Lego David

Yeah, iconic locations that don't even have any recognizable appearance. How did the Temple of Doom look like, again? Oh right, it was just an underground chamber with a stone skull and a human sacrifices pit. Would that be iconic enough to justify making sets based off of? I don't think so, and even if they do, there is no way to make it out outside the playset format. The original 2009 Temple of Doom set was entirely a playset dedicated to a minecart chase gimmick that took a lot of space and barely even looked good on display.

Yeah, I really wish I could have done that, but unfortunately I do not own a whole lot of those flower blossom pieces, so I had to work with what I had. Thanks for sharing your thoughts though, I always appreciate when people give constructive criticism on my MOCs!

After 6 long months of working, our project is finally completed, and has been pitched to LEGO. It can now be publicly viewed on LEGO World Builder, if anyone is interested in checking it out: https://worldbuilder.tongal.com/world/8ff100ad-3233-4c1d-ab0f-fd77224ee424

I do think a UCS style Petra could work decently, but I am not so sure about a Peruvian Temple or Temple of Doom. Those two don't even have any recognizable "faces" that you could put in a set (to prove my point, just try searching those locations on Google, and see what the results are), and given how they are a mixture of different scenes in the movies, it would be hard to make them in any other way besides glorified playsets (which LEGO wouldn't do for a D2C set).

I've got mixed feelings on the prospect of Indiana Jones returning in LEGO. First off, there is the issue of including Nazis/Communists in the set, which as others have pointed out, could very easily blow up in LEGO's face if not handled properly. Add to that the recent stream of sets they cancelled due to "not keeping with the brand values" such as the Ofsprey, and they wouldn't even be able to make any sets based of military vehicles in the first place, even if they are fine with including German or Russian soldiers. Or if they decide not to include any of those whatsoever, then what would even be the point of releasing more Indy sets in the first place? If they do end up releasing those villains though, I'm hoping for some updated military outfits that could be used for purist solider minifigures. Secondly, LEGO has changed a lot since the last time they made Indy sets, Nowdays, it seems like their focus is mainly on iconic locations and vehicles, which Indy has none of. Unlike Star Wars or Harry Potter, Indy doesn't have any instantly recognizable locations or vehicles, so there isn't much they can do if they wanna go the D2C route. Not to mention how there has been a noticeable decline in straight-up playsets within LEGO lately, so even if we do get a fully-fledged line of sets, I'd imagine they would look nothing like the original ones. Besides maybe a Temple of the Grail, I can't think of any other location-based sets they could do. Third, unless they do one massive D2C to capitalize on nostalgia, I honestly can't picture a full line of sets even selling that well. Unlike Star Wars, the Indy franchise has had a very limited presence in pop culture outside the original three films. The fourth movie was very poorly received, and didn't really help boost the franchise's popularity or bring in new fans in any meaningful way. I'd imagine the same would happen with this fifth movie, given its long development hell. Kids who are currently into LEGO will most likely have no prior exposure to the series, unless maybe their parents showed the movies to them or something like that. So honestly, as much as I would still prefer a fully-fledged theme, still I feel like it might be more profitable on LEGO's part if they just released one single large D2C set and tried luring in the nostalgic adults (even though I still am not very convinced that any of the locations in the movies are iconic enough to deserve a D2C). This has worked very well with those one-off nostalgic properties from LEGO Ideas, and honestly, I feel like Indy might fall into the same category at this point.

My goodness, this is one of the largest and most complex MOCs based on Classic Space I have ever seen! Looks like a Titan version of Benny's Spaceship, excellent job!

Built for the Bio-Cup 2021 Contest, the theme being Entertainment/Media. My subtheme was Artwork/Paintings. This MOC was inspired by a painting I happened to come across online.

Would you mind explaining what "homophobia" even means? Just because some people have a different point of view, does that automatically make them homophobes? As long as they respectfully express their opinion without any hate or stigma against anyone, I see no reason why they should be instantly labeled as "homophobes". I am so tired of seeing so many people instantly be labeled as homophobes just for saying anything that even remotely disagrees with the LGBT point of view. As @DBlegonerd7 has said, just constantly throwing that word out there is disingenuous and makes the word quickly lose its meaning.

Well, I mean, the only other alternative with Universal in charge would be an IP-crossover with some of the IPs owned by Universal (Jurassic World, Minions, Fast and Furious, etc) and to be honest I don't feel like any of those franchises would lend themselves to being good LEGO Movies. The most plausible of those would be a LEGO Jurassic World movie, and while I am pretty sure that would sell very well because of the Dinosaurs, I don't know how in the world you would make a good movie with that concept. A LEGO parody of Jurassic Park/World? Given how this is generally pretty serious franchise with often gruesome deaths, I don't know how in the world you would make a parody out of that. While I do agree that a LEGO version of Who Framed Roger Rabbit is a pretty silly concept, I would honestly much rather prefer to see completely new crazy idea like that instead of another IP crossover with whatever random properties Universal happens to own.

There is no confirmation for this, but I have a theory regarding what Universal might be trying out with their LEGO Movies. Recently, on the LEGO World Builder platform, they pushed heavily for the creative prompt of "Combing Live-Action Humans with LEGO Minifigures". Basically, kind of like a LEGO version of Who Framed Roger Rabbit. I have a strong suspicion this might be one of the ideas they are throwing around at Universal, otherwise I see no reason why LEGO would ask fans to come up with a concept for this. Because let us be real here, this sounds more like a concept more fit for a comedy movie and something that wouldn't really make much sense as a LEGO theme. The fact that they literally say "Your ideas could become the next theatrical release" in the post certainly provides some credibility to this theory.

