Review: 76333 Batman & Robin Batmobile
Posted by CapnRex101,
LEGO DC Super Heroes has already covered the majority of cinematic Batmobile designs, which makes 76333 Batman & Robin Batmobile more interesting than most, as a new addition to this range. Batman & Robin may be a famously poor movie, but its Batmobile is quite memorable!
The sleek bodywork looks fantastic, with silver accents on the nose and the Batman & Robin Batmobile's characteristic open cockpit. Additionally, I am glad to see this version of Batman available in minifigure form, filling another gap in the onscreen Batman roster.
Summary
76333 Batman & Robin Batmobile, 272 pieces.
£24.99 / $29.99 / €29.99 | 9.2p, 11.0c, 11.0c per piece.
Buy at LEGO.com »
Despite lacking a few eccentric details, or Robin, this is an excellent LEGO Batmobile
- A completely new Batmobile design
- Smooth and accurate bodywork
- Captures some difficult features, like the windscreen
- No Robin in a Batman & Robin set
- Arguably needs more colour
- Quite a few stickers
The set was provided for review by LEGO. All opinions expressed are those of the author.
Minifigure
Batman dons a specialised suit to combat Mr. Freeze, protected by extra armour. The metallic silver panels are very distinctive, particularly on the cowl because this element has never been decorated before. The dual-moulded white lenses differ from the movie though, as Bruce's eyes should be visible through the cowl.
However, all the silver accents on the cowl, torso and legs look excellent, notably including the Bat-Symbol knee pads. The undecorated arms look bland by comparison, which is unfortunate, but not terribly surprising on a Batman minifigure in a relatively inexpensive set.
Batman's usual double-sided head is included, featuring serious and determined expressions. There are no accessories though; not even the infamous Bat Credit Card!
The Completed Model
While the Batmobile in the 1989 Batman film and Batman Returns was already outlandish, in a good way, those from the subsequent two movies became even more extravagant, culminating with the neon-infused Batman & Robin design. Unsurprisingly, the model lacks light-up features, which arguably makes it more attractive, though obviously less accurate to the movie.
Nevertheless, I am impressed with the aerodynamic shape, as a variety of curved slopes and wedge slopes form sleek bodywork. The bulbous armour over the front wheels looks fantastic and the massive fins correspond with the source material, as does Batman's exposed position, seated in the cockpit.
Pearl silver teeth and a claw element comprise the silver details on the bumper, with stickered slopes in between. Two more stickers denote the turbine engine, which can be seen through a gap in the bodywork. While this is not very effective for such an important feature, I am not sure how else it could have been done, given the intricate Bat Symbol shape.
A section of the bodywork is removable from underneath, as there is a hole all the way through the body. Inside is a printed 2x2 round tile, marking the 20th anniversary of LEGO Batman. The same piece appears in all four new DC sets.
I was a bit disappointed to find that the Bat Symbols on the wheels and the red stripes on the sides of the Batmobile also need stickers. The four 2x2 round tiles on the wheels could surely have been printed. However, the details correspond with the film and these colourful highlights are essential, given the absence of actual lights.
The consoles inside the cockpit and the Bat Symbol on the headrest use a few more stickers, which brings the total to thirteen. That seems rather a lot for a small set, but the details inside the cockpit look superb and I love the use of a 2x4x2 wheel arch piece for the tiny windscreen, even though this means it is opaque.
The all-important tail fins are completely brick-built, instead of relying on the specialised parts sometimes used in the past. The fins are therefore quite thick, but their scalloped shape looks perfect from the sides and they are appropriately angled, connected with click hinges.
Moreover, I like the pearl silver teeth stacked at the back, with dark red pieces forming the rear lights in between. The silver accents are actually exhausts in the film and should be positioned further to the sides, although this would mean interrupting the rounded bodywork, so I think the alternative position works at this scale.
Overall
I am pleased to see a slightly more obscure version of the Batmobile represented as a LEGO model and 76333 Batman & Robin Batmobile is well executed. The aerodynamic bodywork is impressive and the cockpit looks fantastic, even with an opaque windscreen. I think this was a fair compromise for accurate shaping.
Naturally, the absence of garish lights means this model lacks a bit of personality relative to its onscreen counterpart, though I think those details are conveyed reasonably well using stickers. However, the greater issue is the absence of Robin in a set inspired by Batman & Robin. There is only space for one in the cockpit, but both characters should still be included, particularly for the price of £24.99, $29.99 or €29.99.
