Lord of the Rings Ongoing Discussion

[TheDoctor]

26 minutes ago, MAB said:

Sure, it wouldn't surprise me if they do a Hunt for Gollum set, or maybe 2 or 3. But will it spark a new range of smaller and cheaper LOTR sets aimed at kids? I doubt it. LEGO knows LOTR is doing well with large sets for the adult market. 

I agree that the market just isn't there for a full LotR wave.

The only way I see that happening is if the Gollum films are really something quite spectacular that captures the imagination of this new generation and prompts them to go back and watch the Trilogy.
I think it will be pretty easy to gauge the hype and see if that is happening (especially because I work in a school, which is why the Wednesday tie-in was no surprise to me. The kids were REALLY into it despite its mature theme)

I guess it would be akin to the Star Wars prequel/sequel trilogy introducing a new generation to Star Wars.

Regardless, a $1k set is not on the cards, nor are Dwarfs with Bag End.

[Arjo]

Hi, random question: how many in the lego lotr fandom also dabble in middle earth strategy battle game? The lego sets are so expensive (new and old) I am starting to wonder if mesbg might be a suitable alternative to scratch that itch… or use lego minifigs to play the game as neither are particularly cheap. I guess my question is how many of you have been down both rabbit holes and what do you like best/least in one vs the other. Thanks.

[TheDoctor]

Now that 'mid' legs are much more common and colourful, I took the opportunity to upgrade Thorin's company!

Also used new wigs, accessories and reunited Gloin with his walking Axe!



Also updated Bilbo's legs (fingers crossed for Dark Tan Hobbit legs included with Bag End!)

[Meaf]

On 2/26/2025 at 9:54 PM, Lordhelmet said:

The rumor for the Death Star is 40 mini figures too.  If there was a $1k minis tirith 40 mini figs is the bar.  I would be on board for 40 Gondor mini figures. 

I think budget constraints would probably keep the count significantly lower. With the Death Star there's bound to be a lot of reused minifigures, whereas only a handful of minifigures included a Minas Tirith set would reuse existing prints (aside from maybe heads). I think somewhere in the ballpark of 30 would be possible, but even then I'm not super confident in that number since Barad-Dur had significantly less than Rivendell despite being not that much cheaper. I guess that's another reason why smaller sets would be nice, though. They could definitely hit all the major characters even if the count was around 20, and then smaller sets could let people army build and maybe get some of the main characters if they don't want to shell out $1000 or whatever. I doubt it'll happen but I feel like that'd be a good way to handle it.

[Lordhelmet]

2 hours ago, Meaf said:

I think budget constraints would probably keep the count significantly lower. With the Death Star there's bound to be a lot of reused minifigures, whereas only a handful of minifigures included a Minas Tirith set would reuse existing prints (aside from maybe heads). I think somewhere in the ballpark of 30 would be possible, but even then I'm not super confident in that number since Barad-Dur had significantly less than Rivendell despite being not that much cheaper. I guess that's another reason why smaller sets would be nice, though. They could definitely hit all the major characters even if the count was around 20, and then smaller sets could let people army build and maybe get some of the main characters if they don't want to shell out $1000 or whatever. I doubt it'll happen but I feel like that'd be a good way to handle it.

While they may try to do something worse, I don't want to preemptively lower the bar for Lego.  As a company they should be striving for the best for their customers, instead they often take a lot of cost cutting short cuts (and their profit margins are not losing).  Lego has been decreasing minifigure value in sets for a long time now (Star Wars is probably the best way to measure given the longevity of the theme).  I don't think expecting 1 minifigure for every $25 of spend in a set is unreasonable (Rivendell hits that - and I am including the statues).  20 ish as proposed is around 1 minifigure per every $45 (which matches Barad Dur). While those minifigures were great, that set was short mini figures even if it was 3-4 extra orcs.  I vote we say Lego should set high standards for customer value.

