LOTR & The Hobbit 2012

[ETAV8R]

POTC was based on historical events not fictional events as that in The Hobbit and LOTR.

[Gabe]

Sorry im too nerdy, Uruk-Hai is elvish for orc people. Uruks are tall strong black skinned orcs... duh. Im talkin about regular orcs that created all of the Uruks. AAnd the orcs in moria are Morian Goblins...with huge eyes. there are differences and when i say orc i mean regular orc.

Uruk-hai is black speech, isn't it? And anyway, why are you so anxious in particular for Mordor orcs in the first wave? I reckon TLG have done a stirling job with the number and spread of baddies in this wave, and as you say, we haven't even seen the orc forge set yet. It would be churlish not to appreciate what's there.

Edited December 20, 2011 by gabe

[Gryphon Ink]

I reckon TLG have done a stirling job with the number and spread of baddies in this wave, and as you say, we haven't even seen the orc forge set yet. It would be churlish not to appreciate what's there.

I agree, it looks like by the time the theme is over - even if it's only a two-year run ending after the second Hobbit movie - there will be an amazing variety of Middle-Earth bad guys that can be used in just about any fantasy setting. I'm ecstatic about that.

[fred67]

I might. Or maybe not. But personally I find comments like that not especially nice, as if people who care what the official sets are like as themselves are somehow inferior compared to the MOCers who just pour the pieces straight from the box into their drawers and never look back. "So what, you can MOC it" is a bit lame excuse, because you can negate any critisism against any official sets with it. Sometimes the Lego designers do a better job than other times. Sometimes we disagree with their choices. And I think we should be able to say it without someone quipping that we should stop complaining because we can MOC the thing.

I think you guys should stop nit-picking. "You can MOC it" is just something to remove the disappointment at sets that you're not happy with, it's not excusing them, although sometimes the phrase is used so loosely it may seem that way.... nobody is happy when TLG releases a mediocre or poor set.

Even I often go back and forth between viewing sets from the perspective as an AFOL fan of something, in this case LOTR - which I am also a HUGE fan of, and will complain if I think we're just getting crap. Sometimes I look through it with the perspective of TLG - they can't release 10 UCS sets for every theme every year, and that makes it virtually impossible to give us really impressive LOTR sets besides character oriented sets. When you look at it from the latter perspective, you know in advance you won't be getting what you want, no matter how disappointed it makes you, and the only suggestion anyone can offer up to ease the "pain" is that you always have the ability to MOC it. It's really just the only reasonable suggestion.

I'm already thinking of LOTR as a character based theme... I'm planning on MOCing or heavily modding the sets already. I'm happy because I'm not a great customizer, and we'll get all the main characters, which is a great starting point.

POTC was based on historical events not fictional events as that in The Hobbit and LOTR.

Yeah... I learned all about cursed Aztec gold and that squid-headed guy (and his kraken) in history.

No... I know what you mean, but it's like saying Alien Conquest should be in City Theme because of the setting.

Whatever, it seems like a waste to nitpick; the moderators made their decision, they had their reasons they felt it worked, and it's just a waste of energy to argue about it.

[Gryphon Ink]

POTC was based on historical events not fictional events as that in The Hobbit and LOTR.

Seriously, no. There is absolutely nothing even remotely historically or nautically accurate about POTC aside from the fact that everybody goes around saying "East India Company" a lot. Even that was historically inaccurate or at best misleading, since the majority of the East India Company's power and interest was nowhere near the Caribbean area.

I love the movies, but they are about as reality-based as Roadrunner vs. Coyote cartoons. They are to real history as Star Wars is to real space exploration.

[Jack Bricker]

Well, I think LOTR fit in the history forum because of the heavy castle influence here and if you remember fantasy era it was not especially historically accurate either. Anyway back on topic: I really am very pleased with all of these sets both in terms of design and look and scale. The size is just right for a Lego set and the Helms Deep looks very impressive. Also I am really pleased to see so many minifigures included with each set. The color of the sets is dark but, then so is LOTR so I find no fault there. I am also especially happy to see the new large troll and all of the new swords and helmet pieces. A truly awesome theme and one that does look better quality than POTC.

