I have no interest in it as a set, but the house looks good. For reuse, the dwarf torsos are probably too cartoony for me, although some might be useful and I like their hats. It's a shame all the beards are white. We could do with more variability there, but I guess they have to stick to the source so that's fair enough. I do like the witch minifigure though.

The lack of noses on the Dwarves is a bit off-putting (and on Dopey a bit unsettling), but I understand the complications that would arise with making nose moulds on minifig heads. I'll probably pick this up at some point before it retires, but it's definitely not a priority over other sets rumoured to come out throughout 2024.

Some interesting new pieces and re-colours:

- weird 3-clip bar on the door.
- new 2x2 plate with 3 studs and 1 corner curve.
- new foliage piece.
- white seaweed piece.

There sure are a lot of "no" votes in the poll (including myself, choosing that it doesn't interest me). I gotta admit, it looks like a fun build! I like the details. Shame Ideas one was rejected first.

I really like it and probably will get it at some point. Those beards look like they'd make really good fur collars.

Interesting. From when I submitted my option on the will buy poll (262 responses when I clicked it), it seems most people won't buy it. Which is interesting, since these big fancy sets typically have a large portion saying they're buy it followed by those that won't. Wonder why this is the opposite here, but hey, there's still plenty of time for people to affect the poll.
Also, is that a new wide leaf piece on the tree next to the glass coffin? Or have I just not seen it before?

@daniellesa said:
"I don't see why they rejected the ideas project for this version, and judging by the price of this it would have been bigger and a more expensive, much more satisfying set, as they've halved it to make this set.

I like it, but I feel slightly disappointed that they rejected a much better alternative, that they could have kept and done the usual modifications that they always do.

If I get this, I'll need to get 2 to modify it how I would like it."

Agreed. It's frustrating that for many AFOLS and Lego City enthusiasts, this isn't a 'complete set' and that we'll need to be making regular visits to Rebrickable (which isn't a drag in itself; it's a great site!) as well as pay the extra premium on additional parts (which *is* a drag), in order for it to meet our requirements.

Seeing as it's an 18+/AFOL-marketed set, I don't really see the sense in half-assing it (that probably reads worse than it should, because it's still a gorgeous looking set overall, and the minifigs are particularly stunning), and producing something that's too expensive for a kids' playset, but not enhanced enough for most AFOLs (who would likely pay up to, say, another £50 extra for a 'fully complete' set).

@CCC said:
" @AliveAndBricking said:
"Two things I'm getting really tired of with Lego IP sets:

(1) Minidolls over minifigs (so, one point to this set at least, although I've read that upcoming "Wicked" and "Wednesday" sets will be minidolls *sigh*), and (2) open-backed buildings (especially when they're 18+ sets and clearly priced at an older market rather than as a kids' playset). Yes, it is a bit of an AFOL rant, but, like I say, the box clearly says "18+" so, it is to much to ask that TLG produce sets in line with most AFOL requirements (and, yes, I know that they'll be a minority of AFOLs who'll be happy with an open-backed/dollhouse style set)."

I guess the question would then be how much more are you willing to pay to have the back filled in with bricks that won't be seen when it is displayed against a wall? I doubt most people buying this will care that it is open back.

"

Perhaps not, but it depends where it's being displayed, and I suppose for those of us who like collecting Lego buildings to incorporate in a Lego City it feels like an inconvenience. After all, couldn't your argument have been applied to, say, the modular buildings, The Daily Bugle, Avengers Tower, Hocus Pocus Cottage, Home Alone House and Ghostbusters HQ? Not that I want to encourage TLG to follow your suggestion.

@VictorvanSchagen said:
"Some interesting new pieces and re-colours:

- weird 3-clip bar on the door.
- new 2x2 plate with 3 studs and 1 corner curve.
- new foliage piece.
- white seaweed piece."

The 3 clip bar is from the mobility scooter used in a couple of city sets and the large foliage piece is used in a few of the January Friends releases.

@DoonsterBuildsLego said:
"Looks great but not for me. And too much other good stuff to tempt me.

As for the open back building - I much prefer it that way. I dislike the Modular series particularly as they have closed backs. If it's going to have 4 walls, it had better be hinged to open it.

I'd also guess that the Ideas submission was rejected on the basis of "New products currently in development" rather than anything else."

Or maybe you could access the set from a detachable roof.

Still, at this price-point, is anyone playing with these sets/giving them to their kids?

Surely, they exist for display purposes, and surely, nothing looks better for display-purposes than a 3D set that looks good from all angles (which, in the case of a building, means four walls).

@TheOtherMike said:
" @AliveAndBricking said:
"Yes, it is a bit of an AFOL rant, but, like I say, the box clearly says "18+" so, it is to much to ask that TLG produce sets in line with most AFOL requirements (and, yes, I know that they'll be a minority of AFOLs who'll be happy with an open-backed/dollhouse style set)."You're assuming that this set is aimed at AFOLs, rather than being part of the whole "Adults Welcome" thing, which is trying to make AFOLs out of Non=FOL adults.

