TalonCard

I just clicked on the audio dramas (which should be indexed by title here) section to your site, and noticed this text, without any kind of attribution, at the top of the Audio Dramas page: "They were repackaged and re-released without the LEGO brand on June 14 2004, apparently to capitalize on the recently released Pirates of the Caribbean film. (It's interesting to see the non-LEGO versons of Roger, Will, Camilla, and Broadside.) They are available for purchase on CD and immediate download on Amazon.de." This is nearly identical to a post I made here about the audio dramas. "They were repackaged and re-released without the LEGO brand in 2004, apparently to capitalize on the recently released Pirates of the Caribbean film. (It's interesting to see the non-LEGO versons of Roger, Will, Camilla, and Broadside.) They are available for purchase on CD and immediate download on Amazon.de!" And again later on the page: "(Note: The concerns here about Broadside's theoretical replacement were also raised in the Ladybird book "The Royal Visit", but this seems to be a different story...)" Which hasn't even been changed from the original post: "(Note: The concerns here about Broadside's theoretical replacement were also raised in the Ladybird book "The Royal Visit", but this seems to be a different story...)" I appreciate the effort you've put into bringing all of this content into one place. I certainly don't claim ownership over the facts surrounding random LEGO audio dramas, but you can't just copy and paste text without attribution. Re-writing the text in your own words takes minimal effort compared to setting up the website, etc. Or, just explain who wrote the original text. I would even be happy to write content for your site myself, if asked, and given credit. I noticed that you've included the timeline I originally posted here on your own site, so that might be of interest to you. I see that you're trying to give credit throughout the site, but it's frustratingly inconsistent. I appreciate that you've given Runamuck credit for his translations. You've also mentioned the user who originally uploaded the audios to a certain video site, though this appears to be copy-pasted directly from the descriptions of other uploads on the same site. I am credited on the timeline section, but at the very end, with no explanation of who wrote the timeline or where it originally appeared, or a direct link to the forum post. Why is this so inconsistent? TC

I have the Blue Pirate keychain, but I'd love to get the Imperial Soldier or the Pirate with Brown Shirt keychains. TC

You need to do a better job of attributing your discoveries. I'll admit that 2-6 years is a long time when it comes to the internet and this forum, but please give credit to the fans who did a lot of the legwork in discovering this material a few years back. @Sadie Meowsalot was the one who went to all the trouble of contacting the original author of the comic, Per Sanderhage, and it was through her discussions with him that Island of Mist was discovered--if not for her, no one might have even known it existed, never mind it making its way online for us all to enjoy. That's her Brickshelf album you're linking to, and you've posted a quote from her discussion with Sanderhage from the Rock Raiders United forum on the Books/Comics section of your site without a link or attribution. You've included @Runamuck's translations as a text file in the Island of Mist download with no direct mention of him either, as far as I can tell, and I see bits of my own posts included in the download file with no attribution or even context. I appreciate the fact that you mentioned me in your post here, but I wasn't involved in this discovery at all. It most certainly did not go "unnoticed", a number of folks who frequent this forum were excited and an entire English translation was made by Runamuck. There was some concern at the time about widely distributing the scans because technically they still belong to LEGO, which is probably why the discussion didn't spill over into Eurobricks as much. I did notice that you've included an archive of the Rock Raiders United discussion in the download file, so the context for these things is in there somewhere, but this isn't really sufficient attribution. Since the discussion isn't mentioned on the website or directly in the download file, no one would know to go looking for it. I'm hoping that it's just an understandable enthusiasm to share LEGO Pirates material and get it saved in a central location for people on your site that's causing these things to be overlooked. But it doesn't take a lot of work to say something like "According to X user on this forum discussion (insert link here), there was a second comic. The scans originally posted on (link to original site here) can now be downloaded from LEGO Pirates: A Fan's Mania" or "This translation was made by this user and originally posted on this forum." TC

Upping for relevant Pirate discussion.

Upping as it's relevant to LEGO PIrate history. :)

Bumping for Minifigures name discussion. :)

Upping due to the recent interest in Ironhook.

