Robert8

The LEGO Movie 2: The Second Part

Recommended Posts

25 minutes ago, Gorilla94 said:

I don´t know the phrase "bad take".

Ok... Did you even read my comment? Because it is "superfar" away from what i wrote... Where did i say the only ones learning is/are the main character(s)? Where did i say Lucy wasn´t a main character? In my opinion she was in the first one, too. 

You know, that she learned exactly that in the first movie already and fell in love with him for beeing an optimistic and happy little guy who cares about others...? That is the reason it hurts so much listening to her completey out of character first dialouge with Mayhem. It is like Luke throwing his lightsaber away and saying he came here to die, while he left a map to find him - if the lightsaber had feelings .

What means Mary Sue in your opinion? As far as i know Mary Sue is a term for characters who can do anything without need of training and beeing a character without depth. It is used on both sexes and called "Mary Sue" because the prototype of such a charakter was called that way. I can´t see anything sexist about it and i really try to understand you. Could you explain that to me? If this is a accusation towards me you should think twice. You are probalby much more sexist than i am. I am in fact not. Mulan, Eowyn and Lucien for example are three of my favourite characters of all time. My problem are poorly written characters, which are mostly female because some weak writers think their job is done as soon as a female character is "strong" and spend the rest of the day patting their own shoulder. Marge Simpson who trained after getting robbed has in this one 20-Minutes-Episode more depth than Rey or Phasma from 2 Star Wars movies. Give me more Ripleys and i am happy.

Try to separate Lucy in this movie from the one in the first one. There is no development in the second. If we ignore this terrible stuff she says about Emmet and say it is just because of the awfull translation, this is her Story: She wants Emmet to do what is necessery to survive (It is also out of character that Emmet seems to be never worried in the beginning of tlm2. He felt fear in dangerous situations the first movie and would have changed with years of Alien attacks). Then the danger is gone at the end of the movie. There is no need to be tough anymore in lack of any enemy. That´s the reason why she doesn´t want him to destroy the wedding. That´s no character development. If the racist old man in Gran Torino learns to let his prejudice go, this is something he has learned. If he gets new white neighbours, he will act different but without any development. The Queen is evil. She talks and acts evil. Than she says it is a "Kommunikationsproblem", "communication problem" and everything is fine, because people see how great she is... Brainwashing and kidnapping included. Mayhem beats up Batman, Ironbeard, Lucy and Emmet (You know... the one who build the big Mech in the first one and became quite skilled, what he isn´t anymore), insults Emmet and gets beaten up later by Lucy alone, who is now strong enough without training...

A good idea would have been if the younger kid (no matter which sex it has) would learn to be more carefull and don´t come into the room saying "We are going to destroy you!" and smahing everything while the older one tries to include him of her. That would be basic socialisation and a nice theme.

I didn´t say realizing that they are toys makes his relationships less real and i dont get where your speech of feminism comes from... :/ I said in his timeline everybody else acted terrible. Nobody helped him when he needed them and it is even worse thinking about how unbelievable easy it would have been for them to help. This isn´t friendship. That´s the reason why he is right about not caring about THE others anymore - not others in general, but really every other single toy in that room, that let him down. I don´t care about him being a Rex or a Regina Dangervest. I am just shocked by this poor writing.

If it is all about your feelings and feminism, let´s change the characters sexes for a second. A male king kidnapps and manipulates Batgirl to marriage. The kidnapper humilates together with Luke, one of the kidnapped people, Lukes girlfriend. Regina is left alone by all her friends when she is in need of their help and recognizes, she can not rely on them at all... which is her own fault by the movies narrative. Getting angry allready? To me both films would be equally bad...

I accidentally typed "Main" when I meant "Male" in my post, to address your first point of confusion. Sorry about that.

The term "Mary Sue" has gotten so distorted over time from its original meaning, which was specific to fanfiction and referred to an unflawed self-insert character whose presence made the canonical characters act decidedly out of character
(for example, fighting for their affections). But nowadays it's used so broadly that it's used to slander any character (but especially female ones) who succeeds. If Rey, for example, is a Mary Sue because she can pilot the Millennium Falcon ends up able to use the Force with little formal training, then so is Luke, who outlives almost his entire squadron as a newly recruited pilot, and uses the Force to destroy a moon-sized superweapon after one session of being shot at while blindfolded, or Anakin, the only human in the galaxy with fast enough reflexes to podrace and who took out a blockade at the age of ten. But Rey is the one criticized as a "Mary Sue"—probably because unlike all the other exceptionally talented heroes in the Star Wars movie series, she's the only one who's a girl.

Lucy does change over the course of this movie, despite your insistence that she doesn't. It's true that she does have a reason to want Emmet to change in the beginning of the movie, which is the same as the reason she had changed—she felt like desperate times couldn't be safely approached with optimism like his. At the same time, Emmet's optimistic attitude at the beginning of this movie is totally in line with his personality in the first movie—even when he didn't know the truth about Octan and had few actual friends he had approached everything with a happy-go-lucky attitude, and it's unrealistic to assume that the changing threat from Lord Business to Duplo aliens would change that. What does almost change him (much like the one thing that pushes him to the brink of despair in the first movie) is the loss of his friends—until then, he truly believed that "everything is better when they stick together". Meanwhile, Lucy's change of heart at the end of the movie doesn't merely come from a lack of an overarching threat—it comes from seeing what Emmet became like when he tried to change for the tougher and not liking what she saw, and from realizing that Emmet's peace offering to the Duplo aliens at the beginning really did end up making a difference.

As for the queen, her tendency to be sound overly suspicious is almost a running joke, cemented with the revelation that she really DID have good intentions. Was she manipulative? Almost certainly—just as Batman is self-centered, or Unikitty is moody, or Benny is manic. But that doesn't make her evil. You could make a strong case that her manipulative nature echoes the way that many powerful women throughout history have achieved leadership through soft power, rather than bravado or military might. But beyond that, she is also naive—the fact that she was literally created by Emmet five years earlier, and is in many ways an avatar of the younger sister Bianca's wild creativity, means that she's unlikely to recognize how her actions are perceived by what she sees as an aggressive and unreasonable adversary.

It's true that the whole plot could have been averted if the Duplo aliens had not threatened to destroy the heroes on their first appearance. But again, keep in mind that the frame story means that you are trying to impose judgment and reason on the play patterns of a three-year-old. The fact that the Duplo aliens took Emmet's peace offering to heart and in fact, made it their leader, suggests that the lesson you seem to think should have been emphasized was already learned. The conflict here in this movie came more from Finn's relationship to both his sister and his Lego hobby itself becoming strained by the societal pressure to "grow up". In the Lego universe, by the time the time skip goes into effect, the Duplo aliens are no longer the aggressors—but like Finn, repeated conflicts over the years have left them jaded and untrusting when a new visitor comes bearing an olive branch.

