brickbride

It should have already been released but I haven't seen it in person, nor the Marvel one so far. Most stores in my town seem to get a ton of Friends and City polybags this year and not much else.

I figured, that's why I put in so many line breaks just to be safe, give everyone a chance to scroll past it. Besides, Doomsday won't come out for some time. By then they might have changed the plot to Feige knows what.

Allegedly the script for Doomsday has SPOILER the Avengers racing Doom for who'll reach Loki's position at the heart of the Multiverse first. So we might still get God of Timelines Loki as a minifig even years after his series has ended. /SPOILER Of course that's very speculative and also subject to change given the timeframe.

EUR 75-90 would frankly be too cheap with the way the playset Diagon Alley has been going lately. QQS and Fortescue's is EUR 100! In fact I've noticed a trend across themes lately where sets with way too few pieces for the price will be EUR 100. Just off the top of my head: Kakamora Barge, King Magnifico's Castle, and 2023 Elsa's Ice Palace in Disney, Hoopty (well it was "only" EUR 95 but it also had only 420 pieces!) and the newly leaked Endgame set in Marvel, the Titanosaurus one in Jurassic World (at least that one has a large new dino), and the Diagon Alley playsets in HP. It used to be that overpriced sets like these were outliers but more and more they're becoming the new normal. No it won't be. I can all but guarantee that. Reasons: - EUR 75-90 is way too little for a house these days unless we're talking Privet Drive - a small, boring house with no exciting architecture. The Lovegood House is all about the architecture! - When we first heard about Malfoy Manor, many people were expecting a mid-size set with just the fight scene. I correctly guessed that it would be priced akin to Grimmauld Place simply because it's a location people have wanted for so long. The Lovegood House is another one of those. The cheapest we've ever had something like that was the Ministry of Magic for EUR 100, and that was years ago - it surely would be about EUR 150 now, too. - Xenophilius Lovegood has never been made as a minifig. If they do make him I'm sure they'll put him behind an appropriately high paywall. (Aunt Marge has not been made either, but that's different. For one thing I'm pretty sure the inflated version of her will be brickbuilt - we might still get a regular minifig but that could probably be cobbled together from existing parts. And Aunt Marge is solely associated with Privet Drive which, as I've said, is a boring location that solely gets made because of its plot relevance - I doubt there'd be a market for a UCS version or even a EUR 150 playset version. Whereas the Lovegood House, people would probably buy based on its architecture alone.)

4851, came out in 2003.

Everyone hated Secret Invasion, even the majority who didn't watch it. Most people would have read up on it at least and the array of unpopular choices (killing off Maria Hill and Talos, marrying Fury to a Skrull who then immediately disappears from the MCU, having Fury harvest everyone's blood in secret and give ALL of their powers to ONE SINGLE stranger, and of course Rhodey having been replaced by a Skrull for Feige knows how long) ist staggering. And then there were interviews with the showrunners basically going "Yeah, we shot some stuff and now we're making up the plot during the editing phase". I think any movie that came right after would have taken a hit because the MCU looked like a joke at that point. And as you've said, Kamala isn't popular either. (Though IMO she's one of the more tolerable young additions to the MCU.) By this point the audience had definitely seen the trend of "Let's have all our established characters play second fiddle to kids" (like Strange and America, or Hawkeye and Kate, or Ant-Man and Cassie). And this movie was even named "The Marvels" as if they'd wanted to make sure no-one could think that Carol was the main character. I remember seeing the first trailer and going "Great, now Captain Marvel, too, has a whiny teenage siidekick who she needs to learn to work as a team with. Not watching that". I think it put a lot of people off. And adding Monica was frankly another way to stack the deck because a) the character would be unrecognisable to anyone who hadn't seen Wandavision way back when, and she hadn't played a large role in it, either (yes I know she was in Captain Marvel's solo movie as a child but that's barely even the same character) and b) she's really unlikeable on the whole. Again, I've never said that Captain Marvel's solo movie's success didn't benefit from coming before Endgame. But many, many other characters had solo movies that did far worse. Ant-Man 2 did far worse despite being by far the best Ant-Man movie (not that that's saying much) and coming at a crucial time for the MCU, too. Yet no-one here claims that Ant-Man cannot draw in audiences even when that's true (just look at the box office figures of all his movies). It's always Captain Marvel.

