brickbride

Yes, I think they have a more mainstream audience than superhero movies or even Indiana Jones. Which is fine, but those probably aren't the sort of adult viewers to get excited about LEGO sets. And again, the movie's absolutely unsuitable for kids. The smallest new set, the Ilu Discovery, is 8+, but who'd let their eight-year-old watch that movie? So you'd just get "two little blue men and a fish-dragon-thingie". I think most kids would prefer the cooler-looking Ninjago dragons and figs, or even Dreamzzz. Bottom line: I can see SOME of the Avatar sets appealing, like the Soul Tree, if they look cool enough on their own. But not the majority. And I wonder if LEGO knew what the movie was going to be like when they agreed to make sets for it. The cast of figs for the Mako Sub (one character who kids might actually like, one school bully, one character who dies in the movie, and the main bad guy) makes me doubt it. /OT AoU came out in 2015, nearly ten years ago. If they haven't made an AoU set with Quicksilver by now, they're clearly not in a hurry to. It might have to do with the fact that he dies in that movie? LEGO seem to shy away from that for the most part (not always, though). Also, Quicksilver would actually be well-known to casual X-Men fans from the more recent movies. And he's not played by the same actor as the MCU Quicksilver or even the same character, really, so I doubt many moviegoers would consider the two "the same". Scarlet Witch is clearly associated with the MCU due to several appearances in movies that were either huge box office successes (Infinity War) or fairly recent (Dr Strange MoM), plus her own streaming series. If - like MCU Quicksilver - she'd only ever appeared in one movie several years back, I doubt we'd be getting figs of her today.

While the movies are definitely blockbusters, do we actually know that Avatar LEGO sets sell well? I just notice them on clearance a lot. I'm also not quite sure who'd buy them, given that the second movie is absolutely not suitable for kids.

Tell that to the Hufflepuff banner! ;-) (Though I fully accept your correction about the Room of Hidden Things. In fact, I own the set now and look forward to building it, and the Pixies is a cute detail even if not something I'd have associated with the Room at all.)

I'm not so sure about that (and the Mario one, too). Can you imagine showing off your collection to fellow flower enthusiasts? "Here's my new rose bouquet ... Here's the wildflower bouquet in a vase ... There's the daffodils ... The tulips, of course ... Oh, and here's a screaming baby someone's stuck into a pot!" One of these things is not like the others, is all I'm saying.

A Niffler. Yes, one, in singular. And it's on a sticker. That would be my guess based on empirical evidence, anyway. EDIT: On a slightly more serious note, I wouldn't be surprised by a Cornish Pixie. Those are hardly native to the Forbidden Forest, but LEGO wouldn't care - they've already stuck them into two previous sets where they didn't belong, they might as well get some more use out of the mold, especially since I'd guess the Chamber of Secrets set they'd made it for (and really the entire modular Hogwarts) is nearing EOL. And/or a baby Thestral. That's another mold that hasn't seen much use, and the Thestral Carriage set won't be around forever, either.

Fourth Hedwig, actually. Don't forget the pencil holder one!

StoneWars has a list, too. Maybe that helps? https://www.stonewars.de/news/lego-pick-a-brick-eol-2023/

And Dreamzzz is apparently the new HP - the cheapest set in its leaked summer wave amounts to EUR 30. 'Cause nothing says "targeting kids" like exclusively making sets you can't afford on an allowance. Regarding the mandrake: I called it some time ago that HP 2024 would be buildable objects galore, but this is getting ridiculous very fast. If we HAVE to have buildable potions ingredients, at least give us Snape's jar of creepy-crawlies he keeps in his office! A lot of us adults work in offices and like Snape. I'm just saying. ;-)

Just popping in to say: For those interested, German youtuber Held der Steine has a video review of the Hoopty up. Apart from the price - obviously -, he also complains about the build. Specifically, the lack of boat studs on the underside (it just stands flat on the table) and the lack of design for the overhanging part of the roof in the back, which isn't prettied up on the underside - the same for the inside of the cockpit walls. The slit on the roof, while necessary, also looks bad. I have to say, looking at it in the video it does seem like a truly lackluster design. As if the price alone weren't bad enough! And of course the name. I mean, I realize that last one isn't LEGO's fault. But if you HAVE to put an overpriced vehicle called "a heap of junk" on the shelves, the design had better be beyond reproach, just so you're able to avoid the really, really obvious headlines. Still no idea what they were thinking with this one.

But again, would kids want them? Maybe Fleur, I guess, but all of them have fairly minor roles, and both Percy and Scrimgeour aren't well-liked. The average HP advent calendar has only six figs. Generell, I'd expect two to three of these spots to go to the Trio, and at least one or two others to well-known characters (Draco, Dumbledore, Snape ...). I read "brick-built basilisk" and immediately thought of the one in the 2018 Great Hall set. Am I the only one? 😉 By the way, I saw Gringotts assembled in person the other day. It looks impressive but not, to me, EUR 430 impressive. I did like the detail (a sticker, unfortunately, I think) of an ad on the side-build where it says "Multiply your fortune". With a picture of golden cups next to it. 😉

How about the camping trip in DH? It's apparently popular with AFOLs and you can't get any more boring peaceful than that. Most days' builds would be a tree. Paired with the occasional new minifig variant like Sulky Ron or Whiny Hermione. (Yes, DH is absolutely my favourite book of the series, just in case you couldn't tell.)

