LEGO Star Wars 2010 Pictures and Rumors

[Klaus-Dieter]

Thank you very much for the picture of the new AT-AT, Anio!

I've got mixed feelings about the new AT-AT:

On the one hand it looks imo quite ok which concerns the size and the design.

Plus I really like that small cannon (you can see in the back) - a realistic and very nice addition (plus something for kids to fight against the AT-AT).

On the other hand imo there is too much light grey color on the legs which makes it looking strange.

Plus I really do not understand why they throw in a C-3PO and even a new Han minifigure whilst there is no small room included. Major Bren Darlin and Hoth Leia would fit much better.

And instead of giving us two Snowtroopers they should have included a small base.

I really do not understand why TLG does let us wait for years and years until we possibly might get a decent Hoth Base or at least some small additional sets you can add to the already Hoth related ones in order to build a complete base.

(E. g. the medical droid is released this year - so why didn' they throw in him, injured Luke and a small medical room instead of these many (partly dispensable and senseless) minifigs?!)

Apart from this I must admit that I might perhaps buy the new AT-AT nevertheless since I do not own any AT-AT - and all in all I must say that it isn't too bad.

Btw: There surely won't be any other scenery or a speeder bike being included in this sets - otherwise TLG surely would have added it to the picture. The only "interior" I can imagine in the AT-AT is a small cockpit absolutely similar to the one of the motorized version and two til four seats for the Snowies in the big part.

The photo from the AT-AT came from a French Toys'R'Us gift. All sets from 2010 are on it except the Cad Bane's speeder.

There is also arts from all the figs you can find in these sets. There is only one At-AT pilot in the AT-AT set.

If I have time, I will made some scans from all the pages of the little catalogue gift tomorrow at work. You will see them on FreeLUG.org :D

Tribolego, since I can't pm you, I have to ask you following although this doesn't belong to this topic:

1. Are there pictures of sets of Lego City sets, too?

2. If so, are there pictures of 8403 City House (La maison Lego City) and 8404 Public Transport?

3. If so, can you please take some clear pictures of these sets, too?

Klaus-Dieter

Edited March 28, 2010 by Klaus-Dieter

[Deinonychus]

I put this comparisum pic together to show all 3 sets. If you have any doubt about how good the first (4483) AT-AT was look at the movie picture in the background!

Thanks for doing that. Saved me the trouble.

Looking at all of them in line like that, I see that the new one has some interesting tweaks to the head design. Should be neat having all three sets standing side-by-side on the shelf. Looks like I may have to expand my Imperial Army display a little bit.

[Penitent Tangent]

Thanks for the pictures, but can't say I'm too impressed with the set. I plan on getting practically every one of the 2010 sets, except for this one. Just bought the motorized one around Christmas and am quite happy with that one. It's not perfect, but I think it looks a whole lot better than this new one. Decent selection of minifigs though, and it could be an interesting play set if it does open out.

[TheBrickHitHouse]

Hmm, I think it's a fine set - but for those of us that have the previous AT-AT's it's a hard sell

it's just the motorised one - without the motor

I'll get it - but as I hand over that cash i'll know I'm getting this because it's better than no at-at, but that's not the reason I'd hoped for

interior, larger cockpit, small army of troops, damnit didn't even get an endor version!

Edited March 28, 2010 by TheBrickHitHouse

[Navy Trooper Fenson]

Luke Skywalker

Snowtrooper x2

AT-AT Pilot (x2?)

Veers

Han Solo

C3-PO

Hoth Rebel

Only one AT-AT Driver

Is't it actualy a Bespin Han? I thought he was wearing a new vest.

He has a new vest printing, Bespin-style.

I am lucky with the new AT-AT design, mostly because it isn´t new. The shape is exactly like 4483, only with a few minor changes like thiner plates and other parts. I guess I buy this as the third one for my collection and just mod them all so that they look exactly the same.

I am only frightened because of the price. I really hope they can fit it in the same class as Prince of Persias Battle of Alamut. Otherwise, I really don´t see a point to buy this instead of a thrid 4483 for around 80/90.

[Ratshot]

I'm thinking that I might just pass on the new AT-AT, its really un-detailed and bare looking

Maybe I'll change my mind.

