| |
In lugnet.mediawatch, Jennifer L. Boger writes:
> It was mentioned a couple weeks ago that some AFOLs were interviewed for a
> Washington Post article - here it is:
>
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A26969-2001Aug17.html
Thank you Jennifer...you saved me having to find a copy of the paper locally.
Well, it's nice that Michael and Christian were mentioned, but I'm wondering
if they didn't come off as salivating adult geeks by being pegged
alone...especially after so many of us were interviewed, and yet no mention
was made of LUGNET, their site, our sites, etc.
This isn't the article I was expecting, quite frankly. It didn't have the
raw business interest of the Fast Company article, or the fun, child and
adult fan base interest I expected from our interviews. Ms. Williams also
doesn't seem to have read TLCs Fair Use info or their press kit, as she says
"Lego's" (referring to the comapny, not the toys) on multiple occasions.
I am intrigued by the following paragraph, however:
"This fall, it will provide 3 million free book covers and locker posters to
American schools. McDonald's Happy Meals will feature collectable Bionicle
toys in September. Lego officials hint of a Bionicle movie and more
expensive toys to be released in time for Christmas."
Any of you kids out there willing to grab up more than your fair share of
these free book covers and locker posters? Did I see the word "movie"? And
more sets by Christmas? That's not keeping to TLCs normal product release
schedule...all quite intriguing.
Matt
(Not upset that he didn't get into the article, but kinda' POd that LUGNET
didn't even get a nod...)
|
|
| |
Despite LEGO® releasing the new classic and legend sets, I can't help but
feel that they are continuing to slip away from their winning formula used
from the beginning. The Bionicle stuff is total limitation on one's
creativity (at least in my opinion) I know that had Bionicle been marketed
to us in 1986, my then 11 year-old self would have sneered at LEGO® for
making sets which 'don't fit in with my other stuff'. Too bad that kids are
hooked on drugs, video games, and five-minute fads these days, which really
serve to cut the attention span. This, combined with the erosion of our
public school system- are creating a generation of kids bearing names of
people such as Harris and Klebold and the like. If I remember right,
video/computer games and inattentiveness on the part of the parents and
school were sited as an influence leading to the shottings at Columbine, not
LEGO®. We NEVER had school shootings when I was growing up, please forgive
my seemingly pointless ranting. -Harvey
|
|
| |
In lugnet.mediawatch, Harvey Henkelman writes:
> Despite LEGO® releasing the new classic and legend sets, I can't help but
> feel that they are continuing to slip away from their winning formula used
> from the beginning. The Bionicle stuff is total limitation on one's
> creativity (at least in my opinion) I know that had Bionicle been marketed
> to us in 1986, my then 11 year-old self would have sneered at LEGO® for
> making sets which 'don't fit in with my other stuff'. Too bad that kids are
> hooked on drugs, video games, and five-minute fads these days, which really
> serve to cut the attention span. This, combined with the erosion of our
> public school system- are creating a generation of kids bearing names of
> people such as Harris and Klebold and the like. If I remember right,
> video/computer games and inattentiveness on the part of the parents and
> school were sited as an influence leading to the shottings at Columbine, not
> LEGO®. We NEVER had school shootings when I was growing up, please forgive
> my seemingly pointless ranting. -Harvey
Interesting rant Harvey, but I take offense to a couple of things you mention in
it.
> I can't help but
> feel that they are continuing to slip away from their winning formula used
> from the beginning.
If their formula had continued to be a winning one throughout the '90s, Lego
would have continued to use it. I prefer to look at it as 'they held on as long
as they could before needing to change to something that produced profits'.
> The Bionicle stuff is total limitation on one's
> creativity (at least in my opinion) I know that had Bionicle been marketed
> to us in 1986, my then 11 year-old self would have sneered at LEGO® for
> making sets which 'don't fit in with my other stuff'.
Limiting on creativity? Wow! I guess you haven't been reading .build.mecha
lately. Mech builders continually strive to push the limits of creativity well
beyond what the pieces sold to us are usually used for. Two of the best examples
of this were posted in the past few days-Mladen Pejic's mecha-Tortoise and Mark
Sandlin's LM-5 Aerial Assault Mecha.
Regarding the 'sets which don't fit in' remark, I'll assume there is no Technic
in your household, though it isn't needed to hook up to Bionicle in the first
place. I'd rather see more well made Bionicle than yet another technic vehicle.
