The Lego Movie and canon

[Oky]

People keep mentioning that Friends minidolls and sets were not seen in the movie, but they were in the little slideshow of "worlds we don't talk about" Friends, Speed Racer, Bionicle, and Fabuland.

Ah, thanks, I forgot about that. It seems that the movie (much like TLG themselves apparently) dismiss Friends as just another non-minifig theme. I guess you could see that as demeaning towards Friends, but I think it's just them acknowledging the fact that Friends has its own kind of style and therefore must exist in a different world, so I'm okay with that. But that's a discussion for another thread.

Speed Racer's inclusion in that list was obviously catharsis on WB's part, much like the running joke with Green Lantern.

Well, very few stories are "written by TLG". Story-writing is not their business, and most of the writers for LEGO TV shows, books, and movies are not actual employees of The LEGO Group.

I guess you're right, but that was not my main point. My point was that the world that is depicted in the movie does not represent the world that TLG has created with their original themes. Octan is not an evil megacorporation, the Green Ninja is not part of a group of master builders living in the clouds, Batman is not a jerk living in Bricksburg, etc. All these things only happen in the Lego movie, which while it resembles the official Lego universe, is not really part of it and therefore doesn't affect the "main canon" (unless my theory about it being a movie within the Lego universe is correct, in which case it still wouldn't affect the canon).

Really, anything that the LEGO Group puts their stamp of approval of is "official" for that respective theme unless they say otherwise. The world as depicted in the LEGO Movie is "canon" to that theme — but it might not be canon to the BIONICLE theme, or to the Fabuland theme, or to the Classic Space theme, regardless of whether those themes cameo in the sets.

Yes, the movie is obviously canon for the sets based on it, but the question is whether it is canon for the other themes that appear in the movie or not. The way I see it is that the Lego Movie sets exist in an alternate universe, a sort of "what if all themes would exist in the same world" scenario, much like how all other licensed themes are meant to exist in their own world, whereas in the "real" Lego universe all themes are separate and only connected in specific ways.

This sort of obsession with "canon" is what inspired comic and TV writer Dwayne McDuffie to create his "Grand Unification Theory of Television".

This is the second time you've linked to that essay in this thread and my response is still the same. In that essay, the point that McDuffie is trying to make is that "obsessive, cross-series continuity is silly", to which I can only say: Duh! Any kind of obsession is by definition irrational and bad. But even he admits that these things are fun to think about, so what's the harm if it's just done for fun?

I don't think that any of us are really obsessing over this; it's just a fun conversation about entertaining the idea of a unified Lego canon, as silly as it might seem to you, so please don't try to spoil our fun.

A side note about the relation of the LEGO Movie characters to the other LEGO worlds, Friends and Ninjago and what have you:

I think the thing that really sets The LEGO Movie apart isn't so much that there's a "real world" and that the LEGO characters can visit it and bring artifacts back. We knew that much going into the movie, and a similar sequence appeared in

from the official LEGO YouTube channel. Heck, the LEGO Maniac comics have presented the reverse scenario for years.

What's different about the LEGO Movie is that the story is tied to the real world in such a way that the LEGO sequences only make sense dramatically as a reflection of what we find out is going on in the "real world" late in the film. I flipped through the novelization before the movie came out, and I remember being disappointed at how easily Lord Business was defeated and redeemed. (I don't know if I missed the "real life" sequences weren't included or if I just missed them. If it's the former, the marketing people clearly know what they're doing.)

It's not to say that all of Finn's characters exist only in his head--we see Emmet struggle to overcome his own inanimate nature in the live action sequences. But it's very different from, say, the Jim Spaceborn comics or the ongoing Ninjago epic, where the characters and worlds exist completely independently of any "Man Upstairs" or the LEGO Maniac comics, where the Maniac never grows, changes, or learns anything during his interactions with the LEGO characters.

