Lord of the Rings Ongoing Discussion

[Something_Awesome]

2 hours ago, Balrogofmorgoth said:

The way he pronounces Rivendell makes me so mad lol “Rivendale”

Maybe he was a World of Warcraft player.... Ashenvale.

[Balrogofmorgoth]

The rumor said the release would be March, nobody ever said March 1st specifically. Personally I think March 25th would be a more appropriate day to release it, for Tolkien Reading Day. Not that I want to wait almost a month longer. But it would be a cool way to celebrate. If it releases on the 1st, I may wait to build it until the 25th for that reason alone (along with some Tolkien reading obviously)

[Ferret-]

9 hours ago, Balrogofmorgoth said:

The rumor said the release would be March, nobody ever said March 1st specifically. Personally I think March 25th would be a more appropriate day to release it, for Tolkien Reading Day. Not that I want to wait almost a month longer. But it would be a cool way to celebrate. If it releases on the 1st, I may wait to build it until the 25th for that reason alone (along with some Tolkien reading obviously)

That would make more sense that its further out. It just seems strange that there's not more info about a March 1st set with that high a profile, we're only a month away from that date now...

Have there been past cases of D2C's just showing up on shelves with no prior advertising? Haven't really been paying attention to official LEGO sets for a few years, but the medieval blacksmith and 90th Lion's castle have made me look at the official site a bit more often.

[JeanGreyForever]

I can confirm that there is a Barad-Dur set in production after much fan request. It will feature 4000 pieces and the price range is expected to be $320-520, probably around $400. The description of the set that I saw said it is 33 inches/83 cm high, 17 inches/44 cm wide, and 14 inches/36 cm deep. The image I saw only featured the set and didn't include any minifigures but the description does mention that included will be Frodo with the One Ring, Sam, Sauron, and Orcs. The Eye of Sauron is visible at the top but I'm assuming that there will be a minifigure of Sauron in full armor as well. The description also mentions that the set features dungeons and armories. I'm not allowed to include an image of the set unfortunately but it looks incredible.

[Agent Kallus]

I'm sorry that I can't believe you at this stage but I really hope you turn to be telling the truth. I mean a source can't be trusted until we know it's got something right but I'd really like you to be on the money with this (and X-Men set and the Gotham set), though that does make it almost seem too good to be true but I guess only time will tell. But I won't get my hopes up.

Also if you have seen them then I hope there were just more figs that weren't shown. 

[MAB]

2 hours ago, Agent Kallus said:

I'm sorry that I can't believe you at this stage but I really hope you turn to be telling the truth. I mean a source can't be trusted until we know it's got something right but I'd really like you to be on the money with this (and X-Men set and the Gotham set), though that does make it almost seem too good to be true but I guess only time will tell. But I won't get my hopes up.

Also if you have seen them then I hope there were just more figs that weren't shown. 

They have also confirmed a Zelda set, again with a very wide price range. If this information is coming from retailer catalogues, surely the pricing would be known and not an incredibly wide range such as $320-520. And why would there be a figure of Sauron if Frodo and Sam were there.

[BrickBob Studpants]

Come on, an X-Mansion, a Batman The Animated Series set, a Zelda set, and now another LOTR rumour?

Nice try, but none of these are even slightly believable. Try harder

[RichardGoring]

1 hour ago, BrickBob Studpants said:

Come on, an X-Mansion, a Batman The Animated Series set, a Zelda set, and now another LOTR rumour?

Nice try, but none of these are even slightly believable. Try harder

Following on from it's successful collaboration with Hasbro on Optimus Prime, LEGO will now be producing LEGO-branded Mega Bloks...

[MAB]

1 hour ago, RichardGoring said:

Following on from it's successful collaboration with Hasbro on Optimus Prime, LEGO will now be producing LEGO-branded Mega Bloks...

And the set with 1000 pieces will cost between $10 and $1000.

[Balrogofmorgoth]

3 hours ago, MAB said:

They have also confirmed a Zelda set, again with a very wide price range. If this information is coming from retailer catalogues, surely the pricing would be known and not an incredibly wide range such as $320-520. And why would there be a figure of Sauron if Frodo and Sam were there.

