"Boba Fett's Starship"?

My favorite ship . . .
Boba Fett’s starship.
Wish it had a name I could call it.

But no gunship….. shame Lego, shame. They must be oblivious to this thing called ‘the internet’

@HandPositions:
How about Snail-Wing?

Well at least I know I can skip Lego Con every year now. Waste of time.

An hour and a half FOR THIS - what a waste of time. Where was the UCS Gunship or what ever the next UCS set is, huh?

The name of the Slave One leaves a lot to be desired as well - I mean there's probably a reason for it but Slave One is easier and recognisable.

I have to get that light cruiser.

I wonder for Boba Fett's Starship if someone trademarked the Slave I name just like what happened to the Razor Crest, so LEGO has to stay out of legal trouble. Just guessing though.

Love these, but the imperial light cruiser really could have used some walls on the inside to divide the interior room a bit, I wish it had at least a charging station for the dark trooper and a holding cell for Grogu...

Minifigure wise, a near perfect set, part of me wants cara dune to be replaced with another dark trooper, but overall amazing print and design work on those minifigs!

yes yes yes it's all very well seeing high quality images of the sets but what kind of head does Din Djarin have?!? I'm hoping they've stopped using the blank one

Really disappointed over the reveals.. The big reveal at the end was Vidiyo boombox?? The star wars reveal was sets already leaked and everyone knew about... My wife said it was a giant commercial and it is.. They need to focus on all lego not just the stuff they want to sell in the moment.. Nostalgia sections on the classic themes, creativity sessions and building techniques would have been great to see, not just more sets to buy, more more more sets to buy!! I count star wars as done, the harry potter section was lack luster and short and then it had vidiyo... Can we see some more lego themes in this convention please!!

@ResIpsaLoquitur said:
""Boba Fett's Starship"?"

I had noticed the Japanese catalog’s image of the set had this name, but didn’t think the set would be called that in English.

The cruiser is worse than I thought... only the front half has an interior, and the back half is just unusable

WHERES MY GUNSHIP?
also why not call it slave 1 anymore? how is just saying the word "slave" hurtful? you've been calling it slave 1 for years, why change it now?

Boba Fetts Starship is my favorite ship from SW. Yeah back in like, 79, when George Lucas was thinking of what to name this super badass bounty hunters ship, he thought ah yes, Boba Fetts Starship should suit Boba Fetts Starship perfectly! Great job Lego, glad to see youre busy disrespecting the creator of the greatest film franchise ever.

Those tiny TIE fighters make me think Lego really needs to come out with hexagonal tiles.

Hyping up a special set reveal and then they announce 3 sets most of us had already seen. At least we know not to even bother with LegoCon in future.

The 75055 ISD was bigger, more iconic, with more figs and better interior. Yet it was cheaper, even after the inflation adjustment. Same for 8039, 7964, 7965.
Seriously?

Maybe because they want to market the popularity of Boba Fett? Or because in the movies Slave I is never referred to by name. After all they always call Soulless One "General Grievous Starfighter"

Edit:
@CapnRex101
Lol, the same company that removes Finn from posters enforced the name change. I'm not considering buying Mickey and Donald's farm now!

As for the starship name, you never do hear it called that in the show or movies, so it’s not a big deal.

Are you kidding? Disney is getting so woke it is going to stop calling Slave 1 Slave 1?

That’s RIDICULOUS.

Nice sets! Kind of odd that they’re referring to the Slave I as “Boba Fett’s Starship”, but they may want to avoid using the word “slave”, and “Boba Fett’s Starship” does accurately describe it, after all.

The model is good. It appears to be comparable in size to their first version of the ship, 7144 from way back in 2000, but obviously benefits from a little over two decades worth of new elements and colors, advances in building techniques, etc. Some here will probably lament that they’ve gone down to a set this size for the ship (and for so many iconic vehicles from the saga in general, lately), but I think it makes sense if they want to keep the line accessible to kids.

The others look good as well, though I think the Marauder should be priced a little lower, and/or come with more stormtroopers. Then again, I’m probably going to rely on my stock of older trooper figures anyway (I wish they’d settle on one design and not change it all the time…).

