I received my copy of the dictionary today as well, and I agree, the fig does feel pretty cheap, plus mine came with the old head printing which doesn't line up with the cowl. That along with the sparse content of the book make this a pretty disappointing product. Still, the printing on the fig is pretty neat, so if that's all you care about, go ahead and buy it, but otherwise I would not recommend it. I think they should have waited with the release of this book and included the 2013 sets.

I picked up the Batman Lego dictionary last week. The timeline pages are quite sparse as the line is a lot smaller than star wars and harry potter themes. Although it's 96 pages the book feels shorter than the others maybe due to the two page comics and splash pages in between sections. There's 18 pages dedicated to the video games which feels like too much. Also the cardboard 'page' for the exclusive minifigure is also thicker than the one in the star wars visual dictionary. Pics below

I can forgive the thicker cardboard spacer. The Batman fig is thicker front to rear than Han, Luke and Harry Potter. It's the cowl. The rest of the content is mixed. On the positive side it's great finally seeing some good pics of the early sets. Probably the closest I will ever come to them given aftermarket prices. On the negative side, there is a lot of filler like the comic style pages.

The fig is cool. The printing is great. I just wish there was a way to add the back pack.

Edited September 13, 201212 yr by Faefrost

The fig is cool. The printing is great. I just wish there was a way to add the back pack.

There is.

Does anyone know where the Ultimate Spider-man set is available in the UK? I've seen it at Lego.com but not in any stores. Is it exculsive to one store or Just not easy to come by?

Does anyone know where the Ultimate Spider-man set is available in the UK? I've seen it at Lego.com but not in any stores. Is it exculsive to one store or Just not easy to come by?

i saw it yesterday - it was in smyths toys and said exclusive on it.

I received my copy of the dictionary today as well, and I agree, the fig does feel pretty cheap, plus mine came with the old head printing which doesn't line up with the cowl. That along with the sparse content of the book make this a pretty disappointing product. Still, the printing on the fig is pretty neat, so if that's all you care about, go ahead and buy it, but otherwise I would not recommend it. I think they should have waited with the release of this book and included the 2013 sets.

It would only make sense that this was a sparse book to begin with as the line has only been around for 3-4 waves of sets.

I was all about this book for the minifig. The content was a bonus to me, and I find it a good bonus. I suggest buying this on the cheap if you wanted the book outside of the minifig. Amazon is $13.50 right now. That's where I got mine and I'm happy w/ my purchase.

Has anyone seen the mini Quinjet anywhere? Has it not been released yet or did I miss it?

^ I have not. Any one else know? I'm wondering as well.

Has anyone seen the mini Quinjet anywhere? Has it not been released yet or did I miss it?

Hmmm... I expect we will see it as a Christmas promo in the US...

Am I the only one who's disgusted by the serious lack of female superheroes? How about giving us Supergirl, Batgirl, Huntress, Spider-Woman, She-Hulk, and Ms. Marvel?

Am I the only one who's disgusted by the serious lack of female superheroes? How about giving us Supergirl, Batgirl, Huntress, Spider-Woman, She-Hulk, and Ms. Marvel?

I'm sick of the lack of females in ALL Lego except Friends which... I'm not into.

Seriously, it's still like 98% males. I think we've reached the point where child boys can play with girl characters... I'd go as far to say that Lego feels a bit sexist.

The girl sets are ultra stereotypical girly. The regular "boy" sets rarely have females at all.

Heck, in that Superman lego set it's ridiculous... We get a Wonder Woman! A female super hero! But the theme and story behind it is that she needs rescuing from a Kryptonite powered suit that Lex is controlling... That's SUPERMAN'S weakness... it's more likely that Superman would be captured and Wonder Woman would have to rescue him instead of playing the damsel in distress...

Edited September 28, 201212 yr by BrickG

Am I the only one who's disgusted by the serious lack of female superheroes? How about giving us Supergirl, Batgirl, Huntress, Spider-Woman, She-Hulk, and Ms. Marvel?

We have two things going on with hat. The first most obvious is hey have been targeting characters that have clear movie tie ins. The second less obvious reason is hat a substantial portion of the actual target audience that uses these sets as real toys, for play purposes, sorta kinda views girls as yucky.

Am I the only one who's disgusted by the serious lack of female superheroes? How about giving us Supergirl, Batgirl, Huntress, Spider-Woman, She-Hulk, and Ms. Marvel?

