. THE GORILLA.

    AGENTS OF ATLAS - Returns in Early 2009.

  4. #4
    so how close does the likeness have to be in order to make it a likeness?

    Just take some old monkey face leia head, give 'em a new doo and a new outfit, and there you go, monkey face tonnika sisters. Or just say they are the monnika sisters and of no relation to the money grubbing tonnika sisters, and not based on their likeness.

    I agree, I think some explaining is in order.
    Peeps who have hooked me up: General Grievous Dark Marble jjreason Ramy GrandMoffLouie Josephe vader121 Val Da Car

  5. #5
    Originally posted by JarJarBinks

    Just look at McFarlane, when they went after the rights to Linda Blair's face for to do a Exorcist Movie Maniac figure of her and she wanted some ungodly some. I know it was a few million. So a deal was never struck.
    Wow, that's just crazy to me. If I were an actress and somebody wanted to immortalize me in a plastic action figure, I'd be honored and wouldn't ask a cent. It's all these burned out actresses who are no longer wanted or needed for anything that are causing problems.

    Originally posted by JarJarBinks

    The best thing for Lucas and Hasbro to do, is when they do the DVD Boxset of all 6 movies is to yank those two chicks out of there and replace them with a couple Lucasfilm/Hasbro interns in similar outfits.
    That's a great idea! It's not like there's no one else out there with a similar look! Oh, that would be the bestest of best insults to those two as well....sweet, sweet justice
    GIGANTA: A robot that automatically produces fun!

  6. #6
    Heck, use the lovely lady that played Aayla Secura and film her infront of a blue/green screen and digitally double and insert her into the shot. She looks a lot better then the two ladies that played the Tonnika Sisters anyway. Everytime I see them I think Jaye Davidson (Ra) from Stargate.

    MTFBWY and HH!!

    Jar Jar Binks
    THE SPY. THE SPACEMAN. THE GODDESS. THE ROBOT. THE GORILLA.

    AGENTS OF ATLAS - Returns in Early 2009.

  7. #7

    Quite Flimsy

    Geeze, these gals are not even actresses, they are just filler for the scene. Seems to me that they should be replaced by something / someone else like JarJarBinks suggested. These two really don't excite me figure or character wise anyways, but for those that do I can appreciate thier interest in them.
    THANKS FOR THE AT-TE & FALCON HASBRO. NOW IT'S TIME FOR A LARGE TANTIVE IV!

  8. #8
    Frankly, Christine Hewitt isn't really what i'd call a major working actor but she is a real actor not just an extra. so anything would be bread and butter money to her. can't remember the other one's name right now but if i don't remember it she's nobody special.
    I think the problem is less with likeness rights and more with hasbroken not wanting to spend out to make a background character when they can get away with re-issuing older molds of what they already sculpted.
    Female characters don't really sell that well unless they're half naked. Or Twi'Lek. An Aay Vida figure would sell because technically she's current to the last movie and semi naked.
    It's like the Yarna D'al Gargan thing, hasbroken won't make her because it's just some background actor and they can't really get away with shoving a blaster accessory in there with her.
    The Tonnika sisters are on screen for a gnats fart of a second or two whereas Yarna is on screen for some considerable time. If they won't make Yarna then they won't make the Tonnika sisters. Especially not now with all the Outlander nightclub patrons to do. When it comes to choosing whether or not to sculpt a semi naked blonde bombshell in a negilgee from the nightclub or some fruity old has-been actor in a blue/green jump suit with a crappy beehive and bad make up from the cantina I know which one hasbroken will choose.
    And if hasbroken wanted to make the characters they would regardless of likeness rights. The Aayla secura figure looked like Aayla but wasn't Amy Allen's likeness until she sat for the sculptor. If she hadn't we probably would have taken the figure as Aayla anyway though. We've accepted how many Anakin figures despite it never having Hayden's face.
    hasbroken can do a character and have it closely resemble an actor without it being a precise likeness. They can do it if they want to, they just don't want to. Lame excuses and brush offs. That's all we get.

  9. #9
    A Yarna figure is much higher on my list than the Tonnika sisters. While Jar Jar had a good idea, I can't see GL actually replacing their half a second of screen time just so Hasbro can make the figures. Face it, there are some characters we will never get, and the Tonnika sisters are probably on that list.
    Yo momma. That's right, I said "yo momma".

  10. #10
    They could always make them tiny "Unleashed" figures, those things never look like the characters so it wouldn't have a likeness to'em. Though they'd probably do them as tabletop dancers because it's what the "artist" sees.
    "Hokey packaging and ancient gimmicks are no match for good detail on your figure, kid."
    "I am a Klingot from Oklahoma in human boy form."
    "We came, we saw, we conquered... We, woke up!"

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO