Review: 76432 Forbidden Forest: Magical Creatures
Posted by CapnRex101,
As its name suggests, 76432 Forbidden Forest: Magical Creatures includes a variety of animals from the Wizarding World. The menagerie even contains a unique winking Cornish Pixie, plus a few uncommon creatures, including a youthful Thestral and Buckbeak.
However, the actual model seems a little underdeveloped, despite its interesting blue colours. Also, there is an important absentee from the selection of forest creatures included, since the minifigures originate from The Philosopher's Stone.
Summary
76432 Forbidden Forest: Magical Creatures, 172 pieces.
£24.99 / $29.99 / €29.99 | 14.5p/17.4c/17.4c per piece.
Buy at LEGO.com »
I find this set underwhelming, despite the impressive variety of forest creatures
- Good selection of animals
- Fun glow-in-the-dark parts
- Interesting blue-tinted colour scheme
- No unicorn
- Terrain lacks detail
- A little expensive for its size
The set was provided for review by LEGO. All opinions expressed are those of the author.
Minifigures
Hermione Granger and Ron Weasley feature their Hogwarts robes, so these minifigures are fairly common. Even so, they are well-designed and accurate to the film, when Hermione, Ron, Harry and Draco serve detention together in the Forbidden Forest. I like their varying torsos, for example, as Hermione's robes are fastened, while Ron's are open to show his jumper.
The flame yellowish orange and dark red accents look nice too, denoting Gryffindor. Moreover, the triple-moulded short legs suit Hermione, pairing well with a plastic skirt piece. As usual, her textured hair element also looks marvellous and Ron's dark orange hair reflects his appearance in the movie.
Both figures include double-sided heads, featuring smiles and frightened expressions, suitable for their experience in the Forbidden Forest. Dark tan and reddish brown wands are provided with Hermione and Ron too, plus a glow-in-the-dark lantern. You can see the lantern glowing later in this review.
The Completed Model
The Forbidden Forest is a challenging subject for a LEGO model, given its enormous size and relative lack of distinguishing features, other than a dense canopy of trees. On that basis, I like the idea of building the forest in modules, so you can combine several sets or attach this model to 30677 Draco in the Forbidden Forest.
You can also rearrange the different sections and they are connected using clips, so you can angle them in various ways. The design below resembles a clearing in the forest, for example. In addition, the decision to use shades of blue is interesting and effective in communicating the dark setting, particularly as the Forbidden Forest is portrayed in the first two films.
However, the individual modules are lacking in detail. There is relatively little texture and I wish there was more variety between them. The light royal blue elements look nice against the dark blue bases though, including a web making its first appearance in this colour. The glow-in-the-dark spider has earlier appeared in LEGO City, while the young Thestral returns from 76400 Hogwarts Carriage and Thestrals and looks superb.
Buckbeak and an exclusive Cornish Pixie are included too. The white version of Buckbeak was introduced in 76401 Hogwarts Courtyard: Sirius's Rescue and is more accurate to the film than its grey predecessor, although the pearl silver wings present a stark contrast. I would prefer an updated pair of printed wings to match the decoration on Buckbeak's head.
The feathers across the head look excellent and I like Buckbeak's stance, but it would be even better with articulated hind legs. The small Cornish Pixie, meanwhile, lacks articulation, but can still hold accessories because its hands are the width of standard bars. This piece has appeared a few times before with a cheeky smile, so the winking version provided here is unique.
The selection of animals is appealing and there are a couple of details on the back of the focal structure, including a hollow for the Cornish Pixie and a turkey leg. Sadly, the bases otherwise appear lacklustre and the trees are underwhelming, with very few leaves and an odd transition between the trunk and the branches. Such compromises were probably needed though, as this whole set only contains 172 pieces.
While certain aspects of this set are disappointing, the glow-in-the-dark elements look fantastic. As well as the aforementioned lantern and spider, the mushrooms feature glow-in-the-dark 2x2 dishes on top, casting a glow onto the bright light blue 1x1 cones underneath. The spider is my favourite glowing piece though, actually illuminating its web!
