Review: 10354 The Lord of the Rings: The Shire
Posted by CapnRex101,
10354 The Lord of the Rings: The Shire faces an interesting challenge, following two spectacular The Lord of the Rings sets released recently. The Shire is substantially smaller than Rivendell and Barad-dûr and feels less cohesive, so lacks their stunning presence on display.
Nonetheless, I do think this rendition of Bag End looks impressive in official images, perhaps improving on the much-loved 79003 An Unexpected Gathering! There are plenty of stunning minifigures included too, but there are some problems here that cannot be overlooked.
Summary
10354 The Lord of the Rings: The Shire, 2,017 pieces.
£229.99 / $269.99 / €269.99 | 11.4p/13.4c/13.4c per piece.
Buy at LEGO.com »
Though satisfying in many ways, The Shire falls frustratingly short in others
- Bag End is beautifully detailed
- A couple of good functions
- Fantastic minifigure selection
- Pretty limited interior
- Party Tree looks awful
- Extremely expensive
The set was provided for review by LEGO. All opinions expressed are those of the author.
Minifigures
Nine minifigures are included and all are exclusive, so it really feels like no expense has been spared here. Bilbo Baggins is accurately dressed in his dark red jacket for the party and I am delighted with the ornate designs on his waistcoat. Furthermore, this version of Bilbo features a grey hair element rather than white, as in 10316 The Lord of the Rings: Rivendell, showing his age after passing the ring to Frodo.
Speaking of Bilbo's nephew, Frodo Baggins also wears a brilliantly detailed waistcoat and his dual-moulded legs are new, with dark blue trousers. Perhaps two versions of Frodo could have been supplied, with this one dressed for the party and another to greet Gandalf when he arrives in Hobbiton and both characters are introduced.
New double-sided heads have been designed for each minifigure, with cheerful expressions all round, appropriately. As normal, Frodo's textured hair piece looks fantastic too, shared by many Hobbits in various colours. The One Ring is provided, naturally.
Gandalf the Grey earlier appeared in 10316 The Lord of the Rings: Rivendell and the wizard remains almost unchanged. The wrinkles in his dark bluish grey robe look good, with a folded hood on the back of the torso and a belt across both sides. Personally, I am starting to find the classic wizard's hat a bit dated and would like a unique piece for Gandalf, but this suffices.
The minifigure does receive a new head, with a beard printed beneath the beard element. The facial expression seems rather severe and therefore ill-suited to scenes before Bilbo's birthday party, but is hidden under his beard, thankfully. An alternative hair piece and Gandalf's standard staff complete the figure.
Meriadoc Brandybuck and Peregrin Took may explain Gandalf's expression, I suppose! The troublesome pair are suitably dressed for the party and the gold trim on Pippin's jacket is lovely in particular, with a detailed pattern. Similarly, their hairstyles look superb and these figures also include new heads, displaying happy expressions on this side.
The others are more interesting though, covered with soot after launching a firework at close range. Extra hair elements are supplied as well, cleverly re-using Kai's hair from NINJAGO in dark bluish grey, which is a new colour for this piece. Merry even comes with an apple for total accuracy to the scene.
Also attending the party is Samwise Gamgee. Sam's attire is simpler than his fellow Hobbits, though equally faithful to the movie and I can easily imagine the torso reappearing elsewhere because it looks very versatile. Unlike the other Hobbits discussed so far, Sam's double-sided head is the same as his prior appearances.
However, a frown arguably works for Sam at Bilbo's party, given his nervous glances at Rosie Cotton during this scene. Rosie's dress is highly detailed and her hair component reflects her appearance onscreen, complete with curly texture.
I was pleasantly surprised to learn that Rosie's head is only available in one other set, 76439 Ollivanders & Madam Malkin's Robes, so it is great to see it return. Sam comes with a pair of gardening sheers, ready for late-night gardening and potential eavesdropping.
LEGO had plenty of lesser-known Hobbits to choose from and populate this scene. I am glad they selected Odo Proudfoot though, as his brief appearances are definitely memorable and frame the whole adventure, watching Gandalf's arrival in Hobbiton and the four Hobbits' return once the Ring is destroyed with unerring suspicion!
Mrs. Proudfoot joins her husband and both minifigures look excellent, featuring unique torsos and a new dress element for Mrs. Proudfoot, longer than the existing piece Rosie wears above. In addition, this hairstyle is new in reddish brown. The element was originally created for Wendy Darling from Peter Pan and has only appeared in nougat until now.
The intricate curls at the back suit Mrs. Proudfoot, as does her surly alternative expression. Mr. Proudfoot also seems as irritable as I would expect, re-using Professor Slughorn's head from a couple of Harry Potter sets. Odo comes with his ever-present broom, while Mrs. Proudfoot holds a gigantic parsnip.
The Completed Model
9469 Gandalf Arrives was among the first The Lord of the Rings sets released in 2012, so I am pleased to see Gandalf's cart again here. This version is a little smaller, but captures the shape well and its proportions are accurate. On the other hand, the horse should be brown rather than dark orange, so there is room for improvement.
Gandalf looks superb seated on board, using the same bracket and printed curved slope for his robe as seen in 10316 The Lord of the Rings: Rivendell. Reins would have been a nice addition, but rarely appear on LEGO carts of this size nowadays.
Also, you can place two minifigures side-by-side on jumper plates, so Frodo can join Gandalf. Again, the clever technique of using 1x1 headlight bricks and 1x1 plates for seated short legs originates from 10316 The Lord of the Rings: Rivendell and continues to look marvellous.
1x1 bows and palisade bricks add some texture to the model, but I wish the 2x3 tiles with clips along the sides had been decorated with a wicker pattern. The angled uprights on the cart look splendid though and a selection of colourful fireworks are stowed inside, in readiness for Bilbo's birthday party.
79003 An Unexpected Gathering is commonly discussed among the best sets ever released in its price range, so is definitely a hard act to follow. Even so, I think this model of Bag End looks impressive on the whole, faithfully recreating the home's rural setting and featuring some lovely colours outside. Of course, this design also has the advantage of being bigger than its precursor from 2012, measuring 45cm across.
The increased size and piece count has allowed the designer to pay more attention to the hill's shape on this occasion. Building natural slopes is always difficult, but I think 6x6 curved corner slopes work fairly well at either end, creating the impression that the landscape would continue beyond the model's limited scope.
Green is evidently the predominant colour, so I appreciate the dashes of other shades to break up the exterior, including a dark azure bird and a washing line on top. I believe the latter comes from The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey and the Hobbiton Movie Set in New Zealand.
A stone retaining wall runs outside the property onscreen and is represented here, comprising rounded and angled plates and tiles to convey its rough texture. This technique looks fantastic and the bushes are nice too, growing beside a bird feeder mounted on a pole, which is another detail taken directly from the films and perfectly finished with a golden hat piece.
The window behind the wall is among Bag End's most recognisable features, where Gandalf notices Sam apparently eavesdropping and yanks him inside. This window opens to recreate that scene and its round reddish brown frame is striking, though I do miss the colourful design from 79003 An Unexpected Gathering. However, the window's need to open is paramount.
Bag End is actually constructed in three sections and the larger pair are connected at a slight angle, using ball joints. This certainly enhances the model's natural appearance, although the seam between sections is rather visible at close range, which is a shame.
The area outside the front door is my favourite in the whole set. I love the use of vibrant colour and some of the model's most creative building techniques are found here, such as a brilliantly-constructed wattle fence outside Bilbo's front garden.