@Murdoch17:
I am a dwarf
And I'm digging a hole
Diggy diggy hole
Diggy diggy hole"

At the risk of sounding like John Heard's character from Big ("You expect a kid to pay $19 for a comic book?") but at a $220 price-point, my guess is that these sets are predominantly targeted at adults first (hopefully to share and enjoy with their kids, if they have any), rather than at kids, and adults simply as a secondary-market.

Only needed seven pairs of medium legs to make it perfect...

@CCC said:
" @AliveAndBricking said:
" @CCC said:
" @AliveAndBricking said:
"Two things I'm getting really tired of with Lego IP sets:

(1) Minidolls over minifigs (so, one point to this set at least, although I've read that upcoming "Wicked" and "Wednesday" sets will be minidolls *sigh*), and (2) open-backed buildings (especially when they're 18+ sets and clearly priced at an older market rather than as a kids' playset). Yes, it is a bit of an AFOL rant, but, like I say, the box clearly says "18+" so, it is to much to ask that TLG produce sets in line with most AFOL requirements (and, yes, I know that they'll be a minority of AFOLs who'll be happy with an open-backed/dollhouse style set)."

I guess the question would then be how much more are you willing to pay to have the back filled in with bricks that won't be seen when it is displayed against a wall? I doubt most people buying this will care that it is open back.

"

Perhaps not, but it depends where it's being displayed, and I suppose for those of us who like collecting Lego buildings to incorporate in a Lego City it feels like an inconvenience. After all, couldn't your argument have been applied to, say, the modular buildings, The Daily Bugle, Avengers Tower, Hocus Pocus Cottage, Home Alone House and Ghostbusters HQ? Not that I want to encourage TLG to follow your suggestion."

Of course the argument could have been applied there. They do two styles. Some people will prefer one, some people the other. For every build they do, people in the other camp will want it done their way and complain it is not to their liking. If someone wants a closed back, it is simple enough to fill in the gaps with bricks. With a little more skill, they could adapt the back to swing open, or adapt to lift the roof off.

They also have to judge the price point for the sets and look at other sets that are on shelves at the same time. I imagine this set will sell well to adults but also a lot of older teens will have it bought for them at this price. Slap on another £100 to fill in the back, and it is pushed out of range. "

Let's face it, any set that's priced above £100 is already a special, rather than a casual, purpose. People like myself save up for months to purchase these sets, and we're quite discerning when it comes to what we buy. Admittedly, I'll have to skip on many great sets every year (at which point that annoying sence of FOMO will temporarily set in), but if I am going to splash out on a particularly desirous set (e.g. a building based on a classic/much-loved movie), I hope it's the best, which often means best possible, "most comprehensive", TLG could have made from that theme/idea/IP.

So, yeah, I'm speaking from the POV of someone who doesn't have an unlimited budget, and doesn't tend to make 'day one purchases'. Still, when I do make a purchase, I want it to be the best possible purchase I could have made, rather than a half-assed one.

That's a very precise PPP in the US lol

I’ll get this on eBay just the set. Could care less about Snow White, but I’m always looking to expand the medieval village

@legoninja27 said:
"I might get this if it's on sale and change it to fit my Castle setup."

I wonder if it would be out of scale with Classic Castle, though, much as 21325 was?

@TeriXeri said:
" @IgelCampus said:
"When did Lego lose the knowledge how to build full houses with walls on all sides?"

When they realise they can sell more open back sets at lower price points instead of pricing themselves out of the customer base.

There has to be more fans that don't mind open back and rather see a lower price set, instead of people wanting to pay more, and then modify sets to remove a back wall.

People with the extra cash can always add bricks themselves, and even here, there are quite a few sets where the comments often go like "I will buy 2 to make a full set" , well that's bonus sale for LEGO.

Of course , that doesn't mean, that different opinions are valid."

"People with extra cash"

That's nice for the people with 'extra cash'.

Some of us don't want to pay over the odds via Bricklink or Lego's own (barely functioning and very limited) Pick a Brick facility. We'd prefer to save our cash (over several months, if need be) for a single one-off purchase for a *COMPLETED* set.

I don't like to be rude and confrontational DoonsterBuildsLego, but you do realise that a detachable roof means you can detach and re-attach the roof at will, right?

Many sets, including the modulars, including the Home Alone House, and many MANY other sets have incorporated detachable roofs. But it gives one the option of displaying a fully-walled set, or alternatively treating it like a play-set.

Plus, there's nothing stopping you gutting a set/removing a back wall, if you want to get into it from the side. It's much more expensive to have to purchase all the extra bricks required to *complete* the set (bearing in mind that individual bricks tend to cost more per piece than they do when they come as part of completed sets).