[Balrogofmorgoth]

I disagree with the notion that there isn’t a market for smaller LOTR sets. Tons of people are begging for smaller LOTR sets. Contrary to what some people think, there are plenty of kids who love it, and that number will continue to grow with new adaptations like Rings of Power and Hunt for Gollum, not to mention video games. There is also huge demand for it among adults. I don’t think it makes sense to say the demand isn’t there. It absolutely is

[Cyprinus]

1 hour ago, Balrogofmorgoth said:

I disagree with the notion that there isn’t a market for smaller LOTR sets. Tons of people are begging for smaller LOTR sets. Contrary to what some people think, there are plenty of kids who love it, and that number will continue to grow with new adaptations like Rings of Power and Hunt for Gollum, not to mention video games. There is also huge demand for it among adults. I don’t think it makes sense to say the demand isn’t there. It absolutely is

There is some demand, certainly. But it is big enough to justify doing a wave of smaller sets? We won't know until it happens, so likely never. Could be that there is enough people interested in it, but could be that it is a very vocal and loud, yet relatively small group. Some people have been going for a while now how not doing Western is wasting so much potential and money, that people  really want it, and yet BDP western sets don't tend to sell the full 30k...

[Lordhelmet]

4 hours ago, Balrogofmorgoth said:

I disagree with the notion that there isn’t a market for smaller LOTR sets. Tons of people are begging for smaller LOTR sets. Contrary to what some people think, there are plenty of kids who love it, and that number will continue to grow with new adaptations like Rings of Power and Hunt for Gollum, not to mention video games. There is also huge demand for it among adults. I don’t think it makes sense to say the demand isn’t there. It absolutely is

Agreed, there is always a group of naysayers on this though.  Unfortunately there is no way to prove this without them making some small sets to see how they sell.  I agree with you though and believe they would sell.

[DonQuixote]

3 hours ago, Cyprinus said:

There is some demand, certainly. But it is big enough to justify doing a wave of smaller sets? We won't know until it happens, so likely never. Could be that there is enough people interested in it, but could be that it is a very vocal and loud, yet relatively small group. Some people have been going for a while now how not doing Western is wasting so much potential and money, that people  really want it, and yet BDP western sets don't tend to sell the full 30k...

That's because of a lack of decent minifigs for Western. There is absolutely nothing. And I love spaghetti westerns like the good, the bad and the ugly. And some people (like me) buy Western sets from Bluebrixx and Fun Whole  .They have a lot of western sets. But their minifigs are bad.

[MAB]

8 hours ago, Cyprinus said:

There is some demand, certainly. But it is big enough to justify doing a wave of smaller sets? We won't know until it happens, so likely never. Could be that there is enough people interested in it, but could be that it is a very vocal and loud, yet relatively small group. Some people have been going for a while now how not doing Western is wasting so much potential and money, that people  really want it, and yet BDP western sets don't tend to sell the full 30k...

It is a complicated problem, and LEGO have a lot of insight from two other big franchises - Star Wars and Harry Potter. LEGO know that (1) Small sets will take away sales of larger sets, especially where there is a relatively small group of characters and the majority also need to appear in the smaller sets. (2) For small sets to sell in regular retail stores, they have to sell well to regular kids and not just fans of the franchise. Retailers expect small sets to be fast movers. SW and HP sell well to 6-10 year old kids as well as older kids. LOTR doesn't have the same reach for younger kids.

Edited March 2 by MAB

[Cyprinus]

6 hours ago, DonQuixote said:

That's because of a lack of decent minifigs for Western. There is absolutely nothing. And I love spaghetti westerns like the good, the bad and the ugly. And some people (like me) buy Western sets from Bluebrixx and Fun Whole  .They have a lot of western sets. But their minifigs are bad.

I didn't say there isn't any market for it, it is just not big enough for Lego to bother. And you can throw every excuse for the situation you can, but at the end of the day the BDP numbers certainly don't inspire confidence in the theme.

