| |
Is it just me? I just cant seem to get excited over the imminent Harry
Potter line. O.k I have only read 50 pages of the first book, but it all
seemed to be based in a modern day town environment with characters who
wouldn't translate well into minifigs (ie: Harry and the other children are
too small and Hagrid too big).
I would therefore suggest that a "Lord of the Rings" line would be far more
appropriate for TLG to be developing. The film is due for release in
December 2002. It is truly fantasy based, mediaeval, full of knights,
wizards, castles, dragons, etc.. I agree that the size of the Hobbits could
be a problem, but what the heck, they are fantasy figures, so there is more
scope for imagination.
|
|
| |
David Gowing wrote:
> I agree that the size of the Hobbits could
> be a problem, but what the heck, they are fantasy figures, so there is more
> scope for imagination.
I suspect that minifig proportions are actually correct for Hobbits and wrong
for most others!
Jennifer Clark
|
|
| |
In lugnet.castle, David Gowing writes:
> Is it just me? I just cant seem to get excited over the imminent Harry
> Potter line.
Oh well I'd have to see what they came up with first...
> O.k I have only read 50 pages of the first book, but it all
> seemed to be based in a modern day town environment with characters who
> wouldn't translate well into minifigs (ie: Harry and the other children are
> too small and Hagrid too big).
The enviroment will shift to a magical castle enviroment once you read on...
> I would therefore suggest that a "Lord of the Rings" line would be far more
> appropriate for TLG to be developing. The film is due for release in
> December 2002. It is truly fantasy based, mediaeval, full of knights,
> wizards, castles, dragons, etc..
That would indeed be a very cool product line, lots of possibilities. I have
my doubts about the movie though, I don't see how you can put such an
elaborate story into a 120 minute movie... but that's a different matter.
> I agree that the size of the Hobbits could
> be a problem, but what the heck, they are fantasy figures, so there is more
> scope for imagination.
Aren't the HP figures fantasy figures then? Besides, a LOTR line would also
have some practical difficulties that need to be resolved in order to be
able to recreate the plot: e.g. how would you imagine the One Ring to fit
around a minifig finger? Also, unfortunately I think it's easier for TLC to
base sets on a storyline that primarily focusses on a few characters in a
castle then on a lot of characters in a whole imaginative world... you would
have to develop a *LOT* of sets in order to capture the story line of
LOTR... not that we would mind of course...
Cheers,
Wessel
|
|
| |
In lugnet.castle, David Gowing writes:
> Is it just me? I just cant seem to get excited over the imminent Harry
> Potter line. O.k I have only read 50 pages of the first book, but it all
> seemed to be based in a modern day town environment with characters who
> wouldn't translate well into minifigs (ie: Harry and the other children are
> too small and Hagrid too big).
That's because you're only read 50 pages.
> I would therefore suggest that a "Lord of the Rings" line would be far more
> appropriate for TLG to be developing. The film is due for release in
> December 2002. It is truly fantasy based, mediaeval, full of knights,
> wizards, castles, dragons, etc.. I agree that the size of the Hobbits could
> be a problem, but what the heck, they are fantasy figures, so there is more
> scope for imagination.
Well, they could definitely do it with, say, minifigs for the hobbits and
creator-scale figs for everyone else...
eric
|
|
| |
In lugnet.castle, David Gowing writes:
> Is it just me? I just cant seem to get excited over the imminent Harry
> Potter line. O.k I have only read 50 pages of the first book, but it all
> seemed to be based in a modern day town environment with characters who
> wouldn't translate well into minifigs (ie: Harry and the other children are
> too small and Hagrid too big).
I dont think lego are bothered with minifig size. look at the Star Wars
anakin v's chewbacca, about 3 foot difference - both the same size minifig.
The minifig has been around 20 odd years and hasnt changed. I do agree that
the Harry Potter line dosent instill great enthusiasm, unless there are a
few shnacky pieces for my castle sets.
> I would therefore suggest that a "Lord of the Rings" line would be far more
> appropriate for TLG to be developing. The film is due for release in
> December 2002. It is truly fantasy based, mediaeval, full of knights,
> wizards, castles, dragons, etc.. I agree that the size of the Hobbits could
> be a problem, but what the heck, they are fantasy figures, so there is more
> scope for imagination.
