Wizarding World 2024 - Rumors & Discussion

[Gorilla94]

On 6/12/2024 at 9:28 AM, BrickBob Studpants said:

Why? Because of the price?  

To be honest Harry Potter to me was allways mostly about the Castle, then the Diagon Alley (with a long distance to the castle's place one) and the Hogwartsexpress driving between them. I just have no interest in the building even if I didn't have to think about money and space. A good castle expansion for the same price would be more interesting to me. I am afraid the new modular will miss lots of important stuff, if it lasts only 3 years and gets not more sets each year than 2024

Edited June 13, 2024 by Gorilla94

[BrickBob Studpants]

8 hours ago, Gorilla94 said:

A good castle expansion for the same price would be more interesting to me.

In my eyes, keeping the D2C and regular sets independent from each other is a good idea though. The (usually) longer  availability of D2C sets combined with the higher price segments and their exclusivity do not gel too well with normal playsets  

Besides, we have so many castle sections already. I‘m glad they‘re trying different things with the D2C sets

[brickbride]

14 hours ago, Gorilla94 said:

I am afraid the new modular will miss lots of important stuff, if it lasts only 3 years and gets not more sets each year than 2024

But ... but it's the most detailed Hogwarts ever! /s

[BrickBob Studpants]

17 hours ago, Gorilla94 said:

I am afraid the new modular will miss lots of important stuff, if it lasts only 3 years and gets not more sets each year than 2024

The first iteration in 2018 had two sets in its first year, the second one had four (two of which were purely interiors), and so does the current one (with one interior section). That‘s not a bad start I‘d say!

[Black Falcon]

20 hours ago, Gorilla94 said:

 I am afraid the new modular will miss lots of important stuff, if it lasts only 3 years and gets not more sets each year than 2024

Well we had forbidden forest, Aragog, Hagrits hut, and the durmstrang ship this year plus 4 Sets of the Castle itself. Considering that they started with the exterior of the castle, I would expect more Sets to built the castle for next year.

 

[Virginia_Bricks]

29 minutes ago, Black Falcon said:

Well we had forbidden forest, Aragog, Hagrits hut, and the durmstrang ship this year plus 4 Sets of the Castle itself. Considering that they started with the exterior of the castle, I would expect more Sets to built the castle for next year.

 

We only got four sets specific to the new modular castle this year. Those you mention could be integrated with it, but are not designed with that purpose. Just like The Black Lake set last year was not part of the old modular castle.

I expect we will get 4 sets each year for 3 years total. 12 total specific sets for the modular castle. 

[Black Falcon]

1 hour ago, Virginia_Bricks said:

We only got four sets specific to the new modular castle this year. Those you mention could be integrated with it, but are not designed with that purpose. Just like The Black Lake set last year was not part of the old modular castle.

I expect we will get 4 sets each year for 3 years total. 12 total specific sets for the modular castle. 

Well obviously that is why I mentioned the other sets by their own. I could see them doing an other triwizard tournament set then, but I doubt we will get that much more forbidden forest Sets. So, I am not saying we would get 8 Sets for the castle itself but I 5 or 6 Sets don´t seem that unlikely to me.

[Gorilla94]

18 hours ago, brickbride said:

But ... but it's the most detailed Hogwarts ever! /s

Yeah... "Most detailed", mit necessarily "most complete" xD

12 hours ago, Virginia_Bricks said:

I expect we will get 4 sets each year for 3 years total. 12 total specific sets for the modular castle. 

Me too. So at best two big ones like the great hall and the rest smaller stuff. 

I'd say one of the larger ones has to be the clocktower.

[Decat]

I could see them doing 3 big sets for this castle, 1 each year. My guesses for the other two would be the Grand Staircase tower and the Viaduct Entrance, to finish off the front view of Hogwarts. Then the rest would be smaller stuff, hopefully more classrooms and common rooms. The only other sets they need for the grounds would be a Quidditch pitch and Herbology greenhouse, although the Quidditch pitch wouldn't be part of the castle, I guess.

 

[krimimimi]

There's nothing limiting them to a three year run, though. I understand they want to make sure there's a Great Hall available for new fans, but three year cycles seem to be cooling interest, and stretching that a little might help. 