As for why Rex is supposedly right not to trust his friends—this is a point I see people stumble on but with the time travel taken into account does not present a conflict. In Rex's timeline, Emmet left Apocalypseburg on his own with no witnesses, crashed on his way through the Stairgate, and got lost underneath the dryer. In the human world, it's not uncommon for something as small as a Lego figure to get lost for an extended period of time. And in the Lego world, Queen Watevra's plan would have gone unhindered, Emmet's friends would realize that the Systar System wasn't a threat, and by the time they discovered that Emmet was even missing (something they might not assume at first, since they'd expect him to still be in Apocalypseburg when they returned), they would have no leads to where he had ended up and would eventually move on. Of course, you could argue that this point is moot since the time travel is presumably just part of Finn's imagination—but then, by that same argument, so is the notion that Emmet's friends wouldn't have come back for him. Either way, the fact that Rex took the fact that nobody found him personally and used that as an excuse to go back to his past self and cut all of his friends out of his life by force makes him decidedly the villain of the movie. He may have had valid reasons to feel the way he did, but that doesn't make his decisions or actions less wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TheNerdyOne_ said:

Some stuff

 

2 hours ago, Gorilla94 said:

More stuff

 

5 hours ago, Lyichir said:

Even more stuff 

So I feel everyone here made some good points so I'ma just run down a fe

.First of all no one was brainwashed,  though that is shown to be INCREDIBLY lazy writing as the residents of Harmony town were clearly brainwashed 

.While Rex definitely wasn't "right" Gorilla makes a good point, during that scene you can clearly see Emmet's friends partying and the film clearly states they weren't brainwashed or enslaved so it's of theit freewill and Rex states he was lost for years so the fact they never went back for Emmet  (or went back and didn’t care he was MIA) does not bode well for them

.The female characters weren't 'Mary Sues' I admit I didn't like that scene in the start where they say Emmet's useless, it's not like he ever 'Took all the credit' earlier in the exact same scene he says that their all equally special and leaders  bitit's not like the entire film was like that. Unikitty was same as always, Queen Whatevra was a great addition to the cast, it did feel like Lucy regressed a little but she age knowledges it at the film's end and Sweet Mayhem just felt sorta there but none of them felt like 'Mary Sues'

.I agree that the Bad communication thing felt lazy, They set it up with the Queen, it's funny, makes enough sense and has a pay off but then straight after they say that Sweet Mayhem ALSO was just a poor communicatior and that the Duplons were ALSO just good all along. Sure you could just say that it's just a thing with Systarians but it just feels like a lazy cop out.

This was definately a lot longer and rambly-er than I was intending but at the end of the day all I'm trying to say is,  The Classic Red spaceguy appears in the background for like a nanosecond so it's a 1972/10 would The LEGO Movie 2: The Second Part again

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Gorilla94: Besides what @TheNerdyOne_ and @Lyichir brought up, a couple additional notes:

Spoiler
  • I don't know where you get idea that Benny changed completely. He was ALWAYS a little manic/offbeat. I believe in early concepts for the first movie this was attributed to oxygen deprivation due to the crack in his helmet. This was probably scrubbed from the final movie both so that viewers with ADHD, autism, and other neurological conditions who relate to Benny's quirks don't feel like the movie is telling them that people with those traits are "damaged".

    Even so, his behavior in the second movie is no more "psycho" than in the first, where he went into a frenzy and start building a spaceship at the drop of a hat multiple times, only to shatter his creation in frustration when told that it wasn't the proper solution to that problem, and got into an aggressive shouting match with a literal computer because it had poorly-programmed voice recognition technology.

    And anyway, how do you know that if somebody had interrupted him during his climactic "Spaceship" scene in the first movie, he wouldn't have snapped at them the same way he snapped at Balthazar? People in real life FREQUENTLY have the impulse to snap at other people when they're interrupted from an activity that they're intensely focused on — it doesn't make them "psycho".
     
  • Unikitty's lesson in the first movie wasn't simply to become more aggressive — it was not to keep her anger, aggression, and other negative emotions bottled up or be ashamed of them, which was very unhealthy for her. At the end of the first movie, you could clearly see that letting all that bottled-up rage out against the Micro-Managers had already enabled her to calm back down to her usual cuddly pink self and gather with the rest of her friends to celebrate their victory.

    In the second movie, she has clearly become much more comfortable channeling her negative emotions productively when she needs to, as when rescuing Emmet and Lucy towards the beginning of the movie — though the constant stress of living in Apocalypseburg made it harder for her to become completely calm until she was able to escape that "heckish" scenario. Being able to allow herself that freedom to express her genuine feelings has made her much healthier so that when she's not feeling intense negative emotions she's no longer a ticking time bomb who has to exert great effort to avoid that kind of explosive rage from surfacing under even the slightest feelings of negativity.
     
  • The idea that Emmet's friends could have just used time travel to find him ignores that Rex's ability to time travel required him to smash several different types of time machine to combine into his Rexcelsior. Lucy breaking just one critical component (the Flux Capacitor) was enough to prevent him from doing so again. So for Lucy and the others to gain that same ability, they'd have to do more or less the same thing Rex did — which they never would, because unlike Rex they aren't self-obsessed sociopaths who go around smashing stuff built by people who never did them any harm.

    And anyway, Rex only resorted to measures as bonkers as time travel to save Emmet/himself because he KNEW what happened to Emmet/himself after going to rescue his friends, and wanted to prevent that. If Lucy and the others couldn't find Emmet under the dryer themselves, they'd have had no way of knowing for sure that he was even in the kind of danger that only something as crazy and dangerous as time travel could prevent. For all we know, they could have even made several attempts to look for him before assuming he was gone for good (an assumption they already made after he sacrificed himself to the abyss in the first movie) and moving on with their lives.
     
  • Also, for his part, Rex knew that Sweet Mayhem hadn't done his friends any harm. So if his only goal was to save himself from that past trauma and go back to the happy life he'd had before, he could have gone back in time to any point BEFORE that fateful crash and convinced Lucy and the others to go to the Systar System voluntarily — or even just told Emmet/his past self that they would be fine and to wait patiently for their eventual return. But as it is, he had already convinced himself that seeing his friends live fun lives of their own and not obsess constantly about his entirely unknown fate proved that they were worthless to someone as "enlightened" as him.

