• Guest, Help The DPF Community Thrive - Join Our Donation Drive Today!

    We're launching a special DPF Donation Drive to ensure our beloved forum continues to flourish. Your support is vital in helping us cover essential server costs and keep our community running smoothly — This is more than just a donation; it's an investment in the future of our community.

    Join us in this crucial drive and let's ensure our forum remains a vibrant and dynamic place for everyone.

    Please visit the DPF Donation Drive Thread for details and instructions on how you can make your donation today!

Beauty and the Beast [2017] Merchandise Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
Beauty and the Beast [2017] Merchandise Discussion
I think that's the regular Disney Store doll. They are usually way more detailed than the classic dolls. Just look at the mad hatter doll released last year.

As for the head sculpts... Disney has been horrible about their live action sculpts. Just look at Cinderella and the prince... horrible! And look at Alice. They looked nothing like the actors.

So I wonder how the Emma Watson doll will turn out, but the Luke Evans head sculpt looks great.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
lordofanime said:
I think that's the regular Disney Store doll. They are usually way more detailed than the classic dolls. Just look at the mad hatter doll released last year.

As for the head sculpts... Disney has been horrible about their live action sculpts. Just look at Cinderella and the prince... horrible! And look at Alice. They looked nothing like the actors.

So I wonder how the Emma Watson doll will turn out, but the Luke Evans head sculpt looks great.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Their sculpts are flawless. They're almost identical considering they're exact 3D scans of the actors faces. The only problem I see is that they can't paint them well. The paint job Disney does is terrible. It's worse than Mattel.

Here's an example of their sculpts with a good paint job.

s-l1600-20.jpg
madhatterrepaint_beforeafter.jpg
 
Could not agree more keatalex. And honestly, even if the paint isn't perfect, they still look far more like the characters than most of Mattel, Jakks, and Hasbro's offerings. Not to say that those sculpts are all terrible either (even if I hate the sculpt Hasbro used for Emma Watson), as I thought the Mattel Cinderella dolls looked pretty good to certain extent for example, but Disney has a lot more to work with and everything is made in house with them.
 
Last edited:
Hello collecting friends! Just want to invite you to join the Facebook Group I just launched called Kawaii Collectors and Friends - a place for collectors and lovers of all things fun/cute...also an online community that promotes building new friendships! Please check it out: https://www.facebook.com/groups/1897090280525435/

I'm sure there will be much discussion on this new movie, and the merch accompanying it....I'm so pumped!
 
I was waiting for someone to post those pictures. People in my doll group have been losing their minds, and not in a good way.

That is the JCPenny doll, so it is using the same head sculpt as the Disney Store version but its made out of far cheaper materials and not even close to being super detailed. It LOOKS like Emma Watson, but the paint on the face and overall quality of both the dress and the doll itself is so bad that it ruins the entire thing. I can only assume that the DS version will look better as it will have a far better dress and the paint and quality will be much better as well (she will more than likely be looking off to the side like the typical DS doll if I had to assume). I hope that's the case at least.
 
Last edited:
I really hope so because the JcPenny looks a bit like a crystal meth addict or something like that! Someone on a group posted a Bella Swan image from BD (if you know what I mean) LOL. I really hope and I believe DS will not look that odd and creepy because otherwise I'll be so freaking disappointed.
 
Last edited:
The comparisons to Bella from BD are hilarious because they're so true! The doll looks like a very sick and unhealthy version of Emma Watson. I seriously do think the main problem is the paint and body though, so if they fix those with the DS release then I think it will at least be tolerable for most people. I just want some random DS to leak the products already so we can finally have our anticipation/fears put to rest!
 
TheDisneyFanatic said:
The comparisons to Bella from BD are hilarious because they're so true! The doll looks like a very sick and unhealthy version of Emma Watson. I seriously do think the main problem is the paint and body though, so if they fix those with the DS release then I think it will at least be tolerable for most people. I just want some random DS to leak the products already so we can finally have our anticipation/fears put to rest!
Click to expand...

Exactly this!! She looks so odd and unhealthy compared to Emma Watson (she's so freaking beautiful). I hope that too! Now that these leaked they need to show us the DS version before that 16 Jan date because people are going crazy (not in a good way).
 
OH dear god. She looks like Jim Carrey in a wig.

how did no one stop this? The hasbro dolls look bad too... If I were Emma I'd be deeply offended... Lol
 
Wow, that looks very disproportionate and I have nothing positive to say about it. Good thing it's not the official Disney doll.
 
Yes to it being a JCPenny doll; it says Disney Collection, instead of Disney Store. It's really close to something with potential; her head is just a bit too big to her body, and either her forehead is a little too tall, or her hair isn't styled down far enough. Just a little more quality, detail, and joint movement, and she will be truly lovely. Let's try to remember that true beauty come from within though right. :p
 
What I keep coming back to is: this was approved. Somewhere out there is a department head/executive who was handed a factory proof of this nightmare-fuel and said, "Yes, this is a good final product. We can sell this. Make more."

ETA: I've been looking at pictures of JC Penny dolls vs DS dolls, since it's been pointed out that there's a quality difference between them. And yes the clothes do. I have no doubt the DS dress will be greatly superior. However, I can't see any difference in the face paint. It really looks like the factory just produces enough of the same heads for both DS and JCP.

I hate to say it, because I know a lot of people were really looking forward to this doll, but I think this is it. This is Belle. Poor Emma.

On the hopeful side - there's still a chance the 17" LE could look better. She should have different paint and some of her features might translate better on a larger scale. Hopefully.
 
