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

FBTB - From Bricks To Bothans

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

Review: 76079 Ravager Attack

The official Lego set review forum. Please read the Guidelines before posting!

Review: 76079 Ravager Attack

Postby Staff » Wed May 03, 2017 1:00 am

76079 Ravager Attack - Full Set

I'm starting this review a few days before the second Guardians of the Galaxy movie comes out; I'm excited, I have tickets to a double-header with the first in IMAX on Thursday. The first GotG movie represents something very unique in the Super Hero genre; a genre I really enjoy, but is starting to show a few problems. The Marvel movies, which are all entertaining, are very formulaic. The look and appearance of the movies themselves has become somewhat bland. Marvel tends to stick to flat colors and taking off brightness... giving Cap a dull blue suit, making Spider-Man less shiny looking, darker colors for Doctor Strange, etc. DC goes sepia and covers everything in grit; suicide squad made Harley colorful, but everything else was gray and brown with an extra helping of grit and dust.

Guardians of the Galaxy has been bucking all of those trends; it's absurdly colorful. It mixes humor and action more effectively than any other comic book movie not named Deadpool. More than that, it proved that you can tell a comic book story with an ensemble cast, without diving deeply into origin stories, and make us care about them in a two hour runtime. I'm just saying, it's perfectly okay to choke up a bit when you hear "We Are Groot." Guardians of the Galaxy was supposed to be the first "failure" in the MCU, back when it was first released, but it ended up being one of the best, if not the best, we've gotten.

The verdict on LEGO sets is a bit more mixed. The first line only consisted of a few sets and a polybag... but it gave us one of the best spaceship/jets in the first Milano set (I still maintain it's named after Alyssa Milano and not the cookies). It also gave us a good set with a Nova, and a... not good prison break set. Still, it was great to get the major players from the first movie, even if we still need an official Glenn Close minifigure, and that Milano was fantastic. For the sequel, LEGO seems to be sticking to their most recent trend of "let's just rehash the old stuff, but make it worse and raise the price a bit." Thus far, I've only picked up one set for review, 76079 Ravager Attack, and that is mostly because I wanted a Mantis minifigure. Here's hoping that this little $19.99 and 197 piece manages to impress a bit more when built than it does in the first impression.



I've been working on an article for some time about LEGO... are they in some sort of creative drought, or have they just given up on making quality sets for the most part? Certain lines are doing incredible things... the LEGO Batman Movie, their original stuff like the Modular Buildings and Ideas, the new Ninjago movie sets. There are scattering of really great sets in there, but for the most part, especially for our break and butter like Star Wars, Super Heroes, and other licensed themes, we've been getting a bucket of awful, lazy, and rehashed sets. It's not just the repeats, it's that so many features in the sets just look awful. Sizes being off, ugly build techniques, and just ugly ships in general. Did LEGO lose a bunch of the design team (or are they just doing original stuff), or is it all being done by a computer at this point? Who knows.

76079 Ravager Attack - Minifigures

We get three minifigures in the set; an updated version of the still far too large Rocket, the new villain from the Ravagers named Taserface, and a new addition from the Cosmic / GotG canon in Mantis. Three minifigures, two new and one redone, is always nice to see in one of the cheaper sets. More than that, I'm glad Mantis wasn't tucked away in one of the most expensive sets. She's a pretty cool character in the comics.

76079 Ravager Attack - Rocket

Rocket's only real change is color. Otherwise, he's mostly unchanged and still, way, way, too big. I was hoping they could come up with a solution for these figures at this point, but it seems like it's a problem LEGO isn't interested in solving. The size of the head, combined with the standoff for the tail, make him nearly as tall as a regular minifigure.

76079 Ravager Attack - Rocket Back

The tail still feel like it's going to break on any sort of play use. Mine have been sitting on a shelf, so it's fine, but I'd be curious if anyone else has seen problems with the part. At least the legs and torso seem to be fairly reusable for other applications.