    There's a reason that it was hearing that which showed Emmet what a dangerous person he had been letting himself become. I mean, how is it not blatant hypocrisy for him to intentionally doom everyone in the universe besides him to a fate even worse than what he went through (trapped in a sealed storage bin, not just under a dryer with no obstacles between him and freedom than his own immobility) just because in HIS timeline he had to rescue himself from a fate none of them even knew about? And Rex certainly had no reason at any point to attempt to KILL the same past self he'd gone to such lengths to save, just for continuing to care about people besides himself after seeing THEM in danger.

    Between his delusions of grandeur in believing that a couple hours with his past self would be enough to convince him to forsake everyone he ever cared about, and pure spite against anybody who didn't share his twisted, self-obsessed philosophy, Rex was pretty much a homicidal maniac, and way more "psycho" than Benny was for momentarily snapping at Balthazar for interrupting his focus. If you genuinely believe otherwise, then I would honestly be just as uncomfortable hanging around with you as I would be around somebody as demented as Rex.

Also, shouldn't all this discussion be going on in the spoiler thread?

Edited by Aanchir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, TheNerdyOne_ said:

So when Emmet doesn't change, it's out of character.  But Benny changing is out of character as well?  Also Benny was still his happy joyful self once they got to the Systar system, freaking out like that is absolutely something he would have done in the first movie too.  Fits his character perfectly.

Myabe not after they get to the Systar system, but she was absolutely super aggressive in Apocalypseburg.  Which is the whole point.  Unikitty is not an aggressive character normally, so when she returns to normal she isn't aggressive at all.

 

Fair Point.^^ In my opinion it is different because the world around them gives them reason to change or not.

Emmet seems more naive than in the first one. He was afraid of getting hurt when the "super secret police" shot at them or there was a high risk of being captured. He was sad, when Unikittys home was destroyed. I would totally understand if he tries to move on inside the wall. I would understand if he gets maybe only 10% tougher instead of a change like Chainsawdave... But beeing nonstop extra happy between the ruins of his hometown and building a house in a war zone outside the wall feels wrong after years of alienattacks. This is subjective, of course.

Benny on the other hand was just happy to be finally allowed to build a spaceship in the first movie. Even in the biggest battle he was laughing insanely. He wasn´t even angry against the Robots who kept him for years from building spaceships. I can´t even see a reason for him to be aggressive against the Aliens now (he wasn´t) but espacially not to shout that way at his buddy to shut up.  

Compared to her rage moments in the first she wasn´t that angry at the beginning in my opinion. I also wouldn´t call her allways aggressive. But in the first movie she had to suppress her anger for example, when they met her for the first time and she told there aren´t any negative emotions allowed and you must burry them deep inside - becomming red for a few seconds. That she doesn´t have any problems with that while beeing kidnapped feels odd.

In comination with all the male charakters seeming more aggressive and/or more naive it made me wonder.

1 hour ago, TheNerdyOne_ said:

Wildstyle absolutely does look down on Emmet at the beginning, but she completely changes her opinion of him by the end of the movie.  She doesn't think that it's good he's "pathetic" (which, btw he is not, and if you think he is you've clearly missed a major point of the movie), but she realizes that his optimism and positive attitude in the face of even societal collapse actually make him a very strong character, and are things she should appreciate instead of looking down on.

I think you just got a bad translation.  In the english version, Sweet Mayhem points out that Lucy did all the fighting and Emmet took all the credit.  Which is obviously technically correct and can't be refuted directly, but Lucy absolutely does defend him regardless.  Sure, she did most of the fighting, but she points out that Emmet was absolutely crucial to their survival.  Like she says, you don't have to be a warrior to be a hero.  And Lucy being a warrior doesn't detract from Emmet's heroism, which is the angle Lucy took when defending him.  Asserting that he was a warrior and Sweet Mayhem was completely wrong not only would have been lying, but would have completely detracted from the lessons learned in the first movie

I don´t think Emmet is pathetic (especially not in the first one). But it really seemed to me like the people making the movie tried to make him look like that. Like i said, after beeing a big help with his mech in the first movie he fails that bad with his trippledecker couch. It seems like he made 3 steps back. I guess the translation was really a bigger Problem than i thought... In German Lucy changes betreen "ironic" and "unsure" voice every time she says something good about him and Mayhems words are really harsh. Even in the end, when Lucy says he is fine the way he is. If that´s not the case in English it will seem very different.

 

1 hour ago, TheNerdyOne_ said:

No, Rex is not right.

In Rex's universe, he flies off to save his friends just like is shown in the movie, but ends up crashing in the asteroid field and flying under the dryer.  All of his friends had just been kidnapped, and not only had no way of knowing he was even coming after them at all, but could not have possibly known where he went.  And everyone back at Apocalypseburg probably just assumed he suffered the same fate as everyone else who went to the Systar system.  Remember, Emmet is the only character who even knows that a world exists outside of their LEGO universe.  I'm sure they did look for him, but it's literally impossible for them to find him.  And no, "they could have just time travelled" is not a good alternative.

Also, it would take years before Rex would be able to move enough to get himself out from under the dryer and back to his friends.  And by that point, he had convinced himself they didn't care and had no reason to go back.

Ok, that changes really everything. I thought they knew he got lost because there was a scene where Emmet/Rex saw everyone from his spot, so they should have seen him. If it´s the case, they cant recognize him because he is in an "other world/dimension", my main problem with the story is gone. Thank you! :)

2 hours ago, TheNerdyOne_ said:

"Mary Sue" can apply to characters of all sex, but in order to do that you kind of have to stay away from the phrase "every female character is a Mary Sue."  And you especially have to stay away from the assertion that all of the male characters are not.  Every character in this movie had flaws and learned lessons.  I can't see a single one that you could seriously argue was a "Mary Sue."

Ok, that was a stupid statement. Instead of "all" i really should have said the more central characters at that point. I thought no male character was a Merry Sue because none of them seemed very powerfull at all besides Rex and Emmet at the end who are the villain and had to train. With "all" female characters i meant the ones with more screentime Lucy, the Queen and Mayhem.

Mayhem is the best pilot, can sneak into the bunker like nobody else, defeats all established heroes within seconds and has in the German Version not a moment weakness i could remember besides the lost fight against Lucy. The Queen doesn´t fight but plays everyone around her like a fiddle and it seemed like her only flaw was the people around her not understanding how great she is, which fits quite well to the definitition of a Mary Sue. With the tone of the original voiceacting not making it seem like every of Finns characters was just wrong about her and the hypnosis, i take that back for sure. Same for Lucy if she learns a lesson and isn´t just mean to Emmet for the whole movie.