What about Loki? I have yet to meet anyone who didn't like his series (whereas Wandavision was overrated if you ask me). And unlike Wanda he's shown some real character development that hasn't then been immediately negated. So far at least. I'm so over that "Captain Marvel is a box office failure" narrative some people are pushing. Her solo movie is still in the top ten grossing MCU movies ever. Sure, "The Marvels" bombed, but why do people put the blame for that on her instead of Kamala or Monica or, you know, the fact that "The Marvels" was immediately preceded by "Secret Invasion"? That said, I don't disagree that Wanda is one of the MCU's more popular characters, and probably the most popular female (a fairly easy feat given how much screentime she's had compared to most everyone else and just how few female main characters there are in the MCU to begin with). But it doesn't change the fact that by now she's been painted as an utter villain, and a stupid one at that. Her death was her only redemptive action amongst a bunch of stupid, needlessly villainous choices (and let's face it Wanda was never one for smart or moral choices to begin with, see her and Pietro joining Hydra in the first place). If they retcon that and possibly even try to present her as a good guy again (because she's popular) I don't think it'll work. It's not enough for Marvel to bring back their more popular characters IMO, they should also take a long hard look at them and ask themselves questions like "Does the audience still have a reason to like this person if we bring them back?", and in Wanda's case for me the answer is no. Of course that is probably wishful thinking on my part. It's entirely more likely that Marvel will just go "Whee! Aren't you glad your favourite Wanda is back? Please ignore how she butchered most of the Kamar-Taj wizards in her efforts to murder a child and before that mind-controlled an entire city, and go and buy all our Wanda merchandise! Oh, and be excited about our new Avengers movies which run on the premise of 'No-one but Tony Stark ever dies for real'!!!"

Honestly, bringing her back is another terrible, terrible idea (notwithstanding Elizabeth Olsen's top-notch acting). Wanda's multiversal rampage in "Dr Strange 2" just so she could be with her children already didn't cast her in the best light then (and made no sense in light of "Wandavision" where she'd accepted their loss and was much more focused on VIsion anyway), but it was mitigated by her sacrificing herself in order to destroy all copies of the Darkhold - an evil greater than her own countless murders. THEN we learned in "Agatha All Along" that the entire multiversal rampage was utterly pointless since she could have achieved her goal much, much more easily and far, far closer to home without any bloodshed (not sure how much I'm allowed to say here because spoilers), making her look pretty stupid and even more evil in retrospect. And THEN we learn (which was already implied in "Agatha All Along) that she didn't really sacrifice herself at all? Way to ruin a good character is all I'm saying.

At least then the rooms came with the exteriors! Rooms without exteriors, like the new Potions and Charms class, are a bigger annoyance to me.

Just putting it here, the next version will officially be the "most expensive Hogwarts ever" and will start with a EUR 400 Great Hall. ;-)

"Complete" as in we get the iconic silhouette on the outside and all the most important parts (like the Chamber of Secrets) on the inside. Obviously I don't expect them to cover every single classroom or Common Room (though they seem determined to do the latter anyway). That's several big sets with only two of them done so far (counting the Main Tower) and likely only one more to come if we're going by a three-year schedule. And most of those aren't even particularly relevant to the plot in comparison to others like the Hospital Wing, Forbidden Corridor, Room of Requirement, or Chamber of Secrets, or fun builds with fun characters like Trelawney's class or the various DADA classes. So I'd expect a decent chunk of new sets to either be interiors-only or smaller locations. I really cannot see how they'd make all of that work with only one more year given that so far we've only had 2024 Boathouse, Owlery (both fairly unnecessary and irrelevant locations except to complete the silhouette), Potions class (indoors-only), Great Hall 2025 Duelling Club, Charms class (both indoors-only), Flying lesson, Herbology class (yet another location that's not part of the castle proper), Main Tower. Going by what we've had so far, in 2026 we'd likely get about two small-ish "exterior" sets, a big one, and at least one or two indoors-only locations (most likely classrooms but might be something else such as Myrtle's bathroom). That's not going to cover all of the above that's still missing!