Overall
LEGO animals are always popular and 76432 Forbidden Forest: Magical Creatures provides a relatively inexpensive means of acquiring some essential creatures from Harry Potter. The new printed expression on the Cornish Pixie looks wonderful and I am glad to see Buckbeak and the young Thestral again.
However, I think this would have been an excellent opportunity to introduce a unicorn, perhaps taking the place of Buckbeak. After all, the minifigures are inspired by The Philosopher's Stone, when the unicorn appeared onscreen. Also, I find the terrain quite unremarkable, especially for the price of £24.99, $29.99 or €29.99. Even so, I am sure some Harry Potter fans will enjoy this set, given the creatures included.
114 likes
56 comments on this article
Bears. Buckbeaks. Battlestar Galactica.
meh...
$30 for this?!
"Back in mah day, we coulda gotten this fer twenty bucks, easy!"
I may pick it up just for Buckbeak and the glowing pieces, but the price tag is making me seriously question it.
Every time it is called the "Philosopher's stone" I get confused. It is the "sorcerer's stone" to me.
Not mentioned but glowing parts could be used in moc's for lanterns or car headlights..
@person_that_uses_brickset said:
"Every time it is called the "Philosopher's stone" I get confused. It is the "sorcerer's stone" to me."
The original name is the one used in the review. The Sorcerer's Stone was done only in the US for both book and film for some obscure reason... maybe they though general US audiences wouldn't know what a Philosopher was? I wouldn't put it past the book editors / Hollywood to think that...
30 euro for this!?
Nope
I think people are being a bit hard on this set. With Buckbeak, a cornish Pixie (new print) and a baby Thestral, I think it's actually good value. £25 which will be easy to get under £20 would be cheaper than if they sold these large parts on pick a brick.
@CapnRex101 said: "The glow-in-the-dark spider is also new."
Is it different from the glow-in-the-dark spider that I have from 60188 Mining Experts Site (2018)?
Not a fan of this. Just an excuse to re-use a bunch of moulds and minifigures with some crappy trees. Would have been cooler to do the scene with Voldemort and the unicorn. Could do a silver pool of blood and a hovering function for Voldemort! And could include a Firenze minifigure to make use of the centaur hindquarters mould.
Nonetheless, I actually like the use of blue and black pieces to give the appearance of the forest at night
@Murdoch17 said:
" @person_that_uses_brickset said:
"Every time it is called the "Philosopher's stone" I get confused. It is the "sorcerer's stone" to me."
The original name is the one used in the review. The Sorcerer's Stone was done only in the US for both book and film for some obscure reason... maybe they though general US audiences wouldn't know what a Philosopher was? "
Yes, that was the reason, and they were probably right :)
@ForestMenOfEndor said:
" @CapnRex101 said: "The glow-in-the-dark spider is also new."
Is it different from the glow-in-the-dark spider that I have from 60188 Mining Experts Site (2018)?"
Same spider.
@yellowcastle said:
"Bears. Buckbeaks. Battlestar Galactica."
If this had a bear... or even a Battlestar Galactica reference, I'd be much more inclined to buy it.
If we consider prices: Hogwart moments 30€ , Hogwart banners 35€, Hogwarts Thestrals 20€.
We can see that this set is robbery xD (doesn't matter that resellers will sell for 70%)
Wondering if LEGO will start doing HP dioramas (like in Star Wars) for such scenes from movie, to keep interest for AFOL's at HP line.
@Murdoch17 said:
" @person_that_uses_brickset said:
"Every time it is called the "Philosopher's stone" I get confused. It is the "sorcerer's stone" to me."
The original name is the one used in the review. The Sorcerer's Stone was done only in the US for both book and film for some obscure reason... maybe they though general US audiences wouldn't know what a Philosopher was? I wouldn't put it past the book editors / Hollywood to think that..."