Those dwarf faces are.... something

@CCC said:
" @AliveAndBricking said:
" @CCC said:
" @AliveAndBricking said:
"Two things I'm getting really tired of with Lego IP sets:
(1) Minidolls over minifigs (so, one point to this set at least, although I've read that upcoming "Wicked" and "Wednesday" sets will be minidolls *sigh*), and (2) open-backed buildings (especially when they're 18+ sets and clearly priced at an older market rather than as a kids' playset). Yes, it is a bit of an AFOL rant, but, like I say, the box clearly says "18+" so, it is to much to ask that TLG produce sets in line with most AFOL requirements (and, yes, I know that they'll be a minority of AFOLs who'll be happy with an open-backed/dollhouse style set)."

I guess the question would then be how much more are you willing to pay to have the back filled in with bricks that won't be seen when it is displayed against a wall? I doubt most people buying this will care that it is open back.

"

Perhaps not, but it depends where it's being displayed, and I suppose for those of us who like collecting Lego buildings to incorporate in a Lego City it feels like an inconvenience. After all, couldn't your argument have been applied to, say, the modular buildings, The Daily Bugle, Avengers Tower, Hocus Pocus Cottage, Home Alone House and Ghostbusters HQ? Not that I want to encourage TLG to follow your suggestion."

Of course the argument could have been applied there. They do two styles. Some people will prefer one, some people the other. For every build they do, people in the other camp will want it done their way and complain it is not to their liking. If someone wants a closed back, it is simple enough to fill in the gaps with bricks. With a little more skill, they could adapt the back to swing open, or adapt to lift the roof off.

They also have to judge the price point for the sets and look at other sets that are on shelves at the same time. I imagine this set will sell well to adults but also a lot of older teens will have it bought for them at this price. Slap on another £100 to fill in the back, and it is pushed out of range. "

At this price I’d expect a complete building. Lego pushes prices as high as it can. I don’t think there’s an excuse for making an incomplete set for £220.

@Zink said:
"Why did Lego give 14 y/o Hermione a special dress piece but not the 14 y/o Snow White?"

It never made sense to me. At this age, Ron was taller than, for example, Professor McGonagall and he had shorter legs.

I was definitely getting this. Then I saw the back.

Or the lack thereof...

The Hocus Pocus set is a much better buy...

Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs was my *favorite* film as a kid, so this one holds a lot of nostalgia for me. While I do have a few minor quibbles with the execution (particularly the lack of a stairway), I think this looks excellent.

I absolutely love the minifigures too--even if the dwarfs do look a little funny without their noses.

It's extremely rare for me to shell out more than $100 for a set, but I might have to make an exception for this one (eventually--I don't have the extra funds right now).

Glad this is based off of the classic version of Disney's Snow White. It looks good. Wish it was a completed cottage though. I might get it.

Finally! A Rachel Zegler Minifig!

Given that we've had moulded Mickey, Minnie, Donald, Goofy etc heads along with two whole Disney CMF series plus Looney Tunes why have Lego cheaped out with no moulded heads for the Dwarfs? It would have looked so much better. They do look a bit odd as basic heads. Overall, it still looks good though.

Not for me, but looks fantastic. Glad to see the pipe organ is there.

@ShinyBidoof said:
"Especially impressed that one of the first was the "tin foil hat - they stole it from an Ideas submission" double your money box."

I would've thought that it was well-known by now that licensed sets that fail Lego Ideas, are then used to become official sets without the need to credit the original designer.

Probably an issue with licence negotiations.

Sad about the back, but not interested enough anyway to put $220 on such set.
What interests me is, why put the Ideas entry into "further review" when, at that point, they must've been working on this set already (or at least have known they were going to make it), though?

I’ll just wait until I get a donation.

Plus, I own this movie on VHS.

I wonder, when, in the prince school curriculum do charming people learn to kiss total stranger in their sleep? Is it part of Rape 101 or is it part of the much more advanced: Dodgy Tactics 586?

Nice set, glad all the characters are present. I don't understand why the need to put hinges on this set. The seven bowls and the seven beds are also very much part of the story, I suppose the open back makes sense. If I did not have such a large backlog of sets to buy, I would get this early - now it is on the buy list but may eventually be phased out before I get to buy it - like so many sets unfortunately.

TLG designers’ vegetation is ever evolving, and for the better, great work.

@AliveAndBricking said:
" @WemWem said:
"Looks damn good, the kind of Disney set I’d like to see more of from LEGO.

I’d really like to see an Archery Contest set from ROBIN HOOD, personally. There’s a lot of untapped potential in the classic animated films. Don’t tell me an 18+ grand ballroom set from BEAUTY AND THE BEAST wouldn’t fly off the shelves."

As mixed as my feelings are regarding this set, overall, I'm with you. I hope that this is the start of a sub-theme covering the classic Disney animated movies in building or diarama form.