76079 Ravager Attack - Taserface

Taserface is a new Ravager, the good/bad guys from the first movie that Peter was once part of. I know nothing about him, and when I opened up his wiki page it said there were spoilers, so I stopped reading. I'm a bit curious about the name, given that "Taser" is a brand name, not a product (also a type of sailboat, but I think in context we can assume it's the stun gun). On the other hand, that sounds exactly like the name Star-Lord would give someone. I like the hair here, because it can be used in a whole lot of varieties, and black beards are somewhat rare.

76079 Ravager Attack - Taserface Back

I'd need to check the other sets with Ravagers to see if this is a generic uniform or not, but I haven't bought them and I'm too lazy to do some googlin'. Not bad, but they're pretty meh, just like they were in the first Guardians of the Galaxy movie. I mean, how many people even knew the red outfits were Ravager outfits in that movie?

76079 Ravager Attack - Mantis

Mantis is one of the weirder characters in the Marvel universe... and this is a universe that includes Spider-Ham and Thor as several different types of animals. In the comics, she's either a human, a bug, or a plant. Sometimes, it's all of those things. She's a telepath, sometimes, and an empath, most of the time, and on at least one occasion set Groot on fire with her brain. She's been a pacifist before, and also a martial arts master. In short, she's even more messy than your average comic book hero, but she's also usually mixed up with this weird sense of innocence that makes her fun to see in stories.

76079 Ravager Attack - Mantis Alt-Face

 

The figure isn't bad, but I'm really wondering about the angry alt-face (that doesn't fit the more modern version of the character). Much like Rocket's tail, the antennae feel flimsy like they could break off, and are something to keep an eye on. The torso is pretty great for reuse, since there aren't any symbols or insignias, and I could see it pop up in several different applications. How well the character works, much like with Taserface, I'll have to come back to after I see the movie.

76079 Ravager Attack - Tree

I'm not certain if this is the best or worst part of the set. I mean, the gun is very Rocket, so that's cool. The tree is very "typical LEGO filler" which is bad. The chunk of what looks to be the Milano is spoilery, which is... bad, maybe. It's hard to tell with these things since this set could have zero basis in the movie outside of some production stills. Attaching a mixel socket for the wreckage just seems stupid, so that's bad.

76079 Ravager Attack - Frisbee or Something Ship

The biggest problem I'd had with LEGO sets lately is that they often feel like something that either I build as a way to capture a shape before I make it look better or the kind of build I made back when I was just starting out and didn't understand build complexities. That's not to say I'm a great MOC builder. I'm not, but I also know that stacking a few plates and calling it a day doesn't really fly. This set looks very circa 2001 LEGO; that isn't automatically bad... Benny's Spaceship showed us that tapping into that nostalgia can really work for a build, but when all the sets start doing that, I'm left wondering what the point is.

76079 Ravager Attack - Ship Back

 

Pictures do too much justice to this build, because as you're putting it together, it feels like you're missing 2/3rds of a ship. I made a joke about a frisbee above because until you attach that slope blob on the bottom, this thing feels like a flat plate. There is just so little to like about this build, and that's really the biggest problem with that tree. Take those parts and build up a little bit better ship. I know I haven't seen the movie, but there is a style for those ships and this just doesn't feel like it matches what we'd seen before. It's ugly, boring, and lazy.

76079 Ravager Attack - Ship Underside

Even the use of stud-shooter blasters in place of launchers here hurts the ship (the brick versions on top make a lot more sense). I made a joke in chat that this thing isn't even half-*bleep*, it is at best a quarter. That may be generous. In my own private head-canon, I imagine the design going something like "well, that's a good first pass, I'm going to get a sandwich" and then the guy coming back to discover that his first draft was submitted and accepted. Of course, that's giving the designer the benefit of the doubt (mostly because I want to love those guys, they make the toy we love)... but I'm not sure based on what feels like the majority of new sets.

I'm left in a real quandry about the set. It's only $19.99 in the US, so it's far on the inexpensive side. It has Mantis, which is great, along with one of the new bad guys. It doesn't feel like you're getting ripped off at the price, really, but there's also nothing at all to get excited about outside of Mantis. The set is boring at best, disappointing at worst. Everything I've heard about the movie is that its great, but the sets don't seem to do it any justice. This is an unfortunate trend for what has come before, and based on some leaked pictures, what is coming later for Thor and Justice League. I'm not certain LEGO is even trying on these sets any more, and just releasing them as filler for a box with a minifig in them. That underwhelming nature has me calling this a two out of five. Mantis isn't going to improve what is a very forgettable build.

What I Liked

  • Mantis and Taserface are great additions to the minifig lineup, even if Taserface is a bit bland

  • Decent price at $19.99, with some okay parts to it.


What I Didn't Like

  • The box shows the vehicle in quite literally the only position where it doesn't look terrible

  • The tree is at best a spoiler but mostly feels like you wish those parts were used in the ship

  • Rocket is still way too big as a minifigure


Verdict: 2 out of 5. You can, if you feel so inclined, buy 76079 Ravager Attack and the rest of the Guardians of the Galaxy vol. 2 LEGO sets at Amazon.com. You might want a good discount first to feel better about it, and as of this writing, it's rocking a 20% off one.

76079
---
Permalink: http://www.fbtb.net/2017/05/03/review-76079-ravager-attack/
Staff
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2009 8:19 pm

Re: Review: 76079 Ravager Attack

Postby darth_fett » Wed May 03, 2017 4:42 am

This is the Ravager ship Rocket flies in the first movie right? The one where he has to jet ahead & open an armored hull with...machine guns of all things. All i know is it's supposed to be tinier than the Milano class ship (whatever that class is suppose to be called). Kinda sucks we dont get fake turbines top & bottom or just a dedicated part that fills that niche. I don't really mind Rocket's head being gigantic, but would it kill anyone to have a rotatable head? Did Chima ever do a raccoon head? I know they had a fox... Also, are they going to release more movie sets or is this it?
darth_fett
 
Posts: 178
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2009 1:33 pm

Re: Review: 76079 Ravager Attack

Postby dWhisper » Wed May 03, 2017 4:47 am

Could be, those were called Warbirds, but thy were still fairly large. Two-seaters and had a nice shape to them, which isn't captured here at all. I'll see the movie tomorrow and maybe post some impressions and how they fit into the movies.

As for more sets, this is likely it. Off the top of my head, I don't think any of the Super Hero movie lines ever got a second release wave (not counting LEGO Batman Movie as part of that bunch). The closest would be the Helicarrier, though it was more one-off-ish
If the above post didn't offend you, you're probably reading it wrong.
dWhisper
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 10:56 pm
Location: Dallas, TX

Re: Review: 76079 Ravager Attack

Postby chebyrashka » Wed May 03, 2017 9:03 am

Saw the movie on Monday and not sure where this even fit into the movie, must be on the cutting room floor.
chebyrashka
 
Posts: 9
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 1:08 pm

Re: Review: 76079 Ravager Attack

Postby dWhisper » Thu May 04, 2017 8:19 pm

Yeah, just got out of the sneak preview (it is absurdly entertaining)... and this set has nothing to do with anything.

Also, Taserface is the one metaphor of a name
If the above post didn't offend you, you're probably reading it wrong.
dWhisper
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 10:56 pm
Location: Dallas, TX

Re: Review: 76079 Ravager Attack

Postby fallenangel327 » Thu May 04, 2017 9:52 pm

I rather like Mantis' angry alt-face - it's consistent with what this one I remember of her in Englehart's Avengers. Not a fan of the fleshy antennae, though.
Supersonic wrote:nobody is going to see the differences between the Rebels and ESB AT-AT. Definitely not kids.
fallenangel327
 
Posts: 369
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 4:38 pm

Re: Review: 76079 Ravager Attack

Postby dWhisper » Fri May 05, 2017 7:48 am

After watching the movie, the angry face really doesn't belong on the character, and the characters don't belong together like this. I've grabbed the other two sets for review and will get them up next week, and may try to put together a movie review or something like that as well.
If the above post didn't offend you, you're probably reading it wrong.
dWhisper
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 10:56 pm
Location: Dallas, TX

Re: Review: 76079 Ravager Attack

Postby MarOrgana » Fri May 12, 2017 2:20 am

Yeah, I agree.

