(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53483135624_5c78ab9153_o.png)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53482975528_fd96240c44_o.png) (https://flic.kr/p/2pu83U1)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53482833961_2403e18eee_o.png) (https://flic.kr/p/2pu7eiJ)
(https://flic.kr/p/2pu6vdV)
Full catalog here: https://issuu.com/trickortreatstudios/docs/2024-catalog-final (https://issuu.com/trickortreatstudios/docs/2024-catalog-final)
All I can see for now are the three spreads you posted, Josh. What an exciting line-up.
The Topstone characters, Illusive Concepts, Post Studios oldies ... many of those are
masks I never thought would be available again. Thanks for the preview. :D
Quote from: Sir Masksalot on January 23, 2024, 03:05:03 PM
All I can see for now are the three spreads you posted, Josh. What an exciting line-up.
The Topstone characters, Illusive Concepts, Post Studios oldies ... many of those are
masks I never thought would be available again. Thanks for the preview. :D
It is INSANE to see a Frankenstein 2001 or Erik in a 2024 catalog! and that Glowin Ghoulies ad! OMG, such a great love letter to classic Don Post.
(https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-NHgDENxnSmo/TnkQt-HLcSI/AAAAAAAABsk/jh8lxCJS-yo/s1600/DonPost1979Catalog_06.jpg)
Wouldn't mind having one of those Saucerman and Mutant masks! :)
Quote from: Mike Scott on January 23, 2024, 04:21:20 PM
Wouldn't mind having one of those Saucerman and Mutant masks! :)
Yeah, I really want that one. It'll be an embarrassment of riches this year, because Distortions is also re-releasing their looooong out of production Saucerman!
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53483377713_05b5244eaf_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2pu9hRX)r
(https://flic.kr/p/2pu9hRX)
$600! Gulp!
Luv that Thin Frankenstein mask!
Cool to add a wearable version to the collection, it's vinyl like the original Post releases too.
Hope they release the Wide Frankenstein Post mask, but I guess they thought that was too close to the Uni Monster. I don't think so, I think it is rather generic enough, that and I just want a wearable version too.
TOTS new 2024 catalog is full of great stuff, much more than I ever thought after loosing some licensed products.
Both 800 Frank's were originally licensed so I'm surprised they are able to do it. Uni has that look trademarked.
That's the 76 resculpt. A little different than the 67 sculpt.
Not by much difference. The '76 ver is smaller, and not as thin faced, or craggy looking perhaps.
As far as Uni's trade mark on this make up, or design, others have posted on extensive searches through trade mark holdings, and records. They have never come across any actual official filings for this copy right make up.
That's why you see so many various renderings of the bolted, scares, flat head monster from cartoons, films, tv, and numerous products of this image.
I think their thin Frank has those classic traits accepted as the monster, but looks nothing like the original filmed versions. Even as a kid, I wasn't that much of a fan of it, only yrs later accepting it as the artistic rendering of the known monster that it is.
It's literally all of this. Generic stuff can sneak by with one or two, but not all. (https://i.postimg.cc/Y2byrLsZ/Screenshot-20240124-012838-Samsung-Internet.jpg)
Great stuff in that catalogue, but I'm confused by all of the Halloween III offerings. What happened to their beef with Universal Studios?
Quote from: Doh! on January 24, 2024, 03:30:59 AM
Great stuff in that catalogue, but I'm confused by all of the Halloween III offerings. What happened to their beef with Universal Studios?
TOTS owns Don Post Studios. The H3 mask designs existed before H3 so no Uni license is needed.
Thanks for info!
Quote from: Dr.Terror on January 24, 2024, 03:56:12 AM
TOTS owns Don Post Studios. The H3 mask designs existed before H3 so no Uni license is needed.
Yea, try telling that to Uni. That's why they have TOTS in court, as they claim they own the original Post designed Halloween masks, Shull, Witch, and Pumpkin. Perhaps this has been settled, or TOT is just selling them as their known properties.
Not much legal back up from a book publisher, on loose claims for the monsters design.
Uni will have a lot of clamping down to do, with all the generic images of the monster out there.
Generic images that they helped create, and continue to push, that dilutes their own 'trade mark' brand!
The Witch and Skull were Post originals made years earlier, but I thought they created the Pumpkin for Halliween III.
Quote from: MrDark1 on January 24, 2024, 01:19:55 PM
Yea, try telling that to Uni. That's why they have TOTS in court, as they claim they own the original Post designed Halloween masks, Shull, Witch, and Pumpkin. Perhaps this has been settled, or TOT is just selling them as their known properties.
