Samstag, 31. März 2012

Fire Dragon (Remco 1982)

Like I said, I'm a huge fan and defender of bad taste. Hate the good, like the bad, love the ugly! The ugliest dudes are just good enough to get the love of the Toywalker! So does the Warrior Beasts' Fire Dragon.

Remco gave birth to the Warrior Beasts (WB) action figures in the early 80s, jumping the bandwagon of Mattel's MotU success. The steed was sold "exclusively" in a playset consisting of the Dragon and a WB action figure (that was regularly Ramar. It was shown with Guana on WB cardbacks, though) . There's not much known about the Fire Dragon. Besides that at least two versions of Fire Dragons existed (one with a ruff, the other one without).

Finding a boxed set (that would also mean to get more information on the Fire Dragon) ain't easy. For a Kraut like me, it's nearly impossible. WB have never been released in Germany. Anyways, it's not too hard to find a Fire Dragon complement. We've been flooded with cheap, ugly rubber dinosaurs from China in the 80s. And some of them had exactly the same molds like the Remco ones.

Obviously Remco was either using the same molds or did simply snatch some ready molded dragons, to repack them with their WB. For a collector it's quite hard to tell the difference, if a loose Fire Dragon is "original" or not. (Which probably means, if it was originally boxed within a WB playset.)

I got two variations of Fire Dragons so far. One is marked "Made in China" at the ruff and "China" on one foot. The other one is marked "Hong Kong" on one foot and has a logogram on the other. (Unfortunatley I can't read any Chinese. So I'd be thankful if anybody could give me a hand here.)

The steeds have different paintjobs. The China one has a red, the Hong Kong one a merely yelllow ruff. The teeth are different, too. According to pictures from other collections, I'd tell the one with the red ruff is the "original" one. But I could also imagine that both have never been packed as WB. Maybe both have been - I just can't tell, and as long as nobody can, I stick to Popper. They're both Fire Dragons as long as there's no proof they're not. And I'm just loving them!








1 Kommentar:

  1. hi, I'm a fan of bad taste like you, even if I guess that bad taste for us is more like good taste XD
    ...and I found myself in your same exciting situation, as looking for imperial (ko) and motu (ko), I couldn't avoid to stumble into the 3 beasts from imperial - supposed to be used with motu like figures (the knights and daggers line) - and into these 3 beauties that are probably familiar to you: http://www.giocattolivecchi.com/public%5C_mercatino_pic%5C107629%5C107629%5C2014113032_resize.jpg

    The dinosaur has not to do with the other three of course. I bought that lot. And I thought I might add some meat to the fire. When I was a kid, I had - and thank god I still have - the red lizard, but while cleaning it a few months ago, I noticed that it has the imperial logo on its belly. Today I received the 3 in the picture above: the red one and the black one have no imperial logo, while the yellow one has the imperial logo on the belly (but it looks less "precise" than usual). The interesting thing is that ALL the three in the picture have the chinese logogram under one foot! I can't compare the two red lizards right now, I'll do that in a few months (I'm leaving tomorrow). I guess both fire dragons 1 and 2 have that monogram (one is in my hands, the other one is in yours). I can speculate that a local chinese rubber toy production company - owner of the logogram - has made the 3 lizards in the picture plus the collar lizard, so basically all of them. Remco took two of them straight away and used them to pack the sets, without adding any logo. While imperial took the red and yellow ones and added its logo. I say this because there's no black lizard with imperial logo, as far as I know, and not even collar lizard with imperial logo, so I would guess that both company took their beasts from an original producer who had all of them, and it seems the logogram is the common factor among all the items.

    AntwortenLöschen