<< 1 >>
Rating:  Summary: DON'T PANIC...IT'S ONLY GODZILLA! Review: Dana Cain's book is an enjoyable, well written guide to an increasingly popular sub-category of monster toy collecting. No book on pricing collectibles is likely to remain current for long, and its real value lies in providing the reader with a pictorial overview of its subject. COLLECTING JAPANESE MOVIE MONSTERS succeeds very well in this, and its text provides some lively historical background into that singularly odd period in cinema where colossal creatures used Tokyo as a ring and we watched guilt-free. Note to "serious" Japanese movie monster collectors: don't take it all so seriously. Those responsible for the men in the monster suits didn't.
Rating:  Summary: Bad. Review: This is not the first price guide on these toys. Sean Linkenback's was the first and much better than this.... Ms./Mr. Cain should research the subject before saying what prices are. Linkenback is a respected dealer of Japanese toys and thus infitely more qualified for an endeavor such as this. Cain, you should take a research class.
Rating:  Summary: A good book with info not found elsewhere Review: While not perfect, this book is better than the earlier reviews said. The book is very well illustrated, and most of the pictures are very clear and sharp. To say that the pictures come mainly from a Toys-R-Us is simply false: The vast majority of the toys pictured are items not even distributed in the U.S., to say nothing of the movie posters, magazines, etc. Any price guide is eventually going to be out of date. Many of the prices in this book are still current, although there are several that are not. I did find a couple of errors, where a picture was incorrectly labeled. To be fair, Sean Linkenback's book has similar errors and in many examples his prices are more dated than Ms. Cain's, plus her book includes items not even listed in his. Yes, Linkenback's book is more in-depth, but it has its flaws too. As with other kinds of price guides, thinking of a single edition as being all encompassing or definitive is a mistake.
<< 1 >>
|