Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 16
  1. #1

    The TONNIKA SISTERS are going to be in a Super Bowl ad! Why no figures then?

    The Tonnika Sisters are going to be in a new Super Bowl ad.

    http://bottomline.msnbc.msn.com/_new...d#.Tyfh83T_6JE

    Volkwagen is recreating the cantina set for a commercial. As you can see in the picture in the article, Snaggletooth is standing in front of the Tonnikas. And not the actors from the movies, new people in the costumes and hair styles.

    So my questions are:

    1. Why haven't we been able to get a figure of a person in those outfits and hair if Lucas IS willing to license the
    CHARACTERS if not the actors' likenesses?
    2. Does their appearance in the ad show Lucasfilm has changed its position in some way as to the Sisters?
    3. Can we get a figure of the actors from the commercial? Close enough for me!

    I know that there is a ban on asking questions about them and we hate to burn a question in the Q&A, but I think we should ask if their appearance in the ad signals a shift in Tonnika policy and more importantly, can we get a figure based on the women in the Volkswagen ad?

  2. #2
    It's the end of January and still no word of new Q&A, so I don't think that's going to happen.

    Anyway, it's not up to Hasbro, it's up to Lucasfilm to decide whether or not to pull that trigger. Perhaps they are testing the waters to see what becomes of the legal pushback.
    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.

  3. #3
    Honestly, I would love to have these figures! But I really have to look at the fact that so many of the actors that played these iconic characters have been screwed over by likeness licensing and never paid a dime. And being the licensing juggernaut that Star Wars is, would it really be so bad if maybe Lucasfilm paid a couple of people their due?


    So, I hope that either the original actresses and/or their families are paid to have their likenesses used or that the figures are never made. It is ridiculous to think that we would have to pay a premium or that the coffers of Lucasfilm would be broken if they actually paid someone royalties. This situation has been silly for years and it is still silly.
    "Not again, Obi Wan is going to kill me."

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by Dark Marble View Post
    Honestly, I would love to have these figures! But I really have to look at the fact that so many of the actors that played these iconic characters have been screwed over by likeness licensing and never paid a dime. And being the licensing juggernaut that Star Wars is, would it really be so bad if maybe Lucasfilm paid a couple of people their due?


    So, I hope that either the original actresses and/or their families are paid to have their likenesses used or that the figures are never made. It is ridiculous to think that we would have to pay a premium or that the coffers of Lucasfilm would be broken if they actually paid someone royalties. This situation has been silly for years and it is still silly.
    Question: how do you know the actors who portrayed these background characters haven't been paid and have been screwed over by likeness licensing? The legal matter with Angela Staines (one of the Tonnikas) is that she is one of the few actors who they didn't get licensing agreements signed with while she was an extra on the film, that seems to suggest that the other actors did sign likeness contracts in exchange for some sort of payment (probably a modeling release as part of the pay they got to be in the movie). From what I've heard, Staines' lawsuit claims that you cannot tell the difference visually from her Tonnika to the other Tonnika portrayed by Christine Hewitt, so Lucasfilm cannot license product based only on Brea Tonnika despite them looking quite different despite Hewitt having given her consent, the characters being in different colors, having different heights, and Lucasfilm creating the very character designs, costumes, wigs, and makeup that went into the characters. All that argument for a character that glances in a direction and appears on-screen in the background for a few minutes and is obvious in camera for mere seconds. What value should go into that "portrayal" that the performer deserves beyond the original payment they received for acting in the film?
    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.