The Imperial Light Cruiser is obviously the main thing here, and I like it, though I do wish the figure selection could have been a little more generous. Of course there are other ways to get Bo-Katan and Luke and so on, but there should really be a way to army-build Dark Troopers. The ship itself looks good, though, the obvious and necessary scale concessions notwithstanding; it looks good for both play and display.

@monkyby87 said:
"As for the starship name, you never do hear it called that in the show or movies, so it’s not a big deal. "

It's been called that plenty in the books, comics, and pretty much every product release of the ship to date. (Palpatine's name wasn't said aloud before 1999, but his name was in use well before that in other sources.)

I do think there should've been 2 dark troopers, I mean Krennic's shuttle had 2 death troopers, And ke's throne room had 2 preatorian guards, for £150 the light cruiser could have had 2 dark troopers

I am trying my best to get worked up over the name change to Boba's ship but just can't make myself care.

@CapnRex101 said:
"The name change was apparently instructed by Disney. I agree that it is silly, but LEGO is not to blame there."

Okay thank you for making that clear. makes more sense. kinda overreacted, sorry.

...wait, this was the entire Star Wars announcement?

Wouldn't be Lego if they weren't three weeks behind on their own news, would it.

There is quite a discrepancy between how well interior space is used in that Marauder thing and how poorly it's used in the big cruiser. At first I didn't even think there was even enough headroom to fit a standing minifigure in that thing.

Not mad or really surprised about calling the set 'Boba Fett's Starship,' LEGO almost never uses the correct name of ships anyhow and Disney's image concerns are presently as absurdly petty as they've ever been

So let me get this straight... the woke overlords at Disney rename the Slave I after 40 years, presumably because of the connotation of the word “slave”... and this renamed product is available alongside a new Cara Dune figure, a character that they boycotted less than 6 months ago over something they interpreted as racist. What are the Disney people actually trying to accomplish here? The only people who would care about the name of the Slave I being offensive are the same people who say they’re not buying LEGO sets because Cara Dune is in them! Disney has made their stance clear time and time again; they don’t actually care about social issues, they just want your money.

@Blondie-Wan

One possible solution for a battle pack would be the seeing stone on Tython. A half-dome surrounded by pillars with Grogu and 4 dark troopers. Done. Easy to do and very relatable to an important part of the serie.

I hope them make a dark trooper battle pack. We need more than one!

Past: Slave Leia
Present: Jabba’s Bikini Leia

@Xandez1 said:
"Past: Slave Leia
Present: Jabba’s Bikini Leia"

Somehow that sounds worse. Lol

While the change of Slave I to "Boba Fett's Starship" may seem strange at first, it's actually really in line with what LEGO already does. They didn't make a "The Marauder" set they made a "The Bad Batch Attack Shuttle" set. As @Norikins said they didn't make a "Souless One" se they made a "General Grievous' Starfighter" set.

While Disney's concerns over brand image is definitely a part of it, Ever since BIONICLE Gen 2 LEGO has had a habit of describing what a set is instead of using it's name, likely 'cause they think kids are too dumb to tell what something is.

@darthdrauf said:
" @Brikkyy13 said:
"So let me get this straight... the woke overlords at Disney rename the Slave I after 40 years, presumably because of the connotation of the word “slave”... and this renamed product is available alongside a new Cara Dune figure, a character that they boycotted less than 6 months ago over something they interpreted as racist. What are the Disney people actually trying to accomplish here? The only people who would care about the name of the Slave I being offensive are the same people who say they’re not buying LEGO sets because Cara Dune is in them! Disney has made their stance clear time and time again; they don’t actually care about social issues, they just want your money. "

they are just doing their leftist agenda.
nothing they do makes sense. thats kinda the point."
They didn't boycott The character, they boycotted the actress.
She is being recast so the minifigure will just be of the new actress ;)

@Brikkyy13 said:
"So let me get this straight... the woke overlords at Disney rename the Slave I after 40 years, presumably because of the connotation of the word “slave”... and this renamed product is available alongside a new Cara Dune figure, a character that they boycotted less than 6 months ago over something they interpreted as racist. "

Not quite. As far as I’m aware, the ship is still canonically the Slave I ; “Boba Fett’s Starship” is simply the name of the set . The LEGO set does portray the Slave I , yes, but it’s not like calling it Boba Fett’s Starship is wrong . The Slave I was Boba Fett’s Starship 41 years ago, and it still is today.

