LEGO Star Wars 2011 Pictures & Rumors

[Sir von Lego]

Probably because FBTB understand it's an 8 piece X-wing for 8 Year olds. While certain members of this site expects a 100% accurate to scale film replica.

It's an Estimate.

Christ, don't people read anymore?

Hi,

the price of the advent calendar will be 29,99 EUR in Germany.

greetings Hendrik

[Fallenangel]

Probably because FBTB understand it's an 8 piece X-wing for 8 Year olds. While certain members of this site expects a 100% accurate to scale film replica.

Um... come on guy, I already let it go.

After all, 100% accuracy is just impossible, especially with LEGO. This is why as builders we must take the identifying traits of a particular subject and make as best an effort as we can to make it recognizable to the average AFOL.

...

As I said, it's not reasonable to expect an interpretation in a kid's toy that's recognizable to an adult (we see things differently, after all) but that doesn't invalidate what I pointed out. Yes, I realize LEGO is a toy. Yes, I realize AFOLs are not their target market. Yes, I realize price, stability, and availiability of parts are an issue to the LEGO Group.

Why then, you may ask, am I so damn pissed about a set aimed at 8-year olds being ugly as hell? I’m sure the people over at BrickForge and other customizers don’t think as highly as a purist would of LEGO’s minifigures since it’s obvious to them that most AFOL MOCs could be better. The same goes for me and 6212. But you don’t see me waxing lyricals about how awesome the recent trend of LEGO making more detailed minifigures is (in fact I think it detracts from overall set quality) because in the end a LEGO minifigure in its non-customized state is a toy (however great a toy it may be) and it takes a good customizer to make it into a great display piece – to act like the new Boba Fett or the ARF trooper is beautiful on an orgasmic level would be to naively discredit the MOCers who put more work than LEGO ever did into making a minifigure look good. On the other hand, enough people have raved to me about how 6212 is supposedly the greatest thing LEGO’s ever released that it’s admittedly annoying (sorry Millacol88, I realize that you do like the design and I have nothing against that, but to go on and on about how the ugly Technic mess is spot-on accurate to the movies when so many MOC X-wings out there completely blow it out of the water is just ridiculous. I’m sure it’s great for what it is - a toy - but don’t call a toy spot-on accurate when it obviously isn’t, even by LEGO standards, and I’m sure I’ve already made that last point clear).

No more flame wars, replies by PM only please.

[simonjedi]

Hi,

the price of the advent calendar will be 29,99 EUR in Germany.

greetings Hendrik

That's pretty reasonable then. It's about £25

Edited April 29, 2011 by simonjedi

[Brickdoctor]

the price of the advent calendar will be 29,99 EUR in Germany.

That is surprisingly reasonable. Makes me wonder what the other calendars are costing this year.

[Delta 38]

$40-$50.

Sounds like what it would cost here...

Hopefully it's not too inflated. I actually do want this Advent calendar, and I missed the previous ones (including some nice ones like the Kingdoms one).

Those lightsaber hilts on the X-Wing and Y-Wing look like the metallic sort, if I'm not wrong. That could be useful.

[Diggydoes]

Hi,

the price of the advent calendar will be 29,99 EUR in Germany.

greetings Hendrik

Didn't i posted this already 2 or 3 pages ago???Well...

[Praiter Yed]

Didn't i posted this already 2 or 3 pages ago???Well...

You did and clearly you didn't receive the recognition you deserve .

Hi,

the price of the advent calendar will be 29,99 EUR in Germany.

greetings Hendrik

Thanks Sir von Lego, that would suggest roughly 25 GBP - which actually doesn't seem too bad when you consider it's 10 GBP for a magnet set. I Santa Yoda but it's the black Astromech that's the clincher for me (expensive on eBay and BL).

I need at least three advent calendars even if I have to sell one of my kids to get them (although then I'd only need two).

EDIT: Just noticed Simonjedi already posted the £25 estimate - sorry Simonjedi, I didn't mean to steal your thunder.

Edited April 30, 2011 by Praiter Yed

[Mr Man]

That's pretty reasonable then. It's about £25

Well that's better than 30 (by £5 ), and luckily at my maximum spend for it. I agree with Praiter Yed that the black Astromech will be the clincher for me .

Also

Those lightsaber hilts on the X-Wing and Y-Wing look like the metallic sort, if I'm not wrong. That could be useful.

Yeah those look like the pearl silver ones on the Y wing(and Luke's sabre), and the ones on the Spider droid, and X wing look to be matt grey

[Muddy]

You did and clearly you didn't receive the recognition you deserve .

Thanks Sir von Lego, that would suggest roughly 25 GBP - which actually doesn't seem too bad when you consider it's 10 GBP for a magnet set. I Santa Yoda but it's the black Astromech that's the clincher for me (expensive on eBay and BL).

I need at least three advent calendars even if I have to sell one of my kids to get them (although then I'd only need two).

