Clone OPatra

Wow, getting it down to $65 (plus tax) for people in the US is a crazy good deal. This thing was already fairly priced at $100!

Great work! Both of these look very LEGO-set-like to me and you have nicely presented them as well. Doesn't get much more LEGO than a small set consisting mainly of a tree, though you have made a nice distinct tree.

Ah, just what fans of historical themes wish for! I would absolutely love some official LEGO treatment of early 19th century life, and I greatly enjoy the specific setting you have chosen. The minifigures are also nicely done and I agree, some of those Star Wars Rebel/Resistance parts work very well outside of the Star Wars context!

Fun and intriguing concept, leaning all the way into facades (as opposed to many buildings LEGO have released that are mainly a facade but pretend to have a useable interior). I also like the restraint with which you have dipped into fantasy, with just a few aspects of the minifigures, and to some extent the smaller set build, which is excellent!

Not to the same extent at all. The 2013, 14, and 15 Spider-Man sets were all branded as tie-ins with the Ultimate Spider-Man TV show. 2016, 2020, and 2021 were not. I haven't counted up the sets but in terms of years, that's only half that weren't tie-ins. The only other Marvel sets besides mechs that haven't directly tied into something are the two X-Men sets (not counting Mighty Micros), as far as I can recall. Compare that to DC Superheroes, where the majority of sets weren't tied into anything specific, and it's quite a contrast.

The chameleon did come in a modular. Prior to the LEGO Movie 2 series, CMF were made exclusively in China and therefore new moulds introduced for CMF weren't automatically available for other use. I read in a New Elementary article quite a while ago that to introduce CMF parts into sets, it counted as an actual new part budget-wise because they would have to remake the mould for one of the mainline factories that supply parts for sets. That's I think why, while plenty of CMF parts did get reintroduced into sets, many did not. Post LEGO Movie 2 when parts for CMF are now produced in the mainline factories as well, it's much easier for LEGO to keep using those moulds for sets. I don't totally understand everything about this, but that's what I read. The Frenchie came in the Queer Eye set.

The terrier showed up again in later CMF series and BAM. The French bulldog has now appeared in a set. The weird mohawk cat from the LEGO Movie 2 even showed up again in sets in Monkie Kid. The snake mould for Nagini from Harry Potter S1 was used in City. The chameleon has been in a set. It is getting slightly more common.

I watched PenPlays' video and it was very interesting and well-reasoned (while or course being just one person's perspective and experience). It's crazy and sad that LEGO is so deep into property-based licenses now that even older iterations of a licensed theme feel like something original that LEGO doesn't do anymore. And I wonder if that shift in general is why they don't produce much for DC now. Today, for licenses LEGO almost exclusively makes stuff directly based off of something - be it a movie or show or game, etc - and barely creates any in house themes at all. The original LEGO Batman and subsequent DC Superheroes lines were different, essentially in-house created set ideas drawing from all of DC media, but since LEGO has all but abandoned such things, now they say they can't produce DC stuff because the film schedule is too much of a mess, or whatever. It's problem of their own design, but it does feel like perhaps some policies or business cases have changed to say that as far as licensed play themes are concerned, as much as possible needs to be a direct tie-in.

I guess I still haven't come to terms with the reality that sets with piece counts and prices this high have become so commonplace that it means nothing at this point. Having grown up in an era when LEGO sets rarely surpassed $100 (yeah I know, inflation yada yada) and then watched as they slowly tested the waters with larger sets and display pieces in the early 2000s, sets this huge still feel like they are supposed to be special, once in a while things. But or course that isn't the case any more. It's not like this takes anything else's spot particularly because LEGO will just announce another 3000 piece set tomorrow. This has already been the case for the past few years. It's market to people who like the IP, have nostalgia for LEGO, and plenty of cash. That isn't new to this specific season.

What the absolute heck. The gloves look ok. The necklace section looks ok. But the actual head... nah.

Ah, my mistake. The product images made it super hard to tell. Still, LEGO should be able to replace it.

No it's not? Isn't it 36060 in orange which first came in a set in January? https://brickset.com/parts/design-36060 It's even on Pick a Brick again.

Fair, it probably should say $10-15, but the other parameter of max 80 parts and 4 minifigs stands as well even if that isn't totally reasonable to expect for $10 any more. Try to put your own original spin on it like LEGO would, but in essence that is ok. Some of LEGO's original themes have drawn inspiration from other stuff after all, like Adventurers from Indiana Jones and Monster Fighters from classic monsters that LEGO didn't invent themselves.

Normally we'd say not to dig up an old topic, but this one is still relevant, so why not. Carry on.

Reminder! Create a Theme Contest It's now September, which means just over three weeks to go until entries for our Create a Theme Contest close on September 24th. You don't need to build anything big to enter - you can make an entry with just two small builds for example, or just enter the minifigure category. Ask any questions in the Contest Rules & Discussion topic.

People have already been talking about the advent calendar here plenty.

Max 80 pieces + 4 minifigures is fine. Do you mean a photo edit with your sets on a background, or some separate artwork? Either is fine but please only one full blown edit with background per set in your entry topic.

Please don't bump a five year old topic.

Um..... Part of the very function of the LEGO Ambassador Network (LAN) is for LEGO to communicate with fans via the "ambassadors" - i.e. everyone in the program. They don't do a press release about everything, and press releases are pretty much the only way LEGO communicates directly under your definiton. Press releases are for the masses though, and an update about PaB staffing and the intended timeline of adding new parts is not exactly for everyone but for fans, who are best reached through fan media because fans are likely to follow one or another of the many fan media sites/channels. So this really is LEGO communicating directly. They communicated it directly to the ambassadors, and the ambassadors get the message out to the fans. I don't mean to say you shouldn't take it with a grain of salt. Everything about it is a bit nonsensical when they already had a working system and were getting through orders tolerably fine, and then went and broke that system only to claim they were essentially too inundated to add new parts, while also seeming to say that it was a change in policy decision. I'm not holding my breath for new parts on PaB in any particular timeline, or at all. But make no mistake, this is LEGO choosing the method it feels is most appropriate and directly communicating the message through that method.

Ah ok. I might try that out. Though like I said, I don't think the gap kills the model by any means, it just feels like LEGO being like "meh good enough".

I wouldn't read that much into it. Hasn't January been the time for unlicensed series for a while now? It's only Series 23 that is a fluke so far. I think it's totally possible that LEGO was working on something licensed for this year but the property got delayed or cancelled, or they just wanted to do an extra unlicensed series to sort of celebrate the 90th anniversary. Next year might go back to the previous pattern.

I'm talking about in person. Which two plates get rid of the gap? I couldn't get the canopy to angle perfectly flush with the sides (though without changing anything on the model).

IMO it's good enough to appear in a display with other stuff for a whole battle scene, which is how I have it now. The model isn't great with the very flat sides, as pretty much every review has pointed out, but it's fine as one thing amongst others. Admittedly it might look better or the gap might be less noticeable with the stickers applied, which I haven't done because I'd like the option of disassembling it for parts at some stage.

My money is on a double XL mech for miles vs Minifigure Morbius.

I'm super glad I picked up the Fighter Tank when I saw it in the US because the figures are just that good, but does the unsightly gap between the white canopy and the sides bug anyone else ideologically? It reeks of a designer going "hey, I have a neat idea for the front, what about recolouring that canopy in white?", then playing around with it for a while and finding it wasn't a perfect fit, but someone saying "screw it, we've spent enough time on it, release it as is and nobody will care". Because yeah it seems like a NPU, but then doesn't actually 100% work and I'm sure LEGO knows that.