Unpopular Opinions about LEGO

[Peppermint_M]

8 hours ago, dr_spock said:

Why is neon yellow so hard to photograph without screwing up the exposure?

Eldritch colour!

Fluorescence is like that, useful in places where it is needed, a pain in the butt for other spaces! I think it is neat in person, even if it doesn't render or photo well.  I think there are levels that can be played about with in photoshop to fix it, but I am not well versed in it.

[MAB]

13 hours ago, koalayummies said:

London:

I think that was removed in the recent refurbishment, replaced by James Bond. I've not been yet, too many celebs and queues due to the reopening.

[LegendaryArticuno]

Both the Castle and Vikings theme is starting to overstay it's welcome, but I get it, nostalgia can be a powerful and blinding drug.

On the licensed side, the same thing is happening with Indiana Jones and already happened with Jurassic Park/World. A lot of hype/sets dedicated for terrible reboots largely driven by nostalgia for the originals. 

[Lyichir]

10 minutes ago, LegendaryArticuno said:

Both the Castle and Vikings theme is starting to overstay it's welcome, but I get it, nostalgia can be a powerful and blinding drug.

On the licensed side, the same thing is happening with Indiana Jones and already happened with Jurassic Park/World. A lot of hype/sets dedicated for terrible reboots largely driven by nostalgia for the originals. 

I don't think one to two sets a year, at best, can really qualify as subject matter "overstaying its welcome". Before the Viking Ship Creator set we hadn't gotten a Viking set (other than a collectible minifigure) in years. And castle sets (at least non-licensed ones) are still a rare treat—you could barely make a case that what we've gotten recently qualifies as a full "theme" at all.

And while you could maybe make a case for Jurassic World (I haven't seen the movies or bought the sets, so have no real opinion on the matter), saying something like that for Indiana Jones (for which we know barely anything about the sets let alone the upcoming movie) seems to be majorly putting the cart before the horse. Maybe best to wait until a theme exists at all before claiming that it's overstayed its welcome.

[CallMeCarbiz]

22 minutes ago, LegendaryArticuno said:

Both the Castle and Vikings theme is starting to overstay it's welcome, but I get it, nostalgia can be a powerful and blinding drug.

On the licensed side, the same thing is happening with Indiana Jones and already happened with Jurassic Park/World. A lot of hype/sets dedicated for terrible reboots largely driven by nostalgia for the originals. 

I don't know what the rules are on commenting on someone's unpopular opinion, but 3 medieval castle and 2 viking sets in almost a decade is too much?

It sounds like you're not happy that it beat out put-put mini golf. I would have been happy with either, but after almost 10 years we castle and viking fans are hungry for more sets and parts.

[Feuer Zug]

11 minutes ago, CallMeCarbiz said:

It sounds like you're not happy that it beat out put-put mini golf. I would have been happy with either, but after almost 10 years we castle and viking fans are hungry for more sets and parts.

Don't count your chickens before this egg hatches. The vote might not matter in the end.

[Killian]

Unpopular Lego opinions I hold;

I like Chima, Nexo Knights, Hero Factory, Vidiyo, DC Super Hero Girls, Elves, Hidden Side, Fabuland and Mini Dolls.

I don't like Ninjago as a theme, I have no interest in the Ninja, I just buy Ninjago sets to use the builds and enemies with other themes.

[LegendaryArticuno]

4 hours ago, CallMeCarbiz said:

I don't know what the rules are on commenting on someone's unpopular opinion, but 3 medieval castle and 2 viking sets in almost a decade is too much?

It sounds like you're not happy that it beat out put-put mini golf. I would have been happy with either, but after almost 10 years we castle and viking fans are hungry for more sets and parts.

Lol if I'm being honest, I'm not a fan of either 3 of those sets. Vikings, you already know my take, minigolf while interactive will probably feel like a gimmick in reality, for marine life I only like the jellyfish, all 3 need to be bangers for me to buy. That said out of the 3, I like marine life the most.

As of late Lego just hasn't sparked my interest in a majority of the sets/themes, it just feels like they are rehashing old ideas. While it's a guaranteed financial success, it just isn't that interesting to me.

[MAB]

On 8/17/2022 at 5:08 PM, LegendaryArticuno said:

Both the Castle and Vikings theme is starting to overstay it's welcome, but I get it, nostalgia can be a powerful and blinding drug.

