LEGO Star Wars 'affordable scale'
Posted by CapnRex101,
LEGO Star Wars was introduced during 1999 and the steady development of this renowned theme has been relatively consistent, with many models growing in scale, detail and price.
Four products released during 2021 represent an interesting departure from convention, portraying memorable vehicles at lower prices than their respective predecessors. Various compromises have therefore resulted, although they noticeably vary. This article discusses such differences and which designs are most effective.
Why is the 'affordable scale' necessary?
Remakes are an inevitable feature of LEGO Star Wars, since popular subjects and characters must be continually available for new fans to purchase. Each rendition typically improves upon the previous design, exploiting new parts and building techniques to achieve superior accuracy. However, prices also increase, driven partly by inflation but primarily by design changes.
Whether such increases are consistently warranted is debatable, but they have introduced an issue because once-affordable designs have become relatively expensive. The classic T-65 X-wing Starfighter exemplifies that change, with 7140 X-wing Fighter costing $29.99 during 1999, before 75218 X-wing Starfighter was released during 2018 and reached $79.99.
The barrier to purchasing famous vehicles is therefore relatively high, potentially discouraging new LEGO Star Wars fans. Moreover, the scale and expense of various products has affected others. For example, Jens Kronvold Frederiksen confirmed that the scale and associated price of 75211 Imperial TIE Fighter reduced the likelihood of LEGO releasing another TIE/sa Bomber because the model might be too expensive, relative to its popularity.
Launching smaller and more affordable renditions of such prominent subjects was accordingly necessary, interrupting the gradual increases in scale, detail and price which had continued for two decades. Additionally, the positive reaction to the Slave I from 75222 Betrayal at Cloud City demonstrated the potential success of such products.
75300 Imperial TIE Fighter
Changes between 75211 Imperial TIE Fighter and 75300 Imperial TIE Fighter are surprisingly subtle, retaining numerous construction techniques and functions. The revised design is much smaller than its predecessor, although the detail has remained consistent because both models employ similar construction methods for their solar array wings.
The proportions between those solar array wings and the cockpit sphere are different though. While the wings may be adapted for multiple scales, the cockpit must always accommodate a minifigure and cannot therefore change substantially in size. Nevertheless, I think the changes have proven successful because any compromises are relatively minor and scarcely affect the play value, which is most important.
75301 Luke Skywalker's X-wing Fighter
75301 Luke Skywalker's X-wing Fighter achieves something incredible, costing considerably less than its immediate predecessor and containing fewer pieces, while maintaining a similar scale and quality! This model is definitely simpler than 75218 X-wing Starfighter, but provides almost equivalent functionality, play potential and display value.
Compromises in design are apparent, particularly around the nose and engine intakes. These seem comparatively minor though, considering the notable reductions in both piece count and price. The balance between price and detail is splendid in my opinion, particularly because the T-65 X-wing Starfighter was arguably most in-need of this relatively affordable design.
75302 Imperial Shuttle
75302 Imperial Shuttle shares developmental similarities with 75301 Luke Skywalker's X-wing Fighter, prioritising scale over detail. 75094 Imperial Shuttle Tydirium and this design therefore achieve comparable size, primarily because reducing the scale further would eliminate room to place minifigures inside. That is something which an Imperial Shuttle cannot compromise.
The resulting changes are conspicuous, as certain features from the previous Imperial Shuttle are missing from this example. The interior and landing gear seem particularly lacking in detail when compared with 75094 Imperial Shuttle Tydirium, although the most important features do remain intact. However, I consider this the weakest of the four 'affordable scale' products.
75312 Boba Fett's Starship
75312 Boba Fett's Starship represents the most dramatic change from its predecessor, since the scale, piece count and price have dropped substantially. However, this creation is unusual among the four 'affordable scale' sets because the detail has remained fairly constant between 75243 Slave I - 20th Anniversary Edition and 75312 Boba Fett's Starship. Others have instead prioritised size.
The design similarities between these models probably result from their shared designer, since Michael Lee Stockwell created both versions. Additionally, the Slave I is relatively spacious and adequate room remains for Boba Fett, even after reducing its scale. Conversely, the TIE Fighter and Imperial Shuttle could hardly become smaller without abandoning the paramount minifigure interaction.
Subsequent Models
I think these products have proven excellent, on the whole. Additional vehicles of similar scale may therefore be welcome, focusing initially upon the most prominent examples. For example, the A-wing would certainly benefit from a smaller rendition than 75175 A-wing Starfighter from 2017, which features impressive detail but appears significantly larger than necessary.
