Brickset Bouts: 77015 Temple of the Golden Idol vs. 10316 Rivendell
Posted by Huw,
This is the second bout in the first round of our competition that aims to find out what our members think is the best set released since 2020.
In this one, 77015 Temple of the Golden Idol is up against 10316 The Lord of the Rings: Rivendell.
Read what Links has to say about the smallest and cheapest model in the competition, and Montyh7 about the massive Middle Earth set after the break, then cast your vote!
77015 Temple of the Golden Idol
When this set came out I saw it had some Technic mechanisms built into it, but I purposefully avoided reading what they were. It's so much fun building them blind and figuring out what each mechanism does as you go.
Some of the movements in this are ingenious, especially the rolling boulder and the rising illuminated idol with the collapsing wall. I sat there for ages after completing the boulder section, just twisting the dial backwards and forwards because the whole mechanism is just so satisfying to use!
It also looks great on a shelf when completed, although it's not on the original shelf I'd planned to put it on - that was quite high up, and I couldn't bring myself to put those dials out of reach, so I had to re-jig everything to get it at an accessible height!
That proved to be a good decision as of all the many sets I have on display, it's this one I'm drawn to for a quick twist of one of those dials whenever I go past!
The minifigures are great too and, overall, I think this is the perfect set; it's a decent size so you have something to get your teeth into, but not so big you struggle to display it. The many and varied mechanisms going on behind the facade add a level of complexity that makes this stand out in my memory as a truly enjoyable set to build, and it's possibly the most fun I've ever had building a set.
10316 The Lord of the Rings: Rivendell
In December 2001, Peter Jackson and his team brought to life an unforgettable vision of Elven grace, serenity, and wonder. It was a breathtaking realisation of Tolkien’s masterful storytelling. In March 2023, LEGO launched their take on that vision, and quite frankly, they nailed it.
This mammoth set of 6,167 pieces recreates one of the most beautiful scenes from the film, and to help every builder tackle the awe-inspiring, incredibly detailed roof, LEGO included instructions on using the trusty separator to turn what seems painstaking into something achievable no matter the building level.
With 15 minifigures and the ability to separate into three parts or remain as one stunning scene, it offers nooks and Easter eggs galore for the avid LOTR fan. And for everyone else, clever building techniques and NPU will keep them immersed throughout the build.
Granted, the set isn’t on the budget list. It is, however, destined to take pride of place for every LEGO builder, even for those who, sadly and tragically, haven't seen the movie or read the book. It does what no other IP can claim: it appeals to and resonates with everyone.
This isn’t just the best set of the last five years or even the last decade. This is the bar LEGO themselves will need to beat across past, present, and future sets, and honestly, it will be fun to watch them try.
Cast your vote!
Having read the above, which of these two sets do you think should go through to the quarter-final for a chance to be crowned "best set of the last five years" ?
119 likes
98 comments on this article
I have both of this sets. I just built my Rivendell and it's just outstanding. Temple is also cool but it's not same grade. Choose is obvious to me.
I think this will be the most one sided contest of the lot, I'm going to guess 88% of the vote (I don't even need to say to which set).
Not really a fair match up given the huge differences in cost, part numbers, detailing and mini-figure number...
... I mean we all know that Indy is gonna win.
not even a fair comparison, Rivendell might be the most beautiful set LEGO has ever done imo
Very difficult choice this time.
I Think I'll take more time to decide.
I'm afraid no amount of sand in the bag is going to keep Indy from losing his hat this round...
So obviously Rivendell. Already forgotten what the other choice was!
The fact I hesitated even slightly before I voted Rivendell shows how strong of a set that Indiana Jones set really is. But still, no competition in the end.
Nuclear bomb vs fridge
I like giving underdogs a chance, and I did it again, even it was just to balance things out a bit.
One is based off of a classic well-loved film trilogy, the other isn't.
Rivendell for sure. The only flaw I can find for this incredible set is the price, which is why I'll probably never get it, but the set itself is magnificent.
Yep I think we all know Rivendell is walking this. But I wanted to vote indy purely because I think Rivendell is overhyped. At that price should have been a 360 degree set and not dolls house style.
Rivendell will be the winner of the whole competition, I have no doubt. I love the Temple, it looks amazing, but it doesn't stand a chance against Rivendell.
I did not like the building experience of the first section in the Rivendell, so I voted for Temple which I'm yet to build :) Also, I'm too sad about stickers in Rivendell to vote for it.
Judging by the comments, Rivendell is going to win this round. Both are just as exquisitely detailed, both have interesting build techniques and cool minifigs. Both themes have huge fan followings. Even though the Temple has better action features by far yet it seems it will lose because Rivendell is much bigger. This could partly answer the question of why does Lego keep making huge expensive sets, because a lot of people think bigger is better.
If Lego had made these sets the same size, Rivendell probably wouldn't be in this contest at all.
I voted Indy. You're not the Dark Lord of me.
Voted Indy. I had so much fun building the temple and it’s a fantastically detailed remake of one of my favourite sets. The play features are also brilliant.
I have no doubt Rivendell will win - it’s a gorgeous set, and I hope I can own it one day. However if I do, I don’t think I’ll look at these two sets and be able to pick one as having the best features - Rivendell simply has the size and scale advantage. Therefore I feel Indy definitely deserves a chance.
I dediced, finally.
Rivendell is a gorgeous set, and I love it. But the one I was about to purchase was the Indi diorama, while I never really tought to buy Rivendell.
So my vote goes to the temple of golden idol.
Temple, since I dont like open back in 18+ sets
For the money, it's hard to beat the Indiana Jones set, which packs so much in for $150. In relative terms, it's incredible. But I'm absolute terms Rivendell wins and gets my vote, probably for the whole competition. The Indy set deserves more than a first round elimination though.
The fact that 77015 is the smallest model in the competition has a lot to say about you folks. Does it really give you that much joy spending that much more money than anybody else and placing that many 1x1 tiles?
I'll die on the hill that my Boromir from 9473 is the better minifigure compared to this set. Meanwhile, 77015 gets actual improvements like a dual molded hat and where are the die-hards? Oh yeah, turning a blind eye in the name of Rivendell.
What play features did 10316 add again? Oh, that's right, none. It just expanded the roof, added a few basic minifigures and suddenly its the best set of the decade. It's oh so much better than 79006 because the roof is better. God, what a way to ignore all the price hikes we've dealt with in the past few years and give LEGO a layup while paying an exorbitant amount.
Have you heard of play features? Oh right, you're too rich for that nonsense. Who cares if a set has any value beyond being the most popular thing on the block? Just vote for the most popular fantasy franchise ever, who gives a @$% if they actually made a good set; it's not a theme we love. Waaaah.
Adventure? Never heard of it. Here's what you're missing out on: Play features and improvements. It's crazy to think that we would have improved some LEGO sets since 79006, but they actually have. Best part is its not via a roof tile expansion.
The minifigures are inherently better since LEGO last produced an Indiana Jones set. That is best exemplified by Indy himself. A dual-molded hat is incredibly nice for him. Who gets anything fun dual-molded in Rivendell? Oh, right, nobody. Still worth half my retirement account though!
At least we have some basic and boring greenery to keep us happy.
@Captain_Eugene said:
"I like giving underdogs a chance, and I did it again, even it was just to balance things out a bit."
That's why I voted for it, too. Another is that Rivendell already beat Temple (and my beloved 10320, for which I still hold a grudge against it) in the Best Set of 2023 poll. It has enough accolades!
Rivendell by far! I have both sets and I love both of them and the franchises they belong to . Maybe Rivendell doesn't have that many functions but it has other strong points like a far superior aesthetic appeal and awesome building techniques with lots of NPU. Those virtues are present in both sets, but as usually said, big fish eats small one.
Judging from the comments so far I'd say that Indy has a fighting chance here.
I must, however, disagree with those that seemingly write off 10316 because it is expensive. While I agree that it is an issue that no cheaper sets qualified among the 16, I would argue that Rivendell more or less delivers value for the price it costs even if it does cost a lot.
Based on the TLG's price setting over the last few years there are overpriced sets in all price ranges now, but among the top echelon of sets Rivendell is not especially expensive based on what it delivers, be that ingenuity, building techniques, size or pure display value.
The only slight weak point for 10316 as I see it, and as @Aronis briefly alludes to above, is that the minifigures included although good do not improve on the minifigures of the old LotR and Hobbit sets of yesteryear.
Such a shame these two had to meet so soon. Both are great sets that would add to any collection, but unfortunately I think there is one obvious winner here.
Indy doesn't stand a chance against Elrond here.
@chom said:
"Temple, since I dont like open back in 18+ sets"
What about open front and top of a tunnel in an 18+ set?
@aronis It is a little bit ironical that you bash on Rivendell for being an expensive set while you are (based on your profile info) an Star Wars collector, the line that concentrates the most outrageous examples of overpriced models and insulting price per part ratios (especially lately, ejem tinytank). Yet Rivendell still has a great price per part at the cost it has, +6000 pieces for 499 merkels doesn't seem a bad deal to me (And no, I am not rich). And don't get me wrong, I love Star Wars too.
Maybe you are right on the playing features aspect, but this set is mainly meant for display, which doesn't make it worse necessarily, it just has a different strengh.
I can see the scope and minifigure inclusion of Rivendell’s design and yet the iconic fun and display value of Tenple of the Golden Idol, so which should win?
There’s only one way to find out!
FIIIIIIIIIGHT!!!
Despite my 2008 comment, one of these sets (I won’t tell which!) was released still requiring a UBF-2 seaplane so I’m afraid the win is clear.
