Review: 40720 Mini Disney Sleeping Beauty Castle

The Bumblebee of Disney Castles. Not bad, but will only get it as a companion to its superior counterpart.

The color scheme reminds me of the Eurodisney version, so that's a plus in my book.

It looks like 3xPolybag build. The price is so bad xD

Cinderzilla

Is there space for the sleeping dragon in the cave? Like in Disneyland?

@Jena said:
"Is there space for the sleeping dragon in the cave? Like in Disneyland?"

Disneyland California doesn't have a sleeping dragon in the cave, that is only in Paris. Although both buildings are Sleeping Beauty Castle, this one is based on the California one.

@chrisaw said:
"“No interior” as a criticism seems a bit unfair/unrealistic at this scale. "

the midi scale super star destroyer has kind of an interior with those little 1x1 round plates symbolizing characters. They could have done something like that. I dislike how they just reused the CMF figure, practically everyone that wanted that figure probably already has it so there is no point in getting this set.

N...ope.

I'd rather have a model of Neuschwanstein Castle, the original that all the Disney fake wannabe lookalike castles try to imitate but fail miserably at.
I wouldn't set a foot in any of those hideous parks even if I got offered a fortune for doing so.

@AustinPowers said:
"I'd rather have a model of Neuschwanstein Castle, the original that all the Disney fake wannabe lookalike castles try to imitate but fail miserably at."

I used to have a 3D puzzle of that castle. I'd both love and hate for Architecture do do a version. Love, because it would certainly be an impressive set. Hate, because I certainly wouldn't have room to put it.

@TheOtherMike:
Depends on how big they make it. If they do it like Himeji Castle, it would be quite large. If they do it like the inaugural Sears Tower, it might be palm-sized (but missing most of the details). The real question is how expensive it would be.

On the subject of travel and landmarks, I just noticed that 41838 has been added to the sidebar. There are white 1x1 round tiles to mark your travels, including ten camera icons (which corresponds neatly with the ten photo mounts on the back of the display) and there are ten suitcase icons (presumably to mark places you've traveled, but don't have represented with photos). And then in South America (hard to tell exactly which country it's located in, between Brazil, Uraguay, Paraguay, and Argentia), there's a third icon. It's printed in yellow, or a similar shade, so I'm having trouble identifying exactly what the icon depicts. Is it a house? If so, I'm guessing that's supposed to mark where the owner lives, but otherwise I have no idea.

@MrKoshka said:
" @AustinPowers said:
"I'd rather have a model of Neuschwanstein Castle, the original that all the Disney fake wannabe lookalike castles try to imitate but fail miserably at.
I wouldn't set a foot in any of those hideous parks even if I got offered a fortune for doing so. "

Does the sun ever shine where you live?"

How can the good man possibly be expected to see the sunny side of life with so many English soccer hooligans currently invading his peaceful and fair realm?

@MrKoshka said:
" @AustinPowers said:
"I'd rather have a model of Neuschwanstein Castle, the original that all the Disney fake wannabe lookalike castles try to imitate but fail miserably at.
I wouldn't set a foot in any of those hideous parks even if I got offered a fortune for doing so. "

Does the sun ever shine where you live?"
Of course it does. Quite a lot actually.

I would ask differently. How miserable must someone's real life be that they see value in going to a place where everything is fake, and the only reason the place they are going to is letting them in in the first place is to make them part with as much money as possible.
You have to pay through the nose for
- travel to said destination
- accommodation
- entrance fee
- food and drink
- merchandise
- special passes in order to skip queues (or at least shorten wait times)
- anything I missed?

All that just to go to a place where artificial is the best description for what you get to experience.
Or is it to worship the Disney god of commerce?

I'd rather spend my time in a real environment. Some place where I'm not just treated like a lemon that needs to be squeezed as hard as possible in order to part with as much money as possible for as little in return as possible.
But that's just me. Perhaps our definition of fun and enjoyment simply differs.

@PurpleDave said:
" @TheOtherMike:
Depends on how big they make it. If they do it like Himeji Castle, it would be quite large. If they do it like the inaugural Sears Tower, it might be palm-sized (but missing most of the details). The real question is how expensive it would be."