96 likes
50 comments on this article
The hole under the bonnet/hood is just plain lazy and cheap.
Robin: [checking out the Batmobile] I want a car. Chicks dig the car.
Batman: This is why Superman works alone.
Watching the film as a 9-year-old child, I didn't notice it was going to be a bad film…
At least it's so bad it's enjoyable as it is…
Check out ThatGuyWithTheGlasses's review, or the commentary by Red Letter Media, it's gold.
@Bricklunch said:
"The hole under the bonnet/hood is just plain lazy and cheap. "
Why? The alternative would just be filling it in with bricks and it hardly matters either way because the hole is covered. Maybe they could have added some engine detail, I suppose, though I am not convinced that is necessary.
No Bat-nipples?
Fail
@Bricklunch said:
"The hole under the bonnet/hood is just plain lazy and cheap. "
It’s cheap to not include Robin in a set based on a movie where he was pivotal.
But worse than that….where are the Batnips?!
@Vindicare said:
" @Bricklunch said:
But worse than that….where are the Batnips?!"
a glaring omission but one that can be rectified with 1x Minifigure Neck Bracket with 2 Back Studs and 2x Tile, Round 1 x 1 with Bar and Small Pin Hole
I agree with some of the other comments, where's the nipples? Obviously this anti-Freeze suit never had them, but this also isn't the primary Batsuit worn in the movie. You'd think our first outing with Batman & Robin would at least give us its most iconic (and notorious) main hero costume.
When Speed Champions can release a really great Back to the Future set with both figures it's really disappointing that this 76333 and 76331 both just come with Batman and don't include the other movie eponymous figures like Superman and Robin (and ideally their in-movie versions, not just generic figures) - and when else are we likely to ever see these variations?
Compared to the 76252 version, this just isn't as good.
I was always disapointed that we went from one of the best renditions of the Batmobile (The Burton movies), to this monstrosity. Thank gods the Nolan movies fixed it with the tumbler.
Batman and Robin* Batmobile
*Robin not included
Cool set, but I agree with others here that Robin should’ve been included. I would’ve liked to have seen a Batgirl minifig, too.
@CapnRex101 said:
" @Bricklunch said:
"The hole under the bonnet/hood is just plain lazy and cheap. "
Why? The alternative would just be filling it in with bricks and it hardly matters either way because the hole is covered. Maybe they could have added some engine detail, I suppose, though I am not convinced that is necessary."
How about an engine, a storage compartment, a deployable weapon, a mine or oil slick deployment device under the hood/bonnet? - all of these would work for a batmobile. How about a Robin location tracker so Batman can locate the obviously missing minifigure? That way there is more play built into the toy & that shouldn't be beyond the wit of Lego. Rather than find a use for it they decided to just close it off and call it done - that is what I consider cheap or lazy.
@Bricklunch said:
" @CapnRex101 said:
" @Bricklunch said:
"The hole under the bonnet/hood is just plain lazy and cheap. "
Why? The alternative would just be filling it in with bricks and it hardly matters either way because the hole is covered. Maybe they could have added some engine detail, I suppose, though I am not convinced that is necessary."
How about an engine, a storage compartment, a deployable weapon, a mine or oil slick deployment device under the hood/bonnet? - all of these would work for a batmobile. How about a Robin location tracker so Batman can locate the obviously missing minifigure? That way there is more play built into the toy & that shouldn't be beyond the wit of Lego. Rather than find a use for it they decided to just close it off and call it done - that is what I consider cheap or lazy. "
Lego prioritizes play features: "Why doesn't it look better?!"
Lego prioritizes display: "Where are the play features?!"
Never change, Lego fans. Never change.
@Bricklunch said:
"The hole under the bonnet/hood is just plain lazy and cheap. "
"Holey design flaw, Batman!"
Personally I’m rooting for a second set which has Robin and Batgirl with their fancy bikes, so I can live without his inclusion here.
(Also: Dream minifig: Mr Freeze with his fluffy polar bear slippers and devoré velvet dressing gown. I would be ecstatic.)
The movie isn't much of a follow-up to the gothic camp of Burton, but it also doesn’t really feel like it’s meant to be - it’s more in the vein of just-plain-silly camp 60s Batman, and it does perfectly fine at being that.