I know I'm on the losing side, and own neither... But I'd want to own Temple, and actively don't like Rivendell. (Like, I don't see why people find it so great... it's just a million 1x1 tiles!) What makes it so "beautiful"? What makes it so "great"? It's just a bloated bland set with a million tiles and minifigs.
I had to vote Rivendell because I have found that over time the mechanisms for Temple have become warped and don't work as smoothly as they did after construction. Its most noticeable in the boulder roll and somewhat disappointing.
I voted Indy just to balance things out a little.
Sure, Rivendell is going to win this by a landslide, but tbh I don't think it's as good as many make it out to be.
I wouldn't buy it even if it was half the price. I'm just not that interested in LOTR as a theme to begin with. Plus, correctly aligning all those 1x1 roof decorations must be a right PITA.
Finally, the mediocre minifigs would put the nail in the coffin for me, if I had been interested at all.
I got Rivendell the day it came out but I'm just building it right now. It looks amazing and I've really enjoyed myself so far. I don't have the other set, so the choice is obvious for me.
I voted for Indy. The Temple was such a fun build and this set has clever functions. Someone said in the comments section already that bigger isn't always better. At the beginning of the voting the Temple set was described as the "smallest and cheapest model" in this competition. That was a cruel thing to say.
@emQ maybe you simply don't like LOTR at all
What makes the Temple great to you? It is just a bunch of bloated bland plastic pieces...
(I love it too, lol)
I wish I owned both of these sets, but I only own Rivendell. I had to vote for it, just because of how impressive a display model it is. Sure, some of the Minifigures did not improve from the 2012 wave (my main Minifigure gripe is Legolas, I can't make myself like his hair) but some of the Minifigures have been greatly improved IMO. The hobbits look really good in this set.
I own both and the Indy set is great...but this is going to be an absolute blowout. Rivendell is just too amazing
Just voted for the best set of all times ;-)
@Huw said:
"... the smallest and cheapest model in the competition"
Err... Isn't that 10497 Galaxy Explorer? 291 fewer parts and $50 cheaper than the temple?
@LuvsLEGO_Cool_J said:
"I voted for Indy. The Temple was such a fun build and this set has clever functions. Someone said in the comments section already that bigger isn't always better. At the beginning of the voting the Temple set was described as the "smallest and cheapest model" in this competition. That was a cruel thing to say."
I voted for Indy as well. As impressive as most budget-busters are, it's kind of expected that they would be. Managing to so many details and functions into a relatively affordable set is more impressive to me. (I'm also a sucker for well-integrated mechanisms.) LOL
To 77015 : YOU SHALL NOT PASS!
@Duq said:
" @Huw said:
"... the smallest and cheapest model in the competition"
Err... Isn't that 10497 Galaxy Explorer? 291 fewer parts and $50 cheaper than the temple?"
Indeed.
Difficult choice. The Indy set definitely does more with less to be an impressive recreation of possibly one of cinema's most iconic action scenes... but on the other hand, while the LotR set can't say the same since Rivendell is really just a backdrop to some very important conversations in the movie, the way it really does feel like an authentic slice of the Elvish world is still a strong point in its favour.
The goal of each set is honestly so different, and their strengths in such different areas, that it makes it hard to compare them on equal footing: a lot of it, as seen from the comments above, sounds like it's going to come down to whether people place higher value on having innovative features or being a grand display piece.
@AustinPowers said:"Plus, correctly aligning all those 1x1 roof decorations must be a right PITA."
If you look on page 133 of the first instruction book, they avoid that pain by the use of a neat trick.
@Duq said:
" @Huw said:
"... the smallest and cheapest model in the competition"
Err... Isn't that 10497 Galaxy Explorer? 291 fewer parts and $50 cheaper than the temple?"
I didn't notice that when @Huw said it, but I did notice when @The_Cellarer said it.
I haven't seen this posted anywhere else yet, but if anyone is interested in comparing all the sets in one place, here's a quick query I made, sorted by ascending set number:
https://brickset.com/sets/query-11640
And here're a few more queries of the same 16 sets:
Ascending (UK) price:
https://brickset.com/sets/query-11641
Ascending number of pieces:
https://brickset.com/sets/query-11642
Ascending PPP (UK):
https://brickset.com/sets/query-11643
Queries are fun and more people should have a play with them :-)
(I'll stop spamming it now!) :-D
*Sigh*, I was really rooting for the Temple and was hoping it would make a few rounds, but it has to be Rivendell. I have so much nostalgia for the former, but the latter is simply the gold standard for LEGO. No question.
@RaiderOfTheLostBrick said:
"*Sigh*, I was really rooting for the Temple and was hoping it would make a few rounds, but it has to be Rivendell. I have so much nostalgia for the former, but the latter is simply the gold standard for LEGO. No question."
