Lord of the Rings Ongoing Discussion

[kuzyabricks]

5 hours ago, Roebuck said:

Didn't the post before say this was not leaks and that he will stop more or less leaking in the future?

 

Goonies and the Shire were shown which are VERY heavily rumoured

[Black Falcon]

8 hours ago, kuzyabricks said:

TandNbricks released a hype reel for 2025 and there was THE FREAKING BALROG. I am just praying it's not a GWP for the shire because that would be awful

You would think that a GWP someonewhat fits to the set it is made for, which just isn´t the case here - so I kinda doubt that. Additionally I think the Balrog would be much better suitable for a own set, as they can just use more bricks for it - and I would expect the bridge and Gandalf alongside them.

7 hours ago, MAB said:

It is presumably as they don't know anything else.

Yeah but that kinda is the point. They make vague hints that could mean anything or nothing. And kinda fit to several things, so if the Balrog comes, they will claim they knew it - and if not, well it was just a general hint toward more LoTR Sets.

 

[TandNbricks]

4 hours ago, Black Falcon said:

Yeah but that kinda is the point. They make vague hints that could mean anything or nothing. And kinda fit to several things, so if the Balrog comes, they will claim they knew it - and if not, well it was just a general hint toward more LoTR Sets.

 

😂 you don't know my track record then

[Black Falcon]

14 minutes ago, TandNbricks said:

😂 you don't know my track record then

Well not in depth but you are said to be quite reliable. And just to be clear, what I said above was about leakers claiming vague hints in general, not about you specifically. 

Anyways, my point still stands that it is hard to guess sometimes if something is related to a certain scene or just to point towards a theme. I guess since there was not just one hint towards the Balrog, it seems likely that it was indeed a hint towards that. 

 

[Lordhelmet]

The Shire and a Balrog would be cool.  Hopefully we get some news of Gondor.

 

[hikouki]

40 minutes ago, Lordhelmet said:

The Shire and a Balrog would be cool.  Hopefully we get some news of Gondor.

 

Ditto, ditto, and ditto.

[Lordhelmet]

Anyone have any part suggestions on making the blue wizards?  I know there is no movie reference, but I was thinking one of the following robes combos (Albus Dumbledor Robes from series 1, the D&D elf wizard, or Ewald from legend of Chima)  (Paired with beards, old man faces, potentially 20606pb06 if it can fit a beard). I also like the Dwarf Cleric face/Hair combo for one of them.

[wesker]

On 10/25/2024 at 12:26 PM, Lordhelmet said:

The Shire and a Balrog would be cool.  Hopefully we get some news of Gondor.

Hopefully the Witch-King Battle too.

[THELEGOBATMAN]

It would be insane if we'd end up getting at least two sets, because that would mean one of them isn't a 300€+ D2C.

[Black Falcon]

1 hour ago, THELEGOBATMAN said:

It would be insane if we'd end up getting at least two sets, because that would mean one of them isn't a 300€+ D2C.

Well I would bet we get two at least, one D2C and one D2C GWP ;). 

Joking aside, we still have to see though if we will get a playset or something else. I mean if we consider getting the Balrog it could be a Playset, a Buildable Figure or a Diorama.

[THELEGOBATMAN]

Still, it'd open the doors to us getting more LotR sets. The D2Cs are amazing, but not everyone needs or wants huge sets that are bigger than a human body.

[Renny The Spaceman]

6 hours ago, THELEGOBATMAN said:

Still, it'd open the doors to us getting more LotR sets. The D2Cs are amazing, but not everyone needs or wants huge sets that are bigger than a human body.

Indeed, hopefully the extended editions are kept in mind, that way we could get an affordable set of Alfrid's dirty cutscenes 

[Lordhelmet]

11 hours ago, Renny The Spaceman said:

Indeed, hopefully the extended editions are kept in mind, that way we could get an affordable set of Alfrid's dirty cutscenes 

Simple build of a catapult, alfrid and a big fig troll would be a great set.  Just need the gold coins.

[Sneakguest]

On 10/27/2024 at 9:06 AM, Black Falcon said:

Well I would bet we get two at least, one D2C and one D2C GWP ;). 

Joking aside, we still have to see though if we will get a playset or something else. I mean if we consider getting the Balrog it could be a Playset, a Buildable Figure or a Diorama.

I woumd like the balrog to be molded but due to legos last few years trend of only making molds for dinosaurs, I assume its very unlikely 🙁

[Black Falcon]

11 hours ago, Sneakguest said:

I woumd like the balrog to be molded but due to legos last few years trend of only making molds for dinosaurs, I assume its very unlikely 🙁

Yeah, I would think it is very unlikely that they will make a moulded Balrog. For that he is just to big.

[mtrsteve]

On 11/6/2024 at 11:09 AM, Black Falcon said:

Yeah, I would think it is very unlikely that they will make a moulded Balrog. For that he is just to big.

This is not correct. Canonically balrogs are at most twice the size of a human, or even just the size of a large man. Big fig size would totally suffice.

[Renny The Spaceman]

8 minutes ago, mtrsteve said:

This is not correct. Canonically balrogs are at most twice the size of a human, or even just the size of a large man. Big fig size would totally suffice.

Not in the movie though, it's bloody massive in that innit? 

[Black Falcon]

54 minutes ago, mtrsteve said:

This is not correct. Canonically balrogs are at most twice the size of a human, or even just the size of a large man. Big fig size would totally suffice.

