# The Headless Horseman has come back



## jaws62666 (Mar 25, 2009)

This is the re released Horseman from Round 2. The kit is the same except for the omission of Tim Burton's head. Nice little weekend build.


----------



## BobbysMonsterModels (Mar 8, 2014)

Very nice. Looks great! This was a fun kit to work on as I remember.

I find it very interesting how they have re-released this _"Sleepy Hollow"_ kit. I understand they were not allowed to use the words _Sleepy Hollow_ or use Tim Burton's head because of licensing issues. So, I guess without those words or Burton's likeness it's okay to re-release the kit without any legal issues?

If that's the case, then why can't MPC re-release the Disney _Pirates of the Caribbean_ or _Haunted Mansion_ models? They could just drop the Disney name and references, change the series names to Classic Pirates or Spook House and be done with it.


----------



## mcdougall (Oct 28, 2007)

I knew I bought these for a Good reason !



Denis


----------



## TAY666 (Jan 8, 2000)

BobbysMonsterModels said:


> Very nice. Looks great! This was a fun kit to work on as I remember.
> 
> I find it very interesting how they have re-released this _"Sleepy Hollow"_ kit. I understand they were not allowed to use the words _Sleepy Hollow_ or use Tim Burton's head because of licensing issues. So, I guess without those words or Burton's likeness it's okay to re-release the kit without any legal issues?
> 
> If that's the case, then why can't MPC re-release the Disney _Pirates of the Caribbean_ or _Haunted Mansion_ models? They could just drop the Disney name and references, change the series names to Classic Pirates or Spook House and be done with it.


Why not ask Round2 as they are the only ones with the definitive answer.


----------



## SUNGOD (Jan 20, 2006)

Nice to see this back but the Sleep Hollow sign and Burton head did add something to it. Luckily I've already built the original version.

They should bring the 1999 Mummy back too but include a better sculpted Mummy head as the one in the kit ain't very good.


----------



## SUNGOD (Jan 20, 2006)

BobbysMonsterModels said:


> Very nice. Looks great! This was a fun kit to work on as I remember.
> 
> I find it very interesting how they have re-released this _"Sleepy Hollow"_ kit. I understand they were not allowed to use the words _Sleepy Hollow_ or use Tim Burton's head because of licensing issues. So, I guess without those words or Burton's likeness it's okay to re-release the kit without any legal issues?
> 
> If that's the case, then why can't MPC re-release the Disney _Pirates of the Caribbean_ or _Haunted Mansion_ models? They could just drop the Disney name and references, change the series names to Classic Pirates or Spook House and be done with it.






This has often been discussed and people have said why don't they drop the Disney name etc. Someone gave a good explanation a while back but I can't remember what they said.


----------



## BobbysMonsterModels (Mar 8, 2014)

TAY666 said:


> Why not ask Round2 as they are the only ones with the definitive answer.


I went out to the Round2 website about 2 days ago, and sent them a message through their contact form, enquiring about the old MPC Disney kits. Don't know if I'll hear back from them though. After I clicked the "send" button, I saw something about making sure I hit the "request an answer" button, but honestly, I didn't see one. Went back and still didn't see one. Maybe it was there and I just didn't see it. We'll see.

I don't know, it just makes sense that if they could reinterpret this _Sleepy Hollow_ kit to avoid licensing issues, than why can't they do it with the old Disney kits as well? I'm almost willing to bet Disney has stronger clutches around their old properties, and won't give them up, no matter how the product is reinterpreted (even free of their brand). I'm surprised they didn't reissue the Haunted Mansion kits back when they released the Eddie Murphy flop years back. Stranger things have been done to promote movies...

Yes, Sungod, I seem to remember some of these discussions in the past…I think I got flamed in one of them years ago when my 'net speak wasn't as bridled, LOL. It's just you'd think with Disney being a multi-million dollar empire that producing these little novelty plastic models kits would be a tiny drop in the bucket for them. Pennies, you know? Every toy store is full of gobs and gobs of Disney toys…many that do not sell well at all. I'm a toy collector, and their _Toy Story_ toys have been warming pegs in TRU for many years now. So they do take losses, as does every company. I wonder if whoever is in charge of these decisions at Disney isn't a big plastic model fan, and if that's the case, we'll never see these kits produced again. Ah well…doesn't hurt to dream.


