Ecclesiastes

[PRESS RELEASE] 75936 - Jurassic Park

Recommended Posts

I agree that the gates are actually more appealing to me than Rexy itself.

Smaller in minifig scale dino, gates and Explorer = instabuy.

Huge Rexy and gates, plus an AU$399 price tag = second thoughts.

The only reasons we don’t have the Explorer by now that I can think of is that it’s either a licensing issue or it’s already a set planned for 2020.

 

Edited by ChrisW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's another interview with @Nabii on the set, this time with @caperberry's New Elementary alongside @marcosbessa:blush:

New Elementary - 75936 JURASSIC PARK T. REX RAMPAGE: DESIGNER INTERVIEW WITH MARK STAFFORD & MARCOS BESSA

prototype-mike-psiaki_lego-jurassic-park-trex-rampage-75936_272A8425.jpg

6 hours ago, Nabii said:

I'm sorry reception of this set seems to have fallen so flat. I was hoping people would like it. It seems everyone was expecting a visitors centre, I have no idea why as this was never even discussed. Hopefully as people start to get their hands on it the general impression of the set will improve. I tried to make it cool. Cheers everyone.

Hey man, as soon as I saw you handle the T-Rex build in @Zusammengebaut's interview with you, I was utterly sold, as my seven year-old self would've just loved the heck out of this set back then!!! :thumbup: :grin:

Granted, I do somewhat feel though its overall reception from the rest of the community could've been a bit more positive if just the T-Rex build was instead introduced as a standalone Creator Expert set, something you mentioned in the above stated interview that Mike Psiaki was hoping to see happen. Oh, also, it was interesting to read in your other interview with New Elementary about this set's relationship with @senteosan's LEGO Ideas project(s):

Quote

So the idea for a dinosaur set originated from TLG?

Mark: Yes… the elephant in the room is the LEGO Ideas one. Mike’s is from 2012 so we knew it predated that. I was aware it existed, but I purposefully didn’t go and look at it. When I finally did look at it about two weeks before I finished, I was annoyed that we chose the same colours for the dinosaur and the gate but the reason for that is when you look at the actual movie, those are the colours that they are. And the T-Rex is the only dinosaur that is in every movie. So there’s not much that you can do. 

Well, you got kicked for releasing the Ghostbusters Firehouse after someone had their version on LEGO Ideas, didn’t you.

Marcos: Yes, it’s a very similar situation. You work from the same reference, and do your best to represent it within a system that is limited in terms of colours and shapes. 
Mark: It’s a Jurassic gate with a dinosaur and the colours are the same, but the scale is very different. This is twice the size [of the LEGO Ideas one]. As far as I am aware, none of the elements were used in the same way.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Digger of Bricks said:

Granted, I do somewhat feel though its overall reception from the rest of the community could've been a bit more positive if just the T-Rex build was instead introduced as a standalone Creator Expert set, something you mentioned in the above stated interview that Mike Psiaki was hoping to see happen.

That's it precisely.  If the T-Rex in 75936 had been released as a standalone model, perhaps in Creator Expert or as the biggest summer set in Creator 3-in-1 without any branding, I bet it would have been received with universal acclaim.  A gigantic brick-built T-Rex that's 27 inches long and can be rebuilt into two other dinosaurs?  Awesome!  But when it's released with Jurassic Park branding and an oversized gate simply to reach a perceived threshold size of "big enough for a D2C," it clashes dramatically with fan expectations and it makes the set less attractive to the group of customers who would have snapped it up as a $100 or $120 Creator set, or even as a $100 or $120 Jurassic Park-branded set.  Granted, the design team does seem to have been quite unaware of fan expectations, so their method of releasing to the public this totally awesome dinosaur MOC that was sitting on their shelves was quite reasonable from their point of view.  ("We've got a D2C slot coming up ... we've got this totally awesome T-Rex we want to make into a set, and it's not quite big enough for that D2C slot ... what else can we make to go with it?")