Similarly, Paul Dukas’s The Sorcerer’s Apprentice was originally called The Philosopher’s Apprentice.
The baby thestral is an odd choice. Should definitely have been a unicorn.
Or a black goat.
@Murdoch17 said:
" @person_that_uses_brickset said:
"Every time it is called the "Philosopher's stone" I get confused. It is the "sorcerer's stone" to me."
The original name is the one used in the review. The Sorcerer's Stone was done only in the US for both book and film for some obscure reason... maybe they though general US audiences wouldn't know what a Philosopher was? I wouldn't put it past the book editors / Hollywood to think that..."
I believe it was specifically that the "Philosopher's Stone" as a magical concept is not well known in America and that "sorcerer" is a more exciting/evocative word than "philosopher," which it is. "Sorcerer's Stone" wins for me purely on the basis of pleasant alliterative qualities.
Re: the set, it's a decent battle pack and I love the ELVES vibes from the weirdo foliage colors. $30 feels high, but then specialty Lego animals never did come cheap...
@CapnRex101 said:
"The glow-in-the-dark spider is also new."
No, you are wrong. It appeared in all of the 2018 city mining sets including 60184, which I own. Here is some more evidence: https://brickset.com/sets/containing-part-6218845
I assembled this set last night and it looks better IRL than its images - official LEGO, Brickset or other - would have you believe.
That said, it’s pricey at £25. Had it contained everything it does plus a unicorn, it would have been worth it. Shame it doesn’t.
NPU with the https://brickset.com/parts/6478191/weapon-barrel
To many figs and animals that I allready own.
And more Unprinted mushrooms:(
Agree that a unicorn and a centaur would have been great (and more logical). Still, will probably get this set when on discount, because my pixie needs a pal and I don't have this version of buckbeak yet. Also, another baby bony pony is always welcome.
As the great sorcerer Aristotle once said, “In all things of nature there is something of the marvelous.”
This is embarrassing at $30.
@person_that_uses_brickset said:
"Every time it is called the "Philosopher's stone" I get confused. It is the "sorcerer's stone" to me."
Since all the sets are based strictly off the film series, only a few subtle references are likely to have been made to the original book anyways.
@Murdoch17:
The mythical philosopher's stone was historically an alchemy thing, not a philosophy thing. And the transmute-lead-to-gold stone of legend had absolutely jack to do with the brings-people-back-from-the-dead stone from HP. Well, it does have _one_thing_ in common. Look up the "squared circle", and see if it looks familiar.
@HandPositions:
I think you mean "The Apprentice Sorcerer".
@Alatariel:
Did you move?
@person_that_uses_brickset said:
"Every time it is called the "Philosopher's stone" I get confused. It is the "sorcerer's stone" to me."
It shouldn't be. Reject Scholastic's dim opinion of your intellectual abilities. Like most of the devices in Harry Potter, the Philosopher's Stone is drawn from real history and "real" myth. Scholastic's dumbing-down of the titular object robs you of some degree of appreciation for the elaborate what-if-it's-all-real tapestry that Rowling wove—a critical piece of the reading experience. I bought a UK copy of the first book specifically for this reason.
The real-life search for the Philosopher's Stone, an object which would transmute base metal into gold, and yield the elixir of life, was the driving force of centuries of study in alchemy. Although fruitless in its original endeavor, all of this medieval tinkering did wind up accomplishing the minor miracle of transmuting alchemy into modern chemistry. The idea that alchemy, and not chemistry, was the real miracle after all—and that it was ultimately too dangerous a discovery—is one of those wry twists of perspective that make the books so fresh.
It's sad that the Philosopher's Stone legend isn't more widely known by Americans, having featured in a fabulous 1954 Uncle Scrooge comic adventure entitled "The Fabulous Philosopher's Stone" by the American cartoonist Carl Barks that ought to be part of our pop culture. Barks is widely adored and his corpus is general knowledge in northern Europe, but the Disney corporation has nothing but contempt for the rich American comic heritage it unfortunately owns, so if you weren't lucky enough to have read it in its original publication (back when they were among the most widely-read magazines in the world!), you probably haven't encountered it in the US. Do yourself a favor and pick up a copy! It can be found in the anthology "The Seven Cities of Gold."
