Aanchir

This is your site? Thank you SO much for archiving these materials! I have been referring to this site's magazine archive for YEARS whenever I wanted to look up Mania Magazines from back then! Unfortunately, since I was a kid when those magazines came out, a lot of mine from back then are lost or torn up. So being able to browse them online (as well as magazines from before my time and magazines from countries other than mine) is a GODSEND for researching themes that came out back before LEGO theme backstories and supporting media were reliably available online. Something to keep in mind is that a lot of the marketing back then (including set names) was handled by the marketing managers for each individual reason, rather than centralized as things tended to be from the 2000s onward. Even as recently as the late 90s, there were huge discrepancies between story details even in countries that share the same language. In the Insectoids theme, for example, American marketing materials identified the female minifigure "Gypsy Moth" as their leader. But the UK 1998 catalog identified the same minifigure merely as "Insector 2, a female member of the reconnaissance crew". The same catalog reuses the name "Aquanauts" to refer to the Aquazone faction identified as "Hydronauts" in American catalogs. It's possible that the identification of Redbeard/Roger and Ironhook as different captains originated with some similar discrepancy. EDIT: Also, just noticed some names on this site that haven't been brought up in this thread — http://www.miniland.nl/LEGOclub/Bricks en pieces spring 1994.htm gives King Kahuka's UK localized name as Chief Quextil, and http://www.miniland.nl/LEGOclub/Bricks en pieces may june 1996.htm lists the green-clad Imperial Armada figure as Captain Valiant and the armored, red-clad Imperial Armada figure as Sergeant Speedy. EDIT 2: Also, http://www.miniland.nl/LEGOclub/lego mania magazine eng.htm lists Spinoza and Popsy's US localized names as Coco and Squawks.

Good review! I think the lack of the articulated hind legs on the wolf probably stems from how difficult the triple tail would make it to reuse for other animals in future sets. All the big cats in recent City sets (including the Smilodon you compare the wolf with in your review) share the same body segments, and all but the Smilodon share the same head. All that reuse helps to offset the cost of having so many new molds. But the wolf in this set appears ONLY in this set so far, and while the head may appear in other sets or themes in future years, the same can't be said for its hindquarters. The price of this set is already higher than similar-sized Ninjago sets due to these animal molds, and I doubt it could have absorbed two more new molds (left and right sections for a third body segment) without further raising the price. You can compare this with the camel from the Prince of Persia. Unlike the LEGO cows and horses that already existed, it lacked neck articulation — presumably because LEGO didn't expect many themes besides Prince of Persia needing a camel in the near future. Likewise, the Thestral and Hippogriff from recent Harry Potter/Fantastic Beasts sets and Wooly Mammoth from recent City sets are less articulated than many similar-sized creatures since their molds would be difficult to reuse in as many future sets and themes as the molds for big cats, bears, dinosaurs, or horses. Re: the talk about how gruesome undead minifigs should/shouldn't be, I think there's a few things about them that might make injuries or necrosis tame enough for many kids to handle. First, kids often tend to think of zombies and undead as imaginary fantasy monsters, so they don't tend to convey the same "yikes, what if this happened to me?" reaction as if a similarly gruesome injury were depicted on a cadaver or hospital patient minifigure. Second, the cartoonishness of the minifigure tends to offset some of the grotesqueness that these sorts of injuries or this sort of decay might have in a live-action zombie movie. The simplified textures and colors make things like torn flesh a lot less visceral than it would be in a medium where it had a more believably tactile appearance.

No reason to worry about that just yet, when we still have no specific info on ANY of the Minions or Trolls sets. After all, this year's Toy Story 4 sets include one that could be based on just about any of the movies (https://brickset.com/sets/10766-1/Woody-RC). Likewise with the 2017 Cars 3 sets. These upcoming sequel-based licenses could easily be the same way.

It's funny to see people wishing for a theme to be discontinued before it's introduced, not to mention before we have info about even a single one of its sets. Meanwhile, people lament that LEGO gave up on licensed themes like The Lord of the Rings, Scooby-Doo, Indiana Jones, and Pirates of the Caribbean (as well as non-licensed themes like Pirates, Monster Fighters, and Castle) so abruptly!

