Blondie-Wan

Well, we already know TLG plans to go beyond just 2012 with the theme, and I'd bet they do have building-based set ideas kicking around. That this first wave will largely amount to remakes of previous Batman sets doesn't necessarily mean that's what they intend to do for the overall theme, and I do think there's something to be said for tj19941994's idea about TLG possibly doing these sets in response to the feverish demand for those earlier Batman sets. I'm confident they'll do plenty of sets beyond simple vehicular chases and battles between good and bad guys.

"Hopefully"? Do you fear the Marvel ones might indeed feature lots of Batman as well, after all? Hey, you never know, I guess...

I've actually thought of this same thing (using 1x1 round plates offset between other 1x1 round plates), and not just for water, though so far I haven't finished anything really substantial with it (nothing the size of the examples in your post - yet . I like the possibilities it provides for really naturalistic-looking, irregular terrain and so on.

By gum, it put them on the map!

I think Aanchir's right about printing on the tops of minifigure 'shoes.' I've occasionally dreamed of TLG doing boots and the like by actually molding the legs in two colors, the way they occasionally blend colors in other pieces, and then using printing over the area where the two colors meet to finesse the details, but I imagine this would be unfeasible for reasons of cost, even if they had the capability to do it.

And here I thought I was going to be the first one to review this set; that's what I get for slacking off for so long. Ah, well. I no longer have the box for mine anyway, so... I found this set on clearance a while ago, so I picked it up specifically for the chicken figure, with the intention of using it to represent a giant fiberglass chicken sculpture on a restaurant roof in my LEGO city (since DUPLO elements can be connected to non-DUPLO LEGO elements, of course) - I was thinking it would be a chicken restaurant something like a Zaxby's (though I don't know of any real Zaxby's that has a giant chicken; it just seemed like the kind of thing one could have, and I'll probably make it be some other chicken-based eatery of my own creation anyway). I'll get around to it one of these days. Nice review!

Buildings, naturally. They did a bunch of sets for the first two Spider-Man movies, remember; they can do plenty more for everyone else. And I think it's a given the big Marvel set will be the Avengers helicarrier.

Hey, Howard rocks!

I've seen them at my own TRU here now, too, and can attest they appear to be very well-constructed, though I haven't handled one out of the shrinkwrap (and thus haven't been able to open the front, etc.). The minifigure is indeed basic, but that's just the sort of thing I think best suited to go with these, since it can then go with all sorts of other themes. The thing I'm most curious about is seeing how well they stack together. They certainly look like they snap together every bit as effectively as regular LEGO bricks, which of course is what we'd like. I can totally see having a section of wall space devoted to several of these stuck together, with a whole slew of minifigures in them. I don't know if I'd be able to do that given a price of around $20 to $23 apiece, but it'd be nice...

In all honesty, I was actually thinking the exact same thing (before I read these posts, I swear!).

I doubt Marvel / DC characters (or any other licensed characters) will be offered in minifigure-and-accessory-only packs a la the Minifigures (i.e., the "collectible minifigures") line, for reasons discussed a number of times before. The companies holding licenses for action figures based on those properties would surely object to TLG selling something that could be seen as similar; TLG likely needs to stick to sets with enough pieces that there's no mistaking them for anything other than construction toys. Back on topic... aside from my previously-mentioned Howard the Duck, I'd like to see the Fantastic Four for Marvel, and the Unknown Soldier for DC.

Howard the Duck!

Well, keep in mind that as far as LEGO themes are concerned, all this DC Universe stuff is really just half of a larger theme, LEGO Superheroes, and the Marvel Universe is the other half. The DC sets aren't "it" for the year; they're just essentially the first wave, and the Marvel launch will be the second. If you combine this initial wave of DC sets with what we might reasonably assume to be a comparably-sized Marvel wave, you get an overall "LEGO Superheroes" launch year's worth of sets that I believe is larger than any other licensed theme other than Star Wars has ever had. It's different since it's two distinct licenses, but the two themes are similar and linked in a way that other pairs of concurrent licensed themes aren't. And, of course, this is just the first year. The press releases confirm both licenses are multi-year agreements, and we should continue to see new sets from both the DC and Marvel universes into 2013 and beyond, unless the initial sets sell unexpectedly poorly (and how likely is that?).

I'm sure many concur. I also think it might be neat if real-world LEGO sets were occasionally awarded for in-game accomplishments. As it happens, there were promotional sets of the basic LEGO Universe astronaut and his/her rocket. The astronaut was originally offered as a bonus for preordering the game (and after it came out, some LEGO stores continued to offer the astronaut with the game), and the rocket was offered shortly after it was released, again free with the game or sold on its own in stores for $10.

Same here. Like many who've posted in this thread (including the OP), I view LEGO as something best appreciated by fully using it, putting it together, taking it apart, etc. I may have a lot of sets still MISB right now, but I don't intend for any of them to stay that way forever.

I think the Hoth game looks cute, as it's surely supposed to, and I must have missed the set with multiple Sebulba minifigures.