With Snow White (1937) being the very first Disney Animated Movie, my hope would be for a follow-up based on 1940's Pinocchio, possibly capturing Geppetto's workshop (a giant diarama of the whale, Monstro's insides, might be a tad ambitious and possibly a little scary)."

I really like the idea of both of those, as well as maybe Stromboli's puppet show. That would have a natural diorama quality to it.

How is it supposed that the 7 dwarves sit around the table? By taking apart their pants?

I love this! Literally the only downside I see is that I could have skipped buying the Villains Icon set for the old hag, as she's included hete.

This is an instant buy for me.

@WemWem said:
" @AliveAndBricking said:
" @WemWem said:
"Looks damn good, the kind of Disney set I’d like to see more of from LEGO.

I’d really like to see an Archery Contest set from ROBIN HOOD, personally. There’s a lot of untapped potential in the classic animated films. Don’t tell me an 18+ grand ballroom set from BEAUTY AND THE BEAST wouldn’t fly off the shelves."

As mixed as my feelings are regarding this set, overall, I'm with you. I hope that this is the start of a sub-theme covering the classic Disney animated movies in building or diarama form.

With Snow White (1937) being the very first Disney Animated Movie, my hope would be for a follow-up based on 1940's Pinocchio, possibly capturing Geppetto's workshop (a giant diarama of the whale, Monstro's insides, might be a tad ambitious and possibly a little scary)."

I really like the idea of both of those, as well as maybe Stromboli's puppet show. That would have a natural diorama quality to it."

Ah, yes, that's pretty inspired. His wagon/caravan could make for a fairly affordable, but complete, set. You could add a cage using the same design incorporated with the Hocus Pocus Cottage, for Pinocchio to sit in, and Stromboli, Blue Fairy, Fox and Cat minifigs would make perfect sense for this vignette (alongside the Pinocchio and Jiminy Cricket minfigs we got with the Disney 100 CMF series). Would still be nice to get a Gepetto minifig too, even though I don't recall him appearing in this part of the film/story.

I need the smurf hat in white pronto! Or did that hat already exist and i completely missed it?
Very good looking set, and if i was into disney animation films i would totally buy this set the minute it would come out.
Nice owl prints on the 1x1 tiles too

I was thinking it might pair well next to 79003 An Unexpected Gathering on a shelf.

Huh, there's no Rachel Zegler minifigure.

wEIRD, wEIRD ...

@AliveAndBricking said:
" @daniellesa said:
"I don't see why they rejected the ideas project for this version, and judging by the price of this it would have been bigger and a more expensive, much more satisfying set, as they've halved it to make this set.

I like it, but I feel slightly disappointed that they rejected a much better alternative, that they could have kept and done the usual modifications that they always do.

If I get this, I'll need to get 2 to modify it how I would like it."

Agreed. It's frustrating that for many AFOLS and Lego City enthusiasts, this isn't a 'complete set' and that we'll need to be making regular visits to Rebrickable (which isn't a drag in itself; it's a great site!) as well as pay the extra premium on additional parts (which *is* a drag), in order for it to meet our requirements.

Seeing as it's an 18+/AFOL-marketed set, I don't really see the sense in half-assing it (that probably reads worse than it should, because it's still a gorgeous looking set overall, and the minifigs are particularly stunning), and producing something that's too expensive for a kids' playset, but not enhanced enough for most AFOLs (who would likely pay up to, say, another £50 extra for a 'fully complete' set)."

It's what puts me off a lot of sets, Lego's desire not to do complete buildings and steer AFOLs towards getting more than one of the same set just to fix this. Because you know with some you can't pick up every piece you want off other sources without spending the same amount, in which it makes more sense to just buy 2.

I tried this with the Lego art recently, because there are a lot spare dots and found that I probably spent more buying piecemeal rather than just getting the set again.

Finally I can build a Dwarf army to fight off those orcs!

@IgelCampus said:
"When did Lego lose the knowledge how to build full houses with walls on all sides?"

About the same time they decided that a Town "Square" only needed 2 sides!

If ONE Pinocchio could get a special head with nose, why not these SEVEN too? These exagerated expressions really look creepy without the prominent round noses imo. I think this was the main issue with the Avatar minifigures too.

I don't know about you, but there appears to be tremendous play value here.

Even having other Lego characters interact with Snow, the Prince and the dwarves is possible. Maybe someone to run off the witch, someone who knows instantly what she's up to and to run her off before she can create trouble with the infamous apple.

(Just need a Chuck Norris or an Andre the Giant minifig, heh-heh! ;) )

@AustinPowers said:
"Snow White was the second movie I ever saw in the cinema with my dad, the first one was Bambi,the third one was the Jungle Book."
Haha, not sure if it was in the same order, but pretty sure it's the same three for me :-)

Don't care much for this set though, it looks nice but I'm just not interested. I would have much preferred a set based on this Snow White: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=StZcUAPRRac

I have to be honest and say that I have absolutely no interest in this as a Disney set.

