brickbride

Grimmauld Place at least had a good excuse since the mechanism to hide the house required a certain room layout. This here just feels like LEGO being cheap. But like I've said, really shallow facades are the new normal. Just look at Gru's House from Minions (75583) from the back!

StoneWars did a slider comparison of the Mansion with the Natural History Museum for anyone who's interested. Both have two storeys but the Mansion is a lot shorter (and when the Museum came out there were some complaints that it didn't look imposing enough!). I don't think the Mansion woild look all that good in a city setting and it's not meant to be located in one anyway, so why did they even bother to make it compatible at this size/piece count?

Well, that's LEGO for you. They also changed the Bricklink Designer Programme rules so cruelty against animals (including caging or chaining them) can no longer be depicted. Then gave us a EUR 550 Star Wars set with a bunch of male characters and a chained Sex Slave Leia as the only female character. But then they made her wear a miniskirt over her golden bikini, so it's okay again./s I could come up with some other recent examples, but the basic takeaway is always "It's the LEGO version of morality, don't think about it too hard".

Where did you see those? EDIT: found them. Not my kind of thing but they might give us some idea about which stores we can expect next. Also, where is the pink building from the old DA set (QQS, I think)? Shouldn't that be next to Ollivander's or something?

Might just be a budget thing. Unprinted dress slopes look bad and no-one but Dobby and possibly Bella seems to have leg printing. Have you seen Gru's house from Minions? Or the Emerald City leak from Wicked? Paper-thin facades are LEGO 's new thing.

I've heard quite a few sellers complain about them as well, since they're basically subpar action figures at a too-high price point and therefore don't sell. They also would not lend themselves to representing Hagrid's bulky figure (the Green Goblin that supposedly represented the Willem Dafoe version was bad enough). Still, they're the most poseable kind of buildable (human) figure we've got so far. The Wednesday and Wicked ones wouldn't exactly lend themselves to sitting on a motorbike! The Harry & Hermione ones were at a completely different price point, so I think we can rule those out. Honestly, now I expect the entire thing (minus Harry) to look much like this:

Re: brick-built Motorbike with brick-built Hagrid and Harry: Rumour has it that the Marvel subtheme will scrap the buildable figures by the end of 2025 because they don't sell. Given that, I find it baffling that they are only just now introducing them here! At least many Marvel characters wear helmets or cowls that partly cover their heads. After the atrocity that was the buildable Chewbacca over at Star Wars, I really don't want to know how the designers'll attempt to recreate Hagrid's shaggy hair and beard.

Do you mean the one they've used for the Dementors here? Honestly, I was never a fan of the movies' tendency to have people who Apparate turn into mist, so it doesn't bother me at all. Most people seem to think it's the latter, since the set is apparently known as "Motorbike and Sidecar" and the sidecar only appears in DH1. Also I'm not sure who this set is meant for in the first place, but assuming that kids like this kind of stuff, an adult Harry probably has more play value than a baby. In 2021, the EUR 20 set for the modular Hogwarts gave us a really neat and complex build as well as four figures (with extra hair-/headpieces for three of them!). Just saying! That said, I fully agree that the most we're likely to get now are three figs and one of those crappily designed so-called modules reminiscent of the Hufflepuff Common Room in the Great Hall set. Lockhart and Harry for the Dueling Club are a given - the 2021 Chamber of Secrets also did the Dueling Club and somehow left out both Draco and Snape. I also suspect that for the new series of playset Diagon Alley stores we'll get Flourish and Blotts next, and for the modular Hogwarts we'll get the Chamber of Secrets soon. Both would have to involve Lockhart so if they invest in a new minifig for the Dueling Club they can then easily reuse parts of it.

I agree 100%. The gray pieces are ugly, the "bursting out" effect doesn't really work when they burst out above the logo. And the worst thing? No Clint! Honestly, with that figure selection there is no excuse at all for leaving him out. He's a founding member of the Avengers just like the rest of them.