Just my $.02
Sorry about my rant.
-Dave Johann
LUGNET Member #524
|
|
| |
Dave Johann at hardcoredj@techie.com wrote:
> Limiting on creativity? Wow! I guess you haven't been reading .build.mecha
> lately. Mech builders continually strive to push the limits of creativity well
> beyond what the pieces sold to us are usually used for. Two of the best
> examples
> of this were posted in the past few days-Mladen Pejic's mecha-Tortoise and
> Mark
> Sandlin's LM-5 Aerial Assault Mecha.
I appreciate the nod, but I used absolutely no Buy-onicle parts whatsoever
in my latest mecha. I used the ball and socket bits from C-3P0, and I used
two ball bits that I chopped off the end of those useless throwbot arms.
(Egad!)
In a related rant, I noticed that Mega Bloks have three new Block Bots on
the shelves. Each one comes with a Bot and a companion animal/beast. Yeah, I
know the quality isn't there, but when you hold up a $20 Block Bot and a $20
Mars mech thing, the Block Bot looks like something a kid would be much more
impressed with.
~Grand Admiral Muffin Head
--
Mark's Lego(R) Creations
http://www.nwlink.com/~sandlin/lego
|
|
| |
In lugnet.technic.bionicle, Mark Sandlin writes:
> Dave Johann at hardcoredj@techie.com wrote:
>
> > Limiting on creativity? Wow! I guess you haven't been reading .build.mecha
> > lately. Mech builders continually strive to push the limits of creativity • well
> > beyond what the pieces sold to us are usually used for. Two of the best
> > examples
> > of this were posted in the past few days-Mladen Pejic's mecha-Tortoise and
> > Mark
> > Sandlin's LM-5 Aerial Assault Mecha.
>
> I appreciate the nod, but I used absolutely no Buy-onicle parts whatsoever
> in my latest mecha. I used the ball and socket bits from C-3P0, and I used
> two ball bits that I chopped off the end of those useless throwbot arms.
> (Egad!)
"useless throwbot arms"
That's exactly what Dave was saying not to do. Why destroy a piece when you can
work around it? I didn't have to chop off any pieces from my Bionicle
ball-joint arms; I incorporated them into the design. Isn't that the true
spirit of LEGO, otherwise wouldn't we start modifying ever piece that causes us
frustration.
Of course people aren't going to buy Bionicle or Throwbots when they hear that
the only way people use the pieces is by chopping them up! LEGO too should
maybe give more examples of the positive uses of the parts in other themes,
then maybe more kids would want the sets. Just my opinion, personally, I don't
regret buying two Bionicle sets (Pohatu) because I've (suprise, SHOCK!)
*actually* used most of the pieces (without destroying them!).
Mladen Pejic, over and out!
http://www3.sympatico.ca/mladenpejic/
>
> In a related rant, I noticed that Mega Bloks have three new Block Bots on
> the shelves. Each one comes with a Bot and a companion animal/beast. Yeah, I
> know the quality isn't there, but when you hold up a $20 Block Bot and a $20
> Mars mech thing, the Block Bot looks like something a kid would be much more
> impressed with.
>
> ~Grand Admiral Muffin Head
|
|
| |
Mladen Pejic at mladenpejic@sympatico.ca wrote:
> "useless throwbot arms"
>
> That's exactly what Dave was saying not to do. Why destroy a piece when you
> can
> work around it? I didn't have to chop off any pieces from my Bionicle
> ball-joint arms; I incorporated them into the design. Isn't that the true
> spirit of LEGO, otherwise wouldn't we start modifying ever piece that causes
> us
> frustration.
I didn't chop up the regular ball-joint limbs, just the useless Throwbot
Throwing arm (the one that fires the disc)
If you know how to "work around" those, I'd sure like to see some ideas,
because there's no studs or technic holes or nothin'.
~Grand Admiral Muffin Head
--
Mark's Lego(R) Creations
http://www.nwlink.com/~sandlin/lego
|
|
| |
Oh sorry, I didn't know you were referring to that pieces. ;-)
Still, I'm a *bit* of a purist, and think that type of stuff is still wrong.
