The Simpsons 2014 Rumors & Discussion

[Sam892]

I think it goes without saying that a Moe's tavern set is highly unlikely, if not guaranteed to never happen. This in itself poses a problem if the theme continues, as there aren't exactly very many memorable places in The Simpsons which could be made into sets featuring the likes of Lenny, Carl, Barney and Moe. These characters are all quite famous from the show, so it would be disappointing not to get them. Based on this, I would be not at all surprised if we get another wave of CMFs for this theme. I also wouldn't at all be surprised if that was all else we got for this license; while it may sell well, the theme has received relatively high amounts of negative responses from parents and others, including quite a fair amount of users who have commented in this thread or others where this theme was discussed.

Well yesterday I watched an episode where Itchy disembowelled Scratchy, nailed his lower intestines to a rail then pushed him into a volcano. After that he poured gas onto Scratchy sending him up in flames to his death. That's a regular week for Scratchy and much worse has happened to that cat, so its a bit late for LEGO to choose the moral high ground with the Simpsons theme. If they can make Itchy and Scratchy (probably the most violent characters ever made in LEGO) then they can make Moe's, the Church and anything else the Simpsons has to offer. they don't have to include beer just translucent mugs, as long as they don't come out and say its beer what's the problem?

Edited April 8, 2014 by Sam892

[just2good]

For everyone hoping for a Moe's Tavern, keep this interview with TLG's design VP in mind:

For Simpsons fans thinking you might eventually see Moe’s Tavern or the Nuclear Power Plant where Homer works, Ashton pretty much says it will never happen. His exact quote was, “we try to avoid anything alcohol-related within our products, especially targeting kids. I’m very dubious that that would happen.

Edited April 8, 2014 by just2good

[HomerJSimpson]

I think it goes without saying that a Moe's tavern set is highly unlikely, if not guaranteed to never happen. This in itself poses a problem if the theme continues, as there aren't exactly very many memorable places in The Simpsons which could be made into sets featuring the likes of Lenny, Carl, Barney and Moe. These characters are all quite famous from the show, so it would be disappointing not to get them. Based on this, I would be not at all surprised if we get another wave of CMFs for this theme. I also wouldn't at all be surprised if that was all else we got for this license; while it may sell well, the theme has received relatively high amounts of negative responses from parents and others, including quite a fair amount of users who have commented in this thread or others where this theme was discussed.

Ned's house, brown house, kwik-e-mart, android's dungeon, krusty burger, the frying Dutchman, sea captain's houseboat, the church, Bart's treehouse, Marge's car, homer's office, mr. Burns' office, skinner's office, lisa and Bart's classroom, professor frink's lab, king toots music store, the list goes on and on and on.

[TheLegoDr]

Moe would be good similar to Larry the barista.

I'd like a Skinner, if only to have another suit variation. I mean, a green suit with Burns was cool enough.

[strangely]

For everyone hoping for a Moe's Tavern, keep this interview with TLG's design VP in mind:

That's all well and good, but I think there's always a loop hole.

After all it's not technically Moe's Tavern, it's a family style restaurant. And based on the amount of references stuffed into the house and the CMF series I'd say they're probably not above making sets episode specific. After all the primary audience for this theme is Simpsons fans anyway.

And truthfully even if alcohol related content isn't aloud now that doesn't mean it won't be in the future. Standards can change, and it will if Lego continues to make adult oriented themes.

[GregoryBrick]

Well yesterday I watched an episode where Itchy disembowelled Scratchy, nailed his lower intestines to a rail then pushed him into a volcano. After that he poured gas onto Scratchy sending him up in flames to his death. That's a regular week for Scratchy and much worse has happened to that cat, so its a bit late for LEGO to choose the moral high ground with the Simpsons theme. If they can make Itchy and Scratchy (probably the most violent characters ever made in LEGO) then they can make Moe's, the Church and anything else the Simpsons has to offer. they don't have to include beer just translucent mugs, as long as they don't come out and say its beer what's the problem?

What's the problem? Well, they might think the distinction between making minifigures and making an entire set is significant; it's clear that a bar is a bar even if it doesn't say 'beer' anywhere; the Itchy & Scratchy violence is abstracted twice over (a cartoon within a cartoon) and hyperbolic to boot; not all vices are equivalent in LEGO's eyes (nor most people's), so the presence of one doesn't justify the presence of others; and I could probably come up with more justifications. But I don't get the point of your position - ok, so you've tried to deduce LEGO's standards and then you've argued that they are being contradictory, therefore . . . ?