Deleted

You forgot at least one "Venomized", possibly more. Quoting myself because of a thought I've just had: What if the fifth minifig for the logo is Clint (not Fury or Banner), and the Hulk's an extra (big)fig the leaker just hasn't seen?

It makes sense that they would pick the MCU's founding Avengers after all (they'd have been my pick, too), and I guess someone who's not into Marvel might mistake red-headed Nat for Wanda. But where is Clint and why wouldn't it be the Hulk instead of Bruce?

There's minifigs. The line-up has been leaked earlier. One's Scarlet Witch, I don't remember the others right now. If you go back in this thread far enough, you should find the full line-up.

The bit about the Avengers bursting out of the Marvel logo is apparently true, though. The usual place has a breakdown of which rumous of his have been confirmed by other sources so far. The one about Galactus is unconfirmed.

Honestly, one set or even none at all for "Thunderbolts" seems perfectly fair to me. After getting burned with "Eternals" and "Wakanda Forever", LEGO have clearly taken a cautious approch even for movies with established characters like "Ant-Man 3" and "The Marvels", and it seems like they weren't wrong to do so. "GotG 3" and "Spider-Man 3" are an exception, but both Spidey and the Guardians have a huge following, plus - and that's surely as important for a toy company - their characters and locations are visually appealing. Even kids who don't care about the movies might want to have a Talking Tree minifig, Raccoon in a Spacesuit minifig, or Crazy Electric Guy minifig! And then there's the Statue of Liberty and a bunch of spaceships. Meanwhile the cast of "Thunderbolts" looks a lot duller, consist entirely of B- and C-listers, and is not all that kid-friendly. And the trailer at least doesn't have any interesting locations, either. I guess LEGO could do the desert bike chase, but I say that only because LEGO loves bike chases and not because I think that one's something special. So I wouldn't get my hopes up if I were you. Also, I'm surprised that everyone here is so excited for the Fantastic Four movie. To me the entire concept just seems ... I don't know ... outdated? Like, of course there's only one female character and of course she has the power of invisibility. It just all seems a little quaint and old-fashioned to me. The fact that Reed Richards showed up in "Dr Strange 2" and was portrayed as basically a dumba*s and a dick doesn't help, either. (Or the fact that in Germany, Die Fantastischen Vier [The Fantastic Four] were a nineties hip-hop group. Although that's not Marvel's fault.) Still, like I've said above, I'm sure LEGO will make sets if the movie's colourful and appealing with at least one cool location and characters that are visually fun. But three sets is a tall order for an entirely unproven concept after "Eternals" and "Wakanda Forever".

Great, now I really don't want to watch this in the cinema. I haven't seen "Black Widow" so I was only introduced to Yelena in "Hawkeye". If found her very obnoxious and annoying, and the series' constant shilling of her, basically going "Look how cool she is! Isn't she the coolest?" put me off further. Same with Echo. (Hawkeye really got the short end of the stick there. He's the only founding member of the Avengers to never have had a solo movie, and then they used his already-short mini-series to shill not one but THREE characters that weren't him. Some of us actually like the character, you know!) Also, I've never seen a trailer so full of generic quotes - honestly, there wasn't a single one that made me take notice. (Compare with, say, Star-Lords rant about not killing people in the GotG 3 trailer.) Coupled with all the shots of people striking poses it's like they want to market this as the most generic MCU movie ever, no characterisation or character quirks to see here, just move along please. I'm not optimistic about the MCU going forward. I guess hardcore comic fans will still find something for them, but most people I know aren't comic fans. They all used to follow the MCU closely until "Endgame", but after that their interest has been limited to the occasional Disney+ show (not all of them!) or movie (again not all of them!). And whenever I tell them a tidbit about an upcoming movie I've learned from a LEGO forum, like "There's a new Captain America movie coming! Yes, I know Captain America's dead, but the Falcon guy from 'Endgame' is now Captain America!" or "There's a red version of the Hulk played by Harrison Ford!" they look at me as if I'd just made that up. Honestly, the only characters not dead and not confirmed to be retired I care about by now are Doctor Strange, Captain Marvel, and Star-Lord. And I should be surprised if we got any more than a small cameo for any of them in the remaining movies. My experience of course isn't the same as everyone's, but I do think they're losing the casual audiences more and more.