Upping in case this thread is needed for reference.

That's good and all, but I'm not seeing a lot of confusion, just a list of publications that have been discussed on this forum for years.

Dude, I know. I'm delighted that you've found more obscure pirate things and are finding a home for them; pointing out the shortcomings of the existing archives is unnecessary.

Bumping for ongoing lore discussion.

The named pirates were hidden throughout the magazine; Jake is on page 10, lower left hand corner. I know it's been awhile, but I did point out the miniland scans and their relevance to Pirate lore on this very forum. Like, over five years ago, but still. ? TC

The March/April 1996 Mania Magazine (from the US LEGO Club) named all of the pirate figures included in the Red Beard Runner, the figures in the image you posted. The name given to the Ironhook variant with the brown tricorn hat was Jake "the Snake" Blake. I'd mentioned that in my earlier post. That's not quite the way I read it. The Kahuka challenging Red Beard to cross the bridge isn't speaking from the picture of the set; he's a separate image placed above the set listing. While he's referring to a feature of the set, the Kahuka visible in the set picture has no dialogue. The other image of Kahuka could just as easily be calling out the Red Beard figure also shown separately from the sets on page 38. I mean, I see where you're coming from for sure, but I saw the same media at the same time and came to the opposite conclusion. I think we can both agree that in the US Ironhook was effectively a nonentity. I do seem to remember a t-shirt that had the Ironhook figure on it with "Red Beard" embroidered on it, but it was from the early 2000s and I can't remember if it was from LEGOLAND or if it was a bootlegged unofficial shirt. I'd imagine that the American desire for simplification is one reason why we didn't get the expanded Pirate storyline from later years, agreed. Pirates are very, very much American history too, though; many of the most famous pirates visited North and South Carolina, Georgia, Louisiana, and even New York, not to mention that the Caribbean is far, far closer geographically to the US than it is to Europe. You were lucky indeed to get Captain Roger's Activity Book! I didn't even hear about it until about twelve years ago. Where was it sold in the US? TC

Oh hey, that's cool--I didn't know the Eldorado Fortress was still available in 1993! I remember getting the 1994 US Shop at Home catalog and hoping for a picture of the giant Skull's Eye Schooner, only to be surprised that the Black Seas Barracuda and Forbidden Island were included instead! (I wish I had begged my parents to order them, lol.) Dunno why that ship didn't seem to make it to mail order. The Imperial forces were always bundled together in catalogs, even when the Armada sets came around. The Imperial Guards have been consistently portrayed as part of the same faction as the earlier Soldiers, so that's understandable from a story perspective at least. TC

Sorry, that was the point I was trying to make--in the US he didn't have a name as far as I can tell (at least not until 1996), and he wasn't presented as a leader of another faction of pirates. 1992 was very much a continuation of the Red Beard/Broadside conflict from the first wave, and the only notable thing about Ironhook was that he was one of three new pirate designs that year. In the UK and elsewhere, as you point out, it was a different matter. TC