@AcademyofDrX said:
"Lego prioritizes play features: "Why doesn't it look better?!"
Lego prioritizes display: "Where are the play features?!""
Why not both? As long as the one doesn't compromise the other....
>stickered 1x2 slopes
NIGHTMARE
I don't like the movie and I don't like this Batmobile, but I have to admit it is a nice set.
@Bricklunch said:
"The hole under the bonnet/hood is just plain lazy and cheap. "
When I saw the great big 2x4 hole under the hood, I thought it must be intended for Smart Brick integration. Imagine if the structure underneath the hood was all red and it told the Batmobile to make, I dunno, Batmobile noises. That would at least be some kind of excuse for the big hole. Of course, then the price would be jacked up to a hundred dollars or so.
@AcademyofDrX said:
" @Bricklunch said:
" @CapnRex101 said:
" @Bricklunch said:
"The hole under the bonnet/hood is just plain lazy and cheap. "
Why? The alternative would just be filling it in with bricks and it hardly matters either way because the hole is covered. Maybe they could have added some engine detail, I suppose, though I am not convinced that is necessary."
How about an engine, a storage compartment, a deployable weapon, a mine or oil slick deployment device under the hood/bonnet? - all of these would work for a batmobile. How about a Robin location tracker so Batman can locate the obviously missing minifigure? That way there is more play built into the toy & that shouldn't be beyond the wit of Lego. Rather than find a use for it they decided to just close it off and call it done - that is what I consider cheap or lazy. "
Lego prioritizes play features: "Why doesn't it look better?!"
Lego prioritizes display: "Where are the play features?!"
Never change, Lego fans. Never change."
Given the possibility to give input on a Lego review that Lego may well read themselves you choose to attack the fans rather than comment on the product. That's just trolling.
The premise of a binary choice between display or play is spurious. As @AcademyofDrX noted...why not both?
@AcademyofDrX said:
" @Bricklunch said:
" @CapnRex101 said:
" @Bricklunch said:
"The hole under the bonnet/hood is just plain lazy and cheap. "
Why? The alternative would just be filling it in with bricks and it hardly matters either way because the hole is covered. Maybe they could have added some engine detail, I suppose, though I am not convinced that is necessary."
How about an engine, a storage compartment, a deployable weapon, a mine or oil slick deployment device under the hood/bonnet? - all of these would work for a batmobile. How about a Robin location tracker so Batman can locate the obviously missing minifigure? That way there is more play built into the toy & that shouldn't be beyond the wit of Lego. Rather than find a use for it they decided to just close it off and call it done - that is what I consider cheap or lazy. "
Lego prioritizes play features: "Why doesn't it look better?!"
Lego prioritizes display: "Where are the play features?!"
Never change, Lego fans. Never change."
I imagine that a fair amount of the time the positions aren’t held simultaneously - rather, there is Group A who values display the most, Group B that values play features the most, and Group C that likes them to be balanced. It isn’t hypocrisy or inconsistency for all three groups to exist, it just means that Lego fandom is a large group of people with a variety of opinions and perspectives.
@Bricklunch said:
" @CapnRex101 said:
" @Bricklunch said:
"The hole under the bonnet/hood is just plain lazy and cheap. "
Why? The alternative would just be filling it in with bricks and it hardly matters either way because the hole is covered. Maybe they could have added some engine detail, I suppose, though I am not convinced that is necessary."
How about an engine, a storage compartment, a deployable weapon, a mine or oil slick deployment device under the hood/bonnet? - all of these would work for a batmobile. How about a Robin location tracker so Batman can locate the obviously missing minifigure? That way there is more play built into the toy & that shouldn't be beyond the wit of Lego. Rather than find a use for it they decided to just close it off and call it done - that is what I consider cheap or lazy. "
Fair enough. I would always like to see more functions included, but presumably the designer had to prioritise details in this case. Ideally, there would be both, of course.
@Hiratha said:
" @AcademyofDrX said:
" @Bricklunch said:
" @CapnRex101 said:
" @Bricklunch said:
"The hole under the bonnet/hood is just plain lazy and cheap. "
Why? The alternative would just be filling it in with bricks and it hardly matters either way because the hole is covered. Maybe they could have added some engine detail, I suppose, though I am not convinced that is necessary."
