Clone OPatra

Wizarding World 2022 - Rumors & Discussion

Recommended Posts

43 minutes ago, NoOneOfImportance said:

Anyways - back to HP discussion... 
I do expect Gringotts sometime soon. In what form is the question.

Well, there's no way they won't do a Gringotts that's compatible with DA at some point, so the only question for that is whether it'll be a 16x32 cutoff like WWW or a full 32x32 building meant to go at the end of the Alley. 

The 2021 AC already covered the interior scenes from the first movie, and, whether the D2C is a modular Gringotts or not, I highly doubt that the unknown $120 set will be an interior rollercoaster set.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, BrickBob Studpants said:

I think a modified minifig is the likeliest option, followed by an Gollum-like single mould. Brick-built can 100% be ruled out, he’s way too small for that :head_back: Not including him would be supremely silly. It‘s the Shrieking Shack, so they can‘t avoid including its namesake :grin:

The rumors are also saying that the Shack is going to come with the Whomping Willow as a side build. That’s where Lupin actually transforms in the movie, and while the two locations are connected by a passageway, they aren’t really adjacent enough for them to be bundled together unless they are specifically including it because they wanted to include Werewolf!Lupin as well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just rearranged all my 2018-2022 sets, and I re-noticed Gabrielle's double sided head with closed eyes. How long does a figure like that stay in production? Very bizarre that we didn't get the second task set before the Beauxbatons carriage retired, especially since this head has never been used for anything else across any LEGO sets.

Share this post


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

I just rearranged all my 2018-2022 sets, and I re-noticed Gabrielle's double sided head with closed eyes. How long does a figure like that stay in production? Very bizarre that we didn't get the second task set before the Beauxbatons carriage retired, especially since this head has never been used for anything else across any LEGO sets.

It's not that bizarre. She only appears in one major scene, so her alternate face was based on that scene specifically. It's not the only time it's happened in LEGO HP: Lupin's alternate face in the Hogwarts Express was him transforming, but only now five years later are we seemingly getting a set based on the scene in which he transforms.

To answer your question, I don't think there's a specific time that parts go permanently out of use, some stay in the catalogue for years after their last appearance. For example, the new Boba Fett's Throne Room set from Star Wars brought back the Gamorrean Guard body mold and print that hadn't been seen since 2013.

Edited by Retro Brick Reviews

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I finally caved and bought the Hogwarts Icons set. So excited to start building!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Retro Brick Reviews said:

Well, there's no way they won't do a Gringotts that's compatible with DA at some point, so the only question for that is whether it'll be a 16x32 cutoff like WWW or a full 32x32 building meant to go at the end of the Alley. 

The 2021 AC already covered the interior scenes from the first movie, and, whether the D2C is a modular Gringotts or not, I highly doubt that the unknown $120 set will be an interior rollercoaster set.

I hope it's the latter... a 16x32 cutoff would be supremely disappointing for me, although I'd probably buy it anyway. I'm still assuming if there is a Gringott's, it'll be the $120 set and not part of the $470 set. With last year's surprises, I've been set up to think the opposite of what I want/makes sense is going to happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, mirkwoodspiders said:

I hope it's the latter... a 16x32 cutoff would be supremely disappointing for me, although I'd probably buy it anyway. I'm still assuming if there is a Gringott's, it'll be the $120 set and not part of the $470 set. With last year's surprises, I've been set up to think the opposite of what I want/makes sense is going to happen.

yeah, I’m also having a hard time believing we’ll see Gringotts as part of this year’s D2C. After all, why leave it out of the original Diagon Alley set if not to sell it on its own as more affordable set later? And let’s not forget that this time last year the $250 D2C “had to be” Gringotts as well, and proceeded to throw everybody for a loop by not even being close. 

Share this post


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

After all, why leave it out of the original Diagon Alley set if not to sell it on its own as more affordable set later? 

To sell it on it's own as a more expensive set later.

