12/14/2016

Final W Club Doll of 2016 - Thank Goodness!

This has been a bad year in so many ways and the final W Club doll fits right in.
She is Veronique 2.0 with a FR2013 body. Her title is "Reception A Versailles." Sadly, there is nothing Versailles about her.

Take a look for yourself.


The dress is an embarrassment with it's serged edges and cheap-looking design and fabric. There is nothing about her fashion that even hints at good design and/or quality construction. 


What's up with that hairline? It reminds me of many Silkstone dolls who have straight across, unnatural hairlines.

I don't dress my dolls in lingerie and if I did, I'd find something much sexier than the gray and black item shown above with thigh highs.

Her price is $130. and so not worth it. Very disappointing.

For $100. I'd rather get the Glam Gown Barbie Silkstone whose gown does not have serged hems and looks like a bit of work went into it. She is on a posable body. 
As a matter of fact, you can get $20 off with free shipping today through the 16th. I ordered one. 


31 comments:

  1. I was also disappointed. Especially after I looked through archive photos of prior wclub exclusive dolls.

    Such an ugly dress and the hairline is so weird I wonder if it is a mistake. I think they threw that ugly lingerie in there to make people happier about getting a cheap ugly gown. I'm sure it will work for a few. But I hope the edition size for this doll is the smallest ever. $$ speaks louder than anything else.

    I do like that Barbie gown a lot better.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I thought the same about the lingerie...like an attempt to sweeten the bad deal. Ha.

      Delete
  2. Agreed on all points... I've never been a Veronique kinda girl but Versailles here seems objectively bad. :/ I literally cringed when I saw the serged edges on the dress. On a FR doll?!

    The hairline is weird, and her supercilious expression is unpleasant. (And that comes from an Agnes fan... lol.) I think the nude lips don't help.

    I do kinda like the lingerie, but I generally don't display my dolls in their skivvies, so...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for joining in the discussion.

      Delete
  3. What the heck has happened to the FR line since I fell of the scene? Wow, she is quite bad. Multiple body sizes, poor designs... business on a little slide IT?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Yes, very disappointing, and yes, I did buy the articulated Glam Gown Barbie instead. The only thing I really liked about this last WClub doll was the jewellery. The dress looks like a cheap copy of a dress designed for humans - design for dolls and human is profoundly different IMHO, and I can't quite fathom the connection with Versailles in this dress.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I wonder when we'll get the Glam Gown. I'm looking forward to putting her under the tree along with a few other dolly items that are waiting for me.

      Delete
  5. Completely hideous on every level. The hairline is atrocious. The dress is total garbage. I didn't think this year could get much worse. IT keeps lowering the bar.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, my friend. It's time for you to move up to 16" quality dolls.

      Delete
  6. She isn't stellar, I admit, but she isn't THAT bad either. I feel people are exaggerating. IT has done far worse. Like the mainline Luchia Z who looks like she has been hit over the head with a shovel or that hideous emerging rebel Kyori who looks dead with those tiny decal eyes. Not to mention the entire cheapo, tacky MLP line they have committed themselves to. I call that lowering their standards.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Once again, I like to point out that the quality of the FR dolls is lacking because they spend so much of their time on these garbage licenses (that do not even sell all that well). The Coven dolls have got to be the worst IT license ever - ugly and boring looking dolls that are completely uninspiring. MLP with their cuties marks? Katy Keene on the CI body and Jem sculpts, making dolls out of Jem characters that appeared in one lousy scene? Reissuing Jem dolls but with different clothes? No wonder they have no time to apparently put any real effort into their final club doll.

    I cannot believe they dumped their exquisite Monogram and Victoire Roux and the separate FR2 lines for this. They used to actually make great licenses. Look at what they are doing now. Fucking Jem and My Little Pony? I am dreading just thinking what other lame, tacky license idea they will come up with next year. High end Hello Kitty dolls? High end cabbage patch dolls?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for the chuckle. My theory about the Monogram, FR2 and Avantguard lines is this: if you look at the last year or two of dolls from some of those lines you will see a distinct change in design. Something goes off the rails and collectors don't buy it. And then it dies slowly and painfully. Monogram dolls were delightful and they did give us several gorgeous suits and gowns and pretty faces. In 2012 something went wrong!

      Delete
  8. What about the fabulous NU.Face línea from this year? No word about it?
    LuiZ

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Didn't NuFace come out last week?

      Delete
    2. I just looked it up. On 12/2 the NuFace line was revealed. It was sold by dealers. Where were you??