@HandPositions said:
"Similarly, Paul Dukas’s The Sorcerer’s Apprentice was originally called The Philosopher’s Apprentice."
No it wasn't. And it would make no sense to title it that way; the poem upon which the music was based was about sorcery, not philosophy.
The "philosopher" part of the Philosopher's Stone came from ancient Greek philosophers' postulates about the nature of matter, which alchemists sought to prove and exploit.
I would say Buckbeak is gray in the film as well as the book, so this version just looks wrong to me. Seems like a bit of a useless set, but good review.
This should've been a slightly bigger set with Harry, Draco, Fang, Voldemort/Quirrell in a black cloak, Firenze the Centaur, and a unicorn. The action feature would send Firenze running in and Voldemort/Quirrell fly into the air via gears in the forest floor.
This is an easy, easy pass if you own a Buckbeak already.
@gatorbug6 said:
"This should've been a slightly bigger set with Harry, Draco, Fang, Voldemort/Quirrell in a black cloak, Firenze the Centaur, and a unicorn. The action feature would send Firenze running in and Voldemort/Quirrell fly into the air via gears in the forest floor.
This is an easy, easy pass if you own a Buckbeak already."
Agreed. This set was admittedly (per the designer's comments) just a last-minute, thrown-together afterthought.
A better set would have included something a little more interesting, like a unicorn! At the very least, give us an adult thestral and a centaur with a different print. Baby thestral and yet ANOTHER Buckbeak are woefully redundant.
The designer called this an 'HP battlepack.' Who wants to army build with Luke Skywalker, Darth Vader, JarJar, BB-8, and a winking mouse droid??!!
I appreciate that Ron and Hermione aren't interacting with the Thestral on the box art since in year 1 they wouldn't have been able to see it. Not sure if it was intentional, considering the complete inaccuracy of their year 1 selves interacting with Buckbeak, but a fun detail anyway.
Definitely a skippable set if you have been collecting the other recent sets.
one cool thing about this set is that the Draco in the Forbidden Forest polybag 30677 was designed to be added onto this set
@ForestMenOfEndor said:
" @CapnRex101 said: "The glow-in-the-dark spider is also new."
Is it different from the glow-in-the-dark spider that I have from 60188 Mining Experts Site (2018)?"
Nope. In several others, too.
https://brickset.com/sets/containing-part-6218845
I was thinking the same as I collect glow-in-the-dark pieces for my Halloween display, and have several of these.
The designs of the bases for each module really remind me of those from 71717.
Also, I have none of the characters included in this set (not being a Harry Potter fan myself) but I'm quite interested in some of the pieces, like the glow-in-the-dark spider, so I might pick this one up along with the Ford Anglia set.
I've made my peace with the fact that, occasionally, I'm going to be over-charged for Lego sets from licensed themes, but if I really want the set, that's okay.
I was okay with paying too much for the beautiful Brachiosaurus set, last year, and I'm okay with paying too much for this set, this year. I really like this set. I like the colours and the selection of unusual animal pieces. I actually really like the general design of the forest in this one. The blues and dark colours give it a really-interested style, and I like it.
The set name, and the picture, made me think this was a set based on the Commodore 64 game "Forbidden Forest". Now that would have been cool
@Huw said:
" @Murdoch17 said:
" @person_that_uses_brickset said:
"Every time it is called the "Philosopher's stone" I get confused. It is the "sorcerer's stone" to me."
The original name is the one used in the review. The Sorcerer's Stone was done only in the US for both book and film for some obscure reason... maybe they though general US audiences wouldn't know what a Philosopher was? "
Yes, that was the reason, and they were probably right :)"
Boy! What a negative thing to say on your own website. What would happen to your revenue if Americans stopped coming to your site?
