lego the hutt

Eurobricks Citizen
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    132

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by lego the hutt

  1. Posted · Edited by lego the hutt

    You got alot of your information wrong. The necromancer stuff was always in the movie before the 3 movie split. The extended it to 3 movies cause they ahd already shot so much footage, and to make it 3 movies they found even more content from the appendixes to justify it.

    Leave it to this forum to nay say against what Peter Jackson said in an interview. The necromancer stuff wasn't totally absent originally, but it wasn't a main story line. I expect similar to how it was in the Hobbit literature, probably elaborated on for the movies a bit. They have owned the rights to the 100 pages, or however long it is, in the appendices of the return of the king ever since they were purchased for the original movies 10+ years ago. They didn't just "find more content." But yes, I'm sure it is a given they used as much footage that was previously shot as possible. They did actually have to call actors back for more work who had gone home thinking they were finished with the project.

  2. Posted

    I thought the reason for why barrel escape and mirkwood spider sets came out when they weren't in the movie was common knowledge but apparently not.

    What I read was that originally they weren't going to follow Gandalfs side of the story where he deals with the Necromancer. That part is only briefly mentioned in the book and the story stays focused on the main group of Bilbo and the Dwarves when Gandalf leaves.

    But they owned the rights to the appendix in the return of the king where more of the info on the necromancer is discussed. It was decided to tell more of the story than the Hobbit book actually covers as we all know and thus decided it had to be 3 movies to tell it all...and it makes more money that way as well...

    That is also why we have Lego sets that are "Sneak Preview" sets. The spiders and the barrels were originally going to be in the first movie when the toys were planned. The way they added the necromancer content and broke up the movie into thirds was an after thought.

    I read an interview with peter jackson where they actually called the actors back to film the necromancer parts after the original first 2 movies were completed.

    That was rambling thoughts but hopefully it made some sense...

  4. Posted

    Its a shame that lego went with an ewok village as the Big Star Wars exclusive set, although I'm looking foward to seeing how it turns out, I certainly don't plan on buying it and I think myself and many others would have rather seen a large Geonosian Areana this year. Oh well, I guess this just means I can pruchase other products now.

    I think you are probably in the minority. A very vocal portion of the lego community (mostly afols) have been asking for an ewok village for years now. Between the ewok village and the rancor pit lego is doing a good job of listening to the consumer.

  5. Posted

    I would be horrified if Jackson got hold of film rights to The Silmarillion. Tolkien is by far my favorite author, and I was greatly saddened by some of the ridiculous content in the first Hobbit movie. If Christopher Tolkien values his father's unspoiled works, he will keep them far away from Peter Jackson.

    Sure some parts are elaborated for the movies but I'm wondering what you are referring to specifically?

    I think most everyone realized long before the Hobbit move was released that it was going to cover parts of the Hobbit that were only briefly mentioned in the book. That's why it went from 2 movies to 3. To tell the portion of the story that was covered in the RotK appendices that directly relates to the Hobbit but were only mentioned in the Hobbit book in passing.

    There is also the issue of being legally bound to only include what they own the rights to... i can think of a couple instances which limited what they could have described in more detail in the Hobbit movie itself.

  6. Posted · Edited by lego the hutt

    Hmm is LEGO even allowed to sell it as a minifigure by itself? usualy not.

    In my opinion that is not the correct cape at all, it looks better than the short one, but still kindof silly looks very much like a triangle 4625528 is the part number that should be asked for.

    A lego rep confirmed that 6024597 is the correct part number.

    I think the reason it is that cape instead of the normal type of capes that go over the shoulder is because of the long hair piece that interferes less with this cape than one of the standard capes.

  7. Posted · Edited by lego the hutt

    wow, people are still having problems with this? I would have thought anyone who cared would have gotten their replacement by now...it took me 3 tries to get the right one, and that was awhile ago.

    There is a picture of the correct/long cape there: (scroll down about half way until you see the pics)

    http://www.bricksetf...#Comment_136611

    The part # is: 6024597

    They sent me the short cape as a replacement at first until I was able to supply them with the correct part #. After I gave them the number I got a reply saying that the part # I gave was correct and that my full length cape was on the way.

    Hopefully that helps