LEGO Winnie the Pooh sets announced!
Posted by CapnRex101,
Winnie-the-Pooh by A.A. Milne was released in 1926, so the iconic bear is celebrating his 100th anniversary this year! Two new sets will soon be launched to mark the occasion, revealed today.
43300 Winnie the Pooh contains 1399 pieces and depicts Pooh munching on a pot of honey, hence his cheerful expression! There are some neat Easter eggs to discover, shown after the break.
The other is 43305 Piglet's Birthday Fun, which is a much smaller set of 544 pieces, although this brick-built Piglet figure seems approximately to scale with 43300 Winnie the Pooh. Both sets will be released on March 1st.
Many more images and further information is available below...
43300 Winnie the Pooh
- 1399 pieces
- £139.99, $149.99, €149.99
- Winnie the Pooh, Eeyore
43305 Piglet's Birthday Fun
- 544 pieces
- £34.99, $39.99, €39.99
- Piglet
What do you think of these Winnie-the-Pooh sets? Let us know in the comments.
94 likes
58 comments on this article
I like them both but Piglets face seems a little bit like nightmare fuel - it just looks like he is wearing the face of a middle-aged man.
Otherwise, all good.
They did their best to hide it on the box but the gaps on Pooh's stomach are some of the worst I've seen on a brick built character from Lego. Surely there was a better way to get that shape without making it look like he's permanently being sliced open.
Pooh is cool, Piglet is not
I'll be getting Pooh but skipping Piglet
Winnie's heads sides seems very flat horizantally. Which looks very weird.
I simply do not understand why they insist on full legs for Pooh rather than the more proportional 2/3rd legs.
Hate to be so harsh, but these are rough, rough, rough. Here and there I can see where they were going, but these seem very unfinished and unpolished. Very disappointed as a potential buyer of these sets (the Ideas Winnie the Pooh set is prominently displayed by my desk).
I mean, how lazy are piglet's ears using a leaf piece? What happened to building shapes from pieces? Awful!
Both of the little interiors (cake, honey pot) are quite cute! But the figures....are not.
Oh bother...
Gotta say, veeeeeeery cheeky of em to be branding these as 100 year anniversary sets when Disney's rendition of Pooh only first appeared in 1966... 40 whole years later. Guess 60 years didn't have as much of a ring to it?
I mean the honey pot build looks good at least. And the minifigs are top tier.
I prefer Poohneywise:
https://brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.php?i=6774304
But the bees are clever, now that I figured out how they built them.
I like them! Its also a win that they aren't like $700.00... The minifugures look great!
Really cute. :)
SERIOUSLY?! Am I the only one seeing how creepy Pooh is on the back of the box?
For a moment I thought it's a joke like famous Horse in April. Idea of not printed eyes is correct but shaping of the head from side and that mouth (mustache like) is very poor.
18+ label on toy representing character from book/cartoon dedicated to small kids is absurd
I love Winnie the Pooh, and I own the 100 Acre Wood Ideas set. but I'm sorry, these brick-built versions look like stuff of nightmares! Oh dear! Oh bother! Perhaps somethings are just not meant to be made out of LEGO.... :(
I’m sorry, but that one set looks like pooh.
Pooh's face looks absolutely terrifying.
I'm out.
I think Pooh looks excellent but Piglet... yikes! Very wise not to sell them both in the same box!
The upscale spaceman is so much better than these Poohs
Is that Caitlyn Jenner playing with the Pooh set?
I don’t mind the likeness on Pooh, but I’m not a fan of the use of the hinged piece for his stomach. It’s obvious why they tried to hide it as much as they did on the box. It isn’t a dealbreaker for me, and I’ll still be getting both of these sets, but the design of that area should have been much better.
Pooh enjoyer here. It's nice they're keeping around the molds of the Ideas minifigures, but this would be a great opportunity to minifigure-ize the missing characters for the 100th anniversary and they're not taking it. Owl, Kanga, Roo, Christopher Robin, and the later addition Gopher. And I like the house interiors as part of larger builds of things like honey pots. But yikes, those large scale characters... No thank you.
And as someone who had just become an adult in 2018 and was affected greatly by the live action Christopher Robin movie, and now has disposable income, they could easily take a large amount of my money if they made a set representing that movie, with Christopher and his wife and daughter.
I honestly never got on that whole 'Pooh looks like Xi Jinping train'. I just couldn't see it... until now.
And here I thought the Winnie-the-Pooh cash grab opportunists were the 'Blood and Honey' slasher filmmakers who think their output is as good as the 'Blood and Ice Cream' trilogy.
WHAT HORRORS HATH MINE EYES BEEN SHOWN?!
I honestly can't decide which version of Piglet is worse, minifig or brick-built. And Pooh brings to mind that "Blood and Honey" horror movie. Some things are simply not meant to be cast into LEGO....
So, I'll stick with my stuffed animals, thanks. And I don't even have a Pooh stuffed animal....
