Watch the Building the LEGO Dream documentary on LEGO.com
Posted by CapnRex101,
An increasing number of LEGO designers come from the fan community nowadays, including LEGO Ideas fan designers. A new 46-minute documentary follows five of these Ideas fan designers on their journeys to become model designers.
Huw and I had an opportunity to watch the documentary at Bricktastic yesterday and it certainly gives some interesting insights. You can watch it now on LEGO.com.
The five designers featured in the documentary are:
- Alex Storozhuk - fan designer of 21330 Home Alone
- Sandro Quattrini - fan designer of 21335 Motorised Lighthouse
- Josh Bretz - fan designer of 21339 BTS Dynamite
- Ivan Guerrero - fan designer of 21324 123 Sesame Street, 21346 Family Tree and 40533 Cosmic Cardboard Adventures
- Thomas Lajon - fan designer of 21344 The Orient Express Train
57 likes
38 comments on this article
Interesting. I didn't know so many Ideas designers were getting fulltime jobs as Lego employees. In retrospect, it's an obvious talent pipeline. Good for Lego and good for us!
To bad that you have to submit your ideas through studio I think. It means you build on your computer. The essence of lego for me is being away from those machines. I bet there a lot designers who make great objects in real life, but they will never be chosen if the don't use studio. A lot of missed great builds...
What a brilliant documentary!
@ikke said:
"To bad that you have to submit your ideas through studio I think. It means you build on your computer. The essence of lego for me is being away from those machines. I bet there a lot designers who make great objects in real life, but they will never be chosen if the don't use studio. A lot of missed great builds..."
I suspect that LEGO’s product development process requires designers to use CAD, so some ability to use it is a job requirement. If so, it makes sense to recruit from a talent pool that already has that skill.
Obviously they start with a lot of talent and creativity, and in the end it's mostly killed by the restrictions and guidelines necessitated by corporate greed and by needing to always cater to the lowest common denominator.
Which is why I would never want to work for LEGO, even if I had the talent to begin with. The environment and restrictions would frustrate me even more as a designer than how they frustrate me as a customer.
@ikke said:
"To bad that you have to submit your ideas through studio I think. It means you build on your computer. The essence of lego for me is being away from those machines. I bet there a lot designers who make great objects in real life, but they will never be chosen if the don't use studio. A lot of missed great builds..."
No, you can build a design IRL for submission, it’s allowed - I think it just doesn’t happen as much because it’s more expensive and of course you then have to do the photography which is another skill.
@AustinPowers said:
"Obviously they start with a lot of talent and creativity, and in the end it's mostly killed by the restrictions and guidelines necessitated by corporate greed and by needing to always cater to the lowest common denominator.
Which is why I would never want to work for LEGO, even if I had the talent to begin with. The environment and restrictions would frustrate me even more as a designer than how they frustrate me as a customer. "
Working with Lego is pretty much the definition of having limitations. It's a system. That is what makes it fun and challenging. To find ways of approximating the actual shape that you are after with what is available, while making it structurally sound. When designing for other people, you also add another layer of complexity, in that it has to be easily replicated. That doesn't stop creativity. In my experience, adding some limitations usually makes creativity really flow.
If you don't want those limitations you may as well just be sculpting with clay, or use any 3D-software and then print your sculpture designs. That way you don't have to adhere to any system of available shapes, colors, or stability issues caused by certain pieces not connecting well enough to each other.
@ikke said:
"To bad that you have to submit your ideas through studio I think. It means you build on your computer. The essence of lego for me is being away from those machines. I bet there a lot designers who make great objects in real life, but they will never be chosen if the don't use studio. A lot of missed great builds..."
BrickLink Designer Program - requires you to submit your project thru the use of Studio. Which makes sense as the largest part of the design process falls on you and the released product will be essentially identical to what you submit [save for the revision project you go thru with their team to make sure your model is practical]. Submitting thru studio also gives them a quick and easy way to vet submissions for following the parts palette, etc.
Ideas - allows you to submit your idea just about any way you can, since the Ideas team will take the successful projects and redesign them from the ground up anyway, with varying degrees of the original submission, if any, remaining.
Sigh. I'm sure it's a great documentary (I haven't watched it yet), but they couldn't find a single female AFOL turned designer to feature? There have been several who have been hired in the last few years.