----------



## BobbysMonsterModels (Mar 8, 2014)

SUNGOD said:


> They should bring the 1999 Mummy back too but include a better sculpted Mummy head as the one in the kit ain't very good.


Ohhhh, come on, he's not _that_ bad.


----------



## scooke123 (Apr 11, 2008)

The POTC kits were more toy-like than anything. Even though I would like to have them all re-issued I doubt they would really be big sellers in the long run.


----------



## SUNGOD (Jan 20, 2006)

BobbysMonsterModels said:


> Ohhhh, come on, he's not _that_ bad.





The rest of the kit is nice but the head's awful. The mouth is smooth without any features and the teeth sort of morph in to this strange featureless area. What the sculptor was smoking when they came to doing the head I'd love to know.


----------



## scooke123 (Apr 11, 2008)

Picked up a Headless Horseman other day - I had an original I got rid of years ago and never replaced it. Now I can finally build one after all these years. Nice work on yours!


----------



## djnick66 (May 2, 2008)

SUNGOD said:


> This has often been discussed and people have said why don't they drop the Disney name etc. Someone gave a good explanation a while back but I can't remember what they said.


I have never heard a good explanation why they can not, especially since quite a few licensed kits have been reissued without the original licensing, for various reasons. 

Again, some I can think of:

Glencoe Moon Liner/Mars Liner is the old Disney TWA Rocket to the Moon
Revell's small pirate ship is a reissue of the Disney Peter Pan ship
Atlantis reissued the Aurora Walt Disney's Zorro
Revell reissued the Ed Roth kits with no Roth reference. For example Brother Rat Fink became "Sleazy Rider". 

In a similar vein, Dragon's 1/35 Tiger tanks avoid legal issues with Continental Tires (who made the tires on the Tiger tank in WW2) by sculpting the tire logo to say "ContinentaU". If that really bugs you, it's easy to just carve half of the U away and you have an l. There are several "German Army Truck" kits sold under that generic label to avoid problems with Opel and Mercedes even though the kit is obviously a specific truck from a well known company/


----------



## SUNGOD (Jan 20, 2006)

djnick66 said:


> I have never heard a good explanation why they can not, especially since quite a few licensed kits have been reissued without the original licensing, for various reasons.
> 
> Again, some I can think of:
> 
> ...





When I say good I don't mean the reason for not repopping them was good but the explanation was good because it seemed to explain why they haven't been brought back. Again I can't remember the explanation but it was possibly something like it was more hassle than it was worth. Even if that was the case though it still seems ridiculous that they can't be repopped.


----------



## TAY666 (Jan 8, 2000)

Keep in mind, the company that now controls the tooling for the HM and POTC kits, is owned by the same man that had the Hunchback changed to the Bellringer because he was afraid of problems from Disney.
So, he is probably going to err on the side of caution.
Especially if R2 has already approached Disney about licensing those kits. If Disney said no, or wanted a boat load of money to do so, trying to do it without their name could cause problems. Because then they would be aware of the situation and probably be on the look out for something like that.
And Disney can bankrupt a company with litigation. Even if they don't have enough to win a case, they can make it so expensive to win that a company can't survive.


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Shame about the loss of the Burton head - the pumpkin just doesn't look right. You can't hold a pumpkin like that.


----------



## djnick66 (May 2, 2008)

TAY666 said:


> Keep in mind, the company that now controls the tooling for the HM and POTC kits, is owned by the same man that had the Hunchback changed to the Bellringer because he was afraid of problems from Disney.
> So, he is probably going to err on the side of caution.
> Especially if R2 has already approached Disney about licensing those kits. If Disney said no, or wanted a boat load of money to do so, trying to do it without their name could cause problems. Because then they would be aware of the situation and probably be on the look out for something like that.
> And Disney can bankrupt a company with litigation. Even if they don't have enough to win a case, they can make it so expensive to win that a company can't survive.


I don't necessarily believe that. I think most likely 1) the molds take some work to clean up and run 2) molds may be damaged or incomplete 3) Round 2 doesn't think they are viable (the Strange Change kits seemed to tank) 4) company's focus is on something different ie more Star Trek kits or reissuing more kits with broader appeal like cars.


----------



## BobbysMonsterModels (Mar 8, 2014)

djnick66 said:


> 4) company's focus is on something different ie more Star Trek kits or reissuing more kits with broader appeal like cars.


