Joebot

I've read conflicting theories on this. Some say they're going to split the text of "The Hobbit" into two movies. Others say the first movie will cover "The Hobbit," and the second movie will be cobbled together from Tolkien's notes and appendices. I hope you're right, because that second theory sounds like it could be awful. I suppose nobody really knows for sure what they're planning because they haven't written the scripts yet! And they CAN'T write the scripts because of the writer's strike! It's a great story, and I highly recommend it, especially if you like those other writers. "The Hobbit" doesn't have the thematic weight of Pullman's "His Dark Materials," but it's still a good read. I liked it a lot better than the Narnia books.

So, it's official. New Line is coming out with TWO "Hobbit" movies, both executive produced by Peter Jackson. The theory is that the first one (due 2010) will cover the "The Hobbit" book, and the second one will pull together various storylines from all the supplementary stuff that Tolkien wrote (due 2011). I think we'd all agree that the "Lord of the Rings" movie trilogy with its PG-13 rating was a little too dark and violent for TLC to take on as a license. But what about "The Hobbit?" The book definitely skews younger, and is basically a fun, harmless, fantasy adventure story. Seems like that would be right up TLC's alley. We got new dwarf mini-figs this year, so we'd be all set for Thorin and his group. Bilbo would be easy to do with the stubby mini-fig legs. Other characters like Gandalf, Elrond, Beorn, and Bard the Bowman would all make terrific figs. And then there's the giant spiders, eagles, wargs, wood elves, trolls, etc. But, the big set, the one that I really want to see ... Smaug's Lair. This $100 set could come with Smaug in his mountain lair, a treasure horde, the secret door, and Bilbo. C'mon, Lego, make it happen!!!

I can't quite figure that one out either. I realize it's just branding, and I should simply be grateful that we even get these house sets (regardless of what category TLC decides to sell them under), but it's still weird. The new doors and windows are interesting. I hope this is just the first move towards a more coherent, modular set of window designs. New windows in some new sizes is something I've been wanting for years now.

HA! That was my first thought too! This baby's got some junk in the trunk.

I understand where you're coming from, and I sort of agree with you, but I don't think it's quite fair to say this is an "army truck set." This is a set that depicts one of the most iconic scenes from one of the most popular movies ever. Yes, it's a scene that just happens to have an army truck in it, but that's not the point of the set, in the same way that, say, the Best Lock sets were designed primarily as miliary vehicles. I know, it's just semantics, but I think there's a difference. Besides, in the last 20 years, TLC has made sets with: swords, spears, halberds, sabers, flintlocks, muskets, scimitars, laser blasters, bows, crossbows, catapults, pistols, rifles, battle axes, flails, scythes, cannons, clubs, and knives. Does this Indiana Jones set cross some invisible line that they didn't cross years ago?? The TLC "non violence" policy has ALWAYS been a big joke. Violence and conflict have been at the heart of Lego theme design for decades now. Anyway ... looks like a fun set, thanks for the pictures!

TLC isn't opening a new park; Blackstone is opening a new park with the Lego name on it. TLC sold the parks to Blackstone several years ago, and thus Blackstone takes on the finacial risk of building and operating the parks. TLC owns only a 30% controlling interest in the amusement parks. BBC News story Here's the money quote: ""The toy market has been declining for some time and is extremely competitive," said Lego owner Kjeld Kirk Kristiansen. In an effort to boost profits, the company invested heavily in a host of new markets, including computer games, baby products, camping goods and even shoes. The company has since taken steps to reverse that strategy and said the sale of the Legoland parks will further enable it focus on its core businesses." Likewise, TLC doesn't make video games. The Lego Star Wars game, for example, was developed by Traveller's Tales (PS2, Windows, XBox), Griptonite Games (Nintendo GBA), and Aspyr (Mac), then published by Eidos / LucasArts. These other companies take on the financial risk of developing the games, not TLC. So, there was all this weird "stuff" that TLC used to do that was well outside of their core business, and they lost a ton of money because of it. They've since then sold off all those business lines to other companies who are better equipped to know how to do those things successfully. Another key part of their financial turnaround, sadly, was the lay-off of over a thousand people. New York Times article I guess the point I'm trying to make is that as fan, we want to say, "See, Lego! If you make the themes and sets that we tell you to make, you'll be successful!" That's undoubtedly part of the solution. But behind the scenes are a bunch of business decisions having to do with cutting jobs, reducing manufacturing and distrbution costs, streamlining their product offerings, and selling off parts of the business to other companies. But that stuff is really kinda dull to talk about. It's a lot more fun to talk about all the cool new sets and themes coming out in '08!!