This is one to pick up when it goes on sale.
@StyleCounselor said:
" @Huw said:
" @Murdoch17 said:
" @person_that_uses_brickset said:
"Every time it is called the "Philosopher's stone" I get confused. It is the "sorcerer's stone" to me."
The original name is the one used in the review. The Sorcerer's Stone was done only in the US for both book and film for some obscure reason... maybe they though general US audiences wouldn't know what a Philosopher was? "
Yes, that was the reason, and they were probably right :)"
Boy! What a negative thing to say on your own website. What would happen to your revenue if Americans stopped coming to your site? "
He didn't say it. I did. He just confirmed it was true, which I already knew was the case.
I'm just really glad to see the dark blue leaves finally appearing in more sets. I believe they were exclusive to the Stranger Things house (which I sadly didn't get) until this year.
@Murdoch17 said:
" @StyleCounselor said:
" @Huw said:
" @Murdoch17 said:
" @person_that_uses_brickset said:
"Every time it is called the "Philosopher's stone" I get confused. It is the "sorcerer's stone" to me."
The original name is the one used in the review. The Sorcerer's Stone was done only in the US for both book and film for some obscure reason... maybe they though general US audiences wouldn't know what a Philosopher was? "
Yes, that was the reason, and they were probably right :)"
Boy! What a negative thing to say on your own website. What would happen to your revenue if Americans stopped coming to your site? "
He didn't say it. I did. He just confirmed it was true, which I already knew was the case."
I probably first read about the Philosopher's Stone in Gone-Away Lake, which is an American children's book from the 1950s (I'm an American bibliophile from the 1970s). Let's give us Yanks a bit more credit!
@ForestMenOfEndor said:
" @Murdoch17 said:
" @StyleCounselor said:
" @Huw said:
" @Murdoch17 said:
" @person_that_uses_brickset said:
"Every time it is called the "Philosopher's stone" I get confused. It is the "sorcerer's stone" to me."
The original name is the one used in the review. The Sorcerer's Stone was done only in the US for both book and film for some obscure reason... maybe they though general US audiences wouldn't know what a Philosopher was? "
Yes, that was the reason, and they were probably right :)"
Boy! What a negative thing to say on your own website. What would happen to your revenue if Americans stopped coming to your site? "
He didn't say it. I did. He just confirmed it was true, which I already knew was the case."
I probably first read about the Philosopher's Stone in Gone-Away Lake, which is an American children's book from the 1950s (I'm an American bibliophile from the 1970s). Let's give us Yanks a bit more credit!"
I don’t know. I think they may have a point. As much as I love Gandalf and that mouse with a broom, other philosophers haven’t taken as much hold.
@gatorbug6 said:
"This is an easy, easy pass if you own a Buckbeak already."
Perhaps if you treat Buckbeak as the Harry Potter creature. But if, like me, you use it as a generic hippogriff and you already have the grey ones but not a white one, it makes sense to get it in this set. I’ve already replaced its wings and 2 x 2 plate with white ones.
If the information from the designer posted on this very site was referenced there would be a lot less hand wringing over why Buckbeak was included and a unicorn was not.
I would be surprised if they had enough lead time to be able to produce a new mould for a unicorn
"BRICKLIST NOTES
We were deep into developing all of the Harry Potter sets for the March 2024 release when we got a special surprise that we could make one extra set, which is where this set came from! We had produced so many magical creatures over the years and thought it could be fun to include several of them together in one set, like a battle-pack. The build is separated into 5 modular sections so you can arrange your Forbidden Forest in your own way, and I was very happy to be able to depict the forest in the blue colour-scheme as it looks in the movie.
FUN FACT:
- This set contains two new and exclusive creatures: a winking Cornish Pixie and a glow-in-the-dark spider, plus a light blue spider's web!"
@StyleCounselor said:
" @Huw said:
" @Murdoch17 said:
" @person_that_uses_brickset said:
"Every time it is called the "Philosopher's stone" I get confused. It is the "sorcerer's stone" to me."