On the licensed side, the same thing is happening with Indiana Jones and already happened with Jurassic Park/World. A lot of hype/sets dedicated for terrible reboots largely driven by nostalgia for the originals. 

Out of interest, what would you have replaced these with?

[LegendaryArticuno]

2 hours ago, MAB said:

Out of interest, what would you have replaced these with?

Speaking more broadly and in a 'make-a-wish' style post, this is the direction I would like to see Lego move towards completely based on my 100% biased and probably unpopular opinion:

1. Expansion of the Marvel theme:

a) Carve out and consolidate Marvel buildable figures, 4+, juniors sets with their own allocated budget and design team

b) Maintain the MCU team - similar to the above, have a separate team focused on generic appeal, i.e. latest movies/shows. Not much change to the overall design philosophy, create quick sets catering to broadest appeal for both kids and adults, meaning mechs, vehicles and occasional buildings with varying quality. 

c) Create a new team dedicated to comic books with mature themes and higher end display sets - team will be focused on creating UCS quality sets, such as, Daily Bugle 1-2 times a year, while pushing out sets catering towards older audiences but at a lower/medium pricepoint, i.e. dioramas and the Benatar.

2. New licensed theme based on the world of League of Legends/Arcane - I don't care which existing theme(s) needs to die to make room for Runeterra sets just as long as the design philosophy is based on quality and attention to detail.

3. Vikings - as they are I'm completely uninterested, perhaps if they leaned in towards the mythological aspect it would be more interesting to me. Modern God of War is a good example which blends realism/adult themes with fantasy in both Greek and Norse mythology. With Lego making Horizon Dawn sets, I would gladly sacrifice the Vikings theme to make room for God of War sets.

4. Jurassic Park - not completely against the theme, dinosaurs are awesome for all ages. I would probably just like to see a separate team dedicated to high end displays similar to the below. Even the UCS T-Rex/gate set doesn't quite meet my personal expectations:

5. Castle - regarding the direction of castle, I would personally become interested if all the sets were inspired by historical events or literature.

a) Have all existing factions (Lion Knights, Black Falcons, Wolfpack, etc) represent a fictional version of a real historical kingdom. Redesign and create new factions as necessary, new sub factions should be created to represent things like knightly orders (Teutonic, Templars) or new factions for the Ayyubid Dynasty or the Kingdom of Jerusalem. Over time slowly branch into more factions present in the medieval ages like the Roman Catholic Church, Mongol Empire, Barbarian Hordes, etc.

b) Create sets - diorama of Joan of Arc depicted as a patron saintess, King Henry and the Battle of Agincourt, medieval hospital during the bubonic plague (similar to scale as medieval blacksmith), King Baldwin/Leper King carriage and royal guard battlepack :D  

 

Edited August 22, 2022 by LegendaryArticuno

[MAB]

On 8/22/2022 at 3:20 PM, LegendaryArticuno said:

1. Expansion of the Marvel theme:

2. New licensed theme based on the world of League of Legends/Arcane

3. Vikings - as they are I'm completely uninterested, perhaps if they leaned in towards the mythological aspect it would be more interesting to me.

4. Jurassic Park - not completely against the theme, dinosaurs are awesome for all ages.

5. Castle - regarding the direction of castle, I would personally become interested if all the sets were inspired by historical events or literature.

a) Have all existing factions (Lion Knights, Black Falcons, Wolfpack, etc) represent a fictional version of a real historical kingdom. Redesign and create new factions as necessary, new sub factions should be created to represent things like knightly orders (Teutonic, Templars) or new factions for the Ayyubid Dynasty or the Kingdom of Jerusalem. Over time slowly branch into more factions present in the medieval ages like the Roman Catholic Church, Mongol Empire, Barbarian Hordes, etc.

b) Create sets - diorama of Joan of Arc depicted as a patron saintess, King Henry and the Battle of Agincourt, medieval hospital during the bubonic plague (similar to scale as medieval blacksmith), King Baldwin/Leper King carriage and royal guard battlepack :D  

 

I'd counter all those with :

1. Marvel is big enough as it is.

2. Never heard of it.

3. I'd like more Vikings, and more history in general. I wouldn't mind more mythological if that meant doing Norse gods (I've had enough of serpents) but there might be overlap with Marvel then.