Last edited:
Honestly the doll does bear a resemblance to the photo, especially that expression. And the expression on Emma, and the doll, is also how I feel about this doll. I feel like the doll's face exaggerates what I don't find Belle-like about Emma Watson overall (it does look like her to me, but an unflattering portrayal instead of a flattering one), plus I have no idea why this expression was even chosen as the box picture, or doll's expression, either. Belle's character is not supposed to be "hard pressed lips of disapproval" (She is kind of the opposite, she is a little overly airy for someone who is being held against her will). Of course, perhaps if she would see herself represented like this, on top of her captive situation, maybe that would explain it ;)
 
I don't know why Disney keeps painting freckles on the faces of their dolls... They just don't look right.
 
Nearly gave myself a heart attack, thinking this was Disney Store LE doll. It looks like Emma but not enough. Can't put my finger on the "enough". I do have hope for the DS version of this dress.
 
I really think the film collection doll will be fine. At least I hope. I think this is a mix of poor paint and cheap quality along with poor lighting. I have seen people mention that the film collection doll does still look similar to this, but her face looks "fuller" and her hair is styled better. So it's still the same sculpt, but the changes are enough to make it look a lot better.

It just makes me think of the post keatalex made about the Alice dolls earlier in the thread. They scanned her face, so this IS Emma Watson, but the poor paint and hair along with the odd proportions makes the whole thing fall apart. I can only hope the film collection doll delivers. It's going to be so disappointing if it doesn't, especially considering that the Luke Evans Gaston doll looks incredible. Which is ironic because the male dolls are usually the ones that get the short end of the stick.
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure if Yall have seen the photo of the new Emma Watson as Belle doll that they have at JCP.......but Yall. She's pretty bad. I'm crossing my fingers that Disney store does something to fix the mistakes on this before their versions hit shelves. But judging by the fact that JCP and Disney typically use the same face molds....we may be in a doozy. I was beyond excited as I'm sure millions of people were. They are saying her head is made of the hard material that the new Star Wars Delux 10" figures are made of.....which isn't the best for a doll. An action figure, it's perfect. But nothing that you want to be lifelike and beautiful. Buzzfeed is already making an article about this, but here's the link to ozthegreatandpowerful's Flickr if Yall wanna see. https://flic.kr/p/QYXULB
 
Art rant incoming: As a scifi nerd I've been seeing 3D scanning used for action figures for ages, with plenty of the results turning out just as awkward as this (but people tend to give action figures a lot more leeway anyway). Personally, I think the technology is a phenomenal tool and one of the best ways to get a truly accurate likeness. The problem comes when the toy company uses it as a crutch, more or less skipping the sculpting phase. All those resting b*tch faces we love and adore? That's the face the actor was scanned with as they can reliably hold that position steady for longer than if they were smiling (just like old-timey photography). The scan will also take in a huge amount of detail that comes with a life-sized face, detail that over clutters a canvas that's only an inch high. But that's all fine because the 3D model should then be handed over to a sculptor. A sculptor with the skills to know which facial features are iconic to the actor, which are unnecessary clutter, how to alter features to scale flatteringly but still be recognisable, how to add a smile, and understand how it will all translate on the type of plastic it will be produced on. The scan is only supposed to be a rough draft, but there doesn't seem to be much money or effort being put into it after :/

Of course the paint job that follows is also a big deal. Like people keep pointing out, this doll does look like Emma, the bone structure is definitely there. But the paint job is killing it (brutally. And burying the body in the woods). Good sculpts have been betrayed by bad paint before, and likewise poor sculpts have been salvaged by brilliant ooak artists. I think poor, poor, Emma here lies in the middle. Her sculpt has as much potential as problems, but is pushed over the edge by the paint. I look forward to the inevitable repaints - I think they'll look beautiful - but feel badly for all the people that will be stuck with the store face.

The interesting thing is, of course, the leaked Gaston. Everyone was so astounded by his looks anticipation for Belle shot through the roof! If Disney upped their game that much, this Belle will leave Cinderella and Alice in the dust, she'll practically look like a Hot Toys figure - right?? The expectations were so high this mediocre product was doomed from the start. It's probably not even as bad as we're making it out to be, but we will never be able to stop comparing it to what we thought we were getting. I really do wonder if the reaction would be nearly as visceral had we not seen Gaston first? (I still think people would be displeased though.)
 
Well they did use a 3D scan of Emma's head for the Disney doll so this is Emma Watson and it does look like her. I think that it the proportions are off in the forehead area and the face is a bit long. Hopefully the paint on the Disney store version is better and more detailed. I think I'll probably come the film collection version up regardless because I'm a big Emma Watson and bElle fan. I just hope they do look better then the JC penny version. I mean in my opinion the Alice and Cinderella dolls,looked amazing so I hope for the same from Beauty and the Beast
 
I was one of those that believed Disney Store version would be better than Hasbro since they're usually more realistic than a younger version. But wow I would have never expected this.

JcPenny%20Belle%20Doll%20Clopse%20up.jpg


I zoomed in on her face and I would be okay with that minus the extra forehead and add a widow peek. Also her freckles created bags under her eyes. Shame such a shame. I don't know if I'm going to buy her, I might if on sale and I would attempt my 1st repaint. Definitely I would get rid of the freckles. Also I don't like her face being hard plastic and her head vinyl, I guess!?
 
Ouch. Hands down one of the ugliest Disney dolls I've ever seen...what were they thinking with those freckles?!
 
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top