Agreed, but who is to say that there isn't a Man Upstairs in those themes as well? For all we know, the entire Lego universe could just be the product of child's daydream without any of the characters being aware of it, like in that St. Elsewhere example. Perhaps if we completely overthink deeply analyze all the other Lego stories, we'll be able to find parallels to the psyche of a child dealing with his relationship with his parents in the playtime stories that he creates in those themes as well! Probably not though.

As for Emmet's struggle... yeah, I can't quite explain that part myself, but it was basically just a deus ex machina anyway, so I'm willing to dismiss it.

It's the former.

Emmet literally lands in an empty room next to the Piece of Resistance when he falls out of the window. Then a portal immediately opens up above him and he returns to Bricksburg to save the day

I was surprised when I skimmed through it while waiting for the raffle winners to be announced at the Toys R Us event and found that the movie's big twist was omitted entirely. On the one hand, it's good that they didn't spoil it in the novelisation, especially since it came out a good deal before the actual movie. On the other hand, it removes a lot of the movie's punch and makes Emmet's return seem awfully contrived.

Agreed, that is indeed surprising since it dumbs down the story of the movie so much, but I guess it's good that the ending wasn't spoiled and it's probably enough to entertain the kiddies (which is the only purpose of those novels anyway).

I think kids would wish to see, or just hear Emmet and Wyldstyle's news from other future official Lego story rather than just leaving them in the world of TLM.

Well, there seems to be a sequel already in the works, so I don't think fans of the movie will have to wait very long to hear more from Emmet & friends. Plus I still think that a TV show set in the world of TLM is very possible as well.

I guess TLM didn't advertize Chima because it exists in a closed world. so maybe it means TLM did try not to violate.

Or maybe it's because Chima sucks and Finn doesn't want to play with Chima. It's probably one of those "worlds that we don't even talk about."

[Meiko]

Personally I think that all the LEGO themes could be in the same universe like the movie showed it, except for Bionicle since that went on making a huge universe of its own. Basically a LEGO collection on its own is an entire universe with multiple themes in the same universe (or table ). All these years, the only theme that's really defined it own universe is Bionicle, so there's nothing keeping other themes from being in the same universe as each other. That's how I look at it.

[obsidianheart]

Pretty sure Finn doesn't care about established non-licensed story-heavy themes. I think that's why it's "Green Ninja" instead of "Lloyd".

Edited February 13, 2014 by obsidianheart

[Dorayaki]

Ah, thanks, I forgot about that. It seems that the movie (much like TLG themselves apparently) dismiss Friends as just another non-minifig theme. I guess you could see that as demeaning towards Friends, but I think it's just them acknowledging the fact that Friends has its own kind of style and therefore must exist in a different world, so I'm okay with that. But that's a discussion for another thread.

I guess you're right, but that was not my main point. My point was that the world that is depicted in the movie does not represent the world that TLG has created with their original themes. Octan is not an evil megacorporation, the Green Ninja is not part of a group of master builders living in the clouds, Batman is not a jerk living in Bricksburg, etc. All these things only happen in the Lego movie, which while it resembles the official Lego universe, is not really part of it and therefore doesn't affect the "main canon" (unless my theory about it being a movie within the Lego universe is correct, in which case it still wouldn't affect the canon).

Agreed, that is indeed surprising since it dumbs down the story of the movie so much, but I guess it's good that the ending wasn't spoiled and it's probably enough to entertain the kiddies (which is the only purpose of those novels anyway).

Well, there seems to be a sequel already in the works, so I don't think fans of the movie will have to wait very long to hear more from Emmet & friends. Plus I still think that a TV show set in the world of TLM is very possible as well.

Yes, it'd be better discussed in other topics, not the movie. I can only say that if TLC think they cannot market different designs of figures, they shouldn't have made them. The example of Chima at least had a possible reason of "close world", but not for Hearlake City which is simply one of the open worlds of Lego, so it doesn't work.

I do agree the difference part. Many slight differences can be seen on both licensed and nonlicensed characters and places, so I doubt that the existed characters can relate to their own original stories in the future, such as Lloyd referring Emmet in his own movie.

