| |
I am curious to hear folks opinions on this one. I happened across a pics in
brickshelf showing the boxes for new sets for 2008. It is my understanding that
we do not allow links to leaks, so you will have to find it yourself.
Long and short, for the first time in LEGO history, Sets are being sold that are
neither "historical" (pirates, western) or a licensed product (star wars,
indiana jones) with modern looking weapons.
The sets are the "agents" series. In the series is a fighter jet, a
"techinical" Jeep with mounted machine gun, and attack helicopter and the Batman
series pistol and the star wars sniper rifle are included in these sets. Box art
features minifigs shooting at each other.
Slightly mitigating these features are the lack of military uniforms,
non-military color scheme, and somewhat playfull james bond 'esque nature of the
playsets.
Between these sets and the German and Soviet military that we see in the Indiana
Jones sets, are we seeing a trend toward TLG being more willing to make the "war
toys" that the company delcared it would never make?
If so, does anybody care?
Personally, I am torn between my like for the Indy sets and my dissapointement
at this possible trend for TLG.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Karl Paulsen wrote:
> Long and short, for the first time in LEGO history, Sets are being sold that are
> neither "historical" (pirates, western) or a licensed product (star wars,
> indiana jones) with modern looking weapons.
Good!
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Steven Lane wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Karl Paulsen wrote:
>
> > Long and short, for the first time in LEGO history, Sets are being sold that are
> > neither "historical" (pirates, western) or a licensed product (star wars,
> > indiana jones) with modern looking weapons.
>
> Good!
I would say I'm torn as well. I like the idea of the "Agents" series, but would
be against any kind of military-theme set. My main issue right now is the
inclusion of weapons that actually fire in sets (Exo-Force and Star Wars
mainly). To me it seems pointless, but I sure thousands of kids have fun
shooting each other with them. I know it's harmless fun, but I always liked
that LEGO forced me to use my imagination when it came to weapons...especially
in spacecraft. Just call me old fashioned...or something like that.
-Dave
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Karl Paulsen wrote:
> I am curious to hear folks opinions on this one. I happened across a pics in
> brickshelf showing the boxes for new sets for 2008. It is my understanding that
> we do not allow links to leaks, so you will have to find it yourself.
>
> Long and short, for the first time in LEGO history, Sets are being sold that are
> neither "historical" (pirates, western) or a licensed product (star wars,
> indiana jones) with modern looking weapons.
>
> The sets are the "agents" series. In the series is a fighter jet, a
> "techinical" Jeep with mounted machine gun, and attack helicopter and the Batman
> series pistol and the star wars sniper rifle are included in these sets. Box art
> features minifigs shooting at each other.
>
> Slightly mitigating these features are the lack of military uniforms,
> non-military color scheme, and somewhat playfull james bond 'esque nature of the
> playsets.
>
> Between these sets and the German and Soviet military that we see in the Indiana
> Jones sets, are we seeing a trend toward TLG being more willing to make the "war
> toys" that the company delcared it would never make?
>
> If so, does anybody care?
>
> Personally, I am torn between my like for the Indy sets and my dissapointement
> at this possible trend for TLG.
Lego actually produced a plastic, full size gun in the late 50s or early 60s.
Also there were lighters with the Lego logo on it back then.
I too, do not like the idea of weapons in Lego sets, they took a no violence for
many years. There were pieces that could be substituted with a little
imagination to take the place of weapons. With all the violence in movies, TV,
ganster rap and the news it was just a matter of time. While I am moralily
against kids playing with guns, I do not feel that it really hurts anything. I
would rather have them playing with the Lego weapons rather than the Mega
Block's guns.
John P
|
|
| |
> Long and short, for the first time in LEGO history, Sets are being sold
> that are
> neither "historical" (pirates, western) or a licensed product (star wars,
> indiana jones) with modern looking weapons.
What's the difference in modern weapons versus black powder rifles, pistols,
and cannons (even some cannons had spring loaded firing mechanisms) anyway?