[Brickity]

No Arwen or what?

If the Uruk-hai army set is going to include just that small building, it's going to be uhm... kind of dull?

[Artanis I]

POTC was based on historical events not fictional events as that in The Hobbit and LOTR.

Very little of those pirate movies is possibly factual. Zombies, fishmen, ships that can fly, people that turn into skeletons and back, (plus whatever the heck was going on at the edge of the world - which is apparently flat btw), independent beating hearts, mermaids & their tears...

Just been ninja'd, but it's true that the fantasy era of Castle sets were put in the Historic subforum too, with its skeleton armies, trolls & orcs and big dragons. LOTR belongs here no less than that.

Regarding the (Mordor) orcs appearances

In TTT, Merry & Pippin were carried off to Isengard by Saruman's Uruk Hai (the dark ones), and with them were Moria orcs (little goblin ones) & Mordor orcs. Grishnak (who tried to capture them as they escaped) was from Mordor. Apart from that, they were mostly only in ROTK as most other orc appearances were of the mountain dwelling goblin type (as has been said). Saruman's uruks were wiped out after Helm's Deep.

[lightningtiger]

POTC was based on historical events not fictional events as that in The Hobbit and LOTR.

You are serious aren't you, so Jack was a real person.....most licensed products are based fictional stories and in some cases use some real life or historic elements.

At least LOTR sets look better than that future Monster theme.

[Tyrant]

No Arwen or what?

If the Uruk-hai army set is going to include just that small building, it's going to be uhm... kind of dull?

I believe that is meant to be an army builder set. That small building is already going to raise the price so anything more would cut down the number most people would consider buying. As it is, it might be cheap enough for multiples to not break the bank. Helm's Deep is meant to be the centerpiece set for that part of the films.

[Weil]

The point about POTC being based on historical events or not (needless to say it isn't) is irrelevent as it wasn't put in the historical forum it was put in the pirate forum. The much more relevent point is that POTC is based on pirates and therefore makes complete sense to be in the pirates forum. LOTR is not based on history so it appearing in the historic forum is much more odd. Saying that the logic that the moderators gave in the announcement does make sense.

[Vindicare]

POTC was based on historical events not fictional events as that in The Hobbit and LOTR.

Well, he did say based. 2 things I know to be true, Blackbeard and the QAR. Saw a while back on the news someone found, or thought they had, don't remember exactly, his ship off the eastern coast of the USA.

Oh, and the Fountain of Youth, I'm 431 years old.

Edited December 20, 2011 by Legocrazy81

[Solitary Dark]

POTC was based on historical events not fictional events as that in The Hobbit and LOTR.

Professor Tolkien wrote the books and incorporated a huge number of historical myths and legends into the backstories of Middle-earth - the reason it's called Middle-earth is that it's meant to be Earth in the distant past - Professor Tolkien was writing an Historical Novel.

Most of the languages adopt old languagues syntax and words as well (i'm not an expert in LOTR, but I'm versed in this much)

Putting this theme in Historical is entirely appropriate - If you've not read the books I, and i'm sure many others on here, would recommend it.

Edited December 20, 2011 by Solitary Dark

[wesker]

Not true - there are 4 Uruk-hai in the army building set, and looks like another 5 (at least 4) in the Helm's deep set. Uruk-hai just means "orc-folk", after all. And we get a couple of goblins, and a troll in the Moria set! For Mordor orcs (or snaga ) i guess we'll have to wait for the second wave of LOTR sets in 2013, but i see that as less of an issue than the lack of Arwen or Galadriel or Eowyn.

I wouldn't worry about the ladies. Lego randomly threw Amidala in the Sith Infiltrator set this year and the Gungan Sub next year. I'm sure they can fit Arwen in somewhere. Galadriel has the advantage of being the only female to appear in both the LOTR trilogy and the Hobbit films. Plus Eowyn is pretty much inevitable - whether its her confrontation with the Witch-King, the Golden Hall, the Rohirim campsite, the warg attack or another Helms Deep set.