New parts for June are now listed on Brickset! Lots of cool new molds that have already been brought up but also lots of nifty and versatile recolors for existing elements. Check them out! https://brickset.com/parts/new-02-06-19/

Interesting… wouldn't have necessarily expected LEGO to get a second animated movie license in addition to the already-confirmed Trolls 2 license. But this certainly helps them to diversify their risks, and there's no doubt this is a highly marketable brand (at least in the United States). It also fits with LEGO's established pattern of acquiring licenses for sequels and spin-offs to well-known and successful IPs rather than taking risks on brand-new and unproven ones. I don't have much excitement for this personally, since I've only seen the first Despicable Me movie and none of the Minions movies. But I suspect there's a decent audience for this license, especially among kids who haven't been around long enough or become jaded enough to get tired of seeing the same characters so pervasively marketed the way many adults do.

Ooh, that harbor is quite lovely, and while it's a bit large it doesn't seem unreasonably so. I also appreciate that the designer demonstrated restraint with the types of parts and building techniques they used. Supported!

Truth be told, that's why I'm especially grateful they gave him a new one now that they have the opportunity, same as how I'm grateful that the physical minifigures of Shade and Ash were improvements on their original torso designs from the TV show. There have been a LOT of instances where LEGO character graphics originally created for TV shows, video games, or direct-to-DVD movies have been mediocre, awkward, or even just lacking in distinctiveness, and it'd be lame for the physical minifigures to exactly duplicate those attributes purely in the name of remaining "screen-accurate". Especially when costume changes are so easy to justify in canon. :P

Just because older space themes didn’t have working shooters doesn’t mean they were peaceful in either appearance or intent. Even in the 80s and early 90s many ships were bristling with laser cannons. For example: https://brickset.com/sets/6980-1/Galaxy-Commander https://brickset.com/sets/6872-1/Xenon-X-Craft https://brickset.com/sets/6875-1/Hovercraft https://brickset.com/sets/6932-1/Stardefender-200 https://brickset.com/sets/6781-1/SP-Striker https://brickset.com/sets/6810-1/Laser-Ranger https://brickset.com/sets/6878-1/Sub-Orbital-Guardian Even LEGO’s own history site (https://www.lego.com/en-us/themes/lego-history/articles/lego-space-840679f3440c4de8ba6ce7783708808a) acknowledges this: EDIT: whoops, messed up my quote box and can’t fix it on mobile. The quoted content ends after Knudsen’s statement, everything past that is my own thoughts.

Certainly they could! It's just that such a theme would probably end up a lot different than Classic Space since they would be minimizing the emphasis on conflict for a very different reason than they did back then. For example, if they were to make a girl-targeted space theme, it could very well end up focusing on a more optimistic, aspirational vision of a future life among the stars, rather than on an aggressive, high-stakes struggle for survival in a place that feels nothing like home. Likewise, if Benny were to get a spin-off cartoon with its own tie-in theme like Unikitty has, I could see it having a greater focus on space adventure hijinks with new surprises around every corner than on a core good vs. evil conflict that drives the story forward. Either of these scenarios could also be conducive to very different sorts of sets than the Space theme has traditionally had — instead of focusing strictly on faction-specific vehicles and only depicting the setting in actual bricks to give those factions a base of operations, a more lighthearted space exploration premise would allow a lot more room f or sets representing different planetary environments and the characters that inhabit them. But avoiding conflict out of some belief that kids acting out conflict scenarios in play will make them more belligerent or aggressive? Or the idea that a toy even touching on concepts like war and death in a fantasy setting will desensitize kids to their real-world severity? Or that showing toy characters looking sad or angry will make kids grow up to be sad or angry? LEGO's moved far beyond all those naive assumptions. And this isn't just a matter of LEGO relinquishing their lofty goals of being a wholesome, healthy childhood experience in the face of societal pressure, but rather, realizing that their notion of what forms of play were healthy or unhealthy was flawed to begin with. Allowing room for conflict, danger, and negative emotions in kids' pretend play and storytelling allows them a safe space to learn to understand why conficts and negative emotions happen and how they might respond to conflict scenarios or negative emotions in their own lives.

*shrug* Who knows? The sets for the Systar System and Classic Space factions in The LEGO Movie 2 theme are pretty light on conflict (Sweet Mayhem has a laser gun, but so did plenty of Classic Space astronauts and ships). And there have been plenty of other recent themes that are are just as nonviolent as themes of the 1980s (if not more so), such as Friends, Mixels, Elves, Unikitty, and Hidden Side. With all that in mind, I think the chances of a low-conflict LEGO Space theme might be stronger today than they were from the mid-80s to the late naughts. Of course, it's still unlikely to expect a sci-fi theme without ANY conflict — after all, concepts like ray guns and alien invaders have been a staple of the sci-fi genre since the late 19th century, long before humanity achieved spaceflight! Truth be told, the only reason Classic Space even had the slightest semblance of nonviolence is that back in the late 70s and early 80s, LEGO's opinions on violence in toys were preposterously extreme and often counterintuitive — they considered toy swords and axes fair game, but considered creating a LEGO skeleton a borderline firable offense, and took years to accept that smiley-faced astronauts in black spacesuits wouldn't be "too scary" for kids. Now that LEGO has evolved beyond those kind of inflexible attitudes, they don't really have any reason to completely eschew conflict in their fantasy themes, let alone to avoid calling imaginary weapons what they are.