2 hours ago, TheNerdyOne_ said:

You really took some interesting lessons away from this movie.  First of all, there were not seperate lessons for the male and female characters.  The daughter (and by extension, the residents of the Systar System, many of which are male) learned that she has to communicate her intentions better.  The son (and by extension, the residents of Apocalypseburg, many of which are female) learns that growing up doesn't mean you have to get all hardcore and edgy.  This lesson is portrayed through Lucy, and her learning to appreciate Emmet for who he is.

And both characters learn how to appreciate their differences and play together.  And all of these are absolutely great messages for kids to hear.

From what you have said before, that´s something i can comepletely agree on now. With Rex not beeing right all the time and the seemingly completely different tone of the whole Story in the Englisch version it seems to become a whole different movie.

3 hours ago, TheNerdyOne_ said:

One, nobody was accusing you of anything.  Frankly your comments do read as a bit sexist, but pointing that out isn't the same as saying "you are sexist."  It's important to be able to recognize biases in our wording without taking offense people pointing them out and acting like it's an attack on our character.

Two, I think this paragraph right here does bring to light why you might have so many issues with TLM2.  One of the messages in TLM2 is that "femininity," or rather the concepts usually grouped as "feminine" which are present in the Systar System are not bad things.  Sexism is much more complicated than male vs female, and I think can be more accurately summarized as masculine vs feminine.  All of the female characters you just listed (at least the ones I'm familiar with) are very masculine characters regardless of their sex.  In contrast, many of the characters in TLM2 are more on the feminine side.

A character doesn't have to be masculine to have depth.  Again, that was one of the messages of TLM2.  The term "Mary Sue" is very often attributed to feminine characters even though it's rarely actually the case.  I think a major reason for this is that people have trouble understanding that feminine =/= bad.  Hence the accusations of every feminine character in recent memory being "poorly written"

Though off-topic and I don't want to turn this to a Star Wars discussion at all, but since you brought it up Rey is a great example of this.  While she's a naturally gifted character, she has a lot of flaws and goes through a lot of growth over the course of the two movies we've seen.  The exact same thing can be said for Anakin and Luke, and yet nobody called them Mary Sues.  Rey's character has a lot of depth, honestly probably more depth than either Anakin or Luke at these points in their stories, but said depth is disregarded as not being legitimate because her character is more feminine.  I think audiences have more trouble identifying with feminine characters because we're so used to masculine ones being the hero, but that's a whole bigger issue that needs a much more in-depth discussion than is possible here.  We've already kind of gotten off the rails into psychology and social issues as it is.

I am sorry for getting that wrong.^^´ That defensive reflex is result of my daily live... Already got labled as a hardcore communist because i asked in my class about economics in history why indirect taxes were accepted as more fair in the medieval society. Took me months to get rid of that rumor one single guy spread. Similar stuff happened to a lot of buddies. I am working on that outside the campus.^^´

That´s maybe the case. I guess it really depends on what you call feminine and masculine. Personally i don´t see any abilitys and virtues as masculine or feminine. I see them as good, neutral or bad and think a person should do everything possible to be the best person he or she can become. Most times it is the golden middle between classical feminine and masculine. I see a choleric man who yells at his son for writing a bad grade for hours just as negative as an overprotecting mother who doesn´t ask if he could maybe be better prepared the next time. It would be good if Emmet was a better Pilot and more confident. It is nice that he has a smile on his face and wants to cheer other people up. Why can´t he work on his weaknesses and still keep his strengths? That´s what characters like Eowyn does. She still has flaws... especially bad cooking (joke) ... but works on them. That is something i can relate to.

I dont want to start an SW argument, too ;) But one funny thing: someone does xD My fist result at Google for "Mary Sue" is an article about Luke beeing one.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Aanchir said:

@Gorilla94: Besides what @TheNerdyOne_ and @Lyichir brought up, a couple additional notes:

  Reveal hidden contents
  • I don't know where you get idea that Benny changed completely. He was ALWAYS a little manic/offbeat. I believe in early concepts for the first movie this was attributed to oxygen deprivation due to the crack in his helmet. This was probably scrubbed from the final movie both so that viewers with ADHD, autism, and other neurological conditions who relate to Benny's quirks don't feel like the movie is telling them that people with those traits are "damaged".

    Even so, his behavior in the second movie is no more "psycho" than in the first, where he went into a frenzy and start building a spaceship at the drop of a hat multiple times, only to shatter his creation in frustration when told that it wasn't the proper solution to that problem, and got into an aggressive shouting match with a literal computer because it had poorly-programmed voice recognition technology.

    And anyway, how do you know that if somebody had interrupted him during his climactic "Spaceship" scene in the first movie, he wouldn't have snapped at them the same way he snapped at Balthazar? People in real life FREQUENTLY have the impulse to snap at other people when they're interrupted from an activity that they're intensely focused on — it doesn't make them "psycho".
     
  • Unikitty's lesson in the first movie wasn't simply to become more aggressive — it was not to keep her anger, aggression, and other negative emotions bottled up or be ashamed of them, which was very unhealthy for her. At the end of the first movie, you could clearly see that letting all that bottled-up rage out against the Micro-Managers had already enabled her to calm back down to her usual cuddly pink self and gather with the rest of her friends to celebrate their victory.

    In the second movie, she has clearly become much more comfortable channeling her negative emotions productively when she needs to, as when rescuing Emmet and Lucy towards the beginning of the movie — though the constant stress of living in Apocalypseburg made it harder for her to become completely calm until she was able to escape that "heckish" scenario. Being able to allow herself that freedom to express her genuine feelings has made her much healthier so that when she's not feeling intense negative emotions she's no longer a ticking time bomb who has to exert great effort to avoid that kind of explosive rage from surfacing under even the slightest feelings of negativity.
     
  • The idea that Emmet's friends could have just used time travel to find him ignores that Rex's ability to time travel required him to smash several different types of time machine to combine into his Rexcelsior. Lucy breaking just one critical component (the Flux Capacitor) was enough to prevent him from doing so again. So for Lucy and the others to gain that same ability, they'd have to do more or less the same thing Rex did — which they never would, because unlike Rex they aren't self-obsessed sociopaths who go around smashing stuff built by people who never did them any harm.

