blueandwhite

I've been hearing alot of talk about new armour recently, yet I can't quite figure out what people are talking about. Is the armour in 7037 actually new, or is it simply a recolour of this: . I'm always hoping for new castle bricks, but I would expect a new breastplate would be used more extensively.

As cool as this sounds, it seems far too complex to be done well. I could see something like Mask where the sets hide weapons/enhancements, but transforming robots (that are stable enough to be sold as children's toys) seem beyond LEGO. Alot of the amazing mechs and robots on Brickshelf are very fragile. I still like the idea of transformable features though, so long as the hidden features are well hidden.

Good stuff! Can you imagine what this thread would have looked like if somebody made a slip up about Star Wars *vader* ?? The force is strong with this thread. In all seriousness, the Lost Tomb is only as silly as the movie (which is pretty light hearted to begin with), so it's nice to see that LEGO captured the spirit of the movie so well in this set. Surprisingly, this is one of the nicer sets for the line thus far. A good assortment of pieces and a nice recreation of a key moment in Raiders.

I notice that a number of the 08 sets say 7-14 as opposed to 7-12 like the 07 ones. I wonder what prompted the change?

While I don't think any of these years represents LEGO's best, of the options available 1992 wins it for me simply because it was the last great year of castle (IMO of course). The Black Knight's Castle (while not as beautiful as the earlier Black Falcon's Fortress or Black Monarch's Castle was still quite nice despite the Ramp and Pit baseplate. It also was a time when large sets came with large quantities of minifigs. The Wolfpack were also a nice line (too bad the line was so short-lived). The next couple of years of Castle were ok, but 1992 was definitely the last great one (again, simply my opinion). Still, we are definitely on the rebound in the late 2000s. Go Castle :-D !

I love this time of year. I'm actually not as excited as I normally am about this given that we've seen so much of what is to be released in 2008. Last year Toy Fair brought a number of surprises (including the first good look at the Castle line). This year it seems as if we've seen most of the good stuff already. I'm looking forward to seeing the Batman sets, but I can't help but wonder what else we haven't seen. My wallet is crying pretty hard already. More fantastic sets might end up killing her alltogether. The force is a bit too strong with 2008 *vader* !

It's a nice compilation of MOCs to be sure *y* . I actually think it looks a bit too crowded, but this is a very minor complaint. Gernerally all of the MOCs are well done. This is sometimes a problem with larger displays where differing styles and techniques create for a messy looking display. I also prefer castle displays with a large anchor castle rather than a bunch of small villages. This one has a very excellent anchor. As fan displays go, this is definitely a great one.

I'm something of a castle freak, so it should be no surprise that I am first and foremost a CCer. I've been a member on that board for much longer than I've been a member here. That being said, Eurobricks is probably the best LEGO community on the internet right now with a diverse group of fans interested in a variety of themes. It is also the single best source of LEGO news. At the end of the day I go to CC for my castle needs and Eurobricks for everything else. I very much doubt that you could do better than these forums when it comes to talking all things LEGO, though Classic Castle and Classic Space are quite good as theme-dedicated sites. All in all, I find that I get my LEGO fix filled quite nicely on the interweb.

I agree with this completely! Of the 08 castle sets, this is the only one that I actually find to have an interesting structure. It almost looks like a bunch of orcs ran off with the miller's waterwheel. This is really over-the-top. Right now we've got alot of fantasy minifigs, but I would have to say that this is the first truly fantastical structure. If LEGO is going to stick with this fantasy theme, I hope we see more sets push the boundries like this one does. The Dwarf Mine was just a playset. This thing is other worldly!

Is it just me or are there a few dark brown arches in the set with Marion? I'm really hoping that this colour becomes something of a staple because much like dark green, blue and red it is absolutely amazing. I see so many incredible possibilities for dark brown. The abundance of dark green leaves is also quite exciting. My forests won't be quite so monochromatic in the future. These sets are definitely on my to get list, regardless of price. LEGO knows me (and my weakness for bricks to well) :-D .

I can't even imagine HOW this one could happen. A wrong brick, ok. An entire set?! That's just crazy. You would think that QC was on holiday when they packaged this one :-/ .

I appologize for getting out of line. I should have read the thread more carefully. 5150 LEGO, I would also like to appologize directly to you for taking this too far.