[Black Falcon]

8 hours ago, MAB said:

It is a complicated problem, and LEGO have a lot of insight from two other big franchises - Star Wars and Harry Potter. LEGO know that (1) Small sets will take away sales of larger sets, especially where there is a relatively small group of characters and the majority also need to appear in the smaller sets. (2) For small sets to sell in regular retail stores, they have to sell well to regular kids and not just fans of the franchise. Retailers expect small sets to be fast movers. SW and HP sell well to 6-10 year old kids as well as older kids. LOTR doesn't have the same reach for younger kids.

Does Star Wars really? Sure, some kids get into the theme though their parents, and Disney tries to target more towards kids, but overall Star Wars doesn´t seem to do nearly as well to kids as Harry Potter does - with the attention spread over way more Sets than most other themes have. And given that we would have to expect a relative small number of Sets if the theme does return anyways, I don´t think it would sell that bad, especially if they do the right Sets.

[TheDoctor]

1 hour ago, Black Falcon said:

Does Star Wars really? Sure, some kids get into the theme though their parents, and Disney tries to target more towards kids, but overall Star Wars doesn´t seem to do nearly as well to kids as Harry Potter does - with the attention spread over way more Sets than most other themes have. And given that we would have to expect a relative small number of Sets if the theme does return anyways, I don´t think it would sell that bad, especially if they do the right Sets.

As a teacher of 9-12 year olds, I think I can offer some good insight into this.

Harry Potter has not ceased being relevant since the films were released, I can't think of a single class group i've taught since 2001 where at least one child has a HP pencil case or bag.
In between films or lulls in popularity, it still maintains relevance because the kids read the books and the films are always on TV.
I can (and have) done HP quizzes and most every kid knows the answers.
It also appeals to both genders.

Star Wars is very different.
It definitely has more significant quiet periods where I don't see kids talking about it or with merchandise.
It's obviously very male dominated (whether you like it or not) and the kids aren't aware of the EU books to fill the voids between releases.
From 2007ish to 2015, it dropped off the radar in my school. Obviously there were ones who would watch it with their parents and then a small group would be 'into it' for a few school terms, but it would pass.
From 2019 to now, interest has really died off.

But do you know what they NEVER talk about at all... Lord of the Rings, they just don't care.
It's huge to us, but I am frequently stunned and grounded when I found out they have no idea about Ghostbusters, ET, Bugs Life or Jumanji either.
LotR are LONG films which are very dark in places, they honestly don't have the attention span for it.

Most haven't even seen Shrek or Monsters inc.! (aside from the memes)
It's very easy to forget just how internet-centric this generation is and where they get their entertainment.
LEGO does HUGE amounts of market research before committing to this stuff and I can assure you, there is no audience for it in LEGOs target demographic for a fully fledged theme.


It's frustrating to see this endless conversation about a new theme when the interest just isn't there, that's why it's bundled with ICONS for adult collectors who do remember and enjoy the films.
Old and retired theme discussions become echo chambers where their popularity is significantly over-estimated outside this forum bubble.
It just descends into fantasy and dreaming about things that will never come to pass.

We're not going to see a 1K set.
I don't doubt that LEGO have been pleasantly surprised by the reception the new sets have received, but it's taken Star Wars over 25 years to get to the point of building a large enough audience of collectors to risk such a large set! 

 

8 hours ago, Cyprinus said:

I didn't say there isn't any market for it, it is just not big enough for Lego to bother. And you can throw every excuse for the situation you can, but at the end of the day the BDP numbers certainly don't inspire confidence in the theme.

I agree with this, but I'd like to know what 'BDP' number are?
Lord of the Rings is a 'mould-heavy' theme which requires great investment.

[zoth33]

1 hour ago, TheDoctor said:

As a teacher of 9-12 year olds, I think I can offer some good insight into this.

Harry Potter has not ceased being relevant since the films were released, I can't think of a single class group i've taught since 2001 where at least one child has a HP pencil case or bag.
In between films or lulls in popularity, it still maintains relevance because the kids read the books and the films are always on TV.
I can (and have) done HP quizzes and most every kid knows the answers.
It also appeals to both genders.

