KimT

LEGO Star Wars 2011 Pictures & Rumors

Recommended Posts

Ok so IG-88 head was just a printed 1x1. Dengar looks good. Piett is ok but I do like the hologram print.

Alas, I am still not sold on the set as a whole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for posting that, Ritz Brick. Well, there we have it. I'm not a big fan of the play feature, but I don't think it detracts from the overall look of the model. We don't get to see the bottom very well, or the rear (I missed the box pictures).

Yep, I'll be getting it. Now where to put it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*oh2**huh*

Gotta pick my jaw off the floor! This thing's amazing! Definitely a must-buy for me.

Pricepoint? I'm thinking $350.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you didn't see the pics...

10221box1copy.jpg

10221box2copy.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This model just seems so forced into system scale... Take away the figures and it's a definitive UCS set. Building in a token bridge playset, and a rather miniscule one at that, just seems so forced and counter-intuitive to the entire design. I almost wonder if they guy finished his prototype and then a VP of marketing or something said "Okay, now rip it apart and put in a 16x12 bridge area so we can sell it with figs."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly love that it has both a UCS and System flavor to it. And the bridge scene has been so perfectly integrated that it's not obvious once the panel is put in place. Lego did a great job to please both camps on this one. :sweet:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the little bridge scene is not as bad as I first thought. They could have done better thinks with the pieces, but ypu don't see from the outside that it has a interior. And this looks like a real must-have!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The designer said , this was the last time ,hi an UCS designed.

and in the video comment : "the latest ultimate, exclusive LEGO® Star Wars™ set!

can be possible : this set was the latest exclusive set? no more?

iam just askin'...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really like the look of this, and the bridge scene. However, I’m surprised by the low piece count, considering the length of it, but I guess that it’s comprised of lots of plates. I just hope that it isn’t going to be too expensive! I guess that I might have to buy it after all. :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The designer said , this was the last time ,hi an UCS designed.

and in the video comment : "the latest ultimate, exclusive LEGO® Star Wars™ set!

can be possible : this set was the latest exclusive set? no more?

iam just askin'...

Latest not last, it just means that this is the last one untill the next one is built.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The designer said , this was the last time ,hi an UCS designed.

and in the video comment : "the latest ultimate, exclusive LEGO® Star Wars™ set!

can be possible : this set was the latest exclusive set? no more?

iam just askin'...

I don't quite understand the translation of this, but the developer means that's the last UCS set he had any involvement in. Lego is obviously going to make more.

Latest also means newest, not last.

E: lolbrickdoctor

Edited by simonjedi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The designer said , this was the last time ,hi an UCS designed.

and in the video comment : "the latest ultimate, exclusive LEGO® Star Wars™ set!

can be possible : this set was the latest exclusive set? no more?

iam just askin'...

'Latest' just means the last one they designed before writing that statement. It doesn't necessarily mean the last one of all time. (though it could, but I don't know that for sure. Grammatically, it just means the newest one)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The bridge scene actually doesn't make it look bad. I mean if your on the side of "its UCS, it shouldn't have play features", i can see why you don't like it, but just looking at it as a model, and how good it looks, it looks fine. The bridge scene doesn't affect the look.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Come on,the bottom is flat!!! Ok the play-scene seems well integrated i could live with that,but a totally flat bottom???That reminds me of the other models from the summer-wave,almost all of them look really ugly on their bottom(Millenium Falcon,Sith Infiltrator)! Seems like TLG don't really care about the underside of their models no more! Very sad!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems like TLG don't really care about the underside of their models no more! Very sad!

But.. they never did in the first place?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, I'll probably still have to buy an Executor anyway... I'm 100% positive this will be once again one of those sets that, once out of production, instantly receive a 300% boost of their price.

EDIT: just saw its true price on the other thread. My God, TLG is getting greedier and greedier by the minute. Suddenly Obi Wan's Starfighter's price doesn't seem a joke anymore.

Edited by kamigawa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But.. they never did in the first place?

People probably mean the UCS star destroyer, with it's studs-down bottom. Older models also had decent looking undersides, like the original Falcon and it's rounded bottom pieces to match the top.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This model just seems so forced into system scale... Take away the figures and it's a definitive UCS set. Building in a token bridge playset, and a rather miniscule one at that, just seems so forced and counter-intuitive to the entire design. I almost wonder if they guy finished his prototype and then a VP of marketing or something said "Okay, now rip it apart and put in a 16x12 bridge area so we can sell it with figs."

I agree completely... if you ask me the little bridge is a joke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But.. they never did in the first place?

Previously I'm pretty sure all the UCS sets had pretty nice bottoms. Not completely sure though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those are the same pics from the press release. :wink:

What, no model soldier? :sceptic::tongue:

Too bad. Would've been a great touch if they stuck a minifig in the greebling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Too bad. Would've been a great touch if they stuck a minifig in the greebling.

I'm pleasantly surprised that you knew what I was talking about! :sweet:

I'm actually not sure whether a minifigure would have worked well at this scale. Perhaps Lasse could enlighten us...

Edited by fallenangel309

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.