You should probably try and avoid calling others on these forums names. Just because you find Piranha's argument to be lacking doesn't mean you should be calling him a hypocrite. If you find that his argument doesn't make sense, that's one thing but to outright insult him is going a bit far. I'll chime in here because I actually agree with Piranha on this one. Take a look at the Indiana Jones line. You'll notice that it has been significantly de-politicized with the removal of national flags and identifiable military equipment. I wouldn't be expecting a Hitler minifig anytime soon. It is for this reason that I wouldn't be holding my breath for modern day LEGO military sets. LEGO has a reputation as a very child friendly brand. Moving into modern war toys would probably not go over well with alot of consumers or parents groups. The problem with modern warfare is that it is inherently political. A theme focusing around what would presumably be the US military would undoubtedly come under alot of criticism. Even if the sets don't go as far to show any actual combat scenarios (i.e. Afghanistan vs. US or Iraq vs. US sets), the politics associated with these events would not go ignored. There are many people who are strongly opposed to glorifying modern warfare (probably moreso outside of the United States). I'm not sure if this is a bridge that LEGO wants to cross. One of the biggest differences between a toyline that deals with modern non-fictionalized warfare and LEGO's other combat related themes (ie fantasy factions with fantasy vehicles) is that it invariably invokes thoughts about some politically contentious issues. Heck, even a discussion about WWII and the parties involved can stir some heated debates. This is precisely the sort of thing that LEGO has gone out of its way to avoid. Imagine the kind of debates that a modern warfare line would start. Remember, a good number of people outside the US are strongly opposed to the US' military actions. I couldn't see a military line doing anything positive for LEGO.

I'm probably the only one, but I feel that they need to focus on tightening up the house of LEGO and focusing more on successful themes; discarding the ones that simply didn't work. I don't need thirty new one-year themes that sell poorly and place LEGO in financial crisis. Themes like Dino Attack and Mars Mission need to go the way of the dodo for more consistency in the successful lines. The thing that made the 80s and early 90s beautiful was that the four themes (Castle, Pirates, Town, Space) were continuous. A buyer could start to amass an impressive collection in a single theme leading to some wonderful building opportunities. With newer one or two year themes, this isn't possible anymore. Look at the Vikings line. Within two years, everything Viking has disappeared meaning that we probably won't see a huge following for this theme in teh future. I don't need a new line that is going to die out within a year to pop up at the expense of something that has real staying power. This was how Castle, Pirates and Space died in the first place.

Voted for the Princess. I'm not sure what is so bad about some of these so called "worst of 2007" (the knight or republic captian) though considering the Mars Mission martians didn't seem to make the cut. That being said, I'm not surprised that Kit Fisto takes this. Anytime Star Wars is involved it's pretty much guaranteed a win.

Except as far as I can tell, next to nobody actually claimed the line was <insert that tiresome argument>. Most people who are disappointed with the line feel that way because the truck is far too large relative to a minifig. Many people including myself didn't particularly like the Dino line or Alpha Team, so it should come as no surprise that we're not excited about this line either. I gather that you like the appearance of this line. Nobody's going to criticize you for feeling that way. That being said, not everyone is going to follow suit. Many people see the line as being somewhat disappointing. Personally, I find it to be a step in the wrong direction. It reminds me of the numerous lines LEGO has produced that don't manage to last more than a year. Looking at this thread , I don't see the word Juniorization pop up once. People can be disappointed without crying 'juniorization'. Again, I don't see people making those sorts of comments. Also, you must remember that Juniorization was a gradual shift. People don't want to embark on that road again. You're going to have to accept that not everyone feels the same about LEGO as you do. Some people simply have different expectations. There is nothing wrong with being disappointed with a set.

Good stuff. These should be great for folks doing Indy MOCs. It's the one thing that the LEGO theme is missing (for obvious reasons). Much appreciated.

It would have been nice if LEGO had made the Beetle available in a variety of colours. It shouldn't be too hard considering that the body of the car looks to be built of nothing more than basic plates and bricks. Heck, they could have made the car a different colour for different regions (with the US getting a chance at the exlusive chrome gold version). It looks awesome. I'm definitely looking forward to this,

The Clipper wins for me. I was always bothered by the fact that the Pirates always had larger ships. The fact that the non-pirate vessals got subsequently smaller was a huge disappointment. I always thought that the Imperial soldiers needed something to rival the BSB. This continuing disparity just didn't make sense to me as I always viewed the Pirates as underdogs. The Pirate sets however portrayed them as being the dominant force.