Not much legal back up from a book publisher, on loose claims for the monsters design.
Uni will have a lot of clamping down to do, with all the generic images of the monster out there.
Generic images that they helped create, and continue to push, that dilutes their own 'trade mark' brand!
Universal does not have TOTS in court, TOTS has Universal in court. The gist of it is a dispute over Universal licensing the Halloween trio of masks to other companies. TOTS owns the designs, obviously, as they own Post. But Universal still markets Halloween trio merch (action figures, Pops, t-shirts, etc)
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.883992/gov.uscourts.cacd.883992.1.0.pdf
Trick or Treat Studios have done some things that have hurt their street cred. The Michael Myers debacle, with their issuing C&Ds to indy mask makers, and this thing with Universal; have negatively impacted some collector perception of them as a company, sadly.
Quote from: Anton Phibes on January 24, 2024, 09:22:01 PM
Trick or Treat Studios have done some things that have hurt their street cred. The Michael Myers debacle, with their issuing C&Ds to indy mask makers, and this thing with Universal; have negatively impacted some collector perception of them as a company, sadly.
What was the Michael Myers debacle?
So, Universal is clamping down on monsters with green skin...someone needs to tell Universal that Jack Pierce used "sky grey" color makeup on the Frankenstein monster, not green! I had heard that it was Don Post Studios that used green for their first Frankenstein Mask back in 1948.
Flat top head - Edison's Frankenstein had what looked like a flat top head.
Quote from: MonsterBaker666 on January 25, 2024, 07:36:49 AM
So, Universal is clamping down on monsters with green skin...someone needs to tell Universal that Jack Pierce used "sky grey" color makeup on the Frankenstein monster, not green! I had heard that it was Don Post Studios that used green for their first Frankenstein Mask back in 1948.
Flat top head - Edison's Frankenstein had what looked like a flat top head.
Frank has-been depicted as having green skin since the 30s in ballyhoo etc.. it's not the individual traits, it's the combination Uni trademarks.
Quote from: Josh on January 24, 2024, 09:37:19 PM
What was the Michael Myers debacle?
TOTS was started by Indy artists that produced their own unlicensed masks of movie characters starting out. So it was odd to see them go after artists making their own versions of characters they had licenses to. 8 dont know how deep it went.
All this legal stuff just makes me shake my head. Gotta wonder just who owns what anymore. Don Post Studios created some masks years ago, they were used in a movie, and who owns the rights to the masks in the movie? Don Post Studios was sold to another company, another company bought them, then they got rid of Don Post Studios. So...who owns those mask designs? Don Post Jr? The company that bought Post Studios and then closed it down - do they still own the designs? Are they public domain?
Kinda reminds me of the who Famous Monsters Of Filmland lawsuits. Warren Communications went bankrupt, and no one bought the FM name, so no one owned it until Ray Ferry brought the mag back out. There was a battle royal over that.
Everyone and their brother wants a piece of the pie. The families of actors want some. The studio wants some (well, they want it all). Pretty soon the family of Jack Pierce will want a piece of it. and the costume designer. And the guy who put dirt on it to make it look old.
Like a room full of dogs fighting over one hot dog.
Quote from: MonsterBaker666 on January 25, 2024, 11:43:40 AM
All this legal stuff just makes me shake my head. Gotta wonder just who owns what anymore. Don Post Studios created some masks years ago, they were used in a movie, and who owns the rights to the masks in the movie? Don Post Studios was sold to another company, another company bought them, then they got rid of Don Post Studios. So...who owns those mask designs? Don Post Jr? The company that bought Post Studios and then closed it down - do they still own the designs? Are they public domain?
Kinda reminds me of the who Famous Monsters Of Filmland lawsuits. Warren Communications went bankrupt, and no one bought the FM name, so no one owned it until Ray Ferry brought the mag back out. There was a battle royal over that.
Everyone and their brother wants a piece of the pie. The families of actors want some. The studio wants some (well, they want it all). Pretty soon the family of Jack Pierce will want a piece of it. and the costume designer. And the guy who put dirt on it to make it look old.
Like a room full of dogs fighting over one hot dog.
The DP thing isn't like FM, there is a clear chain of ownership of DP from Paper Magic to Gemmy to TOTS.
