Aanchir

What a brilliant set! It's very clever how they designed the curtains to open and close. The box seats, pipe organ, and wall decor add a great sense of luxury/opulence. It also looks like the whole model can fold closed for storage and/or street scene displays. Andrea's signature color scheme she's had since 2018 (Bright Reddish Violet, Flame Yellowish Orange, and Bright Bluish Green) is well-represented here, but balanced out nicely by the use of earth tones like Brick Yellow and Dark Orange. I'm glad the designers included plenty of audience seating. While you'd need to combine the set with figures from other sets to really fill all those seats, the four mini-dolls included provide enough variety for plenty of play scenarios like auditions, stage prep, and dress rehearsals. And the ticket window is a neat detail for when "opening night" finally arrives. The various costume accessories and props offer a wide range of different "story starters" for kids playing with the set, and the SNOTted backdrop seems very customization-friendly. I'm curious if the set will actually include an alternate backdrop (or building instructions for one), since so many of the props and costumes seem geared towards different settings than the urban backdrop shown here. It'd also be neat if the backstage area included some "behind the scenes" accessories like a paint roller for painting new backdrops. Having taken a technical theater class in high school, I do feel a bit bummed that the spotlights are so simple compared to the speakers, and don't resemble the big cylindrical spotlights that I got to work with in that class. But I suspect that may have been a practical constraint to avoid any collisions when folding the building shut. Looking forward to seeing it from more angles — judging from what little we can see of the sidewalk and signage on the far right, it looks like the exterior will have its fair share of detail as well! Just checked there and they also list a piece count of 1154 pieces. Between that and the volume of contents shown in this image, it seems like a pretty decent value to me! I'm eager to see pictures of more of the Friends summer sets. It's very neat to me that there are so many sets focusing on educational experiences related to the interests of the five main characters — especially since so many of the sets in the first half of the year were more focused on the wider community than on the main characters as individuals. I've really developed a fondness for these characters from watching the "Girls on a Mission" animated series, so it's really heartwarming to see them taking further steps to pursue their dreams. When I look at these sets, I can envision all sorts of stories about the girls enrolling in these various specialized programs over the summer, and then coming together again in the fall to tell each other all about the unique experiences they enjoyed while they were apart. And those groundbreaking new experiences for them also mean groundbreaking new sets like the theater school and space academy for builders like us to enjoy!

I have to disagree with you about the relative quality of the two Midgard Serpent builds! While I'm a little disappointed with this new Midgard serpent's design, I stilll think it's a vast improvement over the one from the Vikings theme (and that's despite being a big fan of Bionicle, which the Vikings theme's creature designs took considerable cues from). The old Midgard Serpent's body was very knobbly, and got arbitrarily wider or narrower at various points along its length. While an effort was made to smooth its body out using curved wedges on the top and the bottom, its sides were left looking very gappy and unfinished, especially near the front where a Bionicle Rahkshi back plate was awkwardly draped over a blocky System assembly. And many of the old Midgard Serpent's joints were even MORE exposed than those of the new Creator version. The images from this review really showcase these issues. That's not to discount your points about the difference in price between the two sets, which is definitely pretty stark! But in my eyes, 31132 surpasses 7018 in several areas such as the serpent design, the improved curvature and carvings at the bow and stern, and the much more realistic mast, spars, and rigging. The only areas where I feel 7018 really offers "more" than 31132 are the number of minifigures and oars (there are no oars visible in either the finalized or preliminary images we've seen of 31132, which does worry me since that's a pretty major detail to miss out on).

I'm curious where else we might see the hair piece with winged circlet/crown… I doubt they'd make a new minifigure hair/headgear mold exclusively for a Creator 3-in-1 set, since those rarely even introduce new molds even for non-minifigure parts, and tend to have relatively little emphasis on minifigures in general. Perhaps it was developed for one of this year's blind bag CMF series that we haven't seen yet. The sea serpent build has an awesome head build and pretty impressive articulation, though I'll admit I might've preferred if it were smoother and didn't have such large and conspicuous gaps around its joints. After the gorgeous, lifelike designs of so many other large Creator 3-in-1 animals in sets like 31112, 31121, and 31088 this one doesn't quite live up to my expectations for this theme. That said, it definitely does help fill out the scene very nicely. That one was definitely decent for its time, but I wouldn't mind a newer mold, especially one that can be printed and has more versatile connection points. In any case, I'm glad LEGO's come so far since the 90s when the parrot mold had to stand in for pretty much all species of birds!

I can't imagine LEGO bringing back the cypress tree mold for any 18+ set. Set designers these days typically opt for custom-built solutions for trees and plants that large whenever possible. If today's set designers really wanted to bring back the cypress tree for any reason, it'd probably be for use in more KFOL-targeted sets (e.g. City or 4+). As it stands, the only single-piece tree mold that designers have continued using in recent years is the small spruce tree. And even for trees that size and shape, the designers of last year's LEGO Friends forest subtheme opted for brick-built alternatives instead. On that note, the Friends theme also introduced a brick-built design for an ornamental Italian cypress in 41379 Heartlake City Restaurant, though needless to say it depicts a much younger and smaller tree than the classic molded version. All in all, I think folks who want LEGO cypress trees for reasons other than completing old sets might be better off hoping for LEGO to introduce a good-looking and affordable brick-built design, rather than holding out hope that they'll reintroduce the original molded design.

