THIS IS THE SET IVE BEEN WAITING FOR! As a massive fan of Jurassic Park this is a day 1 buy!

Awesome. Just Awesome.

Well, the Jurassic Park name sticker (or stickers) for the gate is not that awesome.

Aw no Jeeps?
It looks nice though, just wish it was a bit cheaper...

No jeeps. No explorers. No visitors center. I’m going to spend way too much for some exclusive figs and a bunch of bulk.

Doesn't look too bad, but I doubt I'll get it.
Now a Visitor's Center. That's something I'd buy.

Wow, that T-Rex is outstanding.

The dino looks very good. Not enough to make me want to pay for the whole set, though.

$250 for that? Really?!?!
No Jeep! No one cares about anything but the darn Jeep! Plus Malcolm figure is from the Jeep scene!
This is one of the greatest LEGO disappointments ever, probably since that famously bad Hoth Attack set.

Also LEGO stole another Ideas set. Nice job LEGO, you really are awesome!

I think I'd rather have seen a Ford Explorer in lieu of a brick-built T-Rex, but that's probably not as "playable" as a big ol' T-Rex to take on a rampage. I love the gate itself though.

Great set. And it looks pretty cheap in Denmark compared with the amount of bricks. Would be cool for displaying

Essentially the same as the Ideas project they archived a while back. Perhaps a slightly bigger dino and gate, no jeep.

https://ideas.lego.com/projects/e4ffedab-7e33-40e3-a579-f61cc8a0c5ee

I'm guessing the jeep will be a seperate smaller set a bit later. Like the Ghostbusters House and Ecto-1 in reverse.

great set, but we were ALL expecting a visitor's center

really love the use of the Sliding Piece 1x4 (4211613/2653) for the (non-existent Jeep) catch rail

What a weird set. The little nooks representing key elements / scenes from the movie seem really strange to me. Minifigs are cool but that's about the extent of my interest...and not enough to pay $$$ for Bricklink. Hard pass.

How much???
I'd expect the T-Rex to walk around for that price!

This is the Jurassic Park set we've been needing! Awesome!

they do like to name sets with the word 'rampage' in them: https://shop.lego.com/en-GB/product/Triceratops-Rampage-75937 ,
https://shop.lego.com/en-GB/product/Indoraptor-Rampage-at-Lockwood-Estate-75930
and now this ; )
edit - and 2015 set 75917: Raptor Rampage

I still think this an odd combination as the gate and Rex have no connection. No Jeep or Explorer despite those being massive wants. Then including disconnected scenes on the back of the gate of all places. Also, the gate skews way too far on the exposed studs side of things

Edit: also, JW rather than JP on the sign is weird and disappointing

Shame, I was also hoping for a visitors center, instead...

**Removes set from wanted list**

Interesting that the box bears the Jurassic World logo when the set and minifigures are clearly derived from the 1993 film. Is there a clause in the licensing agreement that LEGO may only use the Jurassic World branding on their packaging and not the proper Jurassic Park logo? Nedry and Ray Arnold both have simplified versions of the original logo in their printing. It seems "Jurassic World" has become the umbrella for the franchise ever since it was resurrected in 2015.

I think it's a great looking set and the best brick-built dinosaur LEGO has produced. I also think the minifigs are great. I'd be just a smidgen happier if the packaging bore the original Jurassic Park logo, as I think that's definitively the best film in the franchise.

Jurassic Park is frightening in the dark
All the dinosaurs are running wild
Someone let T-Rex out of his pen
I'm afraid those things will harm me
'cause they sure don't act like Barney
And they think that I'm their dinner, not their friend
Oh noooooooooo

This appears to be one of those cases where the "volume of stuff" doesn't seem to reflect the parts count, hence the overall impression that the set is vastly overpriced. Surprised as I am that nobody has pointed out what would seem like an amazing price-to-part ratio (have people wised up after all?), I wonder how the parts budget could have been better distributed. The dino looks magnificent, as does the gate, but the minifigs look somehow even more out of place than the ones in the nanoscale 71043-1 Hogwarts Castle.

This is an ABJECT disappointment. The rex looks horribly generic, nothing like the rex from the film (which they have a perfect minifig scale version of already), the scale is frankly BIZARRE, the letters on the park sign are VERY out of whack, the inclusion of random scenes behind the gate is nonsensical, and it offers very little play or display value for a HIGH price.

And last not but not least, no Explorers, no Jeeps, no sale. Period.

We could have gotten a visitor center for this price and parts count. Instead we get THIS hodgepodge. Hoth Part 2: Revenge of the Suck.

I don’t like it at all. The Dino is incredibly blocky and cartoony, even when not comparing it to the excellent ideas set. Lots of the slopes and pieces just don’t go together and it looks awkward.

It just doesn’t look organic.

In addition, scale aside, the gate has way too many studs on its side, although I do love the little rooms in the back of it.

Great price per price though, sucks it had be for a set that’s this much of an easy pass.

I actually like the scenes incorporated into the back of the gate, as I think that's a great way to include references to the film.

However, I just can't get past the Jurassic Park sign being done with stickers for some reason.

kinda looks like an oversized juniors set to me honestly.

Personally I like the t - Rex from the ideas set better

Now, is this the T-Rex from Jurassic Park, that's big and scary and you have to hide and sneak past or jump in a Jeep if you want to run away from it, or is it the one from Jurassic World that you can outpace in high-heels and quite comfortably forget about it standing right behind you and a bunch of kids because the end music has started playing?

I love both the T-Rex and the gate, but I don't love them to the tune of $249. If I was going to spend that much on a set I'd rather go for Ninjago Docks.

The T-Rex looks amazing . . . but unfortunately the price of the set will keep me away.
Too bad it's not just the dino (and not gate or figures) . . . that would have kept the cost down and made it more affordable.

Whens the review?

Has no one noticed that on the back every has their actual photo next to their Virtual self apart from Sam Neill, who as if that wasn't bad appears to be replaced by a Toilet ?????? Anyway Initial thought Wow, great, then oh you just get a T-Rex and gate then £220. Even if they magically make other sets at this scale, which they wont its a rather strange set. Too Big and Expensive. Lets get a smaller version with the Vehicles and Visitor Centre I'm sure they could with 3000 pieces.......

The toilet is a nice touch, but there is no Gennaro minifig.

Hmmm. That’s not a visitor center or a Jeep. Cool model but greatly disappointed.

Anyone got a good link to a nice MOC explorer/jeep? Seems like a strange omission to this set, but I get the scale might not link up. Need to save up for this!!

Looking at that picture Huw linked to, the gate actually seems to be minifigure scale or at least close to it. It's the tyre track in the middle of the road that makes the scale look way off, the tracks are way too far apart.

Other than that, I don't understand why they had to make the set like this and not like the proposed Ideas set. The dino looks pretty good but not more accurate than the molded ones, and I have no idea why they tried to cram in half-baked versions of various movie scenes in the gate when some actual sets to depict them would've been so much better.

Concerns about the similarities to past Ideas projects are also addressed here: http://www.newelementary.com/2019/06/lego-75936-jurassic-stafford-bessa-designer-interview.html

I'm trying to think back, has there ever been an accusation of Ideas theft that wasn't either:

a) debunked by the designers in question demonstrating that they had earlier renditions of the concept completed or in progress prior to the Ideas version (e.g. BrickHeadz, Ghostbusters Firehouse Headquarters, etc) or

b) implausible to begin with, given the time frame it would entail and/or completely dissimilar scale and building techniques (Sandcrawler, Helicarrier, etc)?

I can't think of any off the top of my head.

Anyway, LOVE the brick-built T-rex (character and creature builds are my jam!), but I don't care enough about Jurassic Park/Jurassic World to want to own this. I would be much more excited to see more realistic brick-built dinosaurs that are up to date with current science.

@Lordmoral, it's not a low blow at all. They're just making sets based on a license that they obviously payed some amount of money to use and have some sort of rights to use. Just because other people thought a Jurassic Park gate would be a good set doesn't mean Lego stole that idea. It's a really iconic set piece, and outside of the jeep is one of the most recognizable things from the film. Lego isn't going to not utilize a property they have the rights to simply because someone made a set using the IP a while ago. Honestly, someone somewhere has probably made a set from every movie that Lego has the license to. It doesn't mean Lego stole it though.

I also don't understand people not liking the sign (aside from the stickers). The type and wording looks pretty identical to the real thing.

$250...
I would've payed $300 for a Visitor's Center.

I still don't understand how they thought that they could produce this set when it's basically a replica of the Ideas project. The statement makes it sound like they just happened to overlap in design. But the Ideas project was posted and rejected a few years ago. It's not that LEGO really copied the specific design of either the t-Rex or the gate. But rather that the overal idea is a copy. The dino with the gate is an obscure combination to begin with, since they're never both seen at the same time in the film.

Anyway, it's a nice looking set overal. It's overpriced for sure, but it looks like it would be a pretty cool display piece. I think the rooms in the back are a bit weird though. It's like they asked their designers, "can you make one set that squeezed in the entire film and pleases every Jurassic Park fan." Based on the other comments, they failed in that respect. I hope they make more JP sets soon!

Also, am I the only one annoyed that the lawyer wasn't included? With the two JP sets that have been made, the lawyer is really the only important character missing.

As soon as I saw this I wondered how long it would take for someone to claim they stole it from Ideas. Nine minutes, that's impressive!

As for the set, I like it but will probably pass due to the price.

I don't plan to get this set, but I'm glad Mark Stafford got to do a D2C. He's been at the company for ten years and has made lots of awesome smaller sets, so it's about time he got to do something big.

@lego4elio, I suggest you read the link that @Anchir posted. It’s a good interview and helps clear up the incorrect belief that they stole the set idea.

Is it just me, or have Lego fans become increasingly negative about D2Cs recently? It sounds like a lot of rumors get spread which then build unhealthy/unproved expectations, so that even if Lego releases a set thats fine (not even good necessarily, just fine) people bash it, just because it doesn't match their unfounded expectations.

Its not random to include the Trex and gate in the same set. They were never in the same scene, but they're probably two of the most iconic things for the movie so why not put them together.
The vignettes on the back are a nonissue. Who would display the back of the gate anyway?
The visitor center. First of all its easy to prefer a nonexistent alternative. If they got the scale right to capture the epic interior, theres no way it would be an affordable set. If they scaled down, people would complain, and then the Trex would look out of place next to it. If they took out the Trex, people would bash Lego for not including the Trex. Theres really no win here.
The price is a bit much, but it IS 3000+ pieces for $250, which is technically good value.
The jeep...yeah I want a jeep too, come on Lego.

The problem with this set is that LEGO's designers were so preoccupied with whether or not they could create this set, they didn’t stop to think if they should. Still, I am happy that--once the decision was made--they spared no expense. I'm definitely buying this for my daughter. Though she has not yet reached the recommended age of 16 to build this set, I have full confidence in her ability to do so: she's a clever girl. She'd create the dinosaur. She'd destroy the dinosaur. She'd create a man. The man would destroy God. The man would create a dinosaur. The dinosaur would eat the man and she'd inherit the earth.

@lego4elio: Two points I think are worth considering:

• If a set containing both the gate and T-Rex was an obvious enough idea for one person (the LEGO Ideas project creator) to come up with it independently, there’s no reason that somebody else who’s seen the same movies and is aware of the same previous merchandise for those movies (but who also has deeper insights into how other LEGO products have sold) couldn’t come up with it just as easily.

• Even if the “concept” of the gate and the T-Rex HAD been copied, that’s not theft by any stretch of the imagination, because there’s nothing about a product featuring two subjects they don’t own that the Ideas project creator could possibly lay claim to. That would be like saying that if Hasbro sold a Gungan Sub toy with a Queen Amidala action figure, they would owe LEGO credit for the idea of packaging those two subjects from separate scenes in the same movie as a single product.

The price seems about right to me for the size and number of pieces, but I agree with others in that a visitor's center and/or the inclusion of a jeep would be more enticing.

Placing little scenes in the back of the gate feels very odd to me, and the lone toilet looks especially out of place.

If I can find a deal I might pick it up though, because I love the T-Rex and the gate does look quite good from the front!

I'm a massive Jurassic Park fan, but the price of this set is ridiculous.

Still don't understand people when they mention the lack of a jeep or visitors centre etc, it's Lego you can build your own!!!

