But in 2018 they did a reproduction at toys “R” Us before it closed

and thats a fact

Well to me 60s-90s barbie is the best

I wouldn’t mind an update or two-like particularly the mall bangs on the OG Barbie 😂 but they shoulda kept the outfit, makeup and hair the same! Maybe tweaked it a bit (aka. Make the skirt longer 😂😂)

@@idontsm0ke same

I hate Barbie 2015-2022 I love Barbie 2006-2010

@@PREPPYV1B3Ssame

​@@PREPPYV1B3Sbut... 2001-2005.... (Nutcracker, Rapunzel, Princess and the Pauper)

Barbie from late 90s to 2005 was top tier everything after that sucks. The face molds are so beautiful now but mattel has ruined the playline with thier ass fashions litteraly ugly af ​@CharcoalovesWhiskas

Fr or at LEAST early 2000s Barbie

The 1992 Totally 💯 hair Barbie had me in a chokehold in 1992😂 I have the 2022 line of Barbie; Totally Hair Christie is the best comparison to the Orginal. Especially with her hair down or in a ponytail. I also have Barbie and The Rockers and I have the modern 2020s interpretation side by side in my doll case.

I got a reproduction original Chole Bratz doll with all same she came with

And the Hula girls! I had to get Rainbow High Phaedra Westward, 'cause she reminded me so much of the hula Barbie I had as a kid with the pink streaks in her hair. ^^

Haven’t they had Asian looking dolls since the 80’s, no?

@@alejandromolinac You missed the point by a mile. I don't care what ethnicity Mattel gives their dolls. I just want them to give the dolls substance again. Backstories, well thought out themes, accessories that can withstand wear and tear. Even if the Oriental Barbie could be considered all sorts of problematic now, it still had better quality/fitting clothing, hair rooting, and articulation than some of their more recent similar products. The point is, they can work with inclusivity *and* creativity *and* quality in mind, especially at the price points they sell their dolls. Please don't try to twist my comment into something that it's not.

true

@@anonview I liked Marina or Kira... They were really cute

Yeah i miss the old bodies and the glam that Barbie had. I grew up in the 2000s so those are the dolls that I remember but those dolls are 10x better than what we have today. There was no need to change her body but I do see why they did that. The 90s Barbies are the most iconic. I am starting to collect Black Barbes from the 70s-2000s.

I feel like this is a problem with barbie across the board right now though! IDK if they r going for realism or if its just cuz todays hair styles are much more "easy" and smaller in general or just a being cheep thing but either way no barbie today is made with a sufficient amount of hair. Hair play for the entire barbie product line is all but gone from existence

My theory is that Barbie likes to keep their dolls within a certain budget. And with the climate costs and materials, and the rise of shipping prices, they choose to get corners but they cut them in the wrong areas. And I've been noticing other companies starting to do that as well. Barbie has a certain set price that they don't want to see rise and because of that the quality does suffer. But they're still getting that product out there at that same price. Collectors I know would be fine with paying an extra 5 to $10 more if the quality remains. But parents / young kids that they're targeting would not

@@InkpadsPlaypad the only thing that makes me kind of argue that being the “justification” for cutting corners is that MGA seems to be able to put out play line dolls that “quality-wise” run rings around Mattel rainbow high alone is just a Juggernaut in the doll market and parents don’t seem to have an issue paying upwards of between 30 and 50 for them. The Barbie rewind line is perfect example of how they could be upping their quality across the board, yes they are $40 when they are initially released but honestly do they need to be? They don’t even come with a second outfit. I fully understand wut ur getting at I think it’s Mattel being cheep and not having a stellar design team. The ppl they have designing now really really need to take a risk instead of just being cheep and safe

@@Elphaboy MGA is a privately owned company and they are highly focused on making dolls, they're really not known for much else. Mattel on the other hand has a lot of franchises and many investors to answer to. So arguably their budget and design choices are very limited. Many designers that no longer work at Mattel mention how they really have to fight to keep as much details as possible but often times they end up cutting down on quality to meet a certain price point. It's upsetting especially when the CEO recently said in an interview on a magazine that people seem to be willing to pay extra. So idk there's a lot of higher up meddling not letting designers fully explore ideas and make them more interesting. The only kind of exciting line Barbie has rn is barbie extra and Barbie looks. Which are both budget dolls but with decent quality for the price. Barbie extra is really fun and colorful and Barbie looks targets the adult collector with superior articulation and very versatile clothes that are understated yet versatile. On the higher end we have Barbie Pink collection which is the successor of the Barbie Fashion Model collection. That was an iconic line with extremely high quality and I believe the dolls at the time cost 70$. Now we have less detailed designs on the Pink collection AND higher price. So this is why MGA can give us quality with a competitive price (although they've raised their prices significantly lately) I am also thinking maybe they use cheaper labor.