Whoa, that's a neat MOC project! Unfortunately, it seems to showcase just how much detail the gables, doors, windows, and walls lose at a reduced scale like this, and it also seems like the interior would be really, really cramped (much as the exterior staircase is in the images shown). Truth be told, I kind of hope that this new castle looks at least somewhat more appropriately scaled to the Medieval Blacksmith than we're used to from other Castle sets, since LEGO may not have any better opportunity to achieve that than a set with a "premium" price point like this one. Plus, I'm a big fan of the sort of interior details that the Medieval Blacksmith excelled at — so I would feel a little bummed out if a magnificent royal castle set like this had to settle for simple-looking furnishings and fixtures for interior spaces like the throne room than what was provided in the kitchen and bedroom of a working-class tradesman. Unfortunately, despite the brilliance of models like the expanded Löwenstein Castle, their interiors are often limited to cramped spaces with austere furnishings, even when compared to some of the single-room "micro-apartments" from the Ninjago City sets. It's a lot less than I'd hope for from the home of a lord or monarch, especially at a TFOL or AFOL level of complexity. And even THAT surpasses the interior furnishings of many KFOL-targeted castles (at least those from the Castle theme itself — castles in other themes like Disney and Elves have often done much better in that regard). And while I know LEGO designers can create some incredible, well-furnished interiors even in a limited space (as in the case of the aforementioned "micro-apartments"), there's obviously a lot more freedom when you start out with more spacious rooms. Is it any surprise that castle bedrooms, kitchens, and throne rooms with a smaller footprint than a single 8x16 plate struggle to measure up to the interiors of the peasant dwellings from Medieval Market Village?

Yeah, raised baseplates certainly have a lot of charm, but they also have a lot of drawbacks compared to more custom raised foundations (including BURP-based ones): Flat surfaces that rely on set-specific prints/stickers to represent differently textured or colored details like rocky outcroppings, cobblestone paths, waterways, etc. A fixed size and shape that tends to play a big role in determining the size and shape of whatever sets are built on them. Thick, impenetrable cliffs that cut down on space for dungeons, caves, tunnels/secret passages, etc. . A high cost that tends to dramatically increases the price of sets that include them. In many cases, a tendency to break when stepped on (which contributes to their scarcity in the aftermarket). Semi-enclosed pits/dungeons that can be difficult to reach into compared to the interiors of traditional hinged and/or modular castles — I can't tell you how often as a child I dropped small parts like minifigure accessories into the dungeon of 6076, and had a hard time getting them out even with my then child-sized hands! As such, even if raised baseplates were still in use in KFOL-targeted sets, I don't think they'd be a particularly appropriate choice for a premium, adult-targeted set like this one. There have been many recent sets (such as Castle in the Forest, Skull Sorcerer's Dungeons, Ninja Dojo Temple, Flower Fruit Mountain, etc) that show how effectively modern parts and building techniques can be used to construct hilly/mountainous terrain without so many of the drawbacks you'd get with a preformed raised baseplate — especially in sets targeted at older kids and/or adults. And in general, I'd rather see designers push the boundaries of what they can do today that might not have been feasible in Castle sets of the 80s or 90s (whether due to the parts palette of the time, the design philosophy of the time, or just the target age of conventional Castle playsets) than constrain themselves too heavily to the sorts of parts and techniques that were the norm back then. As much as I love a good throwback, I think it's best when the end result attempts to surpass the old-school sets that inspired it, especially since that often helps it come closer to the idealized vision of those older sets that our childhood imaginations and nostalgic memories often conjure up for us. I think one good example is the updated Black Seas Barracuda from Pirates of Barracuda Bay. Its proportions, color scheme, and general motifs stay remarkably true to the original ship from 1989, but the revamp also includes numerous improvements to the ship's detail and historical authenticity. Some of the improvements include greater use of curved elements, meticulously angled sub-assemblies towards the stern, an increased number of gunports, and elaborate custom builds for the masts, spars, and capstan.

I think it's probably just White, though I wouldn't complain if LEGO decided to bring back Light Stone Grey (Very Light Bluish Gray). In the past, that color and its earlier counterpart Light Grey (Very Light Gray) were used quite a bit in mosaic sets similar to the current LEGO Art range. So there may be more justification for a color like that today than there was around a decade ago when it was retired.

Yeah, it's hard to definitively rule out future themes based on what would/wouldn't overlap excessively with current ones. I mean, I know a lot of AFOLs' first reaction to the Monkie Kid sets was surprise that LEGO would introduce another theme with a similar blend of mythology and sci-fi mechs/vehicles alongside Ninjago. And I know that there's recently been discussion in other threads of how often revivals of the Castle theme have launched the same year as revivals of the Harry Potter theme.

The red songbird is very exciting to me because while we'd seen the same recolor in some of the Mario sets, it lacked eye or beak printing (which would make it less versatile for builds where it's more of a focal point and not just background detail/scenery). Also, it's a generic enough print that it's likely not IP-locked, so could easily show up in other themes (which can feel a little more questionable in the case of higher-detail animal prints like some of the new cats). And in general, the "mini-modular" style builds in a lot of the Hogwarts sets (with individual modular segments that can be re-arranged both horizontally and vertically) are the sort of thing I would love to see in non-licensed LEGO castle sets. They've certainly gotten better at achieving an appealing balance of interior and exterior detail than the old-school HP sets of the early 2000s, which often had exteriors riddled with gaps or inconsistent color blocking. One of these sets also has one of the best "library" builds we've seen in official sets, with a nice mix of brick-built bookshelves and molded books that can be taken down and read, plus some tasteful reading desks. I just wish we were getting awesome customization-friendly castle architecture like this in a theme didn't turn my stomach so much…

Oh, yeah, I agree. I was referring to something more along the lines of Barracuda Bay's two display options. I may have misunderstood the point @Roebuck was trying to make in the post I quoted — apologies if so.