The original name is the one used in the review. The Sorcerer's Stone was done only in the US for both book and film for some obscure reason... maybe they though general US audiences wouldn't know what a Philosopher was? "
Yes, that was the reason, and they were probably right :)"
Boy! What a negative thing to say on your own website. What would happen to your revenue if Americans stopped coming to your site? "
Oh come on! It was just a joke. And it's not as if the stereotype of the "uneducated but thinks he's always right" American was not well-known the world over to be an overused stereotype to begin with.
It's like with comments about us Germans being humorless, Bratwurst-and-Sauerkraut eating Nazis wearing Lederhosen and yodeling all the time...
;-)
@PurpleDave said:
" @Alatariel:
Did you move?"
Just on a business trip. I spend a few months a year on the other side of the pond. ;-)
@rebelpilot said:
"If the information from the designer posted on this very site was referenced there would be a lot less hand wringing over why Buckbeak was included and a unicorn was not.
I would be surprised if they had enough lead time to be able to produce a new mould for a unicorn
BRICKLIST NOTES
...
FUN FACT:
- This set contains two new and exclusive creatures: a winking Cornish Pixie and a glow-in-the-dark spider, plus a light blue spider's web!"
Fun fact addendum:
some of LEGO's designers apparently don't know their own inventory if they claim that a piece that has been out for years, and in several sets no less, was new and exclusive.
@AustinPowers said:
" @StyleCounselor said:
" @Huw said:
" @Murdoch17 said:
" @person_that_uses_brickset said:
"Every time it is called the "Philosopher's stone" I get confused. It is the "sorcerer's stone" to me."
The original name is the one used in the review. The Sorcerer's Stone was done only in the US for both book and film for some obscure reason... maybe they though general US audiences wouldn't know what a Philosopher was? "
Yes, that was the reason, and they were probably right :)"
Boy! What a negative thing to say on your own website. What would happen to your revenue if Americans stopped coming to your site? "
Oh come on! It was just a joke. And it's not as if the stereotype of the "uneducated but thinks he's always right" American was not well-known the world over to be an overused stereotype to begin with.
It's like with comments about us Germans being humorless, Bratwurst-and-Sauerkraut eating Nazis wearing Lederhosen and yodeling all the time...
;-) "
You're absolutely right. Yet, I made a similar joke (in my own style), and the BS moderator deleted it.
So, I took the high road since the low (humorous) road was denied.
You can't have it both ways.
@Huw should be ashamed of his comment or his moderation policy... or both!
@Murdoch17 said:
" @StyleCounselor said:
" @Huw said:
" @Murdoch17 said:
" @person_that_uses_brickset said:
"Every time it is called the "Philosopher's stone" I get confused. It is the "sorcerer's stone" to me."
The original name is the one used in the review. The Sorcerer's Stone was done only in the US for both book and film for some obscure reason... maybe they though general US audiences wouldn't know what a Philosopher was? "
Yes, that was the reason, and they were probably right :)"
Boy! What a negative thing to say on your own website. What would happen to your revenue if Americans stopped coming to your site? "
He didn't say it. I did. He just confirmed it was true, which I already knew was the case."
The first step is admitting truth. I'm sorry for you.
Both you and he are wrong, by the way. Do some research.
@AustinPowers said:
"It's like with comments about us Germans being humorless, Bratwurst-and-Sauerkraut eating Nazis wearing Lederhosen and yodeling all the time...
;-) "
You guys yodel? I thought that was Switzerland…
@Alatariel:
Sweden, right? Who knows, maybe we’re distantly related.
@StyleCounselor:
To be fair, I nearly sprained an eyebrow on a few of your recent comments…
@PurpleDave said:
"
@StyleCounselor:
To be fair, I nearly sprained an eyebrow on a few of your recent comments…"
That's funny. :o)
No unicorn is a bummer, as they just released a white horse without a harness print. Just needed a horn attachment mask or something. Anyway, I don't think we will ever see it in HP, because we all know what scene kids shouldn't be able to recreate from the movie.
