Herky

Lego Architecture - rumors and discussion

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, jimmynick said:

The Robie House *is* a well-known landmark...

Well, I guess it is in America. In Europe hardly anyone knows it except for architecture students maybe... but what I meant was that this was a lesser-known building that was mainly chosen for its architectural appeal, not for its fame.

6 hours ago, jimmynick said:

I put it to you that, on the other hand, that the "Jumeirah Emirates Towers Hotel", the "Dubai Frame", the "Mode Gakuen Cocoon Tower", "555 California Street", the "CNA Center" (I lived in Chicago for 4 years and didn't give that carbuncle a second look), the "Bellagio Hotel LLC" and the "Encore at the Wynn" are not.

I was referring to stand-alone sets not skylines. But you are right, these are not really well-known and their architectural value is quite doubtful.

6 hours ago, jimmynick said:

IMO Architecture has been on a downward spiral since the release of the Villa Savoye... I resent the release of landmarks such as Trafalgar Square and (part of) the Louvre rather than smaller buildings of more niche appeal that could spark a more focused interest in architecture in a member of the public.

As I said, I don't mind these landmarks, but I would also prefer additional buildings from other places.

I wouldn't mind if those were chosen for architectural value rather than touristic appeal.

6 hours ago, Rauy said:

...

 

I couldn't have said it better and completely agree!

Edited by Greshi210
Shortened quote

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Now my disgust and apathy have settled down, I’ve tried to look at this scaled down Taj with a critical eye…

…and been left seriously unimpressed. At least the Creator Expert model (y’know the one they only reissued like a year or so ago :hmpf:) allowed for finer details alongside the grandeur of the building itself. This set has neither and the compromises are many. It’s not like it’s a cheap impulse buy either at close to 100 notes, and at 32 studs deep (like the similarly dimensioned and awkward Trafalgar Square) isn’t going to play nicely on a shelf with skylines for example. No, it’ll need it’s own bespoke space (like behind the counter of a local Indian restaurant) and to be brutally honest, I don’t think it deserves such special treatment.

As for building, the symmetry and all those 1x1 tiles and ingots are going to make the build as fun and stimulating as a post-COVID trip to the dentist.

 

Edited by Lucarex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Greshi210 said:

Well, I guess it is in America. In Europe hardly anyone knows it except for architecture students maybe... but what I meant was that this was a lesser-known building that was mainly chosen for its architectural appeal, not for its fame.

The Robie house is hardly known in the US as well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I'm the only person that actually likes the Taj Mahal? I really like the actual building, but not $300+ worth. This looks really nice.

 

Also, I really hate the skylines and would just prefer more of the landmark style sets. The Architect stuff is cool, I guess, but I'd never heard of Fallingwater, Tobie House or the Imperial Hotel before the sets. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This news is very disappointing. The Taj Mahal is a beautiful piece of architecture, but this just feels like a cop out after the re-release retired not long ago. Another Big Ben, another White House, another Taj Mahal. Next year I will be expecting a scaled down Colosseum or Old Trafford. Maybe even another Eiffel Tower.

I would have been okay with anything original. Skylines set or landmark set. It's really sad to see Lego make architecture sets out of things that were already released. 

My money will instead be going to buying Fallingwater or the Farnsworth House.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this is how the set should have looked all the time. This is much more interesting as a Lego build than those huge 5000+-piece monsters. This takes a quarter of the space, costs a fraction of the money, it depicts the building as well as the larger version does, sits on a nice brown/black tiled base, and it has more varied and interesting techniques IMO so it's also more interesting as a model. To be honest I don't understand why someone wouldn't like it. I wouldn't care if it's slightly less accurate; that's not what Lego is for, models like these are for recognizability, not for exact recreation. And I think for recognizability and general proportions, this is definitely a successful build.

That said, I agree it's not very original or novel as a subject matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Gremer2 said:

I guess I'm the only person that actually likes the Taj Mahal? I really like the actual building, but not $300+ worth. This looks really nice.