Well, over at Star Wars they did have a 4+ set with an AT-ST on the Ewok Homeworld, so you don't know what goes on in their heads: "It's never too early to introduce kids to slaughter!", maybe? Also, like I've pointed out before, the official description of 75951 wants YOU to be Grindelwald ("Flap the Thestral’s wings to make a flying escape!"), so yeah. But on the whole, I agree that an AC based on the wedding, or anything DH really, is not that likely.

Aren't the advent calendars supposed to be primarily for kids? I know that many adult minifig collectors buy them, but still they tend to be marketed towards kids. And I kind of doubt that kids would be excited about those last two ones. Or even Bill, who plays very little of a role in the books and movies. Basically, I'd expect them to stick with easily recognisable figures for the advent calendars - mostly students with the odd well-known professor or other adult, like Aberforth, thrown in.

EDITED because I did initially write and post several long paragraphs in answer to @Mandalorianknight, but frankly I'm tired of being attacked, and need a break. My interest in LEGO Marvel is mostly academic anyway, I don't own any of the sets, so I'll take a leave of absence for now. @Everybody who's waiting for the Avengers Tower: Good luck, and may the set end up being what you wish for!

Just read a rumour that The Marvels is going to have a running time of only 1 h 38 min (1h 33 min without credits), making it the shortest MCU movie EVER. The budget was apparently a paltry (for a MCU movie in 2023) USD 130 million. Even though it's set in space, which you'd think would warrant some CGI ... Fun fact: Even the absolutely worst performing MCU movie ever, The Incredible Hulk, had a longer running time of about 1 h 52 min and a higher budget of about USD 150 million - IN 2008! Ant-Man 3 even had a budget of around USD 200! But hey, if/when The Marvels flops, I'm sure it's going to "prove" that people don't want female superheroes, and that Captain Marvel's phenomenal Box office performance was just a fluke./s In all seriousness: Like with the Hoopty's pricing, I'm starting to wonder if everyone involved WANTS this to fail. And I just don't get why. Like, Ant-Man has NEVER performed well, but gets treated much better than the only MCU character whose debut movie made the top 10?

The US price should be USD 525 according to leakers. Rivendell was USD 500 and GBP 430, so something around GBP 450 sounds plausible.

I would not get anywhere near that number regardless, but I still was annoyed to find that something like half my manuals don't even qualify. Most because the sets are too old, or don't have QR codes for whatever reason (Duplo doesn't, the storybooks don't, and so on ...). One has a slight smudge on the QR code so it doesn't get recognised either. At the very least there should be an option to take a pic and send it in if the last thing happens, but I couldn't even find that.

Honestly? I've gotten pretty tired of the gimmicky play sets (as opposed to normal play sets that aren't basically just backdrops), but a) these days even normal playsets have so little depth that they may as well count as backdrops, so the difference is hardly significant; and b) I dislike buildable creatures/objects without any play value and without even a minifig included far more. If you give me the choice between a Moments book for EUR 30 with three figs and at least some semblance of a play set or a buildable Dobby for EUR 30, then Moments book it is. So yeah, I'm not sure what there is to celebrate. Sure we won't get gimmicky foldout sets, but I'd rather have them than ANOTHER buildable Hedwig.

Yes. We absolutely need more cars in HP./s How about a Death Eater bust? Since the Black Panther one sells so well. 😉

Honestly? I'd expect the "forest" part to be something along the lines of the sad little tree build in the Thestral Carriage. Or even worse, Expecto Patronum.

I think it is mainly because we haven't had one for so long, to be honest. The modular Hogwarts plus the banners, trunks, and Moments books covered most other Hogwarts locations (poorly, in some cases) but not that one. Also we've somehow come to the point where an actual playset consisting of a recognisable location (not: half a tree means the Forbidden Forest) is the exception, not the norm.

Affordable (around EUR 15) sets with minifigs (don't even care which ones, just not buildable objects without any) that don't contain fricking cars.

So - worse than Avatar 2, then? I'm just saying. ;-)

That, exactly. I'm all for cheap, accessible HP sets, in fact I spent most of last year complaining about the lack of them. But as a kid I'd have been so disappointed if someone had given me a small HP set because they knew I liked HP, and instead of like a bit of the castle or the forest or Diagon Alley or anything else magical it contained a CAR. Like I've said, Lego already has a lot of cars at kid-friendly price points (most of City, a fair amount of Friends, not to even mention car-specific themes like Speed Racers) - why couldn't they use the cheapest HP set for something different? I think both the Thestral Carriage and the Polyjuice Potion Mistake were much more on point in terms of what the target audience would like. Plus, speaking of the target audience: HP used to be one of the few themes that appealed to girls as well. Again, previous smaller sets did a much better job of including both genders. Harry and Luna with a Thestral carriage? That's one popular male character, one popular female character, a scary carnivorous skeletal horse and a cute baby version of it - it ticks a lot of boxes. But this? Two male characters in a car - don't tell me anyone thought "Girls will love this!" when they okayed it. Give us the Beauxbatons winged horses (which have been paywalled behind one pretty pricey set), a glittery patronus, or at least animals more exciting than Hedwig who has even been included in polybags before.

That's exactly what I am worried about with the Hoopty: the set not selling well at that price, and Lego blaming it on the all-female minifigure selection (in a Superhero theme, too).