If the topic is only about Octan and the City, it only depends on whether Lord Business' rebellion would be recorded on history and how much it affects Octan the brand. Maybe the "city" could be given a specific name such as Tacostue City, so that this movie canon won't be geographically related to any other main Lego line, even if it really happened. Same for the "city" from Ninjago.

Uh, that is still leaving them in "the world of TLM". I mean other media that isn't about the TLM, like the Lloyd example above. And I personally want to see the next original movie featuring a different group of characters that can represent other Lego themes (while here are construction, pirate, space and DC representives in Team Emmet).

Personally I think that all the LEGO themes could be in the same universe like the movie showed it, except for Bionicle since that went on making a huge universe of its own. Basically a LEGO collection on its own is an entire universe with multiple themes in the same universe (or table ). All these years, the only theme that's really defined it own universe is Bionicle, so there's nothing keeping other themes from being in the same universe as each other. That's how I look at it.

I agree that the action figure stories also look like a close world, but compared with Chima, which assumed that humans don't coexist with other animals, it's not hard to make Makuhero City be one of the regions in the Lego world. Or since there are the Space theme, we can also assume that they live in another planet if TLM/TLC wished .

On the contrary, if TLC intended to make the movie an independent canon, maybe including Chima and Bionicle can make more sense. And in a commercial view, they can also be advertised, same for Friends.

Edited February 14, 2014 by Dorayaki

[Faefrost]

I know Dorayaki and Oki will probably be disappointed, but the main reason for the omission of Friends has nothing to do with cannon or story or marketing or even a desire to seperate friends. It comes from visual design of the movie. The core movie is built around the highly recognizable visual styling of the Lego Minifigs. In crafting the visual style and art direction of a film there are certain limitations that come into play in order to avoid shattering the viewers suspension of disbelief. You want to avoid that jarring "one of these things doesn't belong" visual moment

(there are exceptions to this, such as the big twist, which uses the change in visual style as a critical story element. But it is extremely hard to pull off and can be a dangerous trick to play with.)

And I hate to say it, but yeah Friends and Bionicle would create one of those moments of visual dissonance that would have a high risk of taking the viewer out of the movie. The Minifigs form a comfortable and cohesive platform by which the viewer is drawn in. They are the central gimmick by which the audience is tricked into accepting animation as real. And this isn't something Lego specific. All animation works this way. In order to craft the illusion in animation very tight art direction must be maintained. If you have ever seen an animated show where the style shifts throughout the presentation you will know just how jarring it can be. You can't mix Disney Princesses and Anime stylings and have it hold up. And dropping Minidolls or Bionicle into the Lego Movies Minifig centric art direction would feel like that. And it would be enough to shatter the illusion. It would be the difference between TLM's 95+ rotten tomatoes score or a much lower "toy story clone". I suspect we might see some subtle references or homages to Friends etc, but in most cases they will try to avoid anything too pronounced on screen.

as an example note the last scene with the "sisters" contributions. Notice how they are exclusively brick built creatures and not Duplo figs of any vintage? It's for the same reason. Visual consistency within the framework in order to preserve the illusion.

Edited February 14, 2014 by Faefrost

[BlueberryWaffles]

I just realized.....Octan. Octan is evil in this movie.

Space Police 3.

The alien twin's leather jackets.

With the Octan logo.

Mind=blown

Edited February 14, 2014 by Tolkien

[Dorayaki]

I know Dorayaki and Oki will probably be disappointed, but the main reason for the omission of Friends has nothing to do with cannon or story or marketing or even a desire to seperate friends. It comes from visual design of the movie. The core movie is built around the highly recognizable visual styling of the Lego Minifigs.

I actaully agreed with this viewpoint, but this is what TLC should have thought about when they came up with a new design of figure, and obviously they didn't. As mentioned, both violating story concept and losing markets also bring considerable defects to the movie.

Here is another issue: if there could be minifigures for characters from all non-minifigure themes, the problem can be easily solved, but we've not seen Friends minifigure used in this situation. There are also minifigure-scale figures for Bionicle/HF characters (though I'm not sure how TLC dealt with the non-minifigure characters from minifigure themes, such as the droids from SW).