Star Wars is very different.
It definitely has more significant quiet periods where I don't see kids talking about it or with merchandise.
It's obviously very male dominated (whether you like it or not) and the kids aren't aware of the EU books to fill the voids between releases.
From 2007ish to 2015, it dropped off the radar in my school. Obviously there were ones who would watch it with their parents and then a small group would be 'into it' for a few school terms, but it would pass.
From 2019 to now, interest has really died off.

But do you know what they NEVER talk about at all... Lord of the Rings, they just don't care.
It's huge to us, but I am frequently stunned and grounded when I found out they have no idea about Ghostbusters, ET, Bugs Life or Jumanji either.
LotR are LONG films which are very dark in places, they honestly don't have the attention span for it.

Most haven't even seen Shrek or Monsters inc.! (aside from the memes)
It's very easy to forget just how internet-centric this generation is and where they get their entertainment.
LEGO does HUGE amounts of market research before committing to this stuff and I can assure you, there is no audience for it in LEGOs target demographic for a fully fledged theme.


It's frustrating to see this endless conversation about a new theme when the interest just isn't there, that's why it's bundled with ICONS for adult collectors who do remember and enjoy the films.
Old and retired theme discussions become echo chambers where their popularity is significantly over-estimated outside this forum bubble.
It just descends into fantasy and dreaming about things that will never come to pass.

We're not going to see a 1K set.
I don't doubt that LEGO have been pleasantly surprised by the reception the new sets have received, but it's taken Star Wars over 25 years to get to the point of building a large enough audience of collectors to risk such a large set! 

 

I agree with this, but I'd like to know what 'BDP' number are?
Lord of the Rings is a 'mould-heavy' theme which requires great investment.

Just look at the sales data on BDP it's right there on the sets when you click on them it shows how much they were supported when they are being crowd funded.  All the castle stuff sells out the western stuff does not.  The train in series 4 was the closest to being sold out so far.  

Edited March 2 by zoth33

[DonQuixote]

Maybe I should give Lego a fist full of dollars or a few dollars more. So that they have the funds to make western sets. 

[icm]

But if you did that, would the sets turn out good, bad, or ugly?

[Cyprinus]

2 hours ago, TheDoctor said:

I agree with this, but I'd like to know what 'BDP' number are?

I don't think the exact numbers are shared, but BDP has a maximum of 30000 copies. The train from the last series came very close, but still didn't reach it, the General Store was - at a glance - around 80% (so somewhere around 24k copies sold worldwide), while the logging train was kinda a trainwreck in comparison (both pics were taken shortly before their runs ended).

[Lordhelmet]

So LOTR, are we expecting a set reveal this week or next week?  Assuming we will see it a few weeks before release.

 

are we thinking $250?  8 -10 minifigures?

[DonQuixote]

1 hour ago, icm said:

But if you did that, would the sets turn out good, bad, or ugly?

Well if they include Clint Eastwood, Lee Van Cleef and Eli Wallach.. Then it would be all 3 and I would be happy. And ofcourse some, natives, confederates and so on. 

2 minutes ago, DonQuixote said:

Well if they include Clint Eastwood, Lee Van Cleef and Eli Wallach.. Then it would be all 3 and I would be happy. And ofcourse some, natives, confederates and so on. 

Fun fact : 

Spaghetti westerns are filmed in Spain, directed by Sierge Leone and the music was composed by Ennio Morricone. Both Italian. All the actors were Italian. Except Eastwood and Van Cleef ofcourse. 

And Metallica covered the music of the music. 

By the way, this is the western forum right? 

[THELEGOBATMAN]

2 hours ago, Lordhelmet said:

are we thinking $250?  8 -10 minifigures?

I sure hope not, since both previous sets have had great PPP ratios.

Anything above 200€ will be a terrible deal.