How about an engine, a storage compartment, a deployable weapon, a mine or oil slick deployment device under the hood/bonnet? - all of these would work for a batmobile. How about a Robin location tracker so Batman can locate the obviously missing minifigure? That way there is more play built into the toy & that shouldn't be beyond the wit of Lego. Rather than find a use for it they decided to just close it off and call it done - that is what I consider cheap or lazy. "
Lego prioritizes play features: "Why doesn't it look better?!"
Lego prioritizes display: "Where are the play features?!"
Never change, Lego fans. Never change."
I imagine that a fair amount of the time the positions aren’t held simultaneously - rather, there is Group A who values display the most, Group B that values play features the most, and Group C that likes them to be balanced. It isn’t hypocrisy or inconsistency for all three groups to exist, it just means that Lego fandom is a large group of people with a variety of opinions and perspectives."
Absolutely! And Lego fans who value criticizing Lego sets, and Lego fans who value criticizing Lego fans. Truly this set has something for everyone.
I loved the movie as a kid and as an adult. It's so campy, it's fun. If you can't enjoy the fun Batmans then you don't deserve the dark Batmans....
Either way, I don't know how I feel about this set. I don't love it seeing the side views here. It is a bit more lackluster than expected. Maybe I'll wait for a sale.
@essel said:
"Check out ThatGuyWithTheGlasses's review..."
As soon as I saw the words "Bat-Credit Card," I heard his voice in my head.
@BabuBrick said:"Cool set, but I agree with others here that Robin should’ve been included. I would’ve liked to have seen a Batgirl minifig, too."
Ordinarily, I'd be all for a Batgirl minifig, but Batman and Robin didn't use Barbara Gordon, it used some blonde whose name I can't even remember, so I'm good with it.
I was pleasantly surprised to find the other 2 batmobiles at my local toy store earlier today. This one was nowhere to be seen though. I'm still on the fence about it anyway, I don't really care for the movie but it really isn't a bad model and the minifig looks great. I'll probably get it on sale if I can.
A BAT ... CREDIT CARD?????
(And then he Doug Walker'd all over the LEGO Store)
@ra226 said:
" @Bricklunch said:
"The hole under the bonnet/hood is just plain lazy and cheap. "
"Holey design flaw, Batman!""
THIS is the only correct response.
@AcademyofDrX said:
" @Bricklunch said:
" @CapnRex101 said:
" @Bricklunch said:
"The hole under the bonnet/hood is just plain lazy and cheap. "
Why? The alternative would just be filling it in with bricks and it hardly matters either way because the hole is covered. Maybe they could have added some engine detail, I suppose, though I am not convinced that is necessary."
How about an engine, a storage compartment, a deployable weapon, a mine or oil slick deployment device under the hood/bonnet? - all of these would work for a batmobile. How about a Robin location tracker so Batman can locate the obviously missing minifigure? That way there is more play built into the toy & that shouldn't be beyond the wit of Lego. Rather than find a use for it they decided to just close it off and call it done - that is what I consider cheap or lazy. "
Lego prioritizes play features: "Why doesn't it look better?!"
Lego prioritizes display: "Where are the play features?!"
Never change, Lego fans. Never change."
Always find excuses for valid arguments.
Never change, Lego fanboys. Never change.
It's an absolute travesty that there are no Bat Nipples on that Bat Suit.
Lego aside, this is the worse Batmobile ever. One seat and with open top, totally build to be a toy. With wire you can easily decapitate Batman.
That scene Batmobile driving on statue is showing kids to drive Batmobile toy on dad
Correct me if I’m wrong…. Wasn’t this version of the Batmobile the only on screen version that Lego had never made up till now?
It’s a nice looking set, I always thought the Arctic suit was more blue than black? But I agree a second fig of Robin wouldn’t have gone a miss.
No nipples, no like.
I wish LEGO would do a comic book based Batmobile series. Lots of cool designs there.
On a separate note, nipples were in Batman Forever, not Batman And Robin.
@kdu2814 said:
"On a separate note, nipples were in Batman Forever, not Batman And Robin."
https://i.imgur.com/RPETlBg.jpeg
Though as somebody already mentioned, he later switches to a different suit, and that's the one depicted in this set:
https://i.imgur.com/0oqOmJk.png
*sigh*
Needs more…no, _better_ Batman.
@CapnRex101 said:
" @Bricklunch said:
"The hole under the bonnet/hood is just plain lazy and cheap. "
Why? The alternative would just be filling it in with bricks and it hardly matters either way because the hole is covered. Maybe they could have added some engine detail, I suppose, though I am not convinced that is necessary."