LEGO knows that people want Gringotts, and they know that most people would be willing to pay a pretty penny for it, and, as a company, why would they go for "affordable" when they could make people pay "premium"? They also know that a modular Gringotts DA expansion would both automatically sell to everyone who owns the successful DA set, and that some of the people who buy Gringotts would end up going back and getting DA: it increases sales of both sets.

If you want an example of LEGO choosing to do a premium product of an iconic locale over an affordable and more accessible version, well, just look at the original DA. It's the most iconic area in the Wizarding World aside from Hogwarts itself, and both Ollivander's and WWW can rival Gringotts in popularity. If LEGO wanted to go affordable, they would have sold the buildings individually for $100 a pop. But they didn't, because they know that people would be willing to pay a lot more for Diagon Alley, and so they made a set that costs a lot more. And the same goes for Gringotts. 

1 hour ago, Accio Lego said:

And let’s not forget that this time last year the $250 D2C “had to be” Gringotts as well, and proceeded to throw everybody for a loop by not even being close. 

Last time there was a fair amount of argument, and the only evidence was "well, they didn't do it last year". Here, there is actually evidence: namely, the price. LEGO's mot going to make any old set the new HP flagship, it has to be something iconic.

Let's compare to LEGO Star Wars for a moment. In the entire history of that theme, there have only been four craft from the movies that LEGO has made as $400+ sets. Those are the Death Star, Millenium Falcon, Imperial Star Destroyer, and AT-AT. All incredibly iconic, important to the story, and instantly recognizable to anyone who's even heard of the franchise.

The same goes for HP: Our only two $400 sets are Hogwarts and DA. The $470 set needs to be at least as iconic and important as those, and Gringotts is one of exactly two things that fits that bill. The only other is the Hogwarts Express, which I'll start believing as soon as someone can come up with a realistic way a UCS Hogwarts Express could be done at $470 as an actual LEGO product.

Edited by Retro Brick Reviews

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know people are passionately for or against different sets at this price point, with a lot of good points of why certain sets are likely/unlikey.

Just saying that to keep in mind this is 100% pure fun/not a serious idea...but what if the D2C is a Gringotts...underground rollercoaster?

Using the rollercoaster track pieces, they could give us a couple of cars that go around to Harry's vault, the sorcerer's stone vault, the waterfall that removes enchantments, the Lestrange vault, and the Ironbelly, with supports made to look like the caves. And then the $120 set is the Gringotts exterior that can connect to the coaster if you want or stand on its own.

Edited by nicknack116

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Retro Brick Reviews said:

The only other is the Hogwarts Express, which I'll start believing as soon as someone can come up with a realistic way a UCS Hogwarts Express could be done at $470 as an actual LEGO product.

I've said it before.  I can see a UCS Hogwarts Express if it is motorized and includes a detailed Platform for Kings Cross plus a full Hogsmeade Station Platform and the Viaduct and of course an appropriate amount of track.

 

35 minutes ago, nicknack116 said:

I know people are passionately for or against different sets at this price point, with a lot of good points of why certain sets are likely/unlikey.

Just saying that to keep in mind this is 100% pure fun/not a serious idea...but what if the D2C is a Gringotts...underground rollercoaster?

Using the rollercoaster track pieces, they could give us a couple of cars that go around to Harry's vault, the sorcerer's stone vault, the waterfall that removes enchantments, the Lestrange vault, and the Ironbelly, with supports made to look like the caves. And then the $120 set is the Gringotts exterior that can connect to the coaster if you want or stand on its own.

I think this is also another decent possibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, nicknack116 said:

I know people are passionately for or against different sets at this price point, with a lot of good points of why certain sets are likely/unlikey.

Just saying that to keep in mind this is 100% pure fun/not a serious idea...but what if the D2C is a Gringotts...underground rollercoaster?

Using the rollercoaster track pieces, they could give us a couple of cars that go around to Harry's vault, the sorcerer's stone vault, the waterfall that removes enchantments, the Lestrange vault, and the Ironbelly, with supports made to look like the caves. And then the $120 set is the Gringotts exterior that can connect to the coaster if you want or stand on its own.

I could maybe see them doing it the other way - $120 kids play set and a $470 pretentious 18+ display set - but the other way around is unlikely.

1 minute ago, karrit said:

I've said it before.  I can see a UCS Hogwarts Express if it is motorized and includes a detailed Platform for Kings Cross plus a full Hogsmeade Station Platform and the Viaduct and of course an appropriate amount of track.

So... only if they include two stations AND a bridge, meaning that A.) the entire set would have to be elevated to accommodate the viaduct, and B.) the vast majority of parts would go to structures outside the main build? Yeah, no. Include all that at $470 and you wouldn't even have parts left over for the normal HE, much less a motorized UCS. (Not to mention that if it were any wider than the playscale version, it wouldn't fit on track.)

 

The only way I could see them ever doing it is as an isolated display model, in the vein of the Ecto-1 and 007 Aston Martin, of just the engine and tender (no coaches because they wouldn't be minifigure-compatible), but that wouldn't be $470.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Retro Brick Reviews said:

To sell it on it's own as a more expensive set later.

LEGO knows that people want Gringotts, and they know that most people would be willing to pay a pretty penny for it, and, as a company, why would they go for "affordable" when they could make people pay "premium"? They also know that a modular Gringotts DA expansion would both automatically sell to everyone who owns the successful DA set, and that some of the people who buy Gringotts would end up going back and getting DA: it increases sales of both sets.

If you want an example of LEGO choosing to do a premium product of an iconic locale over an affordable and more accessible version, well, just look at the original DA. It's the most iconic area in the Wizarding World aside from Hogwarts itself, and both Ollivander's and WWW can rival Gringotts in popularity. If LEGO wanted to go affordable, they would have sold the buildings individually for $100 a pop. But they didn't, because they know that people would be willing to pay a lot more for Diagon Alley, and so they made a set that costs a lot more. And the same goes for Gringotts. 

I think you’re stuck in an adult collector’s mindset here. There’s not many people who would pay $100 each for Flourish and Blott’s or even Quality Quidditch Supplies outside the adult fans like us - so they don’t lose much by bundling them all together, because at the end of the day there aren’t going to be many people saying ‘Oh, I wanted Ollivander’s but I’m not going to get it because I don’t care about those other shops and it’s too expensive when I only want part of it’. They slapped an 18+ rating on that set for a reason, they know there aren’t many kids who’ll be super upset that their parents won’t buy it for them. 
 

Gringott’s, however, probably has more scenes than the rest of Diagon Alley combined, including some that are very action heavy. Add in the dragon and you’ve got one of the few DH2 sets that you can make, and another massive draw for kids. Gringotts can sell on it’s own in a way that stores’ whose interiors never appeared on screen just couldn’t, and there are going to be a lot of people who are willing to buy a Gringott’s set but wouldn’t be interested in paying an extra $300+ for it to be padded out with things they don’t care about. 
 

If you want an example from previous Harry Potter sets, don’t look any farther than last year. Myrtle’s bathroom is arguably a pretty important part of the Chamber of Secrets, but the actual Chamber of Secrets set didn’t include it, because Lego knew if they sold it with minifigs from another scene for a fifth of the price then they could sell the Polyjuice Potion Mistake set to everyone who’d bought the Chamber and a large number of people who won’t get the big Chamber set for whatever reason but are willing to get the much cheaper bathroom set. The same logic fits Gringott’s and Diagon Alley pretty perfectly. 
 

3 hours ago, Retro Brick Reviews said:

Last time there was a fair amount of argument, and the only evidence was "well, they didn't do it last year". Here, there is actually evidence: namely, the price. LEGO's mot going to make any old set the new HP flagship, it has to be something iconic.

Let's compare to LEGO Star Wars for a moment. In the entire history of that theme, there have only been four craft from the movies that LEGO has made as $400+ sets. Those are the Death Star, Millenium Falcon, Imperial Star Destroyer, and AT-AT. All incredibly iconic, important to the story, and instantly recognizable to anyone who's even heard of the franchise.

The same goes for HP: Our only two $400 sets are Hogwarts and DA. The $470 set needs to be at least as iconic and important as those, and Gringotts is one of exactly two things that fits that bill. The only other is the Hogwarts Express, which I'll start believing as soon as someone can come up with a realistic way a UCS Hogwarts Express could be done at $470 as an actual LEGO product.

Yes, and like last year a lot of people are doing their best to ignore the very real possibility of the D2C being something other than a Minifigure based play set. There’s a very real possibility we’ll see lego announcing a life sized Dobby or Fawkes this year, but nobody seems to want to talk about that. 
 

As for the Hogwarts Express, the last one retailed at $80, but once you add power functions, multiple carriages, the extra minifigs to populate those carriages, a decent amount of track, expand the size of the station, and possibly even include both stations, you start getting up to that $470 figure. It wouldn’t look as pretty on a shelf as the Hogwarts Icons or microscale castle, but the working train angle would balance that out. 
 

So yeah, between the possibility of a sculptural set bringing the list of potential candidates well above just two and the Hogwarts Express being a perfectly healthy contender itself, I think we all need to recognize that Diagon Alley part 2 is far from guaranteed this year, because acting otherwise is a set up for disappointment. 

Edited by Accio Lego

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Accio Lego said:

There’s a very real possibility we’ll see lego announcing a life sized Dobby or Fawkes this year, but nobody seems to want to talk about that. 

Because that'd be supremely silly :tongue: Who in their right mind would buy a $470 Dobby statue? Might as well release a $1000 Jar-Jar head on a pike :laugh_hard:

Share this post


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

Because that'd be supremely silly :tongue: Who in their right mind would buy a $470 Dobby statue? Might as well release a $1000 Jar-Jar head on a pike :laugh_hard:

This was the point I was trying to make. Yeah, there are 10,000 things that they COULD make for $470, but barely any that both befit a cost and people would actually buy. Nobody's buying a $470 Dobby, nobody's buying a $470 Fawkes when Hedwig (the more iconic HP bird) is $250, and nobody's buying a $470 minifig-scale Hogwarts Express when you can buy one at Walmart for $80. 

1 hour ago, Accio Lego said:

I think we all need to recognize that Diagon Alley part 2 is far from guaranteed this year, because acting otherwise is a set up for disappointment. 

I don't think it's anywhere near guaranteed, I just have yet to see a single other plausible suggestion. A $250 Gringotts with a couple of other buildings to bump the price up is plausible. A Hogwarts Express with six coaches and two stations is not.

As for your point about Diagon Alley... you're right about QQS and F&B not being iconic enough to merit their own sets. But I raise you that LEGO still made them BECAUSE they knew that the amount of money they'd make on a giant Diagon Alley would be more than for just selling the iconic parts individually at a more accessible cost. And the same holds true here. They COULD sell a modular Gringotts on it's own for, say, $150 if they skimped on the details. But they could make more money by adding in, say, the Leaky Cauldron, Madam Malkin's, and a displayable Dragon and selling it for $470. And, believe it or don't, but if someone is willing and has enough disposable income to buy a $150 LEGO set for themselves or for their kid, most of the time they can be pushed to buy a $470 one to make the best Christmas ever - just ask all the middle-class kids who got LEGO Death Stars when they were 10 years old.

Edited by Retro Brick Reviews

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Retro Brick Reviews said:

I could maybe see them doing it the other way - $120 kids play set and a $470 pretentious 18+ display set - but the other way around is unlikely.

Definitely agree that a Gringotts rollercoaster would fit a kid consumer more so more likely to be priced lower.

And now I think too hard about all of this for my own good:

Lots of good theories in here for how/why LEGO chooses to make some sets (like Diagon Alley) priced as D2C vs. others. I just think it's fun to speculate and guess. I agree that there aren't a whole of options left to justify a $470 price tag from the "well, duh" category. Seems like people keep throwing around potential sets of:

  • Gringotts/Leaky Cauldron/other DA shops
  • Quidditch Pitch (Personally, I think some people are really underselling the popularity of Quidditch)
  • Some sort of UCS/motorized Hogwarts Express
  • Another version of Hogwarts castle

I think looking at Universal Studio's approach to designing Harry Potter would help see what's iconic to diehard and casual fans, too. So, what does Universal have that's not been made into LEGO?

  • Grimmauld Place
  • Full Hogsmeade/Kings Cross Train Stations
  • Gringotts Bank/Rollercoaster
  • Additional Diagon Alley/Hogsmeade shops
  • The Leaky Cauldron and Brick Wall
  • TONS of merchandise/objects

So, what's left and iconic? Just throwing out random ideas here:

  • Battle-damaged Hogwarts 
  • Brick-built Sorting Hat and Sword of Gryffindor
  • Items to represent the Horcruxes or Deathly Hallow-connected objects
  • The Triwizard Tournament - All 3 tasks in one giant set, complete with hedge maze
  • Portrait of the Fat Lady
  • Brick-built Dobby or Buckbeak

That was probably way too long of a message, so I'm sorry. Really curious to see what the set will end up being.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To the D2C talk & whether it was intentional or not, but since we AFOL’s love patterns...the first D2C was a display model, second was a playset, third was a display model. IF that is an actual thing, we should be seeing a playset this year. I’d rather it not be a $470 one that includes Gringotts...but I’ll get it if I have to. 

After building the Trunk set I’m a bigger fan than I was. It’s basically a People Pack(R.I.P.) in HP form. A little expensive but chock full of goodies. Has some great parts, another Quibbler tile, a third(!) Marauders Map, Bertie Botts, polyjuice potion cup, cauldron. Rare minifig parts, pre sorted uniform & a few hair pieces. And of course, the heads. Great for those of us making full Quidditch teams. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Retro Brick Reviews said:

To sell it on it's own as a more expensive set later.

LEGO knows that people want Gringotts, and they know that most people would be willing to pay a pretty penny for it, and, as a company, why would they go for "affordable" when they could make people pay "premium"? They also know that a modular Gringotts DA expansion would both automatically sell to everyone who owns the successful DA set, and that some of the people who buy Gringotts would end up going back and getting DA: it increases sales of both sets.

The same goes for HP: Our only two $400 sets are Hogwarts and DA. The $470 set needs to be at least as iconic and important as those, and Gringotts is one of exactly two things that fits that bill. The only other is the Hogwarts Express, which I'll start believing as soon as someone can come up with a realistic way a UCS Hogwarts Express could be done at $470 as an actual LEGO product.

You give me hope! I feel like we've considered all the possibilities for $470, but LEGO has a knack (see the past 2 Mario D2C's, for example) of creating something we never thought we wanted/could exist and making it desirable. All this aside, I do wonder if LEGO reads these forums and just chuckles over all the speculation. :head_back:

Edited by mirkwoodspiders
Spelling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Retro Brick Reviews said:

They COULD sell a modular Gringotts on it's own for, say, $150 if they skimped on the details. But they could make more money by adding in, say, the Leaky Cauldron, Madam Malkin's, and a displayable Dragon and selling it for $470. And, believe it or don't, but if someone is willing and has enough disposable income to buy a $150 LEGO set for themselves or for their kid, most of the time they can be pushed to buy a $470 one to make the best Christmas ever - just ask all the middle-class kids who got LEGO Death Stars when they were 10 years old.

You say there wouldn’t be enough people who opted out of Gringotts if it came as part of a much more expensive set to offset the increased price tag - I think there would be. Ultimately, neither of us has the knowledge and know how to say that for certain. Only whatever marketing team lego has working for them has all the numbers from previous sales and the ability to set up focus groups that will give them the data they need to determine what would be more profitable for the company, and we won’t know the results until Lego actually releases a new Gringott’s. 

 

4 hours ago, Retro Brick Reviews said:

This was the point I was trying to make. Yeah, there are 10,000 things that they COULD make for $470, but barely any that both befit a cost and people would actually buy. Nobody's buying a $470 Dobby, nobody's buying a $470 Fawkes when Hedwig (the more iconic HP bird) is $250, and nobody's buying a $470 minifig-scale Hogwarts Express when you can buy one at Walmart for $80. 

Nobody would have thought they’d do a $250 set with Hedwig as the giant centerpiece only a year after releasing a $40 Hedwig, but Lego did it, and they probably sold a whole bunch to people who already had the $40 set. I think it’s safe to say that whoever is determining the subject matter of these sets isn’t always using the same logic as us. (I also think you’re severely underestimating how excited people will get over a powered model train, but that’s an entirely different subject) At the end of the day all we’ve got is unfounded speculation for the next several months :pir-murder: (which is why I’m personally spending much more time wondering about the accessory pack and retailer exclusive, my curiosity will be satisfied much sooner)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Accio Lego said:

 think we all need to recognize that Diagon Alley part 2 is far from guaranteed this year, because acting otherwise is a set up for disappointment. 

3 hours ago, Accio Lego said:

Nobody would have thought they’d do a $250 set with Hedwig as the giant centerpiece only a year after releasing a $40 Hedwig, but Lego did it, and they probably sold a whole bunch to people who already had the $40 set. I think it’s safe to say that whoever is determining the subject matter of these sets isn’t always using the same logic as us.

I agree! I am sure the D2C will be amazing no matter what it is, so I am not so hyped/worried what it might be, since the 90 year castle has taken all my available hype this year :tongue:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/13/2022 at 6:15 PM, Retro Brick Reviews said:

The 2008 Death Star was one of the longest-produced and best-selling LEGO sets of all time (not to mention having a much greater cultural impact than any other licensed LEGO set), and the 2016 set was retired after only a couple years and has yet to see any replacement. That speaks to the likely fact that it did poorly, or else it would have lasted as long as the original set.

I know this is off-topic, but what was the difference actually? Just the minifigures?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My ranking of D2C ideas would be as follows:

  1. Diagon Alley 2
  2. Hogwarts Express
  3. Brick-built creature
  4. Dobby’s sock
  5. Brick-built items that aren‘t Dobby‘s sock
  6. Giant Harry
  7. Dobby
  8. Microscale Hogwarts 2.0
  9. UCS Knight Bus
  10. The logo
  11. Vernon Dursley‘s moustache
  12. Buildable Dark Mark to hang on your ceiling
  13. Harry’s birthday cake
  14. the inevitable heat death of the universe
  15. …literally anything
  16. Quidditch pitch

:tongue:

Share this post


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

Quidditch pitch

I have a little suspect...

Quidditch pitch isn't properly your dreaming set, is it? :laugh:

Or... are you applying reverse psychology to subtly push LEGO designers to produce it? :snicker:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, BrickMatit said:

I have a little suspect...

Quidditch pitch isn't properly your dreaming set, is it? :laugh:

Or... are you applying reverse psychology to subtly push LEGO designers to produce it? :snicker:

Nah, I just REALLY don’t want to spend almost 500 bucks on a couple of boring towers, a few rings, and a patch of dirt :tongue:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, BrickBob Studpants said:

Nah, I just REALLY don’t want to spend almost 500 bucks on a couple of boring towers, a few rings, and a patch of dirt

I agree. A Quidditch Pitch would be nothing but repetitive towers and stands. Not an exciting building experience for me. 

The only thing I will find interesting in this set would be Ravenclaw quidditch uniform.

But, hey, there's less than zero possibilty I would spend 470 for it :snicker:

Share this post


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

Nah, I just REALLY don’t want to spend almost 500 bucks on a couple of boring towers, a few rings, and a patch of dirt :tongue:

No judgement or anything because I know full well the all or nothing feeling, but do you never want to go actually I'm just not getting that set because I really don't like it? Or I'll just buy the minifigures and skip the build. If the D2C is a QP, which could be spectacular in it's own way but certainly not my first choice, is there any way you would say no I'm simply skipping this one?

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.