LEGO Hobbit 2014

[kevkipo]

This is an awful lot you can do between the Hobbit and LOTR. Your idea sounds great, although I think an Beornling should be included.

I still think PJ is leaving himself a lot of breathing room should he ever want to return to Middle Earth. Certain plotlines which weren't concluded and... certain characters who weren't dead.

I mean there's still the fate of two characters, a certain elf and ranger, a rather unfortunate expedition to Moria, the hunt for Gollum and the fate of the north in the war of the ring. That's another trilogy right there.

Yes yes! a Beornling, i have been thinking on adding a Beornling for quite a while! Grimbeorn is the son of Beorn right?

[Mazin]

I would love to see him make some movies based on some of the events described, like the War in the North, and such.

That's exactly my thought. Or even simple stories including some of the characters, official or not. There's always a chance to do something based on the universe, but not totally set in it. You know, like with Red Sonja. Everybody knows that Arnie plays Konan but since ge's not presenting himself as Conan, the whole thing is not set withing his universe

I think the idea of expanding the universe for more content would only damage the world and split the fanbase further. I love the film adaptions, and would TOTALLY watch Kev's thing, but I think just writing new stories wouldn't be good. It's the TOLKIENverse: What is it really if he doesn't write the basic story? Seeing as he's no longer around, I don't think that making more stories like The Hobbit is wise.

I'd say that fanbase is already split since the beginning. And I'm not a huge fan of Lotr and Hobbit adaptations to tell the truth, I can see what Christopher Tolkien doesn't like in Jackson's approach. What interests me are legal issues, if they could do something more or are they strictly narrowed to Lotr and Hobbit.

Other thing is that developing new movies and stories based on the universe and their look would totally depend on the approach of the creators. There's as much chance that someone would destroy the whole thing, as that it could be even better than Tolkien's creation itself.

[kevkipo]

That's exactly my thought. Or even simple stories including some of the characters, official or not. There's always a chance to do something based on the universe, but not totally set in it. You know, like with Red Sonja. Everybody knows that Arnie plays Konan but since ge's not presenting himself as Conan, the whole thing is not set withing his universe

I'd say that fanbase is already split since the beginning. And I'm not a huge fan of Lotr and Hobbit adaptations to tell the truth, I can see what Christopher Tolkien doesn't like in Jackson's approach. What interests me are legal issues, if they could do something more or are they strictly narrowed to Lotr and Hobbit.

Other thing is that developing new movies and stories based on the universe and their look would totally depend on the approach of the creators. There's as much chance that someone would destroy the whole thing, as that it could be even better than Tolkien's creation itself.

Totally get what you are saying, i wouldn't like to destroy what Tolkien built up. If this THING of mine would ever work out i would respect everything Tolkien ever wrote and do the deapest research to not twist anything Tolkien wrote

The only thing i could use is PJ's Erebor wich is faboulus

[Steph 104th]

PJ defiantly gave us beautiful settings, it's a pity we didn't see most of them in sets*cough*minas tirith*coungh*

[kevkipo]

PJ defiantly gave us beautiful settings, it's a pity we didn't see most of them in sets*cough*minas tirith*coungh*

Lol

[Hypernova888]

PJ defiantly gave us beautiful settings, it's a pity we didn't see most of them in sets*cough*minas tirith*coungh*

No kidding!

Kev, They're called BeornINGS,

not BeornLINGS. It's just a little something that I think it'd be good to know if you're thinking of adding one in.

And while this IS VERY off-topic, but Happy Christmas to all you awesome guys! This topic's been a lot of fun discussing. I keep updating my homepage on my phone to be the newest page of this! Thanks for being brilliant.

[Mazin]

And while this IS VERY off-topic, but Happy Christmas to all you awesome guys! This topic's been a lot of fun discussing. I keep updating my homepage on my phone to be the newest page of this! Thanks for being brilliant.