How could you... with a name like yours... ;)
in a surprising turn of events, indy is gonna win because rivendell is too big and it's not fair.
also is it really the smaller and cheaper set ? isn't galaxy explorer in the competition ? I think it was cheaper than the temple
@TheOtherMike said:
" @AustinPowers said:"Plus, correctly aligning all those 1x1 roof decorations must be a right PITA."
If you look on page 133 of the first instruction book, they avoid that pain by the use of a neat trick.
@Duq said:
" @Huw said:
"... the smallest and cheapest model in the competition"
Err... Isn't that 10497 Galaxy Explorer? 291 fewer parts and $50 cheaper than the temple?"
I didn't notice that when @Huw said it, but I did notice when @The_Cellarer said it."
My bad, apologies. Merely copied from "[...] the smallest and cheapest model [...]" in the introduction, but should have known this was erroneous, especially given I own and have built both 10497 and 77015 myself...
Rivendell is simply amazing and one of the only sets over $300 I've saved up for and it was absolutely worth it; it's such stunning centerpiece. I do like the Temple but my vote has to go to Rivendell.
I do feel like they should have put more comparable sets in the brackets together instead of a $500 set with a $150 set.
I'm voting rivendell btw, it's a competition about deciding which is the best set and I don't think being bigger is a disadvantage. also I'm not taking price into account. The temple is very good too though
I mean, Rivendell’s going to win (and that’s where my vote lies). It may very well be one of the best LEGO sets ever produced.
Which is a shame though, because the Indy set is also really great, and deserved to go on another couple of rounds.
@HUW When this competition is over, it would be great to put this winner against the 2020 winner for the title of GOAT
yeah, the indy temple would deserve to win at least 1 round, at the same time, I don't see it potentially winning it all, unlike rivendell.
@Aronis said:
"Oh, right, nobody. Still worth half my retirement account though!
At least we have some basic and boring greenery to keep us happy."
If you only have 1400 CAD in your retirement account, I am a little worried about your retirement plans...
Oh, the irony. I get lambasted in the original nominations article for pointing out the difference between "favorite" and "best", being told to let people have their fun, and now people are upset that all the sets in the contest are huge, (arguably) overpriced display models which most people would say are not the "best LEGO sets", just their favorites.
Anyways, I wanted to vote Indy, the clear underdog. Also I despise the Legolas minifig in Rivendell and overall find that set a bit meh (I've had far better ideas for LEGO LotR sets over the years). But while both sets are dioramas, Indy commits the sin of having one of those awful part-hogging black bases. Those parts could've been used to make the tunnel more three dimensional and bulk out the model to make it more of a playset (like 7623). For the price and part count, a playset with the functions of 77015 would be the clear winner. But 10316 doesn't waste pieces on an ugly base, so I'm afraid it gets my vote this one time.
@MegaBlocks said:
"One is based off of a classic well-loved film trilogy, the other isn't."
What makes you think Lord of the Rings isn't well-loved?
@Aronis said:
"The fact that 77015 is the smallest model in the competition has a lot to say about you folks. Does it really give you that much joy spending that much more money than anybody else and placing that many 1x1 tiles?
I'll die on the hill that my Boromir from 9473 is the better minifigure compared to this set. Meanwhile, 77015 gets actual improvements like a dual molded hat and where are the die-hards? Oh yeah, turning a blind eye in the name of Rivendell.
What play features did 10316 add again? Oh, that's right, none. It just expanded the roof, added a few basic minifigures and suddenly its the best set of the decade. It's oh so much better than 79006 because the roof is better. God, what a way to ignore all the price hikes we've dealt with in the past few years and give LEGO a layup while paying an exorbitant amount.
Have you heard of play features? Oh right, you're too rich for that nonsense. Who cares if a set has any value beyond being the most popular thing on the block? Just vote for the most popular fantasy franchise ever, who gives a @$% if they actually made a good set; it's not a theme we love. Waaaah.
Adventure? Never heard of it. Here's what you're missing out on: Play features and improvements. It's crazy to think that we would have improved some LEGO sets since 79006, but they actually have. Best part is its not via a roof tile expansion.
The minifigures are inherently better since LEGO last produced an Indiana Jones set. That is best exemplified by Indy himself. A dual-molded hat is incredibly nice for him. Who gets anything fun dual-molded in Rivendell? Oh, right, nobody. Still worth half my retirement account though!
At least we have some basic and boring greenery to keep us happy."
I can only assume this is all sarcasm. Because surely nobody is this ignorant.
Wow! Two epic sets facing off against each other. Tough choice for this one. Although I suspect, (and hope) that Rivendell will ultimately win, I had kind of wished that Temple made it further into the competition At least, not been eliminated in the first round. Unfortunately for this ancient Peruvian Temple, it was up against a fantasy elven haven, and unfortunately for Dr. Jones, I had to give my vote to Rivendell.
Rivendell.
