Captain Nemo

Marvel Superheroes 2021 - Rumors & Discussion

Recommended Posts

Completely off topic.. Am I the only one who think they should've printed Strange's legs on Dark Blue Legs? Maybe it would've looked better or maybe not but I would have like to see that (and it prob would've been more accurate)
22ff4d1ae32cff6aea94a571ccd076ae.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we had to choose between a Dr. Strange set including Wanda, or a Disney+ CMF including her, it makes more sense the way it was done, and I have no complaints. I'm honestly thankful they did her new costume at all in the CMF, rather than the casual wear or Halloween costume.

Dr. Strange and Wong are the stars of their movie, I don't know why this is surprising to anyone. There STILL hasn't been a decent Wong figure and I'm also grateful this set includes him. Dr. Strange is a given and otherwise I think this is a perfect set for the movie. Sad that Dr. Strange still isn't big enough to warrant several sets like Thor or Black Panther, but what can you do...

Share this post


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

There STILL hasn't been a decent Wong figure

What about this one?col335.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, bricksandabear said:

If we had to choose between a Dr. Strange set including Wanda, or a Disney+ CMF including her, it makes more sense the way it was done, and I have no complaints. I'm honestly thankful they did her new costume at all in the CMF, rather than the casual wear or Halloween costume.

Dr. Strange and Wong are the stars of their movie, I don't know why this is surprising to anyone. There STILL hasn't been a decent Wong figure and I'm also grateful this set includes him. Dr. Strange is a given and otherwise I think this is a perfect set for the movie. Sad that Dr. Strange still isn't big enough to warrant several sets like Thor or Black Panther, but what can you do...

The thing is, no one had to choose. It could've easily been both.

1 hour ago, upliftingbricks said:

When did they rename it Wanda in the Multiverse of Madness? Dr Strange is the most important character in the movie :laugh:

There is definitely a cost. It could be storage. The 10 boxes required for the 10 parts that make up the CMF figure or the altered one you describe might have been used by other parts/other themes and as the CMF is retired/retiring those boxes might not be around anymore to reuse i.e. her hair piece/torso print.

He's not. He may be the protagonist, but Wanda's role will be more substantial (well, perhaps not in terms of screen time, but who knows).

Share this post


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

He's not. He may be the protagonist, but Wanda's role will be more substantial (well, perhaps not in terms of screen time, but who knows).

Although I think Scarlet Witch should have been in the set, I don't get how you can say, "He's not . . . Wanda's role will be more substantial," and then say "who knows." I get Wanda's a neat character, but at the end of the day, it's a Doctor Strange movie. He is the most important character!

Share this post


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

She's the most important character in the movie. She's on the box, twice. Including her minifigure would cost them nothing. Yet she's not in the set.

Doctor Strange is on the box six times though, and his name appears five times

 

1 hour ago, THELEGOBATMAN said:

Of course she doesn't need to be included, but Wong or Chavez also don't need to be included, yet here we are.

 

He's not. He may be the protagonist, but Wanda's role will be more substantial (well, perhaps not in terms of screen time, but who knows).

You're saying this like it's a known fact, but the film is 5 months away. None of us know exactly how important Wanda's role will be in this film, so saying she's more important than the main character is just pure speculation. Nor do we know the importance of America Chavez or Wong, but if they're in the set, they clearly have a level of importance to the film. And unlike Wanda, Chavez has never been a figure, and Wong (ignoring his NWH jacket figure) has remained a difficult to find exclusive figure, at least this way everyone can get a regular Wong

 

 

If anyone really values the completion of all four figures on the box art, simply just get the CMF Wanda figure. If you don't have one already, and don't fancy buying a bulk of blind bags for one figure, just use Bricklink, she's really not expensive, some of the listings are actually cheaper than buying one bag

Share this post


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

He's not. He may be the protagonist, but Wanda's role will be more substantial (well, perhaps not in terms of screen time, but who knows).