If they could do it something like 40585, that would be great.

@lemish34 :
You would be surprised how fun I can be. My kids are more than happy I can assure you.
Just because I despise Disney's theme parks doesn't mean I am incapable of having fun. My comment was only directed towards Disney properties in particular, for various reasons.
Other than that I am open to fun activities galore.

And my negativity towards certain aspects of TLG and their products is always very specific and not directed towards the product in general.
I am in no way a negative person by any definition of the term.

@lemish34: "everyone" "on every second comment" is quite an exaggeration you will find.
There are a couple of people who get more triggered by my posts than others who seem to have no problem with my comments whatsoever.
Guess what, some even seem to agree with me from time to time. ;-)

Oh and my last experiences with LEGO related stuff were more than positive by the way. Because I have turned my attention from buying current sets to hunting down gems from the past I missed out on as a kid. Classic Space and Technic in particular, with some LEGOLAND Stadt sets mixed in too.
My latest bargain finds on ebay were 8862 and 6987 for example, both in as new condition for a price I wouldn't even get incomplete versions without box or instructions on Bricklink.
I am in the process of rebuilding those right now, and they bring constant smiles to my face.
So no negativity at all you see.

@Mica86 : thank you for your comment.
But don't give @lemish34 a hard time, his opinion is just as valid as mine. And perhaps I did indeed phrase my original comment a bit too offensively. I never meant to insult people for their hobby. The "how miserable must..." comment was meant as a direct reply to @lemish34 's thought that I must be miserable because I strongly dislike Disney's way. It's not that I am against theme parks per se (after all we've been to Legoland Germany several times), I just have an extreme aversion to Disney - the corporate monster, and what I have seen about their theme parks, the way they treat employees, the extreme price gouging, and the fakeness of everything. Going by that made me wonder how anyone could enjoy spending time (and insane amounts of money) there.

I'm not fond of the color scheme--too sharply pink-and-blue--although I understand why it was chosen. I'd rather use bright pink in place of the dark pink, and light nougat or tan in place of the bright pink. If necessary, I'd shift some of the current tan pieces to pearl gold or medium tan to keep any important contrast. While doing that, I think I might substitute two plates for many of the bricks in order to scale the towers down a little. The various Disney castles don't all need to be the same height, IMO, and I prefer Sleeping Beauty's castle to be a little shorter and broader than the others.

@AustinPowers: I'm curious. Does your aversion to Disney extend to their in-house IPs (as opposed to the ones they've bought up), or is it limited to things like their business practices ("We are Disney. You will be assimilated. We will add you pop-cultural relevance to our own. Your IPs will adapt to service us. Resistance... is futile"), and theme parks?

@AustinPowers said:
" @Mica86 : thank you for your comment.
But don't give @lemish34 a hard time, his opinion is just as valid as mine. And perhaps I did indeed phrase my original comment a bit too offensively. I never meant to insult people for their hobby. The "how miserable must..." comment was meant as a direct reply to @lemish34 's thought that I must be miserable because I strongly dislike Disney's way. It's not that I am against theme parks per se (after all we've been to Legoland Germany several times), I just have an extreme aversion to Disney - the corporate monster, and what I have seen about their theme parks, the way they treat employees, the extreme price gouging, and the fakeness of everything. Going by that made me wonder how anyone could enjoy spending time (and insane amounts of money) there. "

Actually, @AustenPowers, your “how miserable everyone must be….” Comment pre-dates my first comment on this thread.
I believe you were responding to @MrKoshka’s comment, not mine.

@TheOtherMike : it's the latter.
@lemish34 : you're right, I must have lost track.
@Jdrewg : family members and friends have been, plus friends have worked at WDW for years. Their accounts match the loads of articles and documentations I have read and watched about the subject over the years. As for why I follow such topics? I work as a business analyst and part of my job is following ESG practices of large companies worldwide. Couple that with the fact that I have been fascinated by the technical aspects of theme parks since I watched the movie "Rollercoaster" as a kid, and hence have read up on the subject for years. Part of that research brings up Disney parks as well, naturally, and the more you dig into the subject, the more you find out.

@AustinPowers:
Some people (like my mom) will never be fans of theme parks, while other people enjoy going on a weekly basis. That much is purely subjective, and the two camps will never agree.

