 | | AT-AT (#4483) - What were you thinking? —Joe Strout
| | | | I had read reviews saying that this model was fragile, but I had no idea how ridiculously fragile it was until I got one for Christmas. You literally can't touch it except in a few special places, without something breaking off. A quick run-down of (...) (20 years ago, 15-Jan-05, to lugnet.dear-lego)
| | | | | | | | | | Re: AT-AT (#4483) - What were you thinking? —Paul S. D'Urbano
| | | | | (...) SNIP (...) Dear LEGO, In the interest of equal time, it's important you know that not all of us feel the same about the AT-AT set. Personally, I love it. It looks great. It was fun to build. It captures much of the detail of the "real" (okay (...) (20 years ago, 15-Jan-05, to lugnet.dear-lego)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: AT-AT (#4483) - What were you thinking? —Paul S. D'Urbano
| | | | | (...) Okay bad form to reply to self and all... Ever post something quickly and then read it again later and really, really want to reel it back in? If anyone cares or was paying attention, sorry for that last paragraph and the holier-than-though (...) (20 years ago, 17-Jan-05, to lugnet.dear-lego)
| | | | | | |