I can't say I'd agree there… after all, the first City Space sets came out in 2011, when Star Wars was still in hiatus between movie trilogies and LEGO Space themes were still active. And those were hardly any less futuristic/cutting-edge for their time than these are (note that despite the name of this subtheme, most of the sets focus on fairly well-established technologies like space stations and rockets, or on test/training scenarios for up-and-coming technologies). Since then, Space-related City sets have been on a four-year refresh cycle, same as Arctic, and have fallen neatly within the "science/exploration" category of subthemes that have appeared every year since 2014. None of those trends seem like they could be linked to the activity or inactivity of the LEGO Star Wars or LEGO Space themes — rather, they seem to tie in more with the recent trendiness of toys that relate to real-world STEM fields, a trend that has also been apparent within other LEGO themes like Creator, Ideas, Friends. Even other parts of the City theme reflect this bigger trend, such as the addition of robotic or remote-operated drones to recent Fire and Police sets or the addition of geologists to recent Mining sets. I'd liken it more to other big sets from the Town subtheme such as 60204 City Hospital 60200 Capital City, 60097 City Square, 60026 Town Square, etc. Unlike a People Pack, this set has much more substantial non-minifigure contents like vehicles and structures, and can probably be expected to cost $100 or more.

I don't think any of us can know for a fact what LEGO is or isn't doing this year when there's still so much that hasn't been announced. That said, I think a lot of times people have unrealistic expectations of how many of their anniversaries LEGO can really justify a big promotional campaign for. They've been around for decades and introduced easily over 100 themes during that time. So they have to be somewhat selective about which anniversaries to focus on. For the most part their major anniversary celebrations seem to meet at least these three criteria: It's an active theme/series/category that will be getting new products that year one way or another It's the anniversary of something that has maintained a fairly stable presence from its launch to the present day ("20 years of X" packs more punch than "20 years since X") Its introduction was a significant "first" even beyond the context of that particular theme. Loosen those criteria and they could quickly wind up with dozens of anniversaries to commemorate each year! I'm not saying LEGO Pirates sets wasn't a big deal — but so were the LEGO brand name (75 years old this year), the Automatic Binding Brick (70 years old this year), LEGO windows and doors (65 years old this year), LEGO sets with instruction manuals (55 years old this year), LEGO 12V trains (50 years old this year), the LEGO "Maxifig" (45 years old this year), LEGO Fabuland (40 years old this year), LEGO Belville (25 years old this year), LEGO watches and buildable action figures (20 years old this year), etc. Celebrating so many anniversaries every year based simply on how long ago they happened (rather than how long they lasted) could end up reducing excitement for the bigger, more extensive milestones LEGO tends to celebrate like when they successfully maintain a single system of parts, a single figure standard, a single theme, a single brand name, or a single brand partnership for however many decades.

I don't see why it should be. It's not as though this is somehow a new problem or an issue with "kids these days". Hand eye coordination and other visual-spatial skills that some adults might take for granted take years of experience to fully develop. It's similar to how a young beginner artist will typically have trouble drawing or sculpting a figure in a lifelike pose than a more experienced professional. If a seven-year-old or eight-year-old can't reliably show you what a lifelike, balanced pose ought to look like in two dimensions when there's no actual weight that will make the joints shift out of position when they lift their pencil, you can't expect them to have an easier time achieving a lifelike, balanced pose with a figure that DOES have real weight and flexibility, and won't just reliably stay where you left it if somebody bumps against the surface you set it down on. Another thing to point out about the whole articulation vs. stability debate — a lot of major action figure brands (whether they're premium-quality ones like Marvel Legends and Star Wars: The Black Series with three or more points of articulation per limb, or cheaper, more basic ones like the old "The Real Ghostbusters" figures that had no knees OR ankles) have to include a "some poses may require hand support" disclaimer on their packaging and advertising materials. Because frankly, instability issues with bipedal figures are not unique to building toys. It's just that as @Lyichir pointed out, normal action figures tend to have much more securely fastened components than toys that are designed to assembled and disassembled over and over — it's no big deal if they tend to fall over, even if it means crashing off a high shelf. For that matter, outside of toys, there's a reason why so few mammals besides humans spend most of their waking lives walking upright on two legs. It's the same reason that babies learn to crawl before they learn to walk, the same reason that elderly people are prone to falling over, and the same reason that making bipedal walking vehicles or robots in real life is so much harder than adding more legs or simply using wheels. A bipedal structure like ours is inherently unstable! Most of the time, even standing upright on two legs without falling over or having anything to lean against takes frequent, precise adjustments in our balance. That's why you can get tired from standing for a long time even if you're not actually walking anywhere! So something like a humanoid toy or statue without intuitive, self-propelled movement like ours needs a lot more stability considerations than something like a model house or car that has a less failure-prone structure and weight distribution to begin with.