Tried to sneak this one by me.
And Indy hates sneaks!
Both are excellent, but alas, Rivendell for me...........
@monkyby87 said:
" @Aronis said:
"The fact that 77015 is the smallest model in the competition has a lot to say about you folks. Does it really give you that much joy spending that much more money than anybody else and placing that many 1x1 tiles?
I'll die on the hill that my Boromir from 9473 is the better minifigure compared to this set. Meanwhile, 77015 gets actual improvements like a dual molded hat and where are the die-hards? Oh yeah, turning a blind eye in the name of Rivendell.
What play features did 10316 add again? Oh, that's right, none. It just expanded the roof, added a few basic minifigures and suddenly its the best set of the decade. It's oh so much better than 79006 because the roof is better. God, what a way to ignore all the price hikes we've dealt with in the past few years and give LEGO a layup while paying an exorbitant amount.
Have you heard of play features? Oh right, you're too rich for that nonsense. Who cares if a set has any value beyond being the most popular thing on the block? Just vote for the most popular fantasy franchise ever, who gives a @$% if they actually made a good set; it's not a theme we love. Waaaah.
Adventure? Never heard of it. Here's what you're missing out on: Play features and improvements. It's crazy to think that we would have improved some LEGO sets since 79006, but they actually have. Best part is its not via a roof tile expansion.
The minifigures are inherently better since LEGO last produced an Indiana Jones set. That is best exemplified by Indy himself. A dual-molded hat is incredibly nice for him. Who gets anything fun dual-molded in Rivendell? Oh, right, nobody. Still worth half my retirement account though!
At least we have some basic and boring greenery to keep us happy."
I can only assume this is all sarcasm. Because surely nobody is this ignorant.
"
It's a good list of facts. Facts that can be used as arguments to vote for the Indy set.
I have yet to see a similar list for Rivendell.
An easier vote than yesterday. I own the Temple of the Golden Idol, it is a very nice build - but so is Rivendell (as per the instructions). I am still saving for Rivendell as it is quite expensive and my wanted list never seems to go down - Lego is producing desirable sets faster than I can buy them :-(
Rivendell is retiring in December of 2026 so that still give me some time - got to get the Lego Castle 10305 this year though.
@theplourde said:
"I had to vote Rivendell because I have found that over time the mechanisms for Temple have become warped and don't work as smoothly as they did after construction. Its most noticeable in the boulder roll and somewhat disappointing."
I have noticed this too, but was optimistically thinking it was dust in the gears after being on a shelf for a year, so I haven’t tried to rebuild yet. Is there any suggested fix?
You call him Doctor Jones AFols!
Indy all the way!
Elves are overrated. Vote Indy!
It kills me that the Temple of the Golden Idol set could likely be eliminated within the first round, as this is such a great set. That said… Rivendell is at a whole other level.
This is so unfair. Temple of the Golden Idol is an amazing set, and gets my vote, yet Rivendell is much more popular, and will likely win the tournament.
Easily Rivendell for me. It has been the best build experience I have ever had, especially with the brilliant geometry involved with setting the council area and the pavilion in their positions. Yes, it is expensive, but it is not overpriced. The colors are fantastic, and the often feared 1x1s are not bad to place at all. It's a shame that it's going up against the Golden Idol though, because I think it is also a really good set. Not Rivendell level. Although a part of me wonders if too many people vote for the underdog, that they'll actually flip the scale.
I'd like to pretend that the Rivendell set is the hulking, mustachioed shirtless German boxing Indy as the Flying Wing spins, soon to be bested by Indy and spinning blades.
Alas, I suspect the Rivendell set is more likely Spielberg himself, right before he locks Indy in a trunk, then a fridge, before finally castrating him with a snake rope and tarzan yell.
@yellowcastle said:
"I'd like to pretend that the Rivendell set is the hulking, mustachioed shirtless German boxing Indy as the Flying Wing spins, soon to be bested by Indy and spinning blades.
Alas, I suspect the Rivendell set is more likely Spielberg himself, right before he locks Indy in a trunk, then a fridge, before finally castrating him with a snake rope and tarzan yell."
If the Indy set wins it will be more like his solution when facing a skilled sword fighter. ;-)
@Feroz said:
" @yellowcastle said:
"I'd like to pretend that the Rivendell set is the hulking, mustachioed shirtless German boxing Indy as the Flying Wing spins, soon to be bested by Indy and spinning blades.
Alas, I suspect the Rivendell set is more likely Spielberg himself, right before he locks Indy in a trunk, then a fridge, before finally castrating him with a snake rope and tarzan yell."
If the Indy set wins it will be more like his solution when facing a skilled sword fighter. ;-)"
Get malaria and leave us with an unplanned now iconic scene? :o)
@Feroz said:
" @monkyby87 said:
" @Aronis said:
"The fact that 77015 is the smallest model in the competition has a lot to say about you folks. Does it really give you that much joy spending that much more money than anybody else and placing that many 1x1 tiles?