I can't help wondering how the television show will influence that. The buy in for your lego Hogwarts is pretty absurd right now, certainly for more casual fans, but the advisability of that might depend on the age of the viewers the show is hoping to reach. 

[BrickBob Studpants]

1 hour ago, krimimimi said:

I can't help wondering how the television show will influence that.

'Not at all' would be my guess. We have yet to see a single set based on a streaming show outside of the Star Wars and Marvel Disney+ offerings and a small handful of Netflix ones, so I'm not sure why everyone is so certain that this HBO Max (sorry, MAX) show will get sets  Continuing with movie-based sets would be a less risky move for TLG. Fans will continue to buy them, and even new fans that purely get interested in HP thanks to the show (which I doubt will be that numerous) likely won't mind that the sets are based on the movies instead. They depict the exact same events anyway.

On the other hand, switching to show-based sets would likely alienate a sizable portion of movie fans. Reboots of beloved franchises don't tend to be super popular, and that's usually reflected in merch sales.

[krimimimi]

@BrickBob Studpants It doesn't have to be something major, but if they're expanding the material from a movie to a multiple episode series, then I would expect book characters who have little or no presence in the films to make more of an appearance on screen. I'm not talking about whatever usually sets people off, significant changes to the cast, their backstories, the setting, or timing, merely the inclusion of Cormac, Firenze, Grubbly-Plank, Peeves and Binns etc. in sets, in the same way they've included Sinistra and Vector, and not sets revolving around them exclusively. Simply more things (characters, locations, scenes) to flesh out their world. 

Perhaps naively, but I still can't see that alienating moviegoers, no matter how far afield the series itself went. It's a little like the ghost in the AC: a bonus, if not a must have, but definitely nothing to actively complain about, whether you recognise her or not. 

Edited June 15, 2024 by krimimimi

[Accio Lego]

6 hours ago, krimimimi said:

@BrickBob Studpants It doesn't have to be something major, but if they're expanding the material from a movie to a multiple episode series, then I would expect book characters who have little or no presence in the films to make more of an appearance on screen. I'm not talking about whatever usually sets people off, significant changes to the cast, their backstories, the setting, or timing, merely the inclusion of Cormac, Firenze, Grubbly-Plank, Peeves and Binns etc. in sets, in the same way they've included Sinistra and Vector, and not sets revolving around them exclusively. Simply more things (characters, locations, scenes) to flesh out their world. 

Perhaps naively, but I still can't see that alienating moviegoers, no matter how far afield the series itself went. It's a little like the ghost in the AC: a bonus, if not a must have, but definitely nothing to actively complain about, whether you recognise her or not. 

Exactly. Personally I’m hoping we finally see characters like Binns, Peeves, Winky, Ludo Bagman, and Dennis Creevy finally get some representation. And characters like Rita Skeeter, Firenze, Millicent Bulstrode, Grubbly-Plank, the Fat Lady, etc. play significantly roles than the movies give them. Then there are characters like Tonks, who get decent representation in the movies, but still are heavily shortchanged. I think a lot of more casual fans don’t realize just how often it’s implied she changes her hair just for funnies. Or that her powers are actually useful for her job - in the books she disguised herself as an older woman to help escort Harry and co. for a trip on the Knight Bus. There are just so many fun visuals from the books that got cut from the movies due to time or money constraints (or just dubious production choices - Drumstrang and Beauxbatons are both coed in the books, and it continues to irk me that the movies low-key imply that the only way there’d be a female champion is if she came from an all girls school - Fleur canonically beat out multiple male classmates to become champion). 
 

Back to the original subject though - the Ollivander’s and Madam Malkin’s set just gave us a named character that never appeared in the movies and two unnamed extras that were included just because they look cool and flesh out the world (and the wheelchair wizard isn’t even based off a movie extra!). And the Great Hall includes Professor Vector, Terry Boot, Daphne Greengrass, and Leanne - most if not all of whom are never even mentioned by name in the movies. Which just goes to show that movies only fans are clearly already willing to roll with whatever minor characters appear in sets so long as they still get the main characters. 

[JVM]

On 6/12/2024 at 2:28 AM, BrickBob Studpants said:

Why? Because of the price?  Personally, I‘m looking forward to it quite a bit. The exterior of the prelim looked fantastic, and the larger scale allows for a lot more details to be included, and the 2020 one was already very detailed! 