No, I like it too. It looks great, fits nicely into the landmarks series, and I prefer an Architecture-sized model over the huge one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will say this about this release...2,022 pieces for $120 USD is a great price.  Most modular sets are at 2,000 pieces now and are $200 USD.  So that alone is nice; however, I imagine the Taj to be A LOT of 1x1 and 1x2 type pieces while the modulars are a mix.  So if you need a lot of white pieces, this is a good deal IMO.  Now one other thing I thought about is, how does Lego go about deciding what to build?  For example, let's take the Gherkin in London.  Does Lego need their permission to create a set?  If so, then there is negotiation and likely some sort of licensing contract that has to be done.  Lego may feel they can make 1 million sets and get a $5 million profit from them.  Say the Gherkin folks want $2 million for their license...not sure Lego would feel that is worth it.  I am not sure by any means but just using this as an example why we may not be getting other architectural buildings we desire in this line.  I do wonder how they do the skylines though, not sure they contract out with each little building in the skyline sets.  Anyone know?  If it is not a licensing thing, then I am even more disappointed in the lack of creativity in this line.  I will be getting the Taj though, have the rest of them, need to keep up.  

On 5/2/2021 at 7:51 PM, Kaanere said:

A better picture is available at Brickset, with a review comming on Tuesday.

  Hide contents

21056-1.jpg?022000

 

Honestly, I like it.

The more I look at this picture, the more all I see are the 1x1 floor tiles that will never line up properly.  This is probably 750-1000 of the 2022 pieces along with the white out pieces that line the walls.  The actual building might be fun to build, the base and outer walls...no possible way will this even be remotely fun.

Share this post


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

Now one other thing I thought about is, how does Lego go about deciding what to build?  For example, let's take the Gherkin in London.  Does Lego need their permission to create a set?  If so, then there is negotiation and likely some sort of licensing contract that has to be done...

I can't really imagine licensing costs to play a huge role in Architecture pricing. At the end of the day I guess it is merely a question of mainstream appeal. A famous tourist attraction that really anyone around the world immediately recognizes, probably promises a lot more sales. Of course I don't know if more original architecture would sell worse or if there really are licensing negotiations, but it's a good guess and that's probably what LEGO goes after. I'm not saying LEGO should look only on profit and nothing else, but let's face it... :wink: It is like with a lot of things in life. Similarly you could ask why Hollywood is doing the same remakes over and over.

1 hour ago, Herky said:

The more I look at this picture, the more all I see are the 1x1 floor tiles that will never line up properly.  This is probably 750-1000 of the 2022 pieces along with the white out pieces that line the walls.  The actual building might be fun to build, the base and outer walls...no possible way will this even be remotely fun.

I know people tend to complain about building fun in Architecture, but I honestly don't mind and usually find these fun to build. Yes, laying 1x1 tiles is probably the least exciting, I would agree with that. But all the better is the feeling of success when it's done. (And with some easy aligning tool it's also not that terrible.) I also honestly think I would enjoy building the big Taj Mahal, that everyone claims to be THE nightmare of building. Like in real Architecture there can be repetition and drag, but it's part of the experience and it only adds to the accomplishment of the final building.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Meanwhile, Adam Reed Tucker’s Atom Bricks have (finally) just released three new models…

- SC Johnson Global Headquarters

- The Alamo (History subtheme)

- Niagara Falls (Nature subtheme).

Now I know a lot of people (myself included) had issues with the Atom brick itself but at least there’s some creativity here that’s sorely lacking at TLG.

https://theatombrick.com/collections/all

 

Edited by Lucarex
URL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Lucarex said:

Meanwhile, Adam Reed Tucker’s Atom Bricks have (finally) just released three new models…

- SC Johnson Global Headquarters

- The Alamo (History subtheme)

- Niagara Falls (Nature subtheme).

Now I know a lot of people (myself included) had issues with the Atom brick itself but at least there’s some creativity here that’s sorely lacking at TLG.

https://theatombrick.com/collections/all

 

I got Niagara Falls coming this week. 
what were the issues with atom bricks. 
this will be my first one ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Steve309 said:

I got Niagara Falls coming this week. 
what were the issues with atom bricks. 
this will be my first one ? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The review on Brickset is a little bit scathing, and I get the need for the designers to make use of selective compression and forced perspective. 

But

The photos on Brickset are very revealing in other ways, flick your eyes between them and the more you compare the more you say 'hang on a minute'

Why all that tan detailing above the second floor arches on the main building, it's spurious, there is nothing like that on the real thing. Maybe use light bley plates to give impression of relief, but what's with those round parts?

Those side domes are going to polarise us. To me they look like an invasion fleet of space aliens, but why is their construction emphasised by dark parts? Look at the the photo of the real thing on Brickset, the bases of the side-domes are concealed. Did they need to be so exposed and prominent on the model?

Lego is hard work for historic curvy buildings, so we have the dancing dog dilemma here. Should we criticise the quality of the dancing, or be amazed that the dog can dance at all?

TM.jpg

http://www.tubemapcentral.com/legodesign/eurobricks/TM.jpg

Edited by Tube Map Central
Added photo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
29 minutes ago, Tube Map Central said:

so we have the dancing dog dilemma here. Should we criticise the quality of the dancing, or be amazed that the dog can dance at all?

The third option. Shake our heads with despair, instantly pull the release for the stage trapdoor beneath the dog, and shout “next please!”

But I think this it for me, the onset of my “dark ages” if you like with this once-great but now-unrecognisable theme. It’s fair enough if you’re no longer the target demographic, but the sad and frustrating thing is, between the tourist tat, the unwanted reissues, and ridiculous piece count obsession that gave birth to the Colosseum, I don’t think LEGO even has the slightest clue what that is anymore.

I guess ART sat in those meetings, heard the new opinions in the room, and saw the writing on the wall a couple of years ago.

Edited by Lucarex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

So it seems like most people are unhappy with the choice of the Taj Mahal which I can see why (there was a big creator expert one), but really what else could they do that they have not done before, that is not directly religious related and is not an unheard of / niche landmark? :shrug_confused:

Edited by User5346

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, Rauy said:

I can't really imagine licensing costs to play a huge role in Architecture pricing

It's wellknown that Paris is very protective when it comes to the Eiffel Tower

 

Edited by 1974

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But that was the point for me, I had never heard of the Farnsworth house before Lego produced it. I assumed it must be a significant building, otherwise it would not be in the architecture range, so I bought it, had an interesting build, and learnt some more about 20th century architecture. 

If I only engaged with things I already knew about, then I would never learn anything new.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, 1974 said:

It's wellknown that Paris is very protective when it comes to the Eiffel Tower

 

Huh? It’s already been in 3 sets so far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It has, but there may have been a license. We don't know

Also, they could put out a new big one using liftarms, The old one looks terrible

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, Tube Map Central said:

But that was the point for me, I had never heard of the Farnsworth house before Lego produced it. I assumed it must be a significant building, otherwise it would not be in the architecture range, so I bought it, had an interesting build, and learnt some more about 20th century architecture. 

If I only engaged with things I already knew about, then I would never learn anything new.

 

Exactly, that fundamentally underlines the massive shift from education to populism in this theme.

When I first bought the Trevi Fountain, my 4 year old was fascinated (not just with the build) and it instilled his interest in the subject and then location. It’s still the top of his list to see when we visit, hopefully next spring. Same with several other sets, the NY Guggenheim reissue for example.

Edited by Lucarex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Tube Map Central said:

 To me they look like an invasion fleet of space aliens

Can't unsee the Probe Droids now :pir-bawling:

Also, the TM is not white. TLG really need to introduce the very light grey colour (that only exist as a few liftarms, sheilds and other odd bits) for common bricks

It's also sorely needed for SW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, 1974 said:

It has, but there may have been a license. We don't know

Also, they could put out a new big one using liftarms, The old one looks terrible

It’s technically owned by the city and they can only effectively enforce copyright when it’s lit up as that’s considered an art installation. It was a very prominent part of the 2019 Skyline so it’s extremely unlikely there’s any ongoing license issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, thanx for the info. My knowledge comes from friends in Paris who wanted to use the Eiffel Tower for and art project/movie and got a no-go

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, 1974 said:

Can't unsee the Probe Droids now :pir-bawling:

Also, the TM is not white. TLG really need to introduce the very light grey colour (that only exist as a few liftarms, sheilds and other odd bits) for common bricks

It's also sorely needed for SW

Very light grey? YES!

And sand red too please!

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.