Medium nougat boomerang pieces are incredibly effective for the fence, stacked and arranged in alternating directions. The result looks exceptional, closely resembling the woven twigs seen onscreen. Also, I like the vegetables sprouting behind the fence, including a couple of pumpkins for another splash of colour.
I wish the 'no admittance' sign on the gate had been printed because this is one more famous feature of the original location. Even so, the sticker is perfectly designed, while the sunflowers and postbox beside the gate look wonderful too. Admittedly, there is no space for letters inside the postbox, but its appearance is faultless.
However, in typically pedantic fashion, I must note that the gate opens in the wrong direction. This does actually create a slight issue because it collides with the tiled pathway, but can still open as far as pictured below. The pathway itself looks beautiful, consisting of various curved tiles to represent cobbles.
The bench outside the front door is too small for Bilbo and Gandalf to sit down, which is a little frustrating. On the other hand, its proportions are realistic in relation to the door and I consider that more significant for a display model.
Printed 2x2 and 4x4 curved corner tiles form brickwork around the windows and door, exactly matching the onscreen location. Furthermore, the wooden supports over the door correspond with the source material and I like the use of green claws where grass is overhanging over the frame, again based on details seen throughout the films.
Of course, the circular front door is an iconic feature of the Baggins' home and one translated remarkably well to LEGO form. While the dark green colour is arguably a bit too dark, its clear contrast with the hill is welcome and the metallic gold doorknob in the centre looks outstanding, making good use of a microphone accessory.
A huge oak tree grows on top of Bag End in the films. This rendition is scaled down relative to the house underneath, which was probably a wise decision because a bigger tree would draw attention away from features I believe are more important, such as the distinctive windows and door already discussed.
That being said, I still think the tree could be improved. The foliage looks reasonable, but the branches are pretty basic and lacking in detail compared with other LEGO trees, like those in 10316 The Lord of the Rings: Rivendell and the stunning 10281 Bonsai Tree. Those examples look far more natural and realistic, in my opinion.
Hobbit Holes are well-known for their round windows, hence a new circular window frame has been created for this set. These match the existing selection of 1x2x2 window frame elements and accommodate the same window panes inside, including pearl gold lattices in this case.
I have no objection to LEGO buildings with open backs most of the time, but this one is rather shallow for a display model. Although it looks impressive directly from the front, I wish the roof extended further back, especially over the living room. I assume the current design is partly for ease of access, but removable roof panels could equally do the job.
The interior also appears rather lacklustre to me. What little is here is richly detailed, but there really is surprisingly little! I understand wanting an open back and therefore only including one layer of rooms inside, although omitting the kitchen, dining room and larder feels like a missed opportunity, even if those rooms had to be rearranged, relative to their layout in the movies.
Black whips provide ornate decoration on the back of the door, resembling ironwork seen in the films and standing out against the dark orange plate. Even though there are slight gaps around the door, it still fits relatively well and opens smoothly, simply connected to the door frame via a couple of clips.
This section of the roof is removable, giving a much better view of the entrance hall. The dark red floor looks wonderful and I am happy the walls are constructed in two layers, so the green pieces outside are separated from the tan and reddish brown interior. The furnishings look nice as well, but the chandelier Gandalf bumps into is conspicuous by its absence, sadly.
A printed rug is placed on the floor, comprising a couple of printed 2x6 tiles. The pattern looks splendid and I am pleased these tiles are printed, even though these parts are perhaps not as versatile as the decorated tiles from 10316 The Lord of the Rings: Rivendell.
The sideboard and coat rack is seen as Gandalf arrives in The Fellowship of the Ring, with a row of hooks available to hold the wizard's hat and cloak. A barrel is also provided, storing an umbrella and a sword. The latter is a bit strange, maybe remaining from the Dwarves' surprise visit sixty years before.
On the other side is a chest and a candelabra, using white pens for candles with melting wax. This is a neat technique, particularly as an alternative to the standard candle elements, which would potentially look too big in a cosy Hobbit Hole.
Inside the chest is a stickered tile representing Bilbo's mithril shirt, ready to pass to Frodo. The same garment appears in Rivendell and maybe the tile could have been printed, if it was going to appear twice. I wonder whether the gold bar represents Bilbo's share of the treasure from his journey to Erebor.
The separation between the entrance hall and the living room could certainly be clearer, but at least the floor colour changes. Again, this room contains lots of detailed furniture and its earthy colour scheme is attractive, with some flowers and a second printed rug introducing splashes of lighter colour.
Dark orange also stands out in here, suiting the table and chairs. The scalloped backs of the chairs look fantastic and these elements were developed for Monkie Kid, but are new in dark orange. Minecraft containers have not appeared in this colour before either, working nicely as chair legs, although I would rather they were securely attached to the floor.
Among the items on the table is a map of the Lonely Mountain, exactly where it appears at the end of The Battle of the Five Armies and the beginning of The Fellowship of the Ring. Although absolutely tiny, Smaug is still recognisable and the metallic silver runes are a delightful detail as well.
Behind the table we find my favourite part use in the set, even better than boomerangs for the fence, as an undecorated Friends hedgehog forms a pine cone! The moulded spines are ideal for the pine cone's scales and this piece blends in seamlessly, without its usual printed face.
The fireplace has been moved from a wall opposite the table to one beside, but it looks good here and I like its stone surround. The stickered portraits above depict Bilbo's parents, Bungo Baggins and Belladonna Took, rendered perfectly in minifigure form.
One of the set's few functions is located here, as rotating the knob on the side of the fireplace shows an envelope burning away to reveal the One Ring inside. While the mechanism is very basic, it recreates a memorable moment from the movies and is integrated well, though I wish the knob was more discrete.
On the other side of the entrance hall is Bilbo's study, where he writes about his adventures and examines old manuscripts. This area is small, but captures the details seen in The Fellowship of the Ring, including a cosy fireplace and wood stack, alongside Bilbo's writing desk and chair.
I already mentioned a connection point between the living room and the entrance hall and the other is found here, this time using clips instead of ball joints. These sections cannot be easily separated, although doing so provides a better view of the fireplace and logs, plus an image of an old tree, seen briefly in Bilbo's study during the film.
Stacks of old documents also appear in the film and Frodo draws specific attention to them in conversation with Gandalf, so their absence is disappointing. The chair and desk are certainly appealing though and I particularly like the use of reddish brown handlebars for the back of the chair.
The Red Book of Westmarch previously appeared in 10316 The Lord of the Rings: Rivendell, although the book was brown on that occasion and had a red sticker on its cover. This one is actually dark red, which is an improvement, despite poor colour matching between the sticker and the book cover.
Another sticker is found inside, showing the title of Bilbo's tale: There and Back Again. One of the notable artefacts from Bilbo's adventure is provided too, with the contract he signed to join Thorin Oakenshield's company on their journey to reclaim Erebor.
I would have been happy with Bag End and Gandalf's cart as an entire set, although the set's name would have to change. However, the designer has included a section of Bilbo's birthday party too, which is a nice idea, but these items feel more suited to a play set than one intended primarily for display.
This is particularly true for the Party Tree, which has received considerable criticism since the set was revealed and understandably so. Firstly, this is supposed to be an enormous tree and seemingly the biggest in Hobbiton, based on the movies, so its height of 17cm is fundamentally too small. Reducing its size makes sense, but this looks silly.
Also, the stage is not present at all in The Fellowship of the Ring, as Bilbo instead stands on a barrel to make his speech. This is a strange change to make for a display model, although I do like the reason for this alteration, as turning a gear behind the tree quickly rotates the stage and causes Bilbo to vanish, exactly as he does when he puts on the Ring.
The function is incredibly effective, thanks to its quick movement and the barrels' two identical sides. Moreover, the fabric banner suspended above the stage looks outstanding, featuring an accurate font and intricate vine-like details.