If you open the door just a little bit, you still opened it. That's like
saying you don't eat M&Ms, if you do eat M&Ms, but only the green ones
without nuts only on days that end in a "Y"... sha, what?
-Rob
www.brickmodder.net
PS - and the LEGO master builders MOD elements! :D
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Rob Hendrix wrote:
> What's the difference in modern weapons versus black powder rifles, pistols,
> and cannons (even some cannons had spring loaded firing mechanisms) anyway?
> If you open the door just a little bit, you still opened it. > -Rob
> www.brickmodder.net
I agree that it seems like there is no diference, but I think that most parents
would say that their is a difference between kids playing cowboys or pirates,
and kids playing war.
I personally have nothing against kids playing war. I played war with GI Joe,
army men, and lots of toy guns, and should I have kids I have no doubt that they
will also. My disapointment is that TLG had long set itself apart as a company
where not making "war toys" is part of their identity, and now they seem to be
reniging on that. I confess that I can't articulate exactly why, but it feels
dishonest to me.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Karl Paulsen wrote:
> I am curious to hear folks opinions on this one. I happened across a pics in
> brickshelf showing the boxes for new sets for 2008. It is my understanding that
> we do not allow links to leaks, so you will have to find it yourself.
>
> Long and short, for the first time in LEGO history, Sets are being sold that are
> neither "historical" (pirates, western) or a licensed product (star wars,
> indiana jones) with modern looking weapons.
>
> The sets are the "agents" series. In the series is a fighter jet, a
> "techinical" Jeep with mounted machine gun, and attack helicopter and the Batman
> series pistol and the star wars sniper rifle are included in these sets. Box art
> features minifigs shooting at each other.
>
> Slightly mitigating these features are the lack of military uniforms,
> non-military color scheme, and somewhat playfull james bond 'esque nature of the
> playsets.
>
> Between these sets and the German and Soviet military that we see in the Indiana
> Jones sets, are we seeing a trend toward TLG being more willing to make the "war
> toys" that the company delcared it would never make?
>
> If so, does anybody care?
>
> Personally, I am torn between my like for the Indy sets and my dissapointement
> at this possible trend for TLG.
If I recall, TLG renounced the "we do not make weapons" philisophy a few years
ago, or something to that effect (most notably, prior to the Batman sets).
There's a TLG press release about it somewhere (don't have time to find it right
now). As someone once pointed out out to me.. "If a bunch of boys get together
and build from a pile of LEGO bricks, invariably, at least one of them is going
to build a gun from those bricks". So, a bunch of bricks with no initial hint
of war or weapons winds up being a simulated weapon. The kids are still using
their imagination, right?
One thing's for sure--it's a fine line, as interpretations are not exact, and
can range from narrow to broad on this particular topic.
Scott
|
|
| |
Karl Paulsen wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Rob Hendrix wrote:
> > What's the difference in modern weapons versus black powder rifles,
> > pistols, and cannons (even some cannons had spring loaded firing
> > mechanisms) anyway? If you open the door just a little bit, you
> > still opened it. > -Rob www.brickmodder.net
>
> I agree that it seems like there is no diference, but I think that
> most parents would say that their is a difference between kids
> playing cowboys or pirates, and kids playing war.
It's funny how it's ok for kids to play at cowboys and indians (well, not so
much the indians part any more) and pirates, both of which are genres that
glorify killing and lawlessness. On the other hand, war (especially WWII
which LEGO has had the most resistance to), which sure isn't very pretty,
does have some positive sides to it (ok, so it does take an agressor, but we
usually don't celebrate the aggressor the way we do with pirates).
Frank
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Rob Hendrix wrote:
> What's the difference in modern weapons versus black powder rifles, pistols,
> and cannons (even some cannons had spring loaded firing mechanisms) anyway?
> If you open the door just a little bit, you still opened it. That's like
> saying you don't eat M&Ms, if you do eat M&Ms, but only the green ones
> without nuts only on days that end in a "Y"... sha, what?