Edited February 14, 2014 by Dorayaki

[SMC]

I just realized.....Octan. Octan is evil in this movie.

Space Police 3.

The alien twin's leather jackets.

With the Octan logo.

Mind=blown

http://brickset.com/minifigs/sp101

yeah your right, although I think in the back of most peoples minds is the fact that big oil might be just a little evil

[Faefrost]

I actaully agreed with this viewpoint, but this is what TLC should have thought about when they came up with a new design of figure, and obviously they didn't. As mentioned, both violating story concept and losing markets also bring considerable defects to the movie.

Here is another issue: if there could be minifigures for characters from all non-minifigure themes, the problem can be easily solved, but we've not seen Friends minifigure used in this situation. There are also minifigure-scale figures for Bionicle/HF characters (though I'm not sure how TLC dealt with the non-minifigure characters from minifigure themes, such as the droids from SW).

The regular character Droids don't really break the stylings or illusion. Most people are familiar enough with the minifig type R2D2 and C3PO. Heck, Lego has a highly successful series of minifig based TV shows and games utilizing them. So they work within the illusion. The Battledroids are a grey area. But once again they have been used enough in animation in conjunction with the minifigs that it would typically work. The Droids can look a little different because they are robots. Which works in context. But the minidolls are people. And that means more than anything else they are the point that shatters the suspension of disbelief. It's a weird subtle thing. The human mind flags more on small things than it does on large. It's what forms what we call the Uncanny Valley, when designing animation or video games. The closer to a depiction of a person something is, the more its minor flaws become evident. In this context a BigFig like Hulk or a LotR troll is less illusion breaking than a minidoll, because you expect it to be over the top different. But the minidolls face just seems weird compared to the minifigs. And that's what shatters the illusion.

[Lyichir]

I just realized.....Octan. Octan is evil in this movie.

Space Police 3.

The alien twin's leather jackets.

With the Octan logo.

Mind=blown

Why does everyone always assume Octan is evil in Space Police 3 just because of that? The Black Hole Gang in Space Police 3 is essentially a motorcycle gang, and the Skull Twins are clearly just wearing racing jackets (which often include branding, and are sold to the public with the same branding). If I robbed a convenience store while wearing a Harley Davidson jacket, you wouldn't assume Harley Davidson hired me to do it. In fact, it would suggest the opposite: if a major corporation wanted to break the law, they certainly wouldn't have their goons wear their logo. The evil Octan in The Lego Movie has no such qualms, since they themselves make and enforce the law (something that clearly isn't the case in the Space Police theme).

Edited February 14, 2014 by Lyichir

[Aanchir]

I actaully agreed with this viewpoint, but this is what TLC should have thought about when they came up with a new design of figure, and obviously they didn't. As mentioned, both violating story concept and losing markets also bring considerable defects to the movie.

I don't think it's something the designers didn't think about when creating the mini-doll. In contrast, they specifically kept the mini-doll hand shape the same and tried to keep the design reasonably simple (compared to the slightly grotesque sculpted designs of Belville dolls) in order to maintain a "LEGO" look.

Likewise, BIONICLE and Hero Factory figures are designed to be reasonably consistent with LEGO Technic design standards, even if they're much more elaborate than the simple, functional parts that define the rest of LEGO technic.

But what is recognizably LEGO to a modern-day LEGO fan is not the same as what is recognizably LEGO to an average filmgoer. I think if you put BIONICLE figures or Friends mini-dolls in the film as conspicuous background characters, people would start asking what Transformers and Polly Pockets were doing there (especially since the film already includes some non-LEGO contents like the Kragle).

