Eurobricks Ladies
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by krimimimi

  1. 7 hours ago, brickbride said:

    I like looking at my Snape minifigures because I like the book version of Snape, even though he doesn't have either a glow-in-the-dark head or a purple shirt. I don't think many kids would care either, for the same reason - they like a character and want to be able to play them, that's all. But given how many people are hung up on small details such as a minifigure finally getting a new torso print, a "better" faceprint, or printed legs, I'd expect the majority of adult fans to disagree.

    Interesting point. I go back and forth on wanting better prints, like I don't feel the Snape minifig's face captures most of the sardonic Snape at the front of the classroom, but then again, you want the dramatic moments, so that only bugs me a little, and on the opposite side, the arm printing in general is very welcome... But I also know when I was building the Ford, I didn't feel I needed those new prints of Harry's and Ron's outfits. Admittedly, it probably didn't help that Ron's didn't even feel like an improvement, and Harry's actually seemed a step backwards. (I miss the pockets.) I would have much rather had the budget spent getting us new ghosts or Ginny's abominable Yule Ball dress, stuff that's difficult to MOC. Obviously they do things like adding new prints to generate sales, we needed the boys in the set, and it's more complicated than just giving us more characters in more scenes. I want HP lego to succeed and keep going for ages, but if external / sales pressures weren't a thing, I'd have (theoretically unnecessary) minifigs like Lavender dancing with Seamus at the Ball. 

  2. 8 hours ago, (1)Stein said:

    If we go from the picture on the box about the extension, the next release will be massive and probable cost +€300 with the third part costing another €200!? 

    Their reasons stated in multiple interviews over the years for not doing the Bell Towers and rear of the castle amount to an unfavourable intersection of necessary price and lacking "iconic-ness" of location. I can't see them releasing a 300 EUR play scale castle set that doesn't include the Great Hall. They might even do the Staircase tower in sections to bring the price down while increasing customisability. I know there's at least one non-lego plastic toy that approaches the tower that way. 

    5 hours ago, Black Falcon said:

    [...]Honestly, I´ve never had the impression that the films would imply that a female character could only become champion if they would come from a girls only-school. And I´ve never before heard that someone else had that impression. [...]

    Which one are you referring to here?

    WARNING, some MATHS FOLLOW: As they said "low-key", and obviously it's a plot driven choice with Cedric as a romantic rival to Harry. Without electing for a certain amount of framing (Cho is bi and could have just as easily chosen Cedrica as Harry - and rather frighteningly, iirc, acting upon the attraction was also illegal in Scotland at the time the story takes place 😧 🏳️‍🌈. Can anyone from the UK confirm / deny?), from a story-telling POV, the decision to make Cedric male in that constellation is simple. From a statistical angle, however, removing the (newly) same sex schools from the equation, there was only a 1 in 4 chance of both remaining Hogwarts champions being male if gender otherwise doesn't figure into it, so it does also seem to - low-key - imply something. Mathematically, it is a less probable result: it is three times more probable that there would have been at least an equal number of witches as wizards from Hogwarts, if not more witches outright. Ignoring plot for the moment, maybe it's just a question of luck, but in a fictional world in need of defining, there's a distinct possibility it's a descriptive statement instead, and the probability of the latter increases when Fleur proceeds to do poorly in the competition. (That's a value-free representation of mathematics. I appreciate it was largely driven by the story they were attempting to tell.)  

    But if Beauxbatons and Durmstrang are not same sex schools, that is to say if the filmmakers had gone with what the author had originally written, that aspect is lessened from a world building POV as a witch's success - canonically - becomes a proven possibility. (There are then 11 in 16 chances of having 2 or more (50% or more) witches (or wizards) as champions. If the maths make you uncomfortable, it might help to note there are also 6 in 16 chances of a 50/50 split. 😉)

    That said, that's maths meets writing theory, so I didn't care about that change as much as I did the odd aging, like somehow Snape, Lupin and Black would have all been 33 - 34 in PoA. And back to topic... as much as I love the canonical casting choices, the result is I do need less wrinkly minifigs to make it look right.