Yes and no. To clarify, I'm not opposed to the idea by any means and happy for anyone who wants it! It was just never a super interesting location to me to begin with on a personal level - but I've not seen the prelim and it's not uncommon for sets like this to impress me when I see the reveal! I didn't have high hopes for Gringotts and now I really wish I'd gone for it.

 

On 6/13/2024 at 4:14 PM, Gorilla94 said:

A good castle expansion for the same price would be more interesting to me. I am afraid the new modular will miss lots of important stuff, if it lasts only 3 years and gets not more sets each year than 2024

I totally don't blame you. I still feel like the 2021-23 system stopped a little short of it's full potential - the lack of a Potions class or house common rooms really bugged me. The former was represented in the 2018-21 sets and is in the new system, too, while the latter were in the House Banners but have not been offered in a castle set since the revival. (I don't count the Dormitory sets.) Both previous systems could have gone for at least one more set, imo

Edited June 16, 2024 by JVM

[(1)Stein]

If 76426 Boathouse and 76435 The Great Hall, is the start to the most detailed Hogwarts Castle system yet, I do hope that they somehow also do the grounds, and not just the front castle! If we go from the picture on the box about the extension, the next release will be massive and probable cost +€300 with the third part costing another €200!? 

Edited June 16, 2024 by (1)Stein

[BrickMatit]

25 minutes ago, (1)Stein said:

If 76426 Boathouse and 76435 The Great Hall, is the start to the most detailed Hogwarts Castle system yet, I do hope that they somehow also do the grounds, and not just the front castle! If we go from the picture on the box about the extension, the next release will be massive and probable cost +€300 with the third part costing another €200!? 

This is something that leaves me a little meh.

I mean, luckily enough I have no money problem, more space problem , but I was a kid in 2000s and remember how much I would liked to have the Harry Potter Castle set, but unfortunately couldn't.

Now we have that the Great Hall, a truly iconic location, passed from €100 in 2018, €140 in 2021, €200 in 2024. Yes, it has more and more pieces and locations, but this made the sets less and less affordable. Now assuming that the future castle expansions will be at least as pricey as the Great Hall, we'll have an upwards shifting of the main set of the year price. It's not something that excites me.

[Black Falcon]

10 hours ago, Accio Lego said:

Exactly. Personally I’m hoping we finally see characters like Binns, Peeves, Winky, Ludo Bagman, and Dennis Creevy finally get some representation. And characters like Rita Skeeter, Firenze, Millicent Bulstrode, Grubbly-Plank, the Fat Lady, etc. play significantly roles than the movies give them. Then there are characters like Tonks, who get decent representation in the movies, but still are heavily shortchanged. I think a lot of more casual fans don’t realize just how often it’s implied she changes her hair just for funnies. Or that her powers are actually useful for her job - in the books she disguised herself as an older woman to help escort Harry and co. for a trip on the Knight Bus.

I think one of the points for sets based on the series could be that Warner just wants to have them. I mean, they would obviously also promote the series, and getting minifigs for new characters not displayed in the films would be pretty cool. The other question is though, how close they will keep the visuals to the old films. Like they have the old scenes, so I would guess they reuse them for the new series but will the characters look similar too? I mean there are characters that are quite far away from the films and some that look quite close to the discription, however the films made people have a certain look in mind now, and changing that to much could look strange. 

10 hours ago, Accio Lego said:

There are just so many fun visuals from the books that got cut from the movies due to time or money constraints (or just dubious production choices - Drumstrang and Beauxbatons are both coed in the books, and it continues to irk me that the movies low-key imply that the only way there’d be a female champion is if she came from an all girls school - Fleur canonically beat out multiple male classmates to become champion). 

Honestly, I´ve never had the impression that the films would imply that a female character could only become champion if they would come from a girls only-school. And I´ve never before heard that someone else had that impression. 

Sure the change was a strange one, but there were other reasons for it (and they were also stated somewhere but I just don´t remember them honestly - but it shouldn´t be that hard to look it up I guess). However there are so many strong women in the films like McGonagall, Hermione - who surely could become a champion aswell - that your take on this seems kinda strange to me.

