I like that they made Luna barefoot! Nice touch.

Well, that's what happens when Nargles steal your shoes...

@Zayzon said:
"Is that broom handle piece Harry has, new? excited to see it in more sets"

New this year, but it's been in other sets.

Thestral - great. Dragon... not so great.

These look rather good, despite having no idea who/what any of the characters are apart from Harry.
One day I'll get around to watching all the films!

The color of Cedric's egg is disappointing, especially juxtaposed against Krum's golden snitch.

That horntail looks more like a demonic owl than a dragon. Also, strange choice of accessories in that set. Harry a broom, Krum the Golden Snitch, Cedric the (golden) egg from the Horntail challenge, and Fleur... a baby dragon? I guess these must all relate to the Horntail challenge, but I'm not sure how. Then again, it's been over a decade since I last touched the book, so I suppose my memory of it is finally starting to slip.

The Prices from two BrickHeadz from Harry potter one will cost $49.99 for the The Goblet of Fire Figures and Luna Lovegood & Thestral cost 19.99 on US and now it has the prices on LEGO Shop!

At first glance, I thought it was a mogwai. These Brickheadz, besides Harry, are too generic.

@BLProductions said:
"That horntail looks more like a demonic owl than a dragon. Also, strange choice of accessories in that set. Harry a broom, Krum the Golden Snitch, Cedric the (golden) egg from the Horntail challenge, and Fleur... a baby dragon? I guess these must all relate to the Horntail challenge, but I'm not sure how. Then again, it's been over a decade since I last touched the book, so I suppose my memory of it is finally starting to slip. "

Harry the broom because that’s what he uses in the task against the dragon, Krum the Snitch because he plays a Seeker, Cedric the egg because retrieving that’s the goal of the task (and he’s the one to give Harry a clue about understanding it) and the Fleur the dragon because…well because there’s nothing really distinctive about her so she gets one of the models they drew to determine which dragon they got

Off the back of the great Stranger Things Brickheadz, these look terrible.

Something about Fleur holding the molded dragon is funny.

@BrickAnomie said:
"The AFOL community is trying to emulate the scientific community by imposing a push to publish negative results."

Sorry to ask, but what does that mean?

@brickwich said:
" @Zayzon said:
"Is that broom handle piece Harry has, new? excited to see it in more sets"

New this year, but it's been in other sets."

Is it? I haven't heard of it here or through my LUG, and there are enough element goblins in both places that stuff like that usually doesn't hit store shelves before I've either noticed it or heard about it. Now I'm curious how that would look with my solution for having someone straddle a broomstick.

@Andrusi said:
"I don't like Harry Potter or BrickHeadz, so I'm not interested. Apparently that's the kind of information many Brickset commenters expect each other to find interesting, so i thought I'd share."

I like Harry Potter and Brickheadz. These 2 sets however don’t work for me. 5 bland and repetitive characters along with 2 indiscernible animals. The professors were just so much more novel, ornate and with interesting designs.

This is more so the type of feedback we Brickset commenters appreciate.

@BrickAnomie said: "The AFOL community is trying to emulate the scientific community by imposing a push to publish negative results"

@Mjiopytr said: "Sorry to ask, but what does that mean?"

Imagine a scientist coming up with a hypothesis that (for instance) could explain some poorly understood physical phenomenon, and would then do several different experiments in an attempt to verify this. Let's say two of the experiments gave negative results (indicating the hypothesis is wrong), one was inconclusive, and one gave something that could be interpreted as a positive result (indicating the hypothesis could be true). It would then be very tempting to only publish the result of this last experiment (sweeping the others under the carpet), giving an impression that the hypothesis is more certain than it actually is. But in order to be as truthful as possible, he really should include all the experiments in his article, even if it may seem to weaken his hypothesis.

@BrickAnomie, on the other hand, just thinks people here are too vocal about their negativity to Brickheadz, this specific set, Harry Potter and/or its author.

@PurpleDave said:
" @brickwich said:
" @Zayzon said:
"Is that broom handle piece Harry has, new? excited to see it in more sets"

New this year, but it's been in other sets."

Is it? I haven't heard of it here or through my LUG, and there are enough element goblins in both places that stuff like that usually doesn't hit store shelves before I've either noticed it or heard about it. Now I'm curious how that would look with my solution for having someone straddle a broomstick."

It was in both the Privet drive set and the Quality Quidditch set from the June wave. Not sure if it appeared before that.

Another day, another brick head ??

@Rowia said:
"Another day, another brick head ??"

Yes. They are obviously very popular.

When they first started, people were describing them as like LEGO Funkopops. With the wide range of characters and variations now available, they have really become similar.

