Captain Pirate Man Posted February 22, 2015 Posted February 22, 2015 There is rumored to be a new "Fantasy Era" style Castle line out in the next Winter wave. In the meantime it looks to be some very strong Super Hero waves. Or there are a few specific other sets that play into a bit of a fantasy feel. The Ninjago Battle for Ninjago City is a nice Temple/Castle. The Star Wars Ewok Village. The Brick Bounty Pirate Ship etc. Ya, only marvel superheros will really get her attention. There has to be a strong female characters, in order to get girls interested. Harry Potter had Hermione, hobbit had Tauriel, superhero has many. That's why Bat man, ninjago, and the others won't get many girls, they are to boy driven. Same goes for pirates, she already has some pirate ships and they just sit on her shelf. Quote
Faefrost Posted February 22, 2015 Posted February 22, 2015 Ya, only marvel superheros will really get her attention. There has to be a strong female characters, in order to get girls interested. Harry Potter had Hermione, hobbit had Tauriel, superhero has many. That's why Bat man, ninjago, and the others won't get many girls, they are to boy driven. Same goes for pirates, she already has some pirate ships and they just sit on her shelf. I mentioned the Battle for Ninjago City set also because it is one that features Nya as Samurai X. Who is a nice strong (if sadly underused in the TV series) female hero. Quote
Artanis I Posted February 23, 2015 Posted February 23, 2015 Sadly for The Hobbit, there was never any accompanying cartoons or comics for the kids to get into, unlike the huge amount of stuff over decades out there for all the other franchises. While the Marvel movies aren't really suitable for young kids to watch, they know all about them through all of the stuff that IS. Middle Earth Lego has no such support. There is the movies and the novels. All of which are quite violent, and not great for kids, so what else is there to make them care about the characters and scenes? Every child knows who Batman is, despite the Nolan movies being unsuitable for them to watch. Star Wars has had 6 years of cartoons recently. (Ninjago & Chima (while also being non-licenced and therefore cheaper) have cartoons to support them.) So kids know and love that stuff without even having seen a movie. Unless their parents are into The Hobbit, you're down to AFOLs and teens. Teens would rather spend their money on other things. Quote
MAB Posted February 23, 2015 Posted February 23, 2015 Ya, only marvel superheros will really get her attention. There has to be a strong female characters, in order to get girls interested. Harry Potter had Hermione, hobbit had Tauriel, superhero has many. That's why Bat man, ninjago, and the others won't get many girls, they are to boy driven. Same goes for pirates, she already has some pirate ships and they just sit on her shelf. So Batgirl (and Cat Woman and Harley Quinn and Harleen Quinzel and Poison Ivy) is not enough for girls to get into Batman, whereas Tauriel (and Galadriel) is enough to get them into The Hobbit? Quote
Captain Pirate Man Posted February 23, 2015 Posted February 23, 2015 (edited) So Batgirl (and Cat Woman and Harley Quinn and Harleen Quinzel and Poison Ivy) is not enough for girls to get into Batman, whereas Tauriel (and Galadriel) is enough to get them into The Hobbit? We are a Marvel household, just the way it is.... I like Batman, especially the Arkham video games, but I'm pretty much the only one. Not to start a Marvel vs Dc debate, because both have strong female characters, but once you get passed DC's big 5 or so, then the well starts running a little dry. While Marvel might not have as big of names to the general public, they have far more 2nd tier strong females. My daughter knows the Marvel encyclopedia cover to cover, so she knows they have a lot of kick butt girls. Psylocke is her personal favorite. Which Lego will probably never release a minifig of her, but with the avengers 2 coming that means black widow will get a lot of attention. But back to your point, I still stand by what I said before because at the end of the day it's still the "batman" line. He is the main character, the girls you mentioned are just secondary characters. Where with the avengers, all of the avengers are main characters, black widow included. That's a huge difference. Also with the hobbit, that whole world is very engaging, to both sexes, so of course the girls are going to relate to Galadrial and Tauriel. I'm sure Batman has his share of female fans, I'm not saying he does not. But if it was a justice league line as opposed to just batman, then I think it could attracted more girls, because as I said before, "Batman" himself is clearly geared more towards boys. Edited February 23, 2015 by Captain Pirate Man Quote
TheWorldAhead Posted February 26, 2015 Posted February 26, 2015 Not sure how we got on this topic, but seeing as I always found LEGO gender studies compelling....I think TLG's biggest problem is that all of their blockbuster licenses are geared toward boys, because Hollywood is, on the whole, problematically geared toward men. Women are definitely present, sometimes in strong roles, but often supporting, often romantic interests, occasionally sex appeal. When was the last time you saw a major movie franchise with a first-billed female? Actually, I take that back, The Hunger Games would have been a fantastic license! I don't even buy the "it's too dark" argument anymore, after sets like "Darth Vader Transformation," "Palpatine's Arrest," "Temple of Doom," "The Orc Forge," etc. Who wouldn't like some dystopian LEGO? Not to get even further off topic, of course...The Hobbit is a compelling and intricately constructed world that should appear to both boys and girls, but the character interactions are so decidedly male-focused that some girls do have difficulty relating. Besides, if all that girls have marketed to them is the pink-and-purple "Friends" and "Elves," then that is what they are going to find socially acceptable, until they can think for themselves (something which very few young people of any kind can do). I know many women who love LOTR and The Hobbit, but when I was in elementary school, I never knew any young girls interested in Jackson's "original trilogy." Quote
