brickbride

I'm glad you like them! Personally I find Bunchu quite hideous but that's of course just my opinion. However it's not just my opinion that we get a lot of Bunchu sets for Izzie and little else, that - as you yourself point out - the girls get fewer sets than the boys, that the girls' sets are more often found on sale than the boys' (including the Bunchu 10-in-1 set whereas the Z-Blob one was well-received, and the Izzie Narwal one which went EOL in December 2024 and therefore shouldn't even be in stock anymore in mid-2025), and that nothing in this last wave sounds like it would particularly appeal to girls who, again, don't get many big sets anyway. So my point about Dreamzzz being unable to appeal to many girls still stands.

Wicked sets have leaked. They're licensed, well under or around .10 per piece, and even include a brand new lion mould! Just to keep in mind when judging HP's recent prices.

Has anyone seen the new Privet Drive in person? I think it's great that they gave us a closed build but on pictures you also see how they skimped on parts in order to do so, i.e. the roof looks really bad compared to the previous version. It almost makes me hope that the Lovegood House will be just a facade like Malfoy Manor because I don't think a closed version at this price point would look good at all.

That's what I was referring too. I did count the Balrog as a brick-built fig. ;-) The HP one had two figs as well, the Sherlock Holmes one with five figs seems to be the outlier so far. I guess you could count the Wicked one but that's clearly bookends, not a book nook, and in a completely different style.

With two figs and the back and sides all made of portals and empty air?

January 2026 set names and prices have leaked. Not one of them's below EUR 50 and one is an actual tank. Way to be child-friendly, LEGO. Are there really parents out there who'd buy their child a EUR 130 LEGO tank? It's like they want to doom this theme. Also I've said it before, but LEGO has soooooo many boy-centric themes and instead of being somewhat gender-equal with their latest in-house theme they've fallen into the same trap here. We get a lot of cool stuff designed to appeal to boys but for girls it's mostly the same (butt-ugly) monstrous bunny thing over and over again. Amazon has lately had Izzy's narwal balloon and and Zoey's cat bike on sale for up to 60% off and I wasn't tempted to buy them even then, the figs and builds really aren't attractive and don't fit in with anything else. (The only cool aspect of the bike is the dual-moulded raven.) And now this latest wave is mech, croc, nightmare scorpion, dino, tank all over again. I'm wondering if LEGO are actually going to take something away from their failure to get enough girls into this theme. Other than "I guess girls don't like action themes/LEGO/minifigs/whatever". 71508 Fox Guardian Mech, USD 80 71512 Crocodile Submarine, USD 70 71513 Nightmare Scorpion Digger, USD 50 71514 Dino Jet, USD 100 71515 Tiger Shark Tank, USD 130

Yeah, I don't think they use in-story logic when designing these things. Like some time ago we got a Rocket mech, and when it was announced many people said that it would be hilariously appropriate if Rocket's mech were Groot. But no, we got a generic raccoon mech instead. And over at DC we have Superman - Superman! - attacking poor Lex Luthor with a Superman mech when the opposite would make a deal more sense. So basically whichever character the audience likes well enough gets a mech regardless of whether that makes any in-story sense. The bar for getting a symbiote version is, presumably, whether the character is well-known enough and whether the Venomized version would look good.

Printed windows are kind of a must. If they use those awful window stickers from the Hogsmeade Village set for a EUR 380 D2C, that would be a new low.

The weird thing is that Gringotts did have large rollercoaster pieces, the printed dragon's head, the fabric wings etc. and still managed to come in way below .10 ppp. So this here might just be the new normal for large HP sets; both the Great Hall and the Main Tower are well over .10 ppp, too. I'm still not convinced and I especially don't think they'd put a Death Eater into what is shaping up to be another allowance-friendly set for boys. Like I've said before, these low-cost sets very much feel like HP's "City" line (two boys and a car, two guys and a motorbike), and a Death Eater would ruin the vibe. Maybe Voldie instead since while he's more fearsome than his Death Eaters in the source material, LEGO tends to treat him simply like someone for Harry to duel.

According to Brick Clicker's latest video the price for the D2C Hogsmeade set is still USD 380 (we've had a couple sets change prices lately). Piece count is 3,228 so well over .10 per piece (as opposed to the big DA or Gringotts).

Exhibit A is from 2011, I think we can discount it for that reason alone. Exhibit B might ve more relevant, being from 2022, but like I've said I don't know. They seem to be getting more stingy with the figs lately (case in point: exhibit A's Narcissa looks way better than the one in the recent EUR 150 Malfoy Manor). The recent Charms Class does have three figs at EUR 20 but none of them are Hagrid so while it's not impossible I just don't think it's likely.

They could, but Hagrid probably already counts as more than one minifig in their budgeting (new face print or not) so that would make more than three for a EUR 20 set which seems unlikely.