The first of the 3 LOTR movies is out in December this year, and looking at
the marketing schedules (they are floating around on the net) it seems that
for the first film at least they are keeping the marketing low key (yeah
sure) as they don't want to phantom menace the merchandise (we all know what
that means). There cetainly isn't any reference to TLC in their lists
(although scarily a Games Workshop board game is on the cards)
Nethertheless.. I want LOTR sets... lots of them... please
:)
James Stacey
www.minifig.co.uk
|
|
| |
In lugnet.castle, James Stacey writes:
> I do agree that
> the Harry Potter line dosent instill great enthusiasm, unless there are a
> few shnacky pieces for my castle sets.
Well, there ought to be a lot of cool "wizardy" stuff...I expect potions,
cauldrons, owls (hopefully they won't use the same bird piece they use for
falcons and parrots), maybe a rat (is Scabbers in the first book?), castle
walls, probably secret doors...
Hmm. Uh-oh. A lot of ths stuff is things I already have plenty of.
Especially secret doors...and brooms...I read the first book so long ago,
I'm not sure what sets might come out of it. Maybe (fingers crossed)
they've been listening and they're going to make Hogwarts as a 'sectional'
castle that joins together several sets...
> The first of the 3 LOTR movies is out in December this year, and looking at
> the marketing schedules (they are floating around on the net) it seems that
> for the first film at least they are keeping the marketing low key (yeah
> sure) as they don't want to phantom menace the merchandise (we all know what
> that means). There cetainly isn't any reference to TLC in their lists
> (although scarily a Games Workshop board game is on the cards)
A wargame, I thought? Hopefully it's not just a re-hash of Warhammer
Fantasy Battles..."What do you mean, Sauron's fielding an army of Chaos
Warriors?"
J
|
|
| |
In lugnet.castle, Jeff Johnston writes:
> maybe a rat (is Scabbers in the first book?),
Yes.
> > There cetainly isn't any reference to TLC in their lists
> > (although scarily a Games Workshop board game is on the cards)
>
> A wargame, I thought? Hopefully it's not just a re-hash of Warhammer
> Fantasy Battles..."What do you mean, Sauron's fielding an army of Chaos
> Warriors?"
As long as it's not anything like "Fellowship of the Ring" by Iron Crown
Enterprises.
"So, the Fellowship player wins if he makes it to here by turn 11, but if he
hasn't been to Rivendell by Turn 6 he has to make it over here to Bree by turn
8 and then over to this spot by turn 14 to win... but if he doesn't make it to
Rivendell by Turn 6 *or* Bree by Turn 8 he can still win by making it over here
by Turn 10... but if the other players manage to intercept him with the
Ringwraiths by Turn 4 he can't win unless he gets to Rivendell within 3 turns
and spends a turn there..."
eric
|
|
| |
> A wargame, I thought? Hopefully it's not just a re-hash of Warhammer
> Fantasy Battles..."What do you mean, Sauron's fielding an army of Chaos
> Warriors?"
>
> J
Err bad news..
from what I read
quote
The Lord of the Rings game will follow along the lines of the popular(sic)
warhammer fantasy battle series
unquote
|
|
| |
James Stacey at james@minifig.co.uk wrote:
>
> The first of the 3 LOTR movies is out in December this year, and looking at
> the marketing schedules (they are floating around on the net) it seems that
> for the first film at least they are keeping the marketing low key (yeah
> sure) as they don't want to phantom menace the merchandise (we all know what
> that means). There cetainly isn't any reference to TLC in their lists
> (although scarily a Games Workshop board game is on the cards)
Fellowship of the Ring - Christmas 2001
The Two Towers - Christmas 2002
Return of the King - Christmas 2003
*sigh* Have to wait 3 years to see them all. ARGH!
In any case, I'm sure we'll see plenty of merchandise, but LEGO sets would
be darn nice.
~Mark "Muffin Head" Sandlin
--
Mark's Lego Creations
http://www.nwlink.com/~sandlin/lego
|
|
| |
In lugnet.castle, David Gowing writes:
> I would therefore suggest that a "Lord of the Rings" line would be far more
> appropriate for TLG to be developing. The film is due for release in
> December 2002. It is truly fantasy based, mediaeval, full of knights,
> wizards, castles, dragons, etc.. I agree that the size of the Hobbits could
> be a problem, but what the heck, they are fantasy figures, so there is more
> scope for imagination.
Actually, the first of three LotR movies is out Decemeber 14, 2001. About
309 days from now, give or take a few hours. Not that I'm counting, or
anything. :)
I think that sets based on LotR would be super-cool, and I'd probably buy
all of them, even if horrid, much like the die-hard SW fans are buying all
the SW sets.
