brickbride

The only surprise is that Arlong Park has neither Sanji nor Zoro, WTH? Though Sanji's probably more popular than Usopp so locking Sanji behind the more expensive sets makes financial sense. The cheapest set with Sanji is now officially the EUR130 Merry! But overall the Arlong Park set still seems to be poor value in terms of figs. Just five figs for EUR 80, they really could have thrown Zoro and Sanji in. Presumably the Luffy in 75636 is a kid with shorter legs and (hopefully) a different face if not hair. At TUDUM itself? I cannot imagine it. The entire OP community is chomping at the bit for either a season 2 release date, a season 2 trailer, a look at Chopper, a confirmation of season 3, or all of these. LEGO sets would be a distant fifth place on the list, if that.

Honestly I'm not a fan of either Great Hall but I will say that the 2018 one was much more affordable overall (cents per piece notwithstanding), has made for some awesome MOCs, AND included the Tower. So you'd really need to compare its then EUR 100 with the now EUR 200 for the new Great Hall, minus the underground section which the old one didn't have, plus part of the EUR 250 set price for the Tower set (we'll throw in the boat from the 2018 one for free). I'd say you'd land at roughly EUR 200-250 that way again and that still wouldn't give you the fireplace - here you have to buy the AC or the Duelling Club in order to get one. It seems a bit choosy to complain about its placement in the 2018 set when the new one doesn't have one at all. I think it's entirely fair to think that given the price increase they could and should have done better. The new ceiling with the negative studs looks really bad and the entire thing just looks bare (I've seen it displayed in a store). It's way too pricey for a playset but nowhere near nice enough for a display set, especially if you compare it to modular buildings.

And terribly unsafe as well. Now I'm just hoping none of those Duelling Club spectators will take even one tiny step backwards in surprise when Harry starts talking to the snake.

I could see people buying the less iconic locations in order to beef up their previous Diagon Alleys - if they would fit. And they don't. And they don't even look nice, they're very cheaply built for the most part with all the stickered panels, no comparison to the 2020 DA's intricate architecture.You'd have to do some massive MOCcing in order to turn, say, Madam Malkin's or the Owl Post Office from the playset line into something that fits with the 2020 Diagon Alley. (The 2011 one might be a closer fit size-wise but that's a long time ago and a set that's hard to get these days, not sure how many people will still want to add on to it. And again that set is much less cheaply built.) At best you'd get some additional figs and new moulds like the Pygmy Puffs - a lot of people initially said they'd buy WWW in order to beef up their existing WWWs - but that hardly justifies the high prices, and again I don't think the less iconic locations are much of a draw in that regard. And the people who don't care about collecting them and just want a display piece, again they'd probably want something halfway recognisable: "What's this on your shelf? Oh, that's the magic bank from HP with the goblins, see, and Harry and his friends in disguise, see!" vs. "What's this on your shelf? Oh, that's some random wizarding shop, I think it sells cauldrons or telescopes or something, and some random witches and minor Hogwarts students." I also don't really get the feeling that the playset line currently sells all that well, though that's just my personal observations.

I meant that it's short for sets belonging to a bigger subtheme (i.e. the new modular Hogwarts), and prevents people from getting the whole picture before investing. For example, you might want the Duelling Club in order to beef up your new (and pretty empty) Great Hall, but you have to buy it within six months and can't know whether next year will give us a different scene set in the Great Hall which you'd like better. Similarly, you might want to wait a bit with investing in the new modular Hogwarts, period, and see what next year brings in order to get a better idea of the entire silhouette, but by then the Owlery, Boathouse, and Potions Class all won't be available any more.

StoneWars did a current EOL list for 2025, subject to change of course. Apart from more obvious sets like the D2C Diagon Alley, this also includes: - the last remaining Hogsmeade set (train and station) - no big surprise here, though it makes me think that we'll be due another Hogwarts Express soon. They have to have one on the shelves and the booknook is a poor substitute for an actual train; - Ollivanders and Madam Malkin's, which means they're fully committing to their super short cycle for the playset Diagon Alley (WWW went out before the third set was even available, and now the second set goes out before there can be a fourth); - Boathouse, Owlery, Hagrid's Hut, Potions Class for the new modular Hogwarts all from 2024 and Duelling Club for the new modular Hogwarts from 2025 (!), so apparently here, too, they're going with "super short cycle in order to induce FOMO and prevent people from thinking too hard about how overpriced these things are"; - Aragog, which means we're probably due another Forbidden Forest set soon; - a bunch of other sets like Dobby, Buckbeak, the Mandrake, and apparently the Durmstrang Ship which aren't connected to anything else. Of course these are all still subject to change. I do wonder how long they will be able to continue with the playset DA at this pace, as the shops will get less and less iconic (barring Gringotts which I'm sure we'll be getting sometime). Anyone starting to collect after this year will already miss both WWW and Ollivanders. That's not really an incentive for new buyers, especially kids!