    As for the named character in the set who didn't appear in the films: I would assume Madam Malkin. The flowersaleswitchard is the opposite, an unnamed character who does appear in the films. 

  3. @BrickBob Studpants It doesn't have to be something major, but if they're expanding the material from a movie to a multiple episode series, then I would expect book characters who have little or no presence in the films to make more of an appearance on screen. I'm not talking about whatever usually sets people off, significant changes to the cast, their backstories, the setting, or timing, merely the inclusion of Cormac, Firenze, Grubbly-Plank, Peeves and Binns etc. in sets, in the same way they've included Sinistra and Vector, and not sets revolving around them exclusively. Simply more things (characters, locations, scenes) to flesh out their world. 

    Perhaps naively, but I still can't see that alienating moviegoers, no matter how far afield the series itself went. It's a little like the ghost in the AC: a bonus, if not a must have, but definitely nothing to actively complain about, whether you recognise her or not. 

  4. There's nothing limiting them to a three year run, though. I understand they want to make sure there's a Great Hall available for new fans, but three year cycles seem to be cooling interest, and stretching that a little might help. 

    I can't help wondering how the television show will influence that. The buy in for your lego Hogwarts is pretty absurd right now, certainly for more casual fans, but the advisability of that might depend on the age of the viewers the show is hoping to reach. 

  5. 7 hours ago, BrickBob Studpants said:

    The Gringotts set we already have is clearly meant to be compatible with DA. Besides, DA will soon be 4 years old and will likely face its EoL within a year or two, negating any further add-ons that rely on its availability. A DA remake is more likely I think :laugh:

    I wouldn't be so sure about that. You're approaching it with simple common sense, and that's not the only driving factor in their decision making process. (If it is at all... :wink:

    Something going EoL isn't an entirely reliable predictor of things to come. For example, the Ninjago City and NC Docks had been retired for over a year before NC Gardens appeared, and for the same reasons you don't think they'd release a DA2 after DA went EoL, I'd argue the latter set lost a little on appeal if you hadn't gotten at least one of the others before. Agreed, but that didn't stop them. Instead you have the release of NC Markets to broaden NC Gardens' appeal again. While it might seem superficially counterintuitive, the approach helps with retailer shelf space issues, rewards fans by increasing the value of something they took a chance on, and allows your piggy bank to replenish so you can make the next stretch when it inevitably comes. (How many aren't getting the 2024 GH because the product cycles were too short?) The thought a set might suddenly get such a boost in the future in turn lends more attractiveness to their present collections (sometimes deservedly, sometimes not), and that while they also try to keep the scalping / speculating in check (purchase limits, or through brutal re-releases: 2009 and 2015 Winter Toy Shops, for instance). It's a delicate balance. Whatever else, the brand holds value in part by how they manage releases and re-releases; that's part of what you're paying for.

    So yeah, I can absolutely picture them doing the same with DA. On a different note, though, the set was made so you could display two builds across from two others, so if they did the same again, it's not necessarily a deal breaker that you'd be missing half the street. 

    We are also definitely experiencing a DA remake, and will eventually see more of the same if only the line runs long enough. Rinse, repeat. Lego, kindly take my monehs. 

    As for Gringotts, I know you can display the set with DA, but if the line continues, there's no earthly way they don't remake it, also on a D2C scale. The current version also has half a set that proves difficult to display with the rest, and over-invests in the façade while under-investing in the Menagerie, which is too rudimentary by far and not in scale with the street. So this, too, feels like something they'd revisit. 

  6. 8 hours ago, Bobdapeach said:

    By advent calendar do you mean the already revealed great hall one, or another one?

    Yes, the 2024 one with GH House tables and sconce House statues and the carolling ghost. 


