Lord of the Rings Ongoing Discussion

[Alegrispa]

4 minutes ago, Brickroll said:

So, the set is amazing, I love it. Fantastic design, fantastic minifigures, really great everything. I don't know if I'll get it, but if I get any set soon, it'll be this one. I was looking at the figures, and I wanted to ask, is that one of the Weasley twins' heads on Merry? It works, sort of, but I wanted to double check. 

Also, I was looking at Brickset's review for the old Council of Elrond, and I noticed that they had the Eye of Sauron under the function to launch Gimli. Do any of you think that the eye under the pavilion is a reference to that set?

Oooh, totally! Nice catch!

[BrickMatit]

9 minutes ago, Brickroll said:

I was looking at the figures, and I wanted to ask, is that one of the Weasley twins' heads on Merry?

Fred Weasley head.

[Ferder]

Now that it's offically revealed we can break down what parts of Rivendell are recreated here from the location as-seen in the films. 

Overall the areas represented favor locations that were built as full-scale sets for filming, versus all the architecture in the "Bigature". This makes sense given that there wasn't actually a lot of consistency for how the Bigature was placed in the background of shots, compared to the layout in the wideshots and Weta sculptures. I've circled in red the parts of the full layout that ended up being recreated in the LEGO build. 

 

Spoiler

Spoiler

 

It wasn't even clear to me where in Rivendell the Council of Elrond took place until I rewatched the section on the DVD, where they show the Bigature, before the shooting set was composited in, and It was confirmed that it is the building on the right hand side of the model, photographed from the back.  

Spoiler

Spoiler

For the LEGO build, the tower on the left is a composite of three areas: the tower in the bigature from the right-hand building,  the crumbling tower with the figures from the shooting set, and the top of the roof from one of the main-house towers in the bigature. 

Spoiler

 

Overall, given the choice to try to represent the entire Rivendell model in Microscale (which even the Microscale Hogwarts wasn't able to do) or do this composite based the most iconic and recognizable Rivendell features from both the Bigature and the shooting set, as a minifig-scale playset, I think they choose the correct approach. This gorgeous set strikes an amazing balance between a well-designed playset and a faithful representation to the source. 

Edited February 7, 2023 by Ferder

[Modal]

Man I feel I am going crazy here, because though it is a pretty nice set, for some reason it just doesn't capture me completely. Like it feels more like a MOC than an official lego set. And the price especially is rubbing me the wrong way, it doesn't seem like a $500 set. Should be $400 MAX.

Considering how big it is, I could only justify buying it if I really wanted to display it. However, it just doesn't have the display factor of, say, Hogwarts 2018 or the Ninjago City sets, in my opinion.

Would have really loved a display of all of Rivendell, but i also realize I am in the minority with not caring about minifigures that much. I just want a cool model to display.

Also, unrelated, but imagine how amazing the box art would have been a few years ago. I think the black boxes is one of the worst decisions they've made recently. Just so ugly

Edited February 7, 2023 by Modal

[Frizzlefry25]

It's a nice looking set, definitely need too see this is person. I know sets have increased alot over the years, but it doesn't scream $500 to me! I feel like there was more to Diagon Ally when it cost only $350

Just now, Modal said:

Man I feel I am going crazy here, because though it is a pretty nice set, for some reason it just doesn't capture me completely. Like it feels more like a MOC than an official lego set. And the price especially is rubbing me the wrong way, it doesn't seem like a $500 set. Should be $400 MAX.

Considering how big it is, I could only justify buying it if I really wanted to display it. However, it just doesn't have the display factor of, say, Hogwarts 2018 or the Ninjago City sets, in my opinion.

Would have really loved a display of all of Rivendell, but i also realize I am in the minority with not caring about minifigures that much. I just want a cool model to display.

Agree with this! If I buy something big, I want it to be a good display piece, which I think play sets, or MBS are hard to be anyway. Which so many big sets, across multiple themes, I think this will end up a pass. Eventually I will get something to go with the Tower of Orthanc!