I think at the rumored price, there's plenty of room for the set to include BURPs or castle wall panels without them dominating the build or overshadowing the set's more creative and complex details. Even the Temple of Airjitzu used BURPs as part of its foundation, and a number of AFOL sites still ranked it one of the best sets of that year from any theme. For that matter, it's not as though Pirates of Barracuda Bay was criticized for using prefab ship hull elements that have been the norm for the Pirates theme since its debut! BURPs tend to be one of the most efficient ways of building up mountainous or hilly terrain, even if other parts are used over top to add textural detail. Building that sort of terrain with basic bricks requires thicker cliff faces to achieve that same level of stability, which both drives up the cost and eats into the amount of interior space "below ground" that can be used for caves, dungeons, cellars, cisterns, etc. Would it really be that hard, though? I mean, Barracuda Bay's alternate build mostly involved just connecting the large segments differently and moving around some of the smaller details. And since the late 90s, most big LEGO castle sets (even "premium" sets like the Kingdoms Joust) have had a fairly modular build with segments that could be freely re-arranged. Even ads and catalog listings for Castle sets of the 80s often advertised how their hinged walls allowed you to play with and display them in two different ways — either as a fully enclosed rectangular castle, or as a long defensive wall with an open back. So I don't think it'd be too far-fetched for this castle to provide instructions for two possible display options using the same modular segments, And at the rumored price point, there may be even more variation possible between those display options — such as having either one long curtain wall like traditional motte-and-bailey castles, or two concentric curtain walls like later castles.

Why are different boxes such a problem? It's not like other themes have never done weird stuff with their boxes. A lot of smaller Ninjago sets like the Airjitzu fliers or last year's Epic Battle Sets have come in boxes with funky angles or layered character cutouts or other stuff. The boxes for most of the 2015 and 2016 Bionicle sets had sort of a hexagonal cross section and a resealable flap at the top. Going back even further, the Exo-Force Deep Jungle sets in 2008 had a sort of cutout in the front of the box showing just the box border and the set, with an inset cardboard jungle backdrop a little further behind. Even the Super Mario starter set boxes are folded in a weird way that I can barely describe in writing without having one of them in front of me to refer to. And honestly, I kind of prefer the beveled edges of the boxes for a lot of Friends and Elves sets to some of those other examples, since it doesn't involve wasting any extra packing material, can be pretty easily flattened out for recycling or storage just like an ordinary rectangular cardboard box without the beveled edges, and still stack reasonably well if you have multiple unopened sets that you need to keep tidy until you're ready to build them. I get that it'd be weird if ONLY the Friends theme uses non-standard boxes. and that the beveled edges can be a little frustrating if you want to try and store assembled or semi-assembled sets in the boxes they came in… but I don't think having different cardboard box styles between sets or themes is implicitly a bad thing, especially since LEGO's shifted away from a lot of the other techniques they used to use to help certain sets stand out on shelves (plastic blister packs, lift-up flaps, transparent front windows, reusable plastic storage canisters with a screw-on lid, zippered foil pouches, etc). So if they DO move away from the beveled edges entirely at any point, I hope it wouldn't mean they intend to give up on more experimental or unconventional cardboard packaging techniques like that for good.