I have a slew of MISB sets (not that the boxes themselves are all mint, mind you, but they're sealed) - well over a hundred, I think, making up perhaps a quarter (or even more) of my entire collection. It's not because I'm hung up on keeping them as sealed, virginal "collectible" things; it's just that up until recently, I lived in a tiny studio apartment and simply had way too little space to properly build and play with and display sets (finding time to build was and continues to be an issue, but primarily it was just a matter of not enough space). I'm happy to report I recently moved into a house with my girlfriend, and though we still have less space than we'd like for LEGO (and everything else!), we have so much more than either of us did before (especially me), so I'm eagerly anticipating diving into my "back inventory" of new, unopened sets. We're still in the process of getting settled in, though - we have lots of boxes and bags all over the place, and we only just recently decided to switch around two of the three bedrooms we'd chosen to be the "fun room" (where the LEGO will reside, along with other hobby stuff like games and computers - we're both gaming enthusiasts) and her bedroom (we use separate bedrooms during the week, since I go to work much earlier than she does and don't want to disturb her too much with my morning routine). So, the wait continues... but hopefully not for much longer! Once we get the new "fun room" set up, with shelving and building table space and all, I plan to spend a lot of time going through all the sets I've gotten over the last several years that I haven't gotten around to opening yet. I do also have a bunch of sealed Minifigures and polybagged sets that I could've opened and built anytime, but I kind of like to keep a small cache of such small sets that I can dig into every once in a while and pull something out to semi-surprise myself with, just for kicks. These include at least a few unopened minifigures from each series, and though I know what I feel-selected in stores and so on and so therefore know what's in the overall pool, I don't necessarily know what's in each specific packet I might randomly pick out of the pile. I think I'm going to enjoy digging into that little pile to add to my assortment of minifigures for quite some time to come, even if I already have opened copies of each of them anyway.

Same here. I actually consider the blank helmet a selling point; the only thing more desirable would be one with a printed helmet that hasn't been in another set, and I don't think they'd do something like that for an advent calendar. It would be either this helmet or another Luke / Wedge / Zev / etc., and of those two options I favor the blank helmet.

I understand how you feel. I've been struggling to resist the temptation to go all throughout this thread and the others about this series responding to everyone who refers to the zookeeper's "monkey" telling them that it's an ape (specifically a chimpanzee, or perhaps a bonobo), not a monkey. It's not easy! Pet peeves are a terrible burden... This is a pretty regular occurrence at TRU. Frequently when they first get brand-new sets in, they're priced at TLG's MSRP for a few days or a week or so, before going up to TRU's usual marked-up price.

And I (respectfully) disagree; I think it's nothing like that at all. I think LEGO tries to predict what the overall balance of demand will be and then tries to set the proportions to match that demand. I further think people who think TLG is intentionally keeping the most in-demand figures scarce are completely oblivious to the fact the target audience for these is young children, who won't necessarily want figures in the same proportions as AFOLs. There may be a bunch of AFOLs who wanted vast hordes of Spartan warriors, but TLG probably did all their market research for the first two series with kids, who presumably didn't particularly covet Spartans over witches and vampires, say, or even traffic cops. After the unexpectedly huge demand for the first two series, and in particular the interest from AFOLs, I think TLG has really tried to take AFOL interests into account and tweak the proportions accordingly. Even so, I think they're a) putting the greater emphasis on what kids want, or at least what they think kids want, and b) trying not to skew the assortments too heavily (i.e., trying to keep the frequency of each figure somewhere around three to five per box - the handful of times they've had something different at first, like having only two fishermen or crazy scientists per box, they've adjusted it partway through production so the overall mixes for the entire run falls within the desired range). Consider this: they're not really going to have trouble selling all the figures anyway, regardless of how skewed the mixes are or aren't. They therefore have no reason to make certain figures super-rare or super-plentiful. They're not a trading card or other traditional "collectibles" company, and don't really adhere to all that market's conventions (at least, not yet, and hopefully not for a long time if ever).

Right. It's worth noting the UCS sets aren't limited editions in the traditional sense; they don't have set numbers or even production times, but instead are offered simply for as long as they continue to sell, like the overwhelming majority of other LEGO sets. The UCS Star Destroyer was around for a good five years or thereabouts, simply because it sold really well, and I don't think anyone would argue TLG was breaking some sort of implicit covenant with well-heeled speculator-fans by continuing to offer it.

Huh? Aren't werewolves themselves "actual figs?" Do you mean you have more werewolves than non-werewolves out of this series, or what?

"Collectors" doesn't necessarily mean the same thing as "investors," and it doesn't automatically mean "collectors of rare and/or valuable things," it just means "collectors." "Cheapening" the line isn't really a concern for people who simply want nice sets. Lots of people really don't care about how many dozens or millions of other people have copies of a particular set; it's all about simply having the set for oneself if it's a nice set, and the scarcity doesn't really enter into it. I know it's not that way for everyone, but it is for quite a few.

I can't say "SQUEEE!!!" enough to convey my delight at this latest round. I must have them all!!!

Well, the reissue of a single, particularly admired and sought-after set - of perhaps the most beloved and iconic Star Wars vessel - out of all the dozens of UCS and other "special" sets they've done in over a decade of LEGO Star Wars, would hardly indicate that every other set was going to get a reissue. I don't think it would impact it too much. But that said, I do think you're right in that they probably won't do a straight reissue, for some of the same reasons you've put forth, and I also have already taken to hoping they do eventually do one more, truly ultimate Millennium Falcon - perhaps like the 10179, only with a detailed interior, say, or an alternate cockpit design, or some other improvement. I do think it's possible that they may simply not wish to ever re-do vessels in the UCS line the way they do with the more mass-market sets, but if there's one ship - or one thing of any kind, be it character, vehicle, whatever in the entire Star Wars canon - that would warrant an exception, it would be the Millennium Falcon (though for that matter, they could be argued to have already redone something in the more high-end, UCS/LEGO Direct/"collector," etc. market, with the UCS Death Star and then the ultra-deluxe "playset" Death Star).