rodiziorobs

Favorite stickers were the holographic Exploriens ones. Back in those days I applied all my stickers, but it didn't take me long even as a kid to remove the annoying red/blue reveal stickers (if you had those sets, you'll remember what I'm talking about). I still have those holographic ones, though, even if they are a bit faded. Nowadays I save the stickers out to use on MOCs later on (which I rarely actually do), then when I take the MOC apart I try to keep those pieces sorted separately so the stickers don't get dinged up.

@Faefrost: Sorry, I realize I wasn't very clear before. This was what I meant with that last post of mine. Now (or soon, whenever it is) with the LR license expired, a single set from the MWT could be resubmitted, as the update suggests for previously rejected projects that had a license conflict (as was probably the case with the MWT project). Obviously, the original MWT project is dead, and cannot come back. Any resubmitted project would have to conform to the current guidelines (single set, not theme, etc.), but then, as The Cook pointed out, it would be judged on its own merits at that point in time, whenever it reached 10k.

My least favorite would have to be any set from Thor: the Dark World. And the only reason I hate them so much is because they don't exist. ... But as far as sets that do exist, but probably never should have, the IM3 and Spidey-trike ones are definitely a blight on the Super Heroes theme, and only (partially) redeemed by the minifigs.

Through some act of providence or serendipity, the Cuusoo team just made an update to clarify some of the issues surrounding licensing conflicts--the exact same issues we have been discussing here. Although they specifically mention Doctor Who (strangely; its almost like they are asking for specific submissions), as far as I can tell the same info would apply to the MWT.

One effect of the minifig shading is that it keeps kids (read: boys) from reappropriating those torsos for male figures, which would thereby eliminate girl minifigs from their collection altogether. For example, growing up I always wanted to make some kind of evil villain Spider-Lord wizard for my castle MOCs, but couldn't because the Fright Knight witch torso had hips. So, by default, there was always a girl in the story. On the other hand, it was always easy to turn any other torso into a female if needed, just by putting the generic lipstick-wearing face on it. By the same token, a lot of heads (obviously, the ones without facial hair) put on a shaded torso suddenly become female. I suppose I should write an article all about how female printing on LEGO minifigs is the best thing to happen to gender equality in toys, because it makes it easier to increase the number of female figs while making it harder to get rid of them. Or decrying the use of beard prints as a way of marking male minifigs as bigoted. How dare LEGO print a mustache on a perfectly generic head? Heck, if nonsense like the article above gets picked up, I think I've got a pretty good chance.

This was my first set: I was lucky enough to start out with five minifigs (including the ghost!) and a monkey. I still have all but the knight, who a friend borrowed about the time I entered my dark ages, so I never bothered to get him back.

I always wanted some shipwreck turned into a secret pirate base-like 6270, Forbidden Cove, but with an actual ship hull, partially buried/submerged at an angle. I tried MOCing one when i was younger, but couldn't get it to work. I might try again in the future. I tavern/inn set would rock--something along the lines of MMV crossed with the Imperial Trading Post, only with pirates instead of soldiers.

Blacktron fan can be seen right after Taco Tuesday starts, IIRC.

I think this is a different case, as each theme would be drafted under a different license. TLG already had a pirate theme when they first licensed with Disney to do PotC, and so likely included a clause in that agreement that would allow them to continue with their own theme. On the other hand, there had not been a proper Western theme since 1996 (unless you count the re-release a few years later), so it is unlikely that TLG sought to include that kind of exception in the LR license. I wonder actually if the licensing agreement for LR was written to exclude any Western sets period; if you notice, both of the Western-themed TLM sets (Getaway Glider and Creative Ambush) are both flying machines, and could thereby be considered "fantasy", allowing TLG to sidestep the LR license if that were the case. It guess it doesn't really matter though. As nice as it would be to see MWT pass review, I don't see how in its current state- it doesn't even abide by CUUSOO's new guidelines (multiple sets). I also don't think a postponement guideline could ever be implemented, although maybe when a project hit 5k votes the CUUSOO team could inform the creator about a potential conflict? The problem there is that preempts the review stage. Besides, even if the project creator were notified of some licensing conflict, what could they do? Shelving the project would kill any momentum it had on social media (which is pretty much the only way to get to 10k), and what other realistic option is there? The only way the MWT (or any other project) would be reconsidered is if it were put out as a new single set and got the 10k supporters once again.

