blueandwhite

In which country do you live? Canada What Education did you Choose? Why? Originally, I took an undergraduate degree in Fine Art & Art History, intent on pursuing a career in either illustration or animation. Unfortunately, things didn't work out that way. Finding work as an illustrator can be daunting, so I decided to shift gears. After finishing University, I went on to Law School where I finished my Law Degree. I have since written the Bar, however I have yet to be called as I haven't completed my articles (necessary in my jurisdiction to become a practising Barister or Solicitor). Sadly, my Law degree has provided me with nothing in the way of employment. I have struggled to find work over this past year. Did someone force you to take this education? My choices, good or bad were mine to make. My family has been very supportive in my educational pursuits. What expectations did your family/friends have about your education/grades? Quite honestly, the aforementioned persons (whether they be family or friend) only expect me to put forward my best effort. For the most part, I have been quite successful academically. I have achieved reasonable success in my undergraduate studies in Art, as well as Law. Needless to say, academic success does not always translate into career success. Did any of the preceding questions affect your education? No. Hope this helps. Later.

This is certainly true of most AFOLs (including myself). With a collection of about 100,000 bricks, I certainly can't claim any sort of shortage. Still, when reviewing a set, I choose to focus solely on the elements included with that particular set. Afterall, reviewing a set and reviewing a set in the context of one's collection are two very different things. Remember, most AFOLs didn't start out with large collections. For me, it took over twenty years of LEGO collecting to amass a decent collection. I remember when I was younger, and building required a great deal of resource management. When a set lacked a solid assortment of bricks, I found it dissappointing as it made building difficult. As a child, variety and versatility were key elements in judging a set. This still holds true today. Later.

Now I assume that this is directed (at least, in part) to persons such as myself. As to the matter of juniorization... This set is <insert that tiresome argument> in my opinion. If you feel differently, that's great. I suppose in this case its best that we agree to disagree. Personally, I prefer the many of the earlier airports. Sure, they may not be as detailed (owing to fewer specialized bricks) as more recent sets, but a healthy variety of basic bricks and plates makes it far easier to build or create your own variations. This airport has alot of glass (which is nice), but there is a noticeable absence of basic elements which are quite useful for MOCing. Look at 6597/10159. Allthough its not as detailed as this year's airport, the larger quantity of basic bricks make this set easier to convert into something new or original. It was the strong mix of basic and specialized bricks that made this set stand out to me. A set needs a good mix of both. Later.

Another one for the set collectors. Allthough the airport interior (not so much the exterior) and the new planes look good, they are far too <insert that tiresome argument> for serious building. The clear blue windows are certainly useful, but without a healthy smattering of ordinary bricks, this set is limited by an overabundance of specialized elements. The sparse slection of minifigs doesn't help for that matter. A definite pass. Later.

I'm hoping 8813 - Battle at the Pass is a minifig pack, or something similar. I simply don't have the money to waste on the larger sets, but wouldn't mind getting a few of the newer minifigs and their heraldry at a reasonable price. As a builder who doesn't buy bley, KKII has become something I generally avoid, but this set might be an exception if it focuses on the minifigs themselves (so long as they aren't of the Jellybean variety). Later.

Nope, its not just you. These 'original' MOCs are simply not very impressive. Taking an original set and adding to it just isn't my cup of tea. Later.

I'm curious as to which Batmobile 7784 is going to be. It sounds like its going to be larger than minifig scale. Here's hoping for an interpretation on the 1989 Burtonmobile! Still, this line sounds amazing, and given the number of sets, it looks alot more promising than the Spiderman line. Batman may be the one line I seriously consider purchasing this year. Later.

I'm still not that excited about KKII, year 3. Still, a few observations... The minifigs are noticeably improved this year. Fortunately, the monochromatic colour-schemes of the previous two years have been done away with. I cannot stress what an improvement this is. Unfortunately, it also looks like 8823 is going to have fewer minfigs than first believed. The original pictures clearly show the set with all of the new Knights. This shot suggests that the set will be missing two of these guys which is unfortunate. The pantless fellow, and the fellow with Danju's visor are notably absent. I suppose that LEGO felt that this set wasn't of sufficient size to warrant the inclusion of all four of the new guys. Still, I'm not too fond of the KKII, year 3 designs. Most of the sets don't actually look like anything. Vladek's Fortress was a strong design, however that seems to be something of an exception. This just seems like a typical collection of slopes and arches. I do hope that we see something fresh soon, as I'm just not keen on these designs. Later.

I store by both colour and piece type (ie plates, tiles, windows etc...). Larger lots of bricks (ie classic grey) are further sub-divided, whereas colours I don't have alot of are kept in single bins. I only sort bricks that have some relevance to the castle-theme. All other bricks are stored together. With a collection of over 60,000 bricks, it becomes necessary to properly sort one's bricks. Later.

I might grab a few Batman sets, but most of my purchases will be from Bricklink (still the best LEGO resource for classic builders). Thus far, 2006 looks a bit dull. Hopefully there are a few surprises to come. Later.

While funny, this list has me feeling somewhat skeptical. This list is positively absurd. If there are actual authors behind these works, they are clearly hobbiests or casual writers looking for a laugh. First and foremost, both Garfield (the cat), and Curious George (the monkey) are still protected by copyright. There is no way that Jim Davis (Garfield's creator), or the Rey estate would have anything to do with "Garfield gets Feline Lukemia" or "Curious George and the Electric Fence". The fact is, these titles are too absurd to be considered 'real' rejections. Seems more like teen humor than anything. Still, its an amusing list. Did you write it yourself, or did you get it from a friend? Later.

For me, this is far more difficult than your fortress poll (BF Fortress was a clear winner for me). I like 6089, 7417, and 6071 alot. All three of these sets are great examples of LEGO bridges. Each set is well constructed and approximately the same size (6089 is a tad bigger though). In the end, 6071 edged it out for me, as I really liked the forestmen theme. The forestwoman is also an added bonus. All and all, a great trio of sets! Later.

Joel Bolton Ontario, Canada Age: 28

Interesting choices thus far... As for me, it's; 1) Pearl Jam You either love them, or you hate them (one of the best live acts, PERIOD)!! There is no middle ground. 2) U2 Strong stage presence despite the stale set-list. Crowds are often less than enthusiastic at live shows. 3) DMB Another great live act. Like Pearl Jam, they have amazing fan support (ironically, liking Pearl Jam & DMB is tantamount to hypocrisy). Currently listening to The Arcade Fire. Totally wild and incredible to see live. As you can guess, for me a band is judged both by the music and by their live performances. Later.

The rarest brick (I don't really own many rare bricks) I own is this in old grey. It was only available with set 6273, which is a fairly large set. I own ten which I purchased from bricklink. Presumably these were originally from LEGOland California. Still, a very useful brick. I have countless other bricks which some might consider rare, but they really aren't (ie minifigs and the like from 375). And when it comes down to it, I would take functional bricks over rare ones any day of the week (it just so happens that the double-convex in grey happens to be both). Later.

Well, if your a LEGO fan there are a variety of choices. That being said, it sounds like you are simply a Star Wars fan. I assume the only reason you even purchase LEGO is because of the Star Wars licence. For LEGO fans, choices go beyond mere licencing. This year was good for Star Wars LEGO, but there certainly have been better years. Later.

Interesting choices. For me, Black Falcon's Fortress is without equal. I only owned one of these when I was younger, so I was elated when LEGO saw fit to re-release it as a legend (I purchased 10 or so more). The original, and the re-release were absolute bargains to boot! 424 - 435 bricks for $35 - 40 dollars is simply incredible! Throw in twelve grey cornerpieces and you have every castle builder's dream set. I can understand that most pirate fans don't appreciate the value of a set like this (or even the forestmen sets), but for many castle fans this is the Holy Grail of LEGO sets. 6074 forever! Later.

I also selected "been there, done that". No offense to Pirate fans, but I suspect that a new Pirate line would mean the end of an existing line (ie Vikings). I honestly believe that the Pirate line was one of the most complete lines in LEGO history. I would rather see new themes (possibly a Roman line). Sorry.

I believe that the multi-coloured joints were implemented to make building easier for children. During the late 1990s when juniorization was running rampant, it was common for sets to colour-code to make building simpler. If a 1x2 was dark grey, then a 1x3 would be light grey, and a 1x4 would be black. It allowed kids to sort not simply by size, but by colour as well. By making similar pieces a distinct colour, it is less likely that a child will make a mistake when constructing a model. Elements of this system are still in place, though it isn't as common as it was back then. In otherwords, I don't think it was LEGO's intention to force you into a second purchase to improve the appearance of the joints. In fact, I can't think of a set where these joints are produced in a single colour. I'm sure LEGO would be happy if you elected to purchase a second Vladek, however I don't think that the joints have anything to do with it. Later.