[Gooker1]

For everyone hoping for a Moe's Tavern, keep this interview with TLG's design VP in mind:

Along w that note, Playmates toys was very reluctant on releasing moves tavern as a playset. It took them a few years and it was only released as a gamestop exclusive, so it was never sold in a toy store or a broader store like target. Sadly, moe's tavern is pretty much dead in the water, buuut, i do like the uncle moe's family feedbag. :)

[CroGo]

Ned's house, brown house, kwik-e-mart, android's dungeon, krusty burger, the frying Dutchman, sea captain's houseboat, the church, Bart's treehouse, Marge's car, homer's office, mr. Burns' office, skinner's office, lisa and Bart's classroom, professor frink's lab, king toots music store, the list goes on and on and on.

This list shows endless possibilites of buildings that Lego could include in future sets. Even without Moe's tavern, there are plenty of other building that could be produced, so I can't see a problem of getting a lot of different sets in the future. Of course, it all depends on Lego's plans.

[Themadpatter]

The only problem I find is that they'll mostly be out of scale with the giant house

[Legoman123]

What's the problem? Well, they might think the distinction between making minifigures and making an entire set is significant; it's clear that a bar is a bar even if it doesn't say 'beer' anywhere; the Itchy & Scratchy violence is abstracted twice over (a cartoon within a cartoon) and hyperbolic to boot; not all vices are equivalent in LEGO's eyes (nor most people's), so the presence of one doesn't justify the presence of others; and I could probably come up with more justifications. But I don't get the point of your position - ok, so you've tried to deduce LEGO's standards and then you've argued that they are being contradictory, therefore . . . ?

Well we are getting a bar in the Mos Eisley Cantina set.

[The Executive]

I really see no problem with Moe, all he needed to come with was a jar of pickled eggs. Personally I think Homer is the most controversial character of the roster, he's gotten drunk so many times in the show its pretty horrifying, Moe is just the bar tender.

[just2good]

, I have to say, the Homer and Scratchy figures are fantastic! Of course, this isn't much of a surprise, but the printing on both are exxxcccellent, and I love the tail accessory for Scratchy.

[Sam892]

What's the problem? Well, they might think the distinction between making minifigures and making an entire set is significant; it's clear that a bar is a bar even if it doesn't say 'beer' anywhere; the Itchy & Scratchy violence is abstracted twice over (a cartoon within a cartoon) and hyperbolic to boot; not all vices are equivalent in LEGO's eyes (nor most people's), so the presence of one doesn't justify the presence of others; and I could probably come up with more justifications. But I don't get the point of your position - ok, so you've tried to deduce LEGO's standards and then you've argued that they are being contradictory, therefore . . . ?

Lego has made Bars and taverns in the past, 4193 The London escape, mos eisley cantina 4501, 75052 the New Mos Eisley Cantina and the medieval market had a tavern. So LEGO hasn't always avoided alcohol and Moe's wouldn't be in a cartoon setting not a City setting.

With Itchy and Scratchy, it shouldn't matter if it's a cartoon inside a cartoon, there's still huge amounts of blood and organs being thrown around. Sure there's no blood referenced on those figures but LEGO did include items intended for violence in that setting ( the Axe and the Club).

It's a bit stupid for LEGO to say we don't want to reference alcohol as that would break our code of standards, even though the Cat and Mouse we just released clearly break our standards.

[GregoryBrick]

Lego has made Bars and taverns in the past, 4193 The London escape, mos eisley cantina 4501, 75052 the New Mos Eisley Cantina and the medieval market had a tavern. So LEGO hasn't always avoided alcohol and Moe's wouldn't be in a cartoon setting not a City setting.

With Itchy and Scratchy, it shouldn't matter if it's a cartoon inside a cartoon, there's still huge amounts of blood and organs being thrown around. Sure there's no blood referenced on those figures but LEGO did include items intended for violence in that setting ( the Axe and the Club).

It's a bit stupid for LEGO to say we don't want to reference alcohol as that would break our code of standards, even though the Cat and Mouse we just released clearly break our standards.