I'm not saying anybody should be perfectly happy with the current slate of themes, and I don't know where you get off putting words in my mouth like this or framing my comment like some kind of personal attack against fans of classic themes. Like, I love Dots, and I genuinely do think it's just as good a theme as any of the ones I grew up with in the 90s and 2000s! But does it perfectly fill the void left behind by specific now-retired themes that remain among my all-time favorites, like Bionicle or Elves? Of course not! It's a fundamentally different sort of theme, and no matter how enjoyable it is, it can't possibly appeal to me in all the same ways that those themes did. I wouldn't expect anything different for those who feel a similar (or for that matter, stronger) yearning for themes like Castle or Space. No matter how many great themes there are these days, that doesn't mean the current LEGO portfolio is faultless or without gaps. And frankly, I would LOVE for themes like Castle and Pirates and Space to make a comeback and fill some of those gaps! The point of my post wasn't to say that nobody should want those themes back — just that it frustrates me when that desire for classic themes like those is used to dismiss or disregard the OTHER original, in-house themes that LEGO has managed to come up with. Frankly, it tires me how any time LEGO posts comments about new sets from a product line like Ninjago, Friends, Monkie Kid, Dots, or even the Botanical Collection, it ends up attracting comments like "What is this garbage? Nobody wants this. Just bring back [insert theme name here]!" And the tendency to direct that sort of ire against the in-house themes that ARE still being produced doesn't help the cause of "originality" one bit. It just fuels pointless antipathy and generational rivalries, and pushes fans of newer original themes to see fans of older themes as stubborn enemies instead of as fellow fans of creative original set designs. Do you really want fans who first get into LEGO through today's in-house themes to feel the same bitterness towards adult Castle/Pirates/Space fans that so many Bionicle fans of my generation still feel today? Wouldn't it make more sense to make common cause with people who clearly have no trouble enjoying sets like Ragana's Magic Shadow Castle, Destiny's Bounty, or Monkie Kid's Galactic Explorer, and who might easily enjoy traditional Castle/Pirates/Space sets with that modern level of detail, complexity, and originality just as much? Most of the time I don't care about licensed themes one way or another. I just prefer to focus on non-licensed ones, and as long as LEGO seems to be managing to keep coming out with new non-licensed sets and themes (and giving plenty of attention to the non-licensed themes that remain active at any given time), the ratio between licensed and non-licensed isn't much of my concern. Sorry for not quoting your whole post, but it's frustrating to try to respond to all of it. The further on your comment goes, the more vicious and insulting it gets. Like… "trying to distract and blow smoke and acting like a cyborg constructed in some Lego PR lab?" Screw that garbage. Just because my perspective sounds like your mental image of what some LEGO PR bot would say doesn't mean it's not genuine and it's really ****ing hurtful that to be insulted like that every time you get irritated with an opinion of mine that doesn't line up with your perspective. I thought that you knew me better than that at this point. For that matter, I thought that I knew YOU better than that. All I was TRYING to say in my previous post was that it's frustrating how often fans of older themes act dismissive or even outright belligerent towards newer ones, regardless of whether they prefer licensed or non-licensed themes. It seems like it'd be more constructive and more beneficial to our community as a whole to try and appreciate LEGO's current in-house themes for what they are (even when "what they are" is something that doesn't particularly appeal to us) than to resent them for what they're not. I apologize if I communicated it badly. I'll try and wrap this up here because I also know that the further MY comment drags on, the more it'll just make you feel even more like I'm trying to berate or judge you for having different favorite themes than I do. I'm not, truly. If you don't believe me… well, there's nothing I can do to change that, nor to prove how much I DO enjoy old-school themes like Castle and Space and Pirates despite them not being my personal favorites. Sorry if this just makes things worse… i've kinda hit my emotional limit right now. I know (think? know? feel?) that you're a good person with awesome ideas and a great and thoughtful understanding of the themes you love most, and I really do like when we can discuss that stuff together in the sci-fi forum without this sort of ire. And so I hate feeling like you still see me as little more than an obnoxious, pretentious nuisance. But I'm doing my best NOT to be one, and I hope that'll be enough. if i'm still screwing that up at this point then maybe I'm not worth your continued patience and you'd just be better off blocking me.

Even if it's not strictly sci-fi, I think the set as a whole is plenty relevant here, if only by virtue of using parts and techniques that could be good inspiration for sci-fi MOCs. For instance, the Technic orrery is wonderfully simple and efficient, and the parts used for the Sun, Earth, and Moon are all simple and common enough that a MOCist could easily build a similar design in different colors to represent an alien solar system. The Technic ring used for the multi-axis trainer has also never been in white before, and even if that's a color some spacers might consider "boring", it's probably a much easier color to use in LEGO Space MOCs than its sole previous appearances in Cool Yellow. A lot of the holographic foil stickers in this set also re-awaken my childhood nostalgia for Exploriens, even if none of the stickers in this set are anywhere near as extraordinary as the minifigure hologram that appeared in that theme! For that matter, the figures in this set are probably also the closest to sci-fi that any mini-dolls have come since Sweet Mayhem from The LEGO Movie 2, and they even feature a variation on the Classic Space logo! I know that mini-dolls in general are probably not too exciting to a lot of Spacers, but there have been plenty of sets mentioned in this thread for less! With that said, I am a bit bummed that the set doesn't include a new version of Olivia's robot buddy Zobo, who was previously the furthest the Friends theme ventured into sci-fi, and sadly hasn't shown up in any new sets since 2020. I hope we haven't seen the last of him, as he's very cute and adds a lot of whimsy and humor to just about every set he shows up in. I also wish the windscreen of the space shuttle were a more exciting color (perhaps Tr. Bright Bluish Violet like the windows on the upper floors of the space center), since if there's one thing LEGO Friends and traditional LEGO Space themes in general tend to have in common, it's their predilection for bold, eye-catching color schemes. EDIT: The space food packets also have a fairly generic Classic Space logo on them, so they could potentially be repurposed in sci-fi MOCs — although I'd like to think that far-future space explorers might have more appealing food options than shelf-stable dehydrated meals and snacks. Come to think of it, I don't think any sci-fi space exploration sets have ever really broached the subject of what or where the astronauts eat.