Well, I guess I don't share the same LEGO interests as you do. Different LEGO products appeal to different people, and Creator isn't one of the themes that appeals to me. There is still the occasional set that might spark my interest, such as the recent 31111 Cyber Drone (which I bought mostly for the Spyrius robot figure), but otherwise, the theme provides me with little that I would personally find useful for my MOC projects. Also, I only display my bigger sets, most of the smaller ones eventually end up being taken apart or stored in a closet.

Please note that I specifically said "normal retail sets" in my post. By that I refer to sets that get wide release across all stores (Target, Walmart, etc), not direct to consumer stuff such as LEGO Ideas or the Modular Buildings. I couldn't care less about Creator 3 in 1, to me that line represents just "low budget LEGO". I can see kids being into that, (heck I had a tone of Creator sets as a kid) but nowdays they offer very little of value to me, the sets being comprised of just generic bricks that I don't particularly need. Unless they increase the budget and start including more proper minifigures, I don't have much reason to care about it. Licensed themes are simply not my thing, and I have been quite vocal about their overwhelming presence in the past. City is another theme I have little interest in. I might be interested in some of its offerings if they include new animal molds, but that's about it. I don't really care about building techniques either, I just want the set to look good and have useful pieces. I for one, would rather reserve advanced building techniques for MOC building.

I am always impressed whenever I see other people successfully make Transformers MOCs that look good in both forms. I've been trying to do that myself for years, but I never quite managed to properly pull it off.

This is another problem I have with LEGO's current strategy. They release so many sets, yet most of them don't stand out that much. Every time I go to a LEGO Store, I see dozens upon dozens of sets to choose from, yet nothing particularly stands out to me as something I really need or want. I'd say LEGO has been suffering from a quantity over quality issue lately (at least with their normal retail sets, that is).

Here is a link to its Bricklink page: https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=53586&idColor=66#T=S&C=66&O={"color":66,"iconly":0}

It depends on what you define as "constantly improve" because that can act as a big of a double edged sword. Sets from 10 years ago were a lot less detailed, yes, but is that really that big of a problem? One thing that I have noticed with most modern sets is that they tend to use a lot of pieces on a very small build and make it very detailed, but the build itself isn't anything substantial. One the other hand, older sets tended to use less pieces, and focus on making a imposing build with a limited amount of parts. Truth to be told, I never really cared much about details myself, and I would much rather just have a cool set to play around with.

I think it has something to do with the 2013 Castle wave not selling very well. That wave in particular is held in very low regard by most Castle fans, due to it being mostly an inferior re-trend of the much beloved Kingdoms wave. With that in mind, why should people buy your sets if they are just the same thing you gave them just two years prior, but with a blue color scheme instead of red? On top of that, by 2013, LEGO was undergoing some changes with their product releases, as at that point they decided to stop production of all one-off original themes that didn't have any media tie-in. In the late 2000's and early 2010's they seemed to have no problems with releasing multiple one-off original themes at the same time, but after the arrival of Ninjago on the scene, they realized that it would be more profitable to just put all their resources into single, high budget "Big Bang" themes instead of doing more smaller ones at one time. I do believe Castle was caught somewhere in there. On top of that, according to LEGO designers, Castle and Pirates seem to suffer from quote on quote "only the largest Castle or Pirate ship sets selling, and everything else being left to warm the shelves" as in, they don't have any faith in a fully fledged Castle or Pirate theme selling very well except for the flagship set. This could explain their recent decision make Castle and Pirates as single big sets as part of the Creator 3 in 1 line.

I'm going to be honest, this MOC doesn't do much to stand out from other Castle LEGO Ideas projects. The build looks very basic and it really feels like it needed a little extra of something if you want people to support it on LEGO Ideas, because right now, there are a dozen other Castle projects there that are just like this one.

I mean, I don't see why you couldn't have two Bigfigs, but also throw in a few extra normal characters in the mix. Like have Sandy, the enemy Bigfig, and maybe two more normal minfig bad guys. If you want, you could also throw in a Monkie Kid minifigure to balance out the heroes and villains more.

Haha, nice use of the CMF Ancient Warrior helmet and shield! They make for a pretty nice modern substitution for the treasure in the original set.

There was also the set 76131 Avengers Compound Battle, which included both the Hulk and Thanos Bigfigs. So I don't think there is any reason to assume LEGO has a problem with putting more than one Bigfig in a single set (perhaps only as long as they are pre-existing Bigfig molds, though).

I see a tone of really cool ideas in this thread, but if people don't actually do something to put them in practice, they aren't going to get anywhere. Why not pitch some of those ideas to LEGO World Builder? Fun fact, this month LEGO is doing a thing called Pitch Fest, where creators can submit their ideas for evaluation and potentially secure a pitch meeting with the LEGO Entertainment Team.

I would suggest using LEGO World Builder instead. Fun fact, this month LEGO is doing a thing called "Pitch Fest" in which creators can pitch their ideas for potential new LEGO themes directly to LEGO for evaluation, and if they pass, they can secure a pitch meeting with the LEGO Entertainment Team. I personally do not believe a Monster Fighters reboot will get very far on LEGO Ideas.

And It it's not like LEGO has never done sets with more than one bigfig before. You might think including another bigfig to an already expensive set would make the set's price skyrocket... but sets like Hulk Vs Red Hulk included two bigfigs while the price being just slightly higher than this one (50$ it is, right?)

Or they could have introduced a new variant of Sandy, for that matter. Not a new mold, that would be way too expensive, but maybe a recolor of the current mold with a different facial expression, could have made the set a little more desirable.