No problemo dude, no problemo

After all, we all have to deal with our brilliance first thing in the morning when we look in the mirror, it's terrifying how great one can be

[Faefrost]

I'd say that fanbase is already split since the beginning. And I'm not a huge fan of Lotr and Hobbit adaptations to tell the truth, I can see what Christopher Tolkien doesn't like in Jackson's approach. What interests me are legal issues, if they could do something more or are they strictly narrowed to Lotr and Hobbit.

Other thing is that developing new movies and stories based on the universe and their look would totally depend on the approach of the creators. There's as much chance that someone would destroy the whole thing, as that it could be even better than Tolkien's creation itself.

Christopher Tolkien doesn't like PJ's stuff largely because he and the family have never had a piece of or any control over the projects. They had no input because JRR outright fully sold the movie rights himself 50 years ago for somewhere in the neighborhood of $50 grand. According to one of my Tolkien fanatic friends the sold rights include and are limited to the Hobbit and LOTR books, their appendices, and a certain block of Tolkien's notes regarding those works. So the ability to stretch beyond those is somewhat limited. They can make changes, additions and such in service to the core story and materials, but wholesale creating a new story puts them into likely litigation with the estate. They might be able to get away wit The War in the North, as it is pretty well referenced in the included materials, but it would be a fight.

I still suspect that new Line/WB's best course at doing more Tolkien is quite frankly (and coldly) to simply wait a bit for Christopher Tolkien to pass away (he is in his mid ninety's) at which point the next generation controlling the estate twill likely be more willing to play let's make a deal and exploit the remaining written works via the people that turned LotR into a billion dollar juggernaut.

And in the end that is likely the only hope we will ever have of more Lego sets or more Middle Earth toys outside of RPG and Wargaming products.

[Mazin]

They had no input because JRR outright fully sold the movie rights himself 50 years ago for somewhere in the neighborhood of $50 grand.

I still suspect that new Line/WB's best course at doing more Tolkien is quite frankly (and coldly) to simply wait a bit for Christopher Tolkien to pass away (he is in his mid ninety's) at which point the next generation controlling the estate twill likely be more willing to play let's make a deal and exploit the remaining written works via the people that turned LotR into a billion dollar juggernaut.

And in the end that is likely the only hope we will ever have of more Lego sets or more Middle Earth toys outside of RPG and Wargaming products.

There's still Warcraft Movie coming sooner or later so they might catch into it or anything that would look cool and possibly sell even better

And yeah, i wouldn't be surprised if the younger ones would sell the whole property, or simply open to the highest bidders.

If so, there might be a fight between companies and studios over those rights.

Other than what You've said are there other limitations that NL/WB have to deal with? Can they still do reboots or was it a one time deal? Still, they could probably make some Hobbit/Lotr cartoons right?

So, Tolkiens estate is not getting any penny from all those milions made by the franchise? Nothing from movies, games and Legos? Not even a small percentage?

Well, i would be mad.

Still, a deal is a deal. Selling something for nothing is one thing. But changing a deal is somewhat illogical and dangerous. Of course we can all see and say that Tolkien made a mistake from our point of view, but how would he know that his creations would be worth that much. He took a pretty nice lload of cash at that moment of time, when he could not sell it and get nothing at all.

[kevkipo]

No kidding!

Kev, They're called BeornINGS,

not BeornLINGS. It's just a little something that I think it'd be good to know if you're thinking of adding one in.

And while this IS VERY off-topic, but Happy Christmas to all you awesome guys! This topic's been a lot of fun discussing. I keep updating my homepage on my phone to be the newest page of this! Thanks for being brilliant.

Owh sorry been a long time since ive read the book

And same to you! have a merry one

[Hypernova888]

Owh sorry been a long time since ive read the book

And same to you! have a merry one

No problem! Totally fine.