[Black Falcon]

5 hours ago, TheDoctor said:

But do you know what they NEVER talk about at all... Lord of the Rings, they just don't care.
It's huge to us, but I am frequently stunned and grounded when I found out they have no idea about Ghostbusters, ET, Bugs Life or Jumanji either.
LotR are LONG films which are very dark in places, they honestly don't have the attention span for it.

Most haven't even seen Shrek or Monsters inc.! (aside from the memes)
It's very easy to forget just how internet-centric this generation is and where they get their entertainment.
LEGO does HUGE amounts of market research before committing to this stuff and I can assure you, there is no audience for it in LEGOs target demographic for a fully fledged theme.

The whole point I was getting at above was, that I do belive, that LotR as a theme would sell enough, even though there might not be much interest for it from kids. And sure the fan base is not as big as it is for Star Wars, but again, the sales for that spread over much more Sets than it would for a 4-5 Sets a year LotR theme - which wouldn´t be bought by LotR fans alone, but also by castle fans to get shields etc. 

[JohnTPT17]

5 hours ago, TheDoctor said:

As a teacher of 9-12 year olds, I think I can offer some good insight into this.

...they have no idea about Ghostbusters, ET, Bugs Life or Jumanji either. Most haven't even seen Shrek or Monsters inc.! (aside from the memes)
It's very easy to forget just how internet-centric this generation is and where they get their entertainment.

Thanks for the insight - that's wild. I grew up through the 2000's, and I feel like I had a good stream of "current" stuff (LoTR, the Star Wars prequels the newer Scooby-Doo/Disney/Pixar stuff, etc), and some shows and movies from when my parents were younger (Star Trek TNG, The Cosby Show [that didn't age well...], The Princess Bride, Back to the Future, Land before Time, Short Circut, older Disney films, etc). 

Now, granted - nowadays, a film from the 80's is going to be 40+ years old. That would basically be the same as 2000's me watching something from the 60's or 70's. Yeah, we did watch some of them (mainly musicals, older Disney films, and the original Star Wars), but not a ton - and there's some films from there deemed as "classics" I still haven't seen. 

[RichardGoring]

1 hour ago, Black Falcon said:

The whole point I was getting at above was, that I do belive, that LotR as a theme would sell enough, even though there might not be much interest for it from kids. And sure the fan base is not as big as it is for Star Wars, but again, the sales for that spread over much more Sets than it would for a 4-5 Sets a year LotR theme - which wouldn´t be bought by LotR fans alone, but also by castle fans to get shields etc. 

I don't think Star Wars is the fair comparison though. It has so much investment from Disney and a large marketing push to promote it. Plus a legion of loyal fans who lap it up. Indiana Jones may be a better to look at. Classic films that people love from quite a while ago, not really marketed towards kids, and not a huge amount of merchandise available. LEGO did, in my opinion, three great sets for it, and they were all on heavy discount or clearance not too long after release. And LEGO likely won't touch it again as a result. If prefer LEGO to take the slow and steady approach that keeps it alive, rather than going out in the blaze of glory of a fun wave, where we still wouldn't get everything that's desired.

[hikouki]

It's been a regular cycle that there is a back-and-forth post on this forum about whether the LOTR line should be a once-a-year expensive large set or a tranche of small sets each year.

Perhaps Lego's preliminary calculations and data point to a singular expensive set as the best way to recoup development costs? But perhaps now they are trying something different with two sets this year, both being relatively less expensive.

Over at the Marvel and SW boards, people are complaining at how expensive some of these smaller sets are - smaller piece counts, less minifigs for a higher-than-expected price. They are often not wrong. Will smaller and more sets mean cheaper prints and many more repeats on the figs? Will larger sets mean a greater selection of figs?

Honestly, I could not care less if they go either way, as long as Lego makes an awesome final product.

[RichardGoring]

1 hour ago, hikouki said:

...

Honestly, I could not care less if they go either way, as long as Lego makes an awesome final product.

Fair. That's ultimately what it's all about. For short-term delight and long-term enjoyment.