I mean the infighting between everyone once they smell money. Warren Communications went bankrupt. The\bankruptcy receiver sold all the assets. The FM name didn't sell, but Creepy, Eerie and Vampirella were sold. And something like 20 years later Warren comes out and sues over Vampirella. Since that was worth a lot more than Creepy or Eerie, Harris, who bought all 3, gave Warren Creepy and Eerie and kept Vampirella. He prob could have fought it, but then someone else would have smelled money and come for it - lawyers - and they'd get whatever those properties were worth in legal fees. The FM title was also fought over. Surprised Warren didn't sue for that, too.
For years we've seen TV commercials and movies with VERY close variations of the Universal Frankenstein image - flat top, green skin, scars, neck bolts, etc, etc. Did Universal sue? did the license all of those? Paul Nashy made at least 1 film with a Frankenstein monster looking like Universals - did he pay for the rights? Who knows. Same with The wolf man - heck, even Chaney did a Mexican movie looking just like the universal version - bet they didn't pay Universal a dime for it.
But now - everyone wants a bite of the apple. Thus all the generic looking stuff out there FROM Universal. Pretty soon all us oldtimers will be dead, and who will care about a Skull mask with the Don Post Studios name on it?
Quote from: MonsterBaker666 on January 25, 2024, 01:40:45 PM
Pretty soon all us oldtimers will be dead, and who will care about a Skull mask with the Don Post Studios name on it?
That's exactly what Justin is working towards, making these masks available to a new generation to they will mean something. It's Justin's passion and dedication that has gotten TOTS to where it is. No one else would revive the Bayshore Zombie or Carlisle for mass production.
Quote from: MonsterBaker666 on January 25, 2024, 01:40:45 PM
I mean the infighting between everyone once they smell money. Warren Communications went bankrupt. The\bankruptcy receiver sold all the assets. The FM name didn't sell, but Creepy, Eerie and Vampirella were sold. And something like 20 years later Warren comes out and sues over Vampirella. Since that was worth a lot more than Creepy or Eerie, Harris, who bought all 3, gave Warren Creepy and Eerie and kept Vampirella. He prob could have fought it, but then someone else would have smelled money and come for it - lawyers - and they'd get whatever those properties were worth in legal fees. The FM title was also fought over. Surprised Warren didn't sue for that, too.
For years we've seen TV commercials and movies with VERY close variations of the Universal Frankenstein image - flat top, green skin, scars, neck bolts, etc, etc. Did Universal sue? did the license all of those? Paul Nashy made at least 1 film with a Frankenstein monster looking like Universals - did he pay for the rights? Who knows. Same with The wolf man - heck, even Chaney did a Mexican movie looking just like the universal version - bet they didn't pay Universal a dime for it.
But now - everyone wants a bite of the apple. Thus all the generic looking stuff out there FROM Universal. Pretty soon all us oldtimers will be dead, and who will care about a Skull mask with the Don Post Studios name on it?
Universal has done this for years and years. It's nothing new.
I didn't even see that Candy Pail. Gonna get that for sure. Lovely masks all around.
Some what surprised to see the Mutant mask release from TOTS too.
Has Uni abandoned this monster? I heard something about this monsters design being in dispute.
Something about its pants, or something of sorts...?
Perhaps it's being offered under the Illusive Concepts Name clears it. TOTS could run Illusive Concept as a separate business, and Post too, even if owned under one roof. A branding way of business I guess, and may have a Uni license for it, just under the Illusive Concepts Banner name.
Either way, the paint work on it looks fantastic! Hope the production run masks look as good.
Yeah, somehow Universal doesn't own the rights to the Metaluna Mutant anymore.
And, like the old Don Post masks, the paint jobs in their catalog photos is usually much better than the actual masks.
Quote from: MonsterBaker666 on January 26, 2024, 05:16:29 PM
Yeah, somehow Universal doesn't own the rights to the Metaluna Mutant anymore.
No kidding? Any idea who does?
I don't know. I think it night somehow be in the public domain now, because there is no copyright owner name on Mutant merchandise now.
Maybe because there are so many generic big headed aliens in old pulp magazine stories. Who know.
Copyright and trademark stuff is so weird now days. Maybe Universal was spending more on legal Bill's trying to defend their ownership on things than they'd make merchandising it that they just don't care anymore.
Dibs, ok, whatcha want Mr Scott, the head or the pants?
Quote from: MrDark1 on January 26, 2024, 07:44:06 PM
Dibs, ok, whatcha want Mr Scott, the head or the pants?
The whole thing, of course.