Well so far in Marvel they have only based things off current movies or TV shows, so there hasn't been much room for random sets just to fill a female quota. However I do think we will see White Tiger pretty soon ad well as She Hulk when the new Hulk show comes out.

Also I wouldn't be surprised if there was an exclusive X-Men set we don't know about which could give us the potential for a lot of female characters.

Am I the only one who's disgusted by the serious lack of female superheroes? How about giving us Supergirl, Batgirl, Huntress, Spider-Woman, She-Hulk, and Ms. Marvel?

Well so far we have Black Widow and Phoenix, but you have to remember that this theme is only just getting started and needs time to mature. Star Wars was the same for a long time there was only Padme and Leia that were figures now look at all the female characters there. Also like Spider-man said so far there hasn't really been any way possible to include female superheroes in the current sets. The Avengers only had Black Widow and there really only White Tiger in Ultimate Spider-man. However next month Marvel reboots its whole line of comics from #1, and looking at the line up I'm guessing there will be a lot of interest in Female superheroes like She Hulk/ Red She Hulk, Hope Summers, Storm, Spider-women,Shadowcat, Rouge and Sue Storm. Their are some characters which I doubt LEGO will ever release due to the look of their character being ever sexualised.

Am I the only one who's disgusted by the serious lack of female superheroes? How about giving us Supergirl, Batgirl, Huntress, Spider-Woman, She-Hulk, and Ms. Marvel?

Though I love female superheroes, I'm not disgusted by the lack of them. Not at this point at least. In 2013 I will be since I would much rather have Batgirl than another Robin or White Tiger instead of Nova.

I myself feel that the DC line was more balanced this first year than many other themes. I mean, if you count Bruce and Batman as one character and ignore the "extras" (guard and goons) the male to female ratio is 2:1. Though that's not how I'd want it to be, that is pretty good.

I know that you said female superheroes though and I'm talking about females in general, but I'm just throwing it out there because DC isn't as bad as it could be. I mean, Poison Ivy and Harley Quinn aren't any better known than Penguin, Mr. Freeze, or Scarecrow, yet the latter three were postponed and here we are with Ivy and Harley.

Marvel on the other hand only has Black Widow. (I'm not counting Phoenix since she isn't easily acquired.) So that ratio that is something I'd like to see change.

We have two things going on with hat. The first most obvious is hey have been targeting characters that have clear movie tie ins. The second less obvious reason is hat a substantial portion of the actual target audience that uses these sets as real toys, for play purposes, sorta kinda views girls as yucky.

I'd rather have a damsel in distress on the box than no woman in a set at all though.

Well so far we have Black Widow and Phoenix, but you have to remember that this theme is only just getting started and needs time to mature. Star Wars was the same for a long time there was only Padme and Leia that were figures now look at all the female characters there. Also like Spider-man said so far there hasn't really been any way possible to include female superheroes in the current sets. The Avengers only had Black Widow and there really only White Tiger in Ultimate Spider-man.

Honestly, I thought that this theme was only going to last as long as Harry Potter (which is a pretty good run I think) but after thinking about it a bit, I do think it could outlive HP and possibly live on as long as Star Wars, though I'm not counting on that. Sure, there are only so many vehicles to make, but the movies which are coming out will be what keeps it going.

I'm just saying that this line can be like Star Wars. So yes, when and if this line becomes founded, and I'm sure the movies will help or even be what allows to become like that (not the comics, I don't think that Marvel starting back with #1s will draw much interest from kids), I think that we will see more women and obscure characters, even though I think that they will still be limited to "damsels in distress" and mostly expensive sets for reasons outlined above by Faefrost.

I'm sick of the lack of females in ALL Lego except Friends which... I'm not into.

Seriously, it's still like 98% males. I think we've reached the point where child boys can play with girl characters... I'd go as far to say that Lego feels a bit sexist.

The girl sets are ultra stereotypical girly. The regular "boy" sets rarely have females at all.

Heck, in that Superman lego set it's ridiculous... We get a Wonder Woman! A female super hero! But the theme and story behind it is that she needs rescuing from a Kryptonite powered suit that Lex is controlling... That's SUPERMAN'S weakness... it's more likely that Superman would be captured and Wonder Woman would have to rescue him instead of playing the damsel in distress...