Wow. This brick built T-Rex looks very good. And the minifig selection too. Guess many fans of the range will be in haste to get it. Nice surprise, I'd be glad to read or watch a good and complete review of it.
Edit :now I have read comments, I could not imagine it would be such a disappointment for so many fans. I liked it at first glance, without noticing the price. Maybe it's because I am not a fan of JW or JP movies and will never buy it. But it still looks like a good set to me, I like this Dino, the gate is majestic, but I also see and understand the different points of those who don't. I did not even know that it was an Idea submission... I don't know what to think about all of this now... When I saw so many comments I was sure that the majority of the fans enjoyed it. That proved wrong, and I know why now...

US $249.99 / CA $299.99 / DE/FR €249.99 / UK £219.99 for 3120 pieces doesn't seem out of line to me, considering:

- The licensed property
- 6 minifigures
- High quantity of medium and large sized plates
- Numerous bows, wedges, and other contour elements for the T-Rex
- Aforementioned high quantity of foliage elements
- Relatively low quantity of small 1x1 elements (or so it appears)

@patrizio84 - I understand your point, but LEGO isn't charging €249.99 for a 2,000 piece set. They're charging what they are for the set you see. Sure they could have designed the set differently by omitting the vignettes, only including 3 minifigs, adding a vehicle, and reducing the price; and maybe that would have been more appealing to some. My comment only implied that for what they ARE selling, the price seems reasonable (to me).

Another Samuel L Jackson minifigure, cool!

To echo Teriyaqi: the negativity for every major release is astonishing. It truly seems that many people have an expectation of what they believe a set should be, and if that set doesn't match their exact expectations, it's keyboard-warrior-on-Brickset time.

Don't like; don't buy it, and build your own (that's how I treat LEGO) but don't come along with your subjective comments about what SHOULD have been included.

Did you really think they could make a minifig-scale Visitor Centre and that it would meet your exacting demands? Can you imagine the outcry when it was open at the back, or the banner wasn't printed, or Mr DNA was the wrong scale of double-helix, or the hatching room had the wrong number of eggs?

Build and let build.

(Edit: I didn't know what I was saving up for, but it seems it was this.)

"First off, LEGO needs to start giving heads up for large sets like this, a couple of days notice for a $250 set is not cool. Enough with hiding product launches, give people time to save up some money (and nothing even for VIPs, I’m losing faith in the revamped program idea already). Thanks LEGO for thinking that everyone has an extra few hundred bucks just lying around to spend on your product. Seriously, I don’t know if it’s arrogance or just plain stupidity."

Lego requires us to buy a product on day one of its launch?! I had no idea!! I always saved up and got a product when I could afford it or find it on sale. Fool that I was! I'll make sure to buy every $200+ set at launch as you suggest from here on out!

Jurassic Park is my favourite movie and yet I've no desire to buy this set because I think it looks absolutely rubbish. The T-rex looks nothing like a T-rex and the gate is pointless as it's a mishmash of things from the original movie. And again, like before, the Ideas set was better.

General thought: I've noticed a lot of people throwing around the word 'overpriced' in reference to this set and others. Specifically, this set is $250 US for 3120 pieces which works out to $.08 / piece. To my mind that is right where it should be given the piece count and probably quite low when you consider the number of minifigs and the licensed aspect. "Overpriced' suggests that Lego is gouging for a unique property. I don't think that's the case here.

Now, "too expensive" is another story. For my tastes I would consider this set too expensive relative to my interests and what you get in the model, in terms of built subject matter.

/pedantry

So, again (because people don't seem to be paying attention), read the New Elementary interview, which explains:

1. Why they chose the T-Rex and gate
2. Why they included the vignettes in the back of the gate
3. What they used for the basis of the T-Rex (including pictures of the original model)
4. How they avoided tainting the design with the Ideas project
5. How they reacted when they compared the two afterwards
6. How they picked the scale for the T-Rex (including a photo of the first scale attempt)
7. Why the set is JW-branded when it's from a JP-branded film

Anyways, everyone is so bent out of shape over "they stole another Ideas project!" that nobody seems to have noticed Samuel L. Jackson just got bumped to four minifigs:

1. Mace Windu
2. Nick Fury from the Helicarrier (but not from the Spiderman set, because that's based off a comic book, not a film or TV show)
3. Frozone
4. Ray Arnold

And nobody has commented on the fact that they have a scene for Nedry, but never show him _in_ the scene like they do for the other five minifigs. Best we get is a shot with him posed standing in front of it, which puts him at least 1" away from the model.

