G_Brickley

I hadn’t heard about these until now! Not 100% certain on if they’re real or not (with the sheer amount of AI generated “leaks” around one can never be sure) but they all seem to match the character portraits from a leaked crew bag I think, so if it’s slop, it’s slop with some basis in reality. With Lego’s new Epic Moments subline starting up, does anyone think there’s any likelihood we finally get a Hulk vs Abomination set out of it? The Hulkbuster set shows that it can work with two big characters and there’s not all that much interesting terrain to replicate outside of the fight itself. Chuck in some police car boxing gloves for Hulk and I think they’d be onto a winner. Also thought that this could be a way to give us a better sized Iron Monger. I know the set wasn’t all that long ago, but I skipped it due to how out of scale the monger was and I’d love to see a redone version similar in size to the new Hulkbuster.

Another possibility I could see for an Epic Moments set is the final Helicarrier fight from Winter Soldier. They already have 90% of the Winter Soldier figure and the relevant Captain America (well, technically it's not the right Cap since it's the WW2 suit and not the Smithsonian one, but considering Lego doesn't see the difference between the AoU and Civil War suits I doubt they'd be picky here). Chuck in a Falcon and we could have a solid first ever (I may be wrong here) Winter Soldier set! The format would be great for comic sets as well (though I'm aware how unlikely that is). I'm thinking cover recreations like Amazing Fantasy #15 or Avengers #4. Again, it'd never happen but this subline has promise and I hope Lego's able to keep up with that.

Oh no that's perfectly valid, my grievance was more of a general one with overall fandom discourse, not anyone specific to this thread. I've just seen so many "my dad could beat up your dad" style arguments in YouTube comments and the like using box office results as evidence, it does my nut in Yeah these are basically my thoughts. The people who need to think it was a success think that it was, regardless of what we may think.

I really miss the days when fandoms didn't use box office metrics to argue over how good a project is. This may be my own naivety showing, but I don't remember any discussions over CBM box office before the charge for Endgame to become the highest-grossing film of all time. Ever since then, I feel like a metric that only studio execs cared about has become ammunition in ridiculous fandom wars. Like should it really matter to the fandom how much money Superman made if we already have a sequel greenlit, storyboarded, and written? It feels like the people who should care about that sort of thing have already decided "yes, it made enough" the same way that they did with Man of Steel when they greenlit BvS. I'm all for people having a preference between these two projects (my own leaning is towards Superman, but that's me), but using the box office to justify those opinions just seems silly to me. Films I have thought were awful have made loads (Avatar 2, Jurassic World 2) and some I thought were excellent have made nothing (Blade Runner 2049). Idk, all this is to say I feel like fandoms have become too executive-brained vs having actual fan discussions. And on a semi-unrelated note, I find it funny that the conversation above stemmed from a meme about Critical Drinker (a known liar and over reactionary grifter) saying the DCU's in trouble. Not a dismissal of any of the takes above btw, just a funny origin point.

Well I might pick up the Pattmobile, but man is this a disappointing wave. The builds and figures (with the exclusion of the logo) are all pretty decent and it’s a nice milestone to have every mainline live action Batman represented in Minifigure form, but seriously?! Not 1 other character?! Not even in the sets based on movies where the TITLE features another character!! The BvS one is the most egregious with the Batman figure being the suit he only uses to fight Superman and at no other point in the movie. You mean to tell me the budget would really be sooooo stretched by including one new Superman torso print with a reused head, hair, legs, and cape!? I have a similar bone to pick with the B&R one, in that if they had gone with Batman’s main and less detailed suit from the majority of the film they would once again probably have the print budget for a head and torso for the other title character. Aaaand then there’s the logo… the only “compliment” I could possibly give it is that comparing it to the other two logos gives a really good chart on where each theme is at. Star Wars is plagued with the 18+ brand, Marvel’s comes with under detailed and inaccurate Minifigures plus a poorly thought out play feature, and then this is flimsy and comes with nothing but two Batman figures. I don’t understand how Lego can go from showing they understand the fan demand with a set like Arkham and then turn around in a matter of months and give us this. It’s a good thing DC customs are becoming more prevalent, even if a lot of them are on the expensive side, at least it’s something other than Batman.