>
> -Rob
> www.brickmodder.net
Well,funny you'd mention M&Ms, but I do actually avoid red ones. Which I guess
might sounds as silly to you. But there's a reason: red ones are not vegetarian.
Subtle difference, of course, but it's there to illustrate the semblance of
point I'm coming to: people perceive differences in a, erm, different way.
For some M&M colour matters, for some the
not-looking-too-much-like-a-present-day-weapon matters. (An for some the
spelling of 'color' matters)
That said, on the topic of weapons, I'm not too fond of them either - although
I'd tend to tolerate ancient more than modern ones, I guess. So it's sad, in a
way, but it's not the weapons which will make the kids go violent. And as
someone said, kids will use non-weapon pieces to mimic weapons anyway if they
want to. (Well, I have no kids, so I'm not really an expert on the subject).
And I don't mind weapon parts as much as things that actually shoot (Bionicle) -
that's much more bothering to me.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Frank Filz wrote:
| |
It’s funny how it’s ok for kids to play at cowboys and indians (well, not so
much the indians part any more) and pirates, both of which are genres that
glorify killing and lawlessness. On the other hand, war (especially WWII
which LEGO has had the most resistance to), which sure isn’t very pretty,
does have some positive sides to it (ok, so it does take an agressor, but we
usually don’t celebrate the aggressor the way we do with pirates).
|
Playing war is fantasy. It is, boiled to its essence, acting out the struggle
between good and evil. Generally speaking, fantasy works well the more removed
it is from reality. Space wars work great. The distant past works well, too.
What doesn’t work so well is contemporary scenarios of conflict-- they just
strike too close to home. The pain of WWI & WWII for Europe is not removed
enough from reality for comfort and therefore taboo, especially for the Danish
toymaker.
My .02,
JOHN
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, John Neal wrote:
| |
Playing war is fantasy. It is, boiled to its essence, acting out the
struggle between good and evil. Generally speaking, fantasy works well the
more removed it is from reality. >
JOHN
|
Thanks John,
I think you put to words what many folks feel, but can’t articulate. In the
US, WWII, has already reached the level of “myth” for most kids. This is of
course an unfortunate by product of a collective refusal to honor history, but
that’s a whole other can-o-worms.
I think LEGO has correctly judged that US customers at least will not mind
buying Nazis (un-swastica-ed, but nazi’s nonetheless) to be defeated by the
dashing Dr. Jones. WWII is long over and the culture collectively decided that
fighting was the right choice. It is easy to mythologize a war when the agressor
and loser was the Nazis.
LEGO could probably not want to try to get away with making modern military
equipment. Such equipment would stir up -in parents- reminders of Vietnam,
Iraq, Afganistan, and countless other wars around the world that are much more
vivid in recent memory, and where good/evil, success/failure are not universally
agreed upon. These wars are harder to mythologize.
Clearly LEGO is not making MI Abrahms’ and Apache’s, and it’s nearly impossible
for me to imagine them doing so. However, a year ago I would have said the
exact same thing about jeeps with guns, technicals, Wermachtt troopers and
fighter jets.
|
|
| |
| |
Clearly LEGO is not making MI Abrahms’ and Apache’s, and it’s nearly
impossible for me to imagine them doing so. However, a year ago I would have
said the exact same thing about jeeps with guns, technicals, Wermachtt
troopers and fighter jets.
|
A crying shame really, since WW2 models precisely like those would guarantee
them my money.
ESPECIALLY M1 Abrahms and Apaches!
(Aircraft carriers would rock, too)
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Scott Lyttle wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Karl Paulsen wrote:
> > I am curious to hear folks opinions on this one. I happened across a pics in
> > brickshelf showing the boxes for new sets for 2008. It is my understanding that
> > we do not allow links to leaks, so you will have to find it yourself.
> >
> > Long and short, for the first time in LEGO history, Sets are being sold that are
> > neither "historical" (pirates, western) or a licensed product (star wars,
> > indiana jones) with modern looking weapons.