It just seems to me TLG sees meaningful distinctions about what's acceptable whereas you do not, e.g. you don't see any meaningful difference between (a) a fictional space-bar populated by wacky aliens with zero discussion of alcohol, (b) a medieval tavern with a couple of goblets or whatever, and © a cartoon location whose central theme is excessive consumption of alcohol and drunkenness. If TLG says one set is appropriate and another not, it doesn't make them hypocrites, or stupid, it simply means they are capable of making fine distinctions. Following your reasoning, you might as well say that they've made a bunch of guns already (ray guns in Alien Conquest), so it's hypocritical if they don't issue guns (Walther PPKs and Sig Sauers) to every police officer minifigure.

Edited April 10, 2014 by GregoryBrick

[Maniac4Legos]

For everyone hoping for a Moe's Tavern, keep this interview with TLG's design VP in mind:

I fully understand this opinion from LEGO. But I have to argue that they made The Hobbit and Lord of a The Rings sets with references to alcohol. Barrel Escape and An Unexpected Gathering for examples by using kegs suggested for beer. If I'm wrong correct me. I do not know much about LOTR so I am subject to being wrong. Also I am used to being proven wrong by surprise but do it kindly so I am not deeply offended.

, I have to say, the Homer and Scratchy figures are fantastic! Of course, this isn't much of a surprise, but the printing on both are exxxcccellent, and I love the tail accessory for Scratchy.

Congratulations for your openings! I was happy to watch! I'm looking forward to close up shots for flickr of these figures if you plan to do them. I wanna see the tail!

Irrelevant thought. The tail could be a great reuse if LEGO made a tail-related animal costume for future CMF's or Nightcrawler for an X-Men set. Calling either now! Dibs! Haha

[Sam892]

(a) a fictional space-bar populated by wacky aliens with zero discussion of alcohol,

Earlier you said a bar is clearly a bar regardless.

it's clear that a bar is a bar even if it doesn't say 'beer' anywhere;

(b) a medieval tavern with a couple of goblets or whatever, and © a cartoon location whose central theme is excessive consumption of alcohol and drunkenness

I don't know if you've seen Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides, but that Tavern and scene contained excessive consumption and drunkenness. While the scene isn't exactly shocking and mostly talking, its clear that the individuals inside the pub are drunk.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxiKFYthv6o Also the set didn't only include goblets but kegs of beer and rum bottles which clearly reference alcohol.

Following your reasoning, you might as well say that they've made a bunch of guns already (ray guns in Alien Conquest), so it's hypocritical if they don't issue guns (Walther PPKs and Sig Sauers) to every police officer minifigure.

Not really. My reasoning is that its hypocritical for LEGO to pick and choose what of their codes they follow at a given time, whether thats violance, alchol or whatever, however they willing shut down projects on CUUSOO that infringe one rule without a seconds thought .

[Yooha]

A LEGO code that forbids violence would be quite..um..strange, considering that there are several caracters in Harry Potter, LOTR, Star Wars...who are tortured/killed in the story.

This hypocricy is present in the western culture, not only in lego.

The likehood of occurence of the following 3 things in an american movie (from more to less likely):

- murder

- swearing

- sex

The order of how much the society thinks the following acts to be unmoral or condemnable (from less to more):

- sex

- swearing

- murder

[strangely]

I kind of think the fact that Moe's Tavern is a modern day bar, is what makes the difference to Lego. I guess Sci-fi settings serving possibly alcoholic drinks and historic settings known for it are okay simply because they're not realistic or something a kid would encounter in the present. At least that's the only difference I can think of between Moe's and the other alcoholic settings Lego has created.

Oddly I wonder if the fact that Moe serves beer is a part of it. Looking back Lego seems really okay with suggesting characters are drinking wine, I mean the CMF waiter comes with a wine bottle with a grape label. I suppose drunkenness is probably a bit more associated with beer than wine (At least where I live).

As for the violence issue I don't exactly see Lego following any real standards for that. I mean war scenes and battles are pretty much their bread and butter. To me it often appears that Lego chooses what guidelines they really want to follow. And at some points it feels arbitrary. I mean last year we got a prostitute in a Lone Ranger set...

Edited April 10, 2014 by strangely

[HomerJSimpson]

I don't think they will ever make a Moe's, but I think they WILL make a Moe and Barney minifigures. They could make a set called "barbecue in the park" or something (I couldn't think of a good name right now :smile:) and could include Homer, Lenny, Carl, Moe, and Barney. This way we have all the bar minifigs and could make a custom Moe's.