Unfortunately, the tree itself is very poor, regardless of its size. I appreciate the clear distinction between this tree and the oak atop Bag End and the stems attached to the leaves bear a loose resemblance to the Monterey Pine shown onscreen, although many more branches were really needed, spread more naturally.
The sparse foliage also has the unfortunate result of leaving the blocky trunk exposed, which only emphasises its problems. It seems no attempt has been made to create a natural shape, nor disguise the many visible studs, so the whole structure looks ridiculous.
The studs provide a useful connection point for Gandalf's dragon firework, however. I like how dual-moulded wings generally used for NINJAGO dragons are integrated here, while the head makes clever use of a trans-orange blade. The head, tail and wings are all adjustable, ready to swoop over Hobbiton.
In addition, the unlit firework is provided and its shape corresponds with the film, inspired by a dragon with its wings folded. The round base looks reasonable and there is even a black stem included to represent the explosion once the firework is launched.
While the launch occurs inside a fully enclosed tent onscreen, this gazebo suffices. Its wooden frame is sturdily constructed and the fabric piece across the top is lovely, featuring a geometric pattern taken directly from the movie. Even the overlapping parts of the fabric are nicely hidden, as the pattern continues almost uninterrupted.
Bilbo's party would not be complete without a cake, presented on a wooden table. This design takes much inspiration from other LEGO cakes, although its colourful decorations and candles look splendid and I appreciate the few extra food and drink accessories.
Overall
10316 The Lord of the Rings: Rivendell and 10333 The Lord of the Rings: Barad-dûr are both tremendous sets and difficult acts to follow. Unfortunately, that unavoidable comparison really highlights any issues with 10354 The Lord of the Rings: The Shire, which is a shame because there is so much to enjoy.
Bag End certainly looks impressive from outside, for example, especially around the front door, where the level of detail rivals existing The Lord of the Rings sets. The interior is well-executed too, albeit considerably smaller than I would have liked. Had that and Gandalf's cart formed this whole set and cost perhaps £179.99, $199.99 or €199.99, I would have been happy.
Unfortunately, a selection of superfluous items from Bilbo's party are also included and the set costs £229.99, $269.99 or €269.99, which is far too expensive. With that in mind, a substantial discount is needed before I can recommend this set, good though much of it is.
217 likes
106 comments on this article
"in typically pedantic fashion" - I love it. Self awareness is a great thing. : D
Great review so far - I will finish reading later!
The party themed side-builds should've been a more relevant GWP or a separate set. Removing those and beefing up the interior by a few more studs in-depth, I could see a $200 set.
Feels like an 'Assault on Hoth'-lite and is by far the weakest of the 3 large LotR sets.
The rugs should be flush with the surrounding floor. Irl rugs have <1 cm of height, almost level with the floor. It makes posing/playing with figures a little awkard as well. Or they could do some snot technique to have the rug just a little bit higher than the surrounding floor.
You think they would have been more accurate for $270!
Where are the dwarves?
I think they could have afforded to extend it in order to have the other rooms and cut out the separate parts, have them as gaps or small add on sets.
I really like the other two sets for their beauty and elegance in build, but this is the poorer one and I think I will wait a while if I get this.
This would be a day one purchase at $200, but at $270 I'll be happy with 79003
Will pick it up when it comes out,
But if it werent for the GWP it would be a wait until discount. thankfully I have enough insider points from the other two LOTR sets to offset that
"Shire. Baggins."
Yeah, the thing about What3Words is that using it requires a third word.
For the positives:
- Excellent exterior
- Stellar minifig selection; no cheap parts re-usage (possibly the best LotR minifig lineup, but Rivendell might be better)
- Good, fun, accurate sidebuilds
- Fun Easter Eggs and references (incl. to The Hobbit!)
- Looks great on display, and has a couple of fun play features
- Fabric elements
- Creative parts usage
- Interesting angles
- Smaug firework!
On the negative side:
- Poor price
- Gandalf needs a new hat / hair piece
- Sparse interior
- Pathetic Party Tree
- The gate, like you mentioned, opening the wrong way
Overall, a definite improvement on 79003, and a great addition to this series, though not without it's problems. I do think the positives outweigh the negatives here, though. As a fan of the heroes of LotR, I was always going to like this set more than Barad-dûr, and would place it in second place behind Rivendell out of the revival sets.
@ikke said:
"Where are the dwarves? "
In 79003 60 years ago. Well, it's LoTR, not Hobbit set.
i'm patriotic, so i'll definitely be getting this average New Zealand townhouse architecture set.
Tempting with the GWP to soften the price. Plus I have VIP points for about half the price.
The party tree is unfortunate. There is already a MOC on Rebrickable to replace the party tree and the one atop Bag End, while another MOC does the same for the GWP.
It's been commented on how much green there is. It should be easy to add some other shades, like sand green or dark green, and some ground cover for atop Bag End—grasses, flowers, shrubs, etc., to break up the monotonous green lump.
A rear half of Bag End could be MOCed to include the dining room, kitchen, and bedroom.
Jokes aside I do very much like this and will be getting it.
can’t disagree with anything here. It’s got its flaws, no doubt about it.
I would hate to see sales for this be poor and Lego interpret that as the theme having run its course rather than recognizing that it would be the result of some faulty execution and overpricing.
My prediction: I think people will gobble it up like crazy despite the extremely high price. The Gollum GWP will give an extreme incentive for first day buyers because of fomo and LEGO will release another set next year for an even worse price to quality ratio. Oh yeah, scalpers will have a blast aquiring as much of the GWPs as possible to resell for ridiculous prices. I’m glad I’m not a LOTR fan…
@CapnRex101:
You forgot to mention that Mrs Proudfoot's head print is Arthur Wealsy's from 76437:
https://brickset.com/minifigs/hp514/arthur-weasley-sand-green-open-jacket-reddish-brown-legs-and-hat
Although the set is mostly quite good, the absence of silver spoons is disappointing and unforgivable. 1/10.
So *now* the Red Book is red.
Red, the colour of fire, the colour of blood. (iykyk)
Also I thought the expression on Mr Proudfoot's face was so perfect and was surprised they had made a custom face print. I'm even more surprised to find out it isnt!
@EtudeTheBadger said:
""Shire. Baggins."
Yeah, the thing about What3Words is that using it requires a third word."
Interestingly, it's pointed out in Unfinished Tales that one of the biggest mistakes Sauron made was to send the Riders to the Vales of Anduin, presuming that was the location of the 'Shire' and therefore 'Baggins'. The Shire was known only as the 'Land of the Halflings' (or the Hobbits) to those, including Sauron, who did not live in the area (Gollum used neither as his kind has disliked the name 'Halfling' just as Hobbits did, and 'Hobbit' being only a local word, Gollum did not know it). This led the Ringwraiths to be weeks later in arriving at the Shire than they could have been, only travelling there after Sauron had realised his mistake.
@Username28 said:
"Although the set is mostly quite good, the absence of silver spoons is disappointing and unforgivable. 1/10."
Another review showed that the chest in the entryway does contain some silverware ;)
Great review, I agree with everything. I do like that the set is based on Bilbo's birthday as it's a big part of the book and film and gives us versions of the characters we have not had before. Not sure how they could have done that without showing some of the birthday but I didn't need the poorly executed extra bits.
@granto said:
" @Username28 said:
"Although the set is mostly quite good, the absence of silver spoons is disappointing and unforgivable. 1/10."