It would take up valuable running time to put these kinds of characters enough in the forefront to explain their significance and make it clear that they are LEGO characters. This runs directly counter to the sense of familiarity that the filmmakers were trying to produce with their extreme attention to detail. Even Fabuland, referenced multiple times in the film, didn't get any of its characters or sets in a direct cameo. And Mindstorms was completely absent from the film, and Technic parts only appeared within the context of System models. I think it might be easier to work these kinds of models and characters into a sequel, since the first movie solidly set up the nature of the universe for viewers to understand, so they wouldn't have to question the universe so much the second time around. But with BIONICLE and Friends in particular, the movie would have to treat things with some delicacy. Those are both themes that have their own self-enclosed story structure — they are not as crossover-prone as many more traditional themes like LEGO City, Pirates, Castle, or even Ninjago.

There's also one other possibility for why Friends might not have made it into the film. The movie has been in development for quite a while, and Friends didn't really have an opportunity to prove its potential until two years ago. Perhaps the filmmakers weren't sure whether including LEGO Friends would be a liability or an asset, and by the time they did, it was too late to give any Friends characters scripted roles. Even Ninjago didn't get a whole lot of screen time, and it had been the LEGO Group's most successful single product launch of all time.

[jamesster]

And Mindstorms was completely absent from the film

You sure? Pretty sure I saw an NXT sound sensor attached to the laser in the melting chamber.

[Oky]

If the topic is only about Octan and the City, it only depends on whether Lord Business' rebellion would be recorded on history and how much it affects Octan the brand. Maybe the "city" could be given a specific name such as Tacostue City, so that this movie canon won't be geographically related to any other main Lego line, even if it really happened. Same for the "city" from Ninjago.

They already have. The city in the movie is called Bricksburg and the city in Ninjago is literally called Ninjago City.

I know Dorayaki and Oki will probably be disappointed, but the main reason for the omission of Friends has nothing to do with cannon or story or marketing or even a desire to seperate friends. It comes from visual design of the movie.

Yeah, that's kinda what I meant to say earlier. This makes sense, and now that I think about it, there were indeed no non-minifigure characters aside from a few animals and brick-built characters such as Unikitty. I don't even remember seeing R2-D2 on the Millennium Falcon, even though C-3PO was there.

Just another sign of how well-crafted this movie is!

Why does everyone always assume Octan is evil in Space Police 3 just because of that? The Black Hole Gang in Space Police 3 is essentially a motorcycle gang, and the Skull Twins are clearly just wearing racing jackets (which often include branding, and are sold to the public with the same branding). If I robbed a convenience store while wearing a Harley Davidson jacket, you wouldn't assume Harley Davidson hired me to do it. In fact, it would suggest the opposite: if a major corporation wanted to break the law, they certainly wouldn't have their goons wear their logo. The evil Octan in The Lego Movie has no such qualms, since they themselves make and enforce the law (something that clearly isn't the case in the Space Police theme).

Agreed, I don't think that's any indication that Octan is evil or turns evil in the future, it's just a harmless reference.

There's also one other possibility for why Friends might not have made it into the film. The movie has been in development for quite a while, and Friends didn't really have an opportunity to prove its potential until two years ago. Perhaps the filmmakers weren't sure whether including LEGO Friends would be a liability or an asset, and by the time they did, it was too late to give any Friends characters scripted roles. Even Ninjago didn't get a whole lot of screen time, and it had been the LEGO Group's most successful single product launch of all time.

I don't think the screen time of a theme has anything to do with with how successful it is or how much potential it has. It's about making the characters recognizable like Faefrost said. There is a heavy focus on classic themes because that's what people grew up with. Minifigures from modern themes are only in there as small references for today's Lego fans.

And I don't think time was a factor since very recent minifigs such as Michelangelo, the Flash, and the CMF Yeti made it into the movie, so if they wanted to include Friends, I'm pretty sure they could have. In fact, as I said before, they did include one of the Friends dolphins which just came out last summer, and by that time Friends had already proven itself, so that can't be the reason.

If anything, it might have something to do with the controversy surrounding Friends and with the film makers not wanting to risk anything by including minidolls, but I think the main reason is the style difference that Faefrost mentioned.

