Sails and Steering Vanes on the Sail Barge
Posted by CapnRex101,
Criticism of 75397 Jabba's Sail Barge has been focused primarily on the minifigure selection and the price, although a couple of exterior features have also been questioned.
I spoke to the set designer, César Soares, about the vehicle's sails and other details at Fan Media Days recently.
Brickset: Looking at the sails, it seems like perhaps they could be a module higher, both for easier access and better accuracy to certain scenes. That being said, their height varies a bit between shots.
César: You have answered your own question really. I played around with a few different heights and I decided on this design for a couple of reasons. The first is that I knew the sails should be removable and adjustable, so there was not really a big focus on accessibility for play, but the main reason is simply that other designers and I agreed that they looked off when mounted any higher.
Looking at the reference materials we received from Lucasfilm, the sails are lower on the studio model than they are on the 'real' one, so we had to decide between sources. The sleeker profile looks better to me and more accurate to the distant shots, which are usually what people have in mind when thinking of the Sail Barge.
I will say that in reality, the sails should be slightly wider, but we had to limit their width to avoid them drooping too much and really making it hard to place minifigures on the deck.
The above image shows the sails mounted one module higher than they are in the original set.
Speaking of wide points on the Sail Barge, I think these semicircular details on the sides should extend further out, actually being the widest points other than the steering vanes, but presumably that was not possible.
César: Yes, I moved them in to accommodate the folding panels. Even the steering vanes were difficult actually. We have teams who come in and build the model with us, searching for areas that might be unstable or awkward to build. They were not completely happy with the supports for the steering vanes being so long, or they wanted them to be fixed in position.
I really wanted to preserve their articulation and eventually they were satisfied with ball joints attaching the steering vanes, as they kind of move themselves out of the way when you open the side panels. Not having the panels open was obviously not an option either, as the brief from the beginning was very clear about the vehicle having a full interior.
The next section of our interview focuses on the Sail Barge's interior and will be published later this week, before moving on to the minifigures.
128 likes
40 comments on this article
The sails look good to me being mounted higher.
No questions about the ugly black pins they somehow can't move on from or even recolor in a $500 flagship set?
Undeserved criticism, in my opinion, this set is fine and, while a bit pricey, is still justified in that priciness, because of the minfigs.
These designers pay an impressive amount of attention to detail!
It looks better to me with higher sails. I too would like recolored pins for the sails.
@SolidState said:
"No questions about the ugly black pins they somehow can't move on from or even recolor in a $500 flagship set?"
People have complained about this since atleast a decade [the last time other colors existed was 2003]. I don't think it's gonna change or get any sort of official statement in the next few years either.
I'm always a bit flummoxed by the number of people who forget they're fundamentally buying a Lego set sometimes. If you want a perfect replica, go buy one of those instead. They're always going to be more accurate and they'll often be cheaper. No sense buying something this expensive where you're objecting to the fundamental premise, and even less sense getting cross about it when you're not intending to buy it at all!
@SolidState said:
"No questions about the ugly black pins they somehow can't move on from or even recolor in a $500 flagship set?"
The response would be "they are colour locked, unfortunately", so I saw little reason to ask. Designers tend to dislike those restrictions as much anyone, in my experience, but it seems there is nothing to be done about it at the moment.
@Mica86 said:
"Sooo their response to the feedback of
" it looks odd that low"
is to say
"well we think it looks odd higher"
Ok... kinda bull id expect honestly
I don't buy UCS StarWars but i was excited at the prospect of this set...i immediately lost all interest when i saw it. That price....coupled with it looking waaay more boring than i had imagined..
I still don't buy UCS StarWars"
No, their response was to point out the difference between the large-scale film set and the pyro model and state that they hewed closer to the model.
You can dislike the set for whatever reason and that is absolutely fine, but it seemed like a reasonable answer to me.
@MisterBrickster said:
"I'm always a bit flummoxed by the number of people who forget they're fundamentally buying a Lego set sometimes. If you want a perfect replica, go buy one of those instead. They're always going to be more accurate and they'll often be cheaper. No sense buying something this expensive where you're objecting to the fundamental premise, and even less sense getting cross about it when you're not intending to buy it at all!"
Exactly my feelings on the matter. Thank you for articulating that point far better than I ever could.
I don't know why it's such an issue. I didn't care about it until this article was posted.
This is the best UCS, in my opinion, and it's only issue is the price.