I'll die on the hill that my Boromir from 9473 is the better minifigure compared to this set. Meanwhile, 77015 gets actual improvements like a dual molded hat and where are the die-hards? Oh yeah, turning a blind eye in the name of Rivendell.
What play features did 10316 add again? Oh, that's right, none. It just expanded the roof, added a few basic minifigures and suddenly its the best set of the decade. It's oh so much better than 79006 because the roof is better. God, what a way to ignore all the price hikes we've dealt with in the past few years and give LEGO a layup while paying an exorbitant amount.
Have you heard of play features? Oh right, you're too rich for that nonsense. Who cares if a set has any value beyond being the most popular thing on the block? Just vote for the most popular fantasy franchise ever, who gives a @$% if they actually made a good set; it's not a theme we love. Waaaah.
Adventure? Never heard of it. Here's what you're missing out on: Play features and improvements. It's crazy to think that we would have improved some LEGO sets since 79006, but they actually have. Best part is its not via a roof tile expansion.
The minifigures are inherently better since LEGO last produced an Indiana Jones set. That is best exemplified by Indy himself. A dual-molded hat is incredibly nice for him. Who gets anything fun dual-molded in Rivendell? Oh, right, nobody. Still worth half my retirement account though!
At least we have some basic and boring greenery to keep us happy."
I can only assume this is all sarcasm. Because surely nobody is this ignorant.
"
It's a good list of facts. Facts that can be used as arguments to vote for the Indy set.
I have yet to see a similar list for Rivendell."
No, it’s mostly opinions slamming anyone that happens to enjoy a different set. Sorry a set you like will likely lose a pointless online poll from an internet website.
I'd laugh if Indy won this round. Really curious to see how the vote totals come out compared to the comments.
@monkyby87 said:
" @Feroz said:
" @monkyby87 said:
" @Aronis said:
"The fact that 77015 is the smallest model in the competition has a lot to say about you folks. Does it really give you that much joy spending that much more money than anybody else and placing that many 1x1 tiles?
I'll die on the hill that my Boromir from 9473 is the better minifigure compared to this set. Meanwhile, 77015 gets actual improvements like a dual molded hat and where are the die-hards? Oh yeah, turning a blind eye in the name of Rivendell.
What play features did 10316 add again? Oh, that's right, none. It just expanded the roof, added a few basic minifigures and suddenly its the best set of the decade. It's oh so much better than 79006 because the roof is better. God, what a way to ignore all the price hikes we've dealt with in the past few years and give LEGO a layup while paying an exorbitant amount.
Have you heard of play features? Oh right, you're too rich for that nonsense. Who cares if a set has any value beyond being the most popular thing on the block? Just vote for the most popular fantasy franchise ever, who gives a @$% if they actually made a good set; it's not a theme we love. Waaaah.
Adventure? Never heard of it. Here's what you're missing out on: Play features and improvements. It's crazy to think that we would have improved some LEGO sets since 79006, but they actually have. Best part is its not via a roof tile expansion.
The minifigures are inherently better since LEGO last produced an Indiana Jones set. That is best exemplified by Indy himself. A dual-molded hat is incredibly nice for him. Who gets anything fun dual-molded in Rivendell? Oh, right, nobody. Still worth half my retirement account though!
At least we have some basic and boring greenery to keep us happy."
I can only assume this is all sarcasm. Because surely nobody is this ignorant.
"
It's a good list of facts. Facts that can be used as arguments to vote for the Indy set.
I have yet to see a similar list for Rivendell."
No, it’s mostly opinions slamming anyone that happens to enjoy a different set. Sorry a set you like will likely lose a pointless online poll from an internet website. "
I appreciate some of the sentiments posted about Rivendell but clearly the delivery left much to be desired. I struggled myself with getting Rivendell as its intricate beauty was indeed tempered with drawbacks, not the least of which was price. My family gifted it to me recently and I'm very appreciative. But its drawbacks will keep me from supporting it as best LEGO set these past 5 years.
I would have liked to see Rivendell go one on one against my preferred choices, 76417 Gringotts and 75290 Mos Eisley. Of these 16, I'll continue to pull for 76178 Daily Bugle.
@theplourde said:
"I had to vote Rivendell because I have found that over time the mechanisms for Temple have become warped and don't work as smoothly as they did after construction. Its most noticeable in the boulder roll and somewhat disappointing."
It's gravity, sagging some parts. Double check the spacing so beams, etc, aren't so tight next to each other. Clear a tiny space between them so they turn, spin freely.
Also check that bricks, plates are push all the way down. But again, if a Technic part is near them, allow some space.
If it does turn out to be "most expensive set always wins," I'm looking forward to 10294 unseating Rivendell.
@Beren_Luthien said:
"Although I suspect, (and hope) that Rivendell will ultimately win..."
Well, of course you'd hope that, given your username.
I'm an Indy fan but debated whether to even purchase the Temple of the Golden Idol. I'm not a LOTR fan, but I splurged & bought Rivendell right away. It's a beautiful set. It gets my vote.
This isn’t a fair fight. I looove Indy and am so happy we get Indy sets… but Rivendell is a top 10 all time set.
@legoDad42 said:
"You call him Doctor Jones AFols!
Indy all the way!"
I see what you did there, and I like it!
@monkyby87 said:
" @Feroz said:
" @monkyby87 said:
" @Aronis said:
"The fact that 77015 is the smallest model in the competition has a lot to say about you folks. Does it really give you that much joy spending that much more money than anybody else and placing that many 1x1 tiles?
I'll die on the hill that my Boromir from 9473 is the better minifigure compared to this set. Meanwhile, 77015 gets actual improvements like a dual molded hat and where are the die-hards? Oh yeah, turning a blind eye in the name of Rivendell.
What play features did 10316 add again? Oh, that's right, none. It just expanded the roof, added a few basic minifigures and suddenly its the best set of the decade. It's oh so much better than 79006 because the roof is better. God, what a way to ignore all the price hikes we've dealt with in the past few years and give LEGO a layup while paying an exorbitant amount.
Have you heard of play features? Oh right, you're too rich for that nonsense. Who cares if a set has any value beyond being the most popular thing on the block? Just vote for the most popular fantasy franchise ever, who gives a @$% if they actually made a good set; it's not a theme we love. Waaaah.
Adventure? Never heard of it. Here's what you're missing out on: Play features and improvements. It's crazy to think that we would have improved some LEGO sets since 79006, but they actually have. Best part is its not via a roof tile expansion.
The minifigures are inherently better since LEGO last produced an Indiana Jones set. That is best exemplified by Indy himself. A dual-molded hat is incredibly nice for him. Who gets anything fun dual-molded in Rivendell? Oh, right, nobody. Still worth half my retirement account though!
At least we have some basic and boring greenery to keep us happy."
I can only assume this is all sarcasm. Because surely nobody is this ignorant.
"
It's a good list of facts. Facts that can be used as arguments to vote for the Indy set.
I have yet to see a similar list for Rivendell."
No, it’s mostly opinions slamming anyone that happens to enjoy a different set. Sorry a set you like will likely lose a pointless online poll from an internet website. "
Again, further proof there are no good arguments to vote for Rivendell.
And you clearly don't know the difference between fact and opinion.
Perhaps a disclaimer is needed on the remaining bouts reminding everyone this is just a bit of fun...
@alLEGOry_HJB2810 said:
" @chom said:
"Temple, since I dont like open back in 18+ sets"
What about open front and top of a tunnel in an 18+ set?"
ill take the vanilla ice cream please
my prediction? Rivendell will be the one set that rules them all...
I'm with Indiana Jones
@Feroz said:
" @monkyby87 said:
" @Feroz said:
" @monkyby87 said:
" @Aronis said:
"The fact that 77015 is the smallest model in the competition has a lot to say about you folks. Does it really give you that much joy spending that much more money than anybody else and placing that many 1x1 tiles?
I'll die on the hill that my Boromir from 9473 is the better minifigure compared to this set. Meanwhile, 77015 gets actual improvements like a dual molded hat and where are the die-hards? Oh yeah, turning a blind eye in the name of Rivendell.
What play features did 10316 add again? Oh, that's right, none. It just expanded the roof, added a few basic minifigures and suddenly its the best set of the decade. It's oh so much better than 79006 because the roof is better. God, what a way to ignore all the price hikes we've dealt with in the past few years and give LEGO a layup while paying an exorbitant amount.
Have you heard of play features? Oh right, you're too rich for that nonsense. Who cares if a set has any value beyond being the most popular thing on the block? Just vote for the most popular fantasy franchise ever, who gives a @ $% if they actually made a good set; it's not a theme we love. Waaaah.
Adventure? Never heard of it. Here's what you're missing out on: Play features and improvements. It's crazy to think that we would have improved some LEGO sets since 79006 , but they actually have. Best part is its not via a roof tile expansion.
The minifigures are inherently better since LEGO last produced an Indiana Jones set. That is best exemplified by Indy himself. A dual-molded hat is incredibly nice for him. Who gets anything fun dual-molded in Rivendell? Oh, right, nobody. Still worth half my retirement account though!
At least we have some basic and boring greenery to keep us happy."
I can only assume this is all sarcasm. Because surely nobody is this ignorant.
"
It's a good list of facts. Facts that can be used as arguments to vote for the Indy set.
I have yet to see a similar list for Rivendell."
No, it’s mostly opinions slamming anyone that happens to enjoy a different set. Sorry a set you like will likely lose a pointless online poll from an internet website. "
Again, further proof there are no good arguments to vote for Rivendell.