My parents took us to the original Disneyland in 1985, and I had a blast. In 1992, I went to WDW, and back to Disneyland in the late 90’s, and both times I had fun (and both times I did the parks solo, which helps a lot in that regard, since you can skip lines when they need to fill a single seat on a ride). None of these trips were cheap, but I know the latter two were less expensive than the Universal Studio parks. Disney has a target range for headcount, and when attendance gets too high, they’ll inch the price up until enough people find other plans and the number gets back in range (unfortunately, this has had the effect of gentrifying attendance).

I’ve never really had to deal with people being able to pay to skip lines. There was an early form of the program the last time I went, but it was limiting enough as to not be a huge detriment to those who didn’t buy in. There also wasn’t any abuse of the handicap bypass policy. If 1985 me could travel to today’s Disney park, I don’t think I would enjoy the current state nearly as much as I did back then.

@Andrusi said:
"Hey everyone, my plane just landed in California. Super hyped to visit Disneyland for the first time tomorrow, but in the meantime what's going in in this threa--"

Hilarious. As your comments usually are.

I agree with both the negativity and positivity about theme parks expressed in this thread. We should limit our negativity to the corporations, and not turn viciously on each other. Ad hominem attacks are the last refuge of the scoundrel.

I have taken my son to all of them (Lego, Disney, Universal) in both California and Florida at different points in his life (5, 10, 13, 17). I've also lived in Florida, and experienced the parks as a resident pass-holder.

I have done it sober and pie-eyed. I've tried it with little knowledge or money. I've tried it with lots of research and no expense spared.

Regardless, they find ways to strip you of your cash, enthusiasm, and patience. Nevertheless, they are fun milestones of your relationship with your kid. I had a lot of fun.

Of course, I've taken him camping to a lot of National Parks, and that is a lot cheaper and much more spectacular.

@StyleCounselor said:
"Of course, I've taken him camping to a lot of National Parks, and that is a lot cheaper and much more spectacular."

That depends on which National Park, and what you plan to do there. Just getting to Gates of the Arctic National Park would probably cost more than a Disney weekend.

@PurpleDave said:
" @StyleCounselor said:
"Of course, I've taken him camping to a lot of National Parks, and that is a lot cheaper and much more spectacular."

That depends on which National Park, and what you plan to do there. Just getting to Gates of the Arctic National Park would probably cost more than a Disney weekend."

Good point. As you know, I live in the American West where we are surrounded with some of the most amazing parks in the world.

So, very cheap.

I think I spent $5k on a 5-day (3 days in parks) trip to Orlando last Nov. for three of us. Gave the boy one last hurrah for his childhood.

I told him that I'm not coming back until he's paying for me or he has children of his own. In the latter case, I'll most likely be on the hook... again. >_<

@StyleCounselor:
I live in Metro Detroit. Our only proper National Park is Sleeping Bear Dunes, way up at the tip of the ring finger, so that’s basically a 3-day commitment when you factor in travel time. I think the new one in Indiana is actually closer, but not by much. Other states don’t even have any. However, there are enough other classifications under the purview of the NPS (particularly on the east coast, where the parks are fewer and farther between), plus a multitude of state parks, that most people live close enough to day-trip _something_ if they so choose.

National parks, state parks, local parks ... I enjoy them all more than the Disney parks. But we just took our kids to Disney World for spring break, and they had an amazing time. My fun meter was filled up for the year by just following them around and basking in their joy.

My wife and I also went to Disneyland for her 30th (we were living in Santa Barbara, just a few hours north of the park), and we had a very different but also very fun time. It was the weekend after we went camping in Joshua Tree and the weekend before we went backpacking in Yosemite. I might pick up 40720 as a souvenir of that trip (which was now 15 years ago - yikes!).

@ForestMenOfEndor said:
"National parks, state parks, local parks ... I enjoy them all more than the Disney parks. But we just took our kids to Disney World for spring break, and they had an amazing time. My fun meter was filled up for the year by just following them around and basking in their joy.