Mantis character does not match this angry face LEGO Mini-figure. The whole set is cool, do not take me wrong, but it isn't her. :S
MarOrgana
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon May 08, 2017 12:35 am

Re: Review: 76079 Ravager Attack

Postby MarOrgana » Fri May 12, 2017 2:21 am

dWhisper wrote:After watching the movie, the angry face really doesn't belong on the character, and the characters don't belong together like this. I've grabbed the other two sets for review and will get them up next week, and may try to put together a movie review or something like that as well.


I'm with you! That was my first thought about it.
MarOrgana
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon May 08, 2017 12:35 am

Re: Review: 76079 Ravager Attack

Postby PurpleDave » Sat May 13, 2017 9:03 am

It's not the look of the Marvel movies that's feeling formulaic. It's everything about the movies, including the utterly forgettable music. Imagine someone playing Wonder Woman's guitar riff. You'd know exactly what that was. Point to anything that's even half as memorable from _any_ MCU movie that doesn't have "of the Galaxy" in the title. Apparently they're even guilty of the unspoken crime of cribbing their music cues from other movies, including Star Trek (used during Doctor Strange, according to a coworker). This stems from a really uncomfortable situation where the director uses placeholder music from other sources during editing to complete the "feel" of the scene before actually bringing the composer in for the first time. When the composer inevitably tries to do something new, original, and non-copyright-violating, the director (who at this time has heard the borrowed stuff literally hundreds of times in the editing room) will often reject it because it doesn't sound like what they've got playing in their heads. Ultimately, the poor composer ends up being painted into a corner where nothing short of a blatant rip-off of the placeholder cues will mollify the director. The only reason it's not so widely known is that it's so widely done that anyone who can legitimately complain about another composer ripping off their work was probably forced into doing the very same thing at some point earlier in their career. Stones and glass houses and all that.

Guardians 1 & 2 both not only manage to buck the MCU trend of endlessly recycled music cues that are probably tailored to sink into the background as much as possible and not draw undue attention to their plagiarism, but it's pretty much the only memorable music in the entire MCU (even if some of it makes my ears cringe). What's more, it's not just a layer added on top of the movie with cheap, kindergarten "edible" paste, but something that's incorporated into the action taking place on screen, thanks to Star-Lord's Walkman.

And who says the Milano is named after the cookies? I mean, sure, they're older than Alyssa, having been introduced in 1956 to solve a problem with the Naples cookies (essentially half a Milano, and prone to melting together in warmer markets). Peter Quill, however, was a child of the 80's. He's obsessed with what little he knows about Earth, and all of that is limited to the pop culture he experienced during his brief time on Earth (1980-1988), which happened to include the height of Alyssa Milano's fame (what's never explained is how he knew what Jackson Pollock's art looks like, since he died the same year as the Naples cookie). Also, this:

http://www.businessinsider.com/guardian ... ano-2014-8

Everyone (at least every AFOL) knows that the dark-red outfits are Ravager uniforms because people were complaining up and down about the fact that the first source for Rocket in a Ravager outfit was the SDCC Warbird set (and later the gone-in-a-flash TRU polybag).

The only thing you need to know about Taserface is that James Gunn swore that he'd never use him in a GotG movie because he hates the name so much. And that's exactly why he's in this movie. Also, the hair is from the orcs in the Attack on Laketown Hobbit 3 set...and it has never appeared in any color besides black. But it worked great for a movie Slipknot minifig...

