Review: 75376 Tantive IV
Posted by CapnRex101,
Of the countless vehicles featured in Star Wars, the Tantive IV definitely belongs in the growing Starship Collection. After all, the famed Rebel Blockade Runner was the first vehicle shown in the original movie and its midi-scale recreation, 75376 Tantive IV, looks excellent.
Similar to other sets from the series, I think the proportions of the model seem accurate and there is plenty of detail included, matching the brilliant 75244 Tantive IV in some areas. Unfortunately, the price of £69.99, $79.99 or €79.99 is a major concern.
Summary
75376 Tantive IV, 654 pieces.
£69.99 / $79.99 / €79.99 | 10.7p/12.2c/12.2c per piece.
Buy at LEGO.com »
Other than its expensive price, 75376 Tantive IV is an outstanding set for display
- Accurate proportions, overall
- High standard of detail
- Stunning drive block
- Too many stickers
- Very expensive
The set was provided for review by LEGO. All opinions expressed are those of the author.
Reference
Source - starwars.fandom.com
The Completed Model
Despite its memorable role onscreen, there has been occasional confusion about the shape of the Tantive IV, as some very similar, though bulkier, corvettes have also appeared in Star Wars. 10019 Rebel Blockade Runner clearly exemplifies the inconsistency, but this model looks much sleeker and therefore more accurate to the classic CR90 Corvette.
The display base is intended to match other Starship Collection sets and I like its smooth style, as well as the black colour, which avoids taking attention from the subject. Technic pins secure the vehicle on top and the unique printed plaque looks splendid, alongside a decorated brick to mark the 25th anniversary of LEGO Star Wars.
As mentioned, the proportions of the Tantive IV correspond with the source material and the length of 32cm feels appropriate, so all the vehicles in this range are a similar size. However, viewing the model from the side reveals a minor issue, as the fuselage section directly behind the cockpit appears slightly too slender, compared with the onscreen vehicle.
The command bridge module has also attracted some criticism since this set was announced, but I think its shape looks nice, considering the limited selection of conical elements available. The dark red and light bluish grey accents denoting the bridge are effective, while the stickers applied on each side are quite detailed, although these 2x2 round tiles could surely have been printed.
Corellian corvettes can be heavily armed, relative to their size. Two twin turbolasers and four single turbolaser batteries are therefore fitted on the Tantive IV. These are articulated and the surrounding bodywork is nicely shaped, even duplicating the changing angle of the hull plating forward of the escape pods. The dark red stripes along both sides are attractive too.
White fez elements represent the ventral escape pods, one of which is missing. This is the pod C-3PO and R2-D2 boarded for Tatooine, which is a lovely detail. Furthermore, I was pleasantly surprised by the texture beneath the fuselage, including 1x2 ingots and a 1x3 jumper plate with some interesting ridges on its underside.
It seems we can expect to find Easter eggs inside every Starship Collection model, since tiny depictions of Princess Leia, R2-D2 and C-3PO are hidden aboard the Tantive IV. These are a neat addition across the series and all three characters are recognisable, recreating the scene of Leia giving R2-D2 the Death Star plans.
The fuselage shape becomes more complex between the escape pods and the docking tubes, including angled panels onscreen. Simpler 3x6 wedge plates are integrated here, which was a sensible decision, as anything else could easily have seemed messy at this scale. The docking tubes also look superb, with the primary sensor rectenna suitably positioned in the middle.
The enormous drive block is probably the Tantive IV's most distinctive feature, housing eleven engines to achieve impressive speed. As expected, there is plenty of mechanical detail around the engines on the original vehicle, which is recreated quite well here. Various small pieces offer ample texture, while the drive block's general shape is accurate too.
However, eight stickers decorate the engines. I applaud the attention to detail on these stickers and their continuation on the underside, but these elements should certainly have been printed, especially because only four unique designs would be needed. A few subtle adjustments to the stickers could even have reduced that number to two.
On the other hand, the stickers are appealing once applied, so the engines look marvellous on all sides. I love the occasional light bluish grey or dark red pieces on certain engines, reflecting the film vehicle as closely as possible. The trans-orange 1x1 cones placed on the back are also welcome additions, offering an extra dash of colour.
Overall
75376 Tantive IV is an excellent model, capturing the proportions of the onscreen corvette and plenty of detail from the original vessel. The drive block and escape pod sections are particular highlights, while most compromises are excusable for a model of this scale, which is never likely to replicate every feature perfectly.
There is a significant issue though. I think other Starship Collection sets are reasonably priced, for their size and the level of detail. On that basis, I struggle to understand how £69.99, $79.99 or €79.99 was reached, especially with ten stickers included. A considerable discount is needed, but once that arrives, I would definitely recommend this model.