Admittedly, the Space Academy's main weakness in my eyes is the lack of an external fuel tank and rocket boosters, which would probably have raised its cost quite a bit (between their parts and the need for a larger crawler transporter to carry the full shuttle assembly). But even then it probably would've still been quite a bit lower than the City launch center, considering the usual differences in price between these two themes. I'm also slightly miffed that this set doesn't include either a mini-doll of Olivia's dad Lucas (who works as an astronaut in the animated series) or any version of Zobo, who'd be a natural fit for the set's subject matter. So far, Zobo hasn't been in ANY new Friends sets of the past two years, which worries me a bit since he's always been such a fun part of the theme and I'd hate for him to disappear for good. And I kind of wish that the shuttle itself had a Tr. Bright Bluish Violet tinted windscreen, both because it'd match the upper floors of the space center and because fun bright colors are very traditional for both LEGO Friends and LEGO Space. Other than those drawbacks, this set is really everything I could have hoped for from a LEGO Friends "space camp" set! It's got training equipment, an observatory, an orrery, a model rocket, a satellite, and plenty of computers for mission simulations and monitoring, as well as multiple types of spacesuit. The aesthetics are also gorgeous, with an exciting color scheme, fancy holographic foil stickers, and some amazing "space age" architecture and signage. One charming detail I wouldn't have anticipated is the wall of space telescope photographs, all captioned with the name or ID number that astronomers use to identify those objects! That's a very nice touch with some genuine educational value. The little packets of space food are also a great new accessory. And I am amused to see that one of the computer screens on the top floor is displaying an image of the Lunar Space Station from this year's City sets! Fun cross-theme reference there. All in all, this is really outstanding work by the LEGO Friends design team, and it makes me very eager to learn what else is in store for this summer. Hopefully any sets inspired by the other friends' respective interests/hobbies will exhibit just as much creativity, detail, and care as this one.

You're right that we're in a very different era than many of us grew up in, but LEGO does have a lot of great in-house themes that weren't around back in those days, like Ninjago, Monkie Kid, Friends, Creator, Dots, BrickHeadz, etc. I often feel like a lot of AFOLs don't give these sorts of themes enough credit for their originality, particularly in the case of those that don't revolve around the classic minifigure. Also, even before LEGO really got heavily into pop culture licensing in the late 90s and early 2000s, they've never really shied away from automotive licenses like we now see in themes like Creator Expert and Speed Champions. Some "vintage" examples include the Town Plan sets and 1:87 vehicles of the 1960s, as well as the Hobby Sets of the 1970s. Yeah, AFOLs have been complaining about licensed themes for as long as I've been a part of the AFOL community. Granted, on the flip side, there are also loads of AFOLs whose primary interest is in licensed themes, including a number who only got into LEGO as an adult hobby due to particular licensed sets or themes that particularly appealed to them. So I don't think there is really any consensus among AFOLs one way or another about whether licensed themes are good or bad. On this note, another thing I've observed is that just as many AFOLs prefer in-house themes of the 80s over more modern ones, a lot of AFOLs also have a similar bias towards licenses from the 80s and 90s compared to more more modern ones. I see loads of celebration pretty much any time LEGO announces sets or themes based on "classic" IPs like Indiana Jones, Back to the Future, Ghostbusters, Doctor Who, The Lord of the Rings, Scooby-Doo, TMNT, Jurassic Park, etc. By comparison, sets based on newer IPs like Minecraft, Adventure Time, Angry Birds, Minions, Trolls World Tour, Overwatch, Horizon: Zero Dawn, etc. tend to be met with a lot more derisive comments ("nobody asked for this", etc) or treated as proof that LEGO licensing has gotten out of control — even when some of those licensing partnerships originated as fan-created, fan-supported projects from LEGO Ideas. And of course, a similar discrepancy often occurs depending on whether the themes in question use traditional minifigures or not. A lot of celebratory reactions to the Super Mario theme or new Super Mario set announcements immediately turned to scorn when it became clear that those sets used big electronic figures for player characters and brick-built figures for NPCs. The Adventure Time set from LEGO Ideas got a lot of criticism on both these fronts, as you can see in the Brickset news article comments. I'm not claiming any of this is universal, of course, or that everybody should be expected to approve of every theme. But it's a trend I've often noticed among a lot of AFOL reactions to both licensed and non-licensed themes. Even "Fantasy Era" Castle came out the same year as a new Hogwarts Castle set! Between Harry Potter, The Lord of the Rings, and The Hobbit, there hasn't been a single Castle theme in the 21st century that DIDN'T coincide with a new wave of sets from a castle-adjacent licensed theme. And yeah, in the case of Space, we've seen various spaceships (whether realistic or fantastical) from all sorts of non-Disney themes even in recent years — City, Creator, Monkie Kid, Nexo Knights, The LEGO Movie 2, DC Comics Super Heroes, Overwatch, Dimensions, etc. While the terms of a licensing agreement can definitely be revised when it comes time to renew the license (which in the case of the Star Wars theme last happened in 2015, I believe), there's way too many conflicting examples for me to believe any of the current licensed themes have a non-compete clause THAT broad. After all, why write a non-compete clause in such weirdly specific terms that it would allow for so many easily exploitable loopholes? I suppose it's plausible that LEGO may presently be choosing to focus on in-house themes in categories that don't overlap much with ongoing licensed themes. But if so, it'd have to be either a very recent strategic change on their part or an approach they're willing to compromise on, considering that Elves (which had a solid four-year run ending in 2018) often featured very similar fairy-tale subject matter and aesthetics to the ongoing Disney Princess license.