Well, if they make Tigger; I know a friend that'll 'Day One' that...:)
An exclusive winnie the pooh figure in a set I don't want, oh bother.
Lego is realy consistent in producing nightmare fuel!
@Briczk said: "SERIOUSLY?! Am I the only one seeing how creepy Pooh is on the back of the box?"
No. With the expression on his face, frozen in hard plastic?
This is the face of something that is about to murder you.
It might be screen-accurate (sort of), but something about the eyes, it's just creepy as hell. Do not want.
Somehow I don't think these sets will really catch on in China.
Winnie the Mech
People have very bizarre dreams if they think that these sets cause nightmares.
Not everything needs to be made out of LEGO. If you don't have the necessary convex pieces, then better leave it be. Both Pooh and Piglet look off.
@R0Sch said:
"Not everything needs to be made out of LEGO. If you don't have the necessary convex pieces, then better leave it be. Both Pooh and Piglet look off."
If these were MOCs shown at a convention, I imagine they'd get positive comments.
pooh's chin looks sooooo off for me.
They did such a great realization of Mario in 73207 that this a bit disappointing. Assuming Pooh cannot stand and only articulation is in the arms. I would buy the mini-figs and small builds on their own as Duplo 2981 and 2982 were popular with todlers.
Nobody puts Winnie in the corner.
Will Winnie be available in China, I wonder? :)
Yeee gods... They both look like they came out of that terrible horror movie attempt at Winnie the Pooh.
Truly Horrifying.
It's a nice attempt, but Pooh starts looking more like Fredbear than the favorite cartoon I used to watch with my brother. Definitely passing.
@MegaBlocks said:
"People have very bizarre dreams if they think that these sets cause nightmares."
Yeah, the may not be the most accurate sets Lego's ever done, but I don't see anything horrifying about them. If I were a Winnie the Pooh enthusiast, I'd definitely want these.
Cracked torso under the arm of the minifigure?? https://images.brickset.com/news/129711_Tumbly%208.jpg
This is incredibly disappointing. I was very excited for this series as the wife is a huge Piglet fan and he often doesn't get much love with merchandising. But these look half complete and lazy as hell. Piglet looks absolutely horrible, and tell me why they can do such a great Gizmo and Grogu, but can't get Piglet to be rounded without massive gaps and square pieces? Piglet's face and hands are just horrifying. I guess they decided the Piglet wasn't an adult set based on the box color, but man they really could have done better. They spent so much effort on the honey pot and the birthday cake, I wish they just didn't include them and instead spend the pieces fleshing out the actual builds.
The Winnie the Pooh set includes an Eeyore figure. But the Piglet set doesn't include any figures. Piglet is alone. The Piglet I know is friendly. Piglet could have been in this set with Tigger. The Winnie the Pooh set is too expensive. It's unfair. Over $100 is too much.
Five Nights at Winnie's
I find it hilarious this announcement is back-to-back with Sauron.
I believe the honey would benefit of the use of trans pieces
Sorry if this has already been said but with those studs on his mouth Pooh looks like he’s got rotten teeth
@Alemas said:
"Will Winnie be available in China, I wonder? :)"
Looks like Xi...so I wouldn't count on it. =)
Winnie's face looks odd, especially from the side. It doenst look anything like the cartoon figure.
And Piggy,...hmmm
I'm not the target group, but surely everyone must agree that this isn't it...the sculpting is just bad!
Also, Why is the female model NOT looking at the thing she is holding?
Winnie gives Chucky "Hi. I'm Winnie. Wanna play?" feel.
This is one of the creepiest LEGO sculpture builds I've ever seen. His little beady eyes are so unsettling. The gap in his stomach is also really off-putting. Pooh looks like he just sliced his own stomach open and is coming for you next...
@BelgianBricker said:
"Also, Why is the female model NOT looking at the thing she is holding?"
She's looking at it. If you zoom in on the picture, you can see that her eyes are open.
@TheOtherMike said:
" @BelgianBricker said:
"Also, Why is the female model NOT looking at the thing she is holding?"
She's looking at it. If you zoom in on the picture, you can see that her eyes are open."
The photo does look a little photo-shopped, you know? Like, Pooh is too shiny, compared to everything else in the picture. It's like he was digitally-added in, later.
Probably because they couldn't find a human model who wanted to be in close proximity to ... that.
@Bricklunch said:
"I like them both but Piglets face seems a little bit like nightmare fuel - it just looks like he is wearing the face of a middle-aged man.
Otherwise, all good. "
He's having a pig-life crisis XD
As much as i like Winnie The Pooh (and still admire how well 21326 turned out and its minifigs hence here they are), this is far too smooth and studless to really feel 'Lego-y' to me. But on the other hand, smooth is what you want for these bigger builds but yeah, not for me.
@Euroseb11 said:
" @Bricklunch said:
"I like them both but Piglets face seems a little bit like nightmare fuel - it just looks like he is wearing the face of a middle-aged man.
Otherwise, all good. "
He's having a pig-life crisis XD
As much as i like Winnie The Pooh (and still admire how well 21326 turned out and its minifigs hence here they are), this is far too smooth and studless to really feel 'Lego-y' to me. But on the other hand, smooth is what you want for these bigger builds but yeah, not for me. "
Everybody talks about models with visible studs, but you know what doesn't get enough discussion? Models with visible anti-studs. 77256 (just to take one example) has six visible studs, but sixty-six visible anti-studs, not counting the ones visible in the wheel wells if you have it in hover mode.
@TheOtherMike said:
" @Euroseb11 said:
" @Bricklunch said:
"I like them both but Piglets face seems a little bit like nightmare fuel - it just looks like he is wearing the face of a middle-aged man.
Otherwise, all good. "
He's having a pig-life crisis XD
As much as i like Winnie The Pooh (and still admire how well 21326 turned out and its minifigs hence here they are), this is far too smooth and studless to really feel 'Lego-y' to me. But on the other hand, smooth is what you want for these bigger builds but yeah, not for me. "
Everybody talks about models with visible studs, but you know what doesn't get enough discussion? Models with visible anti-studs. 77256 (just to take one example) has six visible studs, but sixty-six visible anti-studs, not counting the ones visible in the wheel wells if you have it in hover mode."
Just from the main image, I can see eight visible studs. Four on the hood, two on the roof, one on the left sideview mirror mount, and the eighth just barely peeking out on the right sideview mirror mount. And that's not even counting the two that show through the stud notches on the quarter-round tiles on the sideview mirrors or through the transparent plastic of the time circuits.
Visible anti-studs are usually on the bottoms of models, where they rarely get seen. The BttF DeLorean is an obvious exception since the car does have a flying mode, but most cars fail to miss the ground when they fall. I don't see a single anti-stud showing on the main image, except for ones that are visible through transparent plastic (which shouldn't count), and I'm assuming most are somewhere on the bottom surface of the chassis.
@PurpleDave said:
" @TheOtherMike said:
" @Euroseb11 said:
" @Bricklunch said:
"I like them both but Piglets face seems a little bit like nightmare fuel - it just looks like he is wearing the face of a middle-aged man.
Otherwise, all good. "
He's having a pig-life crisis XD
As much as i like Winnie The Pooh (and still admire how well 21326 turned out and its minifigs hence here they are), this is far too smooth and studless to really feel 'Lego-y' to me. But on the other hand, smooth is what you want for these bigger builds but yeah, not for me. "
Everybody talks about models with visible studs, but you know what doesn't get enough discussion? Models with visible anti-studs. 77256 (just to take one example) has six visible studs, but sixty-six visible anti-studs, not counting the ones visible in the wheel wells if you have it in hover mode."
Just from the main image, I can see eight visible studs. Four on the hood, two on the roof, one on the left sideview mirror mount, and the eighth just barely peeking out on the right sideview mirror mount. And that's not even counting the two that show through the stud notches on the quarter-round tiles on the sideview mirrors or through the transparent plastic of the time circuits.
Visible anti-studs are usually on the bottoms of models, where they rarely get seen. The BttF DeLorean is an obvious exception since the car does have a flying mode, but most cars fail to miss the ground when they fall. I don't see a single anti-stud showing on the main image, except for ones that are visible through transparent plastic (which shouldn't count), and I'm assuming most are somewhere on the bottom surface of the chassis."
You're right; I miscounted the visible studs, of which there are eight. And I used it as my example simply because it was ready to hand, sitting right next to my computer. But where anti-studs tend tend to be prominent is on the backs of mechs and similar builds. The recent review of 77093 called out the ones on Ganon's back, and the pieces used for the torsos of the Star Wars mechs had a whole bunch, although those weren't sets where the designers were going for a clean look.
@TheOtherMike said:
"You're right; I miscounted the visible studs, of which there are eight. And I used it as my example simply because it was ready to hand, sitting right next to my computer. But where anti-studs tend tend to be prominent is on the backs of mechs and similar builds. The recent review of 77093 called out the ones on Ganon's back, and the pieces used for the torsos of the Star Wars mechs had a whole bunch, although those weren't sets where the designers were going for a clean look."
I didn't even check a physical copy to see if there are any more that aren't visible in that shot, plus there are studs on the seats to hold minifigs in place. That brings up the question of whether studs inside the passenger compartment should count or not. Anyways, yeah, some builds make it easier or harder to hide the antistuds, and mecha are pretty bad about it. I also remember stopping at the BrickMania store in Chicago, and seeing an A-10 MOC that looked really great...until I noticed that the bottom was just flat plates. Like zero contouring was even attempted. To be fair, though, historically there hasn't been a wide array of parts that could even be used to smooth out the exposed antistuds. Even now, where these parts do exist, they still have a very limited range. They're kinda like the curved slopes of 20 years ago.