[Borador]

Let's all remember that more movies does not necessarily mean more LEGO sets. A cartoon might, but if they adapted, say, Children of Hurin, (I have never read it, I only know from a summary of it I heard) LEGO wouldn't touch that. They only got The Hobbit because it was a book that is considered a kids book. They wouldn't do anything too dark. And further, if this business partnership between LEGO and the New Line didn't go so well, as we suspect, then they won't be eager to get one again.

We're getting a bit off topic though- this thread is to discuss the Hobbit sets from 2014. Which, having seen better pictures of, I can say are quite nice. I still haven't seen the movie, but we've gotten a lot of good stuff this wave, and I, frankly, cannot complain.

(one final word- someone asked if the rights that Tolkien sold allowed for remakes: Well, I don't know for sure, but I think so, since Ralph Bashki did a cartoon adaptation in the 70s, so technically the films we know today are remakes. It isn't out of the question that they could do that again. As for doing stories from the Appendices... They probably could, but they'd have to fight for it)

[Mazin]

Let's all remember that more movies does not necessarily mean more LEGO sets. They wouldn't do anything too dark. And further, if this business partnership between LEGO and the New Line didn't go so well, as we suspect, then they won't be eager to get one again

Lotr was a little bit dark in tone... well it was pretty mixed actually. Still, there's a lot of stuff in both Lotr and Hobbit that i would never allow to happen in a "kids friendly movie". Still, we all used to watch all the Terminators, Predators and other rated R stuff when we were kids and I don't think that it turned any of us into f... ups, right?

We're getting a bit off topic though- this thread is to discuss the Hobbit sets from 2014. Which, having seen better pictures of, I can say are quite nice. I still haven't seen the movie, but we've gotten a lot of good stuff this wave, and I, frankly, cannot complain.

I can't agree. Well it all depends on what one wants to find in them and get from them. But generally I'd say that they're rather weird if You consider them to be a THEME. Of course it's based on something, but still, a Lego theme is a Lego theme and should allow one to collect certain parts and minifigures to expand creating possibilities. As was the case with Pirates, Castle and so on. You could easily form those parts and troopers together. While here, in the Hobbit there's just way too many factions. Too many types of warriors. Too many different kinds of buildings that you cannot really connect together.

An example?

Correct me if i'm wrong but it appears that there's only ONE Laketown soldier in the entire franchise! This shouldn't have happened. Even in Lone Ranger there're soldiers everywhere and would be more of them if this theme would be allowed to expand into more sets.

I know that for a lot of fans this fact doesn't matter at all, and a lot of kids had fun playing with it anyway as kids will always find a way. But... it's totally against any rules in toy making.

If they wanted to use laketown soldiers they should have made more of them... or made none.

one final word- someone asked if the rights that Tolkien sold allowed for remakes: Well, I don't know for sure, but I think so, since Ralph Bashki did a cartoon adaptation in the 70s, so technically the films we know today are remakes.

I said that and i don't know in what way were Bakshi's filming rights connected to those owned by NLC/WB but technically it wasn't a remake, only a reboot. A remake is a newer adaptation of the same original movie idea. A reboot is more like an another approach to adapt something that it is based on.

So basically Nolans Batmans, new Spidermans and Jacksons Lotrs are reboots, their own take based on someone else's idea. Just like we had dozens of reboots/adaptations of robin hood, count monte christo, 3 musketeers and so on. Of course both remakes and reboots can differ more or less, sometimes change original idea completely.

And it gets even more complicated, if you consider that a lot of american remakes of foreign movies... are ctually based on books or plays. Therefore these could be called foreign reboots. But because the idea was taken from a succesfull foreign movie, therefore they're simply called remakes

Edited December 26, 2014 by Mazin

[Gremer]

I got Bo5A for Christmas. I think that it's a really nice set with amazing minifigs. The Dale ruins look a lot nicer in person, and so does the ballista.