@RTS013 said:
" @AustinPowers said:
"Obviously they start with a lot of talent and creativity, and in the end it's mostly killed by the restrictions and guidelines necessitated by corporate greed and by needing to always cater to the lowest common denominator.
Which is why I would never want to work for LEGO, even if I had the talent to begin with. The environment and restrictions would frustrate me even more as a designer than how they frustrate me as a customer. "
Working with Lego is pretty much the definition of having limitations. It's a system. That is what makes it fun and challenging. To find ways of approximating the actual shape that you are after with what is available, while making it structurally sound. When designing for other people, you also add another layer of complexity, in that it has to be easily replicated. That doesn't stop creativity. In my experience, adding some limitations usually makes creativity really flow.
If you don't want those limitations you may as well just be sculpting with clay, or use any 3D-software and then print your sculpture designs. That way you don't have to adhere to any system of available shapes, colors, or stability issues caused by certain pieces not connecting well enough to each other."
The best creative ideas usually come from restrictions. Sure, many people like big impressive builds with thousands of pieces, but often sets below 100 bucks (or even below 50) are much better products. I'd also much harder to create something (good) that appeals to a lot of people globally than some might think. Only those who are truly talented can pull that off. The best LEGO City sets usually aren't the big ones, but the small 10-20 bucks sets. Of course, you can come up with something much more elaborate at home, with more advanced building techniques, but that's not the point of a consumer product. That's the difference between a hobby and a career.
The same is true for music: Taylor Swift may not make the best songs in the world (as subjective as that is), but she makes the type of songs that a lot of people want to hear, while still managing to tell her own story through those songs. It's not that easy to create a song that millions of people like, let alone to do that repeatedly and build a career out of it. That takes talent, even if it seems simple. Naturally, there's much more to it than just talent, but without the talent it wouldn't work at all.
@RTS013 said:
" @AustinPowers said:
"Obviously they start with a lot of talent and creativity, and in the end it's mostly killed by the restrictions and guidelines necessitated by corporate greed and by needing to always cater to the lowest common denominator.
Which is why I would never want to work for LEGO, even if I had the talent to begin with. The environment and restrictions would frustrate me even more as a designer than how they frustrate me as a customer. "
Working with Lego is pretty much the definition of having limitations. It's a system. That is what makes it fun and challenging. To find ways of approximating the actual shape that you are after with what is available, while making it structurally sound. When designing for other people, you also add another layer of complexity, in that it has to be easily replicated. That doesn't stop creativity. In my experience, adding some limitations usually makes creativity really flow.
If you don't want those limitations you may as well just be sculpting with clay, or use any 3D-software and then print your sculpture designs. That way you don't have to adhere to any system of available shapes, colors, or stability issues caused by certain pieces not connecting well enough to each other."
Building off that, there's a saying among many artists that "limitations breed creativity"—that working within certain constraints can lead to creative solutions to design challenges you might not otherwise consider. I feel like this is a core element of working within a system like Lego, but even moreso for official model designers, who are inherently limited by the fact that they have to reach an end result that works as a consumer product. In some ways, Lego's designers have capabilities average builders don't (prototyping a new part to solve a design challenge no other part could satisfy), but on the same note, they have limitations other builders don't (budget, making things easily buildable for varying age ranges, etc.).
Certainly not every Lego builder has what it would take to enjoy working within those sorts of limitations. But I doubt official Lego designers resent all those limitations either, not when they're so closely tied to the core appeal of building a satisfying toy for a wide audience. If you view that as "appealing to the lowest common denominator" then you probably don't have the right mindset for any sort of career in toy design—it's hard to make kids happy when you aren't willing to meet them on their level, and look down on them instead.
@Lyichir said:
"Certainly not every Lego builder has what it would take to enjoy working within those sorts of limitations. But I doubt official Lego designers resent all those limitations either, not when they're so closely tied to the core appeal of building a satisfying toy for a wide audience. If you view that as "appealing to the lowest common denominator" then you probably don't have the right mindset for any sort of career in toy design—it's hard to make kids happy when you aren't willing to meet them on their level, and look down on them instead."
AFOLs commenting on kid's products in a nutshell. ;-)
Fantastic little documentary, thanks for the article flagging it!
I love how they all speak English... except, ofcource, the Frenchman. :P
Great documentary!
