The Nightmare Before Christmas minifigure comparison
Posted by CapnRex101,
Jack Skellington and Sally made their minifigure debuts in 71024 Disney Collectable Minifigures Series 2, produced in 2019. Five years later, the characters return in 21351 Disney Tim Burton's The Nightmare Before Christmas.
These new minifigures differ substantially from their predecessors, so I have taken some photos to compare them, following our review of the Ideas set.
Jack Skellington
Longer arms and legs were reintroduced for the Avatar theme a couple of years ago and they definitely suit Jack Skellington, although I wish the arms were decorated and the pinstripes on the legs extended further. Additionally, the eyes are now smaller, but either design works, in my opinion. Otherwise, the only clear change is the density of pinstripes on Jack's suit, which is a matter of preference.
Sally
The changes to Sally are obviously not as dramatic, but rather frustrating because the original minifigure was superior. Beyond featuring a more accurate hair piece, the older figure includes printed stitching on the arms and a more intricate spiral design on the torso. Also, dual-moulded legs were used previously and the new legs, with printing alone, are poor by comparison.
Even the colour choices are questionable. Depending on the lighting of each scene, the spiral and windowpane patches on Sally's chest and left leg should be either pink or a sandy colour. Whichever shade is chosen, however, they should be the same colour, rather than mixing the two.
Which version of each character do you prefer? Let us know in the comments.
108 likes
27 comments on this article
@Rabrickzel said:
"Wouldn't it be easier for them to just add that old Sally rather than make new inferior version?"
Yes, but it would diminish the perceived value of the collectible minifigure, which has the embedded 'promise' that'll it remain exclusive as it is. On the other hand, some CMF parts have been found in other sets afterwards, sometimes even very shortly after the CMF series they debuted in (as castle fans will know), so I guess it isn't set in stone. Fans of this film that also appreciate LEGO will likely be getting this set anyway, regardless if the minifigs are remakes or reissues. But yeah, the CMF versions look way better.
Neat article, and cool figures to look through.
Just speculating but based on the graphic sizes of the original vs new versions… I’d say the previous figures were designed by a more seasoned designer. The line weight of the graphics just looks a bit more balanced and true to Lego-aesthetic. …Just look how fine the stitching is on Sally’s chest on the newer figure. Looks a bit thin. …And the eyes on the Original Jack. As you mentioned, look how much fuller they look.
I really would prefer a mix of mini figures and mini dolls. Both of these would work really well in the mini doll shape.
I like the lower density of the pinstripes on Jack but the lack of arm and side of leg printing is unfortunate. Plus the old head looks better, IMO.
Great article! I always thought the original Jack and Sally were fantastic minifigures. It's a shame the new ones aren't as good. I'm on the fence whether or not I care about the long legs, but enough characters of all shapes and sizes have been created in regular minifig form that I don't especially think long legs are required - that's part of the charm of Lego minifigures.
The bigger eyes on the old Jack minifigure is the main loss for me but if you already have that version you can just swap the heads. Otherwise they look decent.
I agree - will be putting the new hair on the old Sally figure, and the old head on the new Jack figure!
Kinda prefer the Jack figure with the standard minifig legs. The long legs weirdly make him look like a properly proportionate human, for example by making his head appear smaller.
The CMF Sally is definitely the superior version.
The location of the printing on the long figures looks very similar to that in Avatar. I imagine that they only have a jig to print on the front of the long legs and not the sides, and cannot yet print on the long arms.
I like the taller height for Jack, but the printing is definitely better on the original CMF.
For me the ideal is old Sally, and new Jack but with the old head.
Also agree with the above comment that including Jack and Sally as minidolls instead would be even better.
@Rabrickzel said:
"Wouldn't it be easier for them to just add that old Sally rather than make new inferior version?"
Design wise, yes, but they would need to put those pieces/prints back into production. And the arms/legs + potentially recreating the hairpiece mold would be more expensive than the new version. (This is an explanation, not an excuse.)
Overall I prefer the new minifigs in terms of height for Jack, head pieces and hair pieces, and the front torso and legs printing. What sets the new minifigs back somewhat is the lack of side printing on Jack's legs and back printing on Sally's legs.
@CCC said:
"The location of the printing on the long figures looks very similar to that in Avatar. I imagine that they only have a jig to print on the front of the long legs and not the sides, and cannot yet print on the long arms."
That's a good point.
Amazing how it has been 5 years since that last series. I somehow have lost that part of my life since I have no memory...
As for the figures, it is interesting how the old look better than the new. But I guess that is typical with most "remakes" these days. I like the taller idea of Jack, but the previous printing really propelled the allure of the figure.
As for Sally, which is the correct eye color? Are we pulling a Harry Potter here and switching from green and blue eyes....
I want to want the set, but figures are always a main selling point for me and I just don't know if I want this change...
They make new molds/prints all the time for what seem to me to be relatively mundane things. Either they didn’t realize these were significant issues or they feel we’ll consume anything they release. I’m not sure which bothers me more…
No arm printing and side leg printing on Jack is a definite step back.
Wow, day and night. You can bet a lot of people buying this set will also be buying these minifigures secondhand.
I actually like different aspects of Jack's heads, but ironically I think the bigger eyes would suit the bigger figure and vice versa.
@Rabrickzel said:
" @ToysFromTheAttic said:
" @Rabrickzel said:
"Wouldn't it be easier for them to just add that old Sally rather than make new inferior version?"
Yes, but it would diminish the perceived value of the collectible minifigure, which has the embedded 'promise' that'll it remain exclusive as it is. On the other hand, some CMF parts have been found in other sets afterwards, sometimes even very shortly after the CMF series they debuted in (as castle fans will know), so I guess it isn't set in stone. Fans of this film that also appreciate LEGO will likely be getting this set anyway, regardless if the minifigs are remakes or reissues. But yeah, the CMF versions look way better."
Does LEGO really care about value when they put that clone trooper figure into microfighter after it being exclusive to expensive set."
I feel confident to say LEGO fully realizes that not that many people are going to buy a big expensive boring gray spaceship just for an exclusive minifigure, and that there are plenty of Star Wars fans out there that can't afford those type of sets -- so they throw that figure in a little cheap boring gray spaceship set. They've done that with other themes as well. It's a bit different with CMFs, though, where the exclusivity of the figure is implied by the higher price point and by merely being in a CMF series.
I prefer my Santa Jack. There’s no issues with pinstripe printing on a red Santa suit.
I'm very surprised to see comments preferring the newer Sally's hair, since the newer piece is not screen-accurate and the older one was literally made for the character specifically. Nothing wrong with preferring the new, but I can't personally get myself there. Just in terms of adaptation, the new hair strikes me as distractingly inferior.
@ToysFromTheAttic said:
" @Rabrickzel said:
"Wouldn't it be easier for them to just add that old Sally rather than make new inferior version?"
Yes, but it would diminish the perceived value of the collectible minifigure, which has the embedded 'promise' that'll it remain exclusive as it is. On the other hand, some CMF parts have been found in other sets afterwards, sometimes even very shortly after the CMF series they debuted in (as castle fans will know), so I guess it isn't set in stone. Fans of this film that also appreciate LEGO will likely be getting this set anyway, regardless if the minifigs are remakes or reissues. But yeah, the CMF versions look way better."
Princess Aurora and Princess Tiana from the third Disney CMF series were put into sets while the CMF bags were still on shelves. They did something similar with the Wonder Woman CMF. I’m sure there are plenty of other examples.
@Studnotontop said:
" @ToysFromTheAttic said:
" @Rabrickzel said:
"Wouldn't it be easier for them to just add that old Sally rather than make new inferior version?"
Yes, but it would diminish the perceived value of the collectible minifigure, which has the embedded 'promise' that'll it remain exclusive as it is. On the other hand, some CMF parts have been found in other sets afterwards, sometimes even very shortly after the CMF series they debuted in (as castle fans will know), so I guess it isn't set in stone. Fans of this film that also appreciate LEGO will likely be getting this set anyway, regardless if the minifigs are remakes or reissues. But yeah, the CMF versions look way better."
Princess Aurora and Princess Tiana from the third Disney CMF series were put into sets while the CMF bags were still on shelves. They did something similar with the Wonder Woman CMF. I’m sure there are plenty of other examples. "
Yes, I'm sure there are plenty, as I already pointed out in my original remark. It does diminish the value of a figure somewhat if you can find it in a not-too-expesive set not too long after its release, as there's less incentive to buy it loose. But it's Disney, so they also have a big say in things.
@ToysFromTheAttic said:
"Yes, I'm sure there are plenty, as I already pointed out in my original remark. It does diminish the value of a figure somewhat if you can find it in a not-too-expesive set not too long after its release, as there's less incentive to buy it loose. But it's Disney, so they also have a big say in things."
Disney doesn’t get a vote in Wonder Woman’s case, but that set was intended to be a convention exclusive, so the quantity involved is a drop in a bucket compared to how many shipped on CMF packets.
I wonder how the new Jack looks if you swap his head for the collectible version?
@PurpleDave said:
" @ToysFromTheAttic said:
"Yes, I'm sure there are plenty, as I already pointed out in my original remark. It does diminish the value of a figure somewhat if you can find it in a not-too-expesive set not too long after its release, as there's less incentive to buy it loose. But it's Disney, so they also have a big say in things."
Disney doesn’t get a vote in Wonder Woman’s case, but that set was intended to be a convention exclusive, so the quantity involved is a drop in a bucket compared to how many shipped on CMF packets."
Obviously not with Wonder Woman, but all the other things mentioned were Ips owned by Disney. In WW's case, it's the Warners who get a say as IP holder.
The old Jack is just better with the arm and leg printing. New Jack looks like he's wearing black cowboy chaps over black boots like the Lone Ranger sets because a billion dollar company can't print a bit further down the legs.
Everyone already knew about Sally.
No matter which version, these figs - and the Burton characters they are based on - are a nightmare to look at. I hate them.