Just that Lego Sets are based on the movies and not the books, and as mentioned in the post above mine, they are way bigger there ;).

[mtrsteve]

I've literally got the wide angle shot from the movie paused with gandalf and the balrogs on the bridge. The balrogs is standing about 2.5 times the height of gandalf. A big fig is STILL totally reasonable proportions for the movie balrogs, and arguably too big for the book ones. They just seeeeeem bigger.

Especially if you add some wings sprouting from the back of the bigfig, it would feel totally to scale.

Edited November 9, 2024 by mtrsteve

[Black Falcon]

20 minutes ago, mtrsteve said:

I've literally got the wide angle shot from the movie paused with gandalf and the balrogs on the bridge. The balrogs is standing about 2.5 times the height of gandalf. A big fig is STILL totally reasonable proportions for the movie balrogs, and arguably too big for the book ones. They just seeeeeem bigger.

Especially if you add some wings sprouting from the back of the bigfig, it would feel totally to scale.

Well, when I look at it in the movies, the Balrog is at least 4 times as big as Gandalf - and that even though Gandalf is closer to the viewer and thus should look bigger because of the point of view. Also when they fall together it looks the same.

[mtrsteve]

35 minutes ago, Black Falcon said:

Well, when I look at it in the movies, the Balrog is at least 4 times as big as Gandalf - and that even though Gandalf is closer to the viewer and thus should look bigger because of the point of view. Also when they fall together it looks the same.

I was judging off one of the few wide angle shots I could find where there is no perspective magnification occuring. So even within movie canon, that scale is present. I'll die on my hill. Bigfig scale is perfect for a balrog. Whether that's what you'd *prefer* or not is reasonable to disagree on.

 

https://youtu.be/DgNrvnY1mo0?si=ZciR6pvpJRaLNgGK at 1:50 for the reference. They definitely do have him seem bigger in other shots, but lots of those have perspective issues as you say. Parallax makes it impossible to guage

Edited November 9, 2024 by mtrsteve

[Black Falcon]

3 hours ago, mtrsteve said:

I was judging off one of the few wide angle shots I could find where there is no perspective magnification occuring. So even within movie canon, that scale is present. I'll die on my hill. Bigfig scale is perfect for a balrog. Whether that's what you'd *prefer* or not is reasonable to disagree on.

https://youtu.be/DgNrvnY1mo0?si=ZciR6pvpJRaLNgGK at 1:50 for the reference. They definitely do have him seem bigger in other shots, but lots of those have perspective issues as you say. Parallax makes it impossible to guage

Well, it is not about what I prefer, but what is seen in the films. But to be fair I guess we have to agree on that the size is just not consistent in the film really. I mean, you can watch him walking though the halls and compare his size with the help of the pillars. When the Fellowship passes them, they are by far smaller than the Balrog. When the Balrog enters the Bridge (about 1:47 in your link, which is where I took the size from in the first place) it is also bigger compared to Gandalf then three seconds later - though not sure if the Balrogs size even changed, since Gandalf is bigger compared to the bridge there. Then when they are falling together the Balrog is again bigger compared to Gandalf - while in the second Movie the size difference is smaller again. Though it also depends on the Balrogs posture.

Eitherway, I still think that a brickbuild Balrog is more likely than a moulded one. 

[Darth Shadowthrone]

Am I the only one who would like Balrog to have a brick-built body but a molded head? Something like Surtur or Steppenwolf in the superheroes sets - I just think the head would be hard to capture with just bricks 

[mtrsteve]

1 hour ago, Darth Shadowthrone said:

Am I the only one who would like Balrog to have a brick-built body but a molded head? Something like Surtur or Steppenwolf in the superheroes sets - I just think the head would be hard to capture with just bricks 

Yes, you are the only one 

15 hours ago, Black Falcon said:

Well, it is not about what I prefer, but what is seen in the films. But to be fair I guess we have to agree on that the size is just not consistent in the film really. I mean, you can watch him walking though the halls and compare his size with the help of the pillars. When the Fellowship passes them, they are by far smaller than the Balrog. When the Balrog enters the Bridge (about 1:47 in your link, which is where I took the size from in the first place) it is also bigger compared to Gandalf then three seconds later - though not sure if the Balrogs size even changed, since Gandalf is bigger compared to the bridge there. Then when they are falling together the Balrog is again bigger compared to Gandalf - while in the second Movie the size difference is smaller again. Though it also depends on the Balrogs posture.

Eitherway, I still think that a brickbuild Balrog is more likely than a moulded one. 

Yeah, I'll agree scale seems inconsistent in the movies. And I bet you're right that brickbuilt is more likely, given recent Lego trends. I think either could be done really well, and I'd be happy to see either hit the shelves! Part of why I'd personally like a bigfig one is that I could always MOC a brickbuilt one, and I've had a shot at it before, but I can't really MOC a bigfig.

[MAB]

Scale isnt particularly good anyway, when you compare hobbits to Legolas or Aragorn. I imagine a big fig would be too bulky, especially around the arms, to look good and would also be problematic to get the fiery look with a solid body and they can really attach much to those big fig bodies. Whereas if brick built, then they can make it look much more fire like even if this results in being a bit big. Or they could go the other way in scale and make it a large minifigure, a bit like they did with Lord Business in TLM, increasing height through leg attachments, allowing fire attachments to come off a brick on a neck bracket and off the legs. I think I'd go for the brick built solution.