Blondie-Wan

Oh, yeah, definitely the monorail, too. That would be awesome.

The major debacle with The Hobbit was that what were initially supposed to be two movies suddenly turned into three late in the production, with scenes on which sets were based that were originally going to be in the first suddenly going into the second. There's no danger of that with Ghostbusters. And whatever one thinks of Ghostbusters 2016's prospects, I don't see any reason for TLG to treat it more cautiously than Speed Racer, The Lone Ranger, or The Angry Birds Movie. I suspect the reason there's apparently just the one non-Dimensions set for this new movie is because new continuity or not, it's still part of the same overall theme / franchise / license as the original Ghostbusters, and that just got a mammoth set that all by itself is like a whole theme's worth of brick content for some lesser franchise. TLG may well just not want to release over half a thousand dollars' worth of set in one year for a licensed theme that's not Star Wars.

I mean a set of one or more of the actual trains, runnable on regular LEGO railroad track (or possibly the narrow gauge track, given that the real Disney park railroads are 3 ft narrow gauge lines), possibly accompanied by a station.

I've had perfect success packet-feeling since Series 3 of the regular line, while I can barely tell where the bumps are supposed to be, so I don't bother with the bumps. It does take a while to packet-feel, though. Whoa! I'll have to check out Target, I guess.

Indeed. For that matter, we don't know that it'll be a bad movie, either. The trailer wasn't great, but the movie has potential. That said, it's kind of unusual for them to do just one set for a new movie in some franchise they have a theme around (though I guess technically it won't be just one, since there are also the LEGO Dimensions sets).

Hi, TCO. Welcome aboard! At the risk of wandering from the subject of this particular set, if this is the first in a series of Disney D2Cs, my big hope for the line would be a Disneyland / Walt Disney World Railroad set. I'm sure a lot of people would love that, myself included.

Tinkerbell isn't even in the line; it sounds like she's exclusive to this set. If Mickey, Minnie and Daisy are in their traditional park attire (the description of Minnie sure sounds like it), that would actually be really cool, IMO. And Donald is a great figure already. Different strokes and all that, but I for one think this sounds great so far.

Cool! But what do you mean by "impartial" - incomplete?

Disneyland is a theme park. Walt Disney World (the name "Walt" is in fact part of the full name; it's three separate words) is much, much more than just a park; it's a colossal, sprawling resort that encompasses four separate theme parks (the Magic Kingdom, which all by itself is analogous to Disneyland, plus Epcot, Disney's Hollywood Studios, and Disney's Animal Kingdom), plus two water parks, a massive sports complex, golf courses, hotels, etc. One reason this is an important distinction with regards to the LEGO set concerns this: Actually, I'm not so sure. Millions of people visit the parks each year, including many people who've never seen all the Disney classics, and I actually think it's entirely possible there are more people who know Cinderella's castle from its place in the Magic Kingdom at WDW than who know it from the actual movie. It's emblematic of not only that park (the oldest part of WDW), but by extension, of WDW in general, and the parks move a lot of merchandise - I mean, more than you could possibly imagine. I could totally see TLG producing sets specifically for sale at WDW - even large and expensive ones, and even ones that might or might not even be sold in TLG's own stores. In other words, while a castle themed specifically around the movie remains a possibility, one themed around the parks not only can't be ruled out, I think it's actually fairly likely - possibly likelier than a straight movie version.

Yikes. I'd much rather think of it as the 35th anniversary of the initial shuttle flight (which is much closer to when you've posted, anyway - Columbia's maiden voyage was April 12 to 14, while the Challenger disaster was back in January). Nice comparison, though. I wish I had all those sets. I particularly wanted to get Expedition / Adventure, but never did.

I don't believe TLG has ever implemented printing on the backs of minifigure legs; I don't think they're set up for it at all. The closest they've come is with dual-molded legs, and even that's a recent innovation. There have been probably hundreds of minifigures that would benefit from "all-around" shoe prints just as much as Mickey, but it's something they've never done - yet.

Ariel is not only the first character to be both a minifigure and a minidoll, but also the first character to be both of those and a DUPLO figure, as well. Thanks for the pix!

Okay, but that doesn't make a Herbie set "bad". I don't know that there's much of an audience for a Herbie set in 2016, either, unless it were a limited run thing through Ideas (in which case there should be enough of an audience for the smaller run), but unless you personally stand to benefit when a LEGO set sells well, I don't see how that's an issue. And I think right now I'd rather have a Herbie set than one of a regular VW bug, actually - especially since a Herbie could likely be converted into a regular Beetle much more easily than a regular Beetle could be concverted into a Herbie, anyway.

I take it you've ignored the first 138 pages of the thread, then?

Wait, why would a Herbie set be bad? That said, if it was described a a "VW" set rather than a "Herbie" one, I'm sure that tells us all we need to know.