Sure, but the Guardians are very popular while the F4 are as of yet untested. And the Galactus set is way overpriced with none-too-great figs, for a lot of people the main draw is that they see it as their only chance to get the whole team.

Meh, I can't see it. Why would they waste one out of four slots on the F4 when I assume the Galactus set will still be on the shelves? Those sets would just cannibalize each other. And where are returning fan favourite characters like the X-Men? Or characters the fans have been clamoring for like God of Timelines Loki and Doctor Doom?

Just read that despite good reviews, Thunderbolts isn't doing so well at the Box Office - not horribly either, more like "with luck it'll break even". How do you think this will reflect on both LEGO and the MCU going forward? Will we get even fewer current (that is, non-legacy) sets since the MCU's clearly past its heyday? Or will Disney/Marvel insist on even more marketing (including merch) in the hopes that this will push the MCU back to its former heights? Personally I think a lot will depend on Doomsday. With all the returning characters and bringing back RDJ, they're throwing everything they have into this film. If Doomsday doesn't make a significant profit I don't know what else they could realistically try given the MCU's current status. And I don't see how a MCU where the better-performing movies just about break even while the rest incur losses would be sustainable in the long run.

You misunderstand me. To me it's not a playset if it’s primarily geared at AFOLs. For example I'd argue that the Flying Lesson is a playset (if a massively overpriced one) because it depicts a scene children would like and has the characters to act it out. But it's plainly unrealistic to expect a EUR 250 set to be predominantly geared at kids, and the Main Tower is heavily optimized towards displayability over playability: way too many stairs, no Quirrel, Mirror of Erised in a location that renders all the challenges moot (but looks pretty), inclusion of Kettleburn over actual plot-relevant characters, and so on.

Most UCS sets have minifigs and (a very limited amount of) play functions. That doesn't make them playsets. For example, the 2020 Diagon Alley has the WWW mascot with the hat that can be raised. But it's still clearly a display set geared at adult buyers. The same goes for the UCS Burrow with the Floo function. The Main Tower is in the same price range as the latter and, for me, fulfills the same role between its displayability and the inclusion of rare characters like Kettleburn (why would a child want this particular fig? What play scene would he lend himself to?). Malfoy Manor is a set AFOLs - not children and certainly not their parents - have been clamoring for for years, the same goes for updated figs of Narcissa and Bellatrix. The sets is way out of a child's price range, is a facade maent for display that would probably fall down if you tried to play with it, and what child wants to play "Death Eater meeting" anyway?

Hogsmeade? Why would I count a display set with a list price of several hundred EUR as a playset? Of those you listed, several are pretty clearly meant as display sets like Malfoy Manor, the Main Tower, and both DA sets. And only two (!) playsets are below EUR 50 (Dueling Club and Charms Class). Now compare this to other childrens themes like Friends, City, Ninjago ...

And yet there's barely any playsets left in this supposed children's theme. Besides, SW is another huge property yet gets all the gimmicks.

Then the corresponding figs would have to be Neville, Hermione, Ron, and Voldie, all of which are common already. Basically most every well-known character with a pet is a student. (Plus now that we know Voldie's "pet" is really a disabled woman of colour I'd expect them to maybe stay clear of that last one.) In addition, LEGO's brick-built animals at a small scale tend to look really bad (i.e. the basilisk from the 2018 Great Hall, Hedwig at Privet Drive ...). And this year"s AC has enough of them to last every fan a lifetime. I cannot see the concept being a huge draw. IMO the mech/microfighter equivalent should be a way to get rarer figs - that's why I mentioned Rita Skeeter - not yet another Harry, Hermione, Ron, or Neville.