EDIT: Just noticed Simonjedi already posted the £25 estimate - sorry Simonjedi, I didn't mean to steal your thunder.

To bad it is the same as the older versions.

personally I would like an R3-S6

But this pretty much covers all 6 movies (E3 is skipped though)

I love it I am already making more microships...

I think 3x of each should be just right well except the Radiant VII and the Falcon

It is perfect for kids of all ages

So still no sign of the Hoth Set?

When is Mace's Starfighter reaching the US?

[Fallenangel]

When is Mace's Starfighter reaching the US?

Answered.

Perhaps we should include this in the first post.

[Mr Man]

Perhaps we should include this in the first post.

So even more people won't read it .

[DarthR2-D2]

What page does it say Han Solo is character encyclopedia minifig?

[Muddy]

So even more people won't read it .

Maybe a flag that says page one updated on (date) or since forum is a db maybe a flag for each user to flag last time they looked at it...would be nice

[JamesBenjamin]

Maybe a flag that says page one updated on (date) or since forum is a db maybe a flag for each user to flag last time they looked at it...would be nice

They have that. Whenever a thread has new posts theres a little orange arrow next to it. So anytime the "news" thread has a new post, its KimT or whoever saying "updated first post with X"

[Lord Of The Fries]

What page does it say Han Solo is character encyclopedia minifig?

It's the first post on page 524.

[Aeroeza]

This advent calender looks perfect for kids and the specialist collector. Slave 1 and the Radiant look particularly good (although it's lacking any republic red). All fussing aside my nephew will love it!. Good one Lego.

But, as for this little bombshell...

Well it makes obvious sense to have the minifigs if the city section lifts off to reveal the bridge scene from EPIV.

Obviously i cannot CONFIRM or deny this as i did not hear this from a Lego employee.

10221 looked to be a set to purchase for myself in 2011. However I can personally CONFIRM without any hint of denial from an Aeroeza employee (i.e. me) that if 10221 is a playset (with a UCS sticker) then my own 'specialized' collecting of Star Wars Lego sets could well be over (apart from the odd Midi but then there isn't one of those this year anyway). This is sad for me but I guess its been a good decade long run. Don't get me wrong, I'm happy for there to be big sets with play features for AFOL who collect them and of course for their kids but its the lack of brand consistency with this UCS product which is losing me.

Put simply a playset has no place in a traditional UCS collection! Why give it a UCS sticker when (for all rumored appearances) it isn't a UCS? Just release it like 10188 or 10198 without the sticker and stop messing with the heads of UCS affectionardos!!!

Rant mode on...

Perhaps, to inject more consistent inconsistency across all Lego themes, we could suggest to TLC the need for them to include Minifigures and play features with their Architecture range. That consequently could sell better as well! Just imagine hot dog stands and sellers for the Guggenheim, bungie jumping mini figs for the Seattle Space Needle (with system scaled ambulance of course) and a 'King Kong' for the Empire State Building (actually that's not a bad idea) complete with a bi-plane and pilot. The Landmarks range deserves similar abuse and I've got some great ideas for the themes dumbing down and repackaging but I'm too demoralized by Cavegods post to write anything more for now...

Rant mode off!

[lefty]

-snip-

I think the simplest way I can phrase my reaction to this post is you hold UCS sets in too high a regard.

[Aeroeza]

I think the simplest way I can phrase my reaction to this post is you hold UCS sets in too high a regard.

I guess I shouldn't have become a passionate collector in the first place then! Could someone please direct me to the 'not so passionate AFOL forum'?

[Alldarker]

In my opinion, the UCS label defines nothing about a set and never really had the pretense to do so. To me, it's just a marketing label without any real strict definition or meaning. It could never be the reason for me to buy or not buy a set, and a Lego set having (or not having) a UCS label means exactly nothing to me.

I only ever judge (and make decisions to buy) Lego sets based on their design (including figures), parts to price and overall cost.

Actually, as a pretty passionate collector of Star Wars Lego myself (since 1999!), the only reason I'd have for buying this 10221 UCS SSD is if it DOES open up to reveal the bridge scene from RotJ.

[Mr Man]

I wont get this because of the price. But TLC should keep system, play-sets and UCS sets separate, because some AFOLs will be very annoyed if the structure or shape or accuracy is compromised by adding a bridge scene in it. If TLG where desperate for a bridge scene they should have done a Home One with the bounty hunters on the 'Executors' bridge, and a DV meditation chamber at the back, with a TIE in the hanger, not potentially ruin or weaken a UCS that is made to look at, by adding a scene that isn't hard to MOC up anyway.

[Aeroeza]

In my opinion, the UCS label defines nothing about a set and never really had the pretense to do so. To me, it's just a marketing label without any real strict definition or meaning.

The UCS label defines everything about these sets otherwise what the hell have I been collecting throughout these years!