4. I also don't care for Jurassic Park, but kids love dinosaurs.

5. I cannot really see them ever doing Templars and Teutonic knights. Too many problems with the appearance of them being anti-Islamic. As for the others, I prefer they keep non-fiction as non-fiction. Lion Knights can remain Lion Knights, rather than representing a fictionalised version of a real country. Who gets Wolfpack for example, and what is LEGO saying about that country if they make them appear as bandits or robbers? Even Joan of Arc and Henry V, etc, I don't think they need to do detailed specific printing or naming them but can still retain play value with the same subject. I'd go for an unnamed female warrior, or a classic king, that anyone can play with rather than a specific real person from one country's history. More medieval clothing, great. But specifics to identify them as certain people, no. I'd prefer to see a battle with a red king vs a blue king with lots of archers and cavalry than a Battle of Agincourt. Otherwise there is again too many problem of why LEGO do a set of England victorious against France and not a battle France won, or why did they do Bannockburn and not do Falkirk (or many similar battles throughout mainly Europe). Going as far as Christians vs Muslims would be disastrous for PR.

[Murdoch17]

On 8/25/2022 at 12:30 PM, MAB said:

I'd counter all those with :

1. Marvel is big enough as it is.

2. Never heard of it.

3. I'd like more Vikings, and more history in general. I wouldn't mind more mythological if that meant doing Norse gods (I've had enough of serpents) but there might be overlap with Marvel then.

4. I also don't care for Jurassic Park, but kids love dinosaurs.

5. I cannot really see them ever doing Templars and Teutonic knights. Too many problems with the appearance of them being anti-Islamic. As for the others, I prefer they keep non-fiction as non-fiction. Lion Knights can remain Lion Knights, rather than representing a fictionalised version of a real country. Who gets Wolfpack for example, and what is LEGO saying about that country if they make them appear as bandits or robbers? Even Joan of Arc and Henry V, etc, I don't think they need to do detailed specific printing or naming them but can still retain play value with the same subject. I'd go for an unnamed female warrior, or a classic king, that anyone can play with rather than a specific real person from one country's history. More medieval clothing, great. But specifics to identify them as certain people, no. I'd prefer to see a battle with a red king vs a blue king with lots of archers and cavalry than a Battle of Agincourt. Otherwise there is again too many problem of why LEGO do a set of England victorious against France and not a battle France won, or why did they do Bannockburn and not do Falkirk (or many similar battles throughout mainly Europe). Going as far as Christians vs Muslims would be disastrous for PR.

I would also add that, since we are in the middle of our own pandemic, doing a set based on something VERY similar as @LegendaryArticuno suggests from medieval times would also be a PR disaster on a epic scale.

Edited August 26, 2022 by Murdoch17

[MaximillianRebo]

On 8/23/2022 at 12:20 AM, LegendaryArticuno said:

5. Castle - regarding the direction of castle, I would personally become interested if all the sets were inspired by historical events or literature.

a) Have all existing factions (Lion Knights, Black Falcons, Wolfpack, etc) represent a fictional version of a real historical kingdom. Redesign and create new factions as necessary, new sub factions should be created to represent things like knightly orders (Teutonic, Templars) or new factions for the Ayyubid Dynasty or the Kingdom of Jerusalem. Over time slowly branch into more factions present in the medieval ages like the Roman Catholic Church, Mongol Empire, Barbarian Hordes, etc.

b) Create sets - diorama of Joan of Arc depicted as a patron saintess, King Henry and the Battle of Agincourt, medieval hospital during the bubonic plague (similar to scale as medieval blacksmith), King Baldwin/Leper King carriage and royal guard battlepack :D  

Given Lego's aversion to doing anything religious, any themes/sets with reference to groups or figures like the Catholic Church/Joan of Arc, or events such as the Crusades would be an instant no. I don't know if there's any 'lore' behind Lego Castle but I can't imagine them ever wanting the existing knight factions to have any correlation to real life medieval kingdoms and the religious affiliations that go with that.

[DrJimbo]

On 11/6/2021 at 12:20 AM, Toastie said:

So it is the ending "s", isn't it? "The Lego" is singular to you, as a type of things, whereas I am thinking of a plurality of bricks in the boxes, "the Legos". Could that be it?

I really like this discussion. It tells a lot (good things)!