Furthermore, the reduced sizes and prices should enable LEGO to produce models that were previously problematic. The imposing TIE/sa Bomber is the most important such vehicle in my opinion. 75300 Imperial TIE Fighter costs $39.99 and I expect an equivalent TIE Bomber could be successful with a price of $49.99, perhaps containing Admiral Ozzel alongside the requisite Imperial Pilot and Stormtrooper.
The smaller 'affordable scale' also suits reasonably obscure subjects, which would previously have struggled to justify bigger models. Somewhat lesser-known starfighters, such as the TIE Defender or V-19 Torrent could be scaled-down successfully. Alternatively, vehicles which have been completely overlooked, including the UT-AT, could provide suitable source material for a medium-size model.
Which of these sets is your favourite and which subjects would benefit from similar treatment? Let us know in the comments.
196 likes
97 comments on this article
It will be interesting to see how Ninjago will do this if the rumours are true. I think they can do it, the only thing I don’t like about the x wing and tie fighter is the lack of retractable gear on the x wing
Having skipped 75218 because of the price I held out little hope for replacing my 6212 so was very excited when 75301 came out - it sits pride of place in my collection after a few modifications to turn it into a blue squadron fighter
Personally, I think LEGO was overreaching (maybe greedy) when making the ships $80-$100. The models just ended up being way too big, way too expensive, and really put me off from buying any of them. I can't imagine what it must've been like for a kid to see one ship costs more than a brand-new videogame.
I personally am very happy with the smaller, more affordable builds! It makes each set feel a lot more within reach, if that makes sense. Now for the price of one of the old bigger kits, you can get two ships. It's great for play and display value. I hope to see more of them come along in the future!
I can only applaud this initiative by TLG. The ever-increasing price of even smaller sets made them completely unaffordable to families with a fairly low income. They may get less money per set sold, but they'll be able to sell more of them.
The earliest generation of SW sets was not exactly accurate, but they were fairly cheap and fun.
Hey TLG: Please churn out some more sets along these lines, and don't forget about Prequel vehicles etc. They need love too.
I get why these exist, for the pricing and the fact that collectors like me will have several versions of these sets already and are increasingly unlikely to pick up new iterations, but at the same time, they really really don’t appeal to me. The compromises in the shapes, play features and detailing really put me off and I wouldn’t even pick them up at heavy discount, but maybe that’s a good thing for me!
While these are good for their target market, I really hope though that the whole line doesn’t end up going down this route, as it would be a shame if new vehicles and ones that haven’t been updated in a long time all have the same corners cut. The new version of the Mandolorian Fighter with its huge cockpit gaps and poor landing gear becoming the norm would be an example.
So, here's a thought... A TIE Bomber is too expensive. I get that... so what about releasing a Vader's TIE Fighter and a standard TIE fighter in the affordable range, both of which can be rebuilt and combined into a TIE Bomber? While it might be pricey to have all three ships, it would provide some options!
I’m very happy with the more affordable vehicles and I think the trend is great. Obviously there’s still room for UCS prices at the higher end. I think both markets are more effectively served separately.
The room inside the Slave I models is interesting. While the cockpit was able to be scaled down without losing minifigure space, the cargo section required swapping out the moulded Han in carbonite for the old-school printed / stickered brick design.
Should add, I love this as a whole thing. Having the smaller / simpler ones at a lower price point is really great for new fans, kids, and people who want a broad collection. I know I could never afford all the Star Wars sets I'd like, so I only have a few of my favourite ships. It's a great middle-ground without too much compromise.