  5. #5
    I'd love to see them Vintage carded with "Volkswagen SuperBowl Ad" across the top instead of a new hope or Star Wars. They could also give them away with a test drive of any volkwagen car.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by JediTricks View Post
    Question: how do you know the actors who portrayed these background characters haven't been paid and have been screwed over by likeness licensing? The legal matter with Angela Staines (one of the Tonnikas) is that she is one of the few actors who they didn't get licensing agreements signed with while she was an extra on the film, that seems to suggest that the other actors did sign likeness contracts in exchange for some sort of payment (probably a modeling release as part of the pay they got to be in the movie). From what I've heard, Staines' lawsuit claims that you cannot tell the difference visually from her Tonnika to the other Tonnika portrayed by Christine Hewitt, so Lucasfilm cannot license product based only on Brea Tonnika despite them looking quite different despite Hewitt having given her consent, the characters being in different colors, having different heights, and Lucasfilm creating the very character designs, costumes, wigs, and makeup that went into the characters. All that argument for a character that glances in a direction and appears on-screen in the background for a few minutes and is obvious in camera for mere seconds. What value should go into that "portrayal" that the performer deserves beyond the original payment they received for acting in the film?
    That is a good question. If we are talking just about the performance, it would seem that the performer couldn't ask for much past their original payment. But when it comes to making money after the fact on a character where the actors likeness is the essence of that character it should be a lot more. It goes on for years making money.

    Lucas might have created a wig and costume for her to wear but he didn't cover her face. I believe that an actor should have a say on his or her likeness and how it is used, and be able to share in the profit of that. Getting paid for the performance is one thing, the licensing is another matter. And I agree that the characters are different in looks and stature but unfortunately they are linked. Until a price is agreed on and terms on how the likeness will be used the characters shouldn't be made. Carrie Fischer has spoken at length on the woes of being a pez and a blowup doll.
    "Not again, Obi Wan is going to kill me."

  7. #7
    As far as the commercial itself went, I rewound it twice and still barely saw them. But the person playing Bo Shek was a dead-on copy.
    CU Later. Contracted Universe? Later. :(

  8. #8
    Wrong.

    The Tonnika Sisters WERE in a commercial. Funny how the passage of just a little time renders the thread title obsolete, eh?
    Tommy, close your eyes.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by El Chuxter View Post
    Wrong.

    The Tonnika Sisters WERE in a commercial. Funny how the passage of just a little time renders the thread title obsolete, eh?
    I can't wait for linear time to be obsolete, too. Then the Tonnika Sisters WILL BE in the commercial.
    CU Later. Contracted Universe? Later. :(

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Dark Marble View Post
    That is a good question. If we are talking just about the performance, it would seem that the performer couldn't ask for much past their original payment. But when it comes to making money after the fact on a character where the actors likeness is the essence of that character it should be a lot more. It goes on for years making money.

    Lucas might have created a wig and costume for her to wear but he didn't cover her face. I believe that an actor should have a say on his or her likeness and how it is used, and be able to share in the profit of that. Getting paid for the performance is one thing, the licensing is another matter. And I agree that the characters are different in looks and stature but unfortunately they are linked. Until a price is agreed on and terms on how the likeness will be used the characters shouldn't be made. Carrie Fischer has spoken at length on the woes of being a pez and a blowup doll.
    He covered her face with makeup and a wig though, and then the faces were barely shown in the film. Could you tell 1 Tonnika from the other at first glance? Could you tell 1 Rebel Fleet Trooper or Hoth Trooper from another at first glance? They were paid to be on-set in a costume and follow simple direction, it wasn't like Carrie Fisher and Mark Hamill where they are main characters and their likenesses are vital to the character as well as the performance. Carrie Fisher complains a lot about Lucas owning her likeness largely for comedic effect, but she signed the contract for him to use those rights, she agreed to take in return what he was offering at the time. It's not like Face/Off where he stole her face.


    Quote Originally Posted by Bel-Cam Jos View Post
    As far as the commercial itself went, I rewound it twice and still barely saw them. But the person playing Bo Shek was a dead-on copy.
    I was surprised, I got the feeling the Youtube version was a little longer and featured them more obviously.

    Bo Shek was a really good piece of casting.


    Quote Originally Posted by Bel-Cam Jos View Post
    I can't wait for linear time to be obsolete, too. Then the Tonnika Sisters WILL BE in the commercial.
    OH SNAP!
    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.

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