Definitely going to be giving this a watch.
@ToysFromTheAttic said:"The best LEGO City sets usually aren't the big ones, but the small 10-20 bucks sets."
60430 almost got enough nominations in to be a possible choice in the overall Best Set poll, after all!
@JayCal isaid:"I love how they all speak English... except, ofcource, the Frenchman. :P"
watched Monty Python and the Holy Grail this morning (it's free with ads on YouTube, for those who don't know), so I can't help but think of, "I'm French. Why do you think I have this outrageous accent, you silly king?"
@MeganL said:
"Sigh. I'm sure it's a great documentary (I haven't watched it yet), but they couldn't find a single female AFOL turned designer to feature? There have been several who have been hired in the last few years."
Yeah, not even managing to convince 1 in 5 to participate doesn’t say anything good about their recruitment pipeline and the existence of any efforts to avoid a sausagefest tbh. Even allowing for the additional incentives for women not to expose themselves to online nonsense.
any update on the amazon reductions feature? definetly the sites second best thing after inventory
Okay, some of those guys are making me feel old. "My first set was a Bionicle set..." I hit drinking age the year Bionicle came out! "The first set I bought I bought with my own money was on lego.com..." I'd been buying sets with my own money for years before lego.com (or the World Wide Web itself) even existed! On the other hand, there were moments I felt closer to them. "I'm an introvert..." Same here. "I just drink hot chocolate, I'm not a coffee person..." Ditto. "I used to work retail, so I'm fixing the shelves..." I feel you. "You see this tire? Maybe it's a tire, maybe it's a turbine." "I have two of them (referring to wheels) because it was a motorcycle, but I'm going to turn them into propellers for a rocketship or an airplane..." All parts are Space parts! Overall, a very enjoyable watch. I'd love to be able to see the history wall shown in the video in person. And, of course, the archive of every set ever, even if seeing them handle those sets with their bare hands made the archivist in me cringe. Oh, and the behind the scenes featurettes were fun too, don't miss those.
@MeganL said:
"Sigh. I'm sure it's a great documentary (I haven't watched it yet), but they couldn't find a single female AFOL turned designer to feature? There have been several who have been hired in the last few years."
At least it has Monica Pedersen, the marketing director for Ideas and Fenella Charity, the Friends design lead. but yeah, they could have done better.
@ToysFromTheAttic said:
" @RTS013 said:
" @AustinPowers said:
"Obviously they start with a lot of talent and creativity, and in the end it's mostly killed by the restrictions and guidelines necessitated by corporate greed and by needing to always cater to the lowest common denominator.
Which is why I would never want to work for LEGO, even if I had the talent to begin with. The environment and restrictions would frustrate me even more as a designer than how they frustrate me as a customer. "
Working with Lego is pretty much the definition of having limitations. It's a system. That is what makes it fun and challenging. To find ways of approximating the actual shape that you are after with what is available, while making it structurally sound. When designing for other people, you also add another layer of complexity, in that it has to be easily replicated. That doesn't stop creativity. In my experience, adding some limitations usually makes creativity really flow.
If you don't want those limitations you may as well just be sculpting with clay, or use any 3D-software and then print your sculpture designs. That way you don't have to adhere to any system of available shapes, colors, or stability issues caused by certain pieces not connecting well enough to each other."
The best creative ideas usually come from restrictions. Sure, many people like big impressive builds with thousands of pieces, but often sets below 100 bucks (or even below 50) are much better products. I'd also much harder to create something (good) that appeals to a lot of people globally than some might think. Only those who are truly talented can pull that off. The best LEGO City sets usually aren't the big ones, but the small 10-20 bucks sets. Of course, you can come up with something much more elaborate at home, with more advanced building techniques, but that's not the point of a consumer product. That's the difference between a hobby and a career.
The same is true for music: Taylor Swift may not make the best songs in the world (as subjective as that is), but she makes the type of songs that a lot of people want to hear, while still managing to tell her own story through those songs. It's not that easy to create a song that millions of people like, let alone to do that repeatedly and build a career out of it. That takes talent, even if it seems simple. Naturally, there's much more to it than just talent, but without the talent it wouldn't work at all."
Taylor does not make good songs. She has teams of people write songs for her, and performs with a backing track and auto-tune (even while performing live) because she has zero talent.