And you clearly don't know the difference between fact and opinion."
Facts? What facts? His argument lies solely (like many other in this comment section) in that Rivendell is bad because is big and expensive, like it was something bad in the first place... You know what? It's a freaking +6000 pieces set! Of course it must be expensive! But again, you know what? You're getting a huge value for that price, unlike other licensed themes (SW). Maybe not a ton of playing features, but an awesome displaying model. Lets display both sets and see which one gets more praise and attention!
Compare Rivendell's price point with one from an Star Wars set with a similar piece count and lets laugh.
Also he's calling Rivendell's supporters "rich people" in a pejorative way, like it was something wrong to like Rivendell over the Indiana Jones set. It's the same with people bashing it just for no having interest in LOTR at all, what kind of argument is that to dislike a set if you dont even like/know about its source material.
And what is wrong with the figures? You literally get all the Fellowship of the Ring and some nice elves. Another nitpicking argument to attack this magnificent set.
You want facts? The Temple of the Golden Idol is already discontinued while Rivendell, being an earlier set, is still running in production, being sold out several times! And it's been regarded in several places of the internet as one of the most beautiful and well built Lego sets ever. I'm sorry to all of you dislikers.
I’m not really a fan of LoTR and I’m a huge Indiana Jones fan, but I chose Rivendell because it looks like such a fantastic set. It’s a hard one to beat.
@Crux Nice argument Sir! You definitely destroyed me lol. Got nothing more to say
I wish you a nice day!
Please keep the conversation civil. it's only a competition about a children's toy being conducted for a bit of fun, after all...
@ADRILEGIA
Despite the venom, good points were made and to dismiss it as ignorant was wrong in my eyes.
I didn't mean to single out one poster. It's everybody's right to vote for what they like, but I don't really understand people giving a strong argument to vote for set A, only to say: but, I voted for set B, because I like it more, masked with some fancy sentence(s).
But yeah, let's just keep it fun.
@Huw said:
"Please keep the conversation civil. it's only a competition about a children's toy being conducted for a bit of fun, after all..."
@Huw said:
" @amok said:
"Users shouldn't be allowed to diss the opponent whilst advocating for their favorite set."
Dissing is fine, and fun!"
Wait, what
@Huw said:
"Please keep the conversation civil. it's only a competition about a children's toy being conducted for a bit of fun, after all..."
I've often noticed this is a common theme. Not just on here, but on numerous things I follow on Facebook - Star Wars, Marvel Comics, G.I. Joe/Action Force, Transformers... mostly things from my childhood that I follow out of nostalgia (Lego is the only one I've actively rediscovered as an adult, but I do still have my collections of all the others in my loft, sneaked in from my parents' house while my wife was out!)
Ostensibly they are all about kids things, but the blokes (and it is almost always blokes) that talk about about them online often seem to really take them too seriously and half the conversations turn into quite nasty, mean spirited spats.
I will judge the whole set in its entirety including the minifigs. I’m not interested in both sets, but I did pick up Rivendell to have a closer look at it. It’s really beautiful.
@GrizBe said:
"Not really a fair match up given the huge differences in cost, part numbers, detailing and mini-figure number...
... I mean we all know that Indy is gonna win. "
I don't know about that. I'm a huge Indy fan and have to admit the Rivendell set is stunning.
These are both remarkable sets--so this is another matchup where I hate to see the loser retired after the first bout. But I will always come back to Lego as a building toy, and Rivendell is, in my opinion, the best building integrated into some of the best scenery that TLG has ever designed.
It says a lot about the overall quality of the top sets produced in the last five years that each of these bouts is going to cause a lot of heartburning because "neither set deserves to lose."
@Crux said:
" @Huw said:
"Please keep the conversation civil. it's only a competition about a children's toy being conducted for a bit of fun, after all..."
@Huw said:
" @amok said:
"Users shouldn't be allowed to diss the opponent whilst advocating for their favorite set."
Dissing is fine, and fun!"
Wait, what
"
Earned my stripes, 300 tracks in my Adidas track jacket...
Oh sorry, 'wait what' just puts that song into my head
@chom said:
" @alLEGOry_HJB2810 said:
" @chom said:
"Temple, since I dont like open back in 18+ sets"
What about open front and top of a tunnel in an 18+ set?"
ill take the vanilla ice cream please"
Eh, i dunno. The Lembas ice cream is pretty wicked. They say one scoop is enough to feed a fully grown man for a day!
There’s dissing that’s good-natured ribbing and there’s dissing that’s… whatever all that was in the comments.
I think different brackets for different price bands could be fun, since the biggest and most expensive sets tend to also be the most impressive ones because of the natural advantages that conveys and it’s a shame that smaller (but still nice) kits don’t get much of a look in as a result, but it would be much more work and also presumably provide more excuses for bitterness.