@@InkpadsPlaypad I feel that this is the case too which is also why they gave her the partial ponytail to "hide" any bald spots that would be apparent if her hair worn loose.

Yes nothing 90s are the best Barbie Dolls

@cate it's not nostalgia, the old Barbies are objectively better than the new ones High quality, fashionable clothes, attention to detail, perfect faces, joints The current ones have very bad quality, pixelated faces and almost always wonky prints, hideous and not at all fashionable clothes, 0 details, stiff bodies

@@vittoriopiorosariosavasta7590 Mattel has certainly fallen from grace with Barbie. They don't even give the dolls basic bend in the knee articulation anymore. The 80's, 90's and the early 2000's were their heyday, but those days are no more. So sad 😞

Magical things in 2022 is totally BS...THERE ISN'T MAGICAL IN THIS TIME;INCLUDING PARENTS APOLOGISE THEIR MISTAKES TO US

@cate , no, it’s unfortunately not the nostalgic feeling, it is a disappointment how Mattel changed to the bad in 30 years! The dolls was just fabulous back in that time, each one was special with so much more quality and magic! Today the Barbies are like the cheap no name fashion dolls of our time, there is no comparison! 😞

My older sisters had a bunch of Barbie dolls when I was a kid and I'd sometimes play with the dolls, I don't care what anyone thinks.

I was an in box collector until this year when I decided to open all of them. The last dolls I had bought were from 2016 and I was sooo disappointed and shocked when I went to try and bend their knees. One doll's arm didn't even stretch outward only front and back movement.

It's insane that only the ugly MTM (made to move are the posable/bendable joints now. We want barbie mattel not fucking ji joes!

I have all the versions of the rainbow leopard Barbies (I think that's what they're called) and in one of the versions I used the same design scrunchies that they came with and they seem to stay in okay

I think those scrunchies are meant foe the doll's wrists. which is not exactly original, but i guess it would justify the decision of making them out of plastic. Still dissaponting lol

Yes, these were terrific! The Hula Hair line from the 90's was also awesome.

the Superstar face is iconic, it is THE Barbie face par excellence, but it should remain in the past Millie needs to be replaced, BUT by a fresh, new facemold, inspired by Margot Robbie from the live action movie

The outfit is totally frumpy tho you're right

As I recall from the dolls I had as a child it depends on the doll. I had the sparkle eyes, the teal mermaid, a bed time Barbie and baby sister Shelly. After a few years the hair of sparkle eyes Barbie (my favorite doll) became brittle and felt like plastic cotton candy, the mermaid hair always felt a little different because of the glittery hair and the streaks that would change their color. Shellys and bedtime Barbies hair still feels nice.

New Barbies are horrible. Cheap hollow legs. Thin hair, blank faces and I'll fitting clothes. Just my opinion. I bought 90s Barbies on ebay for my granddaughter just like the ones her mom played with. Just my opinion though.

Ebay has alot of them for cheap since the majority of then were kept in the box. Which decreases the value over time because they are way to many in great condition.

I see it differently. When the first fashionista dolls where launched, the clothes where really nice- they where normal yet fashionable clothes you as you may find them in a fashion store. The same with the fashion packs.. Some where good, some would have gone straight to goodwill. But during the last 5 years the clothes became more and more.. Meh.. Or something you got at goodwill.. Baggy, shapeless, tasteless color combinations that put the 90ies to shame (and I grew up in late 80ies and 90ies). I like it that barbies doesn't have only big gowns or very skimpy outfits but there is room for improvement.

I think it's so all the dolls bodies, including curvy, tall etc, can fit the dress. I get that, but it's to the detriment of the fashion.

and made the hair longer*

Exactly!! Well said the old ones are the BEST! But the new ones has nice features but I still choose the ORIGINAL Totally Hair Barbie!