> >
> > The sets are the "agents" series. In the series is a fighter jet, a
> > "techinical" Jeep with mounted machine gun, and attack helicopter and the Batman
> > series pistol and the star wars sniper rifle are included in these sets. Box art
> > features minifigs shooting at each other.
> >
> > Slightly mitigating these features are the lack of military uniforms,
> > non-military color scheme, and somewhat playfull james bond 'esque nature of the
> > playsets.
> >
> > Between these sets and the German and Soviet military that we see in the Indiana
> > Jones sets, are we seeing a trend toward TLG being more willing to make the "war
> > toys" that the company delcared it would never make?
> >
> > If so, does anybody care?
With all the support material (decals, paints, painting guides out there for
the military modeling hobby, its an easy jump to Lego doing a military line. I
suspect we are only a few years away from it.
|
|
| |
Hi all,
A good, intelligent, and civil debate here, I'm sorry I didn't see it earlier.
There is no doubt that LEGO has moved away from their diehard position against
violent toys. I'm not sure the new Agents line is really any more military
looking than the Dino Hunters were - there was a minifig head with camo paint on
it a few years ago. As for the lines between good and evil, a lot has changed
since the heady days of the Black Falcons and Crusaders - if you look at the
latest Castle line there is no doubt whatsoever who the goodies and the baddies
are supposed to be.
My main issue with the Agents line is simply that I don't think it is pulled off
very well. The Indy sets on the other hand, are simply marvelous, and I do hope
we see more of them over the next few years
I never thought I'd see a contemporary military line, but at this point who is
to say for sure? LEGO is conscious of not losing ground in the market and for
better or worse, boys have always loved to play war. And to use a martial
metaphor, in the battle for the boys toy market, while technologies and trends
come and go, avoiding producing military playsets is the equivalent of not
trying to take the highest hill of them all.
Things I could see LEGO doing in the future include:
-More model-team type military models (think Sopwith Camel) maybe from WWII,
geared towards older builders. I can see good reasons not to release a Stuka
model in Poland or a Superfortress model in Japan. But a Spitfire or a P 51
Mustang would sell well worldwide, a T34 or a Sherman might have potential.
Maybe even try to sneak in a Tiger Tank if the ball gets rolling?
-A sort of future military/space type minifig-based theme. This would allow LEGO
to do "minifig war", but without the most direct paralells to whatever
problematic conflict is going on in the real world.
-Maybe do military style Technic sets? LEGO have already put out a Cobra
gunship, and of course there was that awesome red Creator chopper with firing
missiles...
-Less likely, but maybe even a contemporary military style minfig scale theme
would be an option, although probably with generic tanks, instead of actually
creating a minifig scale M1 Abrams.
We'll see what happens, I think the only thing we can be sure of is that
whatever LEGO's policy is right now on these things, that is subject to change.
As a military builder, I don't think I'd have a problem with LEGO doing any of
these things. But there are more than enough specialized pieces and colors for
military MOCers to keep busy with already.
For one of the most thoughful set reviews I've ever read, check this out from
2005. It addresses lots of relevant issues to LEGO and military type stuff.
http://news.lugnet.com/build/military/?n=2081
To me the Agents line does not signify LEGO crossing a line for the first time -
I think the company has been selling and profitting from war toys for many years
now, and has wisely stopped trying to stake a claim on some disfuse moral high
ground.
Magnus
|
|
| |
I agree with Karl. It makes a big difference which war is being represented.
Indiana Jones provides a perfect opportunity to provide vehicles from World War
II and the Cold War. LEGO will find them appropriate for their audience for
exactly the same reason Speilberg found them appropriate for his audience.
There is very little debate remaining on whether or not the Nazis or the
Communists were bad guys.
A really bold move would be a Civil War theme. There wouldn’t be many vehicles
to model, but there would be ships and buildings, minifigs and horses. It would
probably look a lot like the Wild West themes. Modeling Civil War battlefields
is a popular hobby among adults, but I don’t think kids are into it.
