Travel the dunes with the LEGO� Star Wars™ Ultimate Collector Series Sancrawler™

FBTB - From Bricks To Bothans

Follow us: RSS
News? Questions? Comments? Email!

[NEW STUFF] 2011 SW Sets

The reason FBTB came to be. We don't forget our roots.

Re: [NEW STUFF] 2011 SW Sets

Postby Cradok » Thu Apr 14, 2011 4:32 am

fallenangel327 wrote:If you ask me the real nerds are the ones who debate over fictional "canon" data that mean absolutely nothing. :lol: (Hyperdrive capability of an A-wing? Who cares?)


Why is it, then, that you call the big wedge shape ship the Empire uses an 'Imperator', a term based on a single, inaccurate product which was eventually referred to in a single work recently and even then as a way for someone to shoehorn a pet theory into canon, rather than the long-established designation of 'Imperial'?

(If it sounds like I have an issue with Curtis Saxon, well... okay, I do, but I'm genuinely curious about the disconnect between your statements.)
Cradok
 
Posts: 44
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 7:05 am
Location: Ireland

Re: [NEW STUFF] 2011 SW Sets

Postby The Brain » Thu Apr 14, 2011 11:32 am

Draykov wrote:
fallenangel327 wrote:Many of our so-called "imaginary spaceships" are real, tangible studio models...


I could crap in a box and tell you it was a 1/1000 scale model of a Skatarian cruiser. That doesn't make the 500 ft. "actual length" of a Skatarian cruiser relevant.


It heartens me that the discussion of the scaling of a toy based on a number of contradictory fictional measurements has devolved to a discussion about poop. Also, Draykov, I am impressed (disturbed?) that you take the time to measure the length of your bowel movements. ;)

Carry on, my friends!
I am the brain, that which keeps you sane
I think your thoughts, I feel your pain
I am able to control both body and soul
I am never asleep, and I make you whole.
The Brain
 
Posts: 489
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2009 1:27 pm
Location: Trapped inside a skull, yearning to be free!

Re: [NEW STUFF] 2011 SW Sets

Postby fallenangel327 » Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:44 pm

Cradok wrote:Why is it, then, that you call the big wedge shape ship the Empire uses an 'Imperator', a term based on a single, inaccurate product which was eventually referred to in a single work recently and even then as a way for someone to shoehorn a pet theory into canon, rather than the long-established designation of 'Imperial'?


You got me there. I guess because 'Imperator' is less ambiguous than 'Imperial'. Sort of like how nobody says Super Star Destroyer or Turbo Tank seriously anymore.

The Brain wrote:It heartens me that the discussion of the scaling of a toy based on a number of contradictory fictional measurements has devolved to a discussion about poop. Also,


Um, the 277cm measurement is real.
fallenangel327
 
Posts: 290
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 4:38 pm

Re: [NEW STUFF] 2011 SW Sets

Postby StoutFiles » Thu Apr 14, 2011 8:15 pm

fallenangel327 wrote:Many of our so-called "imaginary spaceships" are real, tangible studio models, so I don't see what's wrong with that. And it's not like shelf space isn't a big priority. If you ask me the real nerds are the ones who debate over fictional "canon" data that mean absolutely nothing. :lol: (Hyperdrive capability of an A-wing? Who cares?)


Oh come on Fallen! Wing span of an X-wing? Who cares, right! A real nerd knows many Star Wars facts and obsesses over studio models also. It's not a bad thing, but don't knock the other nerds.

Also, where are you getting the 277cm measurement? The Databank has it at 282cm.

EDIT: Oh, from theforce.net. Which one is the accurate one then? 5cm is a pretty big difference...
StoutFiles
 
Posts: 155
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 7:02 am

Re: [NEW STUFF] 2011 SW Sets

Postby fallenangel327 » Fri Apr 15, 2011 3:41 pm

StoutFiles wrote:Oh come on Fallen! Wing span of an X-wing?


According to the studio model, 10.97m with wings open, 11.61m with wings closed. XD

Yeah, I guess so. Sorry guys. Keep in mind, though, that with the wingspan example, it actually does have some solid evidence (the scaled model) while a number like a hyperdrive capability can come from anywhere. But whatever - like StoutFiles said, we're all in the same boat here.
fallenangel327
 
Posts: 290
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 4:38 pm

Re: [NEW STUFF] 2011 SW Sets

Postby Brickweiser » Sun Apr 17, 2011 7:16 pm

Regardless I am stoked for this set. It looks accurate (don't very much care about the ISD for comparision) and the figures are a bonus. Suspecting it to cost 500 CDN. Gonna have to get cracking on getting the Death Star first though :(.
Brickweiser
 
Posts: 105
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 3:17 pm

Re: [NEW STUFF] 2011 SW Sets

Postby ItsTwentyBelow » Thu Apr 21, 2011 6:51 pm

So it seems that the MINI Venator and AAT must never have been intended for release as Easter sets at Target because there is still no sign of them. Seems like an unintelligent move on Lego's part. I definitely would have snapped both up in a heartbeat. The AT-ST holds no interest for me since I have the original from 2002 with the actual printed faceplate.The last few years Lego has done these MINIs for Easter have assuredly been very popular and the sets seemed to sell like hotcakes. I don't know how they plan to market these otherwise and see a comparable profit. Hopefully they don't end up as some LEGO store "spend $50 or more" gimmick because that would kill my interest in them. They certainly aren't worth $50 each. I guess we'll see what happens with them.
ItsTwentyBelow
 
Posts: 26
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 11:41 pm

Re: [NEW STUFF] 2011 SW Sets

Postby MrCRskater » Tue Apr 26, 2011 8:17 am

ItsTwentyBelow wrote:So it seems that the MINI Venator and AAT must never have been intended for release as Easter sets at Target because there is still no sign of them.


Don't get your knickers in a twist. They'll probably show up for Halloween or Christmas or something.
MrCRskater
Staff Writer
 
Posts: 677
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2009 8:44 am

Re: [NEW STUFF] 2011 SW Sets

Postby Draykov » Tue Apr 26, 2011 8:23 am

Another new image from the LEGO site cache: 9901 Yoda. Props to legomilk over at Eurobricks.

Image
Hail Space!
Image
Draykov
 
Posts: 1777
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2009 8:14 pm
Location: Lone Star

Re: [NEW STUFF] 2011 SW Sets

Postby fallenangel327 » Tue Apr 26, 2011 8:43 am

Too bad it's not a set.

KimT wrote:I kinda doubt this is a set.
Why remake a Yoda sculpture that didn't sell very well?
The Darth Maul bust was a cold case as well.
If TGL wanted to relaunch the sculptures, I think they'd done it a long time ago.
No money there in my opinion and thus no need to produce such sets.
Plus the below 10XXX numbers for exclusives and UCS sets haven't been used for ages.

I do believe this is just a number picked randomly to use for cache storing of an image for Master Builder Events like the one linked previously where people could participate in building this exact Yoda Sculpture.

Sorry, but it's a "NO GO!" from my point of view.


Image
fallenangel327
 
Posts: 290
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 4:38 pm

Re: [NEW STUFF] 2011 SW Sets

Postby Brickweiser » Tue Apr 26, 2011 6:26 pm

Mini-Sets and Figures in the Advent Calendar:

Image
Brickweiser
 
Posts: 105
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 3:17 pm

Re: [NEW STUFF] 2011 SW Sets

Postby fallenangel327 » Tue Apr 26, 2011 7:19 pm

A bigger, crisper picture of the advent calendar stuff here. I suppose neither the MINIs nor the minifigures are particularly alluring, but remember, these are aimed at kids.
fallenangel327
 
Posts: 290
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 4:38 pm

Re: [NEW STUFF] 2011 SW Sets

Postby Flynn » Tue Apr 26, 2011 10:26 pm

fallenangel327 wrote: but remember, these are aimed at kids.


As opposed to...? ;)
joecrowaz on Flickr wrote:Flynn you little wussy with a purple robed fairy for an icon,


Flickr Brickshelf
Flynn
 
Posts: 655
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2009 11:38 am

Re: [NEW STUFF] 2011 SW Sets

Postby GIR3691 » Wed Apr 27, 2011 5:59 am

Yeah, not the most exciting fig choices. I was hoping for something cooler, but at least it's a mix of OT and PT stuff.
Image
>>[email protected] <<
GIR3691
Staff Writer
 
Posts: 715
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2009 8:33 pm
Location: CT

Re: [NEW STUFF] 2011 SW Sets

Postby CloneEmperor » Wed Apr 27, 2011 8:37 am

I wasn't expecting anything really large or amazing with an advent calendar, but what sells this for me is the Santa Yoda. I must have that.
Image
CloneEmperor
 
Posts: 142
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2009 10:22 pm
Location: God's Country: Southern Alberta

Re: [NEW STUFF] 2011 SW Sets

Postby fallenangel327 » Thu Apr 28, 2011 1:30 am

Flynn wrote:As opposed to...? ;)


Minifigure-oriented AFOLs, of course. ;)
fallenangel327
 
Posts: 290
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 4:38 pm

Re: [NEW STUFF] 2011 SW Sets

Postby fallenangel327 » Wed May 25, 2011 8:33 pm

Sorry for the double post, but I thought it might interest some of you that someone has bought the 7965 Falcon and taken pictures:

Image

Image

dWhisper could not have been more correct when he said that this set is what it would be if our LEGO bins could vomit. The exterior is so disjointed and messy that it appears to exhibit many vomit-like qualities. :D
fallenangel327
 
Posts: 290
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 4:38 pm

Re: [NEW STUFF] 2011 SW Sets

Postby SDIronClaw » Wed May 25, 2011 9:24 pm

The 7965 Falcon leaves me scratching my head in bewilderment. I like the last Falcon so much better and is a lot more detailed and way cooler features. You would think Lego would only improve on remakes, this is a very sad and dissapointing opposite.
"I find your lack of Lego disturbing."
SDIronClaw
 
Posts: 377
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2010 9:46 pm
Location: Judland Waste

Re: [NEW STUFF] 2011 SW Sets

Postby Feralcom » Fri May 27, 2011 6:57 am

Why is there no pieces number on the box?

I will be watching for sales on this one. The set looks like crap, but there are some great parts.
Feralcom
 
Posts: 112
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 1:22 pm

Re: [NEW STUFF] 2011 SW Sets

Postby Mister Ed » Fri May 27, 2011 7:08 am

SDIronClaw wrote:The 7965 Falcon leaves me scratching my head in bewilderment. I like the last Falcon so much better and is a lot more detailed and way cooler features. You would think Lego would only improve on remakes, this is a very sad and dissapointing opposite.


I know I was among the many who felt the same about the most recent AT-AT remake.
Mister Ed
 
Posts: 1161
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 3:18 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Star Wars

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests