| |
In lugnet.harrypotter, Jeff Thompson writes:
> In lugnet.harrypotter, Matthew Gerber writes:
> > Hey all,
> > 4) General - Hagrid is a brick. You thought the Creatorfigs were bad? At
> > least they are mobile! This dumbing-down (juniorization) is really getting
> > out of hand.
>
> I have mixed feelings about this.
>
> a. Yes, he's a brick. Uck.
>
> However . . .
>
> b. He is no more immobile than the LEGO Ghost figure, though,
> whose ghostly body prevented the minifig legs from moving,
> if the set bothered to include legs at all. From this point
> of view, the figure is no more limited in terms of play value
> than a well-established figure that's been out for a decade or
> so.
>
> c. I hope that the beard fits normal minifigs as well! I will
> love that hairpiece element if it does, and I will hate it if
> it doesn't.
>
> d. At least he's just a brick. If LEGO had bothered to retool
> the minifig completely to make an adult-proportioned minifig, we
> would have even more cause to be concerned that minifigs were
> being phased out entirely. At least this "just-a-brick" concept
> doesn't threaten the idea of minifigs completely, the way that Creator
> minifigs do.
>
> > 5) General - Looking at the hair pieces as rendered in 3D on the box cover,
> > my thought is that LEGO is moving towards blobby chunks of plastic meant to
> > be "more realistic", instead of well sculpted and detailed elements, to
> > represent hair. Case in point: The Alpha Team Buzz Cut. An admireable idea,
> > poorly developed/executed. Every instance of this piece I have seen is flat
> > in the back left quadrant. Not mis-molded...mis-sculpted. In this age of
> > computer-aided design and rapid prototyping, there is no reason for this
> > poor level of element to be produced. And the rounded detail leaves much to
> > be desired, as the deeply defined hair elements of the past worked much
> > better to get the point across. BTW: Harry's got a 'fro!
>
> e. I didn't notice any significant sculpting flaw in the buzz-cut
> hairpiece. Assuming that by "back left quadrant you mean the
> "southwest" portion of the hair (if viewed from the top, with
> the face of the minifig pointing north) I don't see anything
> wrong at all. Certainly nothing I wouldn't have noticed on
> my own, and nothing that bothers me now that you have
> directed my attention to this portion of the hairpiece.
>
> f. I don't mind the "smooth" appearance of the buzz-cut. I
> think that if it was more deeply carved, it might be distracting.
> I like this element. Comparing it to the "hippy hair" element from
> years ago, I don't notice much difference in the level of detail.
>
> g. I am thrilled with the hair pieces that we see on the cover of
> this Harry Potter software! The female hair and the wizard
> hair-and-beard look fantastic (praying, of course, that the
> beard will work on normal minifigs).
> >
> > 6) General - Like some of the other new LEGO product, the faces as
> > represented on the minifigs on the game box are rendered with very thin
> > lines. I assume that this is meant to express more detail and realism. While
> > this is all well and good, the fact that even on different sets in the same
> > theme, different styles are being used shows a seriously poor coherent whole
> > across the entire LEGO line. While some face elements use such thin lines
> > that some are almost non-existent (e.g. Young Anakin), others use similar
> > line weights to the classic head elements of the past (e.g. Han Solo). Why?
>
> h. In general, faces with thin lines seem to be pitched at an
> older age, and figs with thick lines seem to be pitched at a
> younger age.
>
> The thick-lined faces look messy to me. I'd rather just see a classic
> smiley-face than a face with thick sloppy printing on it.
>
> I have no complaints about the faces of the Harry Potter figures.
> They look great to me!
>
> They do wander far afield of the classic smiley, but that is the
> norm for figure faces nowadays. The thin-lined details appeal to
> me more than the thick-lined details we have seen on some faces in
> the past few years, and look to be on par with the level of detail
> we've seen on some of the best Star Wars faces (Anakin and Qui-gon
> Jinn).
>
> I do hope that whatever bad-guys there may be in the Harry Potter
> universe don't come with ugly faces. I'm very tired of LEGO
> promoting the idea that an unattractive person is an evil person, as
> they do in almost any themes with sides that are in conflict with
> each other (example - the 2000 castle sets, with the hideous faces
> of the 'bull' figures, or the scarred faces of the Adventurer bad
> guys, or the snarling faces of the western bad guys).
>
> --
>
> Jeff <jthompson@esker.com> "Float on a river, forever and ever, Emily"
The entertainment industry has portrayed the good guys as young and
handsome, while the bad guys are old, fat, ugly, ect. It has been ingrained
into us from birth. Just check out those soap operas that women watch and
you'll see. And the only way an old or ugly person can be attractive is if
they're wealthy.-Harvey
p.s. And by the way Jeff, "See Emily Play!!"
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
41 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