Edited December 26, 2014 by Gremer

[Flieger]

I can't agree. Well it all depends on what one wants to find in them and get from them. But generally I'd say that they're rather weird if You consider them to be a THEME. Of course it's based on something, but still, a Lego theme is a Lego theme and should allow one to collect certain parts and minifigures to expand creating possibilities. As was the case with Pirates, Castle and so on. You could easily form those parts and troopers together. While here, in the Hobbit there's just way too many factions. Too many types of warriors. Too many different kinds of buildings that you cannot really connect together.

An example?

Correct me if i'm wrong but it appears that there's only ONE Laketown soldier in the entire franchise! This shouldn't have happened. Even in Lone Ranger there're soldiers everywhere and would be more of them if this theme would be allowed to expand into more sets.

I know that for a lot of fans this fact doesn't matter at all, and a lot of kids had fun playing with it anyway as kids will always find a way. But... it's totally against any rules in toy making.

If they wanted to use laketown soldiers they should have made more of them... or made none.

You seem to put a great emphasis on army-building, and that is fine. It is just not what Lego intended with the Hobbit line (or the LotR-line, unfortunately). They put a greater emphasis on completing the characters, and except for Bolg there is no omission I would call significant – much unlike LotR. I am unhappy about the lack of real battle packs as the next, but judging the line by its army-building potential is like judging a fish by its ability to climb a tree. If you want to re-play the adventure of the company from the beginning to the end, you can do it by buying all the sets.

There is much wrong with the Hobbit-line, however some of that can be attributed to the last-minute changes of PJ and the insufficient source material Lego was given.That is where you and I, the customers, come in. We are given enough minifigs and enough builds to fill in most holes (Ravenhill) ourselves – except army building, that is.

PS: the example of the Laketown soldier is a bit weird even for army builders. In the movie they are relatively few and do not do much. Even in the big battle they are far and few in between, all without their characteristic helmets.

I got Bo5A for Christmas. I think that it's a really nice set with amazing minifigs. The Dale ruins look a lot nicer in person, and so does the ballista.

While I agree it is better in person and while the minifigs are great, it is still a weird set. Most of the set's characters were not even in Dale to begin with.

[Hypernova888]

You seem to put a great emphasis on army-building, and that is fine. It is just not what Lego intended with the Hobbit line (or the LotR-line, unfortunately). They put a greater emphasis on completing the characters, and except for Bolg there is no omission I would call significant – much unlike LotR. I am unhappy about the lack of real battle packs as the next, but judging the line by its army-building potential is like judging a fish by its ability to climb a tree. If you want to re-play the adventure of the company from the beginning to the end, you can do it by buying all the sets.

There is much wrong with the Hobbit-line, however some of that can be attributed to the last-minute changes of PJ and the insufficient source material Lego was given.That is where you and I, the customers, come in. We are given enough minifigs and enough builds to fill in most holes (Ravenhill) ourselves – except army building, that is.

PS: the example of the Laketown soldier is a bit weird even for army builders. In the movie they are relatively few and do not do much. Even in the big battle they are far and few in between, all without their characteristic helmets.

While I agree it is better in person and while the minifigs are great, it is still a weird set. Most of the set's characters were not even in Dale to begin with.

I think another noteworthy character omission is Alfrid, as he does play a decently-sized role in BotFA. He's not as crucial as Bolg, who played a big secondary role in DoS AND BotFA, but he was still left out by LEGO.

I have a question: in your Tolkien displays (assuming you have one) do you prefer to set up your figures in action sequences (my preferred route) or lining them up for better viewing? Or do you just scrap the sets and display the figures on their own?

[Gremer]

While I agree it is better in person and while the minifigs are great, it is still a weird set. Most of the set's characters were not even in Dale to begin with.

Ah. I'm never going to watch the movie, so I don't really have a problem with accuracy, though I can see where you're coming from.

[Mazin]

You seem to put a great emphasis on army-building, and that is fine. I am unhappy about the lack of real battle packs as the next, but judging the line by its army-building potential is like judging a fish by its ability to climb a tree.