I mean sets have had weirder minifigure inclusions, especially D2C sets trying to depict multiple scenes of the same location. Plenty of sets have included minifigures that have nothing to do with the scene as well. But still, it’s still nonsense either way. For one thing, there wouldn’t be a second D2C this year, and there wouldn’t be images already floating around of a set for next year, among plenty of other reasons for this being BS

[Something_Awesome]

19 hours ago, JeanGreyForever said:

I can confirm that there is a Barad-Dur set in production after much fan request. It will feature 4000 pieces and the price range is expected to be $320-520, probably around $400. The description of the set that I saw said it is 33 inches/83 cm high, 17 inches/44 cm wide, and 14 inches/36 cm deep. The image I saw only featured the set and didn't include any minifigures but the description does mention that included will be Frodo with the One Ring, Sam, Sauron, and Orcs. The Eye of Sauron is visible at the top but I'm assuming that there will be a minifigure of Sauron in full armor as well. The description also mentions that the set features dungeons and armories. I'm not allowed to include an image of the set unfortunately but it looks incredible.

Two huge LOTR sets before any system scale sets is not even remotely believable. Before such a commitment from LEGO, you would think they would like to know how RIvendell is received, and maybe sprinkle in some smaller system scale sets. Two very big sets for a theme make no sense without system scale sets to accompany them on the shelf. With that said, anything is possible, so I give this leak a 2% chance of being true. 

Edited January 30, 2023 by Something_Awesome

[Alegrispa]

2 hours ago, Something_Awesome said:

Two huge LOTR sets before any system scale sets is not even remotely believable.

I disagree. Not that I believe the user (leaning more towards them being full of it).

But two huge LotR sets before (and more likely entirely without) system scale sets is absolutely believable for current day LEGO. Unfortunately that's just where the company is right now.

[Something_Awesome]

1 hour ago, Alegrispa said:

I disagree. Not that I believe the user (leaning more towards them being full of it).

But two huge LotR sets before (and more likely entirely without) system scale sets is absolutely believable for current day LEGO. Unfortunately that's just where the company is right now.

It's not believable. Two LOTR sets that fall under Icons? The only exception to this, if you even want to consider it an exception, are the Friends show sets. But even then, the first set was an Ideas set, so only one falls under the Icons theme. And those are not huge sets either. Rivendell looks to be an Icons set. What would the second be? Also an Icons set? Licensed sets are driven by system play sets. This includes Harry Potter, Star Wars, and even licensed cars with Speed Champions. Big sets and small sets are needed, together, because they piggy back off each other. You literally sell more of each by having both available. 

It makes no fiscal sense for LEGO to decide to dedicate shelf space to only big sets for LotR. It is for this reason that this guy is lying, because to believe this fake rumor is to also believe LEGO is stupid. And therefore, all of his other "leaks" are fake. 

[Alegrispa]

1 hour ago, Something_Awesome said:

It's not believable. Two LOTR sets that fall under Icons? The only exception to this, if you even want to consider it an exception, are the Friends show sets. But even then, the first set was an Ideas set, so only one falls under the Icons theme. And those are not huge sets either. Rivendell looks to be an Icons set. What would the second be? Also an Icons set? Licensed sets are driven by system play sets. This includes Harry Potter, Star Wars, and even licensed cars with Speed Champions. Big sets and small sets are needed, together, because they piggy back off each other. You literally sell more of each by having both available. 

It makes no fiscal sense for LEGO to decide to dedicate shelf space to only big sets for LotR. It is for this reason that this guy is lying, because to believe this fake rumor is to also believe LEGO is stupid. And therefore, all of his other "leaks" are fake. 

Geez dude. Like I said, I don't believe actually the user (I literally said I think they're full of it), or even that a second LotR set so soon is even likely, just saying it's something I could see the company doing.

Whether or not that would be stupid of them to do, they sure have made a lot of stupid decisions lately. It'd do you good to tone down your inner fanboy a little.

[Something_Awesome]

3 minutes ago, Alegrispa said:

Geez dude. Like I said, I don't believe actually the user (I literally said I think they're full of it), or even that a second LotR set so soon is even likely, just saying it's something I could see the company doing.

Whether or not that would be stupid of them to do, they sure have made a lot of stupid decisions lately. It'd do you good to tone down your inner fanboy a little.

Looks like you quoted the wrong post in your reply. 

[Alegrispa]

3 minutes ago, Something_Awesome said:

Looks like you quoted the wrong post in your reply. 

Did I actually or are you being sarcastic because you don't like my reply?

[Something_Awesome]

1 minute ago, Alegrispa said:

Did I actually or are you being sarcastic because you don't like my reply?

I feel indifferent about your previous post. I just could not make sense of your defensiveness. I think I was on the verge of it, but then you made the "fanboy" comment. 