Was there really that much "MCU type" humour in Superman? I feel like the usual example of it is quippy dialogue (which Peacemaker & Creature Commandos have in spades, I won't deny it's 100% within Gunn's style), but I can only think of a handful of instances of that in the movie. Any other jokes I'd argue are just the typical sort of levity that action movies have had for decades

The X-Mansion only reused a few figures too no? Cyclops, Rogue, and Wolverine for full figs and then Magneto’s face and Storm’s torso. Doesn’t guarantee the planet in the slightest but I think they could get away with it. Having browsed a couple Lego shops yesterday, I’m honestly just excited to have affordable, non 4+ or mech DC sets again. Depending on the design selection, there’s the potential for all 3 to be pretty fun and unique builds as well. I’m gonna throw out the guess that Lego will try to keep the media that all 3 are based on varied, in keeping with the “legacy” aspect of the new game, so one movie, one comic, and one animated? Movie: Pattmobile Comic: Modelled after the OG Batmobile set Animated: Beyond Batmobile (but my heart wants Brave and the Bold or The Batman 2004)

Well the set lineup is rather disappointing on paper but I’ll wait until there are full on pictures and descriptions before I pass too much judgement. I’ve actually thought a “Batmobiles Through the Ages” in speed champions style line would work, particularly if you paired them with era specific villains (e.g. a Neal Adams Batmobile with Ras Al Ghul and Man Bat) but three at once is… wow… With the comment one of the set designers gave about two face’s hair, maybe one will be fun like a remake of the original Batmobile set with him included in the black and white suit (yes, I did just get back from seeing my Hopium dealer, how did you guess?) I guess our only hope at this point for even just Superman characters is for Lego to have fast tracked a DC CMF Series 2 to capitalise on it… ah who am I kidding, it’d probably be 20 years of Lego Batman based anyway I think my money’s on Hugo, with the set up that Bruce’s mother was suffering with mental health problems from the last movie, it’d make sense to explore that more with a psychiatrist villain. As unlikely as it is, I love the image of Reeves combing through all of TLBM to make sure said villain has never appeared Another name I’ll throw out there, Deacon Blackfire would be a pretty wild direction for Part II to go. Right there with you on the BaTB Batmobile train, though I fear how disappointing the real Minifigure would be compared to the gorgeous design in the video game

The site couldn’t cope with the potential of positive Lego DC news! I might be the only person that’d be on board for a DC logo set I just think the techniques that’d be involved for the modern/retro DC bullet logo would be neat Assuming the $80 set is the 678 piece one (I’d hope but you never know with the pricing of some of these sets) my hope is that the higher price is due to some larger pieces, so maybe a Playset Batcave or Fortress of Solitude? (If it turned out to be the latter then my hopium for a Daily Planet modular would skyrocket)

From what I understand, the project is as far along as it is because the script was supposedly so fantastic that they couldn't pass it up. Good complete script = next in production, that seems to be the priority over the release order making sense. I think it's also meant to be indicative of what Gunn wants to do with the DCU that will make it different from the MCU, branching into other genres. I think around the slate announcement, Gunn did a video with GQ where he named his 5 favourite comic book movies; 3 were superhero stories (Donner's Superman, Deadpool, and Into the Spider-verse), but the other 2 were films based on comics (Oldboy & A History of Violence). I think part of the DCU's aim is to prove that superhero films aren't a genre, rather that they're a character archetype that can be slotted into various genres (e.g. I would say that The Batman is a noir film that happens to have a superhero as its protagonist) and as such prove that stories about these characters can still be viable going forward, and not stagnate the cinema industry like some claim they are. In that sense, I think making a low-budget horror film in Clayface makes sense in a "hey, if you're not into superheroes, then how about this?" strategy. I also don't think it's a coincidence that a body horror, Hollywood-based film came out and did well last year in The Substance, prompting DC to strike now, whilst the iron's still hot, so to speak. To bring it back to Lego before I go too far with my thesis (thank you and apologies to anyone who decided to read the whole thing ), I don't know if Clayface will be as impacted by the R-rated content ban as Daredevil and Punisher have been. For one, he's been made a couple of times by Lego before, with his name plastered on the box in both instances, as well as being fairly prominent in the first Lego Batman game and DC supervillains. For two, I don't expect this to be as high-profile a project as seasons of Daredevil or Punisher, and I think the gore factor will be far less real-world than those two. Of course, 0 chance this movie is getting dedicated sets, but I don't think Lego will use it as a reason to avoid the character altogether.

So Hasbro’s put out a tease for their marvel legends based on first steps and it comes with an interesting tidbit, the Thing seems to be shirtless. I’m assuming it’s a case of them following concept art but assuming Lego’s had to do the same we could be about to get a Thing Minifigure that blends easily with comic stuff as well! If Johnny’s in his flame on state as well, I could see Lego (hopefully) taking the chance to reuse some parts with a couple new prints for a full comic F4 down the road. Maybe if Oscorp does well this year we could see them in a Baxter Building Playset in the same style. In the same vein, if the FoX-men show up in Doomsday with comic accurate suits, I wonder if Lego will opt to reuse any prints from the 97 versions (e.g. cyclops’ head)