[ResIpsaLoquitur]

It could also be that they just didn't have time to get a visit to Heartlake City in the story. The bulk of the film was set in the "City" realm, with a good portion in "the Old West." There was a minimal appearance by the "Castle" theme, and only brief nods to the Pirate and Classic Space themes. In other words, there is a LOT of potential Lego themes they could have explored in this movie, and they just couldn't. To do too much would make the movie seem very, very crammed. We saw very brief nods to these other themes (I distinctly remember "Pharaoh's Quest" being on Business' map), but there just wasn't time to go everywhere.

Plus, it could have violated the overall integrity of what the film was supposed to be:

A setup in the Dad's basement. The film mentioned that Finn had a younger sister who played with Duplo, so she's obviously not old enough for minidolls yet. Could Finn's Dad have collected Friends too? Possibly, but it didn't seem to fit his profile as an obsessive builder who wanted every minifigure display to be perfect. If he had a Friends collection, it would have had to have been in its own corner of the basement and also untouched.

Maybe the sequel will get there. Maybe they'll find a credible reason to get into Friends, Technic, CUUSOO, Microbuilding, and who knows what else.

[TalonCard]

Really, the obvious sequel idea to broaden the story's scope would be...

...a trip to a LEGOLAND or a LEGO Imagination Center; probably in conjunction with a Brickcon of some kind to bring in the AFOL element and some older themes. This would take the story out of the basement, though I'm not sure how they'd incorporate the Finn/Dad relationship that was so central to this film. But it would be a great way to include just about anything LEGO-related.

TC

[Dorayaki]

The regular character Droids don't really break the stylings or illusion. Most people are familiar enough with the minifig type R2D2 and C3PO. Heck, Lego has a highly successful series of minifig based TV shows and games utilizing them. So they work within the illusion. The Battledroids are a grey area. But once again they have been used enough in animation in conjunction with the minifigs that it would typically work. In this context a BigFig like Hulk or a LotR troll is less illusion breaking than a minidoll, because you expect it to be over the top different. But the minidolls face just seems weird compared to the minifigs. And that's what shatters the illusion.

I only pointed to droids, because usually such kind of licensed characters wouldn't be reluctantly converted into a real "minifigure", and as you said there have been droids in Lego world for a long time. I'm not sure if Bionicle/HF characters can directly enter this movie in their mini-droid-figure from or their original action figure form in this case.

For Friends characters, their birth was controversial simply because the characters are also based on humankind, not a droid or Fishface, and they were designd as minidolls for commercial reasons. In this case if we need a total minifig-illusion, the Friends characters can directly appear as minifigures.

But what is recognizably LEGO to a modern-day LEGO fan is not the same as what is recognizably LEGO to an average filmgoer. I think if you put BIONICLE figures or Friends mini-dolls in the film as conspicuous background characters, people would start asking what Transformers and Polly Pockets were doing there (especially since the film already includes some non-LEGO contents like the Kragle).

There's also one other possibility for why Friends might not have made it into the film. The movie has been in development for quite a while, and Friends didn't really have an opportunity to prove its potential until two years ago.

I think it might be easier to work these kinds of models and characters into a sequel, since the first movie solidly set up the nature of the universe for viewers to understand, so they wouldn't have to question the universe so much the second time around. But with BIONICLE and Friends in particular, the movie would have to treat things with some delicacy. Those are both themes that have their own self-enclosed story structure — they are not as crossover-prone as many more traditional themes like LEGO City, Pirates, Castle, or even Ninjago.

Half-agreed. The concept of this film is still to build a complete world of the Lego brand, so what average filmgoers know can't represent the whole view of Lego world (at least what current Lego lines produce). Perhaps some people don't even know Green Latern or Johnny when they watch this movie or other starring ones. With a good way of advertising, I don't think it's hard to briefly mentioned minidolls or other figures even though there is the "illusion issue". After all, this movie also target at non-AFOL/KFOL audience or potential consumers. They can find it out by themselves if they don't know there's such kind of Lego product, which is what the movie was for. Contrarily, if consumers would only accept the products they're familiar with, that means TLC shouldn't have introduced other kinds of figures.