    And anyway, Rex only resorted to measures as bonkers as time travel to save Emmet/himself because he KNEW what happened to Emmet/himself after going to rescue his friends, and wanted to prevent that. If Lucy and the others couldn't find Emmet under the dryer themselves, they'd have had no way of knowing for sure that he was even in the kind of danger that only something as crazy and dangerous as time travel could prevent. For all we know, they could have even made several attempts to look for him before assuming he was gone for good (an assumption they already made after he sacrificed himself to the abyss in the first movie) and moving on with their lives.
     
  • Also, for his part, Rex knew that Sweet Mayhem hadn't done his friends any harm. So if his only goal was to save himself from that past trauma and go back to the happy life he'd had before, he could have gone back in time to any point BEFORE that fateful crash and convinced Lucy and the others to go to the Systar System voluntarily — or even just told Emmet/his past self that they would be fine and to wait patiently for their eventual return. But as it is, he had already convinced himself that seeing his friends live fun lives of their own and not obsess constantly about his entirely unknown fate proved that they were worthless to someone as "enlightened" as him.

    There's a reason that it was hearing that which showed Emmet what a dangerous person he had been letting himself become. I mean, how is it not blatant hypocrisy for him to intentionally doom everyone in the universe besides him to a fate even worse than what he went through (trapped in a sealed storage bin, not just under a dryer with no obstacles between him and freedom than his own immobility) just because in HIS timeline he had to rescue himself from a fate none of them even knew about? And Rex certainly had no reason at any point to attempt to KILL the same past self he'd gone to such lengths to save, just for continuing to care about people besides himself after seeing THEM in danger.

    Between his delusions of grandeur in believing that a couple hours with his past self would be enough to convince him to forsake everyone he ever cared about, and pure spite against anybody who didn't share his twisted, self-obsessed philosophy, Rex was pretty much a homicidal maniac, and way more "psycho" than Benny was for momentarily snapping at Balthazar for interrupting his focus. If you genuinely believe otherwise, then I would honestly be just as uncomfortable hanging around with you as I would be around somebody as demented as Rex.

Also, shouldn't all this discussion be going on in the spoiler thread?

  Hide contents

This is not lazy writing so much as a place where the movie's metanarrative comes into play. As Phil Lord and Chris Miller explain in this interview, the presence of both Finn and Bianca as the humans driving the action of the film means that different scenes will be presented via their different styles of storytelling.

The Harmony Town scene is clearly told from Finn's older and more cynical perspective. Because the way his sister plays with the characters doesn't make sense to him, the characters would clearly only behave that way (living in a cute town as friendly neighbors covered in glitter) if they were brainwashed, so that's how they are presented in HIS take on the story. By comparison, when we see Emmet's friends on the party bus listening to the same song, they're clearly NOT brainwashed — they recognize that Lucy is missing, but with encouragement from Zebe decide not to let it ruin the party for them — after all, they have no reason to think she's in danger.

Other films that play around with multiple perspectives , albeit not in quite the same way, include Christopher Nolan's Inception (in which subtle cues help indicate which scenes are real and which take place inside a character's dream/subconscious) and Rashomon, in which the circumstances of a crime are presented from the perspective of multiple witnesses, whose accounts contradict one another and are presumably ALL unreliable accounts of what really happened.

 

Now I can see that , even though I feel it's a bit of a cop out that make's enough sense from that perspective my biggest problem is generally with the meta-narative stuff there's a line in the LEGOverse explaining it from their perspective as they way these things are generally meant to work is if you just take it for face value it makes sense and is good enough storytelling  but once you apply the meta lens it becomes great storytelling. Maybe they could of just added a throwaway line saying they were trying to entrap  Emmet and Rex because "They looked like they needed to party" or that there was a methane gas leak or something 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

EDIT: Some responses to @Renny The Spaceman:

Spoiler
  • The behavior of the inhabitants of Harmony Town is not lazy writing so much as a place where the movie's metanarrative comes into play. As Phil Lord and Chris Miller explain in this interview, the presence of both Finn and Bianca as the humans driving the action of the film means that different scenes will be presented via their different styles of storytelling, and their respective biases.

    The Harmony Town scene is clearly told from Finn's older and more cynical perspective. Because the way his sister plays with the characters doesn't make sense to him, the characters would clearly only behave that way (living in a cute town as friendly neighbors covered in glitter) if they were brainwashed, so that's how they are presented in HIS take on the story. By comparison, when we see Emmet's friends on the party bus listening to the same song, they're clearly NOT brainwashed — they recognize that Lucy is missing, but with encouragement from Zebe decide not to let it ruin the party for them — after all, they have no reason to think she's in danger.

    Other films that play around with multiple perspectives , albeit not in quite the same way, include Christopher Nolan's Inception (in which subtle cues help indicate which scenes are real and which take place inside a character's dream/subconscious) and Rashomon, in which the circumstances of a crime are presented from the perspective of multiple witnesses, whose accounts contradict one another and are presumably ALL unreliable accounts of what really happened.

  • Again, the idea that they didn't care about Emmet being missing is entirely Rex's assumption, based solely on the fact that they continue to live lives of their own instead of constantly obsessing about his whereabouts for two years straight. How do we know they weren't looking for him when they WEREN'T in his line of sight, or that they didn't see the wreckage of his spaceship and assume he died in the crash?

    After all, we know thanks to Vitruvius's death in the first movie that death IS a thing that exists in this universe. Are they supposed to put their lives on hold and abandon any chance at happiness on the off chance that with enough searching they might find him alive, or even do something crazy and go back in time to save them? After all, it's not as though they did that for Vitruvius…

  • Note that the people who are dismissing Emmet as useless are mostly Bricksburg citizens and Master Builders he has no close relationship with, and who didn't think much of him in the first movie, either. While Lucy's account of his heroism helped the people of Bricksburg realize that they could stand a chance against President Business's regime, it was Lucy's lesson about the value of fighting back and being yourself even in the face of overwhelming odds that inspired them, not any abilities Emmet had as a builder or leader.

    Since at the movie's resolution it's established that everyone is special and capable of being a Master Builder, in hindsight there is nothing about Emmet's actions in that movie that would have been remarkable to them. All of them, including Emmet, learned to become heroes and master builders because Lucy believed in them, and for most of them the lesson that they could decide their own destinies instead of just doing as they were told came much more easily than it did for Emmet.