Nope, far from it! This thread is mostly speaking hypothetically about if LEGO ever decided to do a similar wave of sets in the future.

I'm glad I'm not the only person whose interest in specific parts often comes from stuff having personal significance to non-LEGO parts of my life! I might have a different answer to this question as time goes on (because not only do my real-life interests and belongings change over time, but so do the types of things I'm drawn towards building), but some desirable recolors that come to mind for me include: the laptop piece in Medium Stone Grey or Silver Metallic to represent the MacBook Pro I've been using as my personal computer for around seven years now. one of the "hood with hair" pieces from Wyldstyle or Lloyd and/or Wyldstyle's folded-down hood element in Bright Orange with Dark Brown bangs to represent the hood of my orange jacket (then again, I lost that recently so if it doesn't turn up, I may end up replacing it with a differently-colored jacket). That, or in Dark Stone Grey with Dark Brown bangs to represent my current favorite hoodie.

I dunno, I think that the previous way of determining what counted as "extra" (in other words, what parts are used on the model itself) could be kind of nonsensical in its own right. For example, the Hero Cores used to be listed as "extras" for the 2012–2013 Hero Factory villain sets, because they were not used on the model. However, the Hero Cores are not only included in the official set inventories from the back of the instruction manuals and on LEGO Customer Service, but they are advertised on the packaging of the sets in question! So to treat them like they're no more important to the set than a spare 1x1 round plate or Technic pin is ludicrous. And there are many similar instances in which a part NOT used in the actual build is still an important part of the set's inventory, like bonus masks or collectibles from LEGO Bionicle sets, alternate minifigure hair/headgear in themes like Ninjago, the "60 Years" anniversary tiles from many of last year's Classic sets, additional rounds of shooter ammo in any number of sets/themes, and so on. Even with some of those older sets, there are examples where one or more elements from sprues were not used in the "main" build, but DID appear in alternate, combination, or inspiration builds depicted on the set's packaging, such as 6021 Jousting Knights or 6044 King's Carriage. The former even is labeled with the disclaimer that "models pictured can be built individually" — but if you bought a set that BrickLink listed as "Used, complete with box, no extra parts", then there are some of those models pictured on the box that you COULDN'T build accurately without versions of the feather not used in the main model. Needless to say, simply defining extras as any parts that remain "loose" after you finish building the model according to the instructions opens a huge can of worms. Even if this blanket definition makes things easier for resellers, since those types of parts are among the most likely to have gotten lost or separated from the set over the years, it seems like it'd be better to avoid all these other complications when the sets were often made and marketed with the understanding that they'd include parts besides what was in the main build.

Great question! I've never been super great at picking favorites, but I do love LEGO-related songs and have two playlists of them on my phone (one of instrumentals and one of songs with lyrics). Of songs with lyrics, a recent favorite is "Not Evil" from The LEGO Movie 2. I also love many of The Fold's songs for LEGO Ninjago, such as "Day of the Departed", "The Time is Now", "Ninja Roll", and "Enter the Tournament". Of instrumental songs, most of my favorites are probably from Jay Vincent and Michael Kramer's LEGO Ninjago: Masters of Spinjitzu score, such as "Ninjago Overture", "Falcon Chase", "Revealing the Green Ninja", "Taking the Bait", "Misako", "Temple of Light", "What Powered Zane", and Nya's water ninja theme from Season 5. But I also love Miles Hankins' theme to LEGO Elves: Secrets of Elvendale!

The torsos of Conductor Chuck and Ms. Santos should also be fun for train builders. Not a whole lot of super clear pics of them out there but they do feature the LEGO train insignia.

