Dorayaki

Great work. Obviously many FOLs are willing to see Larry's business getting bigger.

As said there are two issues to be solved, one is the possible chances for more licenses of CMF, the other is the annual production schedule of CMF series. Before those, a second series shouldn't be expected. The common way how we get characters is still getting regular sets.

Well, maybe TLC would still release them as alternative versions in future regular sets. But suppose that they won't, not only it's a big pity for the fans of characters, but it would also restrict the possibility for designing more different sets, which could mean a possible end for Supeheroes. There might also be some exclusive characters or scenes that fans expect in the movies. A balance between different media is okay, just depends on how many materials one movie can provide. Some previous movies don't really need too many sets based on them I guess. Winter Soldier and Peggy Carter are both in my list.

Uh, so as said that's two different things, isn't it? Suppose that Edna was Edson instead, the result could be the same. I don't mean to be disrespectful, but I also believe that it's doing with how much these characters relates to this show, which might result in a need for new actors, or, at least a featured funeral episode. Well back to the lego topic, is it debatable to include a character who's been in the show for long time but isn't in a current canon? The current CMF roster is based on current canon, but somewhat weird.

Well that depends, there are many other examples with simply changing the actors while all of them are still alive, safe and sound. In worse cases the producers might think that they had nothing more to do with a certain character so s/he just retired "in time", just like many characters in Simpsons history, who might have more potential in this series before their sudden absence.And I meant that having no important(iconic) female aquaintance for each member of the Simpsons is the overall story problem. If Edna was forced to be deleted, then the prior choice would only lead to the Bouvier aunts.

I'm also alittle worried about this. The two licenses are definitely the most discussed in this forum. Even though I'm not really a Superhero fan and I hope TLC can also focus on other minor themes, still the current arrangement for Superhero is still not the best TLC can do. If I'm asked to say what TLC should do, I'd say that I hope at least every theatrical Superhero film should have Lego sets that are based on them. There is no set based on the passed Thor or the upcoming Captain America 2. Not saying that sets based on comic directly shouldn't exist, but I guess movie products have a better effects of advertising if TLC isn't able to make more sets based on all franchises.

Well yeah, it's more like the directors has very poor focus on Ned's relationships and other recurring female acquaintances. In current canon among the faculty of SE, Otto looks more possible than any other secondary female teacher as a Lego product.

Well even though I like Simpsons a lot, there are three good reasons almost preventing me from getting this series. 1) No seperate new hairstyle pieces. 2) All characters from the D2C house sets are reused. Though some said that not all KFOLs afford the large set, there are no medium sets either. 3) The roster besides the Simpsons is not appealing enough. (No Edna, etc

Okay good job for typing so many sentences. Regular versions don't really interest me if they're still the same character, or at least creating more weird alternatives would be nice. However TLG seem to have to make both the CMF and house set versions of Simpsons in their daily appearances. April sounds early but the weird thing is that the regular CMF series 12 comes in October. Anything coming in July? Regardless of TLM, I actually don't expect WhiteFang to review a licensed series if this has to somewhat based on knowledge of the license. Team GB could be first.

As it has been stated before, the licensed themes more focus on a scenario of a story. If the "Princess" line does mean it restricts the story, this line wouldn't succeed. The current problem is not whether more princesses would appear, but many existed princesses haven't appeared in this line. But then again judging from the longterm cooperation between Disney and Lego we can still see that more non-princess Disney themes can be made in the future, as least hope the return of PotC5 . Well I agree that that topic belongs to the general discussion. It better suspends now. Gender-oriented toys have an advantage that those who weren't interested in Lego (whose themes were neutral or boys-oriented) be interested in this line. But then again, the choice belongs to the consumers whether they just stay in a certain theme they're interested in or is willing to meet more different themes and the toy stores. The other problem is so far the amount of "girls-oriented themes" are still few, compared with the core boys-oriented part. We don't know if there can be more licensed/nonlicensed themes for girls such as Disney Channel commedies.

Well, depends on which part. Disney series is an introduction for girls who are interested in famous Disney fantasies. Perhaps same for boys who were just fans of Superhero of a Lego TV show at first. The ultimate goal is still to encourage kids to buy more be interested in more brick toys. Sorry, your statement sounds kinda weird? As usual the only requirement of license is the agreement between Lego and the owners.