Of course, if SW is any predictor, we won't get any orcs until the 3rd year
of the license, and then we'll get 1 in a $50 Cirith Ungol playset. :(
And of course, there's the other great thing about Lego... you don't have to
wait, you can build your own. :)
Hmm...
James
|
|
| |
In lugnet.castle, James Brown writes:
> Actually, the first of three LotR movies is out Decemeber 14, 2001. About
> 309 days from now, give or take a few hours. Not that I'm counting, or
> anything. :)
I seem to be having trouble accessing the official site, and you seem like
the person to ask, given your understated anticipation of the film! Is
there a mirror site available? The last time I went on it I couldn't get
much info without downloading a .mov file; is there a simple press release page?
Thanks for your help!
Dave!
|
|
| |
In lugnet.castle, Dave Schuler writes:
> In lugnet.castle, James Brown writes:
>
> > Actually, the first of three LotR movies is out Decemeber 14, 2001. About
> > 309 days from now, give or take a few hours. Not that I'm counting, or
> > anything. :)
>
> I seem to be having trouble accessing the official site, and you seem like
> the person to ask, given your understated anticipation of the film! Is
> there a mirror site available? The last time I went on it I couldn't get
> much info without downloading a .mov file; is there a simple press release page?
The official site is very pretty and generally quite neat, but also pretty
darn useless unless your browser has good Real* support. Newline has an
agreement with RealMedia, it seems. :(
The good news is that they have updated the site to include some stuff in
Quicktime, including the theatrical trailer (which is pretty much just a
teaser, but does have some nice eye candy).
I tend to get most of my fix...er...news, yeah, that's it... news at
http://www.theonering.com
It's a pretty good fansite that collects news & stuff. They've also got a
messageboard, but I don't read it much because it's mostly arguments about
how accurate and/or sacriligeous the movie will be. I'm not as fanatic as
some people out there - yikes!
James
|
|
| |
Lorbaat wrote:
>
> In lugnet.castle, Jeff Johnston writes:
>
> > maybe a rat (is Scabbers in the first book?),
>
> Yes.
>
> > > There cetainly isn't any reference to TLC in their lists
> > > (although scarily a Games Workshop board game is on the cards)
> >
> > A wargame, I thought? Hopefully it's not just a re-hash of Warhammer
> > Fantasy Battles..."What do you mean, Sauron's fielding an army of Chaos
> > Warriors?"
>
> As long as it's not anything like "Fellowship of the Ring" by Iron Crown
> Enterprises.
>
> "So, the Fellowship player wins if he makes it to here by turn 11, but if he
> hasn't been to Rivendell by Turn 6 he has to make it over here to Bree by turn
> 8 and then over to this spot by turn 14 to win... but if he doesn't make it to
> Rivendell by Turn 6 *or* Bree by Turn 8 he can still win by making it over here
> by Turn 10... but if the other players manage to intercept him with the
> Ringwraiths by Turn 4 he can't win unless he gets to Rivendell within 3 turns
> and spends a turn there..."
Yea, what a game...
What I'd like to see is ICE re-release Riddle of the Ring. It was a nice
game, and one of the few games I have ever seen which played well for 3
players (too many 3 player games consist of 2 of the players ganging up
and eliminating one of the players, thus turning the game into a 2
player game, with a bored spectator).
--
Frank Filz
-----------------------------
Work: mailto:ffilz@us.ibm.com (business only please)
Home: mailto:ffilz@mindspring.com
|
|
| |
Dave Schuler at orrex@excite.com wrote:
> I seem to be having trouble accessing the official site, and you seem like
> the person to ask, given your understated anticipation of the film! Is
> there a mirror site available? The last time I went on it I couldn't get
> much info without downloading a .mov file; is there a simple press release
> page?
>
> Thanks for your help!
>
> Dave!
There's gobs of info here:
http://www.theonering.net
~Mark "Muffin Head" Sandlin
--
Mark's Lego Creations
http://www.nwlink.com/~sandlin/lego
|
|
| |
Ack! Don't suggest it!
You know why? To get the right scale, they'd end up using minifigs for the
Hobbits, and the new Midifigs for humans. Ick!
David Gowing wrote:
> Is it just me? I just cant seem to get excited over the imminent Harry
> Potter line. O.k I have only read 50 pages of the first book, but it all
> seemed to be based in a modern day town environment with characters who
> wouldn't translate well into minifigs (ie: Harry and the other children are
> too small and Hagrid too big).