All the best,
Thorsten

 

View from Ireland here (native speaker of English). Lego is a brand name, so I would go into a shop and ask ‘What aisle is the Lego in?’  
In the sense of the bits of plastic, I would consider Lego a mass noun, like gravel (or, say, pasta), and that is how I use it in relation to the actual bits of plastic. So if I dump a load of it on the floor, I have a pile of Lego. People who say Legos are using it like ‘stones’ instead of ‘gravel’. It sounds slightly odd to me, but nothing to get upset about. English is weird, and flexible. 
‘Lego brick’ I never use, seems a bit corporate, and many bits are not brick. I would say ‘piece/pieces of Lego’. 

[Ondra]

I love, how lego bring back buildable characters or brickbuild maxifigs...

Its definitely type of sets, that many says it brings lego towards extinction in earls 00' . But as adult, I love these from display purpose. They even are blocky as used to be, perfection!

Back in days, almost every toy store here had brickbuild maximinifigure in entrance. It was eyecatcher for me.

Edited October 6, 2022 by Ondra

[Yperio_Bricks]

On 10/3/2022 at 5:27 PM, DrJimbo said:

View from Ireland here (native speaker of English). Lego is a brand name, so I would go into a shop and ask ‘What aisle is the Lego in?’  
In the sense of the bits of plastic, I would consider Lego a mass noun, like gravel (or, say, pasta), and that is how I use it in relation to the actual bits of plastic. So if I dump a load of it on the floor, I have a pile of Lego. People who say Legos are using it like ‘stones’ instead of ‘gravel’. It sounds slightly odd to me, but nothing to get upset about. English is weird, and flexible. 
‘Lego brick’ I never use, seems a bit corporate, and many bits are not brick. I would say ‘piece/pieces of Lego’. 

Exactly! I am from Germany and in the 90s as a kid i played with Lego, not Legos. Even as a 10 year old i never understood why some other kids said Legos. It sounded so very odd to me And still does today. But i guess it depends on what you hear from your parents when you grow up?!

Nowadays there is sometimes an agenda behind the term Legos, when used by adults. At least here in Germany. The Lego Company does not want the word Legos to be used for all kinds of bricks. Bricks of competitors. So sometimes people would intentionally use the word Legos for bricks of other companies.

[living_off_lego]

Lego has a problem with diversity

to start this I would like to state that I am a Hispanic POC,

why does a head that represents me only come in overpriced sets?

why does lego only strive to put diversity in expensive sets?

why do realistic tan skin-toned heads only come in expensive history?

why do I have to buy either a $60 set or a $249.99 to represent myself in lego?

why do all of the expensive sets that lego puts out have diversity, except the ones on the cheaper side?

the only truly diverse lego set that contains someone close to my skin tone is namor in the black panther sets that came out on October 1st

the 3 big lego themes (marvel/harry potter)only contain tan skin tones when it's an unnamed character or their respective license trying their share at diversity (except Starwars because they're doing well) but that's still 1/3 

example: harry potter is FULL of non people of color the only named person of color is Kingsly, in one set, every single other set, only has unnamed background characters lego even saw this, and in the $500 ucs Hogwarts express, the only POC are unnamed background characters or course this isn't as much legos fault as it is jk Rowlings or the castings for the harry potter movies, but still, the only person of color that was relevant enough to be included is Kingsly.

marvel isn't as bad they have multiple named characters in their sets, namely America Chaves and namor, both tan people of color that are named, and included in relatively cheap sets! of course, namor is close to my skin tone but his cheek bones stand out a lot.

in conclusion, lego, make a diversity battle pack, for 20ish dollars and just put every Minifigure piece in the foosball table, in the battle pack, please.

 

[Ondra]

1 hour ago, living_off_lego said:

Lego has a problem with diversity

to start this I would like to state that I am a Hispanic POC,

why does a head that represents me only come in overpriced sets?

why does lego only strive to put diversity in expensive sets?

why do realistic tan skin-toned heads only come in expensive history?

why do I have to buy either a $60 set or a $249.99 to represent myself in lego?

why do all of the expensive sets that lego puts out have diversity, except the ones on the cheaper side?

the only truly diverse lego set that contains someone close to my skin tone is namor in the black panther sets that came out on October 1st

the 3 big lego themes (marvel/harry potter)only contain tan skin tones when it's an unnamed character or their respective license trying their share at diversity (except Starwars because they're doing well) but that's still 1/3 

example: harry potter is FULL of non people of color the only named person of color is Kingsly, in one set, every single other set, only has unnamed background characters lego even saw this, and in the $500 ucs Hogwarts express, the only POC are unnamed background characters or course this isn't as much legos fault as it is jk Rowlings or the castings for the harry potter movies, but still, the only person of color that was relevant enough to be included is Kingsly.

marvel isn't as bad they have multiple named characters in their sets, namely America Chaves and namor, both tan people of color that are named, and included in relatively cheap sets! of course, namor is close to my skin tone but his cheek bones stand out a lot.

in conclusion, lego, make a diversity battle pack, for 20ish dollars and just put every Minifigure piece in the foosball table, in the battle pack, please.