[Ardelon]

I think the staff gave good enough reasons why to put LotR in this forum. None of the Castle themes are actually "historical" anyway.

I would say we got orcs in the Moria set. Is there any difference explained between "Moria goblins" and "Mordor orcs" in the movies or books? I had the impression that they were simply generic orcs, and only Uruk-hai were in a class apart.

[Belchher]

The difference between the various types of orc is far less than a lot of people seem to be making out. Given the limitations of lego, I'm guessing the only difference between them in TLGs addaption will be the colouring and face prints and armor. Short legs for the "goblins" would be inappropriate, they where smaller than the Uruk-hai but not so much smaller as to justify the use of the child legs as is being done ( we all assume ) for the hobbits.

Personally, from a parents perspective, the prototypes are looking pretty good. Far too many people on here have unrealistic expectations for TLG to include figs and scenes that would of limited use to AFOLs making MOCs, let alone kids. Anyway, Feb isn't that far away, we'll hopefully get a better look at what will be hitting the shelves then during the toy fairs.

[ETAV8R]

Well I take a break from here for a while and all hell fire rains down.

Easy logic here folks, as noted before I said based, there were pirates and they did not only exist in the Caribbean Seas-Fact. POTC is fantasy based on history. POTC is a licensed LEGO theme. Now here's the real reach...was there a factual one ring to rule them all in human history? Were there factual hobbits, goblins, wraiths, elves (some people believe so), trolls, etc? These were all created by Tolkien in his mind, some of which could have been allegories to episodes in human history or what may have been occurring at the time he wrote the novels.

Rant off. Carry on.

[XimenaPaulina]

Why hasn't this whole discussion been moved to Licensed Themes yet?

Because we, the staff decided that it should be here in Historic. The simple logic is LOTR is supposed to temporarily fill the Castle line of products of TLG, the same way what PoTC did in the Pirates theme. Does it really matter whether LOTR, POTC, or any other licensed theme for that matter is based on historical or fictional events? At the end of the day, what's important is it's part of our LEGO hobby - and as such we should keep the discussion within that realm. Pls. refrain from straying away from the focus of the discussions.

Well I take a break from here for a while and all hell fire rains down.

Next time kindly reconsider the way you post, as it borders to trollish flame-baiting, which it seems you have successfully done by eliciting off-topic argumentative responses.

[carium]

Not sure if anyone has seen this yet. Seems like the pics of the LOTR sets have been leaked (they look legit). Check out this post:

http://smashing-bricks.com/2011/12/19/lego-lord-of-the-rings-2012-sneak-peek/

please let it be fake. that doesn´t look that promising at the moment.

[Bonaparte]

please let it be fake. that doesn´t look that promising at the moment.

We'd like to remind everyone that Eurobricks is a site targeting an adult audience and we expect all members to use proper punctuation and capitalization when posting. Thanks!

[Abu Dun]

But seriously there does seem to be a bias towards the first 2 books/films (Shelob excepted) in these sets meaning there are plenty of other scenes to plunder for later years.

Given the release schedule of the Hobbit movies I fully expect this theme to have a good 3 years - It's up to us to help it last longer if we can, but realisticaly without further films/books that will be hard.

(Unless PJ makes a movie of Simarillion or Children of Hurin (I think that's correct))

Oh and this is the first theme that non-lego people at my work have said they will be buying - LOTR has a big following!

Shelob originally was the last part of the second book, so it appears that the first wave will focus on the first two books, while the third may be done later. Either way, there's enough stuff for several waves, what with Rivendell, Bree, the Shire, Edoras, Fangorn, Isengart, etc. etc. being some of the most important places of these two.