Lego marketing failed again. First failure: The fanbase wanted a visitor centre D2C set, not an oversized T-Rex. Second failure: They didn't make it an ideas set when they could have done. Instead they now get bad press for "stealing" the idea. There had to be someone on Lego, who pointed this out to the management in advance? Right? Third failure: No Jeep, no Gennaro. If you do such a set, then do it right.

All things above aside: the T-rex is a cool build in itself, but the vignettes are a cheesy idea. Now get us a visitors centre and a jeep and we are talking about a set, that's selling.

And another thing: Not all new big sets get a shitstorm from the community. Only the ones with severe flaws, like this, the Hoth & Bespin desasters or likewise. The vast majority applauded the new creator lunar lander set, for example.

The explanation that the Gate and Rex are some of he most iconic parts of the franchise is true, but that’s like making a set with the throne room and millennium falcon. They still don’t go together. The ideas submission at least had a transitive property to it. Gate + Explorer made sense and Explorer plus Rex made sense, so Gate made sense with Rex in terms of the whole. Gate plus Rex alone is just weird, especially when the rex, I’d released by itself, wouldn’t immediately be recognizable as the JP one.

All that said, it is growing on me a bit, but the continued lack of a Jeep or Explorer despite getting a D2C release for the line is frustrating similarly, in reading the article and seeing a vid, it seems the genesis of this set was a large T-Rex made just for fun which they thought was cool. That’s neat..but put it in creator rather than shoehorn it in where there are other things fans have expressed a desire for.

@David1985:
Honestly...every time people complain about not getting the Jeep in a set, I keep thinking they're talking about the brightly colored Explorer, which is what I consider to be the _iconic_ JP vehicle. I sometimes forget that there were some Wranglers in the film. They didn't really get talked up as much as the Explorers.

@piteous:
The "catch rail" is the power delivery rail for the Explorers. It has nothing to do with the Jeeps. Presumably, the Explorers would have been custom built, or customized, to be fully electric in-world, and the fact that they needed power from that rail played a critical role in the story as that's what caused them to stall out right next to the T-Rex pen.

@mrforcepower:
You forgot Baxter Robot Rampage (the only instance out of five sets that came from an IP other than JP/JW). Still, Rampage only has five, while Attack has done laps around it with 92, plus a board game, and an entire original theme (they didn't really have a choice on Attack of the Clones).

@LegoSonicBoy:
I wondered about that myself. This is a $300 set, by traditional AFOL expectations, but only costs $250. The same thing happened with the GB Firehouse ($450 in parts, priced at $350, buried under complaints about the price).

@Huw:
"Jurassic" looks to be a single sticker, so no spacing issues. "Park" is split between two plates, so the ban on STAMP means two stickers. How that spacing looks on the final model really depends on how the stickers are applied. If you very carefully place them against the inside edges, the gap may not be noticeable. If you just slap them on there, it could be very distracting.

@Lego34s:
They may have had rights issues for putting Sam Niell's picture on the back of the box. Plus, the outhouse had to go somewhere, so given the general layout it was going to end up next to someone's minifig.

@Yooha:
The last time we saw that toilet, there wasn't any Gennaro either.

@ARSLOCK:
There's someone who does the convention circuit in the US who sells kits of both, I believe.

@Aanchir:
The best I can come up with is the Mighty Micros issue, but given how wildly different some of the existing Ideas sets look compared to their original projects, I'm not sure "very different" really flies in that regard. But I expect that, up until the Ideas team formally selects a project, everything is still fair game for any other theme.

@patrizio84:
Given the parts included, if you want a smaller T-Rex, it should be possible to downsize it.

$249 for a big gate and big T-Rex and 6 minifigs?

Nope.

If it's on sale for $149 then maybe.