Love the (shortened) longhouse, but the aspen trees are my favorite. The whole scene fits together nicely.

The clear conflict with the MWT was LR, as several posters have stated. I like to think that TLG saw the MWT and groaned because they would rather have produced MBbricks' modular buildings than been tied down to a license (especially when the movie tanked). But that's just my POV. I hadn't thought about the LR license affecting the Lego Movie sets, though, but it makes a lot of sense. Again, I feel like TLG would really liked to have produced other western buildings, but their hands were tied. Unfortunately, that means the MWT (along with TLM) was just the victim of poor timing; I'm sure if the project--or a single set from it, to be in line with Cuusoo's revised guidelines--were to get the required supporters today, it would be approved. By the time the set came into production any loose ends with the Disney license would have been taken care of. It's too bad that ship has sailed, but maybe MBbricks will resubmit one of them? While I liked most of the LR sets--let's face it, it was good to see TLG do a western theme again!--it's a shame that we could have had so much more if not for the conflict with the license.

As far as the awesome set images, my only complaint is the notable lack of an ejector seat in Bond's car. BTW, nice figs 12 Volts!

Totally apart from LEGO, the Green Hornet (Britt Reid) is the great-grandson or whatever of the Lone Ranger (John Reid), but what does that have to really do with anything? The connection between them is fairly meaningless--sure they both wear a mask and fight injustice, blah, blah, blah, but the only real thing they have in common is that both movies were terrible (which is an argument for another day). Really, though, the universe the various LEGO elements and themes share is connected, defined, and limited only by the amount of space it takes up in your house, multiplied by your imagination.

I am not particularly familiar with the Oxford study, but I am familiar with similar linguistic research on Spanish and Portuguese. What typically happens is the researchers take any and all text samples they can get--both modern writing as well as digitized manuscripts that have been standardized and made OCR searchable--and then compile them all into a database. This, however, counts each individual text only once; for example, you don't multiply the words in a book by the number of copies. I am guessing Oxford's was something similar. These kinds of studies reveal a lot of interesting things, however they tend to skew more literary, as the texts most readily available are literary works. That being said, if you were to take every word ever printed on anything, including branded materials and packaging, I would say LEGO has a chance of being at least near the top, along with some other brands. More likely it would be some word like 'warning', which is printed on virtually every piece of packaging nowadays. The original post here made me chuckle though--I imagined some archaeologist a few thousand years from now unearthing the remains of our civilization, finding the word' LEGO' so often and, assuming that bricks were a sort of religious emblem (like rosary beads or something), concluding that 'LEGO' was the name of our deity... EDIT: Just caught that 'four-letter' bit.

I'm not a gamer and I don't really collect minifigs, but if I had the cash I would get the game just for the Western Emmet.

I also am missing a turtle torso, and oddly enough, it is also Raphael! I wasn't going to say anything, though, but now that there are four of us... It's not a big deal CopMike-Heck, it's free LEGO so I'm not going to complain. Besides, my son already had one, so we've got a complete set now anyway. Really, though, what is the story behind the chicken, and what good does it do to cut around half its wing like the box suggests? Answer that question and I will let you off the hook for the 'half hero in a half shell'

When I first started to tell my family (particularly my wife's family) that I enjoyed LEGO as an adult I got a lot of weird looks, so I would ask, "When you were growing up, what did you want to be? A LEGO set designer?" Invariably the answer was some form of yes (either an outright yes or that it was on their list or something), so I then would follow up with, "And wouldn't that still be the awesomest job ever?" And those funny looks I got would turn into sheepish grins and nods of agreement. No problems since.

Since TLG will change the design anyway, I'm guessing that regardless of which project they accepted, the end product would be fairly identical. The ones it matters most to are the builders who get the recognition and royalties, and the builders who don't.

Mine came today as well, thanks CopMike! Although I don't get the meaning behind the box...

I think the only LOTR/Hobbit set that could ever top Lothlorien would be Beorn's house (which will never happen), so Lothlorien it is.

Roof techniques aside, I love the look of your window frames on the tower, I'll definitely be borrowing it soon.

Nicely done to everyone who entered, and especially the winners and organizers. There were so many great entries, I'll have to try and borrow some of these ideas for my own WV next year.

Benny's great, but what I really want is the shirt Blacktron fan has from the Rescue Reinforcements set. http://static1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20140114100053/lego/images/5/5d/70813-blacktron.jpg

While I agree that the good knights/evil knights, the bland heraldry, and lack of minor factions and civilian scenes (although the few civilian scenes they have done have been stellar) are all problems with the current (and past) lines, I think I could ignore all of that if the castles themselves were better. For example, the current and most recent past large castle sets have just felt like big slabs of wall thrown against each other to make a square and that for some unknown reason, the knights feel like defending whatever is(n't) inside. You could take a cardboard box and draw LEGO on the outside of it, and it wouldn't be that different. Compare that to LOTR and Hobbit themes, where the walls themselves have some additional detailing, curve instead of making right angles, and have different heights and elevations, beyond just 1st/2nd floor and towers. The build itself--even if you're not a big fan of LOTR--is more interesting and varied. That being said, I wonder if LOTR isn't part of the reason we haven't really gotten much high-quality design out of the castle themes lately. TLG doesn't want its generic line taking business from the licensed one, but they also don't want to kill the castle line off completely in the meantime, to reassure us castle fans that the theme is still around (or else we would be up in arms about it, am I right?). So, they produce a few sub-par themes as place-holders for a few years while the Tolkien licenses are still active, throw in a few gimmicks (like the resurrected big dragon mold) to try and appease us and get our money anyway. I suspect (and hope) they are waiting in the wings with some killer castle themes, factions, and heraldry, that they will unveil to us once LOTR and the Hobbit have gotten off the stage. In the meantime, the licensed themes work as parts packs for the rest of us, if a good bargain can be found.

It's hard to envision a way that such a theme could be a reality, because of the political implications. If they took some historical angle, there isn't much toy-appropriate stuff from a Western world perspective, and if they took an earnest look at producing an authentic African set (from that point of view), it would be decried as exploitation and demeaning to that culture (someone's heritage being reduced to a plaything). That being said, I think there could still be a way to do it, but it would have to approach the material from the safari/zoo angle. And it would be a way (probably the only way) to get official sets from LEGO that are in Africa without being Egyptian, but what else can you really ask for? I mean, two-thirds of the West's history with sub-Saharan Africa is practically pure slave trade (plus another century of the Scramble for Africa), so its nearly impossible to approach that way. Here is my idea: here in the US there is an animated (plus about five minutes of live action) show on public television called "Wild Kratts" where two brothers and their team are dedicated to helping animals "live free and in the wild". Granted, their adventures aren't limited to only Africa, but the style and tone of the show fits LEGO to a T. There are poacher-type villains but who don't use guns--one tries to use animals to power bizarre machines he makes, another wants to use live animals as fashion accessories, etc.--and each episode their outrageous schemes are foiled by the brothers. Along the way, the brothers both teach and learn a lot about animals' unique abilities to survive in their habitats and then use crazy inventions to help rescue them. Over-the-top and easily defeated villains (think Sam Sinister)? Check. Creative and inventive vehicles/locations? Check? Fun yet educational? Check. Sub-Saharan action theme that doesn't include (or even have any appearance of) cultural condescension or exploitation? Check. Furthermore, the whole fleshie problem would be worked out-as licensed characters, they would be fleshies and could include other skin tones. Actually, they would have to, since one of the more important (albeit still minor) characters is black. I realize this would be less "Africa" and more "new System animal molds," but after reading a lot of the comments here it seems like a lot of people would be more interested in that anyway (sorry, but that's the way I read it). This would be a way to bring those molds in in such a way that is creative, educational, and squarely aimed at TLG's professed target market (although we know they are really aiming more and more for us AFOLs these days ). And, it or something akin to it is really the only way an African theme is ever going to happen. I have my own kids (and several nephews and nieces) who love both LEGO and this show; my boys even asked me to make them some Kratt brothers from my minifigs, so I can see a definite market. Sorry (after the fact!) for the long comment. Here is a link to the show's site. Note that I have no ties to the show other than watching it with my kids on PBS. http://pbskids.org/wildkratts/home.html