Why do I keep hoping that the next Silkstone will be better? Violet Eyes arrived today. The sculpt is very nice; the rest is not.
First of all, mine has defectively screened eyes.
There is white showing under one eye only on mine and I noticed the dissimilarity immediately. Her eyes aren't even violet!
This is the promo image:
Am I going to be able to get her hair to look like that? I think not. I don't really know what it will look like because I don't want to de-box a doll that has bad screening. I have never returned a doll to BC.Com for an exchange. Do they even do that?
Here is the rest of my doll in her box:
At first glance the dress looks OK but then you see that the V neckline has been glued to her chest and there are all sorts of fibers sticking out. It looks cheap. UGH. I am really bummed. This doll was not inexpensive but I got her because I love the sculpt and I loved ET as well. Luckily I was able to get her for about 80% of the listed retail by using my quarterly club coupon.
After the debacle of Afternoon Suit, what made me think this Silkstone would be better? Now I don't even know if I will buy Gala Gown. She looks so gorgeous but apparently looks are very deceiving. Mattel is deceiving buyers by posting beautiful images of dolls no one actually gets. Of course they cover themselves by posting their disclaimer: "
Production doll may vary from the photo shown above."
It looks like her forehead grew too. Why is it so hard to get quality in the doll world? Are they all using the same cheap factories?
ReplyDeleteIt's distressing.
DeleteI agree. I will really think twice before getting another Silkstone.
DeleteI think you hit the nail on the head...Most of the garbage coming from Mattel is like poor quality playline because they're using different (less expensive) factories.
DeleteLike the old saying..."you get what you pay for..."
:(
Her eyes are blue! I do notice something wrong with the eyes, but I can't really put my finger on it. Is it the left one? The dress wasn't that impressive on the promo to begin with, so no high expectations there. Je ne sais quoi, but something about it makes one think that it is not carefully sewn. In others words, it looked shabby. She certainly doesn't compare to the lovely White Diamonds in the purple dress or the sumptuously detailed Father of the Bride, both of which I have in my collection. Now those 2 are just amazing!
ReplyDeleteThe problem with the eyes is that one is smaller than the other. The smaller one does not show white under the iris. I, too, have White Diamonds and it is beautiful.
DeleteOh, no wonder she looks like she's squinting. She's expensive for a doll that is neither remarkable in design or workmanship, but luckily for you the discount...perhaps at that price she's still worth getting. At any rate, she could still pass as a pretty doll...
DeleteWhat a disappointment! I was really excited for this one.
ReplyDeleteYou can return her. They SHOULD be able to reimburse your return shipping as well. Lately, I'd been having to do that with Mattel dolls. I expect dolls to be a certain way and then I get the one with the weird lashes or scraped eyes, or white dots. It's distressing as you say and I even get somewhat patronizing responses like, "are you sure it's not just the lighting?" sort of thing, as if I was too stupid to differentiate between a white dot and light reflections...
ReplyDeleteI think there is a flaw in the make-up in general. The lashes are finer in the prototype & the eye make-up seems to have more definition. The problem is in the painting & don't get me started on the hair. Maybe it poofs-up when she is de-boxed & the plastic band is removed.
ReplyDeleteWhere are the earrings?
ReplyDeleteIn the box.
DeleteThe hair could be fluffed into that style out of the box, but if the screening is bad, the color of the eyes are off, and shoddy sewing at the neckline- why bother??? Makes you wonder what you would find if you did take her out!
ReplyDeleteYes, return her if you can. We, as collectors have more of a voice as a group when we return defective items, disclaimer not withstanding. Sorry about this review, but like many, we had higher hopes with ET being a Silkstone product.
You are right, Steve. Defective dolls should be returned and I hope I can return her and get one with good screening. If not, I will not have this doll at all.
DeleteTerri
I have been waiting and hoping you would review this doll. I was really unhappy when she came also.I had such expectations from the promo pick. I cannot imagine Miss Taylor approved this scupt. White Diamonds and Cleopatra are so much better. What really frosts me is I sold White Diamonds because I already have Cleo and didn't want to get anymore overloaded than I already am.I did not debox for several days since I was not sure what I would do. Finally I did and have been working with her hair and she does get better. I can only hope some of the $ goes to her Aids Foundation. Silly me.
ReplyDeleteShe's pretty.. even though I think the AIDS Red Ribbon is out of place with the era they are selling us. AIDS wasn't around then.
