MAB

Yeah, I'm already thinking about what other heads to get for variations in injuries...

I use these ones, but many similar ones are available https://www.amazon.co.uk/Alcohol-Based-Markers-Materials-Calligraphy/dp/B01MU2DEI6 They are great for colouring white parts, and just about OK for tan. Darker marker colours are fine on light colour parts, but the colours are not as true as on white parts. I occasionally use sharpies or similar (especially for thin lines) but I find for block colour they are not as good as the ones above as they don't seem to blend into previous strokes as nicely.

Different countries have different topping and cheeses on pizza. This is clearly a deep pan pizza from the thickness, so nothing to do with Italian pizza. So I expect it to be American cheese, which is very yellow. Although why is mozzarella not a cheese? And why is the Italian pizza called quattro formaggi if one of the four cheeses on it isn't cheese? There is just too much going on with that jacket for me. It looks more like a pyjama shirt. Shame, as the T-shirt underneath is nice.

New parts in new sets can often take months to appear (if ever, for licensed sets).

Some nice ones in there, although you have the wrong head description for Peasant Woman. I love the Monster Hunter and the balaclava piece.

Doesn't the ground close better if you push Voldemort's arms by his sides rather than have them sticking forwards?

Wouldn't you need to accurately cut the film to use the stickers? You might as well remove the sticker then place it onto the film, then cut. That way you can leave a little film around the edge that will attach to the part it it being attached to. Although as the OP noted, to cut these for many sets will be tiresome. I still think the best way to do it is to make sure parts are clean when you apply stickers, then make sure you keep the sets in decent conditions. So not in humid areas, not in bright sunlight, not in high or low temperatures, not in the kitchen.

It will be simple to make a minifigure sized teddy from this character. Even leaving it as it is. Or if you don't like the tiny bits of yellow that show through the eyes, stick a black head on it under the headgear and it can have plain button eyes. I wonder if it is due to complaints that people are missing parts from CMFs. Any complaint and they need to send out a new bag. Might as well just add an extra cheap part and be sure. Has there been a nice clean photo of the Monkey's torso as yet?

The suggestion here was that this should go with a new series 11-20 handbook, to pair with the one on the 1-10 handbook.

Yeah back up for me too (UK). I had a quick look but couldn't spot any new parts.

Adam Acid's head might also be useful for showing one transforming:

Di$n3y? :-)

It was possibly the first car of many people now in their late 40s - early 60s in the UK and Europe. Ideal for nostalgia, but probably too location narrow. I see TeriXeri has already noted it and I guess we'll have to wait to see what it is, but this one sounds a little boring given what is still on the shelves: Dragon, check. Fire, check. 234 pieces vs 223 pieces, so we can expect it to be the same size. I hope it is significantly different as I like this set but don't think I'd buy another one with minor changes.

It was available yesterday morning for UK users, but is now also off-line.

I think it is a fairly random thing, when they spot an opportunity to make money from an old design rather than a planned programme of releases.

Yeah, which would suggest that an Imperial Flagship is more likely to happen than a pre-2000 ship. Although personally, I'd prefer something similar in design, size and style but different to the original.

We've had Disney 2!

There are of course ways around this. Do a slightly different face print or a slightly different torso print and the original one remains original and retains value for those that really want it. Stick the monocle on the other eye, and it is a different figure. I cannot remember now, did LEGO ever claim the figure would be exclusive to S10 only? They have done this before with LOTR comic con figures - the figures became common, but the packaging for them was rare. Personally, I think it has been long enough since the original that a repeat is fine. They have done it with valuable sets, so why not minifigures? There have been a few different store employees already, so I don't think that would be such a draw to buy the book (just for the minifigure).

Ah, I hadn't seen that, just the instagram grainy front of the sheet. I thought as much. They'll do yellow for yellow spacemen, but not for nude figures.

I wish they did this more often, on the human figures too. So for example, the pizza one, why do we need to be told a gender here? Why not bios like "The Pizza Seller loves eating pizza all day long, but eats so much that they have trouble fitting through doorways" instead of "The Pizza Seller loves eating pizza all day long, but eats so much that he has trouble fitting through doorways". That way, everyone can be happy with what they get. Is it a man, is it a woman? Who cares? Same with the Care Bear and fox suit. Ones that are obviously male or obviously female are fine but even better if they can be switched. So looking at the list again: Gamer - male but easy to make female. Showerman - clearly male from the torso and so not really changeable. Unlikely that LEGO would ever do a topless female (especially a human female). It will be interesting to see what is under the towel. White hips or yellow? Knight - either. Monkey - either. And non-human anyway. Programmer -female. I cannot tell, but I hope the torso is useful for male and female. Shame about the yellow skin on the torso. Mummy - looks like it is a female torso and head only. Johnny Thunder look-a-like - obviously male, but could possibly be used for a female body. Firewoman - obviously female, but torso looks like it could be made male. Not very interesting anyway given how many are in City. Pooper scooper - female, but looks easy to change to male. Pizza - could be either. Blacktron - could be either - not human anyway. Gardener - female, and fine as it is. Rugby - male, but could be made female. Fox - either. Bear - either. Biker - clearly female, and cannot be made male. I'd have preferred a more general neutral top for something like this, but fine if most others are more neutral. If the gamer had a female or neutral head and I was told it was female in the bio but it was otherwise presented in exactly the same way, and also told the knight was female, monkey was female, programmer was female, pooper scooper was female, pizza was female, blacktron was female, gardener was female, rugby was female, fox and bear were female, etc. it would be fine for me. There could possibly be 14 females, with 2 males (shower guy, Johnny Thunder). I would be perfectly happy with that. Clearly it is very skewed and not ideal for public complaints, but If the only thing identifying gender was a head or hairstyle, or better still just the bio, it means the figures are much more flexible. But by doing it that way, not only is gender occurence likely to be more balanced, if someone wants more males or more females, then a simple head or hair switch is possible with what we have been given. Rather than 8 male plus 8 female, let's say 4 male and 4 female plus 8 that could be either. That balance is much more attractive to me than obviously male only characters and obviously female only characters. Of course there will still be things to argue about. Why don't the yellow ducks on the towel match the green one? Why does he have a brush when he doesn't have any hair? Why is he / isn't he naked under the towel?

So instead you should continue to push stereotypes onto them to say that all adult females should have lipstick and curly eyelashes? And if someone doesn't have that look then they default to being a man. That is why I think the opposite to you. Having female characters that are not wearing lipstick may help to change opinions that someone has to have lipstick to be an adult female otherwise they default to being male. If not, you are just perpetuating the idea that women must wear make-up to look like a woman as if they default to male. It is interesting to note that most if not all children's heads and torsos are gender neutral. Minifigure girls tend not have lipstick or curly eyelashes (or curvy waists and cleavage), whereas the women do. So having gender neutral parts it is not a problem for representing girls as minifigures. Yet put longer legs on those girl minifigures, and they look more male? To bring it back to the CMF, take the Care Bear style character. If we are told it is male, then people complain it is male and there are too many males in the series when it should be closer to 50:50. Whereas if we become used to some female characters not wearing lipstick, then that character already could be female. We wouldn't know unless we read the backstory. But even if the backstory says it is male, does it matter? In this case, it is what you want it to be. There is nothing in the figure to say it must be a male. There is nothing to say it must be a female. Why does that then have to default to being male, with the result that there must be another minifigure in the series that is stereotypically female or people will complain about gender balance? I find the same with robots and mechs. Even back in Series 1, people complained about gender balance. Is this minifigure really male? Most robots have no gender. Same with Series 6: Is it really male? I guess the answer is yes, because we all know females must be pink, they must have lipstick and eyelashes and rosy cheeks. They must have girly hearts on them. They must have cleavage. Even the robots! For me that figure is gender stereotyping at its worst. Every part of it except the key and the neck bracket. This robot, is it male or female. Or maybe it is just genderless. Would it need to be pink or have eyelashes drawn on it to make it female? If it was in a CMF series, would it count as a male and need balancing by an obviously female character?

This looks great. But even better is the implementation of that water reflection picture. What a great way to show the build and also the original building at the same time.

You really have to do the tests and apply the decals to lego parts to see what the colours look like when placed. What looks right on a light part can look bad on a darker one. What looks good on white can look bad on yellow, and so on. But then LEGO has this problem too when printing directly onto parts: As above, they cannot get white right when printing onto coloured parts. I suggest applying decals to bricks (maybe 1x8 bricks or similar if you have them) rather than to minifigure parts to test - they are cheaper and have larger flat surface areas so easier to compare for example 8 different colour block tests in one go under the same lighting conditions.

I was pleasantly surprised at the contents of the recent fun fair minifigure pack. Take a look at these figures ... All of the torsos work well for both male and female, except for the pink top and the leather jacket. I think this sort of distribution is perfect (along with infrequent male-only torsos when necessary). Does the face painter or ice cream seller lose anything by not having the traditional stereotypical female minifigure indicators on the torso? To me, they look fine. You want the rocker to be a female, or the ice cream seller to be a male, it's easy. Swap the heads and hair around in the set. You want the purple "mall walker" to be male and the red one a younger female? Easy, swap heads and hair. A female stilt walker or a female in the blue jacket? Easy. Of course, not all torsos should be like this - ones like the pink ones should definitely exist, as should ones in dresses and so on, as this adds variety. But where it is possible I prefer the gender neutral ones. It would be even better if not all the adult females had lipstick or curly eyelashes. For example, the man in the blue jacket. Remove his hair and is the face male or female? Is it definitely a man as there is no lipstick or curly eyelashes? Or just maybe it could be either, with an appropriate hairstyle if required. Of course, we should have definitely male (beards, etc) faces and definitely female (make-up, etc) faces, but having some that can be either should not be a problem. Same with hair and hats - in this case it does happen, as there are hair pieces that are used for both male and female, with context often given by other parts of the minifigure.

I also don't think it is a genuine LEGO one. Unfortunately BL doesn't have the keyword belt for all torsos with a belt (such as for some of the original forestmen) but also nothing comes up under other keywords such as purse. It is a strange combination, the black marks at the edges makes the figure look quite busty with hips, typically done for female characters. It is also a fleshie skin one, as can be seen near the neckline.