MAB Posted February 26, 2015 Posted February 26, 2015 ^ Sex in the City. Probably. I'm male so don't watch stuff like that. Quote
Artanis I Posted February 27, 2015 Posted February 27, 2015 The Hunger Games would have been a fantastic license! I don't even buy the "it's too dark" argument anymore Children killing each other violently? Quote
Ruse901 Posted February 27, 2015 Posted February 27, 2015 Sadly for The Hobbit, there was never any accompanying cartoons or comics for the kids to get into, unlike the huge amount of stuff over decades out there for all the other franchises. While the Marvel movies aren't really suitable for young kids to watch, they know all about them through all of the stuff that IS. Middle Earth Lego has no such support. There is the movies and the novels. All of which are quite violent, and not great for kids, so what else is there to make them care about the characters and scenes? Every child knows who Batman is, despite the Nolan movies being unsuitable for them to watch. Star Wars has had 6 years of cartoons recently. (Ninjago & Chima (while also being non-licenced and therefore cheaper) have cartoons to support them.) So kids know and love that stuff without even having seen a movie. Unless their parents are into The Hobbit, you're down to AFOLs and teens. Teens would rather spend their money on other things. Agreed. Too bad too. The Hobbit was originally aimed at a younger crowd and could easily have supported a cartoon or show aimed at a wide audience. Quote
Hive Posted March 1, 2015 Posted March 1, 2015 Actually, I take that back, The Hunger Games would have been a fantastic license! I don't even buy the "it's too dark" argument anymore, after sets like "Darth Vader Transformation," "Palpatine's Arrest," "Temple of Doom," "The Orc Forge," etc. Who wouldn't like some dystopian LEGO? Sure, wonderful idea! Man, I'm looking forward to sets like The Spearing of 12-Year Old Rue, Katniss And Peeta's Suicide Solution and The District 12 Genocide already. Want to do 50 Shades of Grey next? Besides, if all that girls have marketed to them is the pink-and-purple "Friends" and "Elves," then that is what they are going to find socially acceptable, until they can think for themselves (something which very few young people of any kind can do). I don't want to derail the topic too much, but LEGO market the pink-and-purple Friends and Elves themes to girls because intensive research showed them that was the kind of LEGO girls wants to play with. They tried - and failed - for years to get girls in large quantities to be interested in "regular" LEGO. Quote
azog Posted March 1, 2015 Posted March 1, 2015 I have a question that I have been quite curious about how well do you guys think the lonely mountain sold? Quote
MAB Posted March 1, 2015 Posted March 1, 2015 So far, not so good from what I've seen. But it is still available at retail, and hasn't gone on discount yet. Quote
Bobbtom Posted March 1, 2015 Posted March 1, 2015 I have a question that I have been quite curious about how well do you guys think the lonely mountain sold? Terrible, for $130 you can get much larger sets for the same price. Those on a budget looking for a set like kids and adults will definitely pass over it. For $20 you can get a modular. For less you can get bigger sets. Only hardcore fans would get the set for $130 just for a dragon and two small backdrops. Quote
azog Posted March 2, 2015 Posted March 2, 2015 See when I first saw the set pictures I thought everyone would go for it because it had the guy in it that the whole story was about, Smaug but I guess people would just moc one? Quote
Bobbtom Posted March 2, 2015 Posted March 2, 2015 (edited) See when I first saw the set pictures I thought everyone would go for it because it had the guy in it that the whole story was about, Smaug but I guess people would just moc one? I bought King's Castle siege a few years ago for $100 and it had a castle AND a dragon. I want the lonely mountain, but I'm not going to spend $130 for something substantially less. I'm waiting for a sale. Edited March 2, 2015 by Bobbtom Quote
Captain Pirate Man Posted March 2, 2015 Posted March 2, 2015 I bet smaug becomes a real collecter piece down the road though. He is already going for $50-60 on brick links. Imagine him in 20 years? Definatly worth the extra 30 bucks when you think about it like that. But I say that as someone that has that set. Quote
Bobbtom Posted March 2, 2015 Posted March 2, 2015 (edited) I bet smaug becomes a real collecter piece down the road though. He is already going for $50-60 on brick links. Imagine him in 20 years? Definatly worth the extra 30 bucks when you think about it like that. But I say that as someone that has that set. Of course he is. He's an integral focus and an important character from the films and book. I'd really like to have the set and don't contest the dragon's future value. But in context of current prices, the price is abysmal. You get 866 pieces basically two walls and a dragon that uses a bit more plastic than the dragon in King's castle siege, which has nearly 1000 pieces and has a full castle.The licensed theme set price increased point hasn't really applied to the ME line. Many sets are fairly priced like Helms deep, which is also $130, but has a good piece count and a massive fort. If the set retires early, I'll shell out the $130 before the price increases, but I will never consider the set as a good value at $130. Edited March 2, 2015 by Bobbtom Quote