Now all I need is a $40-50 V-19 ,and a $50-60 AT-TE
Well, I dont even know what to say. The new X Wing is an awesome model, and I personally think FAR surpasses 75218 in terms of price and size. That one was too big and it was priced accordingly. Almost like it was trying to be some weird wannabe UCS set. But 75301 is amazing. Great detail, more accurate size, better minifigs, and a lower price. I cannot, however, say the same of anything else Lego has released recently. The new TIE is an abomination, with tiny wings and a massive cockpit. 75211 was a great model, and to see this be released after that one is disappointing. The Imperial Shuttle craps its bricks next to the UCS version, but to be fair, even the last playscale one was better. With this set, its not even worth building a tiny one that can only fit one minifig in the cockpit. (as far as I know, I cant remember lol) My GWP Sailboat has a bigger sail than this things top wing! As for bObA FEtTs sTArsHiP, its a bad sign when the ONLY reason I would want to get it is for one minifig. (even it isnt that great) I can honestly say that the included stand is great, far too many sets lack something like this, so I think Lego is going in the right direction. But the Slave 1 is just TOO SMALL! Its not even REMOTELY close to accurate size! But, next, the A Wing was too big, and I would appreciate a smaller version. Why cant Lego see that theyve got it all backwards? (it seems) I dont want a small Slave 1, I want a massive one. I dont want a huge A Wing, I want a small one. This is, of course, excluding UCS models, theyre a whole different thing. Now Im all worked up, but I think Legos recent shift to giant Lukes Landspeeders and mouse sized Slave 1s is awful. Hopefully you can see my point, feel free to start an argument with me, Im in the mood...
I would love a Rebels era tie defender.
These new "affordable scale" models are so much more popular than the previous versions at the store I work at. We would have the previous x-wing and tie languish on shelves while the current ones are still flying off.
When the new ones are practically half the price of the previous ones instead of spending $100 for your kid to have an x-wing you can now spend $60, or spend the same $100 and then you get an X-Wing AND a Tie Fighter.
I truly do not want to see LEGO go back to the huge expensive models for the sake of them being expensive. These show that you can cut the right things to make a set well prices and I know I, as an AFOL, would rather be able to afford 2 ties for the price of 1 old one. I can always modify it to make it even better.
Also as was mentioned in reference to the A-Wing, some of the ships are just too big currently , the Solo tie was too big, while the new ones a perfect size, and there's many more ships that LEGO could do now at this affordable scale that would be better scaled.
I love this new affordable scale. It’s made me able to get ships I previously didn’t own, like the X-Wing and shuttle. I hope to see more!
I have a six year old daughter who loves Star Wars - my fandom lies elsewhere. We've bought her several of the recent, more detailed ships. As an adult who's interest in Lego is building MOCs that look realistic (but still fun to play with) and in NPU, the more detailed ships appeal to me because they're just more advanced designs. However, from my daughter's perspective these simpler ships are great - they still look like the ones she sees in her books and cartoons, but are easier for her to build, and most importantly easier for her to repair when they break during play. I think it's great that they are offering simpler versions of the ships now. Perhaps Lego could offer simpler ships like these for kids, and expand the UCS series so adults (or those with the budget) can still get the detailed ships they prefer.
I went theough an wxercise a few weeks ago determining which Star Wars vehicles were actually minifigure scale when compared to canon. It was interesting and the newest X-Wing and TIE are relatively right on the mark, along with Y-Wings. A-Wings are historically an inch or two bigger than scale. The UCS Falcon and Imperial Shuttle are both right on the mark and the UCS Slave I is still about three inches too short. Most of the larger scale sets are roughly about half the size they should be, e.g. the UCS Sandcrawler. The Tantive IV would need to be about eight feet long. The most hilarious is that Luke’s landspeeder should only be about three or four inches long. Take the info or leave it, but that’s how I wasted an afternoon one day.
I applaud this move. 75301 X-wing is especially well done for the price. I'd like to see a Millennium Falcon for $90-100. The interior would be small, but all you really need is the holo-chess table, IMO. And I'd like to see Luke's landspeeder the size of the 1999 one.
I'm a huge fan of this new scale. Despite being an adult with a fair amount of disposable income...I just don't have the space to store or display the larger, "better-scaled" versions of these iconic vehicles. 2021's changed that, I finally have the space for an X-Wing, a couple of chasing TIE Fighters, and the Slave I. I hope this scale continues to be used in 2022!
The main reason I like these 'affordable scale' models is that they feel much more in scale with the minifigures. Its all well and good having lots of detail etc, but when the build size dwarfed the figure thats piloting it, it just didn't feel accurate, or given its a 'spaceship toy', very swooshable.
Hopefully the trend continues so we can get other more obscure ships that were 'too expensive' to build before done.
The new X-wing works at the smaller scale. Well done. The TIE Fighter not so much, but it is hard to deny the swooshability factor is strong with it once you have it built. The Shuttle and Slave I, on the other hand, are jokes. The reduced scale makes sense for kids for the reasons stated in the article. But I am a bit shocked at how the AFOL community has embraced these just because they are cheaper to buy. I think even a child, after watching the movies, could see how ridiculous the size of the Boba Fett Starship set is compared to the actual Slave I. Heck, consider if their only reference is to the Mandalorian Season 2, where multiple characters are shown riding inside the Slave I. No way they could replicate it with this new set. It's basically the equivalent of putting lipstick (the new colors, newer pieces, alluring minifigures) on a pig (something akin to the original LEGO Slave I from the year 2000). On the plus side, if they remake Jango Fett's Slave I in this tiny scale, I at least will be relieved to know I still own the spacious 2002 original.
This smaller scale will probably be our only hope of getting another Jango Fett's Slave 1, since Lego seems to hate episode II
Yeah, I'm enjoying this and I hope they continue. The Shuttle was perhaps the weakest (and perhaps it is telling that it is also the most expensive, there was clearly the least fat to cut there), but I've gotten the cockpit to where I'm happy with it. The others were fantastic out of the box, and have finally given me the ships I want at prices that feel good.
Now, could we get a Falcon for similar money to the Eternals triangle ship? We've seen what is posdible for 1.5x that money, but it'll be good to try and get that icon back in double digits again.
I remember writing about 'scale' last time this time this came up; and comparing it to when Kenner had the action figure line. I mean, the Falcon alone would be a nightmare to scale, and TLG's making Death Stars and Star Destroyers...yikes.8|
Hmmm...regarding the TIE Bomber: has Lego ever considered 'expansion/add-on sets', like they did for their old Train series. No, think about: you buy a TIE Fighter, but want a TIE Bomber; TLG then also make a set/kit to expand/convert the Fighter into a Bomber. Yes, you would be 'spending twice' to get what you want, but this way (pardon the pun) expands the options: Interceptor could be don this way, as well as most of the variants (at least of the classic series)...anyhow,
Of the sets shown; I reeealy like that A-Wing, which might be a tad on the large side but still looks amazing. Almost like it came right off the screen.:)
There was already a smaller A-Wing - set 75003 in 2013. 186 pieces. If you want TLG to just re-issue it…..
@Tyrell_Archer said:
"So, here's a thought... A TIE Bomber is too expensive. I get that... so what about releasing a Vader's TIE Fighter and a standard TIE fighter in the affordable range, both of which can be rebuilt and combined into a TIE Bomber? While it might be pricey to have all three ships, it would provide some options!"
TLG hire this one!
I like the idea very much. A little like 76107 and 76102 combining. On the flip side there would probably then be complaints about the perceived money-grab by TLG 'forcing' us the by two sets to get one model... but, you can't please everyone :)
It's a little like reading comments on Brickset about new releases which sometimes alternate between "same old stale ideas LEGO, when will you try something new?" and "LEGO needs to stop with all these wacky ideas and stick to what they do best" :D
I LOVE the smaller scale, even if some proportions are off, the overall "bang for the buck" is there! And since it is Lego, they can be modded to suit the customer's taste. Also, I've noticed over my many years of Lego play and collecting, especially in the internet age, that the ingenious fan mods are sometimes cost-effectively folded into the official sets. The company and fans bounce ideas off each other, resulting in better sets. Keep the affordable size epicness coming Lego!
I'm one of those "new" Lego Star Wars fans (although a long time Star Wars fan) and I love this size. I'd not have considered more expensive ships but bought both 75300 & 75301 because they're iconic, affordable, decent details and easily to display. I'm likely to get 75312 mainly because it's quite cheap, rather than properly scaled.
I'm thinking of modding Vader's TIE from 75159 to create a trench run chase display. I'm only considering that due to the size & price of the current li e.
I think this is a good move to allow more people access to their products.
Has the PPP ratio been maintained between the different versions or are you seeing any inflation? Would be interesting to see that in your little tables under each product.
@brick_r How about a TIE "3 in 1": builds a TIE Bomber, or a TIE Fighter and a TIE Interceptor (at the same time). At a price of around $80, I'm sure plenty of us would buy two, to have all three ships together!
This is just a win across the board. Great for younger fans and families with a more limited budget and great for collectors with more limited space. I do hope they prioritize detail over scale though going forward. Slave I is just an incredible little model and in some ways better than every predecessor save for the UCS edition and I will happily buy up more vehicle releases like it.
I really like these, minus the Slave I, which I wish was a bit bigger.
However, I lile that I will be able to buy all these for 20-30% off and have a nice little similary sized display that doesn't take up much space and becuase they're small piece counts I won't be tempted to strip down for parts to MOC with.