Ugh!
And I didn't know the Strange Change kits tanked. I don't see them anywhere anymore, so I assumed they sold well.
It could also be possible that one of the higher ups at Disney isn't into the POTC or HM kits, period. Sometimes _that_ is the deal breaker.


----------



## djnick66 (May 2, 2008)

The Strange Change kits were supposed to be a limited run. The three Hobbytowns I have access to got a couple of each kit in and never sold any. I think they are still on the shelves at 50% off... I had one as a kid and didn't even buy the reissue.


----------



## veedubb67 (Jul 11, 2003)

mcdougall said:


> I knew I bought these for a Good reason !
> Denis


Are those Cult of Personality heads?


Rob
Iwata Padawan


----------



## BobbysMonsterModels (Mar 8, 2014)

djnick66 said:


> I think they are still on the shelves at 50% off... I had one as a kid and didn't even buy the reissue.


Well, that's a shame. They're awesome models if done properly:

http://www.bobbysmonstermodels.com/strangeChangeVampire.html


----------



## Bwain no more (May 18, 2005)

veedubb67 said:


> Are those Cult of Personality heads?
> 
> 
> Rob
> Iwata Padawan


Rob; those were done by Wayne Hansen back in the day and are available now from John Diaz at Resin Realities. I believe he has them on his eBay store. :thumbsup:
Tom


----------



## veedubb67 (Jul 11, 2003)

Thanks Tom. Couldn't remember who's they were.

I remember seeing the one David Fisher did where he put real hair on the Horseman - incredible!

Rob
Iwata Padawan


----------



## mcdougall (Oct 28, 2007)

veedubb67 said:


> Are those Cult of Personality heads?
> Rob
> Iwata Padawan


What Tom said :thumbsup:




Except not the Frankenskull that came from Matthew Lawrence ( Spockr)
Denis


----------



## TAY666 (Jan 8, 2000)

Bwain no more said:


> Rob; those were done by Wayne Hansen back in the day and are available now from John Diaz at Resin Realities. I believe he has them on his eBay store. :thumbsup:
> Tom


Yep.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Sleepy-holl...907379?hash=item4d414ade33:g:KQsAAOxyUrZSscKa

Got mine from Wayne / John at WF over 10 years ago.
Really need to get that kit out and get it on the bench some day.


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

TAY666 said:


> Really need to get that kit out and get it on the bench some day.


That should be the official HobbyTalk T-shirt.


----------



## Owen E Oulton (Jan 6, 2012)

Reading this thread, I don't know how Disney gets away with this, as both Washington Irving's The Legend of Sleepy Hollow and Victor Hugo's The Hunchback of Notre Dame are both in the public domain and the titles are actually the true titles of the stories. Sure, Dizco made movies, but their movie trademark should not affect the public status to the titles. Guess it's better to have a buttload of money that to be honest... Look at the model made of the stage version of Dracula - completely avoided Universal's trademarks, just by adding the reference to the source, If companies would would just say Washington Irving's Legend of Sleepy Hollow, Disney's corporate stooges could just go pack sand.


----------



## BobbysMonsterModels (Mar 8, 2014)

Owen E Oulton said:


> If companies would would just say Washington Irving's Legend of Sleepy Hollow, Disney's corporate stooges could just go pack sand.


It probably goes back to when the original version of this model came out, and the legalities in the licensing contract. There were probably stipulations agreed upon if this model was to ever be released again down the road…which it now has been. But yeah, I agree with you, but I'm sure there was some legal snag otherwise they would have named it the way you just stated.


----------



## Bwain no more (May 18, 2005)

Owen E Oulton said:


> If companies would would just say Washington Irving's Legend of Sleepy Hollow, Disney's corporate stooges could just go pack sand.


Actually the film "Sleepy Hollow" was a PARAMOUNT film so THEIR corporate stooges would be the ones "packing sand". EXCEPT...from what I have heard, sand packing in Hollywood is a union job and THAT organization is much feared and not to be trifled with, EVEN by stooges. 
Tom


----------



## Rob P. (Jan 26, 2004)

Jaws62666 that model is fantastic! Captures the spirit of the story!

Rob


----------



## jaws62666 (Mar 25, 2009)

Rob P. said:


> Jaws62666 that model is fantastic! Captures the spirit of the story!
> 
> Rob


Thanks for the compliment.:thumbsup:


----------