    • a second DA scale, with the Leaky and maybe another shop or two
    • a DA part 2 that's the other side of the street
    • an eventual Knockturn Alley (same scale, after the series begins and they have more material for it),
    • further down the line, a DA 1 scale compatible Gringotts, 
    • Hogsmeade (it will do double duty as a Christmas / winter display set),
    • the Knight Bus,
    • the Ford,
    • Hagrid's hut (if they can revisit the Burrow in greater detail, they can definitely revisit Hagrid, especially when he's so popular),
    • maybe they'd also revisit the Durmstrang ship, those are perennial faves.

    at which point they can take it from the top again

  7. Also Quality Quidditch Supplies for sure. They can't resist Quidditch content, and it's cheaper and more playable than the bookstore, regardless of scene length. Daily Prophet - it would give them a chance to do an interior. Maybe they'd even include Scribbulus and Fortescue's again.

    Plus some of the ones that aren't as well known and likely to be seen as too pricey, relatively speaking, in a D2C scale, might be deemed a lot more affordable / viable in the new scale where you'd have far less content inside. Then again, they didn't exactly feel pressed to include a lot of creatures in the Menagerie in the Gringotts set with a massive budget, so who knows if that's actually a consideration. 

  8. The Elder Wand seems like it would be a good selling point for yet another Dumbledore if they ever get around to an HP CMF 3. Cursed hand version. Set includes the red-handed Harry, too, post Umbridge. If they ever get around to printing the hands, then he could have a "must not tell lies" version. They could also dual mould the snake head one for a walking stick for Lucius...

  9. Hey, I'm looking at the closed version of the Potions classroom shown on the back of the box and it looks like in between those "arches" there might be a new 1x3 jumper piece (dark tan) with a single stud. (Presently we have 1x3 with 2 studs.) In the middle it has a 1x1 dark grey flat tile, and to either side, there's a dark grey cheese piece attached at a 90* angle to the original 1x3 piece. That should only work if there's a flat tile beneath it, though, right? 

  10. I think this is the first leaked photo from this wave I'm excited about (although I think I'll get Aragog as well). This looks like a great Christmas addition. Yeah, the brick built House mascots are a little odd, but I can't say it sours me on the lot. It really brings the House pride, and I'm very pleased to get the new House jumpers. 

  11. 1 hour ago, Bugbot20082 said:

    One more thought, with the Troll included some of us speculated that the great hall might be decorated for Halloween, sadly this is not the case. But could Halloween pumpkins for example be included in the advent calendar? 

    The X-mas decorations we can see in the pic we have are 5 pieces of holly and four Christmas puds, for a total of 10 very Christmassy decorations with a potential additional 8 if the cupcakes are deemed too x-massy. (And possibly the turkey leg if that's included.) At that count, it shouldn't be much of a problem to remove them and replace it with something else, they could include several pumpkins, maybe some Halloween coloured cupcakes or a cake, chocolate with orange icing, and perhaps a few bats or something. That would get you an equivalent result.  

    According to the information we had from the Polish website from mid-March, the Advent Calendar is supposed to complement the GH set. We know it will have a tree and some gifts, I could see that being additional trimmings so Flitwick (also included) can go all out decorating the Hall for the hols. I can't picture it being Halloween decorations, though. 

  12. Aragog looks great. :wub:  Well, and terrifying, but mostly great. Nice job there. IIRC, there was a price adjustment for Aragog to an estimated $15. Does anyone recall if that's correct? 

    Thanks for the GH dimensions, @MaxHeadroom. That helps.

    Nice spot on the book, @BacktoBricks. It looks like it's going to be a different version of Hagrid's hut Harry, just with a happier face. As it isn't a particularly original minifig, I'll assume it's from Ameet and not DK. Does anyone recall if we've seen this year's DK PR? Which minifig we're getting? 

    And a last thanks @mark1991t for providing the account names. That made them findable. (And if you're still looking for the box pix, cmf6169_leaks had posted them as well. :classic:)

  13. 4 hours ago, brickbride said:

    Do you have pics? That sounds awesome.

    DMed. 😊

    Hospital Wing and RoR are also two of my faves. I loved the library, and even Dumbledore's Office wasn't toooo bad, but the form was all wrong. Primarily it was good for reusing elsewhere, which hardly seems the point.