What does "following in the footsteps of" even mean in this context? Falconcap was one thing: He was Captain America's friend, he'd had been established both as such and as an Avenger in his own right, so his taking over the mantle of Captain America made sense both on a personal and on a logistical level. I still think that it was unnecessary or that if it had been planned from the beginning they, at the very least, should have done a much better job establishing Falcon as a character you could root for than just going "There's this guy who follows Captain America around". But again at least there was some logic to it. Iron Heart on the other hand? How is she following in Tony Stark's footsteps just because she has a robot suit and a similar-sounding moniker? If anyone were to follow in Tony Stark's footsteps it would be War Machine who, just like Falcon, is too dull and underdeveloped a character to really work as a substitute but who at least knew Tony personally and had some (little) part in his success. Iron Heart is much more connected to Wakanda than to Tony Stark. If we needed a Tony Stark substitute then either War Machine (see above) or Spiderman as his protege/surrogate son would be the most logical choices, though since the entire point of "Spiderman: Far From Home" was that there cannot be a second Tony Stark this would not really work either. I agree about the book nooks. As for the other thing, I think art sets like The Amazing Spider-Man (31209), Gotham City (76271), and the BrickSketches (like 40428 Joker) are already comic-adjacent enough.

Good luck with that. I'm still wondering "Who would want that?" everytime I see the UCS Dobby's Sock on a shelf but to each their own. ;-) Also, I think LEGO just like sticking Hermione into sets so they can at least pretend to be somewhat gender-equal. As I've pointed out before, most affordable sets in this theme tend to be very boy-centric (Harry and Ron and giant scary spider, Harry and Ron and car ...) so I'd expect them to go the same route for mechs. If they wanted to make a girl-centric or at least unisex affordable HP set they certainly could - again I'm still surprised that we've never gotten something like Hermione and a unicorn - but it doesn't seem to be a priority. The closest we've come in recent years were the Thestral Carriage and the Cho polybag and they're both outliers.

That's exactly my point. We're here talking about how HP gets somewhat dark after the first two books (notwithstanding the fact that the first one opens with little Harry being orphaned and left with abusive relatives), but the source material of Star Wars, at least the original six movies, is pretty much solely dedicated to warfare with a side of rampant misogyny. Yet somehow LEGO and other toy companies have managed to translate this into "Isn't war cool?" for the 4+ age group. Like you've said: HP has a harder time appealing to kids (that are too young for the movies, and possibly even if they're old enough for them). The sets are increasingly either priced way out of a kid's range or stuff you simply cannot play with. And while LEGO've been broadening the demographics, again, that's only been upwards towards nostalgic adults who I'd guess also make up a significant portion of "playset" buyers in this theme. What kid wants Malfor Manor for Christmas, especially this version that basically consist only of a front, and would receive it at a price of EUR 150? Maybe a few, but I'd assume most buyers of this set are AFOLs who want it for the updated minifigs of Narcissa and Bellatrix. In general, minifigs seem to be the main draw of HP these days and that's not a kids' appeal. Kids as a rule don't care about detailed minifigs of obscure characters (if they want a specific professor for play they can just make their own) and they don't need a new Harry or Ron that's specific to one scene in the movie either. And again, there's no 4+ set, no mechs (which might not work here as well as in other themes, granted) or microfighter equivalents or other stuff. Why doesn't LEGO do a 4+ Hogwarts Castle the way they've been doing Jedi Temples and Batcaves and even Arkham Asylum? Because four-year-olds care more about Jedi Temples and Batcaves and Arkham Asylum than they care about HP.

Meh, while I don't want mechs I could do without all the buildable crap, sorry, objects and creatures. I really don't care whether the slots go to mechs or something like that, it means fewer playsets either way. I also think that the lack of mechs and 4+ sets, and the abundance of very high-priced so-called playsets and buildable decorations might not be the best sign for long-term popularity of the theme. Star Wars is even less kid-friendly than HP in terms of content and message but seems to do a better job attracting the youngest audiences.

Dioes anyone actually want mechs? I hear a lot of complaints about them in other themes. Sure, they're a good way to get figs - though EUR 15 for one fig and a bunch of unnecessary parts isn't cheap. And no-one needs more Harrys and Rons, so LEGO'd better come out with a Rita Skeeter mech or something. Though I wouldn't expect that either (or Hermione for that matter) since mechs are even more boy-centric then the rest of LEGO's portfolio. Plus I don't think HP lends itself to mechs design-wise. Most characters wear school uniforms or dark robes which makes for less exciting colours and less visual distinction than with e.g. Dreamzzz or Ninjago.