Pretty sure that hole is so you can use this car as a coffin for the Schumacher run of Batman films.
@TheOtherMike:
I believe her name was Alfredsniece. Or something like that.
@Tinker97:
They’ve never made the cars from the pre-WWII Batman serial, or the post-WWII Batman & Robin serial. They’ve also never made the first proper 1963 Batmobile, which was privately built on a Rocket 88, and later officially licensed. Sure, it wasn’t ever screen-used, but it needs to be a LEGO set.
@kdu2814:
No, because the jokes at the time were about how they put nipples on Batman’s suit, and nipples on Robin’s suit, but drew the line at putting any on Batgirl’s suit. Although, now that I think about it, they didn’t put them on Alfred’s tuxedo, either, so maybe it’s not as weird as we all thought.
Wait, no, they put them on Mr. Freeze, too, _and_ made his moobs glow. Back to weird.
@PurpleDave said:
[[[ @Tinker97:
They’ve never made the cars from the pre-WWII Batman serial, or the post-WWII Batman & Robin serial. They’ve also never made the first proper 1963 Batmobile, which was privately built on a Rocket 88, and later officially licensed. Sure, it wasn’t ever screen-used, but it needs to be a LEGO set.]]
I would love that. For those unfamiliar: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SGnrXoWeoM
Barbara Wilson. One of several perfectly cromulent non-Gordon Batgirls, including the original and first, Betty Kane, and Cassandra Cain, probably the comics one with the longest tenure after Barbara Gordon and who is also brilliant.
@WizardOfOss said:
" @kdu2814 said:
"On a separate note, nipples were in Batman Forever, not Batman And Robin."
https://i.imgur.com/RPETlBg.jpeg
Though as somebody already mentioned, he later switches to a different suit, and that's the one depicted in this set:
https://i.imgur.com/0oqOmJk.png"
Wow. I sit corrected. That or I saw Batman And Robin on a different or pre-Crisis Earth where Clooney never had bat-Nips, and so that is how I remember it.
I watched Folding Ideas’ video Nostalgia Critic and The Wall, so. Not so much into thinking the dude has interesting and valid insights into popular media.
I love 60s Batman. If we can have Bat Shark Repellant, we can have a Bat Credit Card, it’s called A Joke.
@Hiratha said:
"I watched Folding Ideas’ video Nostalgia Critic and The Wall, so. Not so much into thinking the dude has interesting and valid insights into popular media.
I love 60s Batman. If we can have Bat Shark Repellant, we can have a Bat Credit Card, it’s called A Joke."
They did give TLBM Robin a canister of shark repellent, and TLBM also gave one of the Batgirl CMFs a couple Batbucks that could work as credit cards if you so choose. I don’t. I only use them when having Batman shower a crowd of kids with his loot-launcher.
The hood and stickers really kill it for me, so ugly from afar. BUT, these pictures are a lot better than the original promo shots, the level of detail here is impressive but it doesn't look like a satifying representation. I think they should've picked the Icey Batmobile from the end. Way more of a distinct look, but hopefully Lego will try again and drop that version.
I was very excited for this and the other one, but yeah, not good enough.
I'll just keep buying LEGO Creator 3-in-1. lol
You can probably build this set without the stickers. Batmobiles should be completely black, anyway.
By the way, I’m hoping there will be a Smart Play Batmobile soon.
@aamartin0000 said:
"You can probably build this set without the stickers. Batmobiles should be completely black, anyway.
"
And very, very dark-grey.
That hood could have been done way better. :(
Would have been amazing to see that as a Trans. Clear with printed body detail. (Labels could work too) …And the engine turbine visible within.
I know these sets have a tight budget with the license fee, but these Batmobiles are worthy of a little extra love, as they likely have a broader purchase base. …It’s sad to see this one fail on one of the vehicles most notable details.
@CapnRex101 said:
" @Bricklunch said:
"The hole under the bonnet/hood is just plain lazy and cheap. "
Why? The alternative would just be filling it in with bricks and it hardly matters either way because the hole is covered. Maybe they could have added some engine detail, I suppose, though I am not convinced that is necessary."
I just built mine. It was a design choice to make accessing the coin with ease. If you’re like me with no fingernails it makes prying off the car hood pieces way easier! A simple push from below . Very helpful IMHO