Subject:
|
Re: what makes a legend?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.lego.direct
|
Date:
|
Tue, 30 Oct 2001 15:22:45 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
719 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.lego.direct, Allan Bedford writes:
> In lugnet.lego.direct, Jeff Findley writes:
> > In lugnet.lego.direct, Brad Justus writes:
> > > We're having a debate here in the ABS-paved halls of LEGO Direct that I'd
> > > like to throw open to the community.
> > >
> > > The topic is: what makes a LEGO Legend a legend? Or, more precisely, if we
> > > cannot bring back a set precisely as it was (or pretty darn close), can it
> > > still qualify as a Legend?
> >
> > If you want to go "way back" to a set that's mostly built of generic bricks,
> > I'd highly suggest 565 Moon Landing.
>
> I think this is at least the 2nd vote for this set, in response to the
> original question. Anyone else want to jump in and support it?
>
> http://guide.lugnet.com/set/565_1
I certainly had a lot of fun playing with mine growing up. This set probably
had the most play value of any that I got. I might even buy it again.
George
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: what makes a legend?
|
| (...) I think this is at least the 2nd vote for this set, in response to the original question. Anyone else want to jump in and support it? (URL) think this set would make a good reissue for several reasons: 1) It is historically significant. It (...) (23 years ago, 27-Oct-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
134 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