@shirhac, Lego marketing didn't fail. Fans always want a bunch of sets that they're not going to make. Look at all of the people saying they wanted a mini-figure size Hogwarts? Not feasible at all. And why would they make it an Ideas set? It wasn't based on Ideas (despite how much people like to think they know and say it is). They aren't getting bad press for it. What you're hearing is a bunch of AFOL's on brickset that complain about any thing they possibly can. That's not bad press, it's just the AFOL community acting like they always do.

It's perfectly fine to not like the set. I'm not a big fan of it. Had they made the JP vehicle, I would have written a blank check. But this doesn't interest me all that much. I also think the price seems high for what you're getting, even though it is a little over 3,000 pieces. But I don't bash Lego simply because they made a set that doesn't appeal to everyone.

You're right, not all big sets get a crap ton of negativity...just most of them. The only one I can remember that was overwhelmingly positive was the Saturn V. Even the Lunar Lander has it's fair share of negativity. The anti-sticker brigade was out in full force for that one.

@supervir2 - Spot-on comparison with mashing up two unrelated Star Wars scenes in one set. The absence of the Explorer significantly reduces both the playability and displayability. Without it, you basically have

1.) Posing the rex coming through the gate, which never happened.
2.) Posing the rex to the side of the gate, which is boring. A casual viewer would assume the models were sold separately.

If you had the Explorer, you could have:

1.) Explorer entering the park, one of the most iconic images from the film
2.) Rex menacing the Explorer, easily the most iconic set piece in the film

The rex would still be too damn big (and I can't believe no one has mentioned the gray legs yet. Is this a robot T-Rex?) but at least the play options would be there. And you could just take one of the rexes from a different set and use it instead.

I feel a little guilty being harsh on this set, as I am sure a lot of design work went into it. But I feel the bottom line is a brick-built, out-of-scale Tyrannosaurus was NOT the way to go for a BRANDED Jurassic Park set. As a generic dinosaur, it looks great. As a replica of the rex from the film, it's a POOR facsimile.

I loved dinosaurs as a kid, and have seen many different renditions of Tyrannosaurs in my lifetime. The Tyrannosaurus from JP is a VERY distinctive design - it's easy to forget that, as most properties that came afterward just copied the design from JP. But to me, it's as distinctive a creature design as the Rancor, or the Alien Queen, or the Predator. It's ICONIC and instantly recognizable.

If they released a brick-built rancor in the Star Wars line with inaccurate colors and whacked-out scale, fans would be dissatisfied. I can't help but feel like Lego thought JP fans don't care about source material fidelity, or only like JP because of dinosaurs. If they can't hear the continued clamor for the Explorer and Jeep, and more playsets from earlier movies, they need to open their ears.

TL;DR I'm probably being harsh, but this just has MISFIRE written all over it, which is a shame as it seems a lot of work went into it, and the price is fairly reasonable. I just don't see what need any of this set meets.

@patrizio84:
Seriously? They get grief twelve ways from Sunday when there's any perception that they "stole" something from Ideas, and most companies will return unsolicited ideas untouched because they don't want to risk being sued for plagiarism (and a generous cut of the profits) if they accidentally use an idea that even a single employee who had no involvement in their own project may have read something similar to what they end up doing. So, they wanted to reassure the AFOL community that they _WEREN'T_ browsing the Ideas site for stuff they could "steal", and that they based this model on something that predates the Ideas project. They even reference the storm that whipped up over "copying" the Ghostbusters Firehouse, and explained that, like the color schemes on the T-Rex and JP gate, it's hard to avoid looking like you cribbed someone else's design when you're both working from the same source material, both working with similar element palettes (LEGO Designers get access to never-released elements on top of sometimes being able to order up new shapes and/or colors, but Ideas projects can tap into the entire back catalog of retired elements even if the molds don't exist anymore).

@patrizio84:
I suspect the reason D2C sets have gotten bigger is that we've basically demanded it. Aside from the fact that D2C is really geared towards "too large for retail" sets to begin with, we complain that they should have done "more" when they make small stuff, and sales data on the really expensive stuff probably did a lot to shut down their long-standing belief that there wouldn't be demand for _really_ expensive stuff. Remember, the first UCS MF was believed to be so outrageously expensive that they knocked $100 off the $500 MSRP if you preordered it. The 1st Edition sold out on preorders alone. Our local LEGO Store had to fight tooth and nail to get _twelve_ copies of UCS MF 2, because corporate was convinced they could never move that many. We had at least 20 people show up on launch day, and some of them were buying copies online while waiting for the doors to open.