ReplyDeleteI like these dolls.. I just think the AIDS Ribbon was meant as a heart-string puller. I'd let her pull mine for 29.99. LOL
You are so right. I didn't even think about that.
DeleteThat seems to be an ongoing problem with Mattel - they glue the hair in to place so it has absolutely no volume. Remember the Francie "Smashin' Satin" GS ? The hair was hideous. And I seem to recall the Streisand doll have a very "flat" hairstyle. But definitely return her, if for no other reason than the eyes are TOTALLY the wrong colour! And I think I read somewhere that the ribbon was a stipulation by her family in the licensing.
ReplyDeleteColin
I was almost positive this was going to happen.
ReplyDeleteI was torn....to pre-order at least one E.Taylor Silkstone or wait for IRL pix because of just this issue.
Bad screening, poorly executed fashion and hair that either was too big or too little. In this case - her hair
shrunk and like one poster said - her forehead grew!!
The screening of the eyes is off balance. Her right eye - the lashes are fine and look natural. The left eye looks like a really bad mascara job - thick and no refinement whatsoever.
The lips look playline pink (why can't Mattel get a more natural pink for Silkstones? ugh!!
For 125.00 (on a stiff, non-articulated doll) ... you should definitely get quality.
Obviously, Mattel changed factories when you look at dolls produced a few years back and what's produced today.
The vinyl Liz Taylor dolls look a thousand times better than this Silkstone version - there is no question...it would serve Mattel right if all purchasers of this doll returned her because of all the issues.
I agree with most, what we see in promo(what's advertised) is nothing like what we get. I don't give a tiny rat's ass about disclaimers - it's blatant FALSE advertising.
The past couple years of crappy "gold label" dolls have cured me. I wait for IRL pix which now equals saving a ton of money.
;)
I got mine yesterday, and while mine had decent eye paint, the whole presentation is lack-luster and I do not like this sculpt in person. I am very sad to see Mattel cheapening the Silkies to this degree, as the older ones were truly wonderful. The only upside to any of this is that I will be saving money by NOT buying.
ReplyDeleteThe first thing I thought when i got her was 'holy BHS'. My second thought was 'looks cheap'.
ReplyDeleteThe doll world is peculiarly the only place where the rule seems to be you cannot return an item I generally consider to be if not "expensive" certainly "not cheap" either that you have not seen "in production" beforehand. I have NEVER understood this, EVER.
ReplyDeleteHaving said that, my only recourse is to buy NOTHING until I've seen the actual production dolls.
Yes, I do mean NOTHING, after YEARS of being burnt.
If I don't get it, life goes on.
The doll should go back if you're honestly dissatisfied with it.
This is how doll companies/retailers get away with murder.
Gosh....what a dissapointment...she looks terrible, that one eye is totally wrong. I think I am going to take the risk of buying her, and be happy with my vinyl 'White diamonds'Elizebthe Taylor doll, whom I adore. Sorry this happened to you.
ReplyDeleteThis exact screening mistake (eye white visible under one iris, not under the other) is present in almost all contemporary collector Barbies that I had the chance to see up close, and many more that I've only seen in pictures. Once you start paying attention to it it's EVERYWHERE. (I won't name any examples because pointing out this sort of thing could ruin someone's enjoyment of their doll, and I don't want that) No idea what's up with this, is it quality control detoriating in general or a specific machine in a factory somewhere is recreating the same flaw over and over.
ReplyDelete(Digression: a playline series of Barbies from 2006, 12 Dancing Princesses, had a similar problem- nearly all of the dolls have it in common, Edeline and Blair especially, that one eye is just floating off way to the side of their face. Sometimes just barely, sometimes by a huge margin that makes the face absolutely messed up looking.)
I have her and her eye is a bit misplaced and I'm not crazy about the pearlized mouth so when I do take her out of the box I'm going to lightly recolor her lips a matte coral. I have not got a Silkstone doll since my last one (chinoserie, my other one is the first black lingerie silkstone and I regretably miss out on highland fling so much everywhere I try to get one :sadFace:) had they really ruined the hair? I do not like any of their francies and lately am having a hard time finding many barbie I like and had switched over to integrity since 2010 and picking up what I love from them.
ReplyDeleteIt looks like my strike against Barbie from 1990-1999 is coming to be back on again. At that period I was working on my vintage doll collection, I did buy the 35th anniversary one but that was it for the repros until about 2003. I liked 4 of the stardolls from this year and got this Elizabeth taylor but that's about all I've seen personally.