The production reason is vague, but I guess it could be mentioned in official interviews, so far I've not seen this information. But if girls-oriented themes are the major concern, we could have seen Scala/Belville in cameo appearances instead, same for Bionicle which was already created before Ninjago. As Oky said, they have time to put other characters from very new lines, so why not advertising characters from other current themes?

I agree that it does make sense if TLC introduce other figures in the sequel, for that they just want to make the first story simple enough to guide audience and leave more discussion room for the sequel. But it's hasn't been proved yet.

In the DC comics' case, many of the crossovers are based on a different canon, while the original stories are still independent with each other. I don't think Friends(Heartlake City) is a self-enclosed story structure since the backstory is simple enough and wouldn't be destroyed if there is a communication with other themes (being invaded by Lord Business). If Friends is a self-enclosed story, so for the themes that appeared in this movie.

They already have. The city in the movie is called Bricksburg and the city in Ninjago is literally called Ninjago City.

Thanks for information. I kinda feel that "Ninjago City" is weird because it's not why this theme was called for. Maybe calling it "Kyosaka City" with more modern Japanese building features would be better.

Edited February 15, 2014 by Dorayaki

[Haltiamieli]

There are without doubt many different reasons, big and small, behind the choice of leaving Friends (nearly completely) out of the movie, but one that may have weighed in the matter (and I didn't see mentioned here yet) is that minidolls are less posable. That may suit the play patterns of their intended audience, but it does not suit brickfilms.

[TalonCard]

The movie has also been in development for a good long while--possibly longer than Friends, even?

TC

[SirBlake]

Anyone that's upset about anything that's left out needs to understand that this wasn't written by TLG. It wasn't animated by TLG. Trying to cram the movie full of everything that TLG has made would likely harm the integrity if the final product.

I suppose, as an almost-exclusive castle builder/collector, I could get bent out of shape that the only representation of castle is the current lackluster design, but it's not realistic to expect that the film makers could cram 35 years worth of the theme that's most important to me into the movie.

To that point and the original point of this thread, the universe of the movie is defined by the collection of "The Man Upstairs" and that's that. In my opinion, it has nothing to do with how themes and worlds are considered in the canon of Lego. Thankfully, that's for us, the fans to decide for ourselves.

[Dorayaki]

There are without doubt many different reasons, big and small, behind the choice of leaving Friends (nearly completely) out of the movie, but one that may have weighed in the matter (and I didn't see mentioned here yet) is that minidolls are less posable. That may suit the play patterns of their intended audience, but it does not suit brickfilms.

Yes, it's an issue. The Friends TV animation simply had the human characters interacts with brick-like buildings, rather than portraying an image of minidolls' world, so the problem of minidoll functionality such as unposable legs didn't show up there. Still, it wouldn't be the only reason for not making minidolls appear in this movie. Maybe the film would have "forced" the minidolls to open and bend their legs. Not even to think about making them into minifigures.

The movie has also been in development for a good long while--possibly longer than Friends, even?

Sorry, it's been mentioned in previous replies. If you re-watch the movie, you may find some characters introduced in 2013/14.

Anyone that's upset about anything that's left out needs to understand that this wasn't written by TLG. It wasn't animated by TLG. Trying to cram the movie full of everything that TLG has made would likely harm the integrity if the final product.

I suppose, as an almost-exclusive castle builder/collector, I could get bent out of shape that the only representation of castle is the current lackluster design, but it's not realistic to expect that the film makers could cram 35 years worth of the theme that's most important to me into the movie.

To that point and the original point of this thread, the universe of the movie is defined by the collection of "The Man Upstairs" and that's that. In my opinion, it has nothing to do with how themes and worlds are considered in the canon of Lego. Thankfully, that's for us, the fans to decide for ourselves.