I've ended up buying all of these except the shuttle. And cool as the previous X-Wings or TIEs were, I REALLY like these guys. Very effective models. Don't even mind the proportions on the TIE Fighter, in fact I think it's my favourite of the bunch.
I really hope they continue this trend, and use it to finally make a Delta-7 that's true to scale. Those have always been to big, and have grown to absurd size in the most recent incarnations.
@Tyrell_Archer:
Hopefully they don’t feel the same way. Think back to 1999. You could army-build the X-Wing, but if you wanted a squadron of Y-Wings, you also ended up with a squadron of Vader’s one-off custom prototype TIE fighter, which basically just made the Y-wing far less affordable in large groups.
This would do the same thing for the basic TIE, which would make it far less desirable for AFOL collectors. For kids, it would basically be combining two affordable sets into one that gets right back up into the price range they’re trying to move away from. If they could make it work with a TIE Interceptor and a basic TIE, that would at least solve one of the problems. Or they could just make an affordable TIE Bomber in scale with this new lineup, and it would solve all the problems.
@EstragonHelmer:
The X-Wing has actually grown way too large, so it was additional benefit in that the reduced scale is the most accurate it’s ever been in terms of size. The UCS Slave I is the most accurate for size, but that’s not the only problem with reusing the molded carbonite slab. It’s easy to change the print between Han, a Gamorrean, or even Jar-Jar. Using a molded slab would have required a new mold, because Han wasn’t his cargo in this instance.
@reardonmj:
There was an article here recently that did the same thing.
@brick_r:
Hasbro produced a blow-molded Falcon that was shaped like the original Kenner toy, but large enough to look properly scaled to minifigs when viewed from above (from the side, it was way too thick, with a really fat butt due to the fact that they didn’t omit the play wells). It had no interior access, but for those lucky few who won a copy when TRU was finally ready to take them down, they probably looked really cool hanging next to action figure scaled X-Wings and such.
I absolutely loathe these downscaled sets.
I'm not at all convinced they were necessary at all. If LEGO was so concerned about pricing, they should just accept to take a bigger hit in the profits per set.
Not a single one of these new sets is good. Not one. They all have weird proportions and compromises that are too big for the price tag they still carry. The horrid TIE-Fighter, for example, should at best cost 30€, not 40€. There simply is nothing there to justify the price. Yet, here we are.
I'd rather LEGO bring back Midi-Scale sets rather than making this horrid downscaled minifigure sets.
I think 7140 is one of the best LEGO sets, actually IMO all of the original SW ones are good, at least for the first 5-7 years. "Oh no it looks like a LEGO set" well it IS LEGO after all. " Oh no, studs are showing" Again its a LEGO set, after all. We can call this 'downsizing' some gimmick for LEGO that's recent, but in reality LEGO has been consistently making smaller and smaller looking sets (even if part numbers are up due to the extensive use of 1x1 and 1x2 plate like parts) and charging more, or the same amount, for the same.. Now LEGO is trying to spin it like we should be lucky to have such sets. or this is all inflation.... pulease... LEGO has forgotten all fans and have made either really expensive sets for the minority that can afford them, or really watered down ones, for the 'rest'...LEGO I guess needs to be reminded they are LEGO, not Hasbro. I miss the sets from the first 5 years of SW (yes even though many are non-fleshies), or at least many of the first versions of sets were most are stilll (IMO) much better than what came out later. Yknow, the ones made before LEGO realized they could bilk people out of their cash for later subpar sets.
I really want a mass-able Vulture droid, $15-$20, it wouldn't even need a minifigure but a pilot droid or super battle droid would be fine. Oh and for TIE fighters, A Creator style set that could build any of the 4 main ones would be cool
As a Transformer and Lego collector, it's interesting watching the similar journeys these companies go through. It's not static; it's a constant cycle. Eventually the Lego Star Wars sets will increase in price, detail and parts again, before resetting back to something simpler.
In Transformers, there was a time in around 2014 with 'Thrilling 30' where they peaked for detail and complexity; most adult fans acknowledge that these designs were fantastic for older fans, but seriously compromised for kids that actually wanted to play with them. The transformations were way to complicated and fiddly for quick play and conversion, and we wonder how many of the figures from that line never made it in to vehicle mode. The same went for their movie toys, which were extremely convoluted due to the nature of the movie designs.