EUR 20 list price and three figs, one of which is a new Hagrid (goggles)? I wouldn't get my hopes up.

@BrickBob StudpantsTo be fair Hermione's plan to free the House Elves is pretty stupid. She never once talks to them about what their lives would look like once they're free, and her leaving clothes lying around for them to find should accomplish nothing since she's not actually their master. But that's exactly what I mean - those plot points need to be addressed. Again, I could see a "What if" type of adaptation working where Harry maybe gains Slytherin allies, House Elf allies other than Dobby, where Draco defects to his side, and so on. I think we're both arguing the same side - that this show, which looks to be "just like the movies but more woke" won't work. However, like I've said, I do see a lot of room for expansion even in the earlier books. The thing about Harry as our POV character is that he's both very, very unobservant and lacks curiosity. Part of it stems from JK's inability to plan ahead (by which I mean aspects that are introduced in later books but should be part ofthe earlier ones according to all logic), but for example he barely interacts with members from other Houses save for Luna and Draco. Hermione, on the other hand, clearly does (because everytime JK needs to introduce a new student character Harry's like "Who's that?" and Hermione's like "That's X, don't you know her?") but in the books we don't see any of it because we're stuck with Harry. I would like to see what the members of the other Houses get up to. Or the antagonists! For CoS, we could have Ginny slowly, over several episodes, becoming entrapped by the diary rather than all of it being dealt with in dialogue afterwards. And we could even see what the hell Lucius was thinking when he dumped his Dark Lord's most prized possession in a random Weasley's cauldron. That sort of thing. Also in the later movies the backstory was dealt with way too little; stuff like Remus knowing what the Marauders' Map is or Snape saying "I, the Half-Blood Prince" came completely out of left field for all the viewers I know who hadn't read the books. The thought of a "child-friendly" HBO show will never not be funny to me. ;-) But I agree with @BrickBob Studpants - as long as the show isn't a proven success, LEGO won't take much of a risk on it. Maybe the odd little set here and there, especially ones like "Ron and Harry and car" or "Ron and Harry and spider" that they can be relatively sure will sell anyway, or maybe sets featuring characters like Peeves that got cut out of the movies, but nothing more.

Well HP's not a film franchise to begin with but a book series. I wouldn't have issues with more than one adaptation co-existing. Especially since film and TV are different media with different possibilities and the movies left plenty of room for improvenent (i.e. more focus on backstories, and a books-accurate Snape). However, I do think that the source material is problematic in many ways: from JK's attitude towards bullying (only ever bad if our heroes are on the receiving end) to Hogwarts running on slave labour to even the "good" characters' dismissive attitude towards Squibs and Muggles to the vilefication of Slytherin House as a whole. This coupled with the casting news means I have no interest in another straight adaptation of the books. I'd rather see different aspects of the wizarding world (FB had the right idea despite ending up an illogical, incoherent mess) or, as I've said before, maybe a "What if" type of adaptation where these problems are actually addressed and the outcome isn't set in stone.

PPP might not hold that much weight but for me "It's really tall" doesn't either. I've said it before, for EUR 200+ I'd rather have a fully enclosed modular crammed full of details than a half-empty placeholder for add-ons like the Great Hall or a tower where several storeys consist of little but stairs. But to each their own! The new system just isn't my cup of tea.

No they won't. Minidolls are for girls' themes, not for Harry Ron Hagrid Car Spider Bike themes like LEGO HP. You also couldn't differentiate between younger students/older students/adults that way, and can you imagine what a Voldie/Death Eater minidoll would look like?

The Burrow is enclosed from both sides, though, isn't it? That obviously has to take away from the height. As for the Shire, I don't think they were going for height in the first place, plus the consensus seems to be that the set is vastly overpriced. So those might not be the best comparisons.

But buildable Hedwig, the HE or other things like Privet Drive are all staples of LEGO HP that pop up again and again in slight variations. And playset WWW came seceral years after the latest DA. The motorcycle escape hasn't been done once in more than twenty years of HP, and then twice in a row after the first attempt was poorly received. That's pretty unusual I'd say.

Dumbledore wouldn't have to be there, he wasn't in the last Hospital Wing set either. And the character selection often doesn't make sense (i.e. Kettleburn but not Quirrell in the Main Tower), so they might well give us the Slytherin Common room with only one Slytherin or none at all. Though personally I'd expect the Bloody Baron with it given that so far we've always gotten the House ghost.