One of the things I love about LEGO is that if you think a set would look better with modifications, you can make those modifications!
@TheMikeStrikesBack said:
"The sails look good to me being mounted higher."
Yeah. They look awkward on real set.
@CapnRex101 said:
"
No, their response was to point out the difference between the large-scale film set and the pyro model and state that they hewed closer to the model.
You can dislike the set for whatever reason and that is absolutely fine, but it seemed like a reasonable answer to me."
The smaller model was in two shots maybe? Considering it is a minifig compatible model it should have prioritized the higher sails, especially when it reflects the visuals of most of the action sequence.
But for a Star Wars set that needs modding this is the easiest and most preferable outcome, unlike the skiff that needs a complete overhaul just for the nose to be accurate.
I am also happy that UCS type sets get to other retailers and potentially get some discounts, too. At 400€ instead of 500€ this is a pretty perfect set.
@MisterBrickster said:
"I'm always a bit flummoxed …"
I’m always fascinated about some English words I learn from the comments!
I also fully agree with the rest of the comment.
The build is fine, the short minifig lineup is underwhelming and the price is ridiculous.
I’m gonna say it: I don’t like that the sails are cloth. I have the other versions and the cloth sails on 2006 are dusty and impossible to clean. At least the laminated 2013 ones have stood the test of time. I think I’d have preferred brick built this time around.
@Emmafofemma said:
"I’m gonna say it: I don’t like that the sails are cloth. I have the other versions and the cloth sails on 2006 are dusty and impossible to clean. At least the laminated 2013 ones have stood the test of time. I think I’d have preferred brick built this time around. "
Hmmm, the older cloth sails clean pretty easily. Same with old pirate sets, never had a problem there.
1) LEGO Star Wars set is released.
2) LEGO Star Wars fans go ballistic over minute details that don't meet their very specific criteria for it being acceptable.
3) LEGO Star Wars fans continue buying vastly overpriced sets that can't - and never will - meet their very specific criteria for it being acceptable.
4) Everyone else giggles at the madness of LEGO Star Wars fans who don't seem to realise that if you don't like a detail then you can build it differently. Because it's LEGO.
5) And the universe does *not* explode because a toy brick is slightly misaligned when compared to a single frame of a 50 year old movie that's not great on continuity. Go figure...
@Block_n_Roll said:
"1) LEGO Star Wars set is released.
2) LEGO Star Wars fans go ballistic over minute details that don't meet their very specific criteria for it being acceptable.
3) LEGO Star Wars fans continue buying vastly overpriced sets that can't - and never will - meet their very specific criteria for it being acceptable.
4) Everyone else giggles at the madness of LEGO Star Wars fans who don't seem to realise that if you don't like a detail then you can build it differently. Because it's LEGO.
5) And the universe does *not* explode because a toy brick is slightly misaligned when compared to a single frame of a 50 year old movie that's not great on continuity. Go figure..."
6) In ten years, the set the LSW fans were criticizing will have become a 'classic' set that no one dares to critique.
@Anonym:
Certainly the pyro model was in the pyro shot. Ep6SE had at least one establishing long shot added with CGI (the pyro model having been blown to bits years earlier). I honestly can’t think of anything else from the original release that would have shown the pyro model before the pyro shot. I don’t have access to a copy of the film to watch, though, so maybe someone else can identify some.
@Murdoch17 said:
" @Block_n_Roll said:
"1) LEGO Star Wars set is released.
2) LEGO Star Wars fans go ballistic over minute details that don't meet their very specific criteria for it being acceptable.
3) LEGO Star Wars fans continue buying vastly overpriced sets that can't - and never will - meet their very specific criteria for it being acceptable.
4) Everyone else giggles at the madness of LEGO Star Wars fans who don't seem to realise that if you don't like a detail then you can build it differently. Because it's LEGO.
5) And the universe does *not* explode because a toy brick is slightly misaligned when compared to a single frame of a 50 year old movie that's not great on continuity. Go figure..."
6) In ten years, the set the LSW fans were criticizing will have become a 'classic' set that no one dares to critique."
It is quite a good set. You know I love to criticize SW Lego. But, this is a great combination of model building and fun minifigure features. This is the kind of thing that brought me out of my Dark Ages.
I just wish they would commit to producing the best figs for such expensive sets. SW figs are some of the worst minifigs Lego produces.
Also, this set should have at least 5 more figs. It's a bit spare and empty for Jabba's party barge.