10 hours ago, Accio Lego said:

Back to the original subject though - the Ollivander’s and Madam Malkin’s set just gave us a named character that never appeared in the movies

Which one are you referring to here?

2 hours ago, (1)Stein said:

If 76426 Boathouse and 76435 The Great Hall, is the start to the most detailed Hogwarts Castle system yet, I do hope that they somehow also do the grounds, and not just the front castle! If we go from the picture on the box about the extension, the next release will be massive and probable cost +€300 with the third part costing another €200!? 

It would surprise me if they would make more sets like the Great hall, let alone more expensive ones. To buy one big sets and add smaller ones is one thing but if there would be 3 big sets in the end I think it would influence sales in a bad way. So I would guess the other parts of the castle will be made out of smaller sets.

[(1)Stein]

18 minutes ago, Black Falcon said:

-Snipe-

It would surprise me if they would make more sets like the Great hall, let alone more expensive ones. To buy one big sets and add smaller ones is one thing but if there would be 3 big sets in the end I think it would influence sales in a bad way. So I would guess the other parts of the castle will be made out of smaller sets.

I think it's pretty clear from the text and outline from the picture I posted that we are looking at a really huge extension to the Great Hall! The only way that Lego could reduce the price of the middle set is if they split it! but this will not reduce the price of the series in the end. If they keep adding large sets with small sets as add ons, it's not going to be designed for kids but more the teenage-adult collector! If we look how far Wizarding's World has gotten with the original book series we have some of the books in excess of €200 just for an illustrated edition with people gladly paying the price. It's not for everyone but there are still enough people out there willing to pay the price. Room is a different story entirely! 🤔

[Black Falcon]

4 minutes ago, (1)Stein said:

I think it's pretty clear from the text and outline from the picture I posted that we are looking at a really huge extension to the Great Hall! The only way that Lego could reduce the price of the middle set is if they split it! but this will not reduce the price of the series in the end. If they keep adding large sets with small sets as add ons, it's not going to be designed for kids but more the teenage-adult collector! If we look how far Wizarding's World has gotten with the original book series we have some of the books in excess of €200 just for an illustrated edition with people gladly paying the price. It's not for everyone but there are still enough people out there willing to pay the price. Room is a different story entirely! 🤔

Well of course the overall price will not be lower (actually I would rather expect it to higher since I see more minifigs in total from smaller sets than from two big sets -though there will be some Harry, Ron and Hermiones).But yeah, my point was that I would rather see them doing more smaller sets than to add more Great Hall size sets, since it is more likely that those are ending up as gift for kids and to many big sets priced well above 100€ would just scare parents away IMO.

[krimimimi]

8 hours ago, (1)Stein said:

If we go from the picture on the box about the extension, the next release will be massive and probable cost +€300 with the third part costing another €200!? 

Their reasons stated in multiple interviews over the years for not doing the Bell Towers and rear of the castle amount to an unfavourable intersection of necessary price and lacking "iconic-ness" of location. I can't see them releasing a 300 EUR play scale castle set that doesn't include the Great Hall. They might even do the Staircase tower in sections to bring the price down while increasing customisability. I know there's at least one non-lego plastic toy that approaches the tower that way. 

5 hours ago, Black Falcon said:

[...]Honestly, I´ve never had the impression that the films would imply that a female character could only become champion if they would come from a girls only-school. And I´ve never before heard that someone else had that impression. [...]

Which one are you referring to here?

WARNING, some MATHS FOLLOW: As they said "low-key", and obviously it's a plot driven choice with Cedric as a romantic rival to Harry. Without electing for a certain amount of framing (Cho is bi and could have just as easily chosen Cedrica as Harry - and rather frighteningly, iirc, acting upon the attraction was also illegal in Scotland at the time the story takes place 😧 🏳️‍🌈. Can anyone from the UK confirm / deny?), from a story-telling POV, the decision to make Cedric male in that constellation is simple. From a statistical angle, however, removing the (newly) same sex schools from the equation, there was only a 1 in 4 chance of both remaining Hogwarts champions being male if gender otherwise doesn't figure into it, so it does also seem to - low-key - imply something. Mathematically, it is a less probable result: it is three times more probable that there would have been at least an equal number of witches as wizards from Hogwarts, if not more witches outright. Ignoring plot for the moment, maybe it's just a question of luck, but in a fictional world in need of defining, there's a distinct possibility it's a descriptive statement instead, and the probability of the latter increases when Fleur proceeds to do poorly in the competition. (That's a value-free representation of mathematics. I appreciate it was largely driven by the story they were attempting to tell.)  