Considered as a set designer's favorite MOC released to the public, it's an amazing set - sort of the UCS Millennium Falcon of Jurassic Park builds.  (Remember that 10179 started out as a designer's MOC and had plenty of shortcomings of its own, many of which were remedied with 75192.)  It's only when considered as the ideal D2C Jurassic Park set that it comes up short. - - - The general perspective on fan sites seems to be that the ideal Jurassic Park D2C would feature one or more of the most iconic scenes and locations carefully picked to form a cohesive whole, constructed with a bevy of impressive and innovative building techniques that would do any MOC proud.  (In another franchise, that is exemplified by the Stranger Things set, which features an instantly recognizable, frequently recurring, and critically important location in minifig scale without reducing it to a vignette, a vehicle that is innovative on its own and whose inclusion in the set seems entirely natural, and an ingenious structure that pushes the limits of what's possible with Lego.)  The T-Rex in 75936 features a number of impressive and innovative building techniques that would do any MOC proud and push the limits of what's possible with Lego, but they're mostly hidden inside the hip joints.  Since what meets the eye is mostly simple cladding with curved slopes and organic, lifelike shapes are notoriously hard with Lego, it's bound to look a little disappointing.  The gate is also nice enough on its own, but paired with the T-Rex it doesn't form an especially cohesive whole, and the minifigure vignettes on the back mostly serve to highlight the mismatched scales without adding much playability, unlike the minifigure vignettes in other D2Cs like the Disney Castle. 

I know nothing about how price points and set slots are allocated between themes, of course, but it seems like the Star Wars line has demonstrated pretty well that it's possible for $100 UCS/D2C-like sets to coexist with upper-end play sets and D2Cs.  The BB-8 and Porg sets have the same attention to sculptural accuracy, fun building techniques, and limited playability as this T-Rex, and they coexist just fine with $100 spaceships and location playsets and $200 UCS/MBS models.  With that example, I think it would have been wiser to give the T-Rex its own product slot and leave the D2C slot for something more cohesive, rather than a couple of very different, loosely related $125 models boxed together to meet a price point.  But what do I know?  I'm an engineer, not a production manager.  I guess I better stop kibitzing and get back to engineering ....

Edited by icm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ChrisW said:

The only reasons we don’t have the Explorer by now that I can think of is that it’s either a licensing issue or it’s already a set planned for 2020.

 

That has to be it. I can’t see them not making a vehicle of all things...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like others, I have mixed feelings about this set. I love the T-rex and all the scenes inside the towers (and I especially like Nedry's alternate face with the dino spit/venom) but the towers themselves have too many studs... I know it's a minor quibble but when the dinosaur is so slick and well-shaped, and when the minifigures have had lots of care taken over them, when the exterior of the major set-piece looks like something straight from 90s, it's a bit weird.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have any great nostalgia for the JP movies (I was in my 20s when they came out) so to be honest I would have preferred a JW theme park which could have been supplemented with a couple of the sets in the current JW wave. I guess this set looks decent but the scale is a real issue for me, with the oversized gate featuring minifig-scaled vignettes set into the rear. Also it's impossible to display with other JP/JW sets and dinos because the dinosaur is so freaking huge it will dwarf everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am actually more p’off That LEGO ideas are kind of useless since the interview clearly mention that two sets that got the support got stepped over TLG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm probably the only one, who likes the T-Rex, but not the gate. If it was just the T-Rex for half the price, this would have been a really nice set imho.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Nabii said:

The use of the Jurassic World logo instead of the Jurassic Park one is the decision of the license holder.

I'm sorry reception of this set seems to have fallen so flat. I was hoping people would like it. It seems everyone was expecting a visitors centre, I have no idea why as this was never even discussed. Hopefully as people start to get their hands on it the general impression of the set will improve. I tried to make it cool. Cheers everyone.

Perhaps before designing or planning an D2C, do a survey/focus group test. Then you know what will sell best. People generally love buildings. Just my two cents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Magnum said:

People generally love buildings.

Especially AFOL’s, who a set like this is aimed at. Even a 16 year old wouldn’t have $400 to randomly drop on Lego.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's a very cool set, but I was expecting to see a price of around $150. I know it has 3,120 pieces but it really doesn't look it.

I'd love a standalone T-rex :thumbup:

Share this post


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

I am actually more p’off That LEGO ideas are kind of useless since the interview clearly mention that two sets that got the support got stepped over TLG

The Brick Fan - LEGO Jurassic World Jurassic Park: T. rex Rampage (75936) Statement by Design Teams

Quote

Earlier today, LEGO announced the new LEGO Jurassic World Jurassic Park: T. rex Rampage (75936) and fans noticed that it looks extremely similar to a project that previously hit 10,000 supporters on LEGO Ideas. Both features the Jurassic Park gate and the Tyrannosaurus Rex however the project was minifigure scaled and it featured the Ford Explorer while the new set features a much larger T.Rex. There has already been much discussion about it on social media saying that LEGO did such and such.