Modern pop music is relatively simple to make because it's minimalist, excessively promoted and appeals to how people already feel. This is why we had a song exclusively made with AI reach number one on the charts several months back. It's not music--it's vibes.
Mini-rant aside, I think what @AustinPowers is referencing is that you're put on a team, told what to build, told what parts you're allowed to use based on what LEGO is producing, how much time you have and provided a specific budget to build it in. Considering how IP focused LEGO is these days, it's likely you'll end up designing something that also has to adhere to the source material. Then, if you last long enough, you'll get to make the same model every few years, but this time you'll have access to dozens of new slopes, tiles and wedge parts that LEGO has since produced because the designers couldn't figure out how to capture complex shapes, so specialized parts were needed.
That's not creative. It's derivative.
Speaking of Bricktastic - there was no coverage of news for the 2026 event?
"I start my day by taking the bus", at these prices this guy isn't paid enough to own a car?
11:20 - "There's not just 10 designers". Well how do you think LEGO releases 300 new sets a year? AI?
Jamie hasn't aged in 15 years.
@crawlerbot said:
""I start my day by taking the bus", at these prices this guy isn't paid enough to own a car?"
Typical American thinking. In Europe, many people use buses, some don't drive cars, they don't have a driving license...
I am glad some people have managed to succeed as personally found Lego Ideas, Bricklink Designer program a lot of time and energy with too much competition (nearly 600 odd submissions at the last round). I don't mind using Studio as I only have around 10% of the parts available, so this helps to work out what parts I need to buy after various revisions for the odd moc I think is worthwhile to build, plus you get all the high quality renders and animations for no extra effort.
@Vesperas said:
" @ToysFromTheAttic said:
" @RTS013 said:
" @AustinPowers said:
"Obviously they start with a lot of talent and creativity, and in the end it's mostly killed by the restrictions and guidelines necessitated by corporate greed and by needing to always cater to the lowest common denominator.
Which is why I would never want to work for LEGO, even if I had the talent to begin with. The environment and restrictions would frustrate me even more as a designer than how they frustrate me as a customer. "
Working with Lego is pretty much the definition of having limitations. It's a system. That is what makes it fun and challenging. To find ways of approximating the actual shape that you are after with what is available, while making it structurally sound. When designing for other people, you also add another layer of complexity, in that it has to be easily replicated. That doesn't stop creativity. In my experience, adding some limitations usually makes creativity really flow.
If you don't want those limitations you may as well just be sculpting with clay, or use any 3D-software and then print your sculpture designs. That way you don't have to adhere to any system of available shapes, colors, or stability issues caused by certain pieces not connecting well enough to each other."
The best creative ideas usually come from restrictions. Sure, many people like big impressive builds with thousands of pieces, but often sets below 100 bucks (or even below 50) are much better products. I'd also much harder to create something (good) that appeals to a lot of people globally than some might think. Only those who are truly talented can pull that off. The best LEGO City sets usually aren't the big ones, but the small 10-20 bucks sets. Of course, you can come up with something much more elaborate at home, with more advanced building techniques, but that's not the point of a consumer product. That's the difference between a hobby and a career.
The same is true for music: Taylor Swift may not make the best songs in the world (as subjective as that is), but she makes the type of songs that a lot of people want to hear, while still managing to tell her own story through those songs. It's not that easy to create a song that millions of people like, let alone to do that repeatedly and build a career out of it. That takes talent, even if it seems simple. Naturally, there's much more to it than just talent, but without the talent it wouldn't work at all."
Taylor does not make good songs. She has teams of people write songs for her, and performs with a backing track and auto-tune (even while performing live) because she has zero talent.
Modern pop music is relatively simple to make because it's minimalist, excessively promoted and appeals to how people already feel. This is why we had a song exclusively made with AI reach number one on the charts several months back. It's not music--it's vibes.
Mini-rant aside, I think what @AustinPowers is referencing is that you're put on a team, told what to build, told what parts you're allowed to use based on what LEGO is producing, how much time you have and provided a specific budget to build it in. Considering how IP focused LEGO is these days, it's likely you'll end up designing something that also has to adhere to the source material. Then, if you last long enough, you'll get to make the same model every few years, but this time you'll have access to dozens of new slopes, tiles and wedge parts that LEGO has since produced because the designers couldn't figure out how to capture complex shapes, so specialized parts were needed.
