@ResIpsaLoquitur said:
"Note that 40695 is not explicitly tied to purchasing the Burrow, so there's that. IIRC, the Gringotts add-on was specifically tied to the larger bank.
The Gringotts add on WAS NOT tied to the bank. I was able to get it as a GWP and not buy the bank.
"

Nice set although the previous one (75980) seemed to have a larger interior. Also only the top front facade is askew. And I don’t think you can enter the interior of that.

I always wanted 4840 as a kid, and when I went to Atlanta brick co I caved and embarrassingly overpaid. But this is much much better. I didn’t like the newer model because it had two open walls and even the original 4840 had one open wall but this has none and I love it. Maybe u can sell 4840 and use the money for this one.

@ResIpsaLoquitur said:
"Note that 40695 is not explicitly tied to purchasing the Burrow, so there's that. IIRC, the Gringotts add-on was specifically tied to the larger bank.

$130 in HP sets. Groan. I'd need to carefully figure out what I want to buy to get 40695. What's the affordability on the aftermarket on these?"

Intolerable.

Finally! They gave Ginny and Molly new heads!!!!!

@monty_bricks said:
" @ResIpsaLoquitur said:
"$130 in HP sets. Groan. I'd need to carefully figure out what I want to buy to get 40695."

What about 76440? "

Don't need it. If I were to buy anything HP, it's Hogwarts add-ons or the Advent Calendar.

Can’t wait. Lego has knocked it out of the park with all the HP collectors edition sets. Wonder if this will keep with tradition and have something you can add to Hogwarts Icons.

I’m hoping this has more than just the 2 Collectible Portraits pictured. Hagrid’s Hut had one placed inside a cupboard. For the price, I’d like to find the remaining prints that I’m missing

@bnic99 said:
"What is the purpose of that rubber duck?"

It's supposed to be a fun bath toy!

this does *not* look like 260€

It really isn’t that big

I can't help but be disappointed. Firstly, it should have more varied shades. As it is it is dominated by dark tan. If you look closely at screenshots with certain lighting you can see the wood shade of the floor that the front and back meet on is different, something previous Lego sets have understood, but most other merchandise and this set misinterpret the shadow cast on this level as the actual color.

The interior layout is strange. Ginny's room is too high, the twins are too low. I do hope there's a way to access the attic, there is definitely space above Ron's room for the ghoul. But overall it looks like one of those historical Idea's submissions that Lego would add brighter colors to if picked.

Pluses: Bill and Charlie, finally. Floo Network action that appears to match the Borgin & Burkes GWP. 33% taller than 75980, and deeper/wider on the upper levels.

Minuses: over 60% more costly than 75980. Bill's hair should be longer. The Weasley clock GWP is tied to purchase of this set.

Interesting how they used the staircases for the main floor roof supports.

@woosterlegos said:
"It looks great, but I already have 75980, and I don't think this $259 better."
Couldn't have said it better.

@WemWem said:
"This set feels almost more like an homage to the classic, old-school Burrow set than anything else. It really almost doesn't look that much larger than the old set, though I'm sure side-by-side comparisons would reveal otherwise."

This is 3-4” taller at 18” (not sure if 13.9” or 14.9” is rhe height of the second version).

@bnic99:
Ask Ernie. He’s the expert.

At first glance, I was like a lot of others and say I already have 75980 so I don't need this one. Also of the mindset that it isn't $160 better in build quality than the smaller version. BUT

I have looked at pictures side by side and this newer larger model blows the other one out of the water, at least based on appearance. I haven't looked at all the little details or figures or anything.

I know I won't have the money on day 1, so I'll miss out on that GWP, but eventually yes, this is a must have.

By the looks of the poll, I am in the bottom 8% interested. Yikes...

This set looks great, but I agree it's not a $160 step up over the 2020 Burrow (which is one of the best LEGO playsets ever). The ground floor looks surprisingly cramped to me with much less detail than the 2020 version, although the new Floo Network functionality looks interesting. Love the minifigures and the upper levels, but I need to see how this compares to the previous set.

Look out! It's about to collapse! Oh wait, it's held together by magic that's right.

At the moment I'm really not sure how many of the 2020 releases I have, so whether or not I buy this set depends on whether or not I already have 75980. This is clearly the better set, but it's not enough better to justify duplication of the building. I'm glad I don't have to make up my mind by September 1--as @axeleng says, the specific GWP for the big set is--well, gear. Certainly not what I thought it might be on first reading about it. The smaller GWP set's floo mechanism looks like it would fit nicely into a slightly expanded 75980, and its other bits and pieces can always go into the Room of Requirement or some place similar.

All things considered, I think TLG managed this pretty well!

The funny thing is that you can see houses just like this in some rural areas.

@bananaworld said:
"
Are any of the pictures detailed enough to see if there is black mould growing on the walls?

Specifically the type that could magically turn the resident's brain into a foetid cesspool of spiteful hate?"

I think you've got the wrong poor white family.