The design teams at LEGO has released a statement on the LEGO Ambassador Network about this issue and hopefully it’ll ease some of the concerns that LEGO “copied” the project from LEGO Ideas. Take it however you like but keep in mind that LEGO plans upcoming sets years ahead before they are released as is noted in the statement below:

  • "Based on these discussions I’ve engaged the LEGO Ideas team and the Jurassic Park Design team. Here’s the statement about the set:

    Although the new 75936 Jurassic Park T-Rex Rampage set shares similarities in design to the LEGO Ideas submission “Jurassic Park” by senteosan, this model was developed entirely internally by a team of LEGO Designers who create great new sets that kids and adult fans alike are passionate about. The basis of their model was a large, grey, brick-built T-Rex created by LEGO Designer Mike Psiaki in 2012 when he joined the LEGO Group and from there the model evolved by including the iconic Jurassic Park gates to add additional building experience and value for “Expert” builders.

    In our desire to continue to allow LEGO Ideas members to submit product ideas based on third-party licenses, we have in the LEGO Ideas guidelines acknowledged the fact that there may occur unintentional overlaps between products being developed internally by our design teams and those submitted by fans via LEGO Ideas. This is simply because great minds think alike sometimes, especially when basing designs on popular licenses of movies, TV shows, vehicles, buildings and more, with whom we either already collaborate with or who fit the LEGO brand values for potential future collaborations."

 

Share this post


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

I'm probably the only one, who likes the T-Rex, but not the gate. If it was just the T-Rex for half the price, this would have been a really nice set imho.

No you're not. I loved the set 4507 when I was a kid, and was longing to see another big brick-built Tyrannosaurus like that (I mean, there have been a lot of dinosaur-themed Creator sets since then, but I think 4507 was the best). This rendition of Rexy is excellent, and I would have loved to be able to get her alone. Not that I don't like the gate, though, but I simply don't care enough for it to want to buy it. :sceptic:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, incognito said:

So I guess there is an opportunity here for bricklink resellers, if half the people like the gate and the other half like the T-Rex ;)

 

Not to forget about the insame price they can charge for the minifigures. Just look for how much they sell the figures from the upside down.

Share this post


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

So I guess there is an opportunity here for bricklink resellers, if half the people like the gate and the other half like the T-Rex ;)

 

eBay too. I’ve bought quite a few sets missing figs because I had no interest it them!

Share this post


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

I am actually more p’off That LEGO ideas are kind of useless since the interview clearly mention that two sets that got the support got stepped over TLG

It's not useless. Look at all the fantastic sets we've gotten through Lego Ideas already. Would you rather we never got any of those?

New licensed set ideas like Doctor Who, Ghostbusters, Back to the Future, or Minecraft can still succeed just fine. So can designs based on real-life subject matter like Birds, the Saturn V, the Maze, or the Caterham Super 7. The problem is that any proposal based on an obvious extension of an existing theme is bound to come with a larger degree of risk than a more novel concept. The lesson to take from that is to think outside the box and look for unconventional ideas that Lego isn't already exploring in its other active themes. That's why the Ideas theme exists in the first place, after all—to get feedback from fans about what Lego could be doing that they haven't already considered or recognized the sales potential of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The funny thing is, if this was an Ideas set, the criticism would be the same (or even more). "Why is there no car?" "It has nothing to do with the Ideas project" "It's to big" "The Ideas project was perfect" etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Clone OPatra said:

I think this right here perfectly encapsulates how many of the vocally negative people here and on other LEGO sites feel.

There have been plenty of discussions on Eurobricks and probably elsewhere on the question of - is LEGO putting out too many very large sets? Personally I don't have a problem with the number of large sets, as long as they make sense to be so large. Cloud City - makes sense to be large. Ninjago City sets - beautifully large. Etc. Etc.