Army building is one thing, having a general idea of creating a theme is another. And this is simply what i mean, they've only redone some scene from the movie or a book, that seemed to be the best for them, but i don't think they've ever thought about creating something more from it. It was a rather fast and easy approach, not a real marketing strategy. Even if they knew they woudn't own the rights for long, they should have approached it with a much bigger respect.

And therefore i don't find a reason not to judge it this way.

the example of the Laketown soldier is a bit weird even for army builders. In the movie they are relatively few and do not do much. Even in the big battle they are far and few in between, all without their characteristic helmets.

But they did create him. So maybe it would be wiser to put different soldiers into that set, or not create any soldiers or any laketown sets at all?

This is generally what is wrong with Hobbits, one should not put energy and time into creating any scenographies or factions if they would appear only for a while and they wouldn't give anything special to that project

[Hypernova888]

Army building is one thing, having a general idea of creating a theme is another. And this is simply what i mean, they've only redone some scene from the movie or a book, that seemed to be the best for them, but i don't think they've ever thought about creating something more from it. It was a rather fast and easy approach, not a real marketing strategy. Even if they knew they woudn't own the rights for long, they should have approached it with a much bigger respect.

And therefore i don't find a reason not to judge it this way.

But they did create him. So maybe it would be wiser to put different soldiers into that set, or not create any soldiers or any laketown sets at all?

This is generally what is wrong with Hobbits, one should not put energy and time into creating any scenographies or factions if they would appear only for a while and they wouldn't give anything special to that project

I'm sure that LEGO considered battle packs. I mean, it's almost impossible not to with a film like LotR. And I would remind you that there are technically TWO Lake-Town guards. While it probably is true that they could have strategized a bit better, it's not like the sets are BAD. The figures are immensly well done, and most of the sets are pretty fun to build and represend their locations well.

[atreyu2112]

My biggest gripe with the Hobbit theme is the omission of Elf and Dwarf solders, and Bolg. Honerable mention to Beorn in bear form.

Which leads me to the only set I have yet to get... You know, the one named after the movie? I get why they put in who they did to that set but honestly, Lego was just cheap. Thorin should have been in The Lonely Mountain. Period. Not in another figures place either, just in addition. In Thorin's place should have been a Iron Hill Dwarf soldier. I get having Legolas, but we already got the same one TWICE before. This should have been a Elf soldier. Bard... got 3 variants! Necessary? IDK, I like having this version, but 1. He's already in another set in this wave and 2. This is where Bolg could have been (or either Laketown set). I also wish that instead of the Batista we would have gotten another Dale building structure.

The only other set in the entire Hobbit theme I have gripe with is the Mirkwood Elf Army. The structure itself. This should have been the water gate. Could have easily been the same size (as many here have demonstrated) and would have made much more sense in tying in with both the film and the Barrel Escape set. And yet even ANOTHER spot Bolg could have been.

So, there it is... My last set needed to complete my collection is TBotFA.

My favorite Hobbit Theme sets are Unexpected Gathering, The Lonely Mountain & all of the combined Dol Guldur sets.

[Mazin]

And I would remind you that there are technically TWO Lake-Town guards.

The figures are immensly well done, and most of the sets are pretty fun to build and represend their locations well.

There is Master of Laketown, not a second soldier. Or maybe i'm missing something about different sets?

And about those figures. Yeah, they are pretty well detailer, but that's actually also another thing that i can't understand in TLGs approach. I mean - Lego is not GIJOe or some He-man were a specific action figure is a product and so an action figure needs to be different and pretty detailed to sell in thousands.

And a Lego minifigure is not really a procudt, not something that sells entire expensive sets or at least not in the case of Laketown. I understand that a lot of kids might scream at their parents to get them those multidolar huge sets only to get a Frodo, Bilbo, Gandalf or whovever famous they want.