Hasbro/Takara did a bit of a reset after that line and did Combiner Wars, which simplified things right back, but possibly too far - transformations were very simple, a lot of basic articulation was gone, and things seemed a lot more cheaply made overall. The possibly went too far, but these were great toys for kids.
Now in 2019-2021 they seem to have hit the right balance between detail/simplicity/poseability/complexity in their 'War For Cybertron' line, hitting a happy medium that suits all age groups. Alongside their standard line, they also have a more mature-targeted 'Studio Series' line that makes no apologies for being more complicated and collector targeted (similar to how Hasbro does 'Black Series' Star Wars figures).
The big main difference in this story is that Hasbro has kept the prices consistently creeping upwards this whole time regardless of parts counts and complexity...
Although I would happily buy any TIE Bomber scale at this point, I am still hoping there will be a UCS version in the not too distant future.
@madforLEGO:
The thing about 7140 is that it looked more like a LEGO set than an X-Wing. As part of the initial launch wave, it didn’t benefit at all from the growth of the design team that followed. Look at 7130 compared to any Snowspeeder that followed, and it looks similar in scale, but very clunky and missing some key details. Likewise, the X-Wings that followed did a much better job of matching the aesthetic of the movie, but the problem that went hand-in-hand with that was that they were only able to design that graceful taper to the forward fuselage by scaling it up a bunch. Fans at the time were so caught up by the improved looks that we wrongfully assumes the scale had been “corrected”, when in fact they shot past the proper size and quite a bit beyond it.
It didn’t help that around the same time, Hasbro, having rereleased many of the runty vintage Kenner vehicles, moved on to start releasing a bunch of more accurately shaped versions, reinforcing the idea that “larger = more accurate”. In some cases that’s true, but this is the most accurate minifig-scale X-Wing they’ve released to date, and looks leaps and bounds more accurate than 7140.
@darthsutius:
Transformers also has Masterpiece, which fills a similar role as UCS. I liked Skywarp so much that I bought two copies to display him in both modes. I would have done the same for Soundwave, but I also bought Soundblaster, which is just a simple recolor. Like UCS, however, Masterpiece makes it hard for many collectors to keep up with favorite designs (though partly that’s because they’re difficult to source).
However, I have not had that same experience for WfC vs SS models. I can’t recall buying a single WfC character without using the instructions the first time I transformed them. However, I recently bought 76 Thrust and 86 Wreck-Gar and figured out both from the box art. I’ve never heard of “Thrilling 30”, but the only one I can recall having to seek help with was Masterpiece Movie Series MPM-7 Bumblebee. The video I watched said that was a very common problem, though, due to how hard it is to see what’s going on in the instructions.
I'm saddened at the loss of the amazing detail we've been getting in the minifig-scale SW sets, but this really is where SW should be. People like me can (and do) buy UCS. Playsets should be affordable and these are the right move.
I personally like affordable scale for the most part, with the X-Wing and Slave I being my favourites.
As for future models, the Millenium Falcon will definitely be released in a year or two, while I’d also like to see an A-Wing, TIE Advanced or The Ghost at one point as well.
While the overall idea of downsizing the sets somewhat is great, the four items here are all different cases when it comes to the outcome:
The X-wing is fantastic. It is properly scaled, still large enough for the price, lacks a bit of detailing but because of its simplicity it looks so much more streamlined than the 2018 version. It is a shame that the landing gear doesn't retract.
The TIE Fighter is another successful example, although I can agree with those that are disappointed that the proportions are not ideal. Still, it at least looks a bit like the SW Rebels version, and the TIE does whatever a minifigure scale TIE needs to do for a reasonable price.
The Slave I looks nice but it is way too small. Here they went a bit too far with the downsizing. The Slave I just is supposed to be a bigger ship, so they should've kept it similar to the 2019 one size-wise.
There isn't really a point in downsizing the Imperial Shuttle anymore than the 2015 version, otherwise you end up with... 75302. Again, some ships really do not need to be much smaller as they are simply large compared to a human in-universe. But while the new Slave I looks nice, this year's Imperial Shuttle absolutely does not.
@djcbs said:
"I absolutely loathe these downscaled sets.
I'm not at all convinced they were necessary at all. If LEGO was so concerned about pricing, they should just accept to take a bigger hit in the profits per set.
Not a single one of these new sets is good. Not one. They all have weird proportions and compromises that are too big for the price tag they still carry. The horrid TIE-Fighter, for example, should