>
> I would therefore suggest that a "Lord of the Rings" line would be far more
> appropriate for TLG to be developing. The film is due for release in
> December 2002. It is truly fantasy based, mediaeval, full of knights,
> wizards, castles, dragons, etc.. I agree that the size of the Hobbits could
> be a problem, but what the heck, they are fantasy figures, so there is more
> scope for imagination.
--
| Tom Stangl, iPlanet Web Server Technical Support Netscape Communications
Corp
| iPlanet Support - http://www.iplanet.com/support/ A division of AOL Time
Warner
| Please do not associate my personal views with my employer
|
|
| |
In lugnet.castle, Tom Stangl writes:
> You know why? To get the right scale, they'd end up using minifigs for the
> Hobbits, and the new Midifigs for humans. Ick!
Midifigs? Is this the new music stuff from Lego?
Cheers,
- jsproat
|
|
| |
In lugnet.castle, Tom Stangl writes:
> Ack! Don't suggest it!
>
> You know why? To get the right scale, they'd end up using minifigs for the
> Hobbits, and the new Midifigs for humans. Ick!
http://news.lugnet.com/castle/?n=7730
That wouldn't necessarily be so bad.
I wish the Creator-scale figs were a bit more articulated, but I don't see what
everyone's big problem with them is. Yeah, I'd be upset if they completely
replaced Minifigs, but I don't think that's going to happen.
eric
|
|
| |
David Gowing <davidgowing@lineone.net> wrote in message
news:G8FH27.AE8@lugnet.com...
> Is it just me? I just cant seem to get excited over the imminent Harry
> Potter line. O.k I have only read 50 pages of the first book, but it all
> seemed to be based in a modern day town environment with characters who
> wouldn't translate well into minifigs (ie: Harry and the other children • are
> too small and Hagrid too big).
>
> I would therefore suggest that a "Lord of the Rings" line would be far • more
> appropriate for TLG to be developing. The film is due for release in
> December 2002. It is truly fantasy based, mediaeval, full of knights,
> wizards, castles, dragons, etc.. I agree that the size of the Hobbits • could
> be a problem, but what the heck, they are fantasy figures, so there is • more
> scope for imagination.
I have actually read the first, well, less than 3 pages of the first book,
BUT my girlfriend has read them all. I asked her what kind of
structures/settings the book had, and here's what I got out of her that the
two of us decided might be sorta' Legoish... (from memory):
Hogwarts Castle
Steam Engine Hogwarts train (Not much of a castle theme)
Witches house - kind of a weird house
many plain houses (?)
Dragons
Gnomes
Elves
Prof. Dumple (dimple?)
Doctor Scrape (Scipe, Scaip -- I can't read my own writing, LOL!)
So, assuming this Harry Potter Lego is not part of the Castle Theme, and
perhaps it's own theme like Star Wars, then it's possible there will be
several cool pieces/sets usable for castle - most especially figs.
Theoretically, of course.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.castle, David Gowing writes:
> I would therefore suggest that a "Lord of the Rings" line would be far more
> appropriate for TLG to be developing. The film is due for release in
> December 2002. It is truly fantasy based, mediaeval, full of knights,
> wizards, castles, dragons, etc.. I agree that the size of the Hobbits could
> be a problem, but what the heck, they are fantasy figures, so there is more
> scope for imagination.
This isn't going to happen, it seems. Quoted from a Toy Fair report(1):
"Lord of the Rings will be a major part of this year's Playmates line.
Building upon the interactive voice chip technology used in their very
successful Simpsons line, Playmates' Lord of the Rings action sets will
allow collectors to recreate scenes and dialogue from the film. Featuring
movie-accurate figures, these sets are built on Lego-like platforms with
both building blocks and static scenery. Moreover, they will accommodate
standard Lego bricks allowing any customization one can dream up. Fairly
good-sized sets are affordably priced, and it won't break your wallet to own
more than a few. Unfortunately, as with the Lara Croft 12-inch figures, this
line has not yet received final approval, so pictures were not allowed."
So it looks like someone else has the construction toy contract. (Although I
don't recall Playmates doing construction toys before.) And of course,
there's the obligatory watering down of the LEGO trademark. :(
Then again , whaddya expect from a spy report?
James
1: found at IGN Filmforce: http://filmforce.ign.com/news/2012.html
|
|
|
