Website Review #7


M.U.S.C.L.E. nostalgia permeates many blogs on the internet. The writers’ topics often range from professing their love for the “forgotten” toy to condemning M.U.S.C.L.E. as one of the worst toys ever.

Some M.U.S.C.L.E. collectors consider C.U.T.I.E. (Coolest Ultra Tiny Individuals on Earth) to be a related part of the M.U.S.C.L.E. toy line because of the acronym name, Mattel’s manufacturing and ownership, and the small, mono-colored, unarticulated nature of the figure – basically, M.U.S.C.L.E. figures for girls.

The University of M.U.S.C.L.E. does not believe that C.U.T.I.E. figures are a part of the M.U.S.C.L.E. brand. If the same logic was applied to other brands, then collectors could consider Glamour Gals to be a part of Star Wars – both were released by Kenner, both were 3 ¾ inch action figures, and Glamour Gals were released after the overwhelming success of Star Wars. Glamour Girls even reused Star Wars products.

However, as some M.U.S.C.L.E. collectors still feel an affinity towards C.U.T.I.E. this blog entry, titled: The 10 Greatest Girls’ Toys Secretly Coveted by Boys, from Toplessrobot.com is an interesting perspective.

ToplessRobot.com Screen Shot

ToplessRobot.com Screen Shot


Last Updated/Originally Posted:

June 4th, 2008

Content: 4 out of 5

There isn’t much information offered about M.U.S.C.L.E. or C.U.T.I.E and the suggestion that C.U.T.I.E. figures were still on close-out store shelves in 2000 seems completely unsubstantiated.

However, the overall blog entry is entertaining and seemingly accurate. The inclusion of She-Ra as the number one choice is likely true for male children of the 1980’s. He-Man was a monstrous success and She-Ra was tightly weaved into that world. C.U.T.I.E as the number two choice might be surprising to some people. M.U.S.C.L.E. collectors are aware of the stunning, but brief, success of M.U.S.C.L.E. so it seems logical that C.U.T.I.E. could be validly argued as the number two choice.

Design: 3 out of 5

The design of the website is simple enough, although it seems pretty laden with advertising. The blog entry itself was easy to read and had some nice, and properly representative, pictures.

Pictures: 4 out of 5

While there was only one picture for each entry, the writer had made excellent choices. This seems to be the rare occasion where more pictures would have been detrimental to the write-up.

Overall: 4 out of 5

A valid argument could be made that this review has no place at the University of M.U.S.C.L.E. However, some collectors thoroughly enjoy Mattel’s derivative “girl version” of M.U.S.C.L.E. figures.

While the write-up fails to provide extensive information on M.U.S.C.L.E. or C.U.T.I.E. it does present an interesting topic – with a C.U.T.I.E. ranking that provides some recognition of the powerful impact of M.U.S.C.L.E. Perhaps most importantly, the entry does all of this in an accessible entertaining way.

,

  1. #1 by larry h on May 24th, 2011

    hey there great post but regarding what you said here:
    “The University of M.U.S.C.L.E. does not believe that C.U.T.I.E. figures are a part of the M.U.S.C.L.E. brand.”
    what does that stand for?

  2. #2 by Chad Perry on May 24th, 2011

    C.U.T.I.E. = Coolest Ultra Tiny Individuals on Earth

(will not be published)