Once again, you’re giving information about a movie that is yet to come out and hasn’t many substantial leaks. Cool your jets and decide this information after you’ve seen the movie. You can think your “sources” are reliable with these leaks but the fact is this movie isn’t out yet and we have no idea if Scarlet Witch will have a more prominent role than the character this movie is named after. Stop assuming with hypothetical information.

 

1 hour ago, Buckethead said:

Although I think Scarlet Witch should have been in the set, I don't get how you can say, "He's not . . . Wanda's role will be more substantial," and then say "who knows."

EXACTLY. This is getting hell-a tiresome.


 

And of course, adding another minifigure to the set would increase the price. Sure, there’s been sets with a similar piece count and price with more minifigs but at the end of the day you’re looking at a unique minifig (CMF SW) with a new printed torso and legs, new hair piece mold, dual molded arms, etc.. We could get a Scarlet Witch with different printing to keep the cost but it wouldn’t be exciting and it would most definitely have the infamous hairpiece that almost all female minifigures use (https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=85974&idColor=88#T=C&C=88).

Edited by Moon_Knight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just got the NWH Sanctum set just in case we don't get anymore sets. Plus I want SOME representation of the film before it comes out lol. *Sigh* These hypothetical NWH sets better be amazing if they ever come out in 2HY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All I'm saying is that Wanda's role is substantial in the movie, and she should've been included in the set. The fact that she's on the box art makes it even more ridiculous. 

7 hours ago, Quicksilver838 said:

Doctor Strange is on the box six times though, and his name appears five times

 

You're saying this like it's a known fact, but the film is 5 months away. None of us know exactly how important Wanda's role will be in this film, so saying she's more important than the main character is just pure speculation. Nor do we know the importance of America Chavez or Wong, but if they're in the set, they clearly have a level of importance to the film. And unlike Wanda, Chavez has never been a figure, and Wong (ignoring his NWH jacket figure) has remained a difficult to find exclusive figure, at least this way everyone can get a regular Wong

He's on the box 6 times because his minifigure is included. If Wanda was included, she would've been on the box 5 times, same as Wong or Chavez. I don't get what you're trying to prove with this argument.

And yes, some of us do know how important characters are in this movie. And because of what I know, it feels even weirder that she wasn't included.

6 hours ago, Moon_Knight said:

Once again, you’re giving information about a movie that is yet to come out and hasn’t many substantial leaks. Cool your jets and decide this information after you’ve seen the movie. You can think your “sources” are reliable with these leaks but the fact is this movie isn’t out yet and we have no idea if Scarlet Witch will have a more prominent role than the character this movie is named after. Stop assuming with hypothetical information.

 

And of course, adding another minifigure to the set would increase the price. Sure, there’s been sets with a similar piece count and price with more minifigs but at the end of the day you’re looking at a unique minifig (CMF SW) with a new printed torso and legs, new hair piece mold, dual molded arms, etc.. We could get a Scarlet Witch with different printing to keep the cost but it wouldn’t be exciting and it would most definitely have the infamous hairpiece that almost all female minifigures use (https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=85974&idColor=88#T=C&C=88).

It did have a really substantial leak, and the sources are as reliable as they get. But that's not what I'm here to talk about.

Wanda's role is big. She's on the box, twice. Including them would've been so easy. Yet she's not there, which sucks.

And no, including her would not increase the price of the set. This set us overpriced as it is. 30€ sets can include 4 minifigures. 

What you're saying is simply wrong - there would be no new torso, hairpiece and legs, because they've already made it for the CMF. It already exists, so it couldn't have been new. Plus, she has full dark red arms in the movie, so there would be no need for dual-moulding  

5 hours ago, TurnOffTheDark said:

I just got the NWH Sanctum set just in case we don't get anymore sets. Plus I want SOME representation of the film before it comes out lol. *Sigh* These hypothetical NWH sets better be amazing if they ever come out in 2HY

I probably would've bought it if not for the monster.

I have no problem with sets that don't include spoiler elements from the movie, but I do have a problem with sets that are inaccurate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In other news, Stone Wars revealed some interesting info.