    I'm not sure I agree as to footprint, as space is dear, but I at least want more detail, more creativity, and the interior of the 2024 GH seems to lack both beyond the Christmas puds. As for the rest, you're speaking from my heart. lol It's odd, because they've come so far in set design, but often that seems not to apply to this theme, particularly when they reinvent the wheel in short intervals, or see Madame Malkin's, say. 



    Can anyone make out the interior depth of the Great Hall?


  14. It looks like they've finally give Snape the proper legs! w00t! Those extra, nonsensical lines always drove me bonkers. Lucius' (and seven other HP characters') legs instead of the one from hp134.

    @Gorilla94 they still seem to be BURPing heavily and in dire need of a Tummy Soothing Tonic. :pir_laugh2: 

    @brickbride PPM was brilliant. I've got at least a dozen of them modded in my castle. Fluffy Encounter was the same wave, though, iirc, from 2021 anyway. I remember the pandemic era interview with the poor FE designer where he was trying to explain to a non-Potterhead just why the room was empty and how putting the turkey leg in there was such a departure. I really felt for the gent.  


    @Mordarch, @Brickwraith @chris6507, @SoupOrFishOil, @Gorilla94

    (sorry if I forgot anyone) For those like me who don't have IG accounts, you can use the IG mirror (with all the adblocking stuff you have and then some :sceptic:) and the same hashtags as on IG. The snag is they generally only update once a day, and if it gets triggered too early, you're SooL until those 24 hours are over. (So kindly don't trigger it until you see concrete word of a leak so I don't regret sharing. :tongue:) For those who'd like to help us, it's still possible without IG accounts to view a few entries, but only a few. If you'd only name the acct like @Darth Shadowthrone did (cheers! :wub:) - I think that's still within rules as long as you're not posting links? - then we can go directly to their IG pages and usually still see the relevant posts. That works as long as they haven't made more than nine posts since. Plus the poster gets the hit, which is always nice.

  15. 38 minutes ago, BrickBob Studpants said:

    Those were discontinued for all themes, the last ones having been released in 2022 :laugh: I really liked those, even with their limitations :shrug_oh_well:

    I'm sorry to hear that, but thank you for mentioning it. It makes me feel less taken advantage of as a Harry Potter fan. 

  16. 1 hour ago, BacktoBricks said:

    Anyway, sorry for doubling down on your disappointment. :grin:

    No, it's nice to know I'm not alone. :wink: I take your point on the smaller DA-lite shops. While I do appreciate them making them accessible to different budgets, if they never turn around and offer DA2 with a proper Malkin's, Owl Post, Eeylops, etc. then I'll remain displeased that such a small amount of new set is dangled as temptation to get those DA-lite sets instead. That's the thread, not much new on offer, but give us all your monehs.

    @Gorilla94, unfortunately the shipping adds up when you bricklink the lot. but you're right that it's cheaper than trunks and Banners. @Virginia_Bricks, they could run through annual packs of all four House cardigans, Quidditch uniforms, House jumpers, robes open, robes closed... give us four or five heads, four or five hair pieces, and allow us to mix and match to create the student body or sig figs. I don't need dozens of Harrys & Lunas etc, although that's still closer to my ideal than having to get them from trunks or bricklink. They should do the same with Death Eaters, you could mix and match, with four of each, hair, heads, torsos, that's 64 different possible combinations, double that if it's got a 2nd reverse face. 

  17. I'm not feeling it. The description for the Potions set was it was a single modular unit, and I very much hope it's wrong. How can that be worth 40 EUR? And either these modules come without castle framework, in which case they're apparently far too expensive and they'll take too much shelf space to store, or we're getting soaked on the exterior framework.

    They're still no wider than the ones we had in the 2021+ system, we remain stuck at 16 studs, although it looks like they may have some of the necessary added depth, they're doing this at the expense of walls that can actually be useful for details in the build, and yet still cost us that area in much needed floor space with those odd pony walls. You see that in the Hufflepuff common room. We've got a small couch, a table, a bog standard chair piece, a fireplace and that's it. Try a making a classroom, to not look stingy you need 4 studs per row of desks and seats, with fourteen to work with, that's two jammed back to back, two studs free and then the teacher's desk, and no real room for a chalkboard, or you skip the teacher's desk, but that's also weird and not suited to every class. And it's only two studs free because the hair of the back row of students and the teacher extends into the "wall" / doorway space. Sixteen was always just that bit tight. 