While Grievous' post is beautifully articulated and clearly from the heart, I think BM is right -- there were other business factors at work besides poorly designed themes. Manufacturing and distribution costs were part of it, but so were TLC's unwise ventures into non-toy areas like clothing, video games, and amusement parks. They've since then streamlined their product offering to get rid of most (sadly, not all; see Lego ice cube tray) of their non-toy products, and sold off their amusement parks to a third party. They also moved most of their manufacturing plants to developing nations in order to take advantage of cheaper labor costs. Depending on your political views on globalization, this may or may not be a good thing. I think we've all seen the decrease in TLC's quality control in recent years. While the theme designs have been vastly improved, the actual pieces have not.

Very interesting! Thanks for the clarification on all of that. I wasn't aware of all those details. I'm sure you're right about TLC not releasing official "The Dark Knight" branded sets because it's a PG-13 movie. That was the same reason we always heard for why TLC never went after the "Lord of the Rings" license. As for the sets being influenced by B:TAS, I think it's more of a case of B:TAS and TLC both trying to do the same thing -- create a very iconic, stylized, almost "timeless" look. Batman is such a versatile character that can be interpreted and imagined in a wide range of styles -- from the campy Adam West show to the dark, military-esque "Batman Begins." Making a set based on, say, "The Dark Knight" movie might limit the set's appeal. The movie will come and go, and will soon fade from the public's consciousness, and the sales of the branded merchandise will tail off. Instead, TLC has decided to go with a timeless, iconic appeal that will make it less of a quick "fad" attached to a movie. I think that's a really smart way to go.

You know, I live in Chicago too, and I NEVER find stuff early. Hinckley has some evil, mystical diviniation ability to see where the new sets are going to pop up first. Either that, or the Lego store at Woodfield Mall just sucks. But ... back on topic ... kind of a bummer about all the repeat cars. If you get the whole line, you're stuck with a handful of duplicates. I have no interest in the line (or the movie, for that matter), but the cars do look nice. I like that windshield.

I run into that a lot too. "I didn't know what to get you because I don't know what you already have." I keep telling them that it doesn't matter. It's all just bricks. Now my son is old enough to start getting Lego sets for Christmas too, which is REALLY great, especially since his wish list overlaps with mine a bit.

That's a good point. I was wondering if their merchandising license will allow TLC to make "The Dark Knight" branded sets, or would that require a separate license with the movie studio that's making the movie? For example, the Spidey sets that Lego made were licensed to the movie studio (Sony), not with Marvel. Thus, Lego was forced to include scenes and characters ONLY from the movies. We know that the Batman license is with DC, which gives TLC more leeway on the sets and characters that are available to them. However, can they make a set based on "The Dark Knight" movie? I dunno. Speaking of which ... I read a description of the six-minute footage that they showed to some fans last week. It sounds awesome. With "The Dark Knight," along with Hulk and Iron Man movies, next year could be really great for comic book movies.

I'm lucky to have parents who are very good sports about my hobby. They bought me the Alpha 1 Rocket Base for Christmas way back in 1979, and they've been buying me Lego sets ever since. They think I'm nuts, but they keep buying them anyway! And my mother-in-law buys me Lego sets too!

I WANT to get excited about the new system, but I keep coming back to Alex54's point here. Even if the new system is freaking awesome and has everything any train fan could ever want, it's still going to struggle if Lego doesn't finally start putting some marketing muscle behind their train line. Train sets are very hard to find in retail, and they rarely ever get any kind of advertising push. As for the question of building inclines, I've done that before. It's pretty simple to do, but it eats up a TON of bricks and space.

I like this theory a lot. I hope you're right! I wonder if TLC plots stuff out that far in advance though. I've always read they have about a two-year product development cycle (from initial concept to release). Do you think they've got the 2011 SW sets charted out? I guess they might, at least in some rough conceptual form. I dunno. It's a great theory though. I really hope TLC ends the license with a big bang, rather than just letting it fizzle out over the final couple of years.

It's the Alliance Bobsled Team!!