@R0Sch said:
"Anyway, I don't think we will ever see it in HP, because we all know what scene kids shouldn't be able to recreate from the movie."
Voldemort eating a unicorn? That's not all that bad, considering they released some 4+ sets last year based on scenes of dinosaurs eating people alive.
@Vindic8ed said:
"Voldemort eating a unicorn? That's not all that bad, considering they released some 4+ sets last year based on scenes of dinosaurs eating people alive."
Yeah, but lawyers and Nedry don’t count.
@AustinPowers said:
" @StyleCounselor said:
" @Huw said:
" @Murdoch17 said:
" @person_that_uses_brickset said:
"Every time it is called the "Philosopher's stone" I get confused. It is the "sorcerer's stone" to me."
The original name is the one used in the review. The Sorcerer's Stone was done only in the US for both book and film for some obscure reason... maybe they though general US audiences wouldn't know what a Philosopher was? "
Yes, that was the reason, and they were probably right :)"
Boy! What a negative thing to say on your own website. What would happen to your revenue if Americans stopped coming to your site? "
Oh come on! It was just a joke. And it's not as if the stereotype of the "uneducated but thinks he's always right" American was not well-known the world over to be an overused stereotype to begin with.
It's like with comments about us Germans being humorless, Bratwurst-and-Sauerkraut eating Nazis wearing Lederhosen and yodeling all the time...
;-) "
Everyone knows that’s not true. Some Germans wear dirndls ;~P
@Zander said:
" @AustinPowers said:
" @StyleCounselor said:
" @Huw said:
" @Murdoch17 said:
" @person_that_uses_brickset said:
"Every time it is called the "Philosopher's stone" I get confused. It is the "sorcerer's stone" to me."
The original name is the one used in the review. The Sorcerer's Stone was done only in the US for both book and film for some obscure reason... maybe they though general US audiences wouldn't know what a Philosopher was? "
Yes, that was the reason, and they were probably right :)"
Boy! What a negative thing to say on your own website. What would happen to your revenue if Americans stopped coming to your site? "
Oh come on! It was just a joke. And it's not as if the stereotype of the "uneducated but thinks he's always right" American was not well-known the world over to be an overused stereotype to begin with.
It's like with comments about us Germans being humorless, Bratwurst-and-Sauerkraut eating Nazis wearing Lederhosen and yodeling all the time...
;-) "
Everyone knows that’s not true. Some Germans wear dirndls ;~P
"
....and I thought they all sang 'Edelweiss' all day long while drinking in beer halls! ;-P
@Murdoch17 said:
" @Zander said:
" @AustinPowers said:
" @StyleCounselor said:
" @Huw said:
" @Murdoch17 said:
" @person_that_uses_brickset said:
"Every time it is called the "Philosopher's stone" I get confused. It is the "sorcerer's stone" to me."
The original name is the one used in the review. The Sorcerer's Stone was done only in the US for both book and film for some obscure reason... maybe they though general US audiences wouldn't know what a Philosopher was? "
Yes, that was the reason, and they were probably right :)"
Boy! What a negative thing to say on your own website. What would happen to your revenue if Americans stopped coming to your site? "
Oh come on! It was just a joke. And it's not as if the stereotype of the "uneducated but thinks he's always right" American was not well-known the world over to be an overused stereotype to begin with.
It's like with comments about us Germans being humorless, Bratwurst-and-Sauerkraut eating Nazis wearing Lederhosen and yodeling all the time...
;-) "
Everyone knows that’s not true. Some Germans wear dirndls ;~P
"
....and I thought they all sang 'Edelweiss' all day long while drinking in beer halls! ;-P"
If I learned anything from The Sound of Music, that only happens in Austria.
Never thought I’d see Huw insult his own users. Am I surprised? Not as much as I’d like to be.