BrickJagger Posted March 2, 2015 Posted March 2, 2015 I don't think the Smaug set sold to well due to the high price and limited structure, as others have listed above. However, I also think that another reason for poor sales could be due to the Dragon Mountain set. Around the time the Lonely Mountain sets were released, Dragon Mountain was on clearance in a lot of stores for around 30 bucks. I'm willing to bet that kids (and their parents) saw the two sets and thought "They both have a big dragon, but this one is 100 dollars less." Pretty easy decision, right? You can't really tell how much bigger Smaug is compared to the Castle dragon just by looking at the box, and I think that influenced a lot of buyers. Plus, Dragon Mountain includes a Princess, a Knight to kill the Dragon, a Wizard, etc. Instant playability. The Lonely Mountain, on the other hand, had...........dwarves. They both aren't great sets, but I think you see where I'm coming from. It's not to hard to figure out what happened after that. Hope that helped. Quote
Artanis I Posted March 2, 2015 Posted March 2, 2015 I parted out my extra Helm's Deep last night. It had a LOT of little grey pieces. Part count doesn't mean anything. Quote
Bobbtom Posted March 2, 2015 Posted March 2, 2015 I parted out my extra Helm's Deep last night. It had a LOT of little grey pieces. Part count doesn't mean anything. Yes it does. As brickjagger mentioned above, no one in the right mind is going to pick Lonely Mountain over Dragon mountain. A set for $130 that is tiny will not get many buyers. Quote
Captain Pirate Man Posted March 2, 2015 Posted March 2, 2015 (edited) Yes it does. As brickjagger mentioned above, no one in the right mind is going to pick Lonely Mountain over Dragon mountain. A set for $130 that is tiny will not get many buyers. I would hardly call the lonely mountain "tiny". If you say it is over priced, I will agree with you, but it is by no means a small set. The fact that it is an inside as opposed to an outside set plays a role also. Obviously it isn't a castle or a fortress. But as far as a throne room type of set, I don't think Lego has ever produced a finer set. I just seem to hear a lot of negativity towards that set, and I'm here to say its a pretty awesome set. Sure a $100 price would have been more acceptable, but if you are going to let 30 extra bucks keep you from this set, that is a mistake imo. See when I first saw the set pictures I thought everyone would go for it because it had the guy in it that the whole story was about, Smaug but I guess people would just moc one? As for "mocing" smaug, I'm not sure that is possible. I could be wrong, but I would love to see if it is even possible. Can someone here create a smaug without using and smaug pieces, just regular Dragon parts? Remember his hands are in his wings, unlike all of legos other dragons. Plus his wings are completely different than all other dragons wings as well. Edited March 2, 2015 by Captain Pirate Man Quote
MAB Posted March 2, 2015 Posted March 2, 2015 As for "mocing" smaug, I'm not sure that is possible. Of course it is. Search for Smaug brick built and there are MOCs of Smaug. Not recreations of the official LEGO molded Smaug, but MOCs. Quote
TheLegoDr Posted March 2, 2015 Posted March 2, 2015 Brick built Smaug is the way to go anyway since most people were upset by how small the LEGO version was in comparison. I don't own the set (I do want it, but agree with others that the price is ridiculous), so I'm sure I would be impressed by the scale of Smaug, but ultimately he would need to be bigger. And I have seen many brick built versions that are impressive. With that said, I have hardly seen any Hobbit sets around me at stores. There have been none at Wal-Mart since they were released and I've only seen a few of the smaller sets at the local Targets. I'm guessing either it didn't sell well OR the stores just didn't order very many for the latest wave (which in turn could be because of the previous sets poor sales records). Which is bothersome since I don't own the largest 3 of the Hobbit sets. I was going to pick them up for my birthday in December, but ended up needing the money for bills instead. And with recent Target clearance prices, I picked up way too many to be able to swing Hobbit sets at full price. Quote
Captain Pirate Man Posted March 2, 2015 Posted March 2, 2015 When I get my Dragon mountain set (sometime this week), I will do a size comparison of the two dragons. But even without doing them, I'm pretty sure smaug is taller and quite a bit longer. Quote
nymmerod Posted March 2, 2015 Posted March 2, 2015 Yes it does. As brickjagger mentioned above, no one in the right mind is going to pick Lonely Mountain over Dragon mountain. A set for $130 that is tiny will not get many buyers. I own both sets and I would pick Lonely Mountain hands down. There is a vast difference in size of both the builds and the dragons. Smaug is just incredibly well done and when compared side-by-side, he is much longer, more articulated and just better than the other dragon. And the dragon mountain set is little more than a tower really, the Lonely Mountain build is much more impressive. But maybe I'm not in my right mind I guess. I can see the argument BrickJagger makes though about the competition between the two sets. Most parents (if they're anything like mine were) probably wouldn't get a set like Lonely Mtn for their kids even if there wasn't another dragon-related set to blame it on. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.