I think that Lego is not sexist but practical. My daughter loves Lego and she only like the house and the friends sets. She won't even play with the Star Wars or super hero sets. I guarantee if you can get girls to buy it, they will make more sets with girls in it. Also, she is not into the detail like the boys are. She just puts a girl face on the fig and it is now a girl

Am I the only one who's disgusted by the serious lack of female superheroes? How about giving us Supergirl, Batgirl, Huntress, Spider-Woman, She-Hulk, and Ms. Marvel?

To this, all I can say is: DNFTT.

Honestly, I thought that this theme was only going to last as long as Harry Potter (which is a pretty good run I think) but after thinking about it a bit, I do think it could outlive HP and possibly live on as long as Star Wars, though I'm not counting on that. Sure, there are only so many vehicles to make, but the movies which are coming out will be what keeps it going.

If any current licensed line is going to outlive Star Wars, my metaphorical money are on LoTR. Something quite so similar to Star Wars (based on a double trilogy of movies, directly competing with one of Lego's own Evergreen themes, endless amounts of appendix stuff to add on), but aimed at a slightly different audience. I think Lego's long-term efforts are going to go towards LotR sooner than Superheroes (which is also a combination of two competing licenses, making it twice as difficult to maintain).

Am I the only one who's disgusted by the serious lack of female superheroes? How about giving us Supergirl, Batgirl, Huntress, Spider-Woman, She-Hulk, and Ms. Marvel?

To be fair - and I'm saying this on nothing but guesswork, since I haven't heard of the latter four of those characters, so please correct me if I'm wrong - but many of these sounds like gender-inverted versions of other characters rather than characters in their own right, a lá Mrs. Pacman. Stick a bow in someone's hair and it's virtually a new character.

And if this is the case, wouldn't it make sense to cut them out and give place for something more original? I know Batgirl is an independent character, and I think she definitely deserves a figure, but I'm equally sure that a Supergirl figure would please few people outside of the Lego/comic book enthusiasts (who are, at any rate, already interested)... and possibly a few children who'd like to play that Lex Luthor's evil plan was to turn Superman into a girl and thereby rendering him helpless (and there we have it again, sexism).

To be fair - and I'm saying this on nothing but guesswork, since I haven't heard of the latter four of those characters, so please correct me if I'm wrong - but many of these sounds like gender-inverted versions of other characters rather than characters in their own right, a lá Mrs. Pacman. Stick a bow in someone's hair and it's virtually a new character.

And if this is the case, wouldn't it make sense to cut them out and give place for something more original?

All four of those characters are all individual characters that have their own story lines and are pretty well known. A lot of their names are just incredibly uncreative

Found some Batmobiles in the LEGO section at Target! If you can get past my annoying voice, check it out!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ppbTRdFbu44

Just2good, where are you located? I couldn't get the video to play, so sorry if you mentioned it there

Just2good, where are you located? I couldn't get the video to play, so sorry if you mentioned it there

I'm from Florida, and this was in a Coral Springs Target location (the one in Turtle Run). Fun fact, this is the same one Stephan from The Brick Show goes to.

Oh, and I made a video review of the set!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9AzzA0hhco

After watching The Avengers a few days ago, I can't help but wonder about the awful(inaccuracies terms) scepter they gave Loki. I'm wondering that maybe the fault of it lies in the concept art that was given to the TLG designers?

We know they get some info before it was public knowledge, and maybe this scepter we have in the sets we have now is the one they originally were going with...

Sorry for the bit of digging here, just had me curious. Thought maybe someone had more insight.

After watching The Avengers a few days ago, I can't help but wonder about the awful(inaccuracies terms) scepter they gave Loki. I'm wondering that maybe the fault of it lies in the concept art that was given to the TLG designers?

We know they get some info before it was public knowledge, and maybe this scepter we have in the sets we have now is the one they originally were going with...

Sorry for the bit of digging here, just had me curious. Thought maybe someone had more insight.

It's accurate to the Thor movie, and it maybe accurate to concept art or not. The designers were probably told he had a staff, but weren't shown what it looked like. They probably just thought he would use the one he had in Thor.

It's accurate to the Thor movie, and it maybe accurate to concept art or not. The designers were probably told he had a staff, but weren't shown what it looked like. They probably just thought he would use the one he had in Thor.

Ah ha, that could be the answer. It's been a while since I've seen Thor, but looking at Google, it does look a lot like that. I suppose I have my answer then.