Another review showed that the chest in the entryway does contain some silverware ;)"
That chest is full of fun Easter Eggs:
1. Mithril coat
2. Gold ingot from the Troll hoard
3. Silverware for Lobelia to steal!
Seeing that party tree, I now understand why the Ent Wives left.
Hm…in the books continuity the hobbits might actually have thanked Saruman for cutting down that Party Tree…
Wanna know something funny ? 79003's interior has actually more depth than this set. It was bugging me the other day and I checked my own set, and yep, it does. This one, if we assume the entry hall is the deepest, is 9-stud deep, 2012 bag ? 12-stud deep. What. And if this is was actually around 200/220 €, sure I could understand it ? But 270 € and you're that shallow ? Come on.
(Sure, 79003 is way less detailed but still did the job pretty well, especially at the price and parts count)
I do find it interesting that the universal complaint about this set is that it s way overpriced. Like, I keep reading 'It would be a good set if it was 200 but what is that price'.
This review just confirms my opinion of the set, sadly. The more I look at the set, the more I like the facade of the house, all the nifty little details, how they made it really look like Bag End on/in the hill, but also the more I look at the set the more I dislike the interior and the side builds.
I can't deny that the interior is well-done and there are, again, clever details and builds, but it is so little and lackluster, not in its execution but in the choices of what to put in, and how much to put in. Three rooms is too little no matter how well done they are. The lack of the kitchen (seen in FotR), the dining table/pantry (see in the hobbit, so probably never going to happen), of just more interior, is really really obvious when I look at the back and I see so very little.
(And, yes, why no chandelier ? It's not like it would have been hard to make it and it is an iconic and funny moment in the movie.)
So, yeah, opinion remained unchanged, well, actually, probably getting worse thinking of what this could have been, and what it is actually is.
Short of being absolutely wooed by seeing it IRL in a Lego store in April, I don't think I'll be buying it without a significant discount, which is not likely to happen sadly. Which sucks, as big Tolkien fan.
That party tree is laughably bad. Especially for the price.
This set should be boycotted to show lego that we, the fans, are not stupid. That price, that lousy tree, lousy stickers in place of prints in important places (the book, the map), that shallow interior... it all shows lack of care from lego team and it's unforgivable. I really wanted to buy this set, the front looks splendid, but those flaws alongside ridiculous price made me angry. Everything should be awesome, not enraging.
If even LAN youtubers are vocally unhappy about the price, this means the price is digusting. I'll get it whenever it drops to like 70% MSRP.
Hoping that I can get the GWP with either Barad Dur or Rivendell, as GWP rules are not out yet.
At 200$ I'd queue online at midnight, in front of the store in the morning if I failed online. At 270$ - XD no.
Wasted potential: The set
@MusiMus said:
" @ikke said:
"Where are the dwarves? "
In 79003 60 years ago. Well, it's LoTR, not Hobbit set."
When Lego can put minifigs of different movies in Millennium Falcon sets, they should have used this opportunity to do so with this set.
I like LOTR but I'm not huge fanboy, I have Rivendell and I love it. I was hoping for next great (but smaller set) but it feels bad and price even with GWP is 50€/$ too high...
Most annoying part is that this is 18+ set for collectors and I guess most LOTR fans are adults also. Yet lego is giving us side builds which increases price and look bad on shelf
@granto said:
" @Username28 said:
"Although the set is mostly quite good, the absence of silver spoons is disappointing and unforgivable. 1/10."
Another review showed that the chest in the entryway does contain some silverware ;)"
Oh, good. I was getting worried that LEGO actually forgot a random detail or something. 7/10 set.
Bilbo would have looked better with a standard hobbit hair piece in grey.
Please take every egg that you have and throw it at me because I am precisely the sucker who is going to buy this set, even acknowledging all the flaws that this review rightly points out. This set will never go on discount and it just means that I will not buy something else or de-prioritise it.
I'm baffled by the many, many >$200 sets that seem to tumble out of TLC week after week in terms of who is buying all this stuff, but for this one, I'm the moron - sorry lads!
It just hurts that my favorite location from all of Middle Earth, got the least amount of attention. I really believe that there could have been so much more potential if they had simply kept it to Bag end instead which would have had so many more rooms such as the dining room and pantry. They could have removed the cart, (used that as the GWP instead and could have included normal Frodo since Gandalf should be in the main set) and the rest of the party. The party honestly would have been an amazing playset and would have allowed for a more detailed tree. That way this set could have had normal figures and instead of Merry, Pippin, and some other of the Hobbits that aren't present at Bag end ever in the movies could have been in the party set. We could have had a new young Bilbo, and maybe dwarves if you really wanted to lean intp=o the Hobbit aspect (but then it really would have been an exact remake of an Unexpected Gathering.) But in general this set doesn't need a lot of figures. It really needs to focus on the layout and hole itself more. And the price was the final axe cut for me. It just doesn't fill what could have been for the Shire, or what really should have just been Bag end.
I think this set is overpriced, but only slightly. Snow White's cottage 43242 retailed for $220, similar piece count but this set looks and feels bigger (and uses bigger pieces). 77092 retailed for $300 and was certainly overpriced, but somewhat comparable in terms of size and what it is. 21353 retailed for $300 with way more pieces, but most of them were tiny, and its footprint is similar. Frankly, I think this set has more substance than the botanical garden. 76294 would also be a licensed comparison point.
I think about $250 would have been right on target for this one. Now granted, maybe the horrendous looking party tree knocks some off the price. I don't know how in the year 2025 lego is STILL willing to put out blocky, awful looking trees. That should not be happening at this point in Lego's development.
But I think this set is getting a bit more negativity than it's due.
What were they thinking for that party tree... it's even worse than I thought.
Oh well, it's LEGO, so I'll just rebuild it into something better.
Set is honestly quite underwhelming and if it weren't for the GWP, I'd be skipping it for now. In fact, I may skip it anyway and just buy the GWP off BL.
Also, I completely disagree with the opinions that the rest of the party stuff shouldn't have been included. If anything, the low piece count suggests they could have expanded the party scene (and they should have). There are two scenes in Middle Earth movies with bag end: the arrival of the dwarves and Bilbo's party. I think it would have been a total miss not to do party builds here. It just should have been done better because the lackluster party scene drags the rest of it down.
@apolloivanhoe said:
"Also, I completely disagree with the opinions that the rest of the party stuff shouldn't have been included. If anything, the low piece count suggests they could have expanded the party scene (and they should have). There are two scenes in Middle Earth movies with bag end: the arrival of the dwarves and Bilbo's party. I think it would have been a total miss not to do party builds here. It just should have been done better because the lackluster party scene drags the rest of it down."
Disagree, I'd rather they ditch the party bits and add the dwarves.
My 6 yo could make a better tree...
@jkole said:
"Feels like an 'Assault on Hoth'-lite and is by far the weakest of the 3 large LotR sets."
I have seen a few comparisons with 75098 Assault on Hoth and I must say, I think that is very harsh on this set. I see the similarity in that both sets lack cohesion, but the difference for me is that nearly all the disparate bits in Assault on Hoth were bad, whereas just the Party Tree is really underwhelming here.
@apolloivanhoe said:
"I think this set is overpriced, but only slightly. Snow White's cottage 43242 retailed for $220, similar piece count but this set looks and feels bigger (and uses bigger pieces). 77092 retailed for $300 and was certainly overpriced, but somewhat comparable in terms of size and what it is. 21353 retailed for $300 with way more pieces, but most of them were tiny, and its footprint is similar. Frankly, I think this set has more substance than the botanical garden. 76294 would also be a licensed comparison point.
I think about $250 would have been right on target for this one. Now granted, maybe the horrendous looking party tree knocks some off the price. I don't know how in the year 2025 lego is STILL willing to put out blocky, awful looking trees. That should not be happening at this point in Lego's development.