Mladen Pejic, over and out!
http://www3.sympatico.ca/mladenpejic/
In lugnet.technic.bionicle, Mark Sandlin writes:
> Mladen Pejic at mladenpejic@sympatico.ca wrote:
>
> > "useless throwbot arms"
> >
> > That's exactly what Dave was saying not to do. Why destroy a piece when you
> > can
> > work around it? I didn't have to chop off any pieces from my Bionicle
> > ball-joint arms; I incorporated them into the design. Isn't that the true
> > spirit of LEGO, otherwise wouldn't we start modifying ever piece that causes
> > us
> > frustration.
>
> I didn't chop up the regular ball-joint limbs, just the useless Throwbot
> Throwing arm (the one that fires the disc)
>
> If you know how to "work around" those, I'd sure like to see some ideas,
> because there's no studs or technic holes or nothin'.
>
> ~Grand Admiral Muffin Head
|
|
| |
> I didn't chop up the regular ball-joint limbs, just the useless Throwbot
> Throwing arm (the one that fires the disc)
>
> If you know how to "work around" those, I'd sure like to see some ideas,
> because there's no studs or technic holes or nothin'.
>
> ~Grand Admiral Muffin Head
Don't feel bad, Mark. I do it too. It's the one Lego piece that shouldn't exist,
but I believe it gave birth to the part we both love-the Bionicle ball with
axlehole. I know you had used this part, that's why I didn't mention it in the
first place.
-Dave
|
|
| |
> Interesting rant Harvey, but I take offense to a couple of things you mention in
> it.
>
> > The Bionicle stuff is total limitation on one's
> > creativity (at least in my opinion) I know that had Bionicle been marketed
> > to us in 1986, my then 11 year-old self would have sneered at LEGO® for
> > making sets which 'don't fit in with my other stuff'.
>
> Limiting on creativity? Wow! I guess you haven't been reading .build.mecha
> lately. Mech builders continually strive to push the limits of creativity well
> beyond what the pieces sold to us are usually used for. Two of the best examples
> of this were posted in the past few days-Mladen Pejic's mecha-Tortoise and Mark
> Sandlin's LM-5 Aerial Assault Mecha.
Hey Dave, my Cankerworm uses Bionicle in the neck! (Shameless plug #2!!!)
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=6176
I'm outta here!
Later,
Bryce
|
|
| |
In lugnet.technic.bionicle, Dave Johann writes:
> In lugnet.mediawatch, Harvey Henkelman writes:
> > Despite LEGO® releasing the new classic and legend sets, I can't help but
> > feel that they are continuing to slip away from their winning formula used
> > from the beginning. The Bionicle stuff is total limitation on one's
> > creativity (at least in my opinion) I know that had Bionicle been marketed
> > to us in 1986, my then 11 year-old self would have sneered at LEGO® for
> > making sets which 'don't fit in with my other stuff'. Too bad that kids are
> > hooked on drugs, video games, and five-minute fads these days, which really
> > serve to cut the attention span. This, combined with the erosion of our
> > public school system- are creating a generation of kids bearing names of
> > people such as Harris and Klebold and the like. If I remember right,
> > video/computer games and inattentiveness on the part of the parents and
> > school were sited as an influence leading to the shottings at Columbine, not
> > LEGO®. We NEVER had school shootings when I was growing up, please forgive
> > my seemingly pointless ranting. -Harvey
>
> Interesting rant Harvey, but I take offense to a couple of things you mention in
> it.
>
> > I can't help but
> > feel that they are continuing to slip away from their winning formula used
> > from the beginning.
>
> If their formula had continued to be a winning one throughout the '90s, Lego
> would have continued to use it. I prefer to look at it as 'they held on as long
> as they could before needing to change to something that produced profits'.
>
> > The Bionicle stuff is total limitation on one's
> > creativity (at least in my opinion) I know that had Bionicle been marketed
> > to us in 1986, my then 11 year-old self would have sneered at LEGO® for
> > making sets which 'don't fit in with my other stuff'.
>
> Limiting on creativity? Wow! I guess you haven't been reading .build.mecha
> lately. Mech builders continually strive to push the limits of creativity well
> beyond what the pieces sold to us are usually used for. Two of the best examples
> of this were posted in the past few days-Mladen Pejic's mecha-Tortoise and Mark
> Sandlin's LM-5 Aerial Assault Mecha.
>
> Regarding the 'sets which don't fit in' remark, I'll assume there is no Technic
> in your household, though it isn't needed to hook up to Bionicle in the first
> place. I'd rather see more well made Bionicle than yet another technic vehicle.
>
> Just my $.02
> Sorry about my rant.
>
> -Dave Johann
> LUGNET Member #524
I don't exactly call 'record losses in fiscal year 2000' a profit. I'll be
frank here, LEGO® has to dumb down their new sets and make them with SPUDS
to turn the fast buck. And the winning formula worked from their beginning
right up to juniorization (30+ years!), then we really started hearing about
'profit loss'. Remember Rocky III? Rocky had lost his edge and got his clock
cleaned by Clubber Lang (Mr.T). Later on, Apollo Creed tells Rocky that he
should return to his roots-where it all began. LEGO® needs the 'eye of the
tiger' too, just like Rocky did. The movie may have been fictional, but it's
premise sure wasn't. Eye of the tiger LEGO®, you need that eye of the tiger.
Harvey Henkelman- LUGNET #400
|
|
| |
In lugnet.technic.bionicle, Harvey Henkelman writes:
Remember Rocky III? Rocky had lost his edge and got his clock
> cleaned by Clubber Lang (Mr.T). Later on, Apollo Creed tells Rocky that he
> should return to his roots-where it all began. LEGO® needs the 'eye of the
> tiger' too, just like Rocky did. The movie may have been fictional, but it's
> premise sure wasn't. Eye of the tiger LEGO®, you need that eye of the tiger.
Oh, great work Harvey...now I'll have *that* stupid song in my head for the
rest of the day...thank you *so* very much...
8?P
Matt
|
|
| |
> > Sandlin's LM-5 Aerial Assault Mecha.
> Hey Dave, my Cankerworm uses Bionicle in the neck! (Shameless plug #2!!!)
More shamless plugs! please! new pics! please! I can't wait till september!
-Geordan-
> http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=6176
> I'm outta here!
> Later,
> Bryce
|
|
| |
In lugnet.technic.bionicle, Geordan Hankinson writes:
> > > Sandlin's LM-5 Aerial Assault Mecha.
> > Hey Dave, my Cankerworm uses Bionicle in the neck! (Shameless plug #2!!!)
>
> More shamless plugs! please! new pics! please! I can't wait till september!
>
> -Geordan-
>
> > http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=6176
> > I'm outta here!
> > Later,
> > Bryce
Sorry, Geordan...I'm the only one who gets to see it early and that's only
because I live close by...everyone else has to wait another 2 weeks. I will tell
you this much: I got to hear Cankerworm on the phone yesterday. It sounds both
mean and gruesome. I don't think I fear Bryce's 'Q' mecha anymore...a new fear
has crawled up my leg...
-Dave
|
|
| |
Thanks for the excitment Geordan. I'd like to correct or rather explain
something Dave said...(it's below)
> In lugnet.technic.bionicle, Dave Johann writes:
> In lugnet.technic.bionicle, Geordan Hankinson writes:
> > > > Sandlin's LM-5 Aerial Assault Mecha.
> > > Hey Dave, my Cankerworm uses Bionicle in the neck! (Shameless plug #2!!!)
> >
> > More shamless plugs! please! new pics! please! I can't wait till september!
> >
> > -Geordan-
> >
> > > http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=6176
> > > I'm outta here!
> > > Later,
> > > Bryce
>
> Sorry, Geordan...I'm the only one who gets to see it early and that's only
> because I live close by
Here's the deal. Living close by entitles Dave to see the Cankerworm early
only so I can beg hime for more parts. I usually say something like "well if
you want to see it all done I could use.......(insert long list of parts
here)" Trouble is I NEVER ask for one or two. It's usually more like
"however many you have of those".
Also Dave is a great think tank. I always get new and better ideas talking
my ideas through with him. :-)
Okay the "torso" and shoulders are done. I'm working on the feet and ankles.
Then just the details and I think we'll be done.
Warning shameless plug #3!!!!!
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=6176
Later,
Bryce
...everyone else has to wait another 2 weeks. I will tell
> you this much: I got to hear Cankerworm on the phone yesterday. It sounds both
> mean and gruesome. I don't think I fear Bryce's 'Q' mecha anymore...a new fear
> has crawled up my leg...
>
> -Dave
|
|
| |
snip
sigh
> >
> > Sorry, Geordan...I'm the only one who gets to see it early and that's only
> > because I live close by
Sigh...
>
> Okay the "torso" and shoulders are done. I'm working on the feet and ankles.
> Then just the details and I think we'll be done.
SIGH...
the anticipation level is rising...
-Geordan-
|
|
|