I have no advice, Hp2012, but you have my sympathy. I know what it's like to have to give up stuff you love because of tough financial circumstances, though I've fortunately never had to part with quite so much all at once. :( Best of luck.

I think the Muppets would be great for LEGO, and I think it could actually happen sometime. I'd also dearly love to see My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic, but that one will obviously not happen, alas. CBS is currently developing a new series. I think that represents the best hope for toys / kids' merchandise in general, and LEGO in particular. Crossing fingers.., As we now know, Disney / Lucasfilm is indeed doing just that. Given their extensive, fruitful history of partnership together, and the fact the 2008 / 2009 line did well, I think LEGO Indy's return is all but assured.

Because 60 isn't evenly divisible by 18. But at least this is a much, much more even distribution than some of the "regular" series, which might have anywhere from as few as 2 per box to as many as 6 per box of a particular minifigure (excluding Mr. Gold from Series 10, who was intentionally made substantially rarer than everyone else from that series, with fewer than one per box - only one box out of several would have one). It's also possible that this is just the distribution in the early part of the production run, and that later in the run it'll change, so that later boxes will have, say, four apiece of certain characters who are three-per-box now, while the ones who are four-per-box now will drop down to three; IIRC, something like this was done with Series 3 of the "regular" line, and perhaps others. I wouldn't count on it, though, but that's mainly because the distribution is already the most balanced one they've ever done. I wouldn't worry too much about being able to get Buzz, though - there are already a ton of the previous Buzz minifigures out there, after all, which should help prevent the demand for this new Buzz from getting too crazy.

Ugh, tell me about it. I'm someone who likes most themes.

Of course not - it got 10,000 supports, after all! Every single project that makes it into a review batch is inherently one that several thousand people, at least, want to see as a set. (I voted for the Concorde project myself, as I did most or all of these others. If you meant "am I the only person in this forum that wants to see the Concorde a set", then still no - I'd like very much to see that as well!)

Either one works well. The thing is that "regular" minifigure heads (all of these are minifigure heads, of course; it's just that some are more specific and less traditional) work well for humans, or humanlike characters, but cartoony characters have always gotten specific new molds. The Toy Story characters Buzz, Woody, and Jessie are themselves toys of human characters, but stylized, cartoony ones, and the original, character-specific molds do work well for them. There's nothing wrong with that. At the same time, though, this whole series follows its own character design logic, which is somewhat different from most other licensed LEGO themes, but it is at least internally consistent. All human characters, or characters with humanlike heads, have traditional minifigure heads. That's why the human Alice, the (super-)human Mr. Incredible, the human Syndrome, the human Aladdin, etc., all have conventional heads - including notably even the human Hook, even though he's a particularly cartoony human with a more stylized head shape than most of the others. It's also why non-humans like Buzz, Ariel, Ursula, and Genie, who all have essentially human-like heads, have traditional minifigure heads here. It works in the context of this series. However, someone wanting essentially a more detailed version of Buzz Lightyear for the greater overall Toy Story line - one that benefits from the greater printing detail while still retaining design consistency with the rest of the old line (i.e., having a character-specific head mold like Woody and Jessie) - can easily achieve it by simply putting one of the old heads on one of these new figures. That's all. Since this overall Minifigures line has its own aesthetic that differs in a specific, particular way from the Toy Story line, I personally would favor keeping the traditional minifigure head here for Buzz if one is using the minifigure with the rest of these figures, while keeping the molded head from 2010 if one is using it with a bunch of other Toy Story stuff (whether the official sets as-is, or MOCs / MODs using figures and other parts from that line). Of course, it's all down to one's personal preference anyway; that's what LEGO is all about. My post wasn't about how one "should" play with or display Buzz; it was just pointing out that if one wants a Buzz like I've described now for the purposes I've described, it doesn't need popping arms off a torso, but rather just a simple head swap.

There's no need to pop out the arms. The old torso may have more printing on the actual torso, but it's completely covered by the armor; the only printed area on the torso (besides the arms) that remains visible when the armor is on appears essentially identical between the two figures. Getting the perfect Buzz is just a matter of replacing the new head with the old one, if that's what one wants.

Lilo and Stitch, earlier today, via Netflix.

I did appreciate that the Mane Six root for the Indianapolis Colts. Of course they do. I mean, it would have to be them, or the Denver Broncos, I guess. Is there a LEGO / Saints connection I'm overlooking, or is it more a case of "they have to root for somebody, and the Saints are as suitable a choice as any other"?

In the first place, emissions are a concern, at least for many if not everyone; that's why the emissions standards (at which VW cheated) exist in the first place. Secondly, what VW did was clearly wrong, and companies generally tend to avoid publicly associating with other companies when they garner bad publicity over ethical misdeeds. TLG would like to avoid doing anything to taint or damage their own brand; presumably they just don't think a VW set will do that. They could well be right (and in fact, given all the market research they do, I'm confident they have a much better idea what will or won't be good for their brand than I do). I'm just surprised, that's all.