But I think this set is getting a bit more negativity than it's due."
I think part of the problem with the price is that previous The Lord of the Rings sets have offered pretty good value, so this one feels worse by comparison. Also, the comparison to 21353 The Botanical Garden is slightly misleading because Bag End is substantially smaller than the Botanical Garden; roughly half the size in terms of physical mass.
Also, most of the items comprising Bilbo's party are really not worthy of display, so they add basically no value to what is primarily a display set, whereas everything in Rivendell and Barad-Dûr was contributing to the overall value.
@CapnRex101 said:
" @jkole said:
"Feels like an 'Assault on Hoth'-lite and is by far the weakest of the 3 large LotR sets."
I have seen a few comparisons with 75098 Assault on Hoth and I must say, I think that is very harsh on this set. I see the similarity in that both sets lack cohesion, but the difference for me is that nearly all the disparate bits in Assault on Hoth were bad, whereas just the Party Tree is really underwhelming here."
Hoth had a fairer PPP though :P
@Username28 said:
"Although the set is mostly quite good, the absence of silver spoons is disappointing and unforgivable. 1/10."
After all the F1 sets, I've got enough Spoons to last me a lifetime!! Lol
I had thought 79003 was originally 100$ so imagine learning that it was only 70. That makes this look like an even bigger ripoff. In my opinion the Bag End buildings are fairly even. The new side stuff is mostly flotsam and jetsam to go in a bin. And then only 3 more minifigures than the original 6. With a 200$ price increase. Madness!
After months (years?) of anticipation this set is finally here and... wow. I can think of precious few sets that have been as disappointing as this one. I knew that any smaller LOTR set would have a hard time living up to Rivendell or Barad-dur, but not only is this set far weaker than both of those, but in my opinion this may well be one of the worst Middle-Earth sets we've ever gotten, unfortunately. And that's even ignoring the price (which, going by the price-to-part ratio of the previous two sets, is about $100 too high).
Many people have already commented on how disappointingly shallow the interior is, and it is a little insulting when there isn't any material covered that wasn't already featured in the decade-old 79003, which had more depth to the interior and more detail in some places (such as the shelving on the walls), all at around a third the cost (adjusted for inflation) of the new kit. Ideally the set as a whole should have been deeper, but regardless of that I think it would've been a great improvement if they had additional areas such as the dining room on hinges (similar to the bottom floor of 75980 Attack on the Burrow) to allow for more rooms without significantly increasing the overall size of the build. That said, the bigger issue for me is the exterior - this just looks bad. Everything is so smooth and sterile, it just doesn't capture the look of a lush hill at all. 79003 is certainly blocky, but the level of texture in that set absolutely trumps the smooth slopes featured here - this set looks less like Bag End and more like a handful of green space saucers stacked atop one another. The 2012 version is a bit chunky, but the multiple shades of green used and the texture provided by the different elements gives off the intended effect much better than this new set.
I think the majority of people are in agreement that the party sections are of poor quality - the tree is atrocious and two of the builds just being on 8x8 round plates feels very chintzy for such a large set - however I don't think removing them would have been the right decision. Rather, I think the way LEGO could've made this set something really special would be to have all of those builds included, but instead of being disparate elements they should've all been part of one large environment build that connected onto the side of Bag End. To compare to Rivendell, they could've had the gazebo and bridge be separate builds that stood on their own, but the set is so much better for being one complete diorama. This set would've benefitted greatly from following that same style and essentially being the experience of Rivendell at a smaller size and price, whereas in the released set it just feels like a bunch of extra schlock to bloat up the price.
Neither of the previous sets had perfect minifigures, however in my opinion both Rivendell (reused heads and only one elf hairpiece) and Barad-dur (reused inaccurate Frodo and Sam) had the excuse of putting so much effort into making new pieces and prints for the majority of characters that a handful of cut corners is understandable - after all, both of those sets introduced four(!) exclusive part molds and an exclusive accessory pack. This selection, by comparison, seems very low-effort. Bilbo's light bluish-gray Doc Brown hair looks terrible - for being the main minifigure of this set, he deserved the dark bluish-gray Hobbit hair we've all wanted for years (especially when they WERE willing to recolor Kai's hair into that color for the mischievous cousins). Frodo, Merry, and Pippin all have new heads, but each only receive one new expression with the other being reused from Rivendell which seems very lazy, especially when some new expressions were in order - Frodo should have a frown for Bilbo's disappearance and the reveal of the Ring (two scenes which are highlighted in the set), and this would have been a great opportunity to give Merry his own specially-designed face rather than continuing to reuse Fred Weasley's design. Conversely, Sam is the only one of the Fellowship Hobbits to not
@ikke said:
"Where are the dwarves? "
The Hobbit films don’t have enough fans anymore to justify including them.
I don’t think I’ll bother building the birthday side builds when I get mine. Just feel they are not necessary
Where is sting?
At $200, this would be an instant buy. At $270, I can't justify it. Lego is pricing me out of this hobby.
@CapnRex101 said:
" @jkole said:
"Feels like an 'Assault on Hoth'-lite and is by far the weakest of the 3 large LotR sets."
I have seen a few comparisons with 75098 Assault on Hoth and I must say, I think that is very harsh on this set. I see the similarity in that both sets lack cohesion, but the difference for me is that nearly all the disparate bits in Assault on Hoth were bad, whereas just the Party Tree is really underwhelming here.
...
Also, most of the items comprising Bilbo's party are really not worthy of display, so they add basically no value to what is primarily a display set, whereas everything in Rivendell and Barad-Dûr was contributing to the overall value."
You're right, it is a bit harsh on this set, especially since there is a higher visual appeal for the main build. But 75098 is the easiest comparison I can make since these are both annual/flagship sets that suffer from a lack of cohesion and have multiple small side-builds that feel tacked on to inflate the value (or justify a target price). I guess a better comparison would be the additional side building included in 75290. But the Cantina was so incredible it overcame that, while this set feels more... bloated(?) due to the side builds.
I think the designers should've gone the route of 75192. Include and combine the best aspects and details of Bag End from The Unexpected Journey with the details from the early scenes from The Fellowship of the Ring (sans Bilbo's party).
I would've called this set "The Lord of the Rings: Bag End" and treated this as a remake/improvement on 79003. They could've had new versions of 4-5 of the dwarves and a younger Bilbo to increase the number of minifigures (instead of party guests) and include a dining room and kitchen to the main build.
Then I would've spun off the party builds into a more consumer friendly $50-75 set. Take inspiration from the Lego LotR video game: add another tent and a picnic table, improve on the tree, have unique prints for Bilbo and Frodo (for that FOMO aspect), and add in some terrain or go the route of 75373/75386 or 21338 were the builds can join together or separate for play.
There is so much in this set to like, they just fumbled the execution.
Keep on saving up for Barad-Dur then.....
What does frustrate me about some GWP sets is that they too lack cohesion. Sure a Sméagol diorama is nice enough, but in this case just some Hobbits doing everyday things with interesting and fun building techniques would really complement the main set. Especially as poor Bilbo needs more guests. Sméagol's back-story if I remember rightly takes place in a different Age!
Very glad to have bought 79003 so many years ago. When I built that one I couldn't stop smiling.
I really wanted to like this set. And appreciate some of the details Capt Rex has pointed out. But even with quite a bit of suspension of reality, that tree is an absolute shocker! Standing a brick on its end doesn't cut it these days. Even some cheese wedges would have given a better shape.