[MAB]

21 minutes ago, Brickroll said:

Also, I was looking at Brickset's review for the old Council of Elrond, and I noticed that they had the Eye of Sauron under the function to launch Gimli. Do any of you think that the eye under the pavilion is a reference to that set?

No. The eye in both sets are references to the flash of the eye seen in the movies when Gimli tries to destroy the ring.

[Undi3sss]

Love the set, but $800 in Australia is freaking insane!. Guess I'll have to sell some organs to Science 😏

Edited February 7, 2023 by Undi3sss
Spelling error

[Yoggington]

5 minutes ago, Modal said:

Man I feel I am going crazy here, because though it is a pretty nice set, for some reason it just doesn't capture me completely. Like it feels more like a MOC than an official lego set. And the price especially is rubbing me the wrong way, it doesn't seem like a $500 set. Should be $400 MAX.

Considering how big it is, I could only justify buying it if I really wanted to display it. However, it just doesn't have the display factor of, say, Hogwarts 2018 or the Ninjago City sets, in my opinion.

Would have really loved a display of all of Rivendell, but i also realize I am in the minority with not caring about minifigures that much. I just want a cool model to display.

I'm with you there. It's a decent set, but not mind-blowing, feels like some posters are stuck on the hype train.

The price is exorbitant, and a good 1000 of the piece count are 1x1 tiles or leaves. (The roof looks like a nightmare to build too). I just don't see any value here compared to say, the recent Castle.

Too rich for my blood, and I'm generally okay with blowing disposable income on this kind of thing. Maybe if it were closer to a €350/€400 price point.

 

 

...all that said, my GF is a massive LotR fan so I may not get much say in the matter.

[Maple]

12 minutes ago, Frizzlefry25 said:

It's a nice looking set, definitely need too see this is person. I know sets have increased a lot over the years, but it doesn't scream $500 to me! I feel like there was more to Diagon Ally when it cost only $350

I feel even the Alley at $400 seems to have more than this at $500. At least 700-800 pieces are the tiles on the roof. The sweet spot for me with this set is $350 and before everyone gasps, NinjaGo Gardens is $350 and has about the same figures and pieces. At $500 LEGO is just pushing me more and more to simply buy knock off brands.

In case any designers are here, it's a beautiful set.

Edited February 7, 2023 by Maple

[MAB]

24 minutes ago, Triceron said:

Not really trying to be mean, but it'd be quite funny to me if the Gollum GWP was a direct result of the LOTR Brickhead sales made in support more LOTR in general :P

That seems a bit soon. I doubt they have even analysed sales figures  of the brickheadz sets yet, let alone had time to produce a new one based on those sales.

[kill will]

5 minutes ago, Ferder said:

Now that it's offically revealed we can break down what parts of Rivendell are recreated here from the location as-seen in the films. 

Super cool comparison to the film, I was curious if the set actually had a 1:1 correspondence to any particular shot in it. I've never had a clear mental "map" of Rivendell due to the inconsistency in its presentation in the films like you mentioned. It's even confusing to navigate in the Lego LotR game! Circling various areas of the bigature is very helpful for getting an understanding of the space 

Fully agree with you, I think the decision to combine the most iconic and representational parts of Rivendell rather than trying to be perfectly accurate to the film was a great move. Seems odd to have a crumbling, moss covered tower right next to their meeting space in the film, the tower in the set looks much better!

[MAB]

1 hour ago, StegoLover said:

And I love how we will be able to recreate the meme from the movie 'One does not simply walk into Mordor.' Lol

We already can, at least if you have been a LOTR LEGO fan for a while.

[kuzyabricks]

10 minutes ago, Yoggington said:

I'm with you there. It's a decent set, but not mind-blowing, feels like some posters are stuck on the hype train.