That's not creative. It's derivative."
Thank you.
Exactly the point I was trying to make.
@TheOtherMike said:
"Okay, some of those guys are making me feel old. "The first set I bought I bought with my own money was on lego.com..." "
Yes, that was the 1st comment that made me shocked at how young some of the current set designers are. My 1st set was pre Lego wheels, never mind Lego.com!
I couldn't take anymore after 4 minutes in...
This is not a documentary, this is a 47 minute commercial...
@JayCal said:
"I love how they all speak English... except, ofcource, the Frenchman. :P"
Yeah, that had me in stitches too.
So stereotypical.
:-)
@Vesperas said:
"Taylor does not make good songs. She has teams of people write songs for her, and performs with a backing track and auto-tune (even while performing live) because she has zero talent."
Even if you don't like TayTay, which you obviously don't, the analogy still works: the songwriters on her team, including none other than Max Martin, are like the team of designers at LEGO, in that they use a limited number of techniques to create something that appeals to a lot of people. It's not that easy as it seems, otherwise everybody with the slightest bit of musical talent would be making millions in songwriting royalties -- which they don't.
Also, most big name pop singers nowadays use auto-tune, both in the studio and live. It's not because these people have no talent, but because the use of auto-tune has become an industry standard. I'm also not necessarily pleased about that, because that makes a lot of vocals nowadays sound (too) similar, but I'm sure that's a trend that will pass eventually.
@Vesperas said:
" Modern pop music is relatively simple to make because it's minimalist, excessively promoted and appeals to how people already feel."
This is pop music in a nutshell, going as far back as Elvis Presley. :'-) There are obvious exceptions, but pop music has always tapped into the cultural zeitgeist. That's what makes it pop music. Then again, some people also claimed ABBA was simple music, but then you look into the songwriting, the arrangements, and the production, and you realize it's masterfully crafted. If you don't believe me, ask Bono or Elvis Costello.
@Vesperas said:
" This is why we had a song exclusively made with AI reach number one on the charts several months back. It's not music--it's vibes."
While it's true there was an AI-generated song that hit number 1 on one of Billboard's many, many charts, it wasn't as big of a deal as some headlines made it seem. There was an AI song that went to number one on the Country Digital Sales chart. Now, I don't know how many downloads you need in 2026 to get on that chart, but how many folks do you know that actually still buy songs from Apple Music? You can hire a click farm in Russia to buy a song dozens of times, and then get your song in such a chart, but it doesn't mean that much without context. Same goes for streaming numbers -- just because they're high doesn't mean there are actual people listening to it. A report from streaming service Deezer on AI-generated music confirms that most streaming numbers for AI-generated songs are heavily inflated by bots.
@Vesperas said:
" Mini-rant aside, I think what @AustinPowers is referencing is that you're put on a team, told what to build, told what parts you're allowed to use based on what LEGO is producing, how much time you have and provided a specific budget to build it in."
Correct. That's because it's work. You develop a product for people to buy. You have to work within a budget, deadlines, and other constraints. You need to be more than just a great designer to operate in such an environment. Most AFOLs wouldn't last a day, but they're the first to criticise actual professionals.
@Vesperas said:
" Considering how IP focused LEGO is these days, it's likely you'll end up designing something that also has to adhere to the source material."
Without Star Wars and Harry Potter, we might not have LEGO today. I don't care for either, but if the mass audience keeps supporting our little hobby, I don't have too many complaints.
@Vesperas said:
"Then, if you last long enough, you'll get to make the same model every few years, but this time you'll have access to dozens of new slopes, tiles and wedge parts that LEGO has since produced because the designers couldn't figure out how to capture complex shapes, so specialized parts were needed."
Because a mass produced toy is not a MOC. Again, constraints.
@Vesperas said:
"That's not creative. It's derivative."
So, you only have one LEGO castle / Millennium Falcon / train / fire station / racing car (or whatever your poison is)...? We're talking about toys and collector products. Of course they'll be repeating the same things over and over. That's because they sell. If companies can sell you the same thing five times, they'd be crazy not to do it. LEGO is the biggest toy company in the world... What do you expect from them?
@TheOtherMike said:
"Definitely going to be giving this a watch.
@ToysFromTheAttic said:"The best LEGO City sets usually aren't the big ones, but the small 10-20 bucks sets."