@Eightcoins8 said:
" @SolidState said:
"No questions about the ugly black pins they somehow can't move on from or even recolor in a $500 flagship set?"
People have complained about this since atleast a decade [the last time other colors existed was 2003]. I don't think it's gonna change or get any sort of official statement in the next few years either."
They've figured out work-arounds in some of the dragon wing builds and I refuse to believe they can't innovate an even better solution for these high end sets.
@SolidState said:
" @Eightcoins8 said:
" @SolidState said:
"No questions about the ugly black pins they somehow can't move on from or even recolor in a $500 flagship set?"
People have complained about this since atleast a decade [the last time other colors existed was 2003]. I don't think it's gonna change or get any sort of official statement in the next few years either."
They've figured out work-arounds in some of the dragon wing builds and I refuse to believe they can't innovate an even better solution for these high end sets."
True. The solution for 21348 would undoubtedly look better.
@StyleCounselor:
A Jabba’s Henchmen Battle Pack would certainly help with staffing.
@Murdoch17 said:
" @Block_n_Roll said:
"1) LEGO Star Wars set is released.
2) LEGO Star Wars fans go ballistic over minute details that don't meet their very specific criteria for it being acceptable.
3) LEGO Star Wars fans continue buying vastly overpriced sets that can't - and never will - meet their very specific criteria for it being acceptable.
4) Everyone else giggles at the madness of LEGO Star Wars fans who don't seem to realise that if you don't like a detail then you can build it differently. Because it's LEGO.
5) And the universe does *not* explode because a toy brick is slightly misaligned when compared to a single frame of a 50 year old movie that's not great on continuity. Go figure..."
6) In ten years, the set the LSW fans were criticizing will have become a 'classic' set that no one dares to critique."
(6) is probably the most important fact of them all. Thanks!
@PurpleDave said:
" @StyleCounselor:
A Jabba’s Henchmen Battle Pack would certainly help with staffing."
That's a great idea. 75167 was in that vein.
@StyleCounselor said:
" @PurpleDave said:
" @StyleCounselor:
A Jabba’s Henchmen Battle Pack would certainly help with staffing."
That's a great idea. 75167 was in that vein."
I know. I loved that one, because it gave us a new Ep5 bounty hunter. Still had to wait for another set to finish the group, and that "new" bounty hunter showed up again, but that battle pack still has a unique version of Bossk.
@Block_n_Roll said:
"1) LEGO Star Wars set is released.
2) LEGO Star Wars fans go ballistic over minute details that don't meet their very specific criteria for it being acceptable.
3) LEGO Star Wars fans continue buying vastly overpriced sets that can't - and never will - meet their very specific criteria for it being acceptable.
4) Everyone else giggles at the madness of LEGO Star Wars fans who don't seem to realise that if you don't like a detail then you can build it differently. Because it's LEGO.
5) And the universe does *not* explode because a toy brick is slightly misaligned when compared to a single frame of a 50 year old movie that's not great on continuity. Go figure..."
Yeah perfect summary, SW fans are crazy. There's only as much accuracy in medium like LEGO based on bricks, if someone wants better there's action figures or scale models.
Higher or shorter sails? Is there really an issue?
That’s what makes LEGO a great model/toy.
You can EASILY customize it ANY way you want.
Adjust, change, swap in, swap out, high, low, change some colors, etc.
@dodrian said:
"One of the things I love about LEGO is that if you think a set would look better with modifications, you can make those modifications!"
I was thinking this exact same thing! It seems like a very simple adjustment to make. That being said, I'll play devil's advocate and say it would have been fun to include the pieces to make them taller and point out in the instructions that the design differs between the live set and the filming model.
I think it's totally reasonable in a premium set like this to include exclusive colors for pieces. Keep the color-lock policy for most sets, but this is a $500 18+ set. It should get features that lesser sets don't - and no, I don't count exclusive minifigs as a feature bc there are many non-UCS sets that also get exclusive minifigs.
@Bagelwolf said:
"I think it's totally reasonable in a premium set like this to include exclusive colors for pieces. Keep the color-lock policy for most sets, but this is a $500 18+ set. It should get features that lesser sets don't - and no, I don't count exclusive minifigs as a feature bc there are many non-UCS sets that also get exclusive minifigs."