I also think casual fans would expect a "main" tower to be the tallest building of a castle. If LEGO planned on this one not being the tallest, they probably would have called it Dumbledore's Tower or Gryffindor Tower or Staircase Tower just to avoid confusion down the line.

Pics are out. I take back what I said based on just the sketch, Fawkes looks every bit as bad as Hedwig did. And baby Fawkes looks even worse than drone Hedwig when that should not even be possible. The Thestral family look hideous but then that's kinda the point I guess. And what even is that blue and yellow plant thing? Still miles better than Hagrid’s motorcycle accident. Otherwise (and apart from QQS in the DA set) this wave seems to be a fairly solid effort, though overpriced across the board. I'm not planning on getting any of the sets tbh. As an aside, with the Creator Unicorn Castle out it would be really easy for LEGO to make a set of Hagrid’s Care lesson that involves a unicorn. Or just a random unicorns in the Forbidden Forest set I guess, since the Ron and Hermione one didn't correspond to anything Canon either.

That's the bare minimum definition of what an AC is and does. Doesn't mean that people can't have opinions on whether it does it well. As a kid, I wouldn't have found the figs terribly exciting. Random students I either have a ton of (Draco, Harry ...) or don't care about, all wearing basically the same sweater? How is that better than robes, especially if Christmas sweaters aren't really a thing in your country? This year's City AC with its costumed figures is much more fun, and you'd think a magical setting would lend itself to even more of that. Why not Harry in a stag Patronus costume for once or something off the wall like that if we're not going with Canon scenes? I also don't like the sweater design. What's the thing on the Slytherin sweater even supposed to be? Surely not a snake - a frog maybe? It does look too Funko Pop to me, not consistent with either LEGO or HP (like that horrible HP Dots cooperation set where you had anime-style face tiles for the characters). The Ravenclaw thing is maybe a Pixie, I guess? Why? Because those are blue? If the entire House wears matching Christmas sweaters - and that's a thing I can't really see happening, especially in Slytherin - they had better have their House symbol on them or something. Draco Malfoy wearing a Christmas sweater with a weird Funko Pop style frog on it to match with Blaise Zabini is just something that does nothing for me. It's not off the wall enough to be funny, like Voldemort dressed as Santa or Sirius wearing a dog costume, and it's too random and unbelievable otherwise.

Nothing says Christmas like buildable date rape drugs, sorry, whimsical magical love potions. And the overall childish looks of the whole thing make it even worse. What have we got today? Let's build a letter that invites us to magic school, what fun! And the next day? Oooh, a cutely horrible monster book to study! And the day after that? Uh ... date rape drugs. And beer. Something here doesn't quite seem to fit together. Just saying. Also I'm genuinely baffled that they're including yet another buildable Hedwig, a buildable Sorting Hat (when one comes with Fawkes), and a buildable Thestral (when there's one in the book and we're getting a buildable Thestral family, too). And another buildable spider after the Aragog set, another buildable Buckbeak after the recent set (and this one looks terribly but then again so did the big version), and another buildable Mandrake, buildable stag Patronus, and buildable Monster Book. Maybe you're supposed to display all the cutesy tiny versions with the big versions assuming you've bought all the sets? That's really the only way I can explain it, but it doesn't make the AC feel very fresh or stand-alone. And it doesn't track with the gold coins and Polyjuice and Hogwarts letter and the other stuff that doesn't really fit with any existing set, or the kids in the Christmas sweaters.

It's the same for the Sherlock booknook, and that one actually makes sense when closed. With the HP one, Harry and Ron would push their carts to the front of the engine, and the carriage would be on another track, so I can see why they'd only show the closed version on the back of the box. But my best guess is that they simply want to make it look like you get more for your money.

You're saying that as if Potions hadn't been overpriced to begin with. Though Potions had four figs, a new Snape, and new parts as well (the flask and bubble pieces, both in two different colours). It also had more pieces than Herbology so yes, a EUR 10 premium for fewer parts and fewer figs seems excessive. And that's not even going into whether the figs are going to remain exclusive, which we just don't know. But of course it depends on what you value. If all you care about are potentially exclusive fig parts, have at it! I'm more of the "How much stuff do I get for my money" persuasion and from that POV, both Potions and Herbology seem overpriced to me.