The mystery 100€ set, 76209, is coming out in March - same date as both Love and Thunder sets (76207 and 76208). Is it just a coincidence that those 3 sets are coming out the same month, with matching set numbers? Wonder what that set could be if not another Thor set...

Also, the 80€ Wakanda Forever set, 76214, is coming out in August. Since we got to know about this set's existence later than the other 3, it might suggest that the whole wave got pushed back to August (which would make sense with the movie's November release date).

Share this post


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

All I'm saying is that Wanda's role is substantial in the movie, and she should've been included in the set. The fact that she's on the box art makes it even more ridiculous. 

He's on the box 6 times because his minifigure is included. If Wanda was included, she would've been on the box 5 times, same as Wong or Chavez. I don't get what you're trying to prove with this argument.

And yes, some of us do know how important characters are in this movie. And because of what I know, it feels even weirder that she wasn't included.

It did have a really substantial leak, and the sources are as reliable as they get. But that's not what I'm here to talk about.

Wanda's role is big. She's on the box, twice. Including them would've been so easy. Yet she's not there, which sucks.

And no, including her would not increase the price of the set. This set us overpriced as it is. 30€ sets can include 4 minifigures. 

What you're saying is simply wrong - there would be no new torso, hairpiece and legs, because they've already made it for the CMF. It already exists, so it couldn't have been new. Plus, she has full dark red arms in the movie, so there would be no need for dual-moulding  

I totally agree with your first statement. If she's going to be advertised on the box, she should be included in the set. But that's not all you've been saying. You're arguing she's the "most important character" in a movie that hasn't been released yet.

When you say, "she's on the box, twice" after stating "she's the most important character in the movie," the impression you're giving is that she's the most important character because she appears on the box twice. That's probably not what you meant, but that's what Quicksilver838 is arguing against.

I know there have been leaks. I don't know if they're true. I try to avoid them as much as possible, and I'm pretty sure most of the people in this thread haven't read the leaks either, so from the perspective of someone who has actively tried to avoid spoilers, Doctor Strange clearly seems to be the most important character. His name is in the title, and it features characters who were prominent in his 2016 solo film (i.e. Wong, Mordo, Rachel). Clearly Scarlet Witch is an important character in the film (otherwise Marvel wouldn't have announced Elizabeth Olsen alongside Benedict two years ago at SDCC), but this is what you were here to talk about when you proceeded to claim who was and was not the most important character of the film.

Again, I think she should have been in the set, but seeing as how we just got a relatively similar version of her a few months ago, I don't mind her absence. If it's really a concern, I recommend Bricklink-ing a couple of dark red arms and swapping them out with her dual-molded ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are there examples of other Superhero sets with characters on the box that don't appear in the individual theme's sets?
Someone already pointed out that having her on the box implies she may be in a set, which isn't necessarily true, but it's also pretty suspicious for the artists to go through that amount of work for no reason. Maybe a 2nd set or polybag or even the accessory pack could be itMoM related.

Honestly some of us here are inflating Wanda's importance quite a bit here, but we're all on the same page in regard to why Lego made the decision they did if Wanda doesn't appear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Buckethead said:

I totally agree with your first statement. If she's going to be advertised on the box, she should be included in the set. But that's not all you've been saying. You're arguing she's the "most important character" in a movie that hasn't been released yet.

When you say, "she's on the box, twice" after stating "she's the most important character in the movie," the impression you're giving is that she's the most important character because she appears on the box twice. That's probably not what you meant, but that's what Quicksilver838 is arguing against.

I know there have been leaks. I don't know if they're true. I try to avoid them as much as possible, and I'm pretty sure most of the people in this thread haven't read the leaks either, so from the perspective of someone who has actively tried to avoid spoilers, Doctor Strange clearly seems to be the most important character. His name is in the title, and it features characters who were prominent in his 2016 solo film (i.e. Wong, Mordo, Rachel). Clearly Scarlet Witch is an important character in the film (otherwise Marvel wouldn't have announced Elizabeth Olsen alongside Benedict two years ago at SDCC), but this is what you were here to talk about when you proceeded to claim who was and was not the most important character of the film.