@Norikins said:
"I can't help but be disappointed. Firstly, it should have more varied shades. As it is it is dominated by dark tan. If you look closely at screenshots with certain lighting you can see the wood shade of the floor that the front and back meet on is different, something previous Lego sets have understood, but most other merchandise and this set misinterpret the shadow cast on this level as the actual color.
"
This Burrow is based on Halfblood Prince exterior-wise. The model they used in that movie is on the back-lot of the studios near London. Lots of pictures are online of that one. Colors for this LEGO model are accurate to that specific model.

Harry Potter is like Avatar (the blue one) it's apparently very popular yet I don't know a single person that would say "Oh yeah, I really like it" when asked. Just let this franchise die already.

I don’t really see the point of this when I own the 2020 Burrow, which looks more of the same. Yes, it’s got less than half the number of pieces, but just as much detail. Besides, I’m no longer a big Harry Potter fan as I once was.

@merman said:
"Nice set although the previous one (75980) seemed to have a larger interior. Also only the top front facade is askew. And I don’t think you can enter the interior of that. "

No sure about that as looking at the small pictures on the back of the box, 2 of them depict Ron and Ginny's rooms, and I can't see their beds on the right side of the open model, only Percy's (he's sat on it) and Mr & Mrs Weasley's. Also can't see them on the left side either, so the only place they could be is in the left side behind the bathroom (where Ginny is).

This looks very impressive. Wouldn't have considered it if I already had the previous version but I'm quite glad I don't! Might even be a day 1 purchase with 3 GWPs (I rather like the Weasley Clock Collectable, similar style to the recent magnets)

I have the previous one that I got for AU$100. Definitely not paying AU$400 for this. It’s not 4 times better. I prefer the brighter colours of the previous one too.

@MegaBlocks said:
"This is only the Collector's Edition, I'll wait for the Ultimate Collector's Edition."

Its priced like a UCS, does that count?

I liked 75980 better, but even it was one of the HP sets I never got around to getting.

I would guess at HP Lego sets popularity being largely through book nostalgia rather than those films which for me felt wrong in so many ways.

@merman said:
"Nice set although the previous one (75980) seemed to have a larger interior. "

This is a full doll house interior; the previous one was two walls. So I highly doubt that’s the case. Each half may be roughly the same size as the previous set perhaps.

Since it is an enclosed set I´m all for it, looks great and with a great minifigure selection but I sold all HP sets a year ago and I´m never going back.
Oh, and the price in Sweden is laughable, as always.

@xboxtravis7992 said:"Dresden Files..."

"You're a wizard, Harry." "No s***. Fuego!"

@iwybs said:
" @xboxtravis7992 : What you wrote is a pretty good description of how I feel about Harry Potter now compared to how I felt about it when I was a kid/teen. Positive feelings for the Potter books and films I grew up with, negative feelings for almost all the franchise extension since Deathly Hallows Pt 2 came out, and very mixed feelings about buying new merchandise because of how JKR has changed in the past ten+ years. ..."
This thing is, you can't reminisce on something if it's constantly being shoved in front of your face. Like Yahtzee from Second Wind said "you can't have nostalgia for something if it never went away to begin with". HP had its time in the sun, I enjoyed the the books as child, but now I want to get excited for something new. Franchises like Star Wars, Harry Potter, etc, that become perpetual are yawn inducing for me. Give me a Tomorrowland, Speed Racer, The Orville, or Prey (2017) any day of the week. Stories suffer when they don't have an ending, just look at Marvel post Endgame.

@Dash_Justice said:
" @iwybs said:
" @xboxtravis7992 : What you wrote is a pretty good description of how I feel about Harry Potter now compared to how I felt about it when I was a kid/teen. Positive feelings for the Potter books and films I grew up with, negative feelings for almost all the franchise extension since Deathly Hallows Pt 2 came out, and very mixed feelings about buying new merchandise because of how JKR has changed in the past ten+ years. ..."
This thing is, you can't reminisce on something if it's constantly being shoved in front of your face. Like Yahtzee from Second Wind said "you can't have nostalgia for something if it never went away to begin with". HP had its time in the sun, I enjoyed the the books as child, but now I want to get excited for something new. Franchises like Star Wars, Harry Potter, etc, that become perpetual are yawn inducing for me. Give me a Tomorrowland, Speed Racer, The Orville, or Prey (2017) any day of the week. Stories suffer when they don't have an ending, just look at Marvel post Endgame."

Appreciating something continuing and appreciating something new are not mutually exclusive unless you have some kind of internal appreciation cap.

@yellowcastle said:
" @Dash_Justice said:
" @iwybs said:
" @xboxtravis7992 : What you wrote is a pretty good description of how I feel about Harry Potter now compared to how I felt about it when I was a kid/teen. Positive feelings for the Potter books and films I grew up with, negative feelings for almost all the franchise extension since Deathly Hallows Pt 2 came out, and very mixed feelings about buying new merchandise because of how JKR has changed in the past ten+ years. ..."
This thing is, you can't reminisce on something if it's constantly being shoved in front of your face. Like Yahtzee from Second Wind said "you can't have nostalgia for something if it never went away to begin with". HP had its time in the sun, I enjoyed the the books as child, but now I want to get excited for something new. Franchises like Star Wars, Harry Potter, etc, that become perpetual are yawn inducing for me. Give me a Tomorrowland, Speed Racer, The Orville, or Prey (2017) any day of the week. Stories suffer when they don't have an ending, just look at Marvel post Endgame."