If it's any help, there's a newer version of that part that comes in Sand Yellow (dark tan)! If you don't mind the LEGO Friends style eyes, the Friends dolphin mold has previously appeared in Sand Blue with a different face print (no eyelashes): https://brickset.com/parts/6035448/dolphin-with-hole-ø-1-5-dec-no-2 Other LEGO Friends animals that could be suited to a nautical or island setting include: seals/sea lions (https://brickset.com/parts/6185476 and https://brickset.com/parts/6071282) parrots/macaws (https://brickset.com/parts/6055563 and https://brickset.com/parts/6211857) chameleons (https://brickset.com/parts/6056845 and https://brickset.com/parts/6086772) sea turtles (https://brickset.com/parts/6057015 and https://brickset.com/parts/6028753) an orangutan (https://brickset.com/parts/6052294) The summer Friends sets will also introduce baby dolphins and baby sea turtles! Like other smaller Friends creatures such as hamsters, they have more typical minifig-style black bead eyes, as opposed to more detailed minidoll-style eyes with whites and colored irises.

Reactions like this make it a lot harder to sympathize with fans of classic themes, even with the lengthy dry spell some of y'all have been going through. Just because a set or theme belongs to a genre that typically interests you doesn't mean it needs to be designed with your particular tastes in mind. Some of my favorite themes over the past two decades have been colorful action figure themes like Throwbots, Bionicle, and Hero Factory, and there haven't been any of those since 2016 — but I've never been outright disgusted by even the SUGGESTION of an action figure theme that isn't designed according to my tastes. And that's not for any lack of likes or dislikes on my part!

Was quoting a post from the sets discussion topic but on second thought moved my response here since I didn't want to derail that one any further: I don't see it as a "sacrifice", necessarily. Shows like Adventure Time, Steven Universe, Hanazuki: Full of Treasures, Wander over Yonder, and Star Vs. the Forces of Evil have demonstrated that you can have compelling, emotional storytelling in 11-minute episodes just like in 22-minute ones. And it's not like the people making the show are somehow saving any money this way — a season of 30 episodes that are each 11 minutes long add up to a greater running time than 10 episodes that are each 22 minutes long, which has been the norm for previous seasons. Networks like Cartoon Network and Nickelodeon have been increasingly favoring shorter cartoons like this partly due to more flexibility in scheduling, and I suspect they also do well online since they require both smaller time commitments from viewers, less buffering on streaming services, less memory to download to a mobile device for offline viewing, etc. From the perspective of viewers, it can also help make the storytelling in each individual episode less choppy, since commercial breaks can be scheduled BETWEEN episodes instead of right in the middle of an episode (it's often awkward re-watching episodes of Avatar: The Last Airbender on DVD and seeing just how often you hear a character say something, cut to black, and then they or another character restate what you just heard because people watching the show live need to be reminded what was happening before the commercial break. Obviously there's no guarantee of how well Ninjago will do with this format, but I don't really understand all the cynicism I've seen about this change.

Well, there's still the cost factor with bigger animals. Most of them require multiple new molds, whether packed separately (e.g. crocodile, velociraptor, etc) or pre-assembled (e.g. horse, bear, leopard, etc), which drives up the cost considerably compared to most standard bricks, smaller animal pieces, or even minifig pieces. And while these sets have introduced some great new molds, no People Pack set has introduced more than two or three new molds at a time. By comparison: the LEGO horses, bears, and leopards each required six new molds, since the legs, torso, and head all have separate elements for the right and left sides that are then assembled in the factory. This is part of why the LEGO camel from the Prince of Persia sets and the Thestral from the Fantastic Beasts sets have no neck articulation like the classic LEGO horses — this made it possible to design them using only two new molds each (three if you count the Thestral's wings, but their more generic design and standard LEGO connection points make them a much easier mold to reuse in other sets and themes that wouldn't require the complete animal). But even with that sort of simplification, introducing new molds for MULTIPLE new animals this size in a single $40 set, without plans to use them in other sets that year, really wouldn't be practical any way you slice it. There'd have to be some plan to spread them out across more sets so that you don't need to depend on the revenue for a single set covering the cost of all those new molds.

Yeah, there are quite a few parts with variants BrickLink doesn't acknowledge yet. Some that come to mind: 6191 vs. 10314: https://rebrickable.com/parts/10314/brick-curved-1-x-4-x-1-13-no-studs-curved-top-with-raised-inside-support/ 30663 vs. 16091: https://rebrickable.com/parts/16091/vehicle-steering-wheel-small-2-x-2-reinforced/ There are others that even Rebrickable doesn't acknowledge the difference between, like 61645 vs. 14740 (different connections on the underside)

I would assume the eyepatch, stubble, and scruffy jacket are just meant to signify how much time has passed since we last saw him. A future version of an adventure hero showing the toll their years of adventuring have taken on them is a fairly common trope, all things considered.