The only other Ravager who appears in the GotG2 sets is Yondu, who has a completely different outfit design from Taserface. Besides him, Star-Lord has one minifig with the short Ravager jacket, and one of the Baby Groot things has a tiny Ravager outfit, but the rest of the GotG characters have shucked theirs. In the first movie's sets, Star-Lord had both his Ravager duster from the beginning of the movie, and his shorter jacket outfit. Gamora had a Ravager outfit. Drax had the same pants as the latter Star-Lord and Gamora. Rocket had an entirely different Ravager outfit (but again, not easily obtained). Groot was...naked. So, no, Taserface's outfit is not generic.

The scene depicted by the set _does_ happen in the movie...sorta. The ship is not there (but if it's an actual Warbird, it's understandable why they wanted to include it), but the characters are, as is the tree and the piece of the Milano (to say any more would be highly spoilerish).

darth_fett wrote:I don't really mind Rocket's head being gigantic, but would it kill anyone to have a rotatable head? Did Chima ever do a raccoon head? I know they had a fox... Also, are they going to release more movie sets or is this it?


Heh. They did not do a raccoon, as a matter of fact. They did do a fox and a skunk (used the same head, as I recall), but the tail was actually molded into the back of the head instead of being a separate piece like Rocket's.

dWhisper wrote:As for more sets, this is likely it. Off the top of my head, I don't think any of the Super Hero movie lines ever got a second release wave (not counting LEGO Batman Movie as part of that bunch). The closest would be the Helicarrier, though it was more one-off-ish


I don't believe so, either. Frankly, I think there are just too many superhero movies that they've been doing licensed tie-in sets for to justify making a second wave. For the most part, I believe they get zero sets at all (Suicide Squad), just one set (Antman, Doctor Strange, Wonder Woman), or three sets (MoS, BvS, GotG, GotG2). The closest I think we've seen to a second wave of movie-related Superhero sets is maybe Civil War because the yellow airport truck was a delayed store exclusive, though it may have also been because of the timing of the MCU/Sony deal.

dWhisper wrote:After watching the movie, the angry face really doesn't belong on the character, and the characters don't belong together like this. I've grabbed the other two sets for review and will get them up next week, and may try to put together a movie review or something like that as well.


They aren't all present at the same time, but all three of them are in that location at some point during the movie. We just never see the ship there (and here's you, wanting to sacrifice the only part of the set that's actually legitimate to make the made-up part more accurate). The angry face, I'm unsure about. I've only seen the movie once, a week ago. I do remember that she shows a few different very exaggerated emotions (and looks hyper-creepy, which doesn't seem to translate very well to the minifig, to the unknowing delight of parents everywhere). I know for sure that happiness and sadness are two of those emotions. I don't remember any scenes with anger, but disgust may have come up at one point, and the alt-face could work for that.
Everything is Batman! Except Adam West.
PurpleDave
 
Posts: 442
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2014 8:23 pm

Re: Review: 76079 Ravager Attack

Postby crazybirdman » Sat May 13, 2017 10:04 am

The music isn't a MCU specific problem, several big budget moves have the same problem. That WW riff is a good example, but the only music from that movie I remember. Winter Soldier's score was pretty great, so that's one out of 15?
crazybirdman
 
Posts: 290
Joined: Wed May 18, 2011 8:14 am

Re: Review: 76079 Ravager Attack

Postby PurpleDave » Sat May 13, 2017 4:40 pm

crazybirdman wrote:The music isn't a MCU specific problem, several big budget moves have the same problem. That WW riff is a good example, but the only music from that movie I remember. Winter Soldier's score was pretty great, so that's one out of 15?