That's interesting; as a kid in the US I never thought the torn red shirt figure was the same character as Captain Red Beard in spite of their obvious similarities. Their faces have different color printing for the hair and beard, which is subtle but was maintained throughout all future instances of the Red Beard/redshirt figures for four years, while both figures continued to be used. If the designers had meant for the redshirt figure to be a new version of the same character, the original Red Beard design would have gone away in sets released after 1992, and if it was intended to be an alternate, updated design, there was no reason not to use the new head printing on the old body. (On the other hand, in the US, the similarly updated red Imperial Guards leader figure was consistently said to be the same character as the blue Imperial Soldier Governor Broadside, and I accepted that without question!) But there are other factors too: Red Beard appears consistently from 1989-1997 dressed in a coat, fancy scarf, and with a peg leg. The ragged look of the redshirt figure doesn't really match the character's established look. Plus, the red shirt figure appeared with and without peg legs and with pants of all colors, so it seemed that he was more of a generic pirate figure than Red Beard; likely representing a bunch of different pirates rather than just a singular character. His last appearance, as Mister Phes pointed out, was in the Red Beard Runner with Red Beard, which seems to clinch the whole thing. I never thought much about Red Beard being the captain of the Renegade Runner as I assumed he was the head of all the LEGO Pirates at that point--with a small fleet, he could be in charge of any ship without actually being in the set. In the March-April 1996 issue of LEGO Mania Magazine the red shirt pirate is called Jake "the Snake" Blake, which was the first time, as far as I can tell, that a variant of the figure was given a character name in the US. It wasn't until I started looking around on the Internet years later that I learned that the marketing materials overseas had made a much bigger deal about the 1992 wave, calling the Imperial Guard leader Admiral Woodhouse and the red shirt pirate Captain Ironhook (or Blackbeard in some countries). Whenever the Ironhook name appears, it's always to differentiate him from Roger, so I doubt that a new nickname and mis-translation would have resulted in one character being split into two. More likely, as Tazakkk points out, the occasions when Roger and Ironhook are presented as the same character as you've discovered in the 1994 Bricks and Pieces, were a result of marketing folks not picking up on the differences in the minifigures, or deciding they were too minor to bother with a new character, which is apparently what happened with Broadside and Woodhouse in the US. As with any LEGO backstory it's up to you, the LEGO Maniac, to decide whether they're the same character or not. But the idea of Ironhook as a distinct character from Roger isn't a fluke or a mistranslation, it's very well established in the multiple sources Tazakkk and Jamesster mentioned: the 1992 Bricks and Pieces magazine, Die Insel der schaurigen Masken and Piratensegel am Horizont audio dramas, and the Time Cruisers Klick comics. (The audio dramas even give a whole backstory about how Roger sold Renegade Runner to Ironhook and why Rummy from the Golden Medallion appears in that set.) Personally I like having as many pirate characters around as possible, so I love to imagine that Jake and Ironhook and Red Beard and Broadside and Woodhouse are all running around the Tropical Sea somewhere. TC

Ah, sorry, I meant that the virtual minifigure in the video game LEGO Battles called Camilla doesn't look much like the Camilla from the comic book, though they seem to be the main character. I don't think she's an exact match for either of the physical female minifigures in the Brick Bounty or Imperial Flagship, but she does appear to be in approximately the same style. From what Jamesster has said, it sounds like the character design was created first (based on the then-current sets) and then the name from the old Pirate comic was added retroactively. (I've also personally associated the female minifigure from the Imperial Flagship with the LEGO Battles Camilla for so long that I'd completely forgotten that was my own assumption and not based on any facts.) TC

Of course! How could I forget the monkeys?! I don't think the dolphins came along until 1995, though. (I ended up buying a Bellville set, of all things, from the US Shop at Home to get one.) TC

I'm afraid the paint would flake off, to be honest. I've washed some of the old tiny gold coins that way and the paint came off to varying degrees, it was almost gone one some coins. (I suspect the early years of gold coins wasn't quite as good as the later ones were, but I've been careful to use just regular water, if anything, ever since.) TC

