Legofan04

Oh

Wait I thought there weren't going to be anymore Superman sets this year? Was that false rumor?

Where would they have included it though that it would like it was hanging on the roof of the inside? Placing it beside Ernie to his right would have it outside the vehicle. They couldn't go the route of the 2011 model that had the head as a cylinder piece in front of Ernie as there is no room without moving everything back by at least a stud. Looking at pictures the of the first floor interior theres two potential problems. The first and biggest problem is that at the sleeping witches feet there seems to be a wall. If there is one separating her sleeping area from where Harry is sitting, then nothing in the front section can be pushed back. Second, if there is no wall and things can be shifted by a stud it likely wouldn't leave much room to sit Harry comfortably. If they had done it as a sticker on the window shield (like the 2004 version) it would have been blocking the view of Ernie because the size of the window. Placing a sticker anywhere else on the front of the vehicle would have it too far away. There just isn't any room for the head at the current size of the vehicle without compromising the detailing of their representation of the head. I'm disappointed the head isn't included since it is so iconic but it not being included does make some sense from a design perspective. This doesn't excuse Lego as it points to how flawed the design is ( even though this is the most accurate exterior). What realistic option was there besides creating the bus at a larger scale which would increase the price?

I just looked this up because I hadn't heard about this. This raises so many questions: 1) When did Clayface become popular enough to get a film? He a cool villain and well known but he's not what I would imagine first comes to mind when people think Batman villain. 2) What universe does this take place in? If it takes place in the Robert Patterson Batman universe I could see possibly getting a set for it ( although a bit of a long stretch). Seems more likely than getting a set from Gunn's universe anytime soon since we aren't getting any superman movie sets . I really hope that the rumor about that wasn't true. It just seems baffling that Warner brothers saying its partnering with Dc for the Superman movie means we're getting nothing more than the mech set.

It certainly is an odd choice given that the shrunken head is a pivotal part of the scene when lego seems to be striving for contributing all the needed characters for a scene ( Malfoy mannor being an exception because of how many figures would be needed). They could have put him under the indent outside of the interior. Although that wouldn't have been accurate either at least it would have been still included. The only way it could have been fit within the vehicle would be if they made the build larger. Besides concerns about how it would look, knowing Lego, they would charge more for it.

Looking back over the POA and the pictures of this set, it looks like it might have been a trade-off for the accuracy of the design. Looking back, the 2019 model is fairly inaccurate. The indent on the right side is far less extreme than it is in the film. Ernie is sitting in the center of the model, closer to the indent, and the set chose to put the shrunken head to his left rather than to his right and in front of him as it's placed in the film. In the 2025 model, the indent is properly proportioned to scale, which results in Ernie being pushed up against the left wall ( when looking at this model head-on). Looking at the picture from above, there's only 1 stud between Ernie and the indent where a window should be, with the indented wall onward being where the passengers are. There doesn't seem to be any actual room for the shrunken head to be put within the vehicle itself, and any other placement would be inaccurate. All this to say that it seems that between the choices of creating a more accurate design for the vehicle as it exists in the films or including all character elements, they chose the former.

Wasn't saying that Lego should be expecting us to pay such an insane amount. I was merely pointing out that people weren't liking the majority of smaller Hogwarts systems sets we were getting in the 2021 system. I do think Lego's paid attention to that, however whether they were able to collect that data in time to inform this batch of sets, or learned the right lesson about what consumers want, is a different matter. I personally loved the Room of Requirement but there were a lot of complaints about the lack of more stuff in the room, the height, and other things. Unfortunately it suffered from being based on source material that is hard to pull off at a cheaper scale. An Upbridge office would be wonderful. Imagine they would base it off the scene where Harry tries to contact Sirus so could include a reference to that.

Agree with the desire for smaller play sets, but did anyone truly like the smaller Hogwarts expansions? All I saw for the smaller Hogwarts sets of the 2021 system were complaints about how empty they felt or didn't allow for the figures to really be in them because of the gridded plates that Lego used (which were both valid complaints). The only two that seemed to get a positive response were the Clock tower with the hospital wing and the Girls bathroom, which although a good set didn't have much room to put figures in either. I thought there was a scene with the Felix Felicis but couldn't quite remember.