But Laketown soldier? Master of Laketown? Explain me why does someone spens thousands of dollars to produce helmets that will be used only ONCE?

Cause each new Lego part, whether it's a helmet, or a monkey, or a giant troll should seel themselves and bring the invested money back.

But i don't see this happening with laketown soldiers' parts.

They were lazy enough to make a Lone Ranger gattling gun by using a barrel.

They were lazy enough to make a Laketown longboat by using TWO standard-size boats.

And both gattling and longboat are thing that could be used again and again the future and sell itself back.

But why design, mold and produce helmets and parts that will be used only ONCE?

This i cannot understand.

[Balbo]

Honestly I'm very happy that we got a Lake Town guard with a new-molded helmet. The torso is very usefull - for instance to create the dwarves in their Lake Town armour. Furthermore the helmet looks awesome and is very accurate. The Lake Town guards aren't that important in DoS but nonetheless I'm glad we got them .

When looking at the Lake Town Chase boxart you can see that Bilbo is imprisoned and Thorin seems to rescue him. Maybe the Lake Town guards played a more important role before the Hobbit was splittes in three movies and TLG decided to keep the guards in the set?

But why design, mold and produce helmets and parts that will be used only ONCE?

This i cannot understand.

I understand what you mean but many molds are designed altough they only will be used once. Just look at the current wave: The headpiece of the Witch King or the new Orc hair mold. I couldn't find the Witch King in Bo5A but TLG designed him - and I'm nonetheless very happy about that

Edited December 27, 2014 by Balbo

[Mazin]

Well, they can do everything it's their company, their will, their money. Still, we'll have to pay for it somehow.

And i do agree that these are very accurate and might be well received by many, it's just my way that being a manager, artist and designer myself i'm always concerned about all unnecessary costs

Edited December 27, 2014 by Mazin

[telaruhn]

I got two of the newest sets for Christmas - Attack on Lake-town and The Lonely Mountain.

Attack on Lake-town - an okay set. The structure itself does not fit the style of the previous Lake-town set, I feel. I also hate how one part of the green roof is left exposed. However, he new hairpieces for the Hunter Orcs and the inclusion of Bain is great. The set also has a lot of features, and the Black Arrow contraption has great power and aim.

The Lonely Mountain - My favorite one. Smaug, despite his inaccurate size, is simply amazing and has all the right details, right down to the gilded belly. And the sand green that comprised most of the build is much less inoffensive than I expected. I plan on adding some more treasure, but otherwise I don't plan to alter a lot.

Speaking of alterations/additions, I've been able to get my hands on some repeats of older Hobbit sets that lack minifigures or weapons, leaving only the buildings or set pieces. Along with supplemental bricks I already have, I've been able to expand on many of the older sets with great success, especially because they have the same style due to the identical pieces. And it feels less taxing than getting individual parts from sites like Bricklink.

Thus far, I have gotten Mirkwood Elf Army, Dol-Guldur Ambush, Lake-town Chase, and Escape from Mirkwood Spiders to get extra set pieces for Mirkwood, Dol-Guldur, and Lake-town. When I get the Battle of the Five Armies set, I'll lookout for a set without minifigures so I can make another Dale-style building.

Attack on Lake-town has a nice parts assortment, so I plan to dismantle it for use in my custom Lake-town buildings, which includes building a taller tower for the Black Arrow. When I get The Witch-King Battle, I plan on using all the great parts in that set for a Dol-Guldur prison tower, which will also use pieces from my extra Dol-Guldur Ambush set.

[Godless-Mimicry]

Christopher Tolkien doesn't like PJ's stuff largely because he and the family have never had a piece of or any control over the projects. They had no input because JRR outright fully sold the movie rights himself 50 years ago for somewhere in the neighborhood of $50 grand.

Not quite. Sael Zantz is accredited to claiming that he bought the rights for next to nothing as Tolkien never thought anyone could ever adapt them, though he wanted people to try.