Honestly, if the new leader is the person who's in two of those concept art shots, he's a good choice. (Unless he's written by the same people who wrote Thor 4, then no, just no.) He even has leadership experience of a very diverse group! And more importantly he's fun. Falconcap isn't fun - Captain America wasn't much fun either but that's why we had Iron Man to rile him up. In general: Unless the new Avengers still have Dr Strange, Star-Lord, and/or Captain Marvel (I think Brie Larson did an excellent job with the character though apparently I'm in the minority) in any significant capacity, I'm not interested. The only ones among the younger replacements who are halfway tolerable are Kamala, (less so) Kate, and Billy, and I mean just that - halfway tolerable. Not someone whose problems and fate I'm truly invested in. I'd also take Loki or Agatha any day.

Everyone? Honestly, nobody around me would ever consider buying a EUR 200 LEGO playset, much less one that's part of a larger system with even more expensive sets coming. EUR 100 is pretty much the limit and then you have to feel like you get some substance for your money, which is hardly ever the case these days. Compare, say, the 2018 Hogwarts Great Hall (licenced, ten figs) with the newly leaked Endgame set. The former was a substantial build (with sone awesome alternate MOCs using the same parts) and the latter is ... this.

No way are they going to finish this things within three years (where we're already in year two) if each year's biggest set is a single location and we've spent slots on things that aren't even part of the castle proper like the Boathouse and Owlery. Either the cycle will be longer or this is going to end up a very incomplete castle.

What makes you think LEGO are still for kids? Half the new sets these days are 18+ and as for the others, do you really think many kids will buy a EUR 200 Hogwarts Great Hall? Though the dichotomy concerning video games is kind of funny to me. On the one hand, pretty much the only reason I can think of for adults to shell out EUR 200 for their kids' Great Hall (or Nocturnia Castle) is that at least they'll spend some time away from the screen. On the other hand, the theme of the latest Dreamzzz season and its corresponding sets is video games, and then there's all the Super Mario, Minecraft, Animal Crossing etc. sets.

Wow, that looks bad, and the list price is ... something. They should have just foregone making a set and put all the figs in a battlepack or something. Sure, then it would have been hard to justify that kind of list price, but I honestly don't see 600+ parts here and even if I did, EUR 100 would be too much. (Well, actually, given the mech and the portals I can sort of see them. But mechs are EUR 15 at list price even with two minifigs now. The portal was EUR 4 in a polybag with Doctor Strange. So a bunch of portals, a mech, and some rubble for the base can in no way can account for the price.) I guess they're going by the old rule of thumb "1 minifig per EUR 10 list price" and if you just go by that, the set is actually a good deal. But I cannot ignore the smallish number of parts and the lack of a build. And apart from all the inaccurate figs, where is the infinity gauntlet? You know, the one that plays a huge part in this scene? If you call the entire thing "Endgame Final Battle" instead of "Marvel Heroes Mashup" or something, at the very least it should reflect its name.

Honestly, I cannot see either Gryffindor Tower or the Astronomy Courtyard. I'm assuming we'll get the latter eventually in the "most detailed" castle system, so that'd be a waste of a D2C. As for Gryffindor Tower, it's not that iconic or interesting. It's not like the Friends apartments where like 90% of the show's action takes place! And frankly it's even less interesting than all the other Common Rooms would be, if only because everyone who's only marginally into HP would have a ton of Harrys, Rons, and Hermiones already. Hogsmeade, again, could be viable. If they're smart they'll do it in the style of Diagon Alley so you can add onto your Diagon Alleys if you want to.