By the time I was getting into LEGO Pirates it was around late 1990/early 1991, and while Pirates was still the newest and coolest theme, it was well established. The 1992/1993 waves really just streamlined the set designs and played around with the color schemes. I didn't witness the original sea change of 1989 with all the new molds and accessories, so when the Islanders dropped in 1994 that was my first exposure to radical new things in the Pirate theme. It was incredibly exciting. Back then there was no leaked images or internet rumors, so the first I saw of the Islanders was seeing the sets on the shelves in Target. It seemed crazy to have so many totally new minifigures and accessories, but the biggest draw was the crocodile. Up until that point, our LEGO minifigure animal kingdom basically consisted of birds, horses, and sharks. That was it. There were already dragons by that point, but we didn't have any. And because LEGO had basically no readily available green bricks at the time, you couldn't build a crocodile either--and I really, really wanted one. I was a huge fan of Fox's Peter Pan and the Pirates cartoon show, and had already made the best versions I could of Captain Hook and his crew. But without a crocodile, I was forced to use a shark with an upside down head. This is obviously a ridiculous solution, but I had no choice. The series was pretty much gone and forgotten by the time the Islander sets came out, but my desire for a crocodile was as strong as ever. The silliest thing was that these sets were released in our area just after my birthday, which is in the first half of the year, so I would have had to wait until Christmas to get one. But my younger brother was still little enough (4) that my mom would buy things on impulse for him, so I pretty much got him to get my mom to buy Crocodile Cage for him, and that was the first Islanders set we had. One of us got a King Kahuka somewhere along the way, and that was it for awhile. I spent a lot of time staring at the 1994 catalog, with its dramatic scene of Red Beard confronting Kahuka on a cliff with all the Islander sets tucked away in a lush green cove beneath them. It felt epic. Even the centerpiece of the previous year, the Skull's Eye Schooner, was just a bit of background scenery in this new Islander locale. I was equally obsessed with the commercial for the Islanders, which heavily featured the Enchanted Island bridge trap sending what seemed like dozens of pirates to a watery grave. (It was actually five.) I have a journal with pictures I drew of the Islander sets from this time, including a two-page spread with every pirate designed between 1989 and 1994 falling from the bridge to be eaten by crocodiles. In real life, the bridge trap is not that great and doesn't even extend over the water, but in my imagination it was basically the bridge scene from Temple of Doom, only with hundreds of pirates and more crocodiles. I got a Crocodile Cage of my own that Christmas. The next year I received the Islander Catamaran for my birthday. One of us got a King Kahuka somewhere along the way, but the larger Islander sets remained elusive. After the all-at-once exotic explosion of '94, it seemed like the Pirates could go anywhere. It was a little disappointing that 1995 didn't really bring anything new to the table, without even a single new Islanders set. (I now think that 1995 is an incredibly underrated year for Pirate set designs, but at the time it seemed like a letdown.) The Islander's reappearance in the Treasure Chest set helped, though, and the long shelf life of sets at the time meant that they were still a part of the line and lore well into the 1996 re-design. I had a bit of an Islanders renaissance years later, when I was in college. The Islander sets were much less expensive to get than any of the other Pirate sets, and I quickly bought all of them--for a time, 1994 was the only year I had a complete Pirate collection for. My best finds were a never-opened Islander Catamaran (my original had long since fallen apart) and a Forbidden Cove with the original box and a very large, very nice poster of the enticing catalog scene I had spent so much time poring over. I still hope to have it properly framed and displayed one day. Around that time I also found the European Islander commercial on YouTube, an incredibly cinematic 30-second adventure that put even my imagination's wildest memories of the US commercial to shame. Good times. TC

Not me! I'd love to have a physical copy, but it must have been you or someone else. Yeah, that all-green outfit in the comic was pretty striking. I've been meaning to track down an extra green pirate from the last wave to make a Culverin figure, but I guess I could just use the blue pirate shirt too, haha. TC

I was also able to get a couple of these from a very nice seller on Bricklink awhile back. I agree that they aren't nearly as nice as the picture made them seem. The coin really looks like it has some heft in the image; it looks like a real metal coin. Hats off to the photographer for making it look so good! Even so, they're a nice display piece and I was glad they didn't cost an arm and a leg to buy and ship. I'm going to get one of those really nice coin cases to display them in and no one needs to know they're just plastic, hahaha. TC

Wow, thanks for re-linking those images! I've been patiently waiting to see this for a long time. Looks like Foul and Culverin were part of Redbeard's crew at one point! TC

Wow, I've been hoping for years that videos like these were out there somewhere! I can't wait to sit down and watch. I LOVe the rocking boat effect with the SES. I wonder if it was an older display that was re-purposed for the '93 sets; it's pretty rare to see the '89 bluecoats sets with the '93 SES. TC

That's awesome information, thanks for finding that out! Explains why the minifigure doesn't look anything like the comic; since it wasn't designed with her in mind. TC