And Disney never boycotted Cara Dune. They fired Gina Carano , the performer who plays Cara Dune, but they never got rid of the character - she’s still there in all the same episodes of The Mandalorian that she’s always been in. It may well be that they won’t use the character onscreen again, since they don’t intend to use Carano again; alternatively, they might recast the character. But the character remains a part of Star Wars lore, and the fact they’re not still working with Carano doesn’t preclude them from offering merchandise of a character who has already appeared in multiple episodes of the show. They already have scads of reference material of Carano on which to base new merch; it’s not like LEGO’s designers need Carano to show up in person in full costume at LEGO HQ so they can model a minifigure after the character.

The Marauder...
A small Star Wars vehicle that holds more than two people...
Say no more!

Ah. I see Slave-1 has been put in the memory hole.

Assuming free thought survives, future historians will write that Orwell’s Failure was that he didn’t see private corporations playing the role of Big Brother, and Dick was dismissed due to his paranoia.

Get bent, Disney.

@lemish34 said:
" @Brikkyy13 said:
"So let me get this straight... the woke overlords at Disney rename the Slave I after 40 years, presumably because of the connotation of the word “slave”... and this renamed product is available alongside a new Cara Dune figure, a character that they boycotted less than 6 months ago over something they interpreted as racist. What are the Disney people actually trying to accomplish here? The only people who would care about the name of the Slave I being offensive are the same people who say they’re not buying LEGO sets because Cara Dune is in them! Disney has made their stance clear time and time again; they don’t actually care about social issues, they just want your money. "

THIS!!!"

Pretty sure you’re reading too much into this. The Cara Dune stuff was a PR move. This is a renaming of a LEGO set. All Disney material still calls it “Slave One”. Even if they do change the name, who cares? It’s not going to change anyone calling it Slave I. It’s not going to have much of an effect.

@Brikkyy13 said:
"So let me get this straight... the woke overlords at Disney rename the Slave I after 40 years, presumably because of the connotation of the word “slave”... and this renamed product is available alongside a new Cara Dune figure, a character that they boycotted less than 6 months ago over something they interpreted as racist. What are the Disney people actually trying to accomplish here? The only people who would care about the name of the Slave I being offensive are the same people who say they’re not buying LEGO sets because Cara Dune is in them! Disney has made their stance clear time and time again; they don’t actually care about social issues, they just want your money. "

I cant believe people actually believe this sort of nonsense. You people have brain damage...

I’m amazed how much people care about the name. It’s a few words typed on the box, it isn’t printed on the bricks. After you build it and put it on display you can call it anything you want. I think I’ll just call it Omega’s Brother’s Ship.

That said, I’m very impressed with all these sets. Most of all the lightcruiser. I was afraid there would be no interior to play in, but not only is there an interior, but it is roomy and looks great. Much better than the Tantive IV (which has had a variety of names in its Lego incarnations).

But one serious complaint, please Lego, stop making so many great Star Wars sets. Do you have any idea how much I need to spend between these and the Clone Wars and Bad Batch sets? Or should I be directing my complaint at Disney for giving Lego to much material to build?

@magmafrost said:
" I cant believe people actually believe this sort of nonsense."

It is a bit of an overreaction. The idea of a leftist corporation is also very funny to me, given that leftist ideologies are pretty much exclusively anti-corporate.

@NotProfessorWhymzi said:
"When i first saw the announcement, my gut reaction was, “hoo, boy, it’s only a matter of time before the fanbrats start shedding their salty tears once again.”

Suffice it to say i was not disappointed.
"

Yeah it’s slightly disappointing seeing the entitlement on display in the comments here and in the LegoCon thread. Some people really need to get a bit of perspective

@BuzzFluhart said:
" @DavidBrick said:
"My guess is LEGO didn't want to use the word 'Slave' anymore in a set."

Never mind that it is the NAME OF THE SHIP IN THE MOVIES AND TV SHOWS! This PC stuff has to stop!"

I don’t think it’s ever actually called such at any point though. Like, expanded media calls it Slave I, sure, but is it ever called that in the films? Any of the tv shows? So what are people looking for a set of it most likely going to look for? Are they going to look for a name that is never used or are they just going to look for ‘Boba Fett’s ship’?