  • The idea of the Duplo invaders being good all along doesn't seem that strange to me. After all, despite showing up as invaders (which could have just as easily been a conflict Bianca intended to resolve in that same play session), they didn't actually attack anyone in Bricksburg until Lucy attacked THEM. And she only did that because she saw them enjoying the gift Emmet gave them and wanting more as an existential threat. Plus, keep the metanarrative in mind. This was a 3-year-old playing with an 8-year-old's toys. Certainly, Finn saw this as an attack against his creations, just as his dad saw his childish meddling with the Bricksburg display as an attack on those creations. But if we are willing to accept that in Finn's story, Emmet and his friends meant no harm, then in Bianca's story, neither did the inhabitants of the Duplo planet. And each scenario becomes the truth of the universe when the older storyteller learns to understand appreciate the younger storyteller's perspectives and creative contributions.

EDIT: Whoops, I cut and pasted my stuff from the other thread after I saw that other people had replied and I could make my subsequent thoughts a separate post, but I guess you were already typing your reply :tongue: I'll just leave it here though instead of going back and editing it into my previous post.

EDIT 2
: and some more responses for @Gorilla94:

Spoiler
  • Emmet staying positive when everybody else has become jaded is SUPPOSED to feel wrong. It feels wrong to Lucy, too,— thereby kicking off Emmet's emotional journey to decide whether or not he's failed to grow up to the kind of person she wants him to be. That said, Emmet being scared, confused, or determined when it was appropriate to behave that way during the first movie is different from him being jaded or a cynic.

    Honestly, his response to the "heckish" standard of living in Apocalypseburg is in many ways more mature than many of the other inhabitants'. His "dream house" and his cheerful attitude towards all of his neighbors don't mean he's ignoring the awfulness of the world around him, but that he's making an effort to use his positive spirit to IMPROVE those conditions instead of resigning himself to the fact that everything sucks and he should just start acting like it.

    Also note that the first movie was resolved NOT by Emmet becoming edgy and jaded, but sincerely opening up to President Business about his feelings and giving him a chance for EVERYBODY to be happy. So why would that teach him that violence and aggression works? If anything, he learned that being yourself even when things look bad is worth the risk.

    Notably, his other friends didn't have that firsthand experience. The victory of Lucy and the others came from fighting as hard as they could against Lord Business's regime until Emmet had the OPPORTUNITY to create a peaceful victory. So for them, the lesson was that it's better to fight back than to be happy when things are bad.

    Emmet sought a peaceful outcome during the Duplo invasion as well, and while it didn't go as well as he hoped, he and his friends were still able to survive unharmed, so it wasn't a huge "reality check" for him. What pushes Emmet to question whether his idealistic desires to achieve positive outcomes for everyone are really viable is when he starts to believe that being his usual, cheerful self has put his friends in danger.
     
  • The triple decker couch mech not being enough to save his friends doesn't mean that it wasn't cool or useful, just that it wasn't enough in that specific scenario. Emmet's friends were underwhelmed by it BEFORE he turned it into a mech, but likewise they were underwhelmed by the original Double Decker Couch due to how lame and useless it seemed. In both cases, once those creations DID prove useful, they were much more impressed. But in this case it simply wasn't ENOUGH to overcome Sweet Mayhem, who fought using weapons and strategies that literally NONE of the Apocalypseburg inhabitants, including Emmet's friends, were prepared for.

    If this scene gave you the unique impression that Emmet's skills had declined, I think you're failing to recognize that he and his friends were all fighting an enemy they didn't understand — whereas the victory over President Business in the first movie was possible not because of the mech (which without Unikitty's help would have been overcome by the Micro-Managers) but because Emmet and President Business were able to arrive at a mutual understanding of where their conflict was coming from.
     
  • Lucy IS genuinely speaking with an unsure voice when speaking about Emmet to Sweet Mayhem in the English dub, because she's struggling to reconcile the qualities she loves about Emmet with the amount of effort she's undertaken to "outgrow" those same qualities herself. Sweet Mayhem put her in an uncomfortable position by forcing her to argue that somebody who represents the OPPOSITE of the edgy, hardcore demeanor she personally aspires to is more qualified to lead than she is. By the end of the film, though, she is able to admit that it wasn't Emmet's mistake to be cheerful, open-hearted, and idealistic, but rather HER mistake to think that those qualities were something for ANYONE to be ashamed of.

 

Edited by Aanchir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Aanchir said:

EDIT: Some responses to @Renny The Spaceman:

  Hide contents
  • The behavior of the inhabitants of Harmony Town is not lazy writing so much as a place where the movie's metanarrative comes into play. As Phil Lord and Chris Miller explain in this interview, the presence of both Finn and Bianca as the humans driving the action of the film means that different scenes will be presented via their different styles of storytelling, and their respective biases.

    The Harmony Town scene is clearly told from Finn's older and more cynical perspective. Because the way his sister plays with the characters doesn't make sense to him, the characters would clearly only behave that way (living in a cute town as friendly neighbors covered in glitter) if they were brainwashed, so that's how they are presented in HIS take on the story. By comparison, when we see Emmet's friends on the party bus listening to the same song, they're clearly NOT brainwashed — they recognize that Lucy is missing, but with encouragement from Zebe decide not to let it ruin the party for them — after all, they have no reason to think she's in danger.

    Other films that play around with multiple perspectives , albeit not in quite the same way, include Christopher Nolan's Inception (in which subtle cues help indicate which scenes are real and which take place inside a character's dream/subconscious) and Rashomon, in which the circumstances of a crime are presented from the perspective of multiple witnesses, whose accounts contradict one another and are presumably ALL unreliable accounts of what really happened.

  • Again, the idea that they didn't care about Emmet being missing is entirely Rex's assumption, based solely on the fact that they continue to live lives of their own instead of constantly obsessing about his whereabouts for two years straight. How do we know they weren't looking for him when they WEREN'T in his line of sight, or that they didn't see the wreckage of his spaceship and assume he died in the crash?

    After all, we know thanks to Vitruvius's death in the first movie that death IS a thing that exists in this universe. Are they supposed to put their lives on hold and abandon any chance at happiness on the off chance that with enough searching they might find him alive, or even do something crazy and go back in time to save them? After all, it's not as though they did that for Vitruvius…

  • Note that the people who are dismissing Emmet as useless are mostly Bricksburg citizens and Master Builders he has no close relationship with, and who didn't think much of him in the first movie, either. While Lucy's account of his heroism helped the people of Bricksburg realize that they could stand a chance against President Business's regime, it was Lucy's lesson about the value of fighting back and being yourself even in the face of overwhelming odds that inspired them, not any abilities Emmet had as a builder or leader.

    Since at the movie's resolution it's established that everyone is special and capable of being a Master Builder, in hindsight there is nothing about Emmet's actions in that movie that would have been remarkable to them. All of them, including Emmet, learned to become heroes and master builders because Lucy believed in them, and for most of them the lesson that they could decide their own destinies instead of just doing as they were told came much more easily than it did for Emmet.