This is an interesting challenge. I'd love to take you up on it in the new year :) . A few questions though. Why the non-castle (other themes) category? What does this have to do with set quality? I mean, for me KKII looks like a cross between Space and Castle LEGO. Perhaps you can explain why you wish to include this category. Heck, I'll even concede that KKII is more useful for Space MOCing. When you say between $15-25 dollars, what KKII sets are you including in that price range? Are you including sets you have acquired on sale at places such as Wal-Mart or Amazon, or are you talking MSRP? Finally, perhaps we have different criteria for judging what constitutes a good set, but how about categories such as build-quality or detail? Your categories seem to overlook these areas. For me, the appearance of the model is just as important as playability. I think it would only be fair that these areas also be given consideration. An interesting challenge. Still, I think we have very different views as to what makes a LEGO set good. I don't think this building battle will change anything for either of us. I'm far less interested in playability than you are, and it would seem that the appearance of a model isn't as important to you as it is to me. These things are all subjective of course. And as for sets, I will probably be using either 6067, 6054, or 6059. Still, this sounds like fun. In the New Year, lets give it a go *knight* ! Later.

Actually these sets couldn't be further from the older castle stuff. -they have more weapons -better armor -more hosre accessories -new seige equipment -more detailed pieces -better parts for other MOCs I would say these are better in all aspects except basic bricks and plant life. - More weapons? Maybe. Its hard to say at this point. Still, looking at the pictures, I think your probably right. - Better armour? I don't think so. The Knights from the early 1990s had better armour IMO. This armour is still too sci-fi for my tastes. The colours are a definite imrovement though. - more horse accessories? I'm not sure about that. Heck, it looks like KKII, year 3 only has one horse to begin with. The rider (King Jayko) has a lance, and sword. The horse has a saddle and headpiece. Nothing we haven't seen with earlier castle sets. -New seige equipment. Of course, older castle sets had old seige equipment. -More detailed pieces. I disagree. More specialized pieces, with limited use yes. More detailed? I'm not sure I buy into that one. -Better parts for MOCs. Certainly not! These sets are little more than a collection of arches and pre-fab wall pieces. There is no underlying structure here. Unfortunately, KKII is still more flash than substance. The only stand out set we've seen from this line has been Vladek's castle. Everything else has been sub-standard at best. I would say that these are worse in almost every respect. These sets are more suited to young children and set collectors. Too bad really.

Right here :P ! Well, sort of. The minifigs are certainly a step in the right direction. Metallic armour is definitely preferable to the powder blue and purple armour of last season. Unfortunately, it looks like this year's Knights don't have new helmets. I see that Danju's helmet has been re-coloured grey on a few occasions. Unfortunately, I'm still not that fond of the set design. The ship (if you can call it that) looks like a pile of left-over bricks with two dragon wings stuck on top. The new castle (?) doesn't really do anything for me. It really doesn't look like anything. The bridge looks pretty bland IMO. Overall this is a mixed bag. The minifigs are definitely the best we've had since KKI, but the sets themselves seem to be a step backwards. Vladek's castle was far more interesting than these three sets. Its too bad that there aren't any small sets. I really like some of these minifigs, but I just can't justify spending $35-55 on something like this (Cdn.). Too bad there isn't just a minifig pack. Later.

Vikings. Honestly, there were alot of good sets this year, but as a new theme, the Viking line certainly impressed. Star Wars, while great, wasn't really anything we haven't seen before. Heck, after the AT-AT, the Sandcrawler is a bit of a disappointment. *viki* Later. *viki*

Seems like fun. I'm game. This is a pretraria I made last year for the CCC. It fires 1x1 minifig heads approx 2.5 metres. I've always had a fondness for pretrarias as a seige machine, as they are undoubtedly one of the more silly devices arround. There is some question as to whether such a machine has ever been used in medieval warfare. Still, they look cool, and that's what really counts. Later.

I rarely use 2 x X bricks to make wider castle walls. Not because I don't like thick castle walls, but because I can achieve the same results with 1 x X bricks. Simply put, I don't have enough reason to amass a large volume of 2 x X bricks when I can achieve essentially the same results with 1 x X bricks. And yes, I only use old Grey for my castles. So much so, that I haven't bought a new set for parting out since the introduction of new grey. BRICKLINK FOREVER *knight* !! Later.