Why does Ironman need a car for chasing the Red Hulk?

Between the colour of the Sentinel, the colour of Wolverine's bike, and the colour of the Mansion, am I the only one to get serious Friends vibes from this?

As for the third question, no they won't. HP is one of their top-selling themes. As for the first and second, honestly I don't know. I saw an ad recently that they're casting kids aged 9-11 for the trio, and explicitly welcome diversity. I've talked about that before and was shot down, but I'd be surprised if we ended up with an all-white trio or generally with the show's characters looking like the movies'. As to if and how LEGO change their HP minifigs to reflect any casting choices - well, Marvel might be a good comparision? There's the "Spidey and his Amazing Friends" cartoon for kids which gets 4+ sets, but there's a different Spiderman (or as of No Way Home, three different Spider-Men) in the MCU Multiverse. And then there's even more Spider-Man characters from, say, Across the Spiderverse which get sets as well (Miles Morales has had at least two I can think of, a mech and a car chase). They all just sort of exist next to each other. HP could go the same route, I guess. Of course, Spider-Man wears a mask most of the time, so while true fans surely can point out the differences in the costumes, for a casual buyer these characters are all just Spider-Man.And of course we don't know how successful the HP series will be whereas the movies have a proven audience (and nostalgic 90s kids are probably one of LEGO's main buyer groups by now, especially for the more expensive sets). Going back to the 2025 sets: The X-Men Mansion over at Marvel is reported to be compatible with the modulars at just over 3000 pieces. I'm not personally sure how that would work since it's supposed to have a layout akin to the Natural History Museum, which had 1000 pieces more, and also includes a side-build (a Sentinel). But a leaked image apparently shows the modular connection points so let's assume the information is correct. That said, what do you expect from Malfory Manor? I'm sure we can rule out compatibility with the modular system and expect an open back, but how big do you expect the Manor to be, and how many studs deep?

From what can be seen in the blurry picture, the Cupid's torso might also work for a sort of torn, stained shirt?

I don't think they have. They admit to getting most of their info from @Brick Clicker and basically repeat a bunch of rumours. But the one about the Mansion fitting in with the modulars was new to me, so I've been wondering.

According to StoneWars, the X-Mansion will have a layout comparable to the Natural History Museum and fit in with the modulars (like the Sanctum or Avengers Tower). But the Museum had more than 4000 pieces. The Mansion will only have just above 3000, and that includes the sentinel. How does that fit together? Do you expect the Mansion to be closed on all sides like a modular building or open-backed?

Meh. I loved "Loki", and I liked Mobius as a character a lot, but as minifigs these would be too boring for me. Maybe Renslayer in period dress, Miss Minute, Old Loki, Sylvie in her McDonalds uniform (if nothing else she'd be hugely popular with City MOCcers), and Loki from the final scene - but the rest just look too much like ordinary people to appeal to a casual collector, and I doubt they'd have anything very exciting in the way of accessories either. (Unless you count Croki. 😉)

Halloween BAM parts have been spoilered at the usual place. They include parts for a witch (green face and hands unfortunately, but a hair/hat combo and a nice dress print) for those of you who want to populate their wizarding worlds. Also a cat to go with it.

The Chamber of Secrets is 100% guaranteed. It's the main focus of an entire movie and far more important to the series than, say, the dueling club from the same movie. And LEGO-wise it's been in every iteration of the castle system so far that actually had an underground section (and even the 2018 one which didn't still had the basilisk!). It's also big and therefore expensive, which LEGO likes. Leaving it out would make no sense whatsoever.