As far as the new Agents theme being a war toy, it really didn’t strike me that
way. It seems a lot more like a James Bond type fantasy theme with completely
fictional villains, like Batman and Star Wars.
And as far as coming up with a military-like space theme, I think Star Wars
fills that role quite adequately. The good guys call themselves the Republic,
and the bad guys call themselves the Empire.
Maybe an ancient Roman theme isn’t entirely out of the question. Playmobile has
one.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Erin Howarth wrote:
| |
I agree with Karl. It makes a big difference which war is being represented.
Indiana Jones provides a perfect opportunity to provide vehicles from World
War II and the Cold War. LEGO will find them appropriate for their audience
for exactly the same reason Speilberg found them appropriate for his
audience. There is very little debate remaining on whether or not the Nazis
or the Communists were bad guys.
|
Since the start of this thread, I have had a chance to examine the second wave
of Indiana Jones sets and the entire Agents line in person and now might be a
good time to revisit this thread. It seems like LEGO has a fairly obvious new
policy.
Licensed lines: LEGO war toys in licensed lines are probably here to stay. I
doubt we will see many, if any, armored vehicles and the like (though who
knows), and it is likely that the “wars” will continue to be the ones with
obvoius good-guys and bad-gusys. That said, LEGO has clearly been shown the
profibability of portraying jeeps, machine guns soldiers in uniform.
LEGO lines: It’s pretty clear that outside of Licenses, LEGO is sticking hard to
fantasy or historical (100 or more years ago) fighting only. Having the chance
to see the agents line in person made them seem much less “military” than in
previews. It’s pretty clear that there are guns and fights, but like (perhaps
even more so than) the dino-fighters and exo-force, of the past, it’s pretty
well confined to a clever cartoony fantasy environment with little real combat.
Even the new castle lines, with clearly deliniated good vs. evil and dwarfs,
trolls and “orcs” seem further removed from actual historical combat than sets
from the Classic Castle era.
All in all, I think it’s a nice balance. Clearly LEGO’s position on “war” toys
has shifted somewhat, but it’s nice to see that they seem to be taking their
time and giving serious thought to the shift and it’s implications.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Erin Howarth wrote:
| |
A really bold move would be a Civil War theme. There wouldn’t be many
vehicles to model, but there would be ships and buildings, minifigs and
horses. It would probably look a lot like the Wild West themes. Modeling
Civil War battlefields is a popular hobby among adults, but I don’t think
kids are into it.
|
Whose civil war would you choose?
Tim
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Tim David wrote:
| |
In lugnet.general, Erin Howarth wrote:
| |
A really bold move would be a Civil War theme. There wouldn’t be many
vehicles to model, but there would be ships and buildings, minifigs and
horses. It would probably look a lot like the Wild West themes. Modeling
Civil War battlefields is a popular hobby among adults, but I don’t think
kids are into it.
|
Whose civil war would you choose?
Tim
|
War of the Roses
Tim
|
|
| |
No no, clearly he means the Dutch
Revolt with cavalry charges and great siege works throughout the Low Countries.
The lawlessness and danger of the “Wild West” but with better clothes and
swords!
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Ted Godwin wrote:
| |
No no, clearly he means the Dutch
Revolt with cavalry charges and great siege works throughout the Low
Countries. The lawlessness and danger of the “Wild West” but with better
clothes and swords!
|
That’s a line I could get behind!
Tim
|
|
| |
Tim Gould wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Ted Godwin wrote:
> > No no, clearly he means the
> > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_Revolt Dutch
> > Revolt> with cavalry charges and great siege works throughout the Low
> > Countries. The lawlessness and danger of the "Wild West" but with better
> > clothes and swords!
:-)
> That's a line I could get behind!
Well, it isn't one you would like to be in front of. ;-)
Play well,
Jacob
--
Bregnerod Transit Authority - Moving mini-figs:
http://lego.sparre-andersen.dk/BTA/
|
|
|