The price is exorbitant, and a good 1000 of the piece count are 1x1 tiles or leaves. (The roof looks like a nightmare to build too). I just don't see any value here compared to say, the recent Castle.

Too rich for my blood, and I'm generally okay with blowing disposable income on this kind of thing. Maybe if it were closer to a €350/€400 price point.

 

 

...all that said, my GF is a massive LotR fan so I may not get much say in the matter.

I have been deprived of Lego LOTR for too long....I agree it ain't worth $500 but first time in my life I can buy a LOTR set on shelves. And I'm not missing this opportunity this time 

[th0r1n]

Okay now that I've calmed down and had a really good look at this set I've a few observations. Overall, I love it. I wants it. It's mine. My own. That said, there are a few niggles. The large tree overlooking the CoE...don't like the trunk design. Hopefully I can make some readjustments. The stone table that the ring sits on in the center of the CoE. Not the best. Again, I may have to tweak it. I wish that Aragorn's outfit was modeled on the one he wore at CoE. I do like the Hobbit feet. Nice touch.

Looking at the dimensions this set is longer and wider than the Hogwarts castle. But nowhere near as tall. Which is fine by me.

I've been waiting a long time to expand this theme. What a welcome addition.

 

[wesker]

The set looks great! I'm surprised they molded so many new weapons for this set. I wasn't expecting that at all. The updated figures of the Fellowship all look good although Sam and Gimli being gingers might take some getting used to.

I do hope we eventually see some more affordable sets in the line.

[JimBaggins]

Minifigure comparison of the old ones vs. the new: 

The bottom is mostly the original ones, but improved and customized. I don't have an old Bilbo, so I replaced him with Gollum. The two elves and Glion are custom. 

[RichardGoring]

29 minutes ago, Ferder said:

Overall, given the choice to try to represent the entire Rivendell model in Microscale (which even the Microscale Hogwarts wasn't able to do) or do this composite based the most iconic and recognizable Rivendell features from both the Bigature and the shooting set, as a minifig-scale playset, I think they choose the correct approach. This gorgeous set strikes an amazing balance between a well-designed playset and a faithful representation to the source. 

Agreed. They've captured the iconic locations really well and blended them together pretty seamlessly. If they'd have done a microscale version, half of it would have been rockwork, and the other half would lack the detail required by having to use LEGO elements.

26 minutes ago, Frizzlefry25 said:

It's a nice looking set, definitely need too see this is person. I know sets have increased alot over the years, but it doesn't scream $500 to me! I feel like there was more to Diagon Ally when it cost only $350

Agree with this! If I buy something big, I want it to be a good display piece, which I think play sets, or MBS are hard to be anyway. Which so many big sets, across multiple themes, I think this will end up a pass. Eventually I will get something to go with the Tower of Orthanc!

17 minutes ago, Yoggington said:

I'm with you there. It's a decent set, but not mind-blowing, feels like some posters are stuck on the hype train.

The price is exorbitant, and a good 1000 of the piece count are 1x1 tiles or leaves. (The roof looks like a nightmare to build too). I just don't see any value here compared to say, the recent Castle.

Too rich for my blood, and I'm generally okay with blowing disposable income on this kind of thing. Maybe if it were closer to a €350/€400 price point.

14 minutes ago, Maple said:

I feel even the Alley at $400 seems to have more than this at $500. At least 700-800 pieces are the tiles on the roof. The sweet spot for me with this set is $350 and before everyone gasps, NinjaGo Gardens is $350 and has about the same figures and pieces. At $500 LEGO is just pushing me more and more to simply buy knock off brands.

In case any designers are here, it's a beautiful set.

Diagon Alley was $400 on release and is $450 now. This is very nearly as wide as Diagon Alley (32 inches vs 40 inches), and much deeper, so the mass of stuff is there. I think the product shots are not doing the size of it justice. Compared to the Lion Knights Castle it's a bit trickier to say it's 'good value' (if you can call any LEGO set good value), and Ninjago City Gardens blows pretty much anything of this size out of the water. Obviously a lower price would be better, but I can certainly see that it's inline with similar sets across the LEGO portfolio.