As a set for potential modification that could be added to the 10332 mediaeval village and the 10305 castle…? Oh, yes, that’s definitely a possibility (indeed, much the same as the Sanderson Sisters “Hocus Pocus” set).

Looking at it purely from the *Disney* perspective, I don’t mind it too much. I know Lego, as a consistent design feature, doesn’t do noses on minifig heads but, maybe just this once, they could have at least tried *printed* noses for the seven dwarfs. I understand the irritation some folks have with the lack of enclosing back walls; this set falls into a very odd “no-man’s land” between a kid’s playset (too expensive) and an adult display set (lacking in the finishing features and enclosing rear walls). Personally, I don’t mind it just as it is but then I also freely acknowledge that I have already said that in it’s full “Disney” form it’s not really a set for me anyway!

Will so buy it straight away? Nope. Will I potentially pick it up if it appears on sale so I can butcher it and add to the mediaeval village? Yeah, probably…!

@VictorvanSchagen said:
"Some interesting new pieces and re-colours:

- weird 3-clip bar on the door.
- new 2x2 plate with 3 studs and 1 corner curve.
- new foliage piece.
- white seaweed piece."

Nope,
- Bar 2L with Clip End and 2 Clips on Opposite Sides
- Plate, Round Corner 2 x 2 with 1 x 1 Cutout
- Plant Plate, Round 1 x 2 with Layered Leaves

But the 2x2 half-round tile seems new? (bed-ends)

I noticed on rebrickable that the main moc project for the new Disney castle is a back wall design.

On some sets I'm ok without a back wall, it depends on where I display it. The Ninjago modulars don't do well against a wall, especially the last as I you can't operate the cable car.

What I don't get is with this set is Lego put it up for further review, then they rejected it. Which rules out set already in production motive, you would think.

@Givememorebricks said:
" @AverageChimaEnjoyer said:
"Whew! It's not the Rachel Zegler version!

This set looks amazing! I'm really glad they chose to put in the Prince and Evil Queen in the set so that you have pretty much the whole cast! The cottage is an amazing build (those 1x1 printed owl tiles look great!) and the wishing well and coffin side builds are nice to have too!

If I had one complaint, it's that the dwarves translated HORRIBLY into LEGO form. Molded heads would definitely have looked a lot less derpy."

Rachel Zegler makes me sick."

Thanks for playing... *sigh*

Anyone else getting Sonic Labyrinth Zone vibes from those printed owl tiles?

EUR 220 for half a house? Ridiculous.

So according to Lego insiders get it 1-3 March, everyone else 4th March.

Not June.

shame that I cant support disney cause this set is cool

Something about the aesthetics just works for me. The thatch feels so much more interesting than the rigid blocks in Medieval Town Square, and the colour scheme more cohesive too. I do wish they included the stairs, given how prominently they feature in the movie. But that's the beauty of Lego - just add them in!

Some of the noseless dwarves are horrifying though. Maybe they could have done something like the Pinocchio head?

@AliveAndBricking said:
"Look, this is a fantastic set. It looks brilliant from at least three sides...and the minifigs are glorious even if the beards look a little goofy (would it have been better if they gave the actual headpieces facial hair, I don't know...), but we're all entitled to criticise and suggest what we'd prefer (hoping that TLG take note for future sets).

Most of the criticisms here are quite mild and perfectly reasonable, including the speculation concerning the cancelled IDEAS set (even if TLG had been negotiating with Disney long before the IDEAS set was initially given the green light, it seems unfair to have effectively yanked the fan designer's chain by accepting his design as one of the finalists, and *then* withdrawing the set, as if he'd personally done something wrong).

Where I *do* think some posters here are being petty and falling into pathetic anti-woke/angry white guy territory is all the unnecessary nonsense about Rachel Zegler. There's enough of that 'incel'/alt-right nonsense on other sites, particularly social media. Give the woman a break. I'm not saying I'm personally a fan, but why shoe-horn some petty, politicised hate about an actress when she has ZERO to do with this set?

It's that type of underlying sexism (or any other type of 'ism') that descends into unnecessary and pathetic AFOL territory (see also attacks on sets that are aimed at a particular minority and/or long-overlooked demographic; remember folks, you're not compelled to buy a set that isn't aimed at you!), but, as I say, most of the other criticisms, concerning the final design and/or TLG's business/marketing practices, are perfectly fair, and partly what these forums are here for."
Thank you. I actually didn’t know who this person was or why she kept being mentioned. I now understand that she’s been cast as Snow White in a live action remake. I’m not sure I understand the backlash at her casting or that of Halle Bailey in The Little Mermaid. If you can do the job, you should get the job.

That being said, I’m an original cartoon fan so I wasn’t interested in the mermaid clamshell but do very much like this cottage.

Almost certainly out of scale with the new Medieval Village set, but I think I still want it. Well, actually, I *know* I still want it! I think it's an excellent representation of a truly fine movie--I even find the dwarves very recognizable while still appropriately Legofied. Not to mention some more ideas on how to make plausible thatched roofs!

I guess I'll pass on the Lion Knights' Castle after all. I'll download the instructions and play around with expanding the Creator Castle instead....

And given that the Telephone Box is almost half the cost of this set, I'll just settle for finding a copy of the sticker sheet for that one.

@AliveAndBricking said:
" @Ze_Carlos said:
"Personal wishful thinking: LEGO would realize that generic sets sell better than licensed ones. Fed up with IP. I'll vote with my wallet. I'll get Medieval Town Square. "

Some of us like IP sets. Some of us enjoy pop culture, and the films, TV shows, books, and, now, even Broadway shows, in addition to Lego, and like the idea of being able to create our own 'fanfiction' stories with those characters.

We've got both (IP sets with minifigs that represent all skin tones/races) and the non-IP sets featuring the generic yellow minifigs, so, why complain?"

I'll stop complaining when i get again Pirates, Castle, Western, Classic Space themes. That's that. If there's room for all of our tastes, as you say...

I really liked this set until I saw that it is open at the back... My wallet made a happy sound knowing I will only be getting 10332 in Q1

@Ze_Carlos said:
" @AliveAndBricking said:
" @Ze_Carlos said:
"Personal wishful thinking: LEGO would realize that generic sets sell better than licensed ones. Fed up with IP. I'll vote with my wallet. I'll get Medieval Town Square. "

Some of us like IP sets. Some of us enjoy pop culture, and the films, TV shows, books, and, now, even Broadway shows, in addition to Lego, and like the idea of being able to create our own 'fanfiction' stories with those characters.

We've got both (IP sets with minifigs that represent all skin tones/races) and the non-IP sets featuring the generic yellow minifigs, so, why complain?"

I'll stop complaining when i get again Pirates, Castle, Western, Classic Space themes. That's that. If there's room for all of our tastes, as you say..."

Fair enough. I hope you get what you want, although haven't we recently been seeing more classic sets, particularly in the Medieval/Castle range?

Anyway, I just hope none of it is at the expense of what others want/like, and that TLG continue to attract new fans with new themes.

@MrKoshka said:
" @MegaBlocks said:
"There are clearly issues with licence holders and giving a royalty to fan designers too."

The issues exist only in your imagination. It's a baseless and silly accusation. If you cared to listen to designers who post articles here or on other social media you would see sketch models exist for tons of popular culture items for years and years. The Titanic is a great example of this.

Why did LEGO decide to release the Winnie the Pooh set under Ideas but not Snow White? Are they sometimes evil and greedy and sometimes benevolent? Ultimately we will never know the selection process for when a popular culture reference that someone had the same idea a designer did internally gets released as an Ideas set or under another brand line. But I can think of a dozen good reasons. Disney wanted it branded under Disney not Ideas. The set was already well in the works with details on dates being worked out still. Some issue with the fan model we don't know about from the internal review process. The way Disney licensing works on different properties they developed rather than purchased.

I don't understand why anyone would assign malicious intent to TLG for the decision of when to release a model based on an idea that is trivial to come up to. This is not like someone made up a whole new set concept from their own imagination like the old fishing store. My assumption is that if the idea truly generates interest within TLG and there was no prior work started, then deference to the ideas submission is made. But I believe personally that the decision is complex and probably sometimes mistakes are made.

The logical conclusion to me is that people who think TLG are stealing ideas submissions to save the 1% commission are just looking for something to complain about. And, given your track record of mostly complaining about everything in every post I see you make, that tracks here.

We get it. You guys hate TLG. They do everything wrong and bad now. They are greedy and evil and lazy. Once in awhile they do exactly the thing you want with maybe a castle set or something and you begrudgingly say it's ok but there shouldn't be female knights.

So ... that's why Bingo cards is a good idea. Because you lot are so sadly predictable. You can complain and feel vindicated. We can cross off the sheets and have fun. It's win-win!"

You make some good points, especially with respect to why TLG would be motivated to cheat the IDEAS designer over a mere 1%, but I don't see criticism of corporations like TLG or Disney as 'hatred'. We all like what they're doing, and we're demonstrating our support via our wallets. Sure, some fans can be a bit entitled, but corps also want to satisfy their customer-base, so it makes sense to give them our feedback (assuming any employees check these forums, and my understanding is that some of these discussions have, on occasion, fed back to the company). That said, corps are big enough and rich enough to take care of themselves. They're not the oppressed and slightest party here, and whilst you may be entirely right when you suggest that TLG had no reason to cheat the IDEAS designer, it's not unreasonable for us 'plebs' to question the perceived treatment of a fellow fan/Lego hobbyist, especially without knowing the full details behind TLG's unprecedented decision for withdrawing Hanswasyellowfirst's design, after it had initially been selected for production.

Some of the hate lobbed at corps can occasionally be irrational and, as I say, display a degree of entitlement and truculence, but it's surely much less harmful than attacking and engaging in the bullying of powerless individuals, which is behaviour that I witness far more often on social media/forums with little comment/criticism. The corps are alright. They can take care of themselves. Their marketing and PR departments are big and well-paid enough for us not to feel obliged to do their jobs for them.

@mahasamatman said:
"I really liked this set until I saw that it is open at the back... My wallet made a happy sound knowing I will only be getting 10332 in Q1"

Precisely. I can't help thinking that the open-back 'issue' is putting a lot of potential customers off, even as others insist that we're being petty or that it's not an issue for *them*.

Is it any wonder that the Series 1 Designer Program set with the fewest orders is the (open-backed) 910032 Parisian Street? FWIW, this is the one set out of the five finalists that I *did* order, because I love the overall design and it will still look amazing in a Lego City, even without a back, and, as an aside, it would have been absolutely unaffordable at its current dimensions had it been given a closed back. Still, for many AFOLs it will feel like an 'incomplete set' hence why I suspect, just going by some of the comments left on the designer's page, it's not getting quite the same level of orders as the other sets in ths round, as wonderful as it is.

@HOBBES said:
"I wonder, when, in the prince school curriculum do charming people learn to kiss total stranger in their sleep? Is it part of Rape 101 or is it part of the much more advanced: Dodgy Tactics 586?"

Have you ever met a princeling/nepobaby/fratboy? That's about as well as you can expect them to act. They almost always much, much worse.

I appreciate the design of this set. It would attract me more with a back wall, but I understand the choice. I will need a big sale or GWP to get this.

@MrKoshka said:
" @ShinyBidoof said:
"This thread already appears to mark every box on the AFOL-whine bingo card - excellent work guys.

Especially impressed that one of the first was the "tin foil hat - they stole it from an Ideas submission" double your money box."

For any IP set release that’s the free space on the bingo sheet though. Or maybe complaining about price. Or about it being too woke. Hmmm.

There’s a site to make Bingo cards. I might make one for AFOL complaints. Then we can all play on set release posts!

@Huw - can we have a new site feature please? Instead of a poll can we all play interactive AFOL complaint Bingo on these new set announcements?"

BINGO!!!

Did I just win a free set?

@MrKoshka said:
" @MegaBlocks said:
"There are clearly issues with licence holders and giving a royalty to fan designers too."

The issues exist only in your imagination. It's a baseless and silly accusation. If you cared to listen to designers who post articles here or on other social media you would see sketch models exist for tons of popular culture items for years and years. The Titanic is a great example of this.

Why did LEGO decide to release the Winnie the Pooh set under Ideas but not Snow White? Are they sometimes evil and greedy and sometimes benevolent? Ultimately we will never know the selection process for when a popular culture reference that someone had the same idea a designer did internally gets released as an Ideas set or under another brand line. But I can think of a dozen good reasons. Disney wanted it branded under Disney not Ideas. The set was already well in the works with details on dates being worked out still. Some issue with the fan model we don't know about from the internal review process. The way Disney licensing works on different properties they developed rather than purchased.

I don't understand why anyone would assign malicious intent to TLG for the decision of when to release a model based on an idea that is trivial to come up to. This is not like someone made up a whole new set concept from their own imagination like the old fishing store. My assumption is that if the idea truly generates interest within TLG and there was no prior work started, then deference to the ideas submission is made. But I believe personally that the decision is complex and probably sometimes mistakes are made.

The logical conclusion to me is that people who think TLG are stealing ideas submissions to save the 1% commission are just looking for something to complain about. And, given your track record of mostly complaining about everything in every post I see you make, that tracks here.

We get it. You guys hate TLG. They do everything wrong and bad now. They are greedy and evil and lazy. Once in awhile they do exactly the thing you want with maybe a castle set or something and you begrudgingly say it's ok but there shouldn't be female knights.

So ... that's why Bingo cards is a good idea. Because you lot are so sadly predictable. You can complain and feel vindicated. We can cross off the sheets and have fun. It's win-win!"

Sheesh! A whole lot. The decision in this case is undoubtedly more to do with adherence to the new movie than anything else (e.g., Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings).

New Brickset poll: Who are the worst?

a) Fierce, uptight Lego critics

b) Fierce, uptight Lego apologists

c) Fierce uptight Lego critic trolls

d) AFOLs who don't seem to care about the pressing Lego issues of the day and just want to enjoy new products

@ShinyBidoof: Not quite the full Bingo card, I don't see "You could buy a real one for cheaper."

@Briguy52748 said:
"(Just need a Chuck Norris or an Andre the Giant minifig, heh-heh! ;) )"
"I am the Dread Pirate Roberts! There will be no survivors!"

@WemWem said:
"Looks damn good, the kind of Disney set I’d like to see more of from LEGO.

I’d really like to see an Archery Contest set from ROBIN HOOD, personally. There’s a lot of untapped potential in the classic animated films. Don’t tell me an 18+ grand ballroom set from BEAUTY AND THE BEAST wouldn’t fly off the shelves."

I would love to see more from Robin Hood as well! The archery contest is one of the best scenes for Lego although Prince John's bedroom might work well too. I think the archery contest would also be great for getting more of the cast such as Hiss, Marian, The Sheriff, and Tuck as well as a variant of Little John(albeit not his most iconic outfit). I still think it's a shame no Hiss was included with Prince John.

Did anyone else notice, that biggest picture at the back of the box shows position which is half open and nobody will display it like that? What's a point? It can give wrong expectations.

Structure of the house looks great! Full squad of characters is also nice.
Price is bad, considering pieces and size I see it 20€ less.

Love small tree next to the door and hate black connections at white tree!

Looks like we’re getting unique printed pieces again!

Also, why are there only 6 glasses and bowls? What’s the 7th dwarf going to eat with?

The only missing section is the window area where she puts the freshly baked pie and where she encounters the queen disguised as a beggar.

Thank god it's not politically correct.

@MrKoshka said:
" @MegaBlocks said:
"There are clearly issues with licence holders and giving a royalty to fan designers too."

The issues exist only in your imagination. It's a baseless and silly accusation. If you cared to listen to designers who post articles here or on other social media you would see sketch models exist for tons of popular culture items for years and years. The Titanic is a great example of this.

So ... that's why Bingo cards is a good idea. Because you lot are so sadly predictable. You can complain and feel vindicated. We can cross off the sheets and have fun. It's win-win!"

It is the naivety of posters here and the throwing around of strawman arguments. Did I ever say that Lego wanted to cheat someone out of 1% commission? No. But then again you're throwing a lot of false accusations my way.

Commercial licence agreements are complex. For instance Lego have always had difficultly with Star Wars over the Hasbro licence blocking the sale of individual figures. A licence agreement around a Disney Princess's themed item may fall into marketing issues, or there may be a clause around that particular theme and no royalties given to third parties.

The similarities between this set and the Ideas set are pretty obvious, and it's a pattern that has happened a number of times now. I understand the complex nature of business agreements, it would probably help if Lego were a bit more transparent around it (you can say certain things around NDAs etc), but all we are the personal attacks on sites like this through pretty basic understanding and arguments.

@AliveAndBricking said:
"Some of the hate lobbed at corps can occasionally be irrational and, as I say, display a degree of entitlement and truculence, but it's surely much less harmful than attacking and engaging in the bullying of powerless individuals, which is behaviour that I witness far more often on social media/forums with little comment/criticism. The corps are alright. They can take care of themselves. Their marketing and PR departments are big and well-paid enough for us not to feel obliged to do their jobs for them."

Good points, there is definitely a case of bullying individuals who question large corporations.

There are a lot of similarities between this and ideas sets. I don't hate the set, but if I'd been given the choice, I would rather Lego had approved the ideas set with some modifications that they applied to this one.

It's like with the botanical garden set thats coming soon in ideas. Take a look at some of the moc for the friends one and there's going to be a lot similarities there too.

As for the whole live action film, I have no issues on casting. As long as they can act well, why does it matter?

love it, this is gonna be my "this years birthday present"

Great set, with the 20% off it'll be a nice purchase.

Hocus Pocus (another Disney 18+ set) had a closed up back for around the same size.

SWATSD is here to give OtGaP a run for its money, at least acronym wise.

And now the million dollar question: Snow white over Medieval Town Square or vice versa?

Lego working with Disney, whatever next ...

A TLG designed IP set will mostly / always overcome any fan based design.

In my view : A full building would have been better than the open back design ...... but TLG know how to sell lego.

This Cottage, modified, will get a place in my medieval display.

@saltytbone said:
"There is no misery quite like the misery of a True AFOL (tm) when a new set is revealed. Stickers? Minidolls? Too big? Too small? Too expensive? Not enough minifigs? No printing on legs? Open back (aka not a Complete set aka half assed set)? Licensed? Blind box? Want it to be more detailed but also less expensive?

There are so many options when reaching into the Bag of Disappointment.

Not saying people have to like a set or their opinions aren’t valid. It’s just the comments always flow down the same rivers. Nothing new has been said in years but they keep getting shouted into the clouds. "

Plenty of positive comments. You are choosing to focus on the negative. This is a community made up of individuals, each with an opinion. I see nothing wrong with that and enjoy seeing others' opinions, both positive and negative.

Hi ho! Hi ho! I saw the price then oh!