[CommanderFox]

The new AT-AT looks incredible!!

And it even comes with a Atgar cannon!

Seriously, I need this!

Thanks for finding!

CommanderFox

[prateek]

The AT-AT is just another average AT-AT, but I like that it has a bunch of figs. We'll just have to wait and see the details.

[-Tilius-]

So, is this version significantly smaller than the previous ones? It kinda looks it....

- Tilius

[The Legonater]

Congrats! This looks interesting, I wonder what the cost will be? (NOTE: Do not start a conversation on this)Interesting devolpents. I was hoping we'd get a Riekan...

[ZO6]

I honestly think people are being pretty harsh on this new AT-AT.

I definitely would have preferred a UCS AT-AT, but I can also settle for this one.

Let's consider a few things - the first AT-AT came out in 2003, the motorized one in 2007 (and an mini thrown in there too).

-There have been many Star Wars vehicles recreated far more often than this one.

-Now, not everywhere in the world is fortunate enough to have LEGO stores, so unless S@H was used, the motorized version could be quite inaccessible. It's very likely that many people aren't even aware of sets that they don't see on their local store shelves. For the sake of argument, let's cut people some slack and say the last AT-AT available to the masses was the original one in 2003.

-The original 2003 AT-AT wasn't exactly the cheapest thing either, so even if you saw it for sale back in the day you might not have had the cash to pick it up.

-The way I see it, this new model should be a bit cheaper than the original, and be at least as accessible (even if it does turn out to be a TRU exclusive).

Considering the piece count and the size of the model, it really doesn't look too horrible. Sure the 2003 version takes the cake for design, but this one really isn't that much smaller if you count studs. The head seems the most off to me, but the body and legs are fairly accurate when compared to the beast from the movie. These are just initial reactions, and I won't judge it very hard until I see better pictures and have the full scoop. However, being someone who doesn't yet own a LEGO AT-AT in any form, I can say that I am looking forward to this set.

[Corvus]

Bah. I'm not impressed, at least for now. While a step up from the motorized version, it's still not as accurate as 4483. One of my usual reasons for buying a 'meh' set is also out the window- no good figs. I'll only consider buying it if 1)It's well priced, although as a TRU exclusive I'm not getting my hopes up. I will be very surprised if this is under $100. 2)It changes, as it is currently preliminary, or 3) Has a totally awesome interior, like Deino's suggestions.

Here are some complaints, although most are minor and easily modded.

-Less detailed legs. The shoulder (or is it hip? ) piece is too small. The lack of printing doesn't help, although I'd expect this to be fixed later. Also, the ankle has less detailing, and looks like 4483's stripped bare. As Klaus-dieter said, the light bley tiles on the upper part just seem wierd.

-Less detailed head. The main side cannons have been replaced with massive, less detailed cannons.

-Random tiles. All right, what's up with those randomly placed 2x2 bley tiles on the side? There's no point to them... One of the things I liked about 4483 was the nice transitions between studs and tile pieces. It gave it a neat texture, IMO. The bottom of the large plates they formed also had a nice transition from the light grey (yes, old) to dark grey.

...Oh, and what's up with that turret? Also not an improvement.

Considering the piece count and the size of the model, it really doesn't look too horrible. Sure the 2003 version takes the cake for design, but this one really isn't that much smaller if you count studs. The head seems the most off to me, but the body and legs are fairly accurate when compared to the beast from the movie. These are just initial reactions, and I won't judge it very hard until I see better pictures and have the full scoop. However, being someone who doesn't yet own a LEGO AT-AT in any form, I can say that I am looking forward to this set.

Considering the price markups, as well as the other odds and ends, I wouldn't be suprised if this cost more.

No there should never ever be exclusive, especially for total rip off.

I agree...I'm just glad I don't have a TRU near me, so I don't get tempted into buying new sets.

I honestly think people are being pretty harsh on this new AT-AT.

I suppose we're being harsh...at least they actually made a few changes to it. *points finger at X-wing and Slave 1 accusingly*

[Rinconstar]

looks pretty small to me. I don't like it. The only pro I think is the figs. Really kiddy ish

Edited March 28, 2010 by Rinconstar

[Walter Kovacs]

Hrm, the new AT-AT looks very similar to the original (non-motorized) version, especially in the legs.