You're right, I should have clarified ... it's running out of steam for me personally. I totally understand and respect that others are excited about the EU sets. That's awesome, and honestly I wish I could share the enthusiasm. But to me, they may as well be generic Space sets, and that's not a theme that I generally buy. Man, I sound old. Yeesht. "You young punks with your Rogue Shadows and your Clone Wars ... pfft. Back in MY DAY, all we had was X-wings and TIE fighters, and we LIKED IT!" (shakes walking cane)

Yeah, I don't know that we can make ANY definitive claims about what country gets what sets first. Trying to make sense of TLC's distribution pattern is a fool's errand. There simply is no rhyme or reason to it. Or if there IS, it's so bizarre and abstract as to be meaningless to us mere mortals. I'm convinced they just throw darts at a big map of the world. "And the first country to get the new Star Wars sets will be .... (throws dart) ... Pacific Ocean!!"

Internet Explorer will do that too, if you have it configured properly. Select Tools > Internet Options Click the Advanced tab Scroll down to the "Multimedia" section Place a check mark in the "Enable Automatic Image Resizing" box Click OK Now, Rupee's pictures look very nice! That's a great looking bus.

Yeah, maybe a little sarcasm. I just think that all these non-movie sources (cartoons, video games, lunch boxes, ;-) etc.) are a sign that the Star Wars license is running out of steam. I suppose that's to be expected after almost ten years. Most of the iconic ships have been made TWICE, and just about every conceivable character has been made (except Admiral Ackbar, dammit!!). I dunno, maybe I'm just a grumpy old man, but I don't care about EU sets. For me, the appeal of the Star Wars license has always been two-fold: 1) nice set design, and 2) nostalgia. With the EU stuff, #2 is non-existent. And while #1 might still be there, I'm not sure that it's enough to get me purchase.

My sincere apologies. I humbly bow before your superior knowledge of arcane Star Wars lore. So ... we're going to have sets based on the movies, sets based on a video game, and sets based on a cartoon. What's next, sets based on the Star Wars lunchbox I had in second grade???

I don't understand why the Dark Apprentice mini-fig has a regular face, and not one of the new cartoony Clone Wars faces. For heaven's sake, if TLC is going to completely redesign the style for the mini-fig heads, it would be nice if they would at least be consistent about it. Everytime I see that new Anakin head, I die a little bit inside. I've never NOT bought a set simply because of the mini-fig head, but this might be the first time.

My advice based on my own experience: 1) Collect Lego City sets for 30 years. 2) Marry an EXTREMELY patient and understanding wife. 3) Buy a house with a big basement. Beyond that, all you really need is time and money. The beauty of the City theme is that it's a Lego staple, and it's not going away (despite some horrible, horrible years in the late 90's). Pretty much any other theme can serve as parts fodder for custom City sets. And, it's very modular -- as your collection grows, just buy a couple more road plates, and expand your city. Here's some pictures of my town, Fluxington. Good luck, and have fun!

Good point. You might very well be right that TLC is able to easily kill a theme's second wave if the initial wave sells poorly. Sure, they're out the design and prototyping costs, but my guess is that those costs are quite a bit less than actual manufacturing and distribution costs. But what about the other way around -- if a new disposable theme is a surprise huge hit, can TLC quickly slap together a second wave in a few months? For example, Aquaraiders is pretty clearly a disposable theme. We got one wave of sets, and there's been no indication of any subsequent sets in '08. At this point, this sure looks like another one-and-done theme. I don't know what sales have been like for Aquaraiders, but let's say they've been wildly successful. Can TLC change their minds and quickly design, develop, and produce a second wave of sets to captialize on that success?? I'm guessing not. This is obviously all just conjecture on my part. I wish we had more insights into how themes are planned and produced. I'd be really curious to know how that all works.

I'm with you on the hatred of the animated-style face. It's very un-Legoish. I think it looks more like those Minimate figures. It seems like Lego is really trying to separate these Clone Wars sets through the branding and mini-fig design, almost like it's a new sub-theme.

I've been wondering about this. It's my understanding that TLC has at least a two-year development cycle, which means that they're currently designing the sets to be released in 2010. If that's the case, how can they possibly make decisions based on a theme's sales? For example, let's say they've got some New Awesome Theme scheduled for 2009. They can't make a decision for 2010 based on the sales of the New Awesome Theme because it hasn't hit the stores yet. I'm not convinced that Lego cancels a theme based solely on poor sales. Their development cycle is too long to allow for that kind of quick reaction to the market. My theory is that all these sorts of themes (Alpha Team, Aquaraiders, Dino Attack, Vikings) were originally intended to be "disposable themes." They have a big splashy initial released, followed by perhaps a handful of small sets in a second wave ... then nothing, and they're onto the next one. I think it's a marketing decision, not a sales decision. They probably feel like they need more turnover in their themes in order to stay relevant in a world of increasingly short attention spans. The olden days of only having Space / Castle / Town themes are long over.