With regards to both the 2014 comic Cap and Thor figures, I think it's interesting to note that neither of them were based on the comic designs but on the Avengers Assemble cartoon of the time. Cap is incredibly close to his Ultimate 1610 design, but is missing the scales on the upper torso. Thor looks like he should be the classic design from the blue legs, but the grey arms and gold piping between the chest disks are actually taken from his Heroic Age suit, so why Lego chose to give him blue legs is beyond me. In fact, the closest we've come to official classic design minifigures of both are (checks notes) the Mighty Micros ones?... Huh All this is to say that if we did get comic versions today I think they would be radically different with very different choices of source material. We already saw Marvel NOW Cap in the mech set from a couple years back so who knows, maybe a Marvel NOW Thor isn't far off, would certainly be possible to do with the current helmet piece. We might even see an indication of future comic avengers later this year!... if I'm remembering my leaks correctly and there's meant to be a 4+ set with Captain America in it If Lego did do full on classic Avengers in minifig form, I'd be curious to see how they handle Cap's head wings, whether they'd be integrated into a similar helmet piece to what we have now or if they'd use a piece like the ears/horns used on Daredevil and Black Panther with a fully printed masked head

I think a new, beefier arm piece (like the part used for Eggman but with a standard torso attachment) would do wonders for the Thing. It'd allow him to be broader than the rest whilst still being the right size. Lego could even recolour the part for characters like Venom to make them wider without hiking up the price to make a big fig (which imo aren't the best and stray too far from minifigure proportions) Admittedly, my main interest in the fantastic four set is if we're going to get unprinted medium blue and white dual moulded legs so I can finally upgrade Captain Cold but still, a wider variety of minifigure silhouettes would be appreciated!

Okay, I'm going to apologise upfront for my use of disingenuous. That absolutely made my comment come off way more antagonistic than it was meant to and was not my intention AT ALL. Although if I'm also misreading your repetition of disingenuous as frustration with it then again, my apologies. Internet discourse isn't a strong suit of mine, as is probably obvious from the paragraphs of text To briefly expand my point about the cameos that you correctly critiqued, in my eyes Peacemaker's JL cameo is a punchline to the recurring Aquaman joke, whilst Black Adam's Superman cameo is a set up for Black Adam 2 and what the whole film was marketed on. Both are continuity headaches but one is far far easier to ignore than the other. I'd even argue the Peacemaker one doesn't NEED to be retconned, I just feel that it likely will be in a very small way that most audience members won't pay all that much mind to. I'll admit that my point about the MoS cast is a MASSIVE stretch and I'm not entirely sure what I was thinking when I made it I think I was probably drawing conclusions from the supporting casts of Peacemaker and Blue Beetle being kept, but I honestly can't expand anymore from that because it is one hell of a dumb point. I will say, at no point did I say these should be barriers of entry, I was just pointing out the differences. The only barrier to Cavill's entry was not fitting with Gunn's creative vision, which is the precise reason he's given when asked about it. I don't know where the idea that Cavill was fired for a clean slate has come from, because I can't find an instance where Gunn said that. I'm happy to be proven wrong, but as it stands I'm not seeing where Gunn has lied about Cavill's firing You're more than welcome to disagree with me on any of these points! I'm not trying to change your mind at all and honestly I think far too many discussions on the internet devolve into people trying to say "but I'm right tho!" and not just acknowledging that they're different people with differing opinions. Once again, sorry that some of my phrasing has been off or argumentative

I think comparing the Cavill situation to the Peacemaker/Suicide Squad cast is a little disingenuous. One is only "cemented" in the DCEU through a joke cameo at the end of a TV series that had 0 bearing on the plot and will likely be retconned to some extent in season 2, the other brings back an entire supporting Superman cast that I don't think I saw anyone clamoring for more of and the Rock's Black Adam. Yes, Waller and Harcourt were both in that film (I didn't see it so I don't know to what extent) but they weren't used as a bargaining chip by one of the biggest egos in Hollywood to derail both the film and comic universes (Black Adam suddenly being on the Justice League anyone?) and they're side characters at best, not the focal points of the whole universe. I do feel bad for Cavill, but I couldn't possibly imagine him as the Superman in the trailer that we've just had. I see where you're coming from with the keeping of some actors and the dropping of others, but I do think it also comes down to Gunn is going to keep working with the people he has a good working relationship with vs people who don't fit his vision for the characters and are too weighed down with prior continuity. This is the fun thing about the new DCU that I'm not seeing a lot of people acknowledge, we're getting comic films rather than just superhero films. Way back GQ put out a video of Gunn talking about his top 5 comic book films and on his list was Old Boy and A History Of Violence, two films I've heard of but had no idea they were comic based. Sgt Rock and Clayface seem to be fitting the same bill of films that general audiences won't know are comic books until they see the DC logo at some point and I kind of love that? Idk, I'm just excited to see some different stuff on screen that can build out the DC brand as something other than "Marvel but EDGYYYYY" I'd see your sense in thinking Reeves was being pushed out... if it weren't for the fact of him being a producer on stuff like Clayface and Dynamic Duo. Gunn literally said from the beginning that he and Matt discussed Pattinson being in the DCU, but decided against it. His recent statement of "I thought about it, but decided not to" doesn't contradict that, it's the same narrative that they've taken from the beginning.