What I love about the display aspect of it is that it's a decently solid mass of stuff to behold. A bit like the Lion Knights Castle. With some height variation to make it interesting. And then an explosion of natural colours with the roof and trees.

[Lordhelmet]

10 minutes ago, Yoggington said:

I'm with you there. It's a decent set, but not mind-blowing, feels like some posters are stuck on the hype train.

The price is exorbitant, and a good 1000 of the piece count are 1x1 tiles or leaves. (The roof looks like a nightmare to build too). I just don't see any value here compared to say, the recent Castle.

Too rich for my blood, and I'm generally okay with blowing disposable income on this kind of thing. Maybe if it were closer to a €350/€400 price point.

 

 

...all that said, my GF is a massive LotR fan so I may not get much say in the matter.

Have seen the castle used as a price comparison a few times on here and on YouTube.  Just curious as the castle is currently priced at $400 US.  With 22 minifigs, 4500 pieces and measures 38 cm H, 44cm W, and 33cm D.  Rivendell is 21* minifigs (including statues), 6167 pieces, and measures 39 cm H, 75cm wide, and 50cm deep.  I understand the castle has more big pieces but the detail work and look make me question the comparison as one being objectively a good deal and one being overpriced.  I am not saying it is cheap (I don’t think either are cheap).  
 

i just see this as the castle with an art piece layered on top.  The great wave for instance is like 1900 pieces (mostly small) (also a great set).  And retails for $100. Rivendell to me is essentially taking the castle and layering an art piece over it to make it look awesome.

 

Again, I think these are both expensive sets (my biggest set that I have purchased is Orthanc back when it came out, and I bought two helms deeps and combined them back in the day) this will be my most expensive set by a wide margin.  I just do not get that it doesn’t look like $500 but the castle seems reasonably priced argument, to me they are on the same $ scale when we consider art piece costs and the castle cost together.  If someone does not like Rivendell than they don’t like it and would think it’s overpriced, but if you like Rivendell this seems priced in accordance with other large sets (again which all seem expensive).

[Maple]

14 minutes ago, Lordhelmet said:

Have seen the castle used as a price comparison a few times on here and on YouTube.  Just curious as the castle is currently priced at $400 US.  With 22 minifigs, 4500 pieces and measures 38 cm H, 44cm W, and 33cm D.  Rivendell is 21* minifigs (including statues), 6167 pieces, and measures 39 cm H, 75cm wide, and 50cm deep.  I understand the castle has more big pieces but the detail work and look make me question the comparison as one being objectively a good deal and one being overpriced.  I am not saying it is cheap (I don’t think either are cheap).  
 

i just see this as the castle with an art piece layered on top.  The great wave for instance is like 1900 pieces (mostly small) (also a great set).  And retails for $100. Rivendell to me is essentially taking the castle and layering an art piece over it to make it look awesome.

 

Again, I think these are both expensive sets (my biggest set that I have purchased is Orthanc back when it came out, and I bought two helms deeps and combined them back in the day) this will be my most expensive set by a wide margin.  I just do not get that it doesn’t look like $500 but the castle seems reasonably priced argument, to me they are on the same $ scale when we consider art piece costs and the castle cost together.  If someone does not like Rivendell than they don’t like it and would think it’s overpriced, but if you like Rivendell this seems priced in accordance with other large sets (again which all seem expensive).

I like the Castle and think it's overpriced too. I really don't get the point of your argument.

[Blazej_Holen]

9 minutes ago, RichardGoring said:

Agreed. They've captured the iconic locations really well and blended them together pretty seamlessly. If they'd have done a microscale version, half of it would have been rockwork, and the other half would lack the detail required by having to use LEGO elements.

Diagon Alley was $400 on release and is $450 now. This is very nearly as wide as Diagon Alley (32 inches vs 40 inches), and much deeper, so the mass of stuff is there. I think the product shots are not doing the size of it justice. Compared to the Lion Knights Castle it's a bit trickier to say it's 'good value' (if you can call any LEGO set good value), and Ninjago City Gardens blows pretty much anything of this size out of the water. Obviously a lower price would be better, but I can certainly see that it's inline with similar sets across the LEGO portfolio.

What I love about the display aspect of it is that it's a decently solid mass of stuff to behold. A bit like the Lion Knights Castle. With some height variation to make it interesting. And then an explosion of natural colours with the roof and trees.

Regarding Ninjago city sets (especially original Ninjago city and most recent Ninjago city gardens) these are by dar the best value sets concerning price per part ratio. The minifigs are “ok(ish)” and the build can be appealing to some fans. But thats pretty much it. I liked the first NC, but the builds are cramped and chaotic even though they might capture the overall vine of sprawling asian city… 
 

Diagon Alley is nice facade with somehow realistic appearance. I personally consider the buldings oversized to the minifigs (especially the pink building), but then the price is quite ok, even after Lego rised it up. 
 

Rivendell has many small pieces, so the price per part ratio is not a key. I think we are paying for that exclusivity and sheer amount of new elements (moulds, recolours) and also the figs. Most of them have printed lefs/skirts, some of them are dual moulded… I would like to see it at 450 USD price pount max. But then, its LOTR and after this 10yrs gap I have no choice but to pay 500 (gasp). Pitty that there wont be interesting GWP (I would like to have Arwen on horseback with drodo and then 1-2 Nazgûls or something like that… Hopefully this is just a start and more sets will come. 

1 minute ago, Maple said:

I like the Castle and think it's overpriced too. I really don't get the point of your argument.

400 USD forthe castle seems somehow right to me. 350 would be beter of course, but then Lego is really expensive toy nowadays and it was also before… 

[kill will]

15 minutes ago, JimBaggins said:

Minifigure comparison of the old ones vs. the new: 

Man I thought the original Legolas looked whack but in comparison to the new one he looks pretty decent. I think the 3D ears look ridiculous in both cases but the new one really doesn't fit him at all. I always used this hair piece for Legolas long before any official sets existed and probably will again

Also really not a fan of the cheek lines on all the elf faces, can't be the only one that thinks they look like chad squidward

 

[Lordhelmet]

1 minute ago, Maple said:

I like the Castle and think it's overpriced too. I really don't get the point of your argument.

Not arguing.  I just don’t understand the comparisons to the castle I have seen (and diagon alley) where there seems to be “more value” in those sets than Rivendell.  I am just saying I think they all are valued in scale/detail to each other.  Again not arguing, I just don’t understand the comparison unless the answer is “I just don’t care for the IP or the location, therefore I find it to be pricier than these other sets”. Objectively they are all priced the same, (expensive).

[Balrogofmorgoth]

51 minutes ago, MAB said:

No. The eye in both sets are references to the flash of the eye seen in the movies when Gimli tries to destroy the ring.

Yes, but I do think having the Eye hidden under the Council area like that is a direct reference to the older set

[Wardancer]

I‘ll probably sell off all non-Elven figs to lower the price a little. 
 

Is this 3 Elven swords in the armory or what is this? There is three of something.

The best set ever, all just because of that shitty series. *insert kitschy pseudo-philospical Elven dialogue about light and dark balancing each other here*

Edited February 7, 2023 by Wardancer

[BTappel]

Awesome set!  Not a huge fan of the stickers and I think the lion knights castle is a better parts pack, so I will keep buying multiples of those.  I will still pick up a copy of Rivendell to have the entire fellowship and those new fern pieces!  Thank you LEGO for another castle set!  Keep up the good work!