That's very exciting to hear, since back in the day, a lot of marketing materials identified the green and red forestman minifigures as Robin Hood and Little John, respectively! Of all the Forestmen torso designs, the red torso was also probably the second most common, and as such it seems like a very good choice choice of classic torso design to update/re-imagine for new medieval sets. While I agree with others that the video in question seems to include a mix of various sets and MOCs, it does seem quite plausible that some of the figure designs and builds that aren't recognizable from earlier setsmight be from the 90th anniversary castle, especially since for a CGI video like this, it would be a lot easier to repurpose assets from actual sets like they did for other characters than to create entirely custom minifigure graphics that would only show up briefly in the background. I wouldn't be surprised if at least some parts of the castle's curtain wall in that video are based on the one from the new castle (albeit possibly with some modifications). The new 1x4x2/3 brick with curved top would not be a super obvious/intuitive choice if the animation studio were just trying to throw together a castle wall from random parts. Nor would they likely waste time on details like the tree branch growing out of the wall on the left side that aren't strictly necessary in the context of this video. The sheer SIZE of that curtain wall compared to traditional LEGO castles is also along the lines of what I'd expect from the anniversary castle, considering its rumored price point! I'm less certain about other parts of the castle in the video, since many structures further behind the curtain wall are clearly copied directly from portions of the 3-in-1 Medieval Castle. But I don't think it'd be TOO far-fetched for the new castle to include a minimally-altered recreation of the 6080 King's Castle gatehouse, even if it looks a little incongruous with the more detailed curtain wall in some of the shots from this video. Certainly as a 90s kid, I loved seeing near-exact recreations of stuff from my own childhood in recent exclusive sets, like the Sphinx and Anubis statues in 10273 Haunted House or the Islanders mask statue in 21322 Pirates of Barracuda Bay. Recreating the whole gatehouse certainly goes a bit farther than either of those examples, but even in this video we can see that some detail has been added to some of the roughest or most outdated-looking portions of that set like the drawbridge, so even if this does end up being part of the anniversary set, I'd reserve judgment until seeing how it looks in the context of the set as a whole.

That double bladed part comes as part of a multi-pack with a bunch of other blade pieces that could also be very useful and versatile for arming historic and fantasy characters! And in a number of different metallic colors, too (though Silver Metallic/Flat Silver is definitely the best match for the Moon Warrior minifigure, and I love how well it reflects the figure's general crescent moon motif). That weapon pack debuted in the Ninjago theme so most are designed to resemble blades from traditional Japanese bladed weapons like the tantō, naginata, bisento, and kama/kusarigama. But a lot are basic enough that they could also be used for historical tools/weapons from other parts of the world. In particular, the hooked blade could easily be repurposed as a sickle for European farmers and druids, and the bisento blade could also work for various styles of billhook, bill, war scythe, or fauchard. The tantō could also work as a more generic knife/dagger.

As of a few years ago, Mattel IS the IP holder, and that creates some major complications since they see LEGO as one of their biggest competitors. The rumors of a licensed Transformers set later this year (an IP owned by Hasbro, another major toy company) suggests that licensing agreements between these toy industry power players is not entirely out of the question like it once seemed to be. But there's still a conflict of interest that would make it much harder for LEGO to secure a license from Mattel than from other entertainment companies that aren't also toy companies themselves, like Disney, WB, Universal, etc. It's definitely unfortunate — Back before Mattel acquired full ownership of the Thomas the Tank Engine IP, LEGO was able to create officially licensed Thomas & Friends Duplo sets, and I know that's the sort of thing I would have LOVED if it had come out during my own preschool years. Moreover, even if a licensing agreement were easier to acquire, there's still the issue of Thomas the Tank Engine's core popularity being with the preschool/kindergarten age range, as @Nabii mentioned here — it's hard to maintain that appeal with kids in first grade and beyond, who tend to experience a lot of peer pressure to abandon those "little kid" interests like children's educational TV shows, Dr. Seuss books, etc. That definitely also aligns with my own experience. It's great to encourage kids to stand up to people who would bully or ostracize them for their interests, but even then it's still extremely hard to overcome that sense of shame that comes from being told again and again that you're enjoying things that you shouldn't.

Yeah, Duplo has included fleshie skin tones since the early 80s, and racially diverse skin tones and hair types since the mid-90s. The latter first showed up in the LEGO Dacta (precursor to LEGO Education) set 9171 World People — which also included figures with curly, afro-textured hair, 15 years before the first afro-textured hairstyle for System minifigures (the afro from the CMF Clown and Disco Dude). "Evil corporate company that prey on childrens and their free minds"? What are you even talking about? Like most huge corporations, Disney definitely engages in a LOT of shady and monopolistic business practices that I don't approve of, but I wouldn't describe any of those as "preying on children and their free minds". Their worst offenses that I'm aware of tend to be stuff like like buying out rival entertainment companies to stifle competition, funding political campaigns in exchange for tax breaks or looser business regulations, obstructing attempts by filmmakers and showrunners to introduce LGBTQ+ characters and narratives, etc. While there were numerous instances of workplace sexism and sexual misconduct at Pixar under John Lasseter's leadership, Disney ousted him a few years ago, and has since made an effort to prevent that sort of toxic workplace culture from flourishing. I don't see any reason that the minds of children who watch Disney movies or TV shows would be any less "free" than those who watch Warner Bros or Paramount movies and shows. And with regard to LEGO, I don't think any of the specific Disney IPs that they license are any more harmful or any less "kid-friendly" than the IPs they license from other companies.