115 likes
37 comments on this article
Too many stickers, and the head of the Tantive is wayyyyyy too small.
This whole thing is egregious. The outlandish price, the repetitive stickers, the tiny cockpit... everything! Easy, easy pass.
How does it compare with the earlier version in 10030 ?
@johleth said:
"the head of the Tantive is wayyyyyy too small."
It’s really not though, we’re just accustomed to seeing the ship nearly head-on, which makes the cockpit seem larger. Look up a side view of the filming model and you’ll find that the cockpit section is very close to scale.
@johleth said:
"Too many stickers, and the head of the Tantive is wayyyyyy too small."
It is probably a tiny bit too small, but much closer than people are suggesting. I encourage anyone to have a look at some other references images and diagrams. I would have used a side-on image in the article, but there are a noticeable lack of those available, other than 3D models created by fans, which I would not want to use without permission.
@jsutton said:
"How does it compare with the earlier version in 10030 ?"
The version in 10030 is only about 11cm long, so there is quite a big difference!
The Tantive IV has been one of my favorite ships since I first saw the movie in 1977. There is no doubt that I will be picking this up. It's just a matter of when.
Have R2 and 3PO already left in the pod, or not?
Finally! I've been waiting for this review. Thank you.
I consider the Cap'n to be of the highest authority in all things SW, and his take is reassuring given that the bridge definitely looks too small.
Perspective is an interesting thing. The angles in the movies and the precedng Lego toys could have easily given a false impression of stubbiness.
I was surprised when the set was first revealed. I assumed SW Lego wasn't so awful to make a mistake at this scale.
I'm happy that my fears were for nought. I'm getting this one (happily with a discount). It looks detailed and perhaps even elegant.
EDIT: I perused ROTJ and found a corvette at 1:22:40 (just after the Tydirium jumps into hyperspace) that exactly matches the depiction in the set. Looks like the Cap'n is correct, per usual.
@Huw said:
"Have R2 and 3PO already left in the pod, or not? "
It depends on your perspective.... and Heisenberg's uncertainty principle or Schrödinger's cat.
You'll find that many of the truths we cling to greatly depend on our own point of view. So, what the Cap'n said was true... from a certain point of view.
If at least the white colour of the stickers matched the white colour of the bricks - Lego don't even try, do they?
The visible missing pod must be one of those unoccupied pods launched by the crew concurrent to when the droids were taking theirs. Schrodingerive IV paradox avoided.
For all XL sets licensed or otherwise, I wish they would persevere with a nanofigure scale range.
I appreciate supermassive designs become too big for even that scale.
@Huw said:
"Have R2 and 3PO already left in the pod, or not? "
In the short scene just after the droids leave, they Star Destroyer gunner says "There goes another one..." as he prepares to shoot at it before being stopped because no lifeforms are aboard. This implies that another pod was launched and destroyed before R2 launched the pod with himself and 3PO aboard. Thus, the missing pod is one that was destroyed.
@StyleCounselor said:
" @StyleCounselor said:
"Finally! I've been waiting for this review. Thank you.
I consider the Cap'n to be of the highest authority in all things SW, and his take is reassuring given that the bridge definitely looks too small.
Perspective is an interesting thing. The angles in the movies and the precedng Lego toys could have easily given a false impression of stubbiness.
I was surprised when the set was first revealed. I assumed SW Lego wasn't so awful to make a mistake at this scale.
I'm happy that my fears were for nought. I'm getting this one (happily with a discount). It looks detailed and perhaps even elegant.
EDIT: I perused ROTJ and found a corvette at 53:28 (just after the Tydirium jumps into hyperspace) that exactly matches the depiction in the set. Looks like the Cap'n is correct, per usual."
"
Did you mean to quote yourself and not write anything more there, @StyleCounselor ?
@Murdoch17 said:
" @StyleCounselor said:
" @StyleCounselor said:
"Finally! I've been waiting for this review. Thank you.
I consider the Cap'n to be of the highest authority in all things SW, and his take is reassuring given that the bridge definitely looks too small.
Perspective is an interesting thing. The angles in the movies and the precedng Lego toys could have easily given a false impression of stubbiness.
I was surprised when the set was first revealed. I assumed SW Lego wasn't so awful to make a mistake at this scale.
I'm happy that my fears were for nought. I'm getting this one (happily with a discount). It looks detailed and perhaps even elegant.
EDIT: I perused ROTJ and found a corvette at 53:28 (just after the Tydirium jumps into hyperspace) that exactly matches the depiction in the set. Looks like the Cap'n is correct, per usual."