Again, I think she should have been in the set, but seeing as how we just got a relatively similar version of her a few months ago, I don't mind her absence. If it's really a concern, I recommend Bricklink-ing a couple of dark red arms and swapping them out with her dual-molded ones.

Really well written honestly, I agree :classic:

Let's leave the 'how important she is in the movie' discussion at that. She's just really important in the movie.

I don't really understand people and their 'you can just Bricklink her' argument tho. Some people don't want to add a minifigure made for another series or movie to the mix, they want their products to be complete. So if they advertise Wanda on the box, twice, I expect her to be included.

They wouldn't have to make a single new print or mould. Heck, they'd even cut costs by excluding dual-moulded arms. 

Those are the two main reasons as to why I don't understand why she's not included.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, THELEGOBATMAN said:

All I'm saying is that Wanda's role is substantial in the movie, and she should've been included in the set. The fact that she's on the box art makes it even more ridiculous. 

He's on the box 6 times because his minifigure is included. If Wanda was included, she would've been on the box 5 times, same as Wong or Chavez. I don't get what you're trying to prove with this argument.

And yes, some of us do know how important characters are in this movie. And because of what I know, it feels even weirder that she wasn't included.

It did have a really substantial leak, and the sources are as reliable as they get. But that's not what I'm here to talk about.

Wanda's role is big. She's on the box, twice. Including them would've been so easy. Yet she's not there, which sucks.

And no, including her would not increase the price of the set. This set us overpriced as it is. 30€ sets can include 4 minifigures. 

What you're saying is simply wrong - there would be no new torso, hairpiece and legs, because they've already made it for the CMF. It already exists, so it couldn't have been new. Plus, she has full dark red arms in the movie, so there would be no need for dual-moulding  

I probably would've bought it if not for the monster.

I have no problem with sets that don't include spoiler elements from the movie, but I do have a problem with sets that are inaccurate.

there is a rumor that the monster is actually based on a certain villain (No, not Scorpion) I'll say more after the film comes out 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, bricksandabear said:

Are there examples of other Superhero sets with characters on the box that don't appear in the individual theme's sets?

The initial Endgame sets had Cap, Nat, Clint, Hulk and Nebula in their Endgame suits on the boxart but not in any of the sets. Of course we finally got Cap after a few years but the other 4 are still missing :hmpf_bad:

Edited by lego_guyon02
Forgot Clint and Nebula

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, THELEGOBATMAN said:

And no, including her would not increase the price of the set. This set us overpriced as it is. 30€ sets can include 4 minifigures. 

What you're saying is simply wrong - there would be no new torso, hairpiece and legs, because they've already made it for the CMF. It already exists, so it couldn't have been new. Plus, she has full dark red arms in the movie, so there would be no need for dual-moulding  

I probably would've bought it if not for the monster.

I have no problem with sets that don't include spoiler elements from the movie, but I do have a problem with sets that are inaccurate.

We’re just gonna have to disagree here and leave it at that ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Nice to know you can leave leaks out of the conversation for once. Sounds good. :wink:

3 hours ago, THELEGOBATMAN said:

In other news, Stone Wars revealed some interesting info.

The mystery 100€ set, 76209, is coming out in March - same date as both Love and Thunder sets (76207 and 76208). Is it just a coincidence that those 3 sets are coming out the same month, with matching set numbers? Wonder what that set could be if not another Thor set...

Also, the 80€ Wakanda Forever set, 76214, is coming out in August. Since we got to know about this set's existence later than the other 3, it might suggest that the whole wave got pushed back to August (which would make sense with the movie's November release date).

This is wishful thinking but I would love it if the 100€ set was Thor related even if it wasn’t a Love and Thunder set. I would love to get some form of Asgard, I don’t think that price would do Asgard enough justice, though.

Really pumped to see Jane Foster’s Thor! Love and Thunder is probably my most anticipated movie of 2022. I’m a huge Taika fan. :grin:

 

Edited by Moon_Knight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, THELEGOBATMAN said:

Really well written honestly, I agree :classic:

Let's leave the 'how important she is in the movie' discussion at that. She's just really important in the movie.

I don't really understand people and their 'you can just Bricklink her' argument tho. Some people don't want to add a minifigure made for another series or movie to the mix, they want their products to be complete. So if they advertise Wanda on the box, twice, I expect her to be included.

They wouldn't have to make a single new print or mould. Heck, they'd even cut costs by excluding dual-moulded arms. 

Those are the two main reasons as to why I don't understand why she's not included.

I may not be too bothered by her exclusion in the set, but I totally understand why you and others would be disappointed. That's completely reasonable. 

Share this post


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

This is wishful thinking but I would love it if the 100€ set was Thor related even if it wasn’t a Love and Thunder set. I would love to get some form of Asgard, I don’t think that price would do Asgard enough justice, though.

Really pumped to see Jane Foster’s Thor! Love and Thunder is probably my most anticipated movie of 2022. I’m a huge Taika fan. :grin:

 

I'd also love it. 

We need an actual Asgard sets. I think that 2 sets for L&T will be enough to cover the movie, unless they really want to include all of the characters.

1 hour ago, TurnOffTheDark said:

there is a rumor that the monster is actually based on a certain villain (No, not Scorpion) I'll say more after the film comes out 

Nah, I'm pretty sure it's just a thing made-up by LEGO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, THELEGOBATMAN said:

Nah, I'm pretty sure it's just a thing made-up by LEGO.

The build looks exactly like Shuma Gorath, a Doctor Strange villain from the comics. There's a good chance Gargantos and Shuma Gorath may have been combined into one character, Gargantos has been changed to Shuma Gorath's species (a Many Angled One) or LEGO simply messed up with the name. Either way this is way too specific to be made-up.

Shuma-Gorath

Edited by lego_guyon02
Added picture for reference

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, lego_guyon02 said:

The build looks exactly like Shuma Gorath, a Doctor Strange villain from the comics. There's a good chance Gargantos and Shuma Gorath may have been combined into one character, Gargantos has been changed to Shuma Gorath's species (a Many Angled One) or LEGO simply messed up with the name. Either way this is way too specific to be made-up.

We were talking about the monster from the NWH Sanctum Workshop set :wink:

Edited by THELEGOBATMAN

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, THELEGOBATMAN said:

We were talking about the monster from the NWH Sanctum Workshop set :classic:

If you really want to stretch your imaginations, you can say that the monster resembles Lizard a tiny bit haha

Share this post


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

If you really want to stretch your imaginations, you can say that the monster resembles Lizard a tiny bit haha

A tiny tiny bit :tongue:

3 minutes ago, lego_guyon02 said:

Oh whoops :facepalm:

But I have to say the Shuma Gorath / Gargantos situation is really confusing.

It's clearly Shuma Gorath, but I have no idea why they named it Gargantos. It would be a pretty idiotic move from Marvel, taking Shuma and just slapping Gargantos' name on it. There have been rumours about both of them appearing in the movie, which makes it even more confusing. It also seemed like they've been trying to tease Shuma in What If...?.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, lego_guyon02 said:

The build looks exactly like Shuma Gorath, a Doctor Strange villain from the comics. There's a good chance Gargantos and Shuma Gorath may have been combined into one character, Gargantos has been changed to Shuma Gorath's species (a Many Angled One) or LEGO simply messed up with the name. Either way this is way too specific to be made-up.

Shuma-Gorath

 

36 minutes ago, THELEGOBATMAN said:

A tiny tiny bit :tongue:

But I have to say the Shuma Gorath / Gargantos situation is really confusing.

It's clearly Shuma Gorath, but I have no idea why they named it Gargantos. It would be a pretty idiotic move from Marvel, taking Shuma and just slapping Gargantos' name on it. There have been rumours about both of them appearing in the movie, which makes it even more confusing. It also seemed like they've been trying to tease Shuma in What If...?.

Maybe Disney/Marvel provided the wrong name purposefully to throw people astray from who the main baddie is..? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  Seems unlikely, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.