My wife and I also went to Disneyland for her 30th (we were living in Santa Barbara, just a few hours north of the park), and we had a very different but also very fun time. It was the weekend after we went camping in Joshua Tree and the weekend before we went backpacking in Yosemite. I might pick up 40720 as a souvenir of that trip (which was now 15 years ago - yikes!)."

They are fun trips. I'm glad I did every one. It's especially fun to add Cape Canaveral to the Orlando mix. They even have one ride- it attempts to replicate a space launch.

I'm currently putting into storage the remnants of the boy's $60 Build-a-Lightsaber from when he was 13. We successfully avoided the new $350 Build-a-Droid on the last trip.

He has a lot more/better memories of a flat log he found on a trail in Banff when he was 8. He zoomed that log around and around, pretending it was the Malevolence. When we returned from our road trip, I had to get him 9515.

@StyleCounselor: I remember going to Cape Canaveral when I was a kid and being disappointed that they didn't have Lego Space sets in the gift shop. Still had a lot of fun, space-obsessed kid that I was.

@StyleCounselor said:
" @TheOtherMike said:
" @StyleCounselor: I remember going to Cape Canaveral when I was a kid and being disappointed that they didn't have Lego Space sets in the gift shop. Still had a lot of fun, space-obsessed kid that I was."

I'm not positive, but when we went five years ago. I think they did have some Lego sets. It was at gift center prices, so I wasn't really interested.

Boy, there's nothing like walking past a Saturn V engine to help you to realize your place in the universe, is there?"

I went in the late Eighties, so obviously they've made some changes since then.

Reading this thread in line during my first visit to Disneyland was quite fun :)

@GoldenNinja3000 said:
"Reading this thread in line during my first visit to Disneyland was quite fun :) "

God speed.

@PurpleDave said:
" @StyleCounselor :
I live in Metro Detroit. Our only proper National Park is Sleeping Bear Dunes, way up at the tip of the ring finger, so that’s basically a 3-day commitment when you factor in travel time. I think the new one in Indiana is actually closer, but not by much. Other states don’t even have any. However, there are enough other classifications under the purview of the NPS (particularly on the east coast, where the parks are fewer and farther between), plus a multitude of state parks, that most people live close enough to day-trip _something_ if they so choose."

My camping west of the Rockies has been a mixed bag. The Northeast is fun. The Midwest and South usually involve way too much sweating and insects.

It's hard to compare with the West. We have the mountains in summer and the deserts for the rest of the year.

I spent a few memorable summers camping by a lake in western Iowa chasing fireflies. However, we mostly spent the days hanging out with cousins in air-conditioned homes. That was a novelty for us as no one in Colorado had AC. Now, everyone does who's not in the mountains.

@StyleCounselor:
There was a time in recent years when Michigan was the fourth most popular tourist state in the US. We have the ninth-longest coastline of any state, the longest freshwater coastline of any state, and the most lakes of any state. We have more lighthouses than any other state, and any other nation besides the US. We're tied with Canada for coastal access to Great Lakes. We do okay for ourselves. We also have Mackinac Island. Before there even was air conditioning or mosquito repellent, the island provided both of those things.

@PurpleDave said:
" @StyleCounselor:
There was a time in recent years when Michigan was the fourth most popular tourist state in the US. We have the ninth-longest coastline of any state, the longest freshwater coastline of any state, and the most lakes of any state. We have more lighthouses than any other state, and any other nation besides the US. We're tied with Canada for coastal access to Great Lakes. We do okay for ourselves. We also have Mackinac Island. Before there even was air conditioning or mosquito repellent, the island provided both of those things."

I've heard a lot of good things about the beaches of Michigan. I'm going to have to do that one of these days.

My prior comment said "west of the Rockies" should have been 'east. ' I think that was obvious, but definitely necessary.

@GoldenNinja3000 said:
"Reading this thread in line during my first visit to Disneyland was quite fun :) "

Oh hey! Wonder if we walked past each other at some point and didn't realize it?

I hope this line continues, with the rest of the castles from the international parks.

It's a nice build, and fortunately, I got this for £5 with a gift card :) But I understand the points of negativity in the review.
Now that LEGO have done both the USA castles, fingers crossed that Disneyland Paris is up next, or if LEGO do another large-scale castle, they do the California or Paris edition. I'd get that if it matches up to proportions.