Same for me. Kids that crazily press the arcade game buttons outside the store ususally draw mcuh more attractions than those who just silently wander and look. I know what you mean, it's more like sorting by gender rather than themes. But if the target is to make kids look at "Lego", I guess the chance would be little that girls don't take a look at the opposite aisle that isn't pink/violet, though it's indeed a problem for Duplo. My doubt is why Frozen wasn't considered a movie-hit product just like Lone Ranger. This makes me more worry about the next step of this theme if Disney still doesn't decide to have further cooperation. Well we know that it's not TLC's duty. I disagree this doing since it neglects the possibilities that girls/boys are able to take a look at other Lego products which are not targeted at themselves. It's more like a negative presupposition of discrimination in society. I still support the idea that there should be an independent/neutral area for Lego toys.

I'm neither impressive nor dissapointed by this news. It's a reasonable choice for TLC who never put an exclusive unused character in DVDs. I don't think licensed/existed characters would make it to the exclusive places, not to talk about who should be in regular sets.

Well I'm only against those customs which didn't really devote themselves to designs. I personally see customization as a kind of pure artwork, as Artanis mentioned some of the non-original decos can't afford playability so we don't put them with official figures. Much like sewing clothes for dolls, if you're not a good tailor, the custom wouldn't allow you to take off and put on.

Sorry to ask do Mixel-related topics also belong to LEGO Action Figures subforum?

Well.... some have seen it, I guess. http://www.eurobrick...showtopic=83699 The General Discussion subforum is still mainly about physical products. You may join the discussion in Culture & Multimedia.

Well I meant that there is no other brands in Lego store so we don't even need to discuss whether girls' and boys' Lego are together or not. Even if they're put in different sections of one store, that can still be explained as "theme", not gender. As said my local ToyRUs (and some other retailers) put all Lego brand products together. Maybe different area have different store arrangements and marketing strategies, if that's a truth I guess Asian kids are really lucky and open-minded. I'm against seperating Lego products by gender in a toy store since Lego should be neutral-oriented toys. This would be unable to encourage girls/boys to choose crosstheme Lego products. The other possible classification (back to the topic) might be license: a Disney corner that includes the Lego Disney, Mattel Disney dolls and action figures. But it could be same for the DC/Marvel licensed toys.

So far the horses are the only large animals that TLC specifically made for Friends regular sets (not sure if the lamb would be reused in future polybags). TLC isn't willing to introduce large molds mayeb due to that they don't think the targeted consumers need them, or they've invested alot in polybag series. I personally believe that large animals provide useful elements for story telling in this subetheme. After all as mentioned we expect this theme to be as interesting as those action themes for boys, the lack of animals do become a weakness. For example, in Dino we can see some carnivores or ridable creatures that are not horses. Also City sets provided some brown/polar bears who would attack human. For those who love Lego animals, Friends Jungle might be the only chance for new large animals in this year. The recent new polybag cubs have good potentials to be recolored, as you said. A polar bear cub, white tiger cub would be terrific. I personally don't like the previous bird mold and would like to see new molds for hornbills or egrets.

Uh? Sorry I don't get that, do Lego stores sell Mattel and Hasbro toys?

Well I'm willing to see holiday-ish things more than a City minifigure&accessory pack, and they might be more compatible with the current Winter Village rather than City/Friends sets. But stll I wish every calendar can have own specific theme in order to make cunsomers buy them every year.

Uhmmm..... can't you at least get rid of that mark?

We do know that allowing a licenses doesn't equal to ensuring a future product, no projects pass, no products come. But if the project design and licesne both works and TLC still decides to reject for not wanting to produce, that doesn't make sense. Well TV drama are usually targeted at older people while Lego is a toy brand for younger kids. Making TV drama licensed toys is somewhat risky for TLC so it's nice to see that TLC is willing to do this. Same for the previous video game license.

Well there are many other Marvel series so it is reasonable to make choose one only. Now suppose that most Superhero sets are bound with a film or TV series, Gwen Stacy won't be in any set unless the rule breaks (using a comic reference or switching to the movie) or she appears in USM.

Well one problem is whether it would show other popular non-phisycal characters, or the plot writer would just try to make the CMF characters appear in this episode only. It's looks like that the animation would aim at advertising the CMF series. Yes, both are huge dissapointments to me. I don't mind molded faces but at least there should be interchangeable hairpieces.