[GregoryBrick]

Earlier you said a bar is clearly a bar regardless.

Uh, my point was that Moe's bar and all that it references is still clearly Moe's bar even if they 'don't come out and say it's beer', translucent mugs don't get around the central theme of Moe's bar.

Anyway, TLG's codes that they make available to the public aren't go/no go logic switches. They're summaries of TLG's guiding principles, and it's no wonder they appear hypocritical to you if you think every reference to alcohol (or space-booze or whatever they drink in a galaxy long long ago) is equivalent. The same goes for violence and everything else.

Edited April 10, 2014 by GregoryBrick

[Super Goblin]

TLG has proven time after time they are hypocrites. If they feel like they can get away with alcohol/violence without backlash they will.

[jluck]

TLG has proven time after time they are hypocrites. If they feel like they can get away with alcohol/violence without backlash they will.

Hypocrites might be a little strong. They're a company trying to make money without bad publicity. A bar from an adult-oriented tv show could draw some ire so TLG will avoid it. A waiter holding a bottle with grapes...unlikely to garner any notice except by a few adults in an adult forum. TLG is a business, and will operate as such. Profits are most important, followed by image and I for one, have no issues with that.

[Blondie-Wan]

TLG has proven time after time they are hypocrites. If they feel like they can get away with alcohol/violence without backlash they will.

How does "hypocrites" apply? They're not saying people should do one thing and then doing another themselves; they're just picking and choosing what they will and won't do. Hypocrisy has nothing to do with it. I think a better term for what you mean would be "arbitrary," but even that isn't quite a perfect fit.

They do sets with violent or (tangentially) alcohol-related elements, but there are lines they won't cross, and that's their right. They're not telling others what to do or what not to do (and then doing it themselves); they're just saying what they won't do, and then not doing it. That's not hypocrisy.

[Lord Rahl of Clannad]

How does "hypocrites" apply? They're not saying people should do one thing and then doing another themselves; they're just picking and choosing what they will and won't do. Hypocrisy has nothing to do with it. I think a better term for what you mean would be "arbitrary," but even that isn't quite a perfect fit.

They do sets with violent or (tangentially) alcohol-related elements, but there are lines they won't cross, and that's their right. They're not telling others what to do or what not to do (and then doing it themselves); they're just saying what they won't do, and then not doing it. That's not hypocrisy.

I've looked at his quote, and in all honesty I think that he meant to say that TLG use double standards rather than calling them hypocrites. In some respects this does make sense, as the rules seem to be different depending on the theme, but that's probably as much to do with the licensee as it is to do with TLG. In short, TLG look at the context of something to determine whether it is appropriate for the target audience or not. In this case, they consider Moe's Tavern inappropriate due to it showcasing realistic, modern day alcoholism.

[BrickG]

I don't think it's a double standard. I don't think they ban ALL violence and stuff. They just judge it by the medium it's in. Like WWII Nazis they look at the history and consider it for whatever reason inappropriate. Simpsons Itchy and Scratchy they might consider more appropriate because of it's medium being a cartoon that doesn't take things seriously. I would make a comparison to Stephen Colbert who's "character" can say some pretty horrible things and he's taken heat for his character's racist portrayal of an Asian stereotype. However despite the overt racism and stuff people don't usually take it that way due to the medium he uses with comedy and essentially making fun of racism with a ridiculous character made to outline how ridiculous it is.

And for violence, not all of it is created equal even if it seems to be at first. If you watch a video of Hitler shooting a Jewish person and watch another video of Captain America shooting a terrorist in exactly the same way one of those will be considered worse. It's all about how it's portrayed and less about the actual physical violence. Cutting off one head is not necessarily equal to cutting off another head. There are some heads cut off in LotRs but they're bad guy monster heads. Whereas if the movie was more filled with human heads rolling TLG might have a harder time making sets for those movies.

I wouldn't call it hypocritical. I'd call it attempting to be smartly selective. They look at more than just the level of violence and look at the content of the violence and the medium which it is portrayed. I don't think it's arbitrary either and am sure they spend time researching whether a franchise is appropriate for most of their market (most parents don't mind some violence if it's "good guys beating up bad guys" violence). And I think taking such a black and white view of the issue is naive.

Edited April 12, 2014 by BrickG