60430 almost got enough nominations in to be a possible choice in the overall Best Set poll, after all!"
Exactly! Although I think there were far more, much better City sets that should've qualified. This one likely made it as far as it did because it tapped into nostalgia. Many Brickset users appear to be men above a certain age that can't stop gushing over LEGO's supposed 'golden age' (myself included), and it reflects in these kinds of polls. I'm not someone who collects City sets myself, but some of the recent sets in the lower price ranges are excellent -- near perfection. Designing such good sets at such a low price point with all the constraints required, that's quite a challenge.
Also: The Holy Grail is brilliant. I still have the 2-DVD set. Need to rewatch it someday. Hopefully it still looks good on modern TVs.
@Vesperas said:
"Taylor does not make good songs. She has teams of people write songs for her, and performs with a backing track and auto-tune (even while performing live) because she has zero talent.
Modern pop music is relatively simple to make because it's minimalist, excessively promoted and appeals to how people already feel. This is why we had a song exclusively made with AI reach number one on the charts several months back. It's not music--it's vibes.
Mini-rant aside, I think what @AustinPowers is referencing is that you're put on a team, told what to build, told what parts you're allowed to use based on what LEGO is producing, how much time you have and provided a specific budget to build it in. Considering how IP focused LEGO is these days, it's likely you'll end up designing something that also has to adhere to the source material. Then, if you last long enough, you'll get to make the same model every few years, but this time you'll have access to dozens of new slopes, tiles and wedge parts that LEGO has since produced because the designers couldn't figure out how to capture complex shapes, so specialized parts were needed.
That's not creative. It's derivative."
Firstly, you have made similar comments about KPop Demon Hunters and John Williams before, so I think you might just have an issue with music and the inevitable fact that there is nothing 'new' under the sun. There are always opportunities to recognise familiar features from one song to another, but that does not render the later piece artistically bankrupt.
With regard to your comments about designers, there are quite a few problems. As a new designer, you can certainly influence which teams you work on and that becomes easier as you advance, from my understanding. If you specifically asked not to work on a licensed theme, that would probably be accommodated. Also, the designers are heavily involved in deciding what to make, so it is not the case you are simply instructed to design a certain thing and that is the end of it.
Turning to new elements, just because a part is new does not make it excessively specialised. New parts produced nowadays tend to open new opportunities, rather than limiting them.
Make no mistake, I am sure being a LEGO designer is not free of frustration or restrictions, but as others have already said, such is life!
@CapnRex101 said:
" @Vesperas said:
"Taylor does not make good songs. She has teams of people write songs for her, and performs with a backing track and auto-tune (even while performing live) because she has zero talent.
Modern pop music is relatively simple to make because it's minimalist, excessively promoted and appeals to how people already feel. This is why we had a song exclusively made with AI reach number one on the charts several months back. It's not music--it's vibes.
Mini-rant aside, I think what @AustinPowers is referencing is that you're put on a team, told what to build, told what parts you're allowed to use based on what LEGO is producing, how much time you have and provided a specific budget to build it in. Considering how IP focused LEGO is these days, it's likely you'll end up designing something that also has to adhere to the source material. Then, if you last long enough, you'll get to make the same model every few years, but this time you'll have access to dozens of new slopes, tiles and wedge parts that LEGO has since produced because the designers couldn't figure out how to capture complex shapes, so specialized parts were needed.
That's not creative. It's derivative."
Firstly, you have made similar comments about KPop Demon Hunters and John Williams before, so I think you might just have an issue with music and the inevitable fact that there is nothing 'new' under the sun. There are always opportunities to recognise familiar features from one song to another, but that does not render the later piece artistically bankrupt.
With regard to your comments about designers, there are quite a few problems. As a new designer, you can certainly influence which teams you work on and that becomes easier as you advance, from my understanding. If you specifically asked not to work on a licensed theme, that would probably be accommodated. Also, the designers are heavily involved in deciding what to make, so it is not the case you are simply instructed to design a certain thing and that is the end of it.
Turning to new elements, just because a part is new does not make it excessively specialised. New parts produced nowadays tend to open new opportunities, rather than limiting them.
Make no mistake, I am sure being a LEGO designer is not free of frustration or restrictions, but as others have already said, such is life!"