Appreciating something continuing and appreciating something new are not mutually exclusive unless you have some kind of internal appreciation cap."
You're right, they're not mutually exclusive. But everything past the original book/movies has been somewhere between passable and awful. It kinda sours the taste of the thing I liked when I'm constantly being reminded that there's something new, but less good related it is out now.

This looks great, clearly an improvement over 75980 but at the same time shows how impressive that iteration was with its budget

"Engorgio 75980"

@Dash_Justice said:
"You're right, they're not mutually exclusive. But everything past the original book/movies has been somewhere between passable and awful. It kinda sours the taste of the thing I liked when I'm constantly being reminded that there's something new, but less good related it is out now."

The interesting thing is, I have seen a lot of people take the approach of "well all of Potter was trash to begin with so it all was terrible" recently; and I do disagree with that. I think the series initially worked was for a few reasons:

1) The Harry Potter story format follows the Hero's Journey well, arguably the best of such since George Lucas's original Star Wars trilogy. Using a simple bedrock of storytelling, even if not original; when done well makes an impact.

2) The aesthetic, especially after the films began to be introduced is rich and homey. The combination of British iconography with high magic created a look that was very "Harry Potter" from the covers on the first UK and US editions down to the films. It is visually one of the most pleasing franchises that got big at that time (the latter films kind of lose some of that with how dark every scene is, but the early films had enshrined it by that point). This is why the LEGO sets, the video games, the theme parks; etc. have usually just been great; they can tap into the "Potter look" and really carry a brand identity just due to design elements (my biggest fear about the HBO series is they will honestly mess this up and we'll end up with a NotMyHogwarts controversy).

3) A lot of the characters are fun and memorable. Snape's motivations and the distrust people have towards him, the main trio's relationship as friends, the extended Weasley family and the rivalry with the Malfoys at its core are fun dynamics.

Now of course, that also doesn't mean I think the series is free from criticism. I mentioned before, Rowling was a novice writer and no one could hardly praise her prose as being revolutionary. I already mentioned the sloppy world building, and some of the character names are offensive (think of say Kingsley Shacklebolt or Cho Chang) and reflect Rowling's biases with an Anglo-centric viewpoint and much more limited knowledge of the wider world (her later additions to the lore of the wizarding school locations looks almost worse than how the Middle East was partitioned after World War II). There are real flaws in the work, and while they don't ruin the positives it is also fair to say that the series isn't quite the same thing to lack back on as an adult as it was when reading it as a child.

I think the films worked because while they kept the core hero's journey and feeling of the books, they cut a lot of the chaff and even some of the elements they were stuck with such as odd character names they worked with using talented actors to compensate. Likewise I think Fantastic Beasts failed because Rowling took on to much control in the script, and rather than doing as the original 8 films did and getting to the meat of the matter; it kept all of her weaknesses and muddied the story. I fear that this attempt to "do an HBO series that is 100% book accurate" will fall flat on its face since the films greatest strength WAS its ability to sometimes cut the crap out of the story from the books, and I really can't think of the 'excitement' of watching the characters study for their O.W.L.S. and N.E.W.T.S. being something worth putting to film just in the name of accuracy.

I mentioned before that I am reading the Aubrey-Maturin series, and while those books are pure literature gold and everyone should read them; look at how the film adaptation Master and Commander: Far Side of the World is smart enough to also play the hits, keep to the core of the story, and comes out stronger for it (although the lack of Stephen's spy career and Diana in the story is the film's biggest travesty IMHO). Dune: Part 2 did a similar thing this year too.

... such as cutting Alia Atredies and the mess of Leto Atredies II (the first) from the plot. Book accurate is not always better, and HBO's Potter worries me it will fail the story by hewing to close to the books flaws that really detracted more from the story than added to it.

@xboxtravis7992 said:"Book accurate is not always better,"

Indeed, I don't think too many people were very upset Tom Bombadil wasn't in the film adaptation of The Fellowship of the Ring, or that Frodo wasn't fifty.

@xboxtravis7992:
I haven't read any of the books, but I felt the films didn't really hit their stride until the fourth one, when they really dialed back on the day-to-day stuff in favor of chasing the core story. And I did like the FB films, but it helps that I picked up on a key detail after watching the first two in quick succession prior to seeing the third on the big screen. There was a lot of criticism over Queenie joining Grindelwald's forces considering how easily she can read surface thoughts without even trying. But in the first film, she notes that it doesn't work with Newt because of his British accent. Grindelwald is British, so she had to take his promise on face value, only to realize it wasn't worth the paper it was written on after it was too late to back out.

@TheOtherMike:
Absolutely loathed Tom Bombadil. I've read the books precisely once, because I got the second book free from RIF. I own three copies of the films.