Re: LOTR and the hobbit lego
Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2011 7:17 am
This is a great thing- the books are amazing if a bit slogging intensive and the movies were just about the best movies based on books possible without making more movies than books. That said, I'm going to lay out some cons as well as pros
cons
1) a lot of the best stuff is too big ( orthanc, minas tirith, osgilliath, etc.) they would have to be modules bought seperately
2) fleshies
3)cost- LEGO will probably charge even more than for other franchises because people want these so badly
4) selection- rather than making a few sets for each of 5 films they're making either 2 or 3 waves which means we don't get a lot of sets and I personally want to get my Galadriel, Eomer, Faramir, and Lobelia sackville baggins figs (not to mention a Pukelman, Glorfindel,and Ghan buri Ghan) who don't seem to be making an appearance.
Pros
1) I've wanted this for ages, significantly more even than a BF revival
2) In contrast with Forestboy's "no one will be imaginitive with LotR because of this"(or at least I think that's what he was saying if not please correct me) I think this will spur creation when people find shortcomings in the official versions.(all of my inspiration comes from thinking I could do a better job than whoever designed the orriginal. )
3)pieces- both potential and already in existance
4)non vehicle centric sets. sorry but it irks me so much when there's a line like the goblins in castle where almost every set was "look it has wheels and it shoots stuff" here we get some architecture. I'm guessing that helms deep will be a section of deeping wall and a few minifigs.(no tower, no horn of Helm, possibly some caves, but definately no hurons) So in order to keep it interesting, TLG need to make the deeping wall look good architecturally.
However the real wildcard is Gollum. He will be hard to do right because he will need to be both bestial and humanoid all whilst being short.
long windedly
-J.R.R-I mean-T.R.
cons
1) a lot of the best stuff is too big ( orthanc, minas tirith, osgilliath, etc.) they would have to be modules bought seperately
2) fleshies
3)cost- LEGO will probably charge even more than for other franchises because people want these so badly
4) selection- rather than making a few sets for each of 5 films they're making either 2 or 3 waves which means we don't get a lot of sets and I personally want to get my Galadriel, Eomer, Faramir, and Lobelia sackville baggins figs (not to mention a Pukelman, Glorfindel,and Ghan buri Ghan) who don't seem to be making an appearance.
Pros
1) I've wanted this for ages, significantly more even than a BF revival
2) In contrast with Forestboy's "no one will be imaginitive with LotR because of this"(or at least I think that's what he was saying if not please correct me) I think this will spur creation when people find shortcomings in the official versions.(all of my inspiration comes from thinking I could do a better job than whoever designed the orriginal. )
3)pieces- both potential and already in existance
4)non vehicle centric sets. sorry but it irks me so much when there's a line like the goblins in castle where almost every set was "look it has wheels and it shoots stuff" here we get some architecture. I'm guessing that helms deep will be a section of deeping wall and a few minifigs.(no tower, no horn of Helm, possibly some caves, but definately no hurons) So in order to keep it interesting, TLG need to make the deeping wall look good architecturally.
However the real wildcard is Gollum. He will be hard to do right because he will need to be both bestial and humanoid all whilst being short.
long windedly
-J.R.R-I mean-T.R.