And with that bombshell, I won't be buying this set. I love LotR, but that does not mean that I need to own this at that price. Maybe the next one will be better...
The gold can’t be his share, he took the arkenstone as his 13th share
@NinjaNerd said:
"The gold can’t be his share, he took the arkenstone as his 13th share "
He accepted 2 chests as his reward,could have been more but this was enough for bilbo
arkenstone was buried with thorin
It's not extremely expensive.
For what it is, with the large elements, printed cloth elements, printed parts, 9 new exclusive figures, it's pricey, but for what you get, it's not bad.
It's just ANOTHER large set with a high price point.
If Lego could do another LotR line with $20 to $150 sets, with this one being the 'ucs' of the line, then I'd be all in.
For everyone complaining about the dwarves not being included this is a LOTR set not a Hobbit set. So the Dwarves really don't belong here.
@karrit said:
"For everyone complaining about the dwarves not being included this is a LOTR set not a Hobbit set. So the Dwarves really don't belong here."
Then what's a Warhammer Grey Wizard doing in this set ? /s
Some things I like even more now (dragon, minifigs, little details), and some things I like less (party tree, cramped study).
I'm probably in the minority, but I also kinda like the tree on top...
Who designed the trees? Five year old?
The party tree is annoying but the interior is what really disappoints me. The could've built a little kitchen section that hinged open or jutted out from the back that was easy to remove.
What's there is good, I just wish it continued. Bag End has such a great interior design in the movies, and this doesn't quite take advantage of that. It would not have taken much to make this feel like a good value, close to what they did with the interior spaces of Rivendell.
Love it or hate it, I just hope this set doesn't suffer from the brittle brown curse. 79003 still gives me flashbacks.
@legoDad42 said:
"It's not extremely expensive.
For what it is, with the large elements, printed cloth elements, printed parts, 9 new exclusive figures, it's pricey, but for what you get, it's not bad.
It's just ANOTHER large set with a high price point.
If Lego could do another LotR line with $20 to $150 sets, with this one being the 'ucs' of the line, then I'd be all in."
Firstly, no, this set is extremely expensive. $270 for 2,000 pieces and only nine minifigures is outrageous. Only the most overpriced Star Wars sets are at the same level.
Secondly, even ignoring that, compared to the two other LOTR sets currently available the value is abysmal. If this set had the same value of Rivendell or Barad-dur, it would be $170 at the most - really even less, since both of those sets had a plethora of new part molds and an exclusive accessory pack each, not to mention an overall much higher-effort minifigure selection.
@granto said:
"It's been commented on how much green there is. It should be easy to add some other shades, like sand green or dark green, and some ground cover for atop Bag End—grasses, flowers, shrubs, etc., to break up the monotonous green lump."
You could, sure, but if your lawn has such varied color, then your lawn has a problem. Most likely you've got multiple strains of grass growing, and the most likely source of that is crabgrass.
I think the main issue of this set is that it’s sort of stuck in an uncomfortable middle position; they should have either trimmed the fat of the party scene and released the main build at a lower price point, or built up the main build (or the main built+that barebones tree) and released it at $350 or so. As it stands, it’s the most affordable of the three (Rivendell is nearly twice as much!) but the least substantial. I think that instead of the traditional LEGO approach of assigning a budget and making the designers work around it, for such a significant set which could prove very popular, they should have done a few different concepts at different price points, or maybe they did do that and they just picked the wrong option.
I really wanted to like this, but I think my quick thrown together MOC (while not as refined) is bigger and looks good enough. It has inspired me to maybe rebuild a more accurate one though.
It's a shame that the goodwill created with the excellence of Rivendell and Barad-Dûr should be wasted to gouge the fans with this set.
I have no problem with the price. Perhaps it should be higher. The problem is the set isn’t better. More interior and a better tree are required.
"Rosy knows an idiot when she sees one."
Rosy is winking at me. I would like to wait for a discount, but the exclusive GWP is too great a temptation. Like Smeagol, I won't be able to resist.
This should have been two sets.
1: Bag End, ideally a bit larger to include the kitchen and dining room, another big display set for the AFOLs who want something to put next to Rivendell and Barad-dûr.
2: Bilbo's party - either a play set with more or less what we have here with separate sub-sets (except a better party tree) or else something larger along the lines of 80109 with a full base for the field, several tents, a huge tree, and so on that could be displayed in front of / connecting to Bag End.
If they'd produced two really great $500 dollar sets with more minifigs I suspect a lot more of the comments here would be positive....
If it were $200 it'd be a great set.
Also I feel like it's not really "The Shire," innit? It's Bag End.
Love that firework Dragon, might just buy the parts for that when it comes out and add it to the original set, as nothing else in this set is tempting me to drop over £200 on a remake of a set I already have :)
@Harmonious_Building said:
"This set will never go on discount and it just means that I will not buy something else or de-prioritise it."
It's expected to move from exclusive to broad distribution in July. I'm waiting for those discounts :)
@ikke said:
" @MusiMus said:
" @ikke said:
"Where are the dwarves? "
In 79003 60 years ago. Well, it's LoTR, not Hobbit set."
When Lego can put minifigs of different movies in Millennium Falcon sets, they should have used this opportunity to do so with this set."
Adding another 14 minifigures to the set wouldn't be appropriate though.
LOTR is one of the few themes in current LEGO lineup that truly speaks to me.
This set is a massive disappointment. Its overall rather weak design is especially hard to excuse now that we know what amazing things LEGO can do with the theme if they just put enough effort in it.
The price/quality on this one is just impossible to justify. I might consider it if I ever see it with a 30-40% discount, otherwise it's a non-starter, sadly.
@CCC said:
" @ikke said:
" @MusiMus said:
" @ikke said:
"Where are the dwarves? "
In 79003 60 years ago. Well, it's LoTR, not Hobbit set."
When Lego can put minifigs of different movies in Millennium Falcon sets, they should have used this opportunity to do so with this set."
Adding another 14 minifigures to the set wouldn't be appropriate though."
The amount of minifigures would perhaps justify the price better. Well, I'll buy it anyway.
Bilbo's birthday party probably should've been its own set or GWP, with the leftover budget for those parts used to add more details to the Shire itself. The tree is pathetic looking, especially for 2025.
I've only seen these films once, when they were new, so I'm not intimately familiar with the interior of this house, but it looks very recognisable. I'm sure fans of the franchise find plenty to fault with it, but most of these critiques have already been expressed in the reviews I've seen and read. It also looks tiny in comparison to the last two Lord Of The Rings offerings, although it may very well be in scale with those in-universe.
It's also easy enough to convert it to Teletubby Land.
@PurpleDave said:
" @granto said:
"It's been commented on how much green there is. It should be easy to add some other shades, like sand green or dark green, and some ground cover for atop Bag End—grasses, flowers, shrubs, etc., to break up the monotonous green lump."
You could, sure, but if your lawn has such varied color, then your lawn has a problem. Most likely you've got multiple strains of grass growing, and the most likely source of that is crabgrass."
Sometimes representational objects are given lighter colours in areas that are more exposed to (sun)light and darker colours in shadier, less exposed areas. So it might have been possible to use lighter shades of green towards the top and darker ones lower down to simulate natural light. It would have to be done subtly of course but might have helped to break up the impression of a solid green mass.
@ToysFromTheAttic said:
"It's also easy enough to convert it to Teletubby Land. "
For that matter, you could just as easily run over it with a steamroller.
The party tree now holds the title for "worst Lego tree ever". You don't know how bad it is until you see it in person.
@CapnRex101 said:
"The Party Tree is really underwhelming here."
@Darth_Dee said:
"The party tree now holds the title for "worst Lego tree ever". You don't know how bad it is until you see it in person."
