Jump to content

strangely

Eurobricks Dukes
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2,111

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by strangely

  1. strangely
    Great review as always. As for the loose skirt on Minnie I've had a similar issue with my Alice, when I move her legs the skirt becomes loose. Her hair likewise has weak clutch power, I mean it still clutches some, but nowhere near as much as other hairpieces. I'm curious if anyone else is having issues with these two parts or if it's just me?
  2. strangely
    Straight bangs are way closer than the no bangs the current piece has. You're right though, it's not a match, but it's at least closer than the currently used pieces which bare little to no resemblance. But I also tend to think those hairpieces will be exclusive to those movie sets. For the DCSHG sets I expect rubber hairpieces (Like the Friends stuff), if only to add more accessories.
  3. strangely
    So far I haven't had that happen on these, but I did have a Scooby Doo last year that did the same thing. The only thing I noticed different between the Scooby head that did that and the others was that the printing wasn't that shiny on the one that rubbed off. I'm sort of assuming Lego puts an extra layer of something over the printing to keep it from easily coming off (Some sort of sealer I'd think) and I'm assuming there was an error and that piece didn't get it.
  4. strangely
    I think her hair in the show is way more stylized than the piece they currently use. Plus in the show she has bangs, which aren't really represented on the current mold.
  5. strangely
    I assume there will be some interior, but I think it'll be more like the Hogwarts sets where mostly there's just a couple of pieces of furniture and a few props. I could see maybe one or two rooms on the inside, but then everything else just being facade. I'd guess the entryway and balcony will be minifigure sized. On the interior maybe a few of the mosaics, a throne and some stickered wall panels. As to scale I'd prefer that the ground floor be scaled like a playset, so the minifigures don't look huge next to it, but then all the floors above can get smaller to give the illusion it's bigger (Similar of course to how the actual building creates it's immense scale).
  6. strangely
    That's probably as it should be. Even the actual castle is smaller than it looks, they use force perspective to achieve the size it appears to be. I'm just now thinking that ultimately if this does include Cinderella they'd likely have to create a new hairpiece for her as the Princess version of the hair is very different (It's not even really the right color either, she's more of a strawberry blonde in the movie). I mean they fixed Ariel's hair, so I'm doubting that any of the Princess hair will transition to the regular minifigure sets. Simpsons got a new mold in the last set, I'd assume if this set needs a new mold it'll get it. I am looking forward to how they create the detailing of this castle, there's a lot of gold detailing and arches. Props to whichever designer has taken this on.
  7. strangely
    I don't know that I see them doing another D2C next year. Personally I'd rather that they do regular sets rather than just one yearly set.
  8. strangely
    That's true to an extent, it's not based on the movie castle at all, but it is Cinderella themed. The interior is really all about her (The events of the movie are depicted in mosaics, the boutique is Princess themed and the restaurant is named after Cinderella too). On top of that she's almost always featured in the ceremonies held there (Usually Mickey and crew are there too). But those actresses are supposed to be Cinderella. They are there as if that character is real, that's part of the illusion. So I see no reason why Cinderella couldn't be the movie character. Looks like CInderella = is Cinderella.
  9. strangely
    Nobody said that. You need to read more carefully. CM4Sci said it was an incomplete list. Only what is known for sure is posted. Odd's are ridiculously good she'll be included. The castle is named for her after all. She's undoubtedly be included. I can only assume her not being included in the CMF was solely so she'd be exclusive to this set, making it even more valuable. So save the freak out for when we have final pictures, there's no need to panic yet.
  10. strangely
    A parade vehicle would be great. Plus, nearly all Lego sets include a vehicle of some sort. I'm heavily expecting Cinderella to be in this set as well. Given that the castle is named for her and she is a very common park character. Plus I don't think they could do a Disney World set without including at least one princess. The D2C's for the Simpsons ended up having six minifigures each, so I'm guessing this will be around the same.
  11. strangely
    Awesome! Thanks for the confirmation. I'm really looking forward to this one. I can't wait to see what characters actually end up in this set. Being the park opens the door for a lot of possibilities.
  12. strangely
    Confused. Park or Movie.
  13. strangely
    Read the quote again: He assumed it was because his source said it was. So far, based on the information we have it's leaning toward the Disney World castle rather than the animated movie. In addition to that there's the Tinkerbell rumor too, which also points to Disney World.
  14. strangely
    First off, not Disneyland. The castle at Disneyland is Sleeping Beauty Castle. It's Disney World that has the Cinderella Castle. Second, it's hardly a souvenir. That castle happens to be their logo and has been for quite some time. Beyond that the Disney World park is featured often on television and is a very recognizable landmark. People who have never been to the park know that castle. Third, the castle from the animated movie has already been done in Lego. That particular castle has appeared in a Princess set already. It seems unlikely they'd do another version of the exact same castle again. Fourth, our extremely reliable source has already confirmed it to be the Disney World Cinderella Castle. This is not a Cinderella set, it's a Disney set. Move on.
  15. strangely
    I didn't say Cinderella wouldn't be in it. I was just giving an example as to how they'd include other Disney characters. And Disney creates toys of their park attractions all the time, the park itself is very popular. Anyway's we've already had the castle from the movie Cinderella, so rather than repeat they'd be better off doing the Cinderella Castle located at Disney World. That castle is many times more iconic and popular than the castle in the movie, which is barely seen. And if Tinkerbell is in this set, then that 100% confirms it's the park version.
  16. strangely
    Just because it's named the Cinderella castle does not mean it's a Cinderella set. Cinderella Castle is also a building located at the Disney World resort. So there's a possibility that this set is based on the park attraction, rather than the movie. So we could easily see a wide variety of Disney characters appear if indeed this is based off the park.
  17. strangely
    That's a matter of opinion. I think Hook looks perfect, I don't even feel like the nose is missing. The mustache placement almost implies the big hooked nose of his. So for me, I wouldn't have it any other way.
  18. strangely
    Just bought some in Columbus, Ohio. Had to ask, but they had them.
  19. strangely
    I love all the face printing and the new hair colors. Too bad I'll have no chance to get these. Oh well.
  20. strangely
    Looking at the official pictures of the summer sets I'm actually pretty pleased, though the Jakku set is a little bare. My main problem is that they didn't bother to give us an accurate Rey yet. She really should have dual molded arms and legs to represent her sleeves and boots respectively. Plus it just makes me feel cheated paying for the same minifigure again and again in these sets, especially when it's one that's not even accurate to the character. Updating it would have made me feel a whole lot better about getting the Jakku set.
  21. strangely
    They sort of are and they sort of aren't. Basically the designer wanted it to look like the tentacles are separate, because they're supposed to be, but the bottom is solid. So dips were sculpted in to give the impression of separation. From the top it looks good, it captures the waviness. But from the front it looks like a hole, this is a result of the sharp edge around the circles. Instead the rim of the hole should have been eased back to soften the edge. All in all it's a mold that could have used a bit of refining. But it's still decent.
  22. strangely
    I know. I was just saying they look like dents. Dips probably would have been a better descriptor. It would look better had they been more sculpted and gradual.
  23. strangely
    They're not holes, but they are dents.
  24. strangely
    Too bad we didn't get any alt faces for these characters.
  25. strangely
    No, they are holes. There in almost every picture we've seen, other than the very first one. They are kind of odd looking, perhaps the sculpt could have incorporated them more naturally. I'm not too bothered overall.
×
×
  • Create New...