"
Did you mean to quote yourself and not write anything more there, @StyleCounselor ?"
Oops. I thought I was editing. I was trying to change the time stamp of where the side shot of the corvette is depicted. I had erroneously confused the time remaining in the movie with the time of the scene, which is 53:28.
I've just been beefing up my Tantive-IV (https://brickset.com/sets/TANTIVEIV-1/Tantive-IV) that we got as a giveaway at the Lego Store a few years ago. (I have this thing about taking tiny sets like Advent Calendar builds or store giveaways and making them more accurate.) I managed to give it an accurate 11-engine rear and added some greebles for detail. Who needs an $80 bigger model?
Hard pass.
Here's a comparison to the studio miniature: https://i.imgur.com/WcGMsEQ.png
IMO the head isn't too small.
No printed cockpit poster, no deal.
@Murdoch17 said:
" @Huw said:
"Have R2 and 3PO already left in the pod, or not? "
In the short scene just after the droids leave, they Star Destroyer gunner says "There goes another one..." as he prepares to shoot at it before being stopped because no lifeforms are aboard. This implies that another pod was launched and destroyed before R2 launched the pod with himself and 3PO aboard. Thus, the missing pod is one that was destroyed."
The two forward port side escape pods are missing when the Tantive IV is drawn into the Star Destroyer's hangar, so it is assumed that one or both of those are what the gunner is talking about. R2-D2 and C-3PO take the third pod on the starboard side.
For complete accuracy, I suppose this model should omit those other two escape pods, but perhaps LEGO wanted to highlight that the droids' pod is missing, rather than complicating things!
I love it. Mine sits proudly on my desk. Perfect size too.
@CapnRex101 I'd argue reducing the engine decorations for prints would need 3 designs: left, right and center patterns, repeated on top and underside of the model.
Up til now I hadn't considered the difficulties/limitations of their equipment that might be present to guarantee the printed design on a 2x2 round tile will be oriented properly once the tile is placed, as it has to be in this instance. Guess that makes one argument for stickers in this case, alas a disappointing one.
Like the easter egg and attention to detail regarding the escape pods.
Not so much liking the price here considering the amount and type of stickers. I just wish that TLG would use clear-backed stickers on these display models instead of opaque ones where the design is meant for the same color of the underlying part; and hey guess what, you'd gain more flexibility on what color part you might want to apply that sticker!
I'm usually very frugal when it comes to price per piece (many of my purchases are made to optimize rewards points, etc) but the second I saw this set in the brand store it came home with me. I still have a very colorful midi-scale Corellian Cruiser I made that was more or less this scale, and this model satisfies the kid in me like few others have. It has earned a place in my heart that it will share with the likes of my beloved 8098 , despite the fact that is an objectively bad deal with an excessive number of stickers. The ones on the head were especially frustrating, but I still love the finished product and it's very swooshable.
@MrClassic said:
"If at least the white colour of the stickers matched the white colour of the bricks - Lego don't even try, do they?"
The thing that annoys me the most is that they get away with it again and again.
Sure, people complain, but in the end they always say something along the lines of "I will still buy it, but LEGO should do better".
Well, guess what, as long as so many people accept their mediocre quality at absurd prices, why should they change and "do better"?
I vote with my wallet and instead buy sets I like from Cobi, BlueBrixx, MEGA, and others, all of which offer sets with "prints only" decorations. The prices of those sets are certainly higher than of the "no prints" rest of their portfolio, because yes, prints DO cost more, but are still far better value for money than LEGO.
Everyone has a choice.
The reference image was a really poor choice for this review. The perspective in it is really bad and appears to make the command bridge look way too large in the image and too small in the model. Given all the chat about wrong proportions as discussed in the review, a side on reference image should have been used. A quick Google search throws up many images that are far more suitable.
I'm wondering if the round tiles at the front weren't printed because of the dark red colour. We've seen multiple times on minifigs that printing can be a bit iffy depending on the plastic colour and the colours printed on it, whereas stickers give a much more uniform look.
I presume the tiles by the engine weren't printed to keep costs down and I don't have an issue with that, but the cost of this set has to be somewhere and I don't see where it is. It seems like it's almost entirely basic parts with no aspect beyond the "display" style contributing anything to such a high price. Not even a minifigure is included, which I think is a big mistake.
Part of me wonders if the price of these sets reflects an expectation that they won't sell as well as the more kid-oriented sets. If the total volume of sales is lower, the price would have to be higher to make it worth producing.
I'm fine with that TBH if that's what it is. I'd rather have an expensive set than no set at all.
@darkstonegrey said:
" @CapnRex101 I'd argue reducing the engine decorations for prints would need 3 designs: left, right and center patterns, repeated on top and underside of the model.
Up til now I hadn't considered the difficulties/limitations of their equipment that might be present to guarantee the printed design on a 2x2 round tile will be oriented properly once the tile is placed, as it has to be in this instance. Guess that makes one argument for stickers in this case, alas a disappointing one."
Maybe three would be a fair compromise. Four pairs of unique printed tiles would be the best for accuracy and I was thinking they could probably drop it to two pairs because there is not a huge difference between those in the middle or on the left and right, but any fewer than four is going to involve minor concessions.
The orientation of decoration on round tiles could be a factor, although there are many instances of printed round tiles where orientation is important. The central eye on the Beholder in 21348 Dungeons & Dragons: Red Dragon's Tale is one example. I suppose designs like that being slightly off-kilter are acceptable though, whereas it would be very noticeable on the Tantive IV.
@CCC said:
"The reference image was a really poor choice for this review. The perspective in it is really bad and appears to make the command bridge look way too large in the image and too small in the model. Given all the chat about wrong proportions as discussed in the review, a side on reference image should have been used. A quick Google search throws up many images that are far more suitable."
I agree it is not ideal, but there are very few real alternatives. Almost all images taken from a better angle are either low resolution, photos of toys and miniatures, or digital models made by fans. Others depict the version from Star Wars Rebels, with a different armament.
Nonetheless, I have replaced the original image with one from the side. I am not very happy with the resolution, but that is the compromise.
Stickers. No minifigs.
The value doesn't justify the price. Pass.
@AustinPowers said:
"I vote with my wallet and instead buy sets I like from Cobi, BlueBrixx, MEGA, and others, "
Really? I hadn't heard.
@Andrusi said:
" @AustinPowers said:
"I vote with my wallet and instead buy sets I like from Cobi, BlueBrixx, MEGA, and others, "
Really? I hadn't heard."
Well, it's easy enough to find out. But many people just don't bother, which is exactly what LEGO is counting on. Thankfully over here at least things are noticeably beginning to change.
@AustinPowers said:
" @Andrusi said:
" @AustinPowers said:
"I vote with my wallet and instead buy sets I like from Cobi, BlueBrixx, MEGA, and others, "
Really? I hadn't heard."
Well, it's easy enough to find out. But many people just don't bother, which is exactly what LEGO is counting on. Thankfully over here at least things are noticeably beginning to change. "
I'm making a joke about how frequently you bring this up.
@Andrusi said:
" @AustinPowers said:
" @Andrusi said:
" @AustinPowers said:
"I vote with my wallet and instead buy sets I like from Cobi, BlueBrixx, MEGA, and others, "
Really? I hadn't heard."
Well, it's easy enough to find out. But many people just don't bother, which is exactly what LEGO is counting on. Thankfully over here at least things are noticeably beginning to change. "
I'm making a joke about how frequently you bring this up."
That's nothing to joke about you know.
Plus, going by how many here still think LEGO is the be all and end all in terms of quality, when in fact it is quite the opposite, one can't bring it up often enough!
@CapnRex101 I'd love some help here.
Is the post-Disney pronunciation 'Tan-Teev' (as I have been hearing more often recently) or 'Tan-ta-Vee' - as used in the NPR Radio series of Star Wars produced back in 1981?
@gasdoc said:
" @CapnRex101 I'd love some help here.
Is the post-Disney pronunciation 'Tan-Teev' (as I have been hearing more often recently) or 'Tan-ta-Vee' - as used in the NPR Radio series of Star Wars produced back in 1981?"
The second one, pronouncing the 'e' on the end. It comes from the archaic word 'tantivy', meaning 'at full gallop'.
I would not particularly associate the two-syllable pronunciation with the Disney era. I am not aware of the name actually being spoken in any modern Star Wars content, so many people just assume 'Tan-teev' is correct because it sounds natural, unless they are familiar with the radio drama.
@ResIpsaLoquitur said:
"I've just been beefing up my Tantive-IV (https://brickset.com/sets/TANTIVEIV-1/Tantive-IV) that we got as a giveaway at the Lego Store a few years ago. (I have this thing about taking tiny sets like Advent Calendar builds or store giveaways and making them more accurate.) I managed to give it an accurate 11-engine rear and added some greebles for detail. Who needs an $80 bigger model?"
Agree. I have the fantastic little Tantive IV from the Planets Series on my bookcase; it's great and doesn't take up much space.
They could have replaced the droids with Antilles and Vader to avoid the anachronism of the missing escape pod.