Oh, this is an interesting list indeed. - Herbology classroom: For $60 dollars it all but confirms a proper Green House Build of decent size ( since it'll be assumedly bigger than the potions classroom). This is incredibly exciting as by the time of its release, it'll have been 18 years since a proper Greenhouse. No, the one in the Astronomy tower doesn't count (imo) which was an odd conclusion. Would have rather had the parts to it have gone to the main tower or the budget going to giving us door frames that weren't horrendously white. The figures in this new set will be interesting depending on the scene they choose to adapt. What scenes were there besides the one with the Mandrakes? - Dumbledore's phonix is an odd set name. Although the suggestions have been a set similar to the Hedwig from this year, what if it's a play set? I could see them making Dumbledore's departing scene from Order of The Phonix, especially with one of sets being the Main Tower. - Aunt Marges visit should be cool depending on how they do Aunt Marge. I hope they dow both a regular figure of her and a blown up version. As far as differences between this an the last Private drive, I would imagine the interior to different. Given the scenes Lego would be portraying, it would likely include the kitchen and dining room compared to the family/sitting room in the last version. Also Perhaps it'll be the back half of the house with their black porch area she floats through and the back yard. - Monster Book of Monsters is likely buildable object. The only scenes it's prominent in wouldn't work well as a play set. Don't have much interest in that or the Book end. - The quality Quiddich and Ice Cream isn't as interesting sounding as the Diagon Alley set this year. - The Main tower is expansive but I bet it's going to look great.

I hope this rumor is true. I hate that Lego has been trying to create action figures.

I'm personally fine with them being closed up as that's how it exists in universe but I completely understand wanting to show off the classroom interiors. What Iv'e done with the potion classroom when its under the Great Hall is open the wall with the door. Depending on the lighting in the room and what height it's being displayed at. you can actually see the majority of the details. I think the problem is as somewhat else said, the sets sold separately wouldn't feel complete if they aren't more enclosed. Shoot people have already complained about that with the troll bathroom under the great hall that comes with the set.

Interesting that it can be placed there given that charms doesn't take place in the dungeon/ sub levels. I guess Lego is trying to emphasize how it can be placed inside of the current released sets. Looking at the pictures of the website I'm curious about whether the Dueling Club's fire place can be put in the great hall. The pictures- when it's put inside- don't show the inclusion of the fireplace. Can it be put in the great hall. With better pictures of the Knight Bus, I'm not sure how to feel about it. I like the inclusion of the sleeping witch and the surrounding scenery. It would make the set feel more complete if it wasn't for the seeming absence of the Dre Head. Speaking of heads, is Stan's head new? As tho the build of the bus I love the back with the steps and the curved pieces make it feel more rounded. It's odd though as the front seems a lot flatter. It still includes a chandelier but doesn't open up from the side. Personally i like this change as the side was always slinging open on the 2019 model

I think that kids on some level still prefer environments for their characters to play in but unfortunately the products being sold aren't designed to encourage that and society on the whole is moving away from that idea. As @Lego Nostalgia referenced above, technology is a huge issue. Kids' attention spans are being consumed by flashy enticing digital games and media that is purposely designed to overstimulate or be short ( as is the case with social media trends like TIKTok).Trends such as these have lead to toy companies decreasing the number of toys designed for imaginative and long lasting play; what's happened with boardgames is a good example. Not only are kids loosing options for imaginative play, evidence suggest that they are having a harder time with being imaginative (of course this is general and doesn't apply to all kids across the globe). In this context the disappearance of playsets or of sets with a lot of play features makes sense. The ability to stay focused and to imagine are crucial for engaging with these type of sets or having fun with them. The other large problem ( besides the ones I've already mentioned) is the gendered bias of toys and toy marketing. Many societies have pushed the notion that boys are active ad easily distracted while girls are quieter and more focused. I find this line of thinking to be a bunch of BS but it's the logic that toy companies have geared it's products to and thus their marketing creating a feedback loop. The toys created from this tend to be action based for boys and more imaginative/ nurturing for girls. Lego sadly has fallen into/ abides by this pattern. A prime example is comparing City and Friends. Both are based on everyday life but thats where the similarity ends. City is populated by vehicles and seems to be centered around police, firefighting, rescue, and adventure. Friends focuses on the characters' home lives and activities where they interact with each other. Superheroes have also largely been pushed to boys and although thats slowly changing in both the comics and film to be more inclusive, the products designed are still heavily biased. Brining the conversation back to Marvel, look at the sets being offered. The cars, mechs, and projectile shooters all lend themselves toward fighting and action. I would argue that this biased line of thinking has contributed to the decline of this theme as Lego has seemed to come to two main conclusions from it. The first is that its target audience won't want location based playsets ( eventhough that's not necessairly the opinion a kid may have). SInce these types of sets tend to have play features, they also require more imaginative play, hense the lack of focus on them. Even the Spiderverse set places some of its focus on the police car which can chase the villain rather than the building. Second is that if the target audience only care about direct action then the exact hero doesn't matter. Might as well just put Spiderman or Iron Man in it as the target audience knows them and won't really care about the rest. With all that said above, I wish this as well. It would bring some life back into this theme.