4074
@Trigger_ said:
" @ikke said:
"Where are the dwarves? "
The Hobbit films don’t have enough fans anymore to justify including them."
If you follow any of the modern adaptations of lotr too, it seems like getting rights for middle earth properties gets very complicated. I wonder if they just don’t have the rights to do hobbit specific characters. And if so, it’s clear going through all the work to get that license would not be justified at this point given its lack of appeal compared to lotr
Thanks for this -- as usual excellent -- review! It looks fun to build, display, and expand (for example I'd replace the ugly tree right away). I don't think the price is a sticking point considering much higher markups for other franchises and the parts in the set -- fabric, horse, and large parts compared to the many tiny dots in Rivendell for example.
@lego4elio said:
" @Trigger_ said:
" @ikke said:
"Where are the dwarves? "
The Hobbit films don’t have enough fans anymore to justify including them."
If you follow any of the modern adaptations of lotr too, it seems like getting rights for middle earth properties gets very complicated. I wonder if they just don’t have the rights to do hobbit specific characters. And if so, it’s clear going through all the work to get that license would not be justified at this point given its lack of appeal compared to lotr"
WB holds the rights to, specifically, LotR (the trilogy and all appendices) and The Hobbit. I don’t know the source of rights that resulted in LotR:WotR, or that is being used for the Gollum duology, but apparently that stuff is all tied to LotR proper, since LotR:WotR was only produced as a way to prevent the rights from reverting back to the estate before they could start filming the first Gollum movie.
Amazon got rights to The Silmarillion. There might be other texts that have yet to be optioned, but I doubt WB would have lost the rights to The Hobbit this soon after the film trilogy was released. The LEGO license was tied to the Hobbit films, so they got plenty of coverage during the initial run, while LotR got touched on here and there. It makes more sense to keep plugging the holes in the LotR lineup more than reprising any of the Hobbit stuff.
Actually, I'm pretty sure Amazon doesn't have the right to the Silmarillion. IIRC, they don't even have the right to the Hobbit [edit : apparently I'm wrong and they do have the rights to the Hobbit, according to reddit], just LotR and its appendices, and that's why Rings of Power ended up being , well what it ended up being.
And while I'm a big fan of the Hobbit movies (however flawed they were), I sort of understand why they won't necessarily use it for sets. It's a bit of a wasted opportunity, like in Bag End, but it never was as popular as LotR.
@lego4elio said:
" @Trigger_ said:
" @ikke said:
"Where are the dwarves? "
The Hobbit films don’t have enough fans anymore to justify including them."
If you follow any of the modern adaptations of lotr too, it seems like getting rights for middle earth properties gets very complicated. I wonder if they just don’t have the rights to do hobbit specific characters. And if so, it’s clear going through all the work to get that license would not be justified at this point given its lack of appeal compared to lotr"
They certainly had the right to them in the past as they made all the dwarves. I would imagine that they could easily get them again if they wanted as they obviously have good relationships with Warner Bros and it is not like any other companies are producing brick building sets for The Hobbit. The bigger issues are whether LEGO want to do The Hobbit sets again after how badly they did first time around and whether Warner would prefer them to be doing (kid aimed) sets for their new movies where there is money to be made from kids going to the cinema.
@PurpleTrooper said:
"Actually, I'm pretty sure Amazon doesn't have the right to the Silmarillion. IIRC, they don't even have the right to the Hobbit [edit : apparently I'm wrong and they do have the rights to the Hobbit, according to reddit], just LotR and its appendices, and that's why Rings of Power ended up being , well what it ended up being.
And while I'm a big fan of the Hobbit movies (however flawed they were), I sort of understand why they won't necessarily use it for sets. It's a bit of a wasted opportunity, like in Bag End, but it never was as popular as LotR. "
Worst edit ever.
@Harmonious_Building said:
"Please take every egg that you have and throw it at me because I am precisely the sucker who is going to buy this set, even acknowledging all the flaws that this review rightly points out. This set will never go on discount and it just means that I will not buy something else or de-prioritise it.
I'm baffled by the many, many >$200 sets that seem to tumble out of TLC week after week in terms of who is buying all this stuff, but for this one, I'm the moron - sorry lads! "
Just build it yourself at this point. It will be much more fun and cost less.
@alLEGOry_HJB2810 said:
" @CapnRex101 said:
"The Party Tree is really underwhelming here."
@Darth_Dee said:
"The party tree now holds the title for "worst Lego tree ever". You don't know how bad it is until you see it in person."
4074"
Touche!
@PurpleTrooper said:
"Actually, I'm pretty sure Amazon doesn't have the right to the Silmarillion. IIRC, they don't even have the right to the Hobbit [edit : apparently I'm wrong and they do have the rights to the Hobbit, according to reddit], just LotR and its appendices, and that's why Rings of Power ended up being , well what it ended up being."
Okay, I did some digging around, and some remembering, and I think I got this mostly figured out. So, J.R.R. writes the books, and people kept pestering him about the film rights. He didn't think anyone could ever film it, but did like getting paid, so United Artists ended up with the film/stage/merch rights to those four books and their appendices. UA later sold the film rights (but kept the distribution rights), and with time and name changes, those film rights are currently owned by a company called Middle Earth Enterprises. MEE _leased_ the film rights to New Line Cinema (which is owned by WB, so that's how they got involved). That lease has a termination clause, so if they don't produce new stuff, MEE eventually gets the rights back. That's where LotR:WotR comes in, as it kept the New Line/WB rights from expiring. The film is based on just a little bit of information from the appendices. Most of the filler material used to pad out The Hobbit into a trilogy also came from the appendices, as will, I'd assume, the upcoming live-action duology.
Amazon _also_ acquired some rights to the appendices. Apparently either the original UA deal, or the leased rights from MEE, did not include rights to TV series of "eight or more episodes", which is how Bezos was able to worm his way into competing rights.. The Amazon series (which I've never watched) was, I believe, originally talked about as being a Silmarillion adaptation, except apparently nobody has ever acquired those rights from the estate, so RoP leans as close to being an adaptation of The Silmarillion as they could get with whatever they could find in the appendices.
I'd heard at one point that Christopher steadfastly refused to sell film rights to The Silmarillion, but apparently the Tolkien Estate got into bed with Amazon over the whole RoP deal, so I don't know where things stand in that regard. He died in 2020, so before Amazon managed to release even one episode. Simon (grandson) consulted on Jackson's trilogy, so maybe there could be some movement on the unsold film rights, provided Christopher didn't impose an outright ban on doing so. If he did, then the world will just have to wait until stuff starts hitting the public domain.
@StyleCounselor said:
" @PurpleTrooper said:
"Actually, I'm pretty sure Amazon doesn't have the right to the Silmarillion. IIRC, they don't even have the right to the Hobbit [edit : apparently I'm wrong and they do have the rights to the Hobbit, according to reddit], just LotR and its appendices, and that's why Rings of Power ended up being , well what it ended up being.
And while I'm a big fan of the Hobbit movies (however flawed they were), I sort of understand why they won't necessarily use it for sets. It's a bit of a wasted opportunity, like in Bag End, but it never was as popular as LotR. "
Worst edit ever."
Be nice.
@RoboticJesus said:
" @StyleCounselor said:
" @PurpleTrooper said:
"Actually, I'm pretty sure Amazon doesn't have the right to the Silmarillion. IIRC, they don't even have the right to the Hobbit [edit : apparently I'm wrong and they do have the rights to the Hobbit, according to reddit], just LotR and its appendices, and that's why Rings of Power ended up being , well what it ended up being.