      Delete
    3. I meant, that release was excellent on every detail but alas I missed your post about it. Yes, this doll is rather bland and ugly dressed, but I think there were Good things this year too.
      Luiz

      Delete
    4. I see. For a multitude of reasons, I have not been posting as much on this blog. I do have a blog on Facebook and I did comment there about the NuFace release. Thank you for comments!
      Terri

      Delete
  9. As I am trying to re-dip into Integrity dolls again, what's frustrating are the different body sizes for the girls. Maybe they could shave a few pennies by standardizing a body size, height, SHOE SIZE (Color Infusion shoes are shrimp boats and not too special), etc. Why the separate big toe on the foot? Not seeing many open-toed shoes to show it off. Truthfully, I'd be happy if all the feet were Barbie-sized, so the girls could wear her molded shoes. I think Victoire Roux can fit into SOME open-toed Barbie shoes- not a bad thing to wear molded shoes if done well.

    As for the dress.....I've seen better amateur designs. She should have been released in the lingerie with the jewelry, and deep-six the dress. She does have a beautiful face and wouldn't mind buying her nude. Integrity seems kind of aimless right now. And yes, I did buy the Glam Gown Barbie as well with my $20 discount and free shipping. THAT girl is stunning!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The size of their feet is the reason I won't buy CI dolls no matter how pretty they are. It was a stupid decision. I hate that they made FR2 feet big as well. Supposedly the Industry body goes back to using Barbie sized feet. That's nice but I'm not buying.
      T

      Delete
    2. Terri: The CI dolls are just generally big boned. Everything about them them is just bigger and I HATE their giant man-hands. While I can see that they would make FR bodies different from Poppy and NuFace (they are supposed to represent different age groups and styles) I don't know what the point of the Color Infusion line is. Why are they so much bigger? IT knows that a lot of people redress their dolls and swap outfits - and for the most part that is doable, at least with some tiny tweaking - so why create the Color Infusion dolls who have bigger bodies and that do not fit in anywhere.

      The first Color Infusion dolls really did earn their name and made sense as a concept (Cosmic Love and Revel Spirit). And they had the DG bodies I believe. The CIs that followed them are a totally different breed. What is so color infused about them? Other than being an eye sore scale and size wise, I have no idea what purpose they serve. The only people who love their bodies and collect them are the same 20 - 30 people who love and collect Jem, which is why they never sell out and just take up shelf space.

      Delete
    3. I agree with everything. The first two dolls were color infused. Then they lost it. It's a money maker at the convention, though. Or it was.

      Delete
  10. Well, I like her. I hope no one likes her which would lead to lower edition size and more attention from the workers :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I do like the doll, just not the gown. This doll's outfit looks like a dreary day sky outside the Chateau de Versaille. No color, grandeur, or style. Should be just this side of costume fun.

      Delete
    2. @Steve C.: I know what you mean. I am not too excited about the lower part of the dress, but the upper part is totally fine. I would replace lower part with long pale orange light chiffon (something like You look so fine Erin: http://woodsky.free.fr/LBX/Images/REFFR/MBNF/11ErinYouLookSoFine2.jpg). Otherwise, I really like her.

      Delete
    3. THAT is more like it!!! :)

      Delete
  11. By the way, I, too, got the Glam Gown Silkstone with the deal they had and I must say I am disappointed. This has got to be the one of the cheapest gowns I have ever seen on a Sikstone in like...ever. The fabric feels stiff and cheap and synthetic/plastic; not at all flowy and luxurious as you are used to from Silkstones. The quality just isn't there. As a result, it is rather ill fitting and awkward. From the promo pics, one would think the gown itself was made of a soft, satin while the train/side part a flowy chiffon georgette (similar to the material of Gala Gown Silkstone's gown), but in reality the dress is a cheap, stiff synthetic and the train is made of something resembling nylon. It does not flow and lie as it should. Especially on top, it is just sticking out cause it is so cheap.

    The gown feels like the ones they used to make for the collector Barbies of the 80s and 90s. It is not Sikstone caliber at all. In fact, it is not even worth the $100 price tag and I am glad I got her for about half that. Just mentioning this here since people were saying how much better and more quality this is compared to the Vero one. No, it really isn't. I don't know what the Vero will look and feel like in the final version but don't think this glam gown here is superior. It is, frankly, crap.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I found that her gown is quite stiff. I looks gorgeous in the photo but the fabric is not a quality product. This may be the end of my Silkstone collection. Sigh.

      Delete
  12. And did I mention that it is not the blush pink as shown in the promo pics, but a coral?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I didn't notice a color shift at all.

      Delete
    2. Yeah in the image it is a blush but in real it is more of a darker pink, almost coral. I noticed several other folks made that observation as well on flickr and blogs etc. Also notice how the promo doll has black shoes while the real doll has pink ones.

      I really think I am done with Silkstones too. This was a huge disappointment. The shift in quality is so noticeable. Not to mention that the body of the doll itself looks like that of a child. It does not look like the body of a woman.

      Delete