@KevinFleming:
They had four new minifigs, plus a couple elements to build the T-Rex that used up their available "frames". For the rest, stickers is what gets the set released.

@xboxtravis7992:
We've been enjoying long lead time (I think the most was around a year) on these big projects due to leaks. Now that they're starting to get a handle on the leaks, we barely get any warning before launch. They've paired this with launch exclusives, like the keychain for the Mustang, or the mission patch for the Apollo lander. So, while you'll be able to wait a bit and still pick up the set, you'll miss out on some of the goodies if you can't jump on it right away. Also, there's Joker's Manor. As a $270 D2C set, it should have been available for at least two years, but it was retired almost exactly one year after it debuted. Modulars pulled something similar when one set got pulled a year earlier than expected. People like to know ASAP about big sets like this because it may adjust their purchasing for a year or longer just to fit it in.

@shirhac:
So...pretty much every big D2C set, then. No, seriously, go back and look at every announcement thread for a D2C that costs $250 or more. Every single time people will complain about how it should cost less, even though some of them are clearly underpriced for what you get. Every single time people will complain about the subject matter, either because they hate the theme, or they wish something different had been done with the same theme. Every time people will complain about how the model looks. I can't recall a single set that was received with universal praise.

@supervir2:
You don't do that with SW because you know you're going to release piles of SW sets each year. For this, they got one set, and that was probably only due to the sets that are tied into the animated series. The only other JP set outside of the Studios theme was released alongside the 2018 JW2 movie sets.

@patrizio84:
Didn't you

According to Mark Stafford himself, the JW logo was the choice of the license holder. Also they never discussed a visitor center.

He's also saddened by the negative reception. :(

https://www.eurobricks.com/forum/index.php?/forums/topic/171923-press-release-75936-jurassic-park/&tab=commentscomment-3118251

There is another interesting question that no one seems to have posted:

How will Ian Malcom's bare chest look, being printed on a black torso? :-)

@Librarian1976: Congrats on what is without a doubt the best comment in this thread! ^_^ I couldn't help but laugh, read it aloud to my brother, and share it in a chat with some friends who were discussing the set as soon as I saw it.

And to all those complaining about the lack of a Jeep, I think one of the possible reasons LEGO might have omitted one is that they might anticipate future opportunities to release one in a non-D2C set. Like, assuming they hold onto the license until the next Jurassic World movie, one of the vehicles from the original movie would be a great starting point for a medium-priced throwback set similar to 75932-1 from last year's Jurassic World 2 range.

Another possible reason is that according to the New Elementary interview, the main focus of this set was always meant to be the Tyrannosaurus Rex, which the designers attempted to make as large and detailed as possible. That ended up being considerably LARGER than minifig scale — a real T. Rex is only around two and a half times the height of a full-grown adult.

So unlike the vignettes, which could be squeezed into otherwise unused interior spaces without adding too much to the cost (similar to the bridge scene in the Super Star Destroyer set), a minifig-scale Jeep or any of the other vehicles would have stuck out as obviously out of scale with the rest of the set, no matter how you chose to display it. All the more reason for LEGO to wait on a more suitable opportunity for a classic jeep set!

Gennaro is included - he's in the T-Rex's belly.

Wouldn't it be cleverly fun if during the build of the T-Rex model some hidden bones were placed inside?

@Brick_Dangerous: Are you serious? There's nothing wrong with being excited for something. It's not "blind fanboyism" to express that you have some spending money and think this is a good use for it.

You could sort of make a Vic Viper if you turn that gate structure on its side.

@brick dangerous
Ah, it seems I didn't articulate exactly what I meant in my original post.

I had no idea this set was coming out until this Brickset announcement, then I saw it here, and love it. Sure, it's divided opinion, but we all have different tastes (I have zero interest in fairground rides & modular buildings, for example).