@magmafrost:
I don’t see what’s so hard to understand about it. Yes, the creative side of the company has been pushing a leftist agenda, but that’s easy to chalk up to the arts appealing more to liberals as a career path, and those people wanting to work on projects that have meaning to themselves.

From the corporate side of things, they were fully aware of James Gunn’s online history when they hired him, but he wasn’t famous at the time, so it hadn’t gone public. When it did, they immediately fired him. Two versions of his tweets got spread around by the press. One version, which was far more commonly seen, was trimmed down to only include posts that could safely be included in daytime coverage, or published on the front page or cover. The full list made that one look as offensive as kindergartener insults. Based on the tame list, Twitter backed Gunn and demanded that he be rehired. The cast of the best MCU property threatened to quit. Disney caved and rehired him.

The same Disney was fully aware of John Lassiter’s behavior, to the point that, rather than directly address it, they put a chaperone on him at any company functions where alcohol was served. He also got cut loose only after this became public knowledge, but in the absence of any outrage, he didn’t get his job back.

Both of these men hold left-wing views, but Gunn was fired and then rehired, while Lassiter took (or was pushed into) a leave of absence that lasted several months before announcing that he was parting ways with the company. The main difference seems to be all the social media support that Gunn received, while nobody really stood up to defend Lassiter.

On the flip side of things are all the right-wing employees that they’ve cut loose. There was no broad support for Roseanne Barr, or Gina Carano, and both have been fired with no signs that they will be forgiven/rehired. Tim Allen hasn’t been cut loose from the Toy Story franchise, but his show got axed.
Chris Pratt only had a little dust-up following the “least favorite Chris” incident, and doesn’t seem to have had any negative impact on his employment status. So again, the more abusively they were treated on social media, the quicker Disney was to cut all ties. If there wasn’t much fuss, they didn’t respond at all.

Lots of companies have been accused of virtue-signaling as a form of advertisement. During the past month, many companies have vocally supported Pride causes, right before rolling out Pride merchandise. The ultimate purpose of any company is to make money, and Disney has gotten very good at it. They know that to make money you have to either give the people what they want, or convince them to want what you’re giving. If you want to see where a company’s true values lie, see where they spend their money without turning it into a press conference. Amongst other things, and you’d be shocked to find out how many will give campaign donations to both opponents, as a way of currying favor with whoever happens to win. It’s not about putting the best candidate in office, but rather building the best relationship with whoever ends up in office. Why? Because favorable legislation helps them earn more money. Unfavorable legislation can cost them a lot more than a few campaign donations.

As a family with poc, not a one...NOT ONE of us ever were offended or hurt by Slave Leia or Slave I.
These companies think, what, they're good and righteous all of a sudden? Just laughable.

Wowee, the reactions in this thread! Let it not be said that AFOL communities do not have their fair share of toxic fanboys.

For starters, who has the time or energy to get upset about ANY of the topics mentioned in this thread? Like LOL I cannot imagine caring about what a toy is called, whether or not “Slave 1” is still canon, or whether or not Gina Carano can pay her bills (for the record I hope she’s not able to lol).

Secondly, the primary argument for avoiding the use of “slave” is ENTIRELY correct! Slavery is evil because it dehumanizes human beings. In that sense, labeling them “slaves” is recontextualizing them to something OTHER than a person. It’s effectively affirming the enslaver’s perspective of the situation.

The preferred “enslaved persons” is part of an expanded effort to acknowledge America’s horrific sins and assess them and learn from them and build, in the words of our slaver founding fathers, “a more perfect union.”

The Constitution empathically endorses the concept of progressive change - it’s why our constitution has survived for approaching 250 years while other nations scrap and rewrite their’s on a regular basis.

I’m really, really saddened that so many members of society see no benefit in reassessing our language and trying to make it more respectful of all peoples. And that there is such opposition to this effort that grown adults will get actively angry about what some for-profit corporation wants its products to be referred to on boxes and in advertising.

TL;DR You all know you’re losing the fight against efforts to make society more fair and equitable, and you’re scared. Just remember the void lies within you, and no amount of building block toys will fill it.