I agree to all of this. :-)
I'm not sure what @Vesperas said about John Williams, but if anyone can't recognise he's one of the best film composers in American cinema, with some truly iconic scores, they don't know what the brick they're talking about. The music of Kpop Demon Hunters is also exceptionally well-crafted. Sure, there are some familiar tropes in there, as is common with pop music of any age, but the vocal arrangements are pretty intricate, and not something you hear an awful lot.
@asherkobin said:"11:20 - "There's not just 10 designers". Well how do you think LEGO releases 300 new sets a year? AI?"
He thought they were just really overworked. "Alright, you, break's over. Back to the design mines!" Although to be fair, I think that was one of the older designers, who would have started playing with Lego when they released a lot fewer sets a year.
@sjr60 said:" @TheOtherMike said:"Okay, some of those guys are making me feel old. "The first set I bought I bought with my own money was on lego.com..." "
Yes, that was the 1st comment that made me shocked at how young some of the current set designers are. My 1st set was pre Lego wheels, never mind Lego.com!"
Thank you for making me feel (relatively) young. Wheels (and hinges, and turntables, and minifigures, etc.) have always been a part of Lego for me.
Vesperas didn’t really talk about KPop Demon Hunters at all. They just tried to claim that their multiparagraph rant on everything they hate about the KPop-the-musical-genre industry somehow reflected on the artistry of a film they clearly hadn’t seen and the passion of the people who made it because they certainly had no opinions that were actually about or relevant to the film itself.
Also, having had a quick flick through Taylor Swift’s discography and the writing credits, claiming she has teams of people writing songs for her with none of her own involvement seems at best an exaggeration and at worst a total fantasy.
Also also, weird how Adele never comes up in conversations about how there’s totally no skilled vocalists or songwriters in modern pop music, huh. Or Ed Sheeran, for that matter, who might not be the most fantastic singer in the world but is certainly an interesting, creative songwriter.
Autotune is a tool. It doesn’t actually negate the talent or skill of anyone involved in making the songs. It’s just a tool.
@woosterlegos said:
"Good for Lego and good for us!"
But not good for our wallets.
@Hiratha said:
"Vesperas didn’t really talk about KPop Demon Hunters at all. They just tried to claim that their multiparagraph rant on everything they hate about the KPop-the-musical-genre industry somehow reflected on the artistry of a film they clearly hadn’t seen and the passion of the people who made it because they certainly had no opinions that were actually about or relevant to the film itself."
I can't speak for this specific instance, but it does seem to be a trend to lambast a movie just because of the trailer or even just a picture of the cast. I see people rant how much they hate a certain film or entry in a franchise, while they clearly didn't see it, and never intend to do so. They just seem to want everything to be the same as it was when they were growing up.
@Hiratha said:
"Also, having had a quick flick through Taylor Swift’s discography and the writing credits, claiming she has teams of people writing songs for her with none of her own involvement seems at best an exaggeration and at worst a total fantasy."
It's definitely a gross exaggeration. She comes from the country music tradition, where storytelling is a very important part of music, as is co-writing with others. While she may not be the sole writer for many of her songs, most of the song ideas come directly from her. She's not just a girl who looks pretty, as some like to claim.
Fun fact: All Too Well, which by many is considered to the best song of her catalogue, was entirely written by her, while the credited co-writer only edited the lyrics -- in this case, taking out parts, as she had written way too many verses. To have someone else edit your story down to a cohesive song and give them credits (and royalties) for that, means you have to set aside your ego, and trust someone else's talent.
@Hiratha said:
"Also also, weird how Adele never comes up in conversations about how there’s totally no skilled vocalists or songwriters in modern pop music, huh. Or Ed Sheeran, for that matter, who might not be the most fantastic singer in the world but is certainly an interesting, creative songwriter."
And Adele works with some of the same co-writers and producers as Taylor Swift, specifically Max Martin. As does Ed Sheeran. All talented artists, although I can somehow imagine that overexposure to some artists may lead people to hate them regardless. But you can also just change the channel.
@Hiratha said:
"Autotune is a tool. It doesn’t actually negate the talent or skill of anyone involved in making the songs. It’s just a tool."
Exactly. You still need to be a decent singer to make your voice sound good with autotune. It corrects pitch, but if you're awful to begin with, autotune will make you sound worse.