No, it's not exclusive to the MCU (as I said, many composers end up being forced into a similar situation), but:

http://www.avclub.com/article/why-marve ... usi-242487

And it should be pointed out that we've been listening to Star Wars for just shy of 40 years, James Bond for even longer, Indiana Jones for 36 years, and Harry Potter for 16. Each of those properties uses a single theme song across the entire series, and we've heard _that_theme_ so many times that it's burned into our brains. Even though the Burton Batman movies got tanked by Schumacher, Danny Elfman's (totally original) theme song outgrew the success of its origin by being used as the theme song for Batman: The Animated Series. Even though I can't actually recall the Nolan Batman theme off the top of my head (it was intentionally made to not be something you can easily hum), I can recognize it when it's played. With time, and a few more movies to reinforce them, I'll probably be able to at least do the same with the Snyder Batman and Superman themes (though I do recall really liking the Batman theme, even though it's overshadowed by the Wonder Woman theme). The only stuff from the MCU that I can ever pick out is the licensed music from GotG 1 & 2, and Black Sabbath's Ironman from Ironman 2. Heck, the only stuff from the MCU that I can attest to actually listening to is the licensed music from GotG 1 & 2, Black Sabbath's Ironman from Ironman 2, and anything that was in the first and third videos in that article. But I could mention something like PotC, LotR, or The Matrix, and you should be able to remember at least something about the music used within. Aside from the licensed stuff, I draw a total blank on the MCU.

It's terribly ironic that Disney practically owes its success to memorable music in movies (to the point that they currently require at least one song per episode for many of their animated series, like Phineas & Ferb, and The Lion Guard), and the PotC music is so distinctive that it's the only one of the "temp music" examples in the third video that I actually recognize. And yet, music in Disney's MCU has been rendered so bland and inoffensive that you can't even remember hearing some of it when you're watching a clip that's pointing out how bland, inoffensive, and totally forgettable the music has become.
Everything is Batman! Except Adam West.
PurpleDave
 
Posts: 442
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2014 8:23 pm

Re: Review: 76079 Ravager Attack

Postby dWhisper » Sat May 13, 2017 9:53 pm

PurpleDave wrote:And who says the Milano is named after the cookies?


It was "discussed" in the thread for the review of the original set, since I devoted a great deal of that review to my own personal adoration of Alyssa Milano (hey, I'm a child of the 80s too).

PurpleDave wrote:Everyone (at least every AFOL) knows that the dark-red outfits are Ravager uniforms because people were complaining up and down about the fact that the first source for Rocket in a Ravager outfit was the SDCC Warbird set (and later the gone-in-a-flash TRU polybag).


Gone in a flash? I could find those things for a good year after the fact, and I think I have 10 or 20 of them in storage somewhere.

PurpleDave wrote:The only thing you need to know about Taserface is that James Gunn swore that he'd never use him in a GotG movie because he hates the name so much. And that's exactly why he's in this movie.


Also the single funniest point of an absurdly funny movie. I actually hurt myself laughing so hard at that exchange. The Ravager we really needed more than anything was Kraglin. So many gaps in what this set deserved for minifigs, like Ego or a proper Aeysha.

My great fear now is Stakar and the other GotG 3000 characters will end up as a Comic Con exclusive.
If the above post didn't offend you, you're probably reading it wrong.
dWhisper
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 10:56 pm
Location: Dallas, TX

Re: Review: 76079 Ravager Attack

Postby PurpleDave » Sun May 14, 2017 11:03 am

dWhisper wrote:It was "discussed" in the thread for the review of the original set, since I devoted a great deal of that review to my own personal adoration of Alyssa Milano (hey, I'm a child of the 80s too).


Ah. Don't remember if I read that review, and I doubt very much that I kept up with the comments. *checks* Nope. Never read it at all. Then again, I never watched it in theatrical release (GotG2 was my first for the MCU), so I probably didn't pay much attention to the sets back when you posted it.

Gone in a flash? I could find those things for a good year after the fact, and I think I have 10 or 20 of them in storage somewhere.