You just mentioned the City line. Take a look at KKI, much of KKII, Fright Knights and countless others. Plates and smaller elements became exceptionally rare while large columns, and pre fab walls and battlements predominated. I've seen people defend some of these sets passionately, but it doesn't change the fact that the ratio of basic bricks to specialized elements was quite poor. Other lines suffered from colour-coded building to make things easier. I think you should take a closer look at some of the older threads on this subject on this and other LEGO forums. Juniorization isn't simply a question of set size. That being said, most modern sets are noticeably larger. With an overabundance of large specialized elements in the place of several smaller ones, sets have become noticeably larger. Without those smaller basic bricks however, MOCing options become extremely limited. Heck, I don't think you'd ever hear anybody suggest that the UCS Falcon or Eiffel Tower sets are too <insert that tiresome argument>. The same could be said of the Cafe Corner or any number of large sets. Juniorization has more to do with the elements that make up a set than the size of the set itself. It was a trend that was most pronounced in the late 90s and early 2000s. It wasn't as if every theme suffered equally. Some lines like Star Wars and Ninja were actually very good. That being said, it's hard not to notice the shift towards juniorization that occured during that period. With a greater number of specialized elements, colour coded building, and a noticeable reduction in the number of smaller, more diverse bricks, LEGO began to suffer as a building toy. This trend has definitely been reversed in the past few years, but it isn't something that most fans look back on with much fondess. What you've just described is Juniorization at its best (worst?)! There were alot of sets produced during that era that were pretty abysmal. Juniorization still pops up from time to time (KKII), but it is far less pronounced than it was in the late 90s or early 2000s.

As an adult I think this would be fantastic. As a child, this would be an absolute nightmare! Fan designed sets have typically not been very child friendly. When it comes to new pieces, I really think LEGO could cut back. I like new bricks as much as the next person, but I also appreciate that we have a ton of bricks to choose from. Short of very specialized bricks like Batman's cowl or a Storm Trooper's helmet, we already have a huge assortment of pieces that fill most needs. Alot of AFOL models show just how far one can go with the existing selection of bricks. Sometimes it seems that LEGO is inventing new pieces simply for the sake of doing it. If producing fewer new molds could save me a few bucks on sets, then I would be thrilled.

I don't think this relationship will die anytime soon. In fact, I would be surprised if both parties didn't extend this licence. It's almost been a decade and it is still one of LEGO's biggest sellers. Licencing has become a major factor for LEGO's financial success. Heck, they currently have Star Wars, Indiana Jones, Sponge Bob, Ferrari, Harry Potter and Batman, not to mention Speed Racer. Losing Star Wars would probably have a devistating impact on LEGO.

I feel somewhat psychic right now :-D .

Actually if you look at a number of the early catalogs, different castle factions were often shown marching and interacting together. Factions that were fighting each other in one catalog could be co-operating in the next. Even the idea books showed the different factions interacting with each other in non combative ways. Where there were conflicts, the names of the different characters involved were left entirely to the child who was playing. Heck, the castle line of the 80s had several civilian sets (Guarded Inn, the Blacksmith's Shop, the Armour Shop, and the Maiden's Cart) which had nothing to do with conflict. Let's not forget that other themes like Space and Town had virtually no disputes whatsoever during that time. LEGO from the 80s really emphasized building more than anything else. I guess this is where I feel Johnny Thunder suffers the most. For me, this puts Johnny Thunder squarely between the more open-ended themes of the 80s, and the more familiar characters and storys that LEGO has taken the trouble to licence. The Johnny Thunder storylines sell the features of a series of playsets rather than the flexibility of the LEGO brand. Having a clearly established protagonist and antagonist, along with a defined objective and supporting characters who stumble through a series adventures doesn't really stand out as being very different than your typical licence IMO. The thing is, we know the same things about Johnny Thunder. As you previously mentioned; he is a pulp adventurer archetype. As that archetype, we know what sorts of adventures and situations Johnny Thunder belongs in, and how he will act. This is why I don't really see much distinction between Indiana Jones and Johnny Thunder. Both are pulp cliches produced for a more contemporary audience. They are globe trotters who come into contact with fantastic objects and exotic dangers. Just as Indiana Jones is defined by these cliches, so too is Johnny Thunder. Do you think that nonlicenced themes are immune to the effects of film or television? Heck, Exo Force plays heavily on a number of Japanese animation cliches to entice kids. Those same cliches and stereotypes are not easy to overlook regardless of whether a theme is licenced or not. A child who is playing Star Wars doesn't necessarily reinact the movie over and over again. Many tell their own stories within the Star Wars universe. The same can be said of any licence. How is that really much different than what kids do with the non-licenced themes that are story driven (particularly when those storys borrow heavily from popular culture)?