And while I'm a big fan of the Hobbit movies (however flawed they were), I sort of understand why they won't necessarily use it for sets. It's a bit of a wasted opportunity, like in Bag End, but it never was as popular as LotR. "
Worst edit ever."
Be nice."
Ok. I'll try.
"with the contrast he signed" -> contract
Cheerleaders can rationalize all they want with their vaunted 'part count' argument, but it is too expensive. Then again since most of LEGO sets now are well overpriced I guess it is desensitized many to think its OK for the price.
LEGO is greedy and I think it is very good timing for them to focus on a theme that has a coveted item that all must have and will go to great lengths to attain.
Both for fans lusting so hard for LoTR themed LEGO sets to ignore, or rationalize, the exorbitant cost of the set, and LEGO for looking for every way to make an extra buck gouging its fan base constantly and apparently having no qualms for doing so.
Yes LEGO has always had some expensive sets, but it used to be many sets were sensibly priced, and better on sale. Now, its any set you want you hope goes on sale because its RRP is just ridiculous. Almost every set one may be interested is about 20-30% more than it should be (even before the tariffs being threatened, which, as another excuse, LEGO will likely knock the prices up even higher than what would account for the tariffs, even if they go away).
I am torn. I like it a lot. They did a great job with the details. I don't know if I can justify $270 and I don't see when or how it would ever go on sale, so I'll have to just suck it up I guess.
Ah, I got it!
Problem solved.
Will build out the terrain to the right more, incorporate the 'fireworks' tent, add one or two small picnic tables - detailed with food, drink and the birthday cake build.
Then build up a large Great Tree. Ditch this one in the kit (use some of its parts). Keep the mechanism with the barrels, etc.
And finally add a road all along the front of the diorama for Gandalf's cart.
Problem solved people. Whew!
@madforLEGO:
Fortunately, there's a little cheese on the mantel, if you'd like some to go with...well, you know.
@legoDad42:
When I started expanding the Home Alone set, I built a yard that had a pocket for the house to sit in. Very few changes were actually made to the set itself, and most of those were only to anchor any loose stuff so it wouldn't fall out and get lost when doing setup/teardown at shows. There's also a Ninjago set that has a separate base that was only produced to send out to various social media types. The set itself again remains unchanged, but will just attach to the base in a way that makes it easy to remove. So, yeah, I could see making a Shire base that you can just plop this into, including the birthday party stuff. There are even things you could do to fully preserve the stock set while still replacing one or both trees with original designs.
@PurpleDave said:
" @legoDad42 :
When I started expanding the Home Alone set, I built a yard that had a pocket for the house to sit in. Very few changes were actually made to the set itself, and most of those were only to anchor any loose stuff so it wouldn't fall out and get lost when doing setup/teardown at shows. There's also a Ninjago set that has a separate base that was only produced to send out to various social media types. The set itself again remains unchanged, but will just attach to the base in a way that makes it easy to remove. So, yeah, I could see making a Shire base that you can just plop this into, including the birthday party stuff. There are even things you could do to fully preserve the stock set while still replacing one or both trees with original designs."
Spot on Purple! You're the man.
This is how you're supposed to play with Lego, build, rebuild, alt-build expand, add on.
With this set, yep...almost all is preserved. Just gonna' make a new large base/footprint with road.
Add in the side builds and completely redo the Great Tree.
Wish more Afol's knew how Lego works.
Oh, and yes, I remember someone on YouTube, Jang maybe having that unique Ninjago detailed base plate with terrain.
You got one of those? Super rare indeed.
@legoDad42:
I did not. I haven't dabbled in that side of things for over two decades. I did get some cool stuff out of it, but really don't miss feeling like I was spending every waking hour tied to the site. I considered buying the parts to build that Ninjago base, but in the end I never even got the set itself, so not really much point.
And I didn't really have a choice with Home Alone. We do a display for the Detroit Symphony Orchestra every year, and they started showing Home Alone with live orchestra every year as the first show after we set up. Can't have a display at a Home Alone concert without the Home Alone house, but the stock set really doesn't fit into the type of display we do. Plus, it was too small, and didn't come with the garage. So I bought two copies, a bunch of extra parts, and built the set up a bit. At some point I still need to add the circle drive, and I'd like to make a better van.
I like that they included the party, but I don’t like the execution of the party. Or, well, mostly just the tree, which is shockingly awful to the extent I don’t understand how it got as far as the final model - but I also really wish they’d included a few little kid hobbits. The bit where Bilbo tells them a story is one of my favourite moments in the whole trilogy. Three little hobbit children? It’d be straight onto my Christmas list, even with that terrible tree. As it is… I’m just not sure, even though I love Bag End (even the interior), I love the tents, I love Gandalf’s cart.
I find most of the comments on this set overly severe. I think it looks great and is quite faithful to the movie, except for the birthday tree of course (which I plan to fix). It is a bit expensive yes, but I plan to buy it the very minute it releases, so with the Smeagol & Deagol GWP included the price makes more sense. As for the 79003 set I already own, I will probably use it to extend my Shire.
@Hiratha said:
"I like that they included the party, but I don’t like the execution of the party. Or, well, mostly just the tree, which is shockingly awful to the extent I don’t understand how it got as far as the final model - but I also really wish they’d included a few little kid hobbits. The bit where Bilbo tells them a story is one of my favourite moments in the whole trilogy. Three little hobbit children? It’d be straight onto my Christmas list, even with that terrible tree. As it is… I’m just not sure, even though I love Bag End (even the interior), I love the tents, I love Gandalf’s cart. "
Now you've got me wondering how they'd even do kid hobbits, considering that they do adult hobbits the way they do kids.Just put a torso on a side-printed plate?
@TheOtherMike said:
" @Hiratha said:
"I like that they included the party, but I don’t like the execution of the party. Or, well, mostly just the tree, which is shockingly awful to the extent I don’t understand how it got as far as the final model - but I also really wish they’d included a few little kid hobbits. The bit where Bilbo tells them a story is one of my favourite moments in the whole trilogy. Three little hobbit children? It’d be straight onto my Christmas list, even with that terrible tree. As it is… I’m just not sure, even though I love Bag End (even the interior), I love the tents, I love Gandalf’s cart. "
Now you've got me wondering how they'd even do kid hobbits, considering that they do adult hobbits the way they do kids.Just put a torso on a side-printed plate?"
If they really wanted to do it right, they'd use minifig babies and either give them a removable hair element, or dual-mold the hair on their heads like they did with the Baby Benny helmet.
Someone better eat the mint ice cream before it finishes melting into a pool of green ooze.
The designer should have used fewer spaceship parts.
@StyleCounselor said:
"The designer should have used fewer spaceship parts."
Blasphemy!!!
@TheOtherMike said:
" @StyleCounselor said:
"The designer should have used fewer spaceship parts."
Blasphemy!!!"
Hobbits in Spaaaace.
does anyone know whats going on with the orders on the lego canada site?
@Gar1Gamer said:
"does anyone know whats going on with the orders on the lego canada site?"
should be working now if you’re still awake!
@lego4elio said:
" @Gar1Gamer said:
"does anyone know whats going on with the orders on the lego canada site?"
should be working now if you’re still awake!"
thanks bro, i realized i was in the wrong thread way before they ever fixed the site.
“I can see the Shire. The Brandywine River. Bag End. Gandalf’s fireworks, the lights, the party tree.” Mostly there, right?
As someone who never watched Lord of the Rings, I'm looking at this set as a general Lego fan. When I saw 10333 and 10316, I considered buying them simply because they look amazing, each in their own way. Here, however, I feel the main point of this set is only for those who would actually appreciate the small details and such.