Clone OPatra

This is where you have to stop arguing. Unless there's something we don't know, you do not work in LEGO sales and marketing. Since you do not work in LEGO sales and marketing, you can have as many of your own suppositions as you want, but you don't truly know what is "good business" for LEGO, the LEGO sales and marketing people know what is good business for LEGO. Your argument boils down to that you want a new Falcon, you suppose many others and lots of children want a new Falcon, and that LEGO is long overdue to give us a new Falcon since it's been many years since a system-scaled Falcon was released. And you know what, you're probably right. The Falcon is iconic, and, just like every other LEGO SW set, I'm sure it would sell quite well. Perhaps we shall see one soon. Maybe next year. Maybe 2011. Who's to say, but it's very likely since LEGO does like to remake sets. And now that you've made your argument numerous times, I think it's time to let it rest.

Everything but the Landspeeder and Swamp Speeder is up in the US now too. Nice that we get to see the official prices, I guess it was finally time for the battlepacks to go up a buck over what past battlepacks sold for.

Yes, I agree that it doesn't quite look like the armor piece, but it doesn't look like just a minifig torso either. I highly doubt that it would be the Agents torso. LEGO sometimes does crazy things, but they wouldn't go that far. ANyhow, I guess we'll just have to wait for clearer pics and pics that show the minifigs well to really discern the armor situation. It's only a month and half until NY Toy Fair, you know, and I'm sure close-to-finalized sets will be there. I hope we get at least some armor, be it the old piece or a new one.

I was thinking the same thing about the chest armor pieces at first, but if you look closely, a few sets have minifigs with the chest armor piece. The mounted "unicorn" knight in the tower set has chest armor, and it's possible that the king does as well. Maybe I'm just seeing things though, and I do agree that overall there is much much less armor than in the the Castle line. I wouldn't want every random foot-soldier to have armor, and it looks like most of these sets only contain foot-soldiers and few have mounted knights. But still, like you I'd like to see a bit more of the armor piece in these sets than the current pics show. It would be nice if every minifig of both sides with the new helmet piece also had some armor, as that would distinguish those minifigs more from the average foot-soldiers.

No, you did just the right thing to discuss a set. That's why we make reviews of old sets, in order to learn about them and discuss them. Discussion topics that have been dead a long time are most often useless to bump up, but reviews are and should be timeless. I love reviewing old sets myself, and I'm always happy when somebody bumps an older review back up in order to discuss the set. Anyway, back to the set, no, it's certainly not a trebuchet. But it is a big, interesting catapult. What I like about the dragon knights subtheme was that all of the sets easily conveyed the symbol of the faction: the dragon. Though it is slightly odd and probably unrealistic, having that big dragon head there really conveys who this catapult belongs to, and gives a very child-toy feeling to the set since it's so big and goofy. A little too garish for my taste, though, is all that blue used. Perhaps with the new dark shades of colors that LEGO often uses now these different colors would work, but the bright blue is just all wrong to me in this use. On the top of castles, yes, but on catapults, no.

Do you have to be rude just because you have a difference of opinion? KK 1 and 2 had some good elements, especially the many printed legs in KK1, and there were plenty of well designed and grand sets in KK2, like Vladek's fortress for example. Both themes were certainly very far from a classic style, but there were plenty of good things about them that could lead some people to like them very much. Anyway, let's not get this discussion too sidetracked on whether people liked or disliked other Castle lines, since KK has been gone for years and I don't think there's any realistic worry that it'll be coming back. These new sets clearly show that LEGO is currently not interested in jelly beans or big ugly bull battering rams, so let's keep this to talking about how the new pictures look rather than debating themes that have passed.

Yes! These look awesome, even though they're prelims, I don't see anything wrong with them. LEGO is going in such a good direction with new lines of evergreen themes lately: blasts from the past, yet done in LEGO's new and much more detailed way of doing things. These are very reminiscent of Castle sets from before Leo came around, but they look to be designed much better than Classic Castle sets which didn't have so many details. I was hoping that LEGO would take the standard of the recent Drawbridge and make an entire line like that, and it seems that's what they've done. I'm so excited!

Well, I hate to say it, but I always thought the Ice Planet 2002 looked like crap. Barebones, blocky spaceships and vehicles, and big ugly wheels on many sets, something I've never been fond of. The art for the line also repulsed me: plastic-looking ice cliffs in the background, plus that awful-looking and super-'90s grid design. Then there's the color scheme: blue, white, and trans-orange; better than gray I suppose, but to me this color-scheme made mish-mashy ships. Though your review is very, very good, I still think this line (and this set) sucks. Since we're sharing our opinions here, let me break down the things I really dislike about this set: -Its bareness. It's supposed to be a big base, but there's no enclosure at all! It's just a whole bunch of plates, bit, and bobs stuck on a big molded baseplate. I'm sot asking for air-tight structures, but for an ice base I'd like to see at least a semi-enclosed building from which the space-men can control the rocket and also take off their helmets and enjoy some heat. -The rolling vehicle. It's basically just a plate with a bunch of wheels stuck on, and then a few things on top. To me, that equals ugly ugly ugly. -The huge orange panels. Ok, I don't hate the panels themselves, but I hate that LEGO would just slap those on and call it a day. Just because they made the thing super-tall at one point makes it a big base? What are those panels even good for? Most of this probably sounds like a lot of ranting, and those of you who love this line and this set may become angry with me. I understand, since I'm the same way with anybody dissing my Classic Star Wars sets, but I'm glad that we can all share our views. I hope I've at least made some sense in explaining why I dislike this set and line, instead of just saying "this sucks."

Hello, I know this isn't news about new sets, but I was just looking on LEGO.com and I noticed that the price of last January's battlepacks have gone up to $10.99. I just thought this was very odd that LEGO has now bumped up the price on year-old sets. I guess they know that people who still want them will pay for it.

I'm pretty sure they're going to be PF. Why? Well, on the box directly behind the lady's head is that orange strip, at the top of which is a logo that looks a heck of a lot like the PF logo. I think most PF sets have that orange strip to show off what PF equipment they come with, so that's why I think at least that train set is PF.

You mean a wampa, hence the name: Wampa Cave? Thanks very much for that link! I wonder where they got to shoot that footage, at a UK toy fair? I remember press at the UK Toy Fair being very very tight last year, without hardly any images from there. Why did LEGO not mind this year?

While I think that the old Han face worked very well to show what a cheery guy Han is compared to the stern-looking Luke, I can definitely see them making a new, pupiled version for the new Slave I. Since in that scene in the movie he is kind of in pain and sad before getting frozen, maybe he will have a less cheery smile. Although, we've seen that LEGO doesn't always care about scene accuracy with the new crazily happy Obi-Wan and Luke heads.

I get those too, but if you go to ebay itself and type in the set number, it shows up with a few auctions with pictures. One person shows a back of the box picture too, showing the one feature of the set: storage underneath the middle engine.

Great video! The way you mixed the movie audio and your own story was great, and the animation was very smooth. Then end kind of reminded of Lakeview Terrace.

If you're talking about the Landspeeder, Big Cam, that set is a January release, and I'm next to positive that that picture is final. What is the source of that pic, by the way?

Well Oky, I'm an Academy Teacher too so I'll answer your question in the meantime. I've actually read your review a second ago, so this isn't coming off the top of my head. Though I shouldn't talk for him, what Big Cam probably meant by "awfully dark" was not "unseeably dark," just not "brightly popping." I can illustrate "brightly popping" with a picture in the very same review, the scattered parts and instructions picture. In that picture, the background is a brighter white, but more importantly, those LEGO bits are bright so they pop right out. In the rest of your pics, the content can easily be seen, but it doesn't pop right out. If you want to, a swift click of ColorCorrect or a similarly titled option will probably make most of your pics shinier and the colors fuller. But hey, we're not even in the Academy here, so it's all up to you! I hope this has been a clear-enough explanation, (sarcasm) even with such technical descriptive jargon as "brightly popping."

I do to, but OW! It looks like they've got bound feet. I thought that was only in China. Beautiful MOC you've created. The setting of a modern sidewalk but still relaxed interior is a wonderful contrast. I also like how you use just classic and plain minifigures; just normal people going about their normal business, or taking a break over a soothing cup of tea. Excellent work!

Well, I'll take what LEGO gives me, as always. As I said in the other thread, I'll take any Luke head over the one they've been using, which I've always thought of as young Obi-Wan. I agree that these figs look a bit too happy for their characters, and Luke still screams for a different 'do, but the torsos are great. Also, we don't know that the heads are not double-sided, though I'm not sure what would be on the other sides (Luke wining face and Obi-Wan's stern face?). I guess Star Wars figs were already getting "not-simple," so this seems like a logical step. And I've still got my old yellow '99 Luke and Ben beside me, in case I get nostalgic.

Nabii, a designer for SPIII, has said it was fake. What better verdict is there than from someone on the design team of the line?

Ben's face looks about the same to me, besides for the eyes.

You can't, but a moderator can, so perhaps one will.

Thanks for he review of this! I have this set, and it's still mostly together, but a few pieces here and there are off in some other place. I never got many EpIII sets, but I couldn't pass this one up since it came with three different vehicles, two awesome wookies, and a good price tag. I wish LEGO still put out deals like this. Nowadays a tank droid by itself is $24.99, but back then, you got a tank droid, wookie flyer, and spider droid all for $29.99. Those were the days! I've read people's complaints about the colors on the tank droid, but I personally thought they were great. Star Wars is often too gray all the time, so this was a great set because it was mainly brown and blue. I think you've got the wrong color disks under the trans-orange "eyes." The disks you have are black, but they're supposed to be dark bley. Doesn't matter much though.

Guys, why are you still talking about the old ARC pic with misspelled names? The set is out in stores for goodness sake, and we've had a review! On the real box, everything is fine, isn't it? So what does it matter if they didn't check so closely on some more preliminary pictures? Let's remember that the January sets are actually out now, and that all the summer pics are preliminary, which means they are without a doubt going to change.

Please remember that every summer picture is preliminary.

I don't know what to think about the new Luke face. I certainly like it better than the one Lego's been using, that one will always be young Obi-Wan to me. But, as people have been saying, he looks an awful lot like the City happy guy, and I think that makes Luke a bit too happy seeming. I miss the original SW figures, who had basically straight lines for mouths, but Luke had a slight turnup at the ends to make him seem just a bit cheery. In the picture provided, it looks like Ben and Luke have just been having the time of their lives, and I don't remember Ben looking all that happy in the entire movie!