  • The idea of the Duplo invaders being good all along doesn't seem that strange to me. After all, despite showing up as invaders (which could have just as easily been a conflict Bianca intended to resolve in that same play session), they didn't actually attack anyone in Bricksburg until Lucy attacked THEM. And she only did that because she saw them enjoying the gift Emmet gave them and wanting more as an existential threat. Plus, keep the metanarrative in mind. This was a 3-year-old playing with an 8-year-old's toys. Certainly, Finn saw this as an attack against his creations, just as his dad saw his childish meddling with the Bricksburg display as an attack on those creations. But if we are willing to accept that in Finn's story, Emmet and his friends meant no harm, then in Bianca's story, neither did the inhabitants of the Duplo planet. And each scenario becomes the truth of the universe when the older storyteller learns to understand appreciate the younger storyteller's perspectives and creative contributions.

EDIT: Whoops, I cut and pasted my stuff from the other thread after I saw that other people had replied and I could make my subsequent thoughts a separate post, but I guess you were already typing your reply :tongue: I'll just leave it here though instead of going back and editing it into my previous post.

EDIT 2
: and some more responses for @Gorilla94

 

I know, I didn't say Rex was right,he obviously wasn't, I just said it makes him a more sympathetic villian as from his perspective they abandoned him though they probably didn't.

I get the apocalypseburgers not valuing Emmet but the thing I find annoying is how they claim he's a terrible leader as of the Fellowship of Strangers he's clearly shown to be the best leader, the team couldn't work together without Emmet. To be honest Sweet Mayhem's scan of Emmet feels more like a judgement of him from the end of this movie

I wouldn't say Emmet became special because Lucy believed in him as for most of the film she didn't, it was much more Virtruvius who made him that way. 

As I said in my first response I get it's meant to be a Meta-narrative bit generally there's an explanation in the LEGOVERSE and the metatextual element just makes it better whereas just explainin away any plothole with "That’s just how the kids imagined it" feels rather lazy and I think the reason  TLM2 isn't held in quite as high of a regard as the first is it relys on that explanation too much making the story much less seamless 

 

Just to be clear I loved this movie but I just wanted to point out a couple of the problems I had with it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ive seen some people asking about the brainwashing. I think the film wasnt clear enough about the brainwashing thing being just Finn's point of view.

Though that means they were actually playing together. Finn controlling Rex and Emmet and Bianca controlling the plantimals and the Harmony Town inhabitants. And that makes Finn look like a jerk for destroying the cake build after being playing with his sister.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Robert8 said:

Ive seen some people asking about the brainwashing. I think the film wasnt clear enough about the brainwashing thing being just Finn's point of view.

Though that means they were actually playing together. Finn controlling Rex and Emmet and Bianca controlling the plantimals and the Harmony Town inhabitants. And that makes Finn look like a jerk for destroying the cake build after being playing with his sister.

Yeah, the meta-narative is a lot more messy this time. Maybe if they had something like 'It was actually Rex Controlling them with his Convenient Plot Device to teach Emmet a lesson or something it'd make more sense in the LEGOVERSE and in the human world as that implies Finn was Controlling them for his story

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I watched it in English now... The German Version is by far the worst failure of a translation i ever experienced in a film or video game until now. My friends - including females - and me saw the German version as hostile against men in general. I can´t see anything of that in the English version. The figures are nowhere as aggressive or insulting to each other. Some stuff makes sense instead of seeming to be said just to buy time. It´s also much more clear, what happened to Emmet/Rex exactly and that the others were not able to save him. Rex´ goals are also much better communicated, while in the German version it seems like he is only caring about Emmet and just wants to help him, while the doesn´t care aout the others anymore for good reason. 

I still think the movie isn´t really good because of the humor (even if it is much better in English), the lack of character development compared to the first movies and the worlds - for example i would have really enjoyed an Elves world or heartlake city instead of the design of harmony town - and some other things, But all the stuff i really hate about it is seemingly exclusive to the German version. Like i said in my first post, i wasn´t able to imagine, there would be THAT much difference :/

@Aanchir  I thought in the beginning it was shown from the two perspectives. What confuses me is the connection between reallife and "Legoverse". Is Finn even there, when his sister plays with the captured figures in her room? Is Rex really time travelling? He disappears after a real live fight. so i thought that was real in the movie like Emmet was really moving in the first one. How can Rex come to save Emmet with his ship and be part of the Story, when Finn is playing with Emmet. Wouldn´t a real flying Lego ship nobody build be at least irritating for Finn?

Edited by Gorilla94

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gorilla94 said:

I watched it in English now... The German Version is by far the worst failure of a translation i ever experienced in a film or video game until now. My friends - including females - and me saw the German version as hostile against men in general. I can´t see anything of that in the English version. The figures are nowhere as aggressive or insulting to each other. Some stuff makes sense instead of seeming to be said just to buy time. It´s also much more clear, what happened to Emmet/Rex exactly and that the others were not able to save him. Rex´ goals are also much better communicated, while in the German version it seems like he is only caring about Emmet and just wants to help him, while the doesn´t care aout the others anymore for good reason. 

I still think the movie isn´t really good because of the humor (even if it is much better in English), the lack of character development compared to the first movies and the worlds - for example i would have really enjoyed an Elves world or heartlake city instead of the design of harmony town - and some other things, But all the stuff i really hate about it is seemingly exclusive to the German version. Like i said in my first post, i wasn´t able to imagine, there would be THAT much difference :/

@Aanchir  I thought in the beginning it was shown from the two perspectives. What confuses me is the connection between reallife and "Legoverse". Is Finn even there, when his sister plays with the captured figures in her room? Is Rex really time travelling? He disappears after a real live fight. so i thought that was real in the movie like Emmet was really moving in the first one. How can Rex come to save Emmet with his ship and be part of the Story, when Finn is playing with Emmet. Wouldn´t a real flying Lego ship nobody build be at least irritating for Finn?

A couple things about the time travel:

• In one of the live action scenes, Bianca asks Finn to play, but he can’t because he’s (paraphrased) “in the middle of creating a complex storyline with aliens and time travel”. Thus, we can infer that the time travel plotline involving Rex is part of the LEGO world the kids create through their play sessions.