Rule of thumb: if you have to go into this much detail justifying the possible minifig selection, then no, the location itself isn't iconic enough. Would people have bought the Avengers Tower, or for that matter Diagon Alley, even without the figs? Sure, because of the fun building experience and how the finished product looks on your shelf. But stacking up four identical (apart from the colours) towers isn't that much fun and apart from that you basically have grass and some goal hoops. I'm not ruling out a smaller, Burrow-size D2C. But EUR 400-500? That's a lot of Quidditch torsos and capes you could buy instead.

I mostly agree but there's still some overlap I'd say. The D&D set and CMF series were especially well-received not only because of the D&D IP but also because they could double as generic medieval fantasy which many AFOLs would like more of. The Cullen House works not only for Twilight fans but for those who would like LEGO to give us modulars in a more modern style. So I do think that the overlap here with, say, horror is intended to broaden the target group towards non-Spiderverse fans.

I didn't mean casual movie fans, I meant CMF collectors who aren't into those particular movies. Like you can want a Werewolf Spiderman either because you know who that is or because you have a general idea of who Spiderman is and werewolves are fun and the design just looks appealing.

I called this when the series was first announced and got shouted down. LEGO cannot afford to make a CMF series just for superfans, it has to have wider appeal. Which means fun and visually appealing designs trump plot relevance. Like Ballerina and Lobster-Lovin' Batman.

I wouldn't get my hopes up for the Leaky Cauldron, since it's a pub and LEGO avoid doing those. Yes they did the Three Broomsticks but I'm not sure if they know that butterbeer is supposed to be alcoholic, they didn't do the Hog's Head either. And the problem with a DA expansion is that the old DA is set to retire soon, so anything new would have to be able to stand on its own. What else in Knockturn Alley (apart from B&B) would even be iconic or well-known enough to count? Hogsmeade in the same style as DA would make more sense to me since it would stand on its own yet be able to be displayed together. Well the most dramatic games usually end up being those houses up against each other so it makes sense. For me the 2018 set with all the stands was as definitive as it needs to get. Sure the players were still Gryffindor against Slytherin, but even a D2C version would be unlikely to feature all four houses playing each other simultaneously, that just doesn't make sense. Army-building Quidditch players even from other houses isn't that hard thanks to the Cho polybag, the book with Cedric, and the house banners. Certainly cheaper, I'd guess, than a D2C! So I'm not sure if enough demand would really be there.

That's pretty optimistic! The big DA is four half baseplates and already costs EUR 450, so even with three I wouldn't expect much below EUR 400. 😞 It's worth noting that most of the playscale Hogsmeade (except the station) went EOL last year. As did the UCS Hogwarts Express so maybe we are due a new one (this time what most everyone wanted, i.e. a motorized version that runs on rails with King's Cross)? Though with the way things have been going lately, I agree with @BrickBob Studpants that buildable objects (or Merlin forbid, giant buildable creatures) sound likely. Could be, but then the D2C isn't listed either, so I am curious. By the way, I think we have confirmation now that HP is getting an AC (since 76456 can't really be anything else IMO).

Also if the leak is true then there are two set numbers, 76455 and 76456, still unaccounted for. 76456 has to be the AC since Brickmerge features it as an HP set, 7+, 278 pieces, with a September release date but also a 2025 EOL date. Any ideas for 76455?

According to a story on instagram, there will be a HP D2C with a set number of 76457, no rumours as to the set name yet. What do you think, a smaller D2C like the Burrow or another massive one? Youtuber JJ Mly (not the leaker of the set number) did a vid a month ago pedicting five likely topics (Quidditch Pitch, Hogsmeade, Azkaban, Horcruxes, MoM) but that seems to me to just be guesswork. I cannot see a large enough target group for either Azkaban (way too bleak), Horcruxes (the same), or MoM (a fairly dark location and the only previous set wasn't well-received). Hogsmeade maybe - I do think the playsets have covered all that LEGO is going to cover but it's a theme park location which might make it more popular. As for a Quidditch Pitch, it would still have to be minifig scale so would that not basically be just a ton of green plates? If anything I could rather see a Quidditch Icons set with Harry's Firebolt, James Potter's Seeker trophy, and a Snitch or something.