 

Unlicensed sets have neutral yellow skin tone for everybody, licensed sets reflect actors of movie.

This is well known fact, if you think there is no enough representation just ask license holder like Disney. My bet LEGO only do what they tells them.

 

 

[living_off_lego]

51 minutes ago, Ondra said:

Unlicensed sets have neutral yellow skin tone for everybody, licensed sets reflect actors of movie.

This is well known fact, if you think there is no enough representation just ask license holder like Disney. My bet LEGO only do what they tells them.

 

 

whats stopping lego from making a un licesnsed skin tone theme, if they actually had the initiative to change theyre mo i think they would

[Feuer Zug]

1 hour ago, living_off_lego said:

Lego has a problem with diversity

why does a head that represents me only come in overpriced sets?

why does lego only strive to put diversity in expensive sets?

why do realistic tan skin-toned heads only come in expensive history?

why do I have to buy either a $60 set or a $249.99 to represent myself in lego?

why do all of the expensive sets that lego puts out have diversity, except the ones on the cheaper side?

the only truly diverse lego set that contains someone close to my skin tone is namor in the black panther sets that came out on October 1st

the 3 big lego themes (marvel/harry potter)only contain tan skin tones when it's an unnamed character or their respective license trying their share at diversity (except Starwars because they're doing well) but that's still 1/3 

example: harry potter is FULL of non people of color the only named person of color is Kingsly, in one set, every single other set, only has unnamed background characters lego even saw this, and in the $500 ucs Hogwarts express, the only POC are unnamed background characters or course this isn't as much legos fault as it is jk Rowlings or the castings for the harry potter movies, but still, the only person of color that was relevant enough to be included is Kingsly.

marvel isn't as bad they have multiple named characters in their sets, namely America Chaves and namor, both tan people of color that are named, and included in relatively cheap sets! of course, namor is close to my skin tone but his cheek bones stand out a lot.

in conclusion, lego, make a diversity battle pack, for 20ish dollars and just put every Minifigure piece in the foosball table, in the battle pack, please.

 

I think we're going to have to differ on opinions heavily here. First, LEGO has made considerable strides to become more diverse lately. Yes, much of the lack of diversity has come due to Hollywood preferring Caucasian people as leading actors in many films. Most of the skin tones have come from licensed themes. Yes, I admit it appears most tan or darker skin tones appear in more expensive sets. I remember buying a load of the Captain Marvel polybag because it came with the Samuel L. Jackson "Nick Fury" minifig just to have the diversity option (No, I don't wear an eye patch). You mentioned a diversity pack that doesn't cost as much as the foosball table. If you need options, Pick A Brick is available. I've used it often of recent to get more options.

[danth]

1 hour ago, Ondra said:

Unlicensed sets have neutral yellow skin tone for everybody, licensed sets reflect actors of movie.

This is well known fact

If Lego truly thought yellow minfigs really represented "everyone", they wouldn't need the different flesh tones in licensed sets. They actually released 4 years of Star Wars sets where all the human minifigs were yellow.

Funnily enough, when they finally made Lando Calrissian in 2003, he was released as a brown minifig in the same set as yellow Luke, Han, and Leia. So Lego was totally fine with yellow = white people and special colors for everyone else.

So the whole "yellow is neutral" was never true, it's just sort of a ret-con. I honestly don't think Lego really thought about non-white people that much before 2003.

Edited October 6, 2022 by danth

[Lyichir]

3 hours ago, living_off_lego said:

Lego has a problem with diversity

to start this I would like to state that I am a Hispanic POC,

why does a head that represents me only come in overpriced sets?

why does lego only strive to put diversity in expensive sets?

why do realistic tan skin-toned heads only come in expensive history?

why do I have to buy either a $60 set or a $249.99 to represent myself in lego?

why do all of the expensive sets that lego puts out have diversity, except the ones on the cheaper side?

the only truly diverse lego set that contains someone close to my skin tone is namor in the black panther sets that came out on October 1st

the 3 big lego themes (marvel/harry potter)only contain tan skin tones when it's an unnamed character or their respective license trying their share at diversity (except Starwars because they're doing well) but that's still 1/3 

example: harry potter is FULL of non people of color the only named person of color is Kingsly, in one set, every single other set, only has unnamed background characters lego even saw this, and in the $500 ucs Hogwarts express, the only POC are unnamed background characters or course this isn't as much legos fault as it is jk Rowlings or the castings for the harry potter movies, but still, the only person of color that was relevant enough to be included is Kingsly.

marvel isn't as bad they have multiple named characters in their sets, namely America Chaves and namor, both tan people of color that are named, and included in relatively cheap sets! of course, namor is close to my skin tone but his cheek bones stand out a lot.

in conclusion, lego, make a diversity battle pack, for 20ish dollars and just put every Minifigure piece in the foosball table, in the battle pack, please.

 

I think you have a valid point about wanting diverse figs at lower price points. Licensed themes have been an inconsistent means of introducing diversity, especially given that the kinds of properties Lego tends to license (mostly Hollywood blockbusters, a lot of them legacy franchises from the 80s to early 2000s when those kinds of movies were even less diverse than they are today) rarely are as diverse as the general human population. I'm hoping that the wonderfully diverse selection of faces in the table football set was designed with the intention of being reused in other sets, including cheaper sets and possibly even the online and in-store build-a-mini/minifigure factory (so that you could special order a fig with a specific face that resembles you).

[Ondra]

12 minutes ago, danth said:

If Lego truly thought yellow minfigs really represented "everyone", they wouldn't need the different flesh tones in licensed sets. They actually released 4 years of Star Wars sets where all the human minifigs were yellow.

Funnily enough, when they finally made Lando Calrissian in 2003, he was released as a brown minifig in the same set as yellow Luke, Han, and Leia. So Lego was totally fine with yellow = white people and special colors for everyone else.

So the whole "yellow is neutral" was never true, it's just sort of a ret-con. I honestly don't think Lego really thought about non-white people that much before 2003.

I would like to say these two yellow tones are just headache thing... Not mention Duplo are flesh tones.

Well I kinda understand why they stick with yellow skin tone for basic sets, they just outplayed skin tones issues for all sets, because licensed are based on movies.

 

I heard that some people here are skipping Duplo, because these minifigures skin doesnt represent their family and doesnt represent people living here at all. So at the end I see yellow skin as neutral just win.

[TeriXeri]

Purely from a parts standpoint, even if LEGO added 10 different "realistic" skin tones on their figs, it's still going to be incompatible when hand color and torso (collar) prints are taken in consideration.

Even in this Football Table set, 40+ heads and Hairs can be swapped but hand color will still be a limiting factor, swapping hands is possible but not an official thing, and also not great for the durability of parts when done regularly.

And then there are dual-moulded short shorts, or short sleeve arms as well nowadays.

 

Minidolls never had yellow version but are still limited by skin tones if you want to swap parts as well.

2012 had 2 minidoll skin tones, 2018 added a 3rd, and 2022 doubled the colors to 6.

Good video that analyzes minidolls and the recent 3 color additions as well as swapping parts etc.

 

Edited October 6, 2022 by TeriXeri

[Toastie]

4 hours ago, Yperio_Bricks said:

I am from Germany and in the 90s as a kid i played with Lego, not Legos

Me too :D and in late 60s as a kid I played with Legos all the time, not Lego, according to people familiar with the matter.

You know what? I simply don't care. So The Lego Gods said (or is there only one? TLG pretty much suggests that, as there are no TLGs), it needs to be Lego bricks or Lego sets I am playing with. I just don't care what a company in Denmark tells me to say ... furthermore, everybody in the family knows that I don't only play with Lego bricks, but also with Mould King bricks. Or who-the-hell-knows-where-BlueBrixx-get-their-bricks-from bricks. That would make it much more difficult to let folks here know, that I am going to play with ... all sorts of bricks. As I do also some bricking in the house and garden, that would cause total confusion. Just imagine, the look for me in the garden - and I am upstairs, missing the cake or something equally disastrous.

Just do it the way you may have picked it up - back then.

BMW actually says they have all sorts of BMWs on their website . Ding dongs :D

Have fun,
Thorsten