• Around when Lucy shows up to rescue Emmet, the ground and the bottom of the dryer become covered in colorful CGI bricks, and the character movements change from the stiff, flailing way the characters move when they’re not being played with to the more controlled way they move when they are. This signifies that the space underneath the dryer has become part of the fanciful LEGO world… and thus, that this isn’t just Lucy rescuing Emmet, it’s Finn and/or Bianca acting out the rescue scene within that space using the Lucy minifigure. As such, Rex’s disappearance at the end of the movie is likewise part of the play scenario and not the physical minifigure dematerializing.

I can’t answer definitively where Finn is during the LEGO world scenes from Bianca’s perspective or vice-versa, though. But remember that these stories aren’t necessarily told in real time. The first movie began at least three days before Taco Tuesday if the dialogue during Bad Cop’s interrogation of Emmet is any indication. It’s safe to assume that Finn isn’t down in the basement playing for three days straight without breaks, but likewise that he’s not inserting 10+ hour stretches in his story where time passes in-universe but none of the characters actually do anything for those 10+ hours. While this movie’s much shorter doomsday clock suggests the events happen over the course of a single day, I believe there’s still plenty of room for the real-life characters’ play sessions to start and stop, even at points where the in-universe story they’re telling seems to continue more or less seamlessly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Aanchir said:

 

  Hide contents

I can’t answer definitively where Finn is during the LEGO world scenes from Bianca’s perspective or vice-versa, though. But remember that these stories aren’t necessarily told in real time. The first movie began at least three days before Taco Tuesday if the dialogue during Bad Cop’s interrogation of Emmet is any indication. It’s safe to assume that Finn isn’t down in the basement playing for three days straight without breaks, but likewise that he’s not inserting 10+ hour stretches in his story where time passes in-universe but none of the characters actually do anything for those 10+ hours. While this movie’s much shorter doomsday clock suggests the events happen over the course of a single day, I believe there’s still plenty of room for the real-life characters’ play sessions to start and stop, even at points where the in-universe story they’re telling seems to continue more or less seamlessly.

 

Possibly during the literal intermission scene? :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there no “Making of the Movie” book this time? Those were absolute joys to pore over for the Batman and Ninjago movies, and some of my favorite artwork and preliminary designs came from them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, legozebra said:

Is there no “Making of the Movie” book this time? Those were absolute joys to pore over for the Batman and Ninjago movies, and some of my favorite artwork and preliminary designs came from them

So far it doesn't look like it. Which is a huge shame—I had hoped that this movie would present the opportunity for a book or books that included not just the concept material from the sequel but also concepts, graphics, and production art for the original Lego movie, which likewise didn't get any sort of artbook along those lines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s a darn shame the movie isn’t doing as well at the box office as it deserves (IMO, of course). I have to confess I haven’t seen it nearly as many times so far as I saw the first, but I still plan to see it more before it leaves theaters.

I’m really looking forward to getting the soundtrack album, though I gather it’s missing a lot of the music I love in the movie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Blondie-Wan said:

It’s a darn shame the movie isn’t doing as well at the box office as it deserves (IMO, of course). I have to confess I haven’t seen it nearly as many times so far as I saw the first, but I still plan to see it more before it leaves theaters.

I’m really looking forward to getting the soundtrack album, though I gather it’s missing a lot of the music I love in the movie.

Which music in particular? The music is divided between a soundtrack and score album, and the only parts I noticed being missing is a portion of the credits song as well as some of the licensed music from the movie (the latter of which I don't mind since I felt like the Lego Batman Movie soundtrack's inclusion of music that wasn't written for the movie tended to take me out of it when listening casually).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Lyichir said:

Which music in particular? The music is divided between a soundtrack and score album, and the only parts I noticed being missing is a portion of the credits song as well as some of the licensed music from the movie (the latter of which I don't mind since I felt like the Lego Batman Movie soundtrack's inclusion of music that wasn't written for the movie tended to take me out of it when listening casually).

The score in general. I was unaware until your post that there actually is a discrete score release, something I hadn’t expected for this movie and had overlooked seeing in the credits (assuming it’s mentioned, which may not be the case). Thanks for the heads-up!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Lyichir said:

So far it doesn't look like it. Which is a huge shame—I had hoped that this movie would present the opportunity for a book or books that included not just the concept material from the sequel but also concepts, graphics, and production art for the original Lego movie, which likewise didn't get any sort of artbook along those lines.

I too have been hoping for "Art of" books for both The Lego Movie and its sequel, something I presumed would be a tradition for all installments in this franchise from TLBM onwards. :sad: Perhaps the bulk of concept art for the main movies are too sensitive, as in that most of it may be potentially utilized in future films, whereas that may not be the case so much for the spinoffs? :def_shrug:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Digger of Bricks said:

I too have been hoping for "Art of" books for both The Lego Movie and its sequel, something I presumed would be a tradition for all installments in this franchise from TLBM onwards. :sad: Perhaps the bulk of concept art for the main movies are too sensitive, as in that most of it may be potentially utilized in future films, whereas that may not be the case so much for the spinoffs? :def_shrug:

Either that or the books didn't sell great - I know I bought them all on the day they were released, but maybe the general public didn't take to them? Right now, it looks like the only way to see concept art and such is at the Lego House, which is a bit unfortunate (but at least it's something)...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, legozebra said:

Either that or the books didn't sell great - I know I bought them all on the day they were released, but maybe the general public didn't take to them?

Honestly, that could very well be the case instead. :def_shrug:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if this is allowed to post here, but if not, just tell me and i'll delete it. I made a stop motion test with Queen Watevra Wa'Nabi and i must say that she was a lot easier for me to animate than regular minifigs or minidolls. I'm currently sick, so that's why i had time to make it and it may reflect on my voice :classic: 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Fifulin said:

I don't know if this is allowed to post here, but if not, just tell me and i'll delete it. I made a stop motion test with Queen Watevra Wa'Nabi and i must say that she was a lot easier for me to animate than regular minifigs or minidolls. I'm currently sick, so that's why i had time to make it and it may reflect on my voice :classic: 

 

This is really well done!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I have finally watched the movie and all I have to say is: IT SUUUUUCKS!

It SUCKS so bad that I can’t even believe how much it SUCKS! It SUCKS balls! It SUCKS so much that even a succubus compare to it is a loving creature! It SUCKS all the way! It SUCKS so much that I just want to delete everything Lego from my PC and all the accounts related to Lego! It SUCKS so magnificently that I want to never see and hear anything Lego again! It SUCKS so spectacularly that it deserves a place in the hall of SUCKS! It SUCKS so exquisitely that I want to burn every Lego thing. Everything was not awesome. IT SUCKS, IT SUCKS, IT SUCKS, IT SUCKS!

The first one was ten times better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.