I only got some because I asked if they had them in stock a couple days before the promo was officially supposed to start. I _might_ have seen them one other time a few days later, but when you consider that I used to be able to regularly frequent three TRU stores, and semi-regularly two others (before one of each closed down in the last couple years), I should have seen a lot more of him. I kept spotting Electro for months. I even saw more of the Sandtrooper poybag, and considering that could easily be used as an army builder for both Sandtroopers and regular Stormtroopers, _and_ you got the gun for free over BL prices on the minifig alone, that should have sold out faster than Rocket by a long shot. But here, at least, that was not the case. The only polybag minifig I've seen less of is the A-Wing pilot, which I've never actually seen in person.

The Ravager we really needed more than anything was Kraglin. So many gaps in what this set deserved for minifigs, like Ego or a proper Aeysha.


Kraglin isn't a villain in this movie. Nor is he exactly a hero. Or a major character to any degree. Superhero sets mostly feature heroes, followed by villains, with civilians (banana truck guy, some farmer, TLBM's mayor, and I would include any and all security guards in this category) or truly nameless henchmen probably forming the next most common group. TLBM is a rare exception in that we've now seen several actual cops released in quick succession (with the upcoming 2nd wave, there will be a total of 9 different TLBM police characters, including the Gordons). Ego is a bit of an oversight, but it's not the first time that a major villain has been left out from a movie-related Superhero release. Out of three retail sets tied to the Nolan Batman trilogy, the only villains we ever saw were two Jokers (one not even based on his movie appearance) and one Bane (who had more costumes in one movie than Batman did in three). Doomsday got left out of the BvS sets. I'm sure there are some MCU villains who got skipped over, but they're all so gosh-darned memorable that Loki is the only one I can think of who appeared in a movie that didn't end in "of the Galaxy". Anyways, there are only a handful of non-police supporting characters. TLBM is the first time we've gotten a movie Alfred (and the second TLBM Alfred will be in superhero costume). Pepper Potts only got her minifig in a set based on the scene where she actually ends up wearing Ironman armor, from a movie where she actually becomes something of a superhero herself. Lois Lane and Mary Jane are so constant in their superhero-boyfriends lives that they kinda have to be included at some point (and Lois is actually helping drive the plot in MoS and BvS).

Kraglin _may_ get his minifig for GotG3, based on how the second movie ended. Ayesha got _a_ minifig, which is definitely not the first two outfits we see her in (all gold and red carpet), but _may_ be based on an outfit that she wore at some point in the movie (I'm thinking a video game scene?). Ego is my bet for SDCC17. Of the minifigs which appear in the GotG2 sets, I can think of four that could easily be dropped for GotG3, and one which will absolutely have to be added. That still leaves a few openings for other characters to be slotted in, assuming GotG3 follows the same release pattern as the first two movies. More, if they can limit themselves to one version of Star-Lord and Groot.

My great fear now is Stakar and the other GotG 3000 characters will end up as a Comic Con exclusive.


I doubt they'll get any GotG2 release. Ego's a more important character to this story, and with only one Marvel SDCC character per year, they'd be releasing them through 2021. When is GotG3 due out?
Everything is Batman! Except Adam West.
PurpleDave
 
Posts: 442
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2014 8:23 pm

Re: Review: 76079 Ravager Attack

Postby fallenangel327 » Sun May 14, 2017 3:20 pm

dWhisper wrote:My great fear now is Stakar and the other GotG 3000 characters will end up as a Comic Con exclusive.


It took me far too long to realize what you were referring to with this.

I'm a little disappointed that my favorite Arnold Drake creation after the Doom Patrol was written into the MCU in such a way as to prevent them from ever assuming a more prominent role (not to mention squander the chances of them ever appearing in any film adaptation of the Korvac Saga), though it's still neat that they were featured at all.
Supersonic wrote:nobody is going to see the differences between the Rebels and ESB AT-AT. Definitely not kids.
fallenangel327
 
Posts: 369
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 4:38 pm

Re: Review: 76079 Ravager Attack

Postby PurpleDave » Sun May 14, 2017 5:49 pm

fallenangel327 wrote:I'm a little disappointed that my favorite Arnold Drake creation after the Doom Patrol was written into the MCU in such a way as to prevent them from ever assuming a more prominent role (not to mention squander the chances of them ever appearing in any film adaptation of the Korvac Saga), though it's still neat that they were featured at all.


