Darth_Bane13

The Anakin part is tricky because to be an orphan typically means to lose at least one parent as a minor, his father never even existed though since he was born from the force. Obviously in the real world this is impossible so there's no clear answer here. As for Luke, if you're adopted you are no longer considered an orphan (especially adopted as newborn infant). I knew a kid who was adopted very little and he definitely doesn't consider himself an orphan.

well he has no father it doesn't mean his father died and Anakin was an adult when his mother died, to be technically considered an orphan you have to be a child under 18. Luke and Anakin we're both 19 when they lost their parents so technically they're not orphans.

Honestly I prefer the Revenge of the Sith novel to the movie. Things in the movie seem to make more sense after reading the book, like why Anakin was so upset about not being granted the rank of master was because he wanted to access information to save Padme that only jedi masters could use. and I'd add reading labyrinth of evil before and Dark lord rise of Darth Vader after(aka dark lord trilogy). Anakin isn't really an orphan. I've seen a lot of praise for the Tantive IV set, so I'd assume it's pretty popular. 20% seems pretty standard for most sets nowadays.

well we never even got a finished script or anything so to dismiss his hypothetical sequel trilogy as worse than the Disney trilogy is odd because most people would agree that the 6 films Lucas made were better than the sequels. And I agree his ideas sound odd and retconning the legacy comics would suck but it's far from the amount of damage Disney has done, in my opinion of course.

I disagree because even George's worst Star Wars films (AOTC, TPM) are far better than the sequels, -TFA is literally just a lazy remake of a new hope but much much worse -TLJ ruined Luke Skywalker -TROS is just an absolute incoherent film riddled with plot holes. Even if George's sequels were bad they would at least be made with care and passion since he's the creator and cares deeply about Star Wars (unlike JJ Abrams and Rian Johnson)

I don't understand how people dislike Andor, it is leagues above anything else Disney has done

I've always wondered what sets we could've gotten if Disney didn't buy Star Wars. Probably would've gotten a couple more years of clone wars sets and sets based off 1313 and the Darth maul video game, would've been a lot better than 5 years of sequel sets.

I think OT figures were generally the same from 2010 to 2013, it sorta bridged the gap between the classic and modern figures. In 2014 leg printing became the norm and we finally got an updated Chewie and Stormtrooper and the new Vader helmet would follow the next year.

I do have some nostalgia for the clone wars style but they just look weird next to realistic figures

Kind of annoying how the only Shaak Ti we have is a clone wars one

Plo koon is a playable character in the complete saga

Plo koon was in a lot of episodes of the clone wars though

I'm not really a fan of the large combined battle packs, when I was a kid battle packs were good small sets that I could convince my mom to buy when we were at the store. A $30 or $40 set is less of a purchase on a whim.

Yeah I don't think it needs to be a permanent theme but a couple waves similar to 2008/2009 with some remakes and some new stuff would be cool. The original sets go for quite a lot now so I think there's a decent sized fanbase, and the 2023 sets we got seemed to be pretty popular.

true but my point stands, in 2010 we got a bunch of empire strikes back sets (granted it was the 30th anniversary), 2012/13 we got a bunch of Rotj sets, 2015 we got a bunch of TPM sets. nowadays we'll get a set like obi wans starfighter or the Sith infiltrator but kids wont have anything to pair it with.

I kind of miss when LEGO used to have a subtheme for a wave, like in 2013 we had a bunch of AOTC sets, or the rogue one waves in 2016/2017. The sets would just complement each other well and they'd have box art and commercials with the sets together which would encourage people to buy them all.

I see people say this a lot and I have the UCS X-wing however I haven't really noticed any of these stability issues, to be fair though I just keep mine on a shelf and don't touch it. perhaps I'll give mine a good swoosh and see what happens.

I really don't understand why LEGO wont make a full Indiana Jones wave, did they really sell that poorly?

is midi scale Kylo's shuttle the first real sequel set since 2020? I'm not a fan of the sequels but its cool for those who are.

Genuine question, does anyone here actually like all the buildable characters were getting? I was fine with getting around 1 per year but they're overdone now in my opinion.

I think he means that all the true fans of Star Wars know the name of the ship, and no amount of retconning Disney tries to do matters because it is the canon and legends name of the ship. Frankly I think the whole name debate is ridiculous because I've never seen anyone get offended at it, and if you are then I don't even know what to say...

Yeah that's fair and I understand I'm in the minority here, but I do care about the plaque a bit and it'd likely bring the set down a point for me personally.

Because it's ridiculous they've stopped using the name "slave 1", and if I'm spending $240 on it I want the product to be accurate including the plaque. Also I already own the 2015 UCS slave 1 so I'm on the fence about purchasing the new one anyway.

If they put "Jango Fetts Starship" on the plaque I'm not buying it.

Its sad because I feel like a lot of us here like LEGO for the playsets. LEGO seems to think adult collectors just want display only type sets which I guess is true for some, but a lot of fans like LEGO as a toy that's able to be played with.