This set on the other hand feels like it has no business being as large as it is because, like some others have said, it has two builds that pretty much don't go together besides sort of being "icons" from a particular franchise. Both builds are very well done, but to me and it seems to a fair percentage of the AFOLs who post their opinions online, only one of the two large builds is of interest: the gates. Those gates are fantastic, and I even like the very AFOL-y touch of the vignettes inside, but when only 50% of a big set interests me, there's unfortunately no way I'm going to even consider buying it.

It does seem therefore that this set could alienate a potential market by not being just the gates, plus an iconic JP-coloured vehicle.

It's true that a smaller set with just the gates and a Jeep or other Jurassic Park vehicle might be a very popular set. That said, I think a lot of people aren't considering that D2C sets IN GENERAL tend to be fairly niche products aimed at a smaller audience with more advanced building skill than the normal retail products. And the gate and Jurassic Park vehicles are things LEGO could VERY easily still be saving for a future release — possibly another mid-range "throwback" set to accompany a planned JW3 wave, similar to the Raptor Chase set from the Fallen kingdom lineup.

If the first Jurassic World D2C set HAD included the Visitor Center, a Jeep and however many other classic scenes/vehicles it might've needed to flesh it out into a complete play scenario, I wouldn't be surprised if it got a similar negative reaction to Assault on Hoth, Classic TV Series Batcave, or Betrayal on Cloud City — "Ugh, this sucks! I only care about *insert dino/vehicle/building here*. Why should I have to pay over $200 for a bunch of other stuff that could have been sold as smaller retail sets?"

I'm not saying people's disappointment can't possibly be justified, but I do think it's understandable that LEGO might've expected AFOLs to be more enthusiastic for a large-scale sculpture as opposed to an enormous minifig-scale playset, considering how often in other licensed themes they seem to be UPSET when a playset takes up a D2C slot.

And if anything, I'd expect people who are frustrated with the number of large exclusive sets LEGO makes to be HAPPY that in this case it's something they can skip without feeling guilty, rather than the playset they'd been dreaming of.

That said, it's ALWAYS confusing to me when I see comments from people about skipping a set from a theme they like as though that's somehow a sign it's failed spectacularly. In my case, I almost invariably look for opportunities to reduce my wish list whenever possible, even if it means skipping sets I actually really like or even would enjoy owning. That way, at least I feel a little more in control of my LEGO spending habits.

Yet for some reason, people who never seem able to skip a set from a theme they enjoy without blaming the designer's lack of creativity, skill, or intelligence for their personal disinterest seem to think that makes THEM the intelligent free thinker and ME the mindless sheep who buys whatever LEGO wants me to. :sceptic:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
 
 
23 hours ago, Nabii said:

The use of the Jurassic World logo instead of the Jurassic Park one is the decision of the license holder.

Which is a shame, really, and speaks to how out of touch Universal's licensing team was on a detail like this. Honestly, that's my biggest gripe about the set (which like you said -- wasn't your decision).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, jimmynick said:

Like others, I have mixed feelings about this set. I love the T-rex and all the scenes inside the towers (and I especially like Nedry's alternate face with the dino spit/venom) but the towers themselves have too many studs... I know it's a minor quibble but when the dinosaur is so slick and well-shaped, and when the minifigures have had lots of care taken over them, when the exterior of the major set-piece looks like something straight from 90s, it's a bit weird.

Having looked at the interview and some of the additional photographs, the studs on the gate don't stand out so much. Yet they are the most obvious thing in the box art because of the render's lighting. Strange.

Share this post


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

The only reasons we don’t have the Explorer by now that I can think of is that it’s either a licensing issue or it’s already a set planned for 2020.

I highly doubt it is a licensing issue... I also don’t think we will see any future JP sets. Not including the Explorer was just either a major miscalculation or intellectual oversight on those Lego decision makers. The pulse of JP fans was not investigated or just ingnored entirely. I was hoping for a gate but with an Explorer and a Jeep. This was a huge miss by LEGO and a major disappointment. The figures leaked gave me hope, but alas they were dashed. I could be wrong about no future JP sets (and I would like to see more) but I see no logic for LEGO to further invest in the JP theme. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its downright impressive! A really awesome and huge brick built tyrannosaurus. It would be great even as a standalone without the main gate but I can see why they included it. Roughly $0.08 a piece isn't too bad for licensed and there's a lot of great angled plates and curved pieces in all the delicious brown colors. If I was loaded it would be a definite acquisition. Can't wait to see the construction process.

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.