Don't write them off so soon. Gunn has said that he plans to make a complete trilogy that has a clear ending for this group, but that it doesn't rule out the possibility of further movies featuring other incarnations of the Guardians. Given this movie, I think he pretty clearly was referring to the original roster. That said, I don't think it would be as popular. Rocket and Groot are the clear standouts of the GotG movies, and quite possibly of the entire MCU at this point. Just as importantly, Star-Lord brings a massive dose of 80's nostalgia, which you'd lose if you replaced him with any other character.

My dad volunteers at an historic theater that was built in the waning days of the silent movie. It still exists today because a volunteer organization purchased it and runs older movies twice a month. The people who have been in charge of selecting movies have apparently long held to the belief that 30 years is a good cutoff, but lost track of the passage of time. The 80's is now 75% past that 30-year mark, and people like me who grew up (primarily) in the 80's are experiencing nostalgia for the defining events from our collective childhood. So, while they aren't exactly as appealing to some of the older volunteers as the movies they grew up with, The Princess Bride drew in a huge audience. Raiders of the Lost Ark drew in a big audience. Back to the Future II, on Back to the Future II day, with what is believed to be the screen-used C-car (used primarily for closeups) pulled in the biggest audience I'd seen there...on a Wednesday night. The only bigger audience I remember seeing was when they played Labyrinth at a tribute performance the weekend after Bowie died. Ghostbusters on Halloween with a pretty decent replica car parked out front drew in an audience that would have been respectable at the time if it'd been spread out over a full weekend instead of just a single show. Beetlejuice and the Bladerunner Final Cut were both big. I finally convinced them to screen Ferris Bueller's Day Off and The Sandlot this summer. The 80's is bankable right now, which is further evidenced by the range of 80's properties that have appeared in Dimensions. Drop Star-Lord and there goes your entire soundtrack for both films, which I believe was a significant part of what drove the success of the first GotG film (for the first time, viewers were actually paying attention to the music in an MCU film, and they were enjoying it quite a bit).

But who knows? The first movie was supposed to be a flop because nobody knew who any of them were. Then again, as I've said before, the Avengers were literally the top of the bottom of the barrel of properties that Marvel had failed to sell the movie rights for back before they finally had to sell the entire company to Disney.
Everything is Batman! Except Adam West.
PurpleDave
 
Posts: 442
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2014 8:23 pm

Re: Review: 76079 Ravager Attack

Postby dWhisper » Sun May 14, 2017 8:37 pm

The Marvel sale to Disney wasn't a "had to" moment; that was after the company had managed to reorganize itself. In the years leading up to that sale, they'd already positioned themselves and partnered with Paramount for the original slate of MCU releases (everything prior to The Avengers was distributed by Paramount and the rights later acquired by Disney), and it was the success of Iron Man and the build-up to the next movies that prompted the sale. Much like the Star Wars sale, it was a move that was for a lot of money and based on future returns.

I do always find it funny that GotG was supposed to be the first flop... I remember the articles around that, and even commented on it when I was writing reviews back then. I knew the characters and the series, and had hope, it could be fun and different. But I would qualify Hulk as the first flop of the MCU well before anything other than the first couple of Iron Man films were around. Thor: Dark World had under-performed at that point as well, so there were some missteps. Small ones, overall, but there. It also featured a director who was only known for directing/writing the Scooby-Doo movies and some good (Dawn of the Dead) and bad (Slither) horror movies.
If the above post didn't offend you, you're probably reading it wrong.
dWhisper
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 10:56 pm
Location: Dallas, TX


Return to Reviews

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests