 | | Re: 2002’s good for Castle!
|
| (...) I realize this, however TLC is responsibe for the Lego sets of the movie, therefore my complaints are directed correctly. I'm sure Sony Entertainment didn't say "Could you make Green Goblin's head three times the size of his body? Thanks." (...) (22 years ago, 11-Feb-02, to lugnet.castle, lugnet.harrypotter, lugnet.general, lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.year.2002)
| | | | | Re: 2002’s good for Castle!
|
| (...) It isn't "three times the size of his body." I'd say it is little more than 20% larger than a regular minifig head. I can't comment on how it looks compared to either the movie or the comic, since I have seen neither, nor do I plan to. (...) (22 years ago, 11-Feb-02, to lugnet.castle, lugnet.harrypotter, lugnet.general, lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.year.2002)
| | | | | Re: 2002’s good for Castle!
|
| (...) Okay, a little follow-up: A friend showed me a pic, and the minifig head looks like a pretty good representation of the character's head. Is it a bit wide? Sure, but minifigs THEMSELVES are a bit wide. Jeff (22 years ago, 11-Feb-02, to lugnet.castle, lugnet.harrypotter, lugnet.general, lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.year.2002)
| | | | | Re: 2002’s good for Castle!
|
| (...) It is a good representation, but wouldn't you rather have a minifig head, instead of this helmet thing? Don't get me wrong, though, I see some uses for it. I just think it looks a bit absurd, as well as the frankenstein's monster hat peice (...) (22 years ago, 11-Feb-02, to lugnet.castle, lugnet.harrypotter, lugnet.general, lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.year.2002)
| | | | | Re: 2002’s good for Castle!
|
| (...) much time and work go into each of these minifigs, but who would even spend $15-20 on a single minifig? Magnus (22 years ago, 12-Feb-02, to lugnet.castle, lugnet.harrypotter, lugnet.general, lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.year.2002)
| |