That sort of thing also happens with trains — which is why LEGO no longer sells locomotives, wagons, and coaches individually like they did back in the 80s or 90s. As skeptical as a lot of train fans are of these observations, that approach seems to be working out alright for LEGO so far from a business standpoint, considering that they still can justify introducing at least two new City train sets of that sort every four years. I'm sure Pirates and Castle fans would love if they could count on at least two full-size castle or ship playsets every four years, compared to the droughts between new releases that those themes have had in recent years! Yeah, the idea that LEGO designers aren't Castle fans doesn't line up with what I've heard/seen at all. Especially since LEGO has hired a number of designers out of the AFOL community. That love of classic themes like Castle is a big part of why there have been so many references to older Castle themes in the collectible minifigures over the years, and also why so much care was put into the design process for the Medieval Blacksmith. Even Mark Stafford, whose set designs have usually been more geared towards sci-fi themes and genre-bending "action themes" like Nexo Knights, was active on Classic-Castle.com back in the day, and you can still see several of his Castle MOCs from his AFOL days on his Brickshelf. For that matter, Matthew Ashton (LEGO's VP of Design) oversaw the development of the Fantasy-Era Castle sets back in 2007, which he spoke about at length in this interview. I realize being without new waves of sets from a favorite theme for years on end can be SUPER frustrating, but there's no need to assume that the decision-makers at LEGO are against, disinterested in, or clueless about the themes you enjoy. Unfortunately, a big part of being a designer is putting the stuff that seems to sell best and resonate best with buyers ahead of your own personal preferences. It's a true stroke of luck for a designer any time those goals happen to align and they get to design their own "dream set". And to be honest, I strongly suspect might end up being the case for whoever was assigned to work on the rumored 350€ castle based on the LEGO Ideas 90th anniversary fan vote! That's not the sort of project that a designer tends to be grudgingly assigned to — and like Barracuda Bay, I'm sure this will be a true labor of love for whichever designer is willing elects to turn a concept this ambitious into a reality.

Even before a single vote was cast, the LEGO Ideas poll stated that it was "a single new product for the 2022 LEGO Adult Portfolio", so I think we can say with confidence that it won't be geared towards KFOLs. That said, some AFOL-oriented sets DO include more KFOL-oriented secondary builds so that adults with children of their own can build the sets together as a family. For example, the Winter Village Collection sets' instructions are often split between a smaller booklet that includes some of the simpler, more kid-friendly side builds and a larger booklet for the main structure of the set. Even if LEGO were to do something along those lines for this set, the set as a whole would still be AFOL-targeted. But that doesn't necessarily rule out features that might not seem entirely "serious" or "realistic", because even adults can often enjoy when sets include cute and quirky details or references! On another note, even if the set is a Lion Knight/Crusader castle, it may still include references to subsequent Castle sets and themes. After all, all sorts of Castle subthemes earned a lot of support from AFOLs in the fan vote. And for comparison's sake, even though the main build of Pirates of Barracuda Bay was based on a 1989 set, it still included references to later Pirates sets and figures, such as a statue based on the 1995 Islanders sets and a couple characters inspired by pirate minifigures from the 1996 sets. I suspect the Knights' Kingdom 2 heraldry was designed to fit the characters' archetypes/personalities, not the other way around. The original four knights were a young hero eager to dive right into danger (Jayko the Quick), a burly knight who served as the team's protector and muscle (Santis the Strong), an older veteran knight who served as the team's mentor (Danju the Wise), and an athletic, rambunctious "noble trickster" character (Rascus the Clever). As such, their heraldry was based on creatures that represented those physical attributes and personality traits. And monkeys and apes HAVE been used as medieval heraldic charges (albeit rare ones) as far back as the 14th century. There were probably many more common real-world heraldic charges that could have been chosen to represent Rascus instead of a monkey (such as a raven, fox, or squirrel, which are also commonly associated with "trickster" characters). But I suspect the designers felt a raven or fox would have been too similar to the hawk and wolf they'd chosen for Jayko and Danju, whereas a squirrel might not have been considered "cool" or "aggressive" enough for its target audience. Let's not forget, Knights' Kingdom 2 was heavily boy-targeted — there wasn't a single female character in its entire run aside from the good and evil queen that they made up for the chess sets. That was one of my biggest frustrations with the theme even as a kid (along with the lack of buildable horses for the action figure sets), even though I otherwise loved the bright-colored heroes, mystical lore, and fantasy design elements. Knights' Kingdom 2 also changed a lot over the course of its development, as you can read on illustrator and concept artist Mike Rayhawk's site — the working title was "LEGO FUTURE KNIGHTS", and it was intended to have a Saturday morning cartoon style science-fantasy blend much like Masters of the Universe. Accordingly, it was replete with stuff like animal-shaped transforming castles and armor with heavily stylized futuristic contours. And much later themes in that genre like Legends of Chima, Ninjago, and Nexo Knights, it was aimed at older kids than traditional LEGO castle products. But as development went on, it was steered towards a more typical medieval fantasy setting and a more typical 6+ target age. Perhaps if the theme had remained closer to how it was originally envisioned, Rascus's monkey emblem would have felt less out of place. On an earlier version of Mike Rayhawk's site, you can see various early concepts for the theme's setting, and Rascus's whimsical baboon-shaped woodland castle certainly feels like a more natural fit for the character's heraldry than a more traditional medieval castle does! EDIT: Actually, come to think of it, I'm pretty sure the scorpion representing Vladek and his shadow knights is a rarer and more modern heraldic charge than monkeys. After all, monkeys at least were respected as a fascinating exotic novelty when first introduced to medieval Europe by Italian merchants — imagine being a medieval lord and being presented with an animal that resembles a beastly mockery of humankind, which speaks in comical shrieks and is as comfortable on four legs as on two! By comparison, to medieval Europeans, scorpions were just thought of as a particularly nasty, irritable, and treacherous bug — not the sort of thing a lot of noble houses would be lining up to identify with! Even among animal charges with similar connotations, animals such as the crab, lobster, and crayfish were more frequently used in medieval heraldry. I mean, I don't see much reason to think it'd be a full mix, but I wouldn't mind at all if they included references to other 90s castle themes and characters. It'd be very fun to see graphical references to characters like Majisto the wizard, Willa the witch, and the LEGO Castle dragon (e.g. as illustrations in a book or on a stained glass window memorializing a legendary tale of heroism), even if they aren't actually included as characters! And if LEGO did choose to create a new "King" character for the Lion Knights/Crusaders, there's no reason they couldn't take some inspiration from the Royal King from 1995 — particularly since in some countries' marketing, the Crusaders and Royal Knights were treated as two incarnations of the same faction (like Blacktron 1 and 2), and the leaders of the two factions as pre- and post-coronation versions of the same character.