The problem there is that, when one set gets to break color lock, _every_ set gets to join in on that same recolor. When Disney required them to recolor part 14704 because light-bley stood out too much in 76051, it got used four more times the next year. Then there was a three year gap, until they had to use it again in the hands for 75551. Then it showed up in one more set that year, plus a store opening set the following year. And in 2022, it got used so many times (plus a few more in 2023-2024) that I can only assume they expanded the color lock to include both light-bley and dark-bley.
I would hate to be a Lego Star Wars designer, unless I never looked at social media or never talked to anyone who buys one of your sets. They literally can't win, no matter what they do: put in more play features and the fans cry about lack of realism; try to be realistic and your choices get nit-picked to death; comply with the company's strict cost target formulae and hear the loud complaints about shrink-flation or dumbing-down of the set designs.
But as a consumer I do understand that if you're paying $400-500 for a Lego set (or anything of leisure, for that matter), it had better be pretty darn good!
@Murdoch17 said:
" @Block_n_Roll said:
"1) LEGO Star Wars set is released.
2) LEGO Star Wars fans go ballistic over minute details that don't meet their very specific criteria for it being acceptable.
3) LEGO Star Wars fans continue buying vastly overpriced sets that can't - and never will - meet their very specific criteria for it being acceptable.
4) Everyone else giggles at the madness of LEGO Star Wars fans who don't seem to realise that if you don't like a detail then you can build it differently. Because it's LEGO.
5) And the universe does *not* explode because a toy brick is slightly misaligned when compared to a single frame of a 50 year old movie that's not great on continuity. Go figure..."
6) In ten years, the set the LSW fans were criticizing will have become a 'classic' set that no one dares to critique."
I remember the previous Sail Barge (75020 from 2013) being absolutely ripped apart online due to the "inaccurate" nose and "inferior minifigure selection" when compared to the 2006 version (6210 ). Nowadays *both* sets are viewed as classics by fans, and most of the figures from 75020 have become quite valuable. Funny how that works!
From the photo definitely need to be wider and symmetric, and dark red/brown not orange, but can see wanted a contrast with the barge which would look interesting in an olive/grey color.
@CapnRex101 - Can you please advise which part you used to elevate the sales? Thanks.
@MisterBrickster said:
"I'm always a bit flummoxed by the number of people who forget they're fundamentally buying a Lego set sometimes. If you want a perfect replica, go buy one of those instead. They're always going to be more accurate and they'll often be cheaper. No sense buying something this expensive where you're objecting to the fundamental premise, and even less sense getting cross about it when you're not intending to buy it at all!"
I gotta disagree with your last bit. While I don’t mind the sails here, I don’t want to see corners cut, for lack of a better word, even in sets I don’t plan on buying because it will affect the sets I do buy. The criticism should come from all angles.
@oldfan said:
"I would hate to be a Lego Star Wars designer, unless I never looked at social media or never talked to anyone who buys one of your sets. They literally can't win, no matter what they do: put in more play features and the fans cry about lack of realism; try to be realistic and your choices get nit-picked to death; comply with the company's strict cost target formulae and hear the loud complaints about shrink-flation or dumbing-down of the set designs.
But as a consumer I do understand that if you're paying $400-500 for a Lego set (or anything of leisure, for that matter), it had better be pretty darn good!"
Let them quit. There are plenty of talented, passionate Lego SW builders who would gladly take up the banner.
The reason why Lego SW receives so much vitriol is because they increase prices dramatically whilst providing much less design and fun than the other Lego lines.
In other words, they get what they deserve. They will really be in trouble when no one cares any longer. If we're complaining, we're likely still buying.
That said, I think this set is quite good (with sad figs and incredibly overpriced).
BS is inviting the disection and discussion of the set's minutiae with this series of articles. It's all in good fun. I'm sure the designers take all of this with a grain of salt.
@StyleCounselor said:
"In other words, they get what they deserve. They will really be in trouble when no one cares any longer. If we're complaining, we're likely still buying."
Will that be just before or just after the sun goes “red giant” and envelops Earth’s orbit? Because they don’t seem to be getting impacted that much.
@PurpleDave said:
" @StyleCounselor said:
"In other words, they get what they deserve. They will really be in trouble when no one cares any longer. If we're complaining, we're likely still buying."
Will that be just before or just after the sun goes “red giant” and envelops Earth’s orbit? Because they don’t seem to be getting impacted that much."
Yeah, no kidding. With sets selling out in record time.
Then again, the main product (shows and movies) has stalled. Nothing lasts forever.