7181, 7191, 10019, 10026, 10030, 10129, 10134, 10143, 10174, 10175, 10179, 10212 and 10215 are all a consistent collection of vehicles with the UCS sticker that are built for display purposes only and have no real play features to speak of. 7194, 10018 and 10186, although they don't sport the classic vehicle UCS sticker, remain sculptural in nature, also lack play features and consequently fit quite easily into the collection as display pieces in their own right.

These are all products which were generally large and highly detailed with some attempt (often successful) at sculptural accuracy regardless of varying scales, subject matter and whether-or-not 'Ultimate Collectors Series' was printed on the box.

'UCS' has quite a clear definition and as a result of this definition the sets are often critiqued for their 'pretense' to accuracy by collectors who wish they were more so. Consequently the label has come to mean something to AFOL such as myself. Heck! there's a whole bunch of MOCers out there who dedicate an amazing amount of time and talent to creating and modifying UCS builds so I'm pretty sure the label means quite a lot to people.

It could never be the reason for me to buy or not buy a set, and a Lego set having (or not having) a UCS label means exactly nothing to me.

It would be nice for me to feel the same way but unfortunately I have no interest in System sets and minifigures (apart from minifig scaled sets like 10179 and 10212). Lets face it 10221 looks awesome but if the 'sculptural integrity' of this UCS set is somewhat compromised by the inclusion of play features then it really does change the prestige of the label for me. It simply becomes a glorified playset and if all future UCS sets are like this then my Star Wars collection has probably come to an end and I can look forward to building more 'Landmark' releases.

Now obviously most of our posting here is jumping the gun, afterall we have yet to see detailed images of the set, but this is the 'Pictures & Rumors' forum afterall and so we should feel obligated to wax lyrical and discuss some Lego stuff based on very little.

My simple point is this. Why make a UCS playset at all? Why not just release it like 10188 or 10198 as an exclusive or funky limited edition piece i.e. a big, spectacular playset without the UCS badge. It would sell just as well and keep the UCS line consistent even if we never see another UCS vehicle or sculpture again....

EDIT:

... TLC should keep system, play-sets and UCS sets separate, because some AFOLs will be very annoyed if the structure or shape or accuracy is compromised by adding a bridge scene in it...

...that's me!

Edited May 2, 2011 by Aeroeza

[lightningtiger]

What a bunch of sad-sacks, so what of a UCS comes with minifigs, you put the figures to one side and display your set as simply a UCS. But something also comes to mind, Lego was once aim at children wasn't it ?

I wonder what the play feature is with Vader's ship ?

[Aeroeza]

What a bunch of sad-sacks, so what of a UCS comes with minifigs, you put the figures to one side and display your set as simply a UCS. But something also comes to mind, Lego was once aim at children wasn't it ?

I wonder what the play feature is with Vader's ship ?

I guess we'd best all donate our Lego collections to a childrens charity then. Lets start with yours shall we!

Come on my friend, 7000 posts and you have to dismiss a considered post so lightly? And here's me thinking we should 'all brick together as one large respectful community!'

As for play features, if this UCS doesn't come with bar snacks for my minifigs then I'm writing a letter of complaint in triplicate.

Edited May 2, 2011 by Aeroeza

[lightningtiger]

I guess we'd best all donate our Lego collections to a children charity then. Lets start with yours shall we!

Come on my friend, 5000 posts and you have to dismiss a considered post so lightly? And here's me thinking we should 'all brick together as one large family!

Now, now there is no need to donate anything, my point was why are people going on about UCS and UCS with minifigs....maybe they include the figures to keep kids hands off the dad's UCS model eh ?

Forgive me, but I'm not into the UCS thing as such....just sit Lego on a shelf saying oh, it's pretty and not touching it is very sad indeed.....but it's one's own choice. Anyway, that's enough off-topic stuff...we don't want to upset 'KimT' now do we ?

Like the question still stands - what would be the play feature that requires those minifigs ?

[Aeroeza]

Now, now there is no need to donate anything, my point was why are people going on about UCS and UCS with minifigs....maybe they include the figures to keep kids hands off the dad's UCS model eh ?

Forgive me, but I'm not into the UCS thing as such....just sit Lego on a shelf saying oh, it's pretty and not touching it is very sad indeed.....but it's one's own choice. Anyway, that's enough off-topic stuff...we don't want to upset 'KimT' now do we ?

Like the question still stands - what would be the play feature that requires those minifigs ?

Very sad indeed? Now that can't be the way to make friends around here. This is a Lego site is it not? And you inadvertently dismissed my quite reasonable question...

i.e. Why make a UCS playset at all? Why not just release it like 10188 or 10198 as an exclusive or funky limited edition piece i.e. a big, spectacular playset without the UCS badge. It would sell just as well and keep the UCS line consistent even if we never see another UCS vehicle or sculpture again....