But if Beauxbatons and Durmstrang are not same sex schools, that is to say if the filmmakers had gone with what the author had originally written, that aspect is lessened from a world building POV as a witch's success - canonically - becomes a proven possibility. (There are then 11 in 16 chances of having 2 or more (50% or more) witches (or wizards) as champions. If the maths make you uncomfortable, it might help to note there are also 6 in 16 chances of a 50/50 split. 😉)

That said, that's maths meets writing theory, so I didn't care about that change as much as I did the odd aging, like somehow Snape, Lupin and Black would have all been 33 - 34 in PoA. And back to topic... as much as I love the canonical casting choices, the result is I do need less wrinkly minifigs to make it look right.

 

As for the named character in the set who didn't appear in the films: I would assume Madam Malkin. The flowersaleswitchard is the opposite, an unnamed character who does appear in the films. 

Edited June 16, 2024 by krimimimi

[Black Falcon]

The issue with your math is however, that you consider that everyone had the same chances, which just isn´t the case. First of all you don´t know how many people from every school applied for the tournament, and even less how many from each sex - which wouldn´t still play a role, since IMO the goblet just chooses the best of each school (and as Harry was set by manipulation anyways, there would have been a 50/50 chance for either Male/Female and Male/Male for the Hogwarts-Champion without that btw - and same goes for the rest, you would have to calculate with 3 champions only)

 

39 minutes ago, krimimimi said:

As for the named character in the set who didn't appear in the films: I would assume Madam Malkin. The flowersaleswitchard is the opposite, an unnamed character who does appear in the films. 

Well, but she was in the films. I mean it wasn´t especially mentioned it was her, but IMO she had some kind of background appearance in front or inside her shop. I think there was a pic of her somewhere here in this thread when we discussed about the news of her and the flowerwitch to be in the set.

[Accio Lego]

54 minutes ago, krimimimi said:

As for the named character in the set who didn't appear in the films: I would assume Madam Malkin. The flowersaleswitchard is the opposite, an unnamed character who does appear in the films. 

Yes, that is who I was getting at. There was some speculation when we first learned she’d be in the set that the minifig would be based off one of the extras at the flower witch’s stall (which is located right outside Malkin’s in the first movie) but the Minifigure we eventually got looks nothing like any of the extras, and instead the designers were apparently allowed to have complete creative discretion. 

[Black Falcon]

22 minutes ago, Accio Lego said:

Yes, that is who I was getting at. There was some speculation when we first learned she’d be in the set that the minifig would be based off one of the extras at the flower witch’s stall (which is located right outside Malkin’s in the first movie) but the Minifigure we eventually got looks nothing like any of the extras, and instead the designers were apparently allowed to have complete creative discretion. 

Well if that one wasn´t Malkin maybe their design was still based of her - I mean they still did cast all of the vendors/shop owners so they surley do have material about how she looked.

[Accio Lego]

20 minutes ago, Black Falcon said:

Well if that one wasn´t Malkin maybe their design was still based of her - I mean they still did cast all of the vendors/shop owners so they surley do have material about how she looked.

Yes, but if they did then she never appeared on screen. That’s the point here - Madam Malkin isn’t recognizable to anybody who’s only seen the movies. And if Lego isn’t worried about that now then they definitely aren’t going to when the tv show eventually comes along and makes other book only characters more recognizable to casual fans. 

[Black Falcon]

55 minutes ago, Accio Lego said:

Yes, but if they did then she never appeared on screen. That’s the point here - Madam Malkin isn’t recognizable to anybody who’s only seen the movies. And if Lego isn’t worried about that now then they definitely aren’t going to when the tv show eventually comes along and makes other book only characters more recognizable to casual fans. 

I see you point, but in the end they would be recognizable to the ones that watched the series and they wouldn´t care if others do anyways IMO. Also, even without recognizing Malkins, I think her name is still prominent enough through her shop.