    As a whole, I'm getting really nervous about the direction they're taking. Too much previously covered ground in the sets, only very marginally improved, if at all, too few new additions to justify them this soon, and the prices... Previously we had pivotal scenes (like the trio bonding as they battle the troll (albeit a few minifigs shy)) available for small money, in small sets. Now we need to buy a very pricey set to have that scene. (Or everyone bricklinks the troll.) The price per unit in the D2C DA, even after the price hike, no discounts applied, is 112 EUR for Ollivander's and Scribbulus. Here Ollivander's (despite the lovely new wands) is so pared back, and now compare Madams Malkin's to Scribbulus and ask if what's on offer is worth the 12 EUR saved? And nowhere in all of this are we seeing the Quidditch and school uniform Accessory Packs anymore that Star Wars seems to enjoy. If you want those other Houses, you need to buy into expensive sets, those ridiculous trunks, or something like the Banners, which still aren't a remotely good way to come by other House uniforms.

    I'm not sure how to phrase this, but as a fan, I don't feel respected by many of these choices, if that makes sense? I'm not an ATM. You do need to deliver something enticing for the price. 

    Sorry for being a downer. It's just I was so looking forward to this, and now I'm disappointed. :sad:

  18. 43 minutes ago, BrickBob Studpants said:

    He also said a reveal would likely happen next week, which makes sense. We‘re running out of opportunities this week since they don‘t typically reveal sets on weekends

    Odd choice. 1. May is a bank holiday for most of Europe (not Switzerland apparently). Falling as it does in the middle of the week means plenty of people will take the first two, last two, or full week off (we are), leaving many offices short staffed. lego have 4. May fixed in their calendars, on a Saturday, no less; it seems odd to deliberately plan things for the week if they aren't forced to. If so, here's betting on Monday or Tuesday for HP to spread the workload. 


    1 hour ago, BrickBob Studpants said:

    Last year, it was on the 1st of May, and other years it was also a bit late, like on the 25th or the 28th of April. So, we‘re still within the normal range! 2022 spoiled us a bit with the reveal on April 8th :laugh:

    Ack! The dreaded Mandela effect! :pir_laugh2: So now I had to go check. Only counting the leaked pix for the summer waves, 2023 the leaks were about the 28th, 2022 the 8th, and 2021 they were 16. April. The dates for the previous years are proving more difficult to nail down right now. 

    Edit: The official lego press release was on or before 28. April 2020. Haven't found the leaks for that year yet. 

    We had official pix for half the 2019 summer wave 25. April, and lego released them all on 29. April (including the 2019 HP AC).

    2018 was the relaunch of the theme, and I'm not sure it should count, but I found some early official pix of the Great Hall (not even the toy fair version) from 16. February 2018 on brothers-brick. Going off their reporting, the rest seems to have been officially press released 16. May. 

    Soooooo impatient. :grin:

  20. How many of the rest of you keep refreshing your damn browsers? When have we last been so late in the year for pix of the summer sets? This feels really late.

    My impression was lego has started following the leaked pix shortly after with official releases (presumably as damage control and to take away from the leakers' thunder), if so, we're still dependent on those leaks for the timeline. I am feeling so let down by their lack of leakiness... :pir_laugh2:

  21. Iirc, part of the issue with epilogue Hermione & Ron in the Deluxe HE was "where do you stop?" because they didn't feel you could include those two and then not include Rose and Hugo as well, especially if you had Harry & Ginny's kids in the set (that's now nine just between the 2 families), and then maybe you go for Draco & Astoria, and then you need Scorpious... (that's twelve between the 3 families) Throw in the trolley witch and engineer, and they'd have been well on their way to having enough characters just in the epilogue alone to fill the set, which presented a problem if they wanted to stick to their various scenes through the ages plan. I think that might have been from an interview with Marcos. That was one of his last HP sets.