@axeleng said:
" @BrickAnomie said: "The AFOL community is trying to emulate the scientific community by imposing a push to publish negative results"

@Mjiopytr said: "Sorry to ask, but what does that mean?"

Imagine a scientist coming up with a hypothesis that (for instance) could explain some poorly understood physical phenomenon, and would then do several different experiments in an attempt to verify this. Let's say two of the experiments gave negative results (indicating the hypothesis is wrong), one was inconclusive, and one gave something that could be interpreted as a positive result (indicating the hypothesis could be true). It would then be very tempting to only publish the result of this last experiment (sweeping the others under the carpet), giving an impression that the hypothesis is more certain than it actually is. But in order to be as truthful as possible, he really should include all the experiments in his article, even if it may seem to weaken his hypothesis.

@BrickAnomie, on the other hand, just thinks people here are too vocal about their negativity to Brickheadz, this specific set, Harry Potter and/or its author."

All the negativity is justified, and this is a horrible representation of the topic I presume you are tip-toeing around.

I kind of like the beastie-builds here, probably _because_ they don't really look like Brickheadz.

I am not super into the Brickheadz line, so I was unaware of POA sets last year. But the GOF look like they cover what they need to. And I'm sure fans of the theme will be thrilled for these.

Sad I don't see a grindylow though for Fleur.

Looks interesting, but I'll never buy Potter merchandise again.

I’m not buying anything HP considering its long been clear the author will never see me as an actual human being and is actively using her money to harm the group im part of internationally. The same author also has incited violence against us for years before already through intentional misinformation and openly denies our persecution during certain major negative historic events in my country (similair to „Holofoil“).

Is this really someone Lego wants to keep associating with and actively funding by keeping the liscense going?

@axeleng said:
" @BrickAnomie said: "The AFOL community is trying to emulate the scientific community by imposing a push to publish negative results"

@Mjiopytr said: "Sorry to ask, but what does that mean?"

Imagine a scientist coming up with a hypothesis that (for instance) could explain some poorly understood physical phenomenon, and would then do several different experiments in an attempt to verify this. Let's say two of the experiments gave negative results (indicating the hypothesis is wrong), one was inconclusive, and one gave something that could be interpreted as a positive result (indicating the hypothesis could be true). It would then be very tempting to only publish the result of this last experiment (sweeping the others under the carpet), giving an impression that the hypothesis is more certain than it actually is. But in order to be as truthful as possible, he really should include all the experiments in his article, even if it may seem to weaken his hypothesis.

@BrickAnomie , on the other hand, just thinks people here are too vocal about their negativity to Brickheadz, this specific set, Harry Potter and/or its author."

I think it‘s pretty justified to be vocally negative against a known hateful person that admitted to spending her money specifically to harm people solely for being dIfferent from her. Especially when royalties for merchandise go straight to her.

@Emmafofemma said: "All the negativity is justified, and this is a horrible representation of the topic I presume you are tip-toeing around"

@Eightcoins8 said: "I think it‘s pretty justified to be vocally negative against a known hateful person that admitted to spending her money specifically to harm people solely for being dIfferent from her"

Hey, don't shoot the messenger - I only said @BrickAnomie thought it was too much negativity towards the set and author, not that I necessarily agreed with that. I have no clear opinion whether someone is a "terf" or not (a term I've *only* heard used for this particular author, which would make her a hate group of one), it's just that the subject tends to lead to closed comment sections which I really dislike and tried to avoid.

@axeleng said:
" @Emmafofemma said: "All the negativity is justified, and this is a horrible representation of the topic I presume you are tip-toeing around"

@Eightcoins8 said: "I think it‘s pretty justified to be vocally negative against a known hateful person that admitted to spending her money specifically to harm people solely for being dIfferent from her"

Hey, don't shoot the messenger - I only said @BrickAnomie thought it was too much negativity towards the set and author, not that I necessarily agreed with that. I have no clear opinion whether someone is a "terf" or not (a term I've *only* heard used for this particular author, which would make her a hate group of one), it's just that the subject tends to lead to closed comment sections which I really dislike and tried to avoid."

Personally don’t think she’s a TERF because I don’t consider her a feminist, but the term itself predates her big transphobic coming out moment by a good decade, and the general group to whom it refers were known in feminist circles for decades before that. I suspect you simply haven’t been around many relevant conversations that aren’t purely prompted by HP if your exposure is solely Rowling-themed, which isn’t a sin but also isn’t terribly meaningful as to its general use.

Much though closed comment sections can be disappointing, I don’t think it’s reasonable to expect trans people and their loved ones to grin and bear it and ignore a billionaire advocating violence against them and funnelling hundreds of thousands of pounds into trying to remove their rights just so people can admire a Lego kit without having to think about it.