Not sure if the lack of "professionality" is the reason. If we consider "The Man Upstairs" has to be responsible for this, it wouldn't correspond to the spirit of "a generalized and open Lego world" from the very beginning of the story, which could disappoint audience. So IMO, "The Man Upstairs" and the plot writers have to provide a complete collection of Lego lines as far as possible.

As Aanchir mentioned, there is a professional team who support the official stories of Lego. Obviously we can still see many commercial elements from this movie, such as the master builders or TLM-themed products, these were not just added by one plot writer who lacks knowledge of Lego. In a commercial view, it's beneficial for TLC to have audience see all current Lego lines, so that they can run to toy stores and remember what they saw from the movie.

Edited February 16, 2014 by Dorayaki

[Samiens]

Leaving the Friends stuff aside (it could have been a creative decision, a visual decision, a decision based on the assumed target audience- there's no evidence to suggest the reasons why; controversially it could have been to try and move girls away from their more dedicated lines by feminising more typically male lines, who knows) the very notion of canon in a toy world entirely about imagination had never really occurred to me before and, to be honest, I've yet to see any real evidence in favour of a singular canon across Lego with the fictional works tending to be suggestions to provide context to sets/themes.

As such, the impact of this movie on a weak canon is, in my opinion, almost entirely negligible. This is a tale set in one particular world view with a story focussed on challenging that particular status quo. If anything, this is an anti-canon narrative.

Incidentally, as a kid I rarely if ever used to mix themes- I used to build and play around one theme at a time only, so in my much younger view I don't think there was any crossover at all, and I don't remember many 80s Lego stories suggesting there was. How very dull and consistent a child I was!\

[Dorayaki]

Incidentally, as a kid I rarely if ever used to mix themes- I used to build and play around one theme at a time only, so in my much younger view I don't think there was any crossover at all, and I don't remember many 80s Lego stories suggesting there was. How very dull and consistent a child I was!\

Leaving the Friends stuff aside (it could have been a creative decision, a visual decision, a decision based on the assumed target audience- there's no evidence to suggest the reasons why; controversially it could have been to try and move girls away from their more dedicated lines by feminising more typically male lines, who knows) the very notion of canon in a toy world entirely about imagination had never really occurred to me before and, to be honest, I've yet to see any real evidence in favour of a singular canon across Lego with the fictional works tending to be suggestions to provide context to sets/themes.

As such, the impact of this movie on a weak canon is, in my opinion, almost entirely negligible. This is a tale set in one particular world view with a story focussed on challenging that particular status quo. If anything, this is an anti-canon narrative.

The reason why TLM was made to be a mixed theme world might be that it's many AFOL's dream, or after all TLC want to know if they can enter the film industry with TLM. Maybe there would be more Lego films that only focus on a single theme, such as Ninjago, if TLM is successful enough. If not, it's a safe move to make all themes appear in one story, along with the story concept "free play". Still, I'm sure many AFOLs have no problem with a crossover theme.

And yes, unless an original minidoll character directly joins the prota/antigonists like Unikitty did, even that minidolls and other characters weren't absent, their existence would still be negligible (litereally, all minor characters don't have too much significance). But still, Friends' position (and maybe the others') is a sensitive topic since it's been an issue in marketing, and TLM is also important with TLM's strategy in marketing. Their existence might have more effects than Simpsons or Ninjago representives.

Edited February 17, 2014 by Dorayaki

[DraikNova]

Considering that the BIONICLE poster shown in the movie is from 2001, I think it's safe to say that those are part of Finn's dad's prized collection. I expect some of those to show up in the sequel, possibly alongside both HF and Bionicle minifigs for a silly gag, implying that every story is canon in this universe, even and especially those that contradict.

[Lego dad]

I think the only canon established by the Lego Movie is in Finn's basement. Which seemed to be the point of the movie.

[TheBrickPal]

As all of you should know already, The LEGO Movie is in its own universe. Its story, and all of the minifigures and themes within it, are the creation of a young boy's imagination. I'm sure all of us have our own LEGO universe set for our collection, don't we?

Edited March 2, 2014 by Puffle Pal26