I dunno, I think it's super charming. Yes, it's mostly the same sort of parts you'd find in any LEGO Classic brick assortment, but that doesn't negate the appeal of all the cute (and in most cases, instantly recognizable) "throwback" builds recognizing various milestones in LEGO's history. Certainly it excites me at least as much as previous microscale throwback builds like 40290, and a lot MORE than the generic "anniversary tubs" of the 90s and 2000s like 3026 and 4496. And it'd be silly to expect every set for LEGO's 90th anniversary to be some show-stopping spectacle with Creator Expert quality builds.

I mean, this is hardly a deal-breaker. I mean, LEGO City didn't have much in the way of media tie-ins either, until it did! And there's nothing about the Castle theme that would make it fundamentally incompatible with an app or a series of animated webisodes, if LEGO decided it needed those. A lot of people look at the growth of LEGO tie-in media as an indication that themes today NEED that sort of stuff, but I think a more accurate assessment is that LEGO has always promoted their themes in whatever ways they feel they can reach kids most effectively. LEGO wasn't able to successfully get into stuff like animated series or mobile apps before the 2010s. So the marketing of themes from the 80s, 90s, and 2000s was limited to stuff that was more in their wheelhouse at that time, like comics, picture books, audio dramas, computer games, and web content. Even so, themes like Knights Kingdom I and II had a pretty substantial amount of tie-in media for their time! So I don't see any reason to think that LEGO considers the Castle theme any less compatible with these modern sorts of media tie-ins than themes like City, Friends, or Elves. That said, you're right that the stuff we've heard from the Creator team makes it sound like there are no plans to bring the Castle theme back in the immediate future. And in general, I don't feel like adult-targeted sets ever really suggest anything about the likelihood of a full theme revival one way or another.

I never claimed any differently. But this is a topic about "unpopular opinions", after all — and I think it's plenty LEGO-related for me (and others with similar perspectives) to speak up in a topic like this about certain LEGO themes that make us uncomfortable, even if our reasons for that discomfort and the sort of changes that would help make us more comfortable are far from universal. So regardless of whether others here agree or disagree, I don't understand the point of trying to shut this particular conversation down for being "non-LEGO-related", when from what I can tell, most people sharing perspectives like mine are just describing how this issue is frustrating to us as LEGO fans, like so many other people in this thread have done about other issues. For what it's worth, if LEGO were producing a theme based on an IP created by Joss Whedon, I'd be bothered by that as well. It probably wouldn't be on quite such a personal level since I did not grow up as an avid admirer of his work, so didn't feel nearly such a deep sense of betrayal upon learning about his various abusive actions and patterns of behavior. But it'd still be a source of discomfort. And I don't think there's any sort of "slippery slope" in acknowledging the awfulness of awful people and acknowledging when it makes us feel gross, overwhelmed, or anxious. Frankly, I wish more of us could feel free to talk about that stuff instead of always treading on eggshells and expecting criticisms of a particular work (such as "hey, the fact that Indiana Jones canonically had a sexual relationship with a teenager while he was ten years older than her is super creepy, actually!") to be dismissed as some kind of witch hunt or "cancel culture" instead of just venting about things that make those works more difficult for us as individuals to enjoy. As I mentioned, I try not to wade into discussions of the Harry Potter theme at ALL anymore. And often when I do work up the nerve to say anything about it, it's because I am struggling, in my own way, to process and voice some of these conflicting feelings I get from seeing the new Harry Potter sets that are coming out. After all, they're often genuinely amazing in their own right — far superior to their counterparts from the early 2000s or 2010s — and I realize that I'd have been overjoyed with them if they'd come out ten or even twenty years ago, long before the author decided to broadcast her prejudices to the world! But I'm not the same person I was ten or twenty years ago, and I can't somehow "un-learn" the things about the series and its author (or about myself) that have brought about so many changes in my perspective since then. I wish I could live in a different world where the author never turned against people like me — even among her own devoted fans — in such a hurtful way. But then, I also wish I could go back in time and come to terms with my own identity much sooner, instead of subconsciously burying those parts of me until my 20 and forcing myself to try and be somebody I wasn't. But since I can't change the reality I've found myself in, the best I can do is try to make the most of it. And sometimes that means accepting that a LEGO theme and series that used to bring me immense joy now does the opposite, despite the products themselves being better than ever. I apologize if hearing about that sort of thing makes other people uncomfortable sometimes. But if LEGO sites like Eurobricks aren't about sharing our personal opinions and perspectives on this hobby/interest/passion we all share, then what are they even for?