I wasn't saving up specifically for this set, I just have a little 'slush fund' I keep going for unexpected LEGO releases which it turns out I find desirable. Please don't misunderstand: I wouldn't spend on just anything LEGO release (again, my LEGO fund remained untouched when that rollercoaster was announced, for example).

Personally, a huge T. rex and a large model from an iconic film of my youth are the sort of thing that would get me to part with my cash. It seems many people won't be buying it. One more time: lots of people spent similar amounts on Ninjago City and Apocalypseburg, which I never considered.

Just because you are unsatisfied with this release, doesn't mean others can't praise & enjoy it. One last time (honest): I personally could not at all understand the appeal of the Technic Bugatti.

We all like different things and will spend our money accordingly.

I was thinking a lot about the topic if the set idea was stolen and to clarify everything a little bit I reached out to the fan-designer of the Ideas set from 2014 and asked him some questions about how he feels about the topic. I wrote about it on StoneWars.de and I made an english translation of the article, since this is probably interesing to some people outside Germany: https://www.stonewars.net/commentaries/lego-75936-jurassic-park-set-stolen/

The original German article can be found here: https://www.stonewars.de/kommentare/lego-75936-jurassic-park-set-vs-ideas-entwurf/

I hope it's okay to post this here, Huw. Otherwise: Feel free to delete this! :)

[Perfectly fine, it's about the only constructive comment anyone's posted -- Huw]

@StoneWars.de: Very interesting and informative! Thank you for this fantastic reporting. I need to get in the habit of checking your site more often, because every time I see a link to it sharing new information, it tends to be really insightful! I'm glad to see the original fan designer has no hard feelings against LEGO or suspicion that they are taking advantage of him. It's also great to know that LEGO DID reach out to him individually to make sure there were no hard feelings.

Of course, I doubt this will put conspiracy theories like this to rest. Besides the number of people who might never read this article and will thus stand by their preconceptions, I'm sure some folks who have an irrational distrust of anything a LEGO employee says or does will suspect that the fan designer might've secretly been bribed to give positive feedback (something I have heard people say about even fan designers whose Ideas projects DID get approved and who then help promote the resulting set).

Either that, or like @Brick Dangerous above, they will simply accuse the project creator of "blind fanboyism" for daring to be OK with stuff LEGO does which whinier folks want to believe is a travesty that any thinking person would be outraged by.

I am stunned at the amount of people wanting a jeep (ANOTHER vehicle, because apparently there are not enough Lego vehicles !) and a visitor centre - so basically a building. So much negatively lately - its all getting a bit entitled reading the comment section.

I understand everyone wanting a visitors center over the gate. I too would have preferred that to the gate. But, people upset at Lego really only have themselves to blame. Not once did Lego say they were making a big Jurassic Park set, nor did they ever hint what it could be. Fans that saw some leaks (meaning not officially from Lego) started wild speculation. That then set everyone up for disappointment. If you read the interviews that have been conducted, it's really a brick-built dinosaur with the iconic gate to compliment it. The dinosaur is really the focus of the set, not the other way around. If you think about it in those terms, it's not as much of a let down.

It's ok to not be a fan of this set, and wish Lego had made something else, but much of the anger is self-made...something AFOL's have a lot of practice in.

@Phathead: I DO have eyes and can see the similarity to the Ideas version, but I also have enough of a brain not going to cling to an irrational conspiracy theory like this, when we’ve seen credible evidence against it and even the person who created the Ideas set in question has been satisfied with LEGO’s explanation and response. After all, LEGO has nothing to gain from copying a fan design and going out of their way to lie about when they chave plenty of equally qualified designers on their payroll AND more insights into toy market trends and people’s buying patterns than fan designers do.

You’re grasping at straws here, and making a complete fool of yourself with ludicrously over-the-top demands like putting over 1000 people (who would have had no part in the decision to make this set) out of work as punishment for an imagined slight against a stranger who doesn’t even believe half the garbage you’re spewing.

@Phathead, you just have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. You are looking, and acting, like an absolute fool. You're also extremely ignorant and arrogant. Anyone with eyes can see that.

Lego doesn't treat everyone like they're ignorant children, but perhaps they should if you're supposedly representative of the fans. If anyone should be banned from posting, it should be you.