I would laugh so hard if they gave us the Lovegood House with Luna, who isn't even present in the scene, and without Ron. No way are they giving us the Chamber of Secrets in a set that doesn't have "Chamber of Secrets" in its name. And no way are we getting three detailed storeys in a EUR 100 set. The Flying Lesson was EUR 80 (which would probably be at least EUR 90 or EUR 100 in 2026) and it's tiny! At best we'll get a crappy slide-out Slytherin Common room akin to the Hufflepuff one in the Great Hall set, the Hospital Wing itself, and another uninspired slide-out of an unimportant location just for completeness' sake (like the Transfig class in the Flying Lesson). The Chamber of Secrets would also necessitate a basilisk which again, no way are we getting that as an add-on to a set called the Hospital Wing. Maybe. But it's odd to say the least that we'd get two sets based on the same scene within the space of a year (January to January) - in some leaks the new set is called Hagrid and Harry"s Privet Drive Escape which would indeed point to it being DH-based - and that the second set would be what everyone wanted the first one to be. That doesn't look like a coincidence to me.

Or it's LEGO listening to the customers. And noticing that everyone went "Yay, Hagrid's DH motorbike, finally!" when the previous one was announced and then went "WTF is THAT? And where are the minfigs?" when they saw what we were actually getting. Either way I'm expecting two figs (Hagrid and Harry/baby Harry) and a small build. This will fit nicely into LEGO's What Do You Mean It's Not Solely For Boys Series of Affordable HP Sets: Ron and Harry and car, Ron and Harry and giant murderous spider, and now Hagrid and Harry and bike. Other than that ... 76460 Sorting Hat: As has been said, that's probably yet another Great Hall add-on. I'm expecting three figs max including McGonagall and probably yet another never-been-done-before student character, though just two figs is probably the most likely. 76463 Hogwarts Castle: Hospital Wing: The last one was EUR 50 and included the Clock Tower, so it stands to reason that the Most Expensive Hogwarts Ever version won't even do that. 76464 Cauldron: Disney has 43252 Moana's Flowerpot and Wednesday has 76784 Black Dahlia Flower, which both times is a flowerpot with a little scene inside. I'm expecting something like that just without the flower, and maybe with built steam or bubbles coming out of it. 76466 TBD Philosopher’s Stone set: At that price point I'm fully expecting a follow-up to Hogwarts Icons. With the Stone, obviously, and possibly Harry's wand and/or a Gringotts vault key, and other assorted stuff. The troll would probably be too big (and look atrocious when brick-built but it's not like that stopped them with Chewbacca over at SW). Actually what would make the most sense would be to base it on the challenges so, you know, chess piece, flying key, Devil's Snare, potions bottle if you go by the book instead of the movie. 76467 Luna Lovegood’s House: Colour me surprised - fans have wanted this as much as Malfoy Manor for ages, and it's a pretty dark location too, so I'd have figured they'd have waited a bit and then made it for like EUR 150 at the least. Since the budget now is as much as this year's Privet Drive without adjusting for LEGOflation, I'm expecting that we'll get a pretty small build and few figs. 76470 Flying Ford Anglia: Yeesh, another one? This isn't LEGO City! We don't need a ton of cars, and it's always the same one, too! At this price point it pretty much has to be the definitive UCS version. 76461 Cornish Pixie: Buildable Dobby had a list price of EUR 30 so I'm expecting this to be even smaller. Though it could be an interesting parts pack given the colour.

No. I rather think LEGO would like to pretend those movies don't exist.

Check out the OnePieceLiveAction subsection of the usual place! There are promos up where live-action Luffy (Inaki Godoy), Nami (Emily Rudd), and Zoro (Mackenyu) review the LEGO sets - it's very much the characters not the actors doing the reviewing (well except that with Godoy/Luffy you can't really tell :-)). Nami does the Battle of Arlong Park, Zoro does Buggy's Circus Tent and the Going Merry, Luffy does Windmill Village and the Merry again. Nami complaining about Arlong standing right next to "her" and why did they have to include Nami's chains but hey at least you can destroy the pagoda is hilarious. And so's Zoro stealing Luffy's hat (deadpan: "I'm Luffy now") and knocking over the Sanji minifig (deadpan: "This is how I feel right now"). EDIT: Usopp's (Battle of Arlong Park again) and Sanji's (Baratie) promo are up as well. Usopp's is kind of meh but then I don't like the character much. Sanji's take on Sanji and the fancy egg dish vs. Zeff is fun, although I'm surprised he didn't use the duel in order to get in a dig against Zoro. Bottom line: check those out! Also I think that's a first for LEGO, actors in character endorsing the sets. Has that ever been done before? If not, what do we think it means for the future of One Piece Live Action and the LEGO One Piece theme? I mean those promos most have cost a pretty penny.

Wanting five figs doesn't necessarily mean having the budget or room for a EUR 130 ship. Plus a pirate ship doesn't really fit in with my other stuff, I'd prefer to have just the figs and build a cute little port scene with them. But thank you, LEGO, for telling me how to display them and how much to spend on them, I guess?