 

[Agent Kallus]

I mean the Simpson line consisted of only d2cs and cmfs

[MAB]

10 minutes ago, Agent Kallus said:

I mean the Simpson line consisted of only d2cs and cmfs

The Simpsons was a separate theme (even if both sets were D2C), but then this was before ICONS came along. Indeed, before all the 18+ sets came along, The Simpsons were 12+ sets. I don't think we can now read much into what happened five or even ten years ago. LEGO and their marketing to adults has changed so much since then.

[Agent Kallus]

20 hours ago, MAB said:

The Simpsons was a separate theme (even if both sets were D2C), but then this was before ICONS came along. Indeed, before all the 18+ sets came along, The Simpsons were 12+ sets. I don't think we can now read much into what happened five or even ten years ago. LEGO and their marketing to adults has changed so much since then.

But if anything they are even more into big d2cs than they were when they did Simpson, I wouldn’t be surprised if they decided to make lotr a D2c only theme, like they’ve done mostly with ghost busters and back to the future.

 

[BrickBob Studpants]

I‘d be surprised if LOTR was anything but a pure 18+ line (plus BrickHeadz)  The fact there‘s nothing else in the pipeline is a pretty clear indication. Had they planned playsets, why wouldn’t they release them before/alongside the big D2C set? And the fact said set is part of the Icons theme speaks volumes too

[Balrogofmorgoth]

32 minutes ago, Agent Kallus said:

But if anything they are even more into big d2cs than they were when they did Simpson, I wouldn’t be surprised if they decided to make lotr a D2c only theme, like they’ve done mostly with ghost busters and back to the future.

 

Obviously this wouldn’t be ideal, most of us want play sets with a D2C here and there. BUT if they did this then I would hope for about two per year. Which is difficult for me to say because I think they’re doing WAYYYY too many D2C sets in general right now and it’s really hard to keep up with the themes I like. But I would drop them all for continuous LOTR D2C sets

[RichardGoring]

I also think LEGO would more likely focus on D2C sets for LOTR. It's not aimed at younger children at all (at least all the media stuff), so they're going to be drawn more towards the TFOLs, AFOLs, and, perhaps critically, the 18+ adults who will see something cool and impressive, and they've seen LOTR or RoP, and are happy to get a large, expensive set to build. As with many releases in the last year or so, LEGO could be treating this as a gateway product, to get people into LEGO that haven't been before (or not since childhood).

Two at the same time seems unlikely, but you could easily see it being one a year, or maybe a second after six months. And if they're doing that, they are likely designing them together, and thinking about a release cycle if they want to make it a semi-regular thing.

Some of that may be drawing too much on my own experience - I have the Jurassic Park D2Cs, but only one or two of the playsets. Same for Marvel (a D2C, no playsets), Disney (two D2Cs, one playset), and Star Wars (two D2Cs, no playsets). Although I have all the Nintendo D2Cs and a load of playsets too, but mostly because my children are the right age.

If they're releasing the LOTR D2Cs as an Icons set, it suggests no playsets (for now) and also the possibility of more D2Cs being released very possible.

None of which is to say that it will happen, but you can easily see the route, rationale, and past behaviour to suggest that it might.

[MAB]

35 minutes ago, RichardGoring said:

I also think LEGO would more likely focus on D2C sets for LOTR. It's not aimed at younger children at all (at least all the media stuff), so they're going to be drawn more towards the TFOLs, AFOLs, and, perhaps critically, the 18+ adults who will see something cool and impressive, and they've seen LOTR or RoP, and are happy to get a large, expensive set to build. As with many releases in the last year or so, LEGO could be treating this as a gateway product, to get people into LEGO that haven't been before (or not since childhood).

I agree that playsets are unlikely, and I imagine LEGO knows kids (in general, not specific individuals) are not interested in LOTR. They know what the sales numbers were like last time they did LOTR and The Hobbit.

However, I'm not sure D2C is necessarily the best way to go. I have no issue with one set per year (if we get that lucky) in the ICONS range. It seems to me that having it D2C misses out on people that are not necessarily into LEGO but might buy it. If they don't visit the LEGO store or website, they are unlikely to see it. Whereas if it is a non-D2C set in other stores too, then non-LEGO fans who are nto actually looking for LEGO will also get to see it.  Plus there is the advantage that it is more likely to be discounted if stocked by retailers other than LEGO!

 

[BrickBob Studpants]

Just to clarify, @Clone OPatra vouches for the recent rumours, so there might be something to it after all  

I‘m still taking it with the biggest non-lethal dose of salt imaginable! Actually, I‘d much rather have a Barad-Dûr as opposed to a Rivendell set, but maybe that’s just me

Edited January 31, 2023 by BrickBob Studpants