Interesting I didn't notice that about robes closing at the waist. Thanks for pointing that out and agreed about hoping the summer sets have the figure budget. They are trying to enlose the slide-in modules that are sold separately as Lego wants to give those sets a feeling of being complete. Not to say that the particular strategy always works although it it did with potions. However, potions feels far more complete - with all the interior details- than the charms classroom. Couldn't have said this better. These sets try to offer the best of best worlds and imo it works pretty well. I wasn't into lego when the original sets came out and when I pictured a return of the theme I envisioned sets more in line with this system: sets that were movie accurate and more scene specific. As great as the 2018-2020 sets were they didn't really offer this. The interiors, besides being overly cramped, tried to cover too broad of a range of things. It all had issues of rooms being too empty ( great hall tower and clock tower DADA classroom come to mind) and weren't scaled well. I think the inferior 2021-2023 castle system and the excitement over the the themes return have resulted in the 2018-2020 sets being put on pedestal. Might be a hot take though.

Want to actually commit about this point as it's defiantly true but I think this pattern isn't entirely Lego's fault. I think lego focuses on these types of builds not only because they sale to the kids ( although that might not be as true with some of the sets now) but more importantly because there isn't much else to base the sets on. A major problem within the past couple of years or so is the decrease in media - both in relation to superheroes and in general- for the 6-8 crowd which is one of the key lego demographics. Looking back to when the superhero themes started, and throughout the 2010s) there was so much content. Dc had Lego Batman 2 coming out and released multiple directly to dvd lego movies. On Marvel's side there were multiple cartoons including two for the avengers, Guardians of the Galaxy, Ultimate Spiderman, and even one for Hulk which helped to create a consumer base for these sets (regardless of whether the sets were based on the show or the films) among that demographic. When these shows started to come to end, there weren't many replacements, a trend likely exacerbated by the pandemic. Since then there has been hardly any content for this age group. For Dc the only show is My Adventures with Superman. For Marvel it's the Spidey and His Amazing Friends that the 4+ sets are based off. Both What if and Xmen '97 are targeted to older audiences having a rating of 14+ in the US which alienates many in the 6-8 range. With many being a tad young for the films and hardly any reading comics, there isn't as much of a market for them. It seems that Lego is trying to recapture this market by using the trends of what's popular in other themes and trends in media. The former leads to the generic sets while the later is probably what's driven Lego's venom craze. And the Mcu isn't really helping matters. With a prime market cut off from them Lego has to rely on older fans for the mcu sets. The older fans aren't being satisfied by this group of sets because marvel isn't giving Lego as much promotional material especially for it's villains so the primary villains aren't getting included. This is unfortunate of course as they offer something different from the heroes whose costumes don't often have many changes between movies and don't give the kids someone for their heroes to fight. Furthermore the older fans aren't enjoying the more recent MCU movies, something Lego has undoubtedly picked up on leading the company in the direction of trying to milk the infinity saga. These film battle sets then further alienate kids as they don't have interest in displaying their toys. Nobody wins and probably won't until Disney changes up their tactics for attracting and targeting an audience. All this to say is that there is more going on than whats others have labled as Lego being lazy.