As for the duration being closely bound to new releases of themovies, well, I've heard sometime ago that the original trilogy is sheduled for a re-release in cinema after the Hobbit is done. If this rumour proves to be true we'll be in for some years of LotR-sets

On the other hand, converting the Silmarillion into one movie is outright impossible, as it's spans several millenia from the Song of the Ainur to the Fall of Angband and consists of multiple stories that are woven into eachother. Even the Tale of the Children of Hurin, Feanor's bane, Tuor and the Fall of Gondolin as well as the Lay of Beren and Luthien (the four centerpieces of that collection) all would need two films each - at the very least, . If anything, a series divided into several volumes would be the only way one can stay even remotely true to the entire Silmarillion.

[Belchher]

Oh gawd, please please keep the topic to the upcoming sets. Even the thought of PJ getting his filthy hands on the Silmarillion gives me the shudders. As for the rumours of the trilogy being re released, the way hollywoood is these days it'll probably be in 3D, seems to be the done thing.

For those waiting on the girls, I think your best bet would probably be for Eowyn in the 2nd wave. Given the lack of RoTK sets in those prelims, a "fall of the wraith king" or some such set seems like a reasonable chance. Neither Galadriel nor Arwen did anything exciting that would make a good playset for kids ( I guess if I face reality and the fact that these are based off the movies, they might do Arwen in some sort of "Ford of Bruinen" set, although I'm hoping TLG's license always them some leeway in choosing between sticking to the book rather than the movies for accuracy ).

[Ash]

Obviously the best thing about this line is we finally get a Sean Bean minifig. Now I can buy the Mines of Moria set and put him in the Kindom's Joust set and pretend it's a Licensed Game of Thrones set :)

But seriously.... my own response is similar to one I saw earlier. Unrealistic expectations, initial disappointment, followed by being a bit more interested/excited. My biggest issue is that Weathertop and Helms Deep both look plain ugly. I hope it's just because they're prototypes. One of the best things about the film visually was that even though Middle Earth was a world in decline all the ruins and old fortesses were still gorgeous. I really like the fact that Weathertop actually looks like a ruin, but it needs better colours.

Well my other issue will probably be the price. PotC was just crazy expensive. I expect these will be to.

[Belchher]

I wouldn't worry too much about the ugly colours. If you look at both Helms Deep and Weathertop in that video, they use the new "brick brick", which is currently only available in a couple of colours, and it looks to me like they've just thrown the medium dark flesh ( dont crucify me if I'm wrong! ) version thats currently available.

While as an AFOL I'm not a huge fan of the Weathertop set, I think from a kids point of view its actually pretty well done. They've managed to squeeze both the top of the hill and the dell where they camped into one very small set, so its got a good amount of playability for the size. The use of the micro figs is also a good compromise vs giant statues for keeping detail while not blowing the price.

[Ash]

For those waiting on the girls, I think your best bet would probably be for Eowyn in the 2nd wave. Given the lack of RoTK sets in those prelims, a "fall of the wraith king" or some such set seems like a reasonable chance. Neither Galadriel nor Arwen did anything exciting that would make a good playset for kids ( I guess if I face reality and the fact that these are based off the movies, they might do Arwen in some sort of "Ford of Bruinen" set, although I'm hoping TLG's license always them some leeway in choosing between sticking to the book rather than the movies for accuracy ).

I want Galadriel just for so Cate Blanchette can join the two minifigs club!

But aside from that the license will be strictly limited to the movies and there will be no choice/leeway with regards to the books. They've always been two totally seperate licenses. I'm happy with that though, the movies are more visual and probably better suited to LEGO.

With regards to Weathertop one of the things I like is that they have managed to make it a bit jagged and ruined. Obviously nothing like the stuff people do in MOCs, but a bit of a nod towards that style of building structures. The two baseplates look like they could be interesting shapes/sized as well. I completely agree with you that the playset aspect of it is well done. But as a vignette I think it's a little better than average. Compare it to similar PotC sets where everything is seperate stranded on it's own little plate... I like the way this is solid and all-in-one.

Edited December 20, 2011 by Ash