The legs are what I dislike most about this new verision. Those 4 x 4 dishes at the hip joints look far too small. I think they'd look much better as 6 x 6 dishes, like on the original.

Right now, the AT-AT looks like it is low on my list. Despite my dislike for the PT, the Clone Wars era sets are my favorite. Go figure.

[gunm]

I have to reserve judgement on this until closer to the actual release. I don't have the motorized one, so I'd consider this new set instead if it proved to be a better value.

[etcknight]

I really thought that this would be a UCS ATAT. I don't really see the point in a new regular ATAT so soon. There's really nothing very new about it, even the minifigs. The baddies come straight from the Battle pack. I will pas and buy Han on Bricklink.

Ditto. A UCS or Endor themed AT-AT would have been a nice change. Considering the 2nd AT-AT is still widely available, I don't know what Lego Co is thinking.

[Cloney]

The AT-AT is a must buy for me! (Because I don't have one yet.) I wonder what that ship is above the AT-AT on the top left?

[Walter Kovacs]

The AT-AT is a must buy for me! (Because I don't have one yet.) I wonder what that ship is above the AT-AT on the top left?

I'm pretty sure it's the 6212 - X-Wing Fighter. TRU still has them stocked on their shelves.

[SWMAN]

After looking at the comparison pictures I now officially do not like the new AT-AT. The legs are two thin and un-detailed and the body isn't proportional.

[RileyC]

Man with this new photo I really want to see Cad Bane's speeder and 10212 pics!

Thanks for the comparison pic Mutley! While the body looks nicer than the PF one, the legs could do with some improving. The end of the legs could have a bit more colour variation. Im still pretty torn about this set though...

[Oky]

Meh, that AT-AT doesn't really appeal to me at all. It looks just like the others, only smaller.

Anyway, here is a pic of the Ackbar magnet set, complete with the silly typos and the sticker to correct them:

Credit to Brickset.

Edited March 29, 2010 by Oky Wan Kenobi

[Delta 38]

Is it just me, or does the body look flat? It appears strangely thin. I won't get this, for a few reasons. One being price, and also the fact that there don't seem to be good (or enough) minifigs. I'd settle if it included at least five snowtroopers, but then there's the price...

Depends on how much it costs, really. I may get it just for the AT-AT, however bad.

[Tribolego]

Tribolego, since I can't pm you, I have to ask you following although this doesn't belong to this topic:

1. Are there pictures of sets of Lego City sets, too?

2. If so, are there pictures of 8403 City House (La maison Lego City) and 8404 Public Transport?

3. If so, can you please take some clear pictures of these sets, too?

Klaus-Dieter

Sorry, It is a Star-Wars promotional so only SW sets photos !

[KimT]

Meh, that AT-AT doesn't really appeal to me at all. It looks just like the others, only smaller.

Anyway, here is a pic of the Ackbar magnet set, complete with the silly typos and the sticker to correct them:

Credit to Brickset.

That's hilarious, almost as hilarious as Darth Vader spelled with a "W" in Vader - they did that in LEGO Denmark's season overview.

"Come and meet Darth Wader at the Star Wars Days In Legoland"

Bravo!

The AT-AT doesn't look that small to me.

Am I blind or?

When comparing the stud length of the legs and body using Mutley's pic, it doesn't look that much smaller.

[Alldarker]

(...)

The AT-AT doesn't look that small to me.

Am I blind or?

When comparing the stud length of the legs and body using Mutley's pic, it doesn't look that much smaller.

When compared to the 4483 AT-AT, this new version IS actually a couple of studs shorter (front to back and top to bottom). This is most obvious in the front panels and back panels on the main body, which are each two studs shorter front to back than the original, making this one at least 4 studs shorter than the original. The main side panels are two studs shorter in height than the 4483 one, making it a little less tall as well. I'd say the legs are pretty comparable in length with the oldest AT-AT, which makes this one slighter better in scale with itself than the 4483 was, although of course it's become even less in scale with minifigs.

To be honest, I like it well enough, but mostly because it looks like the 4483 again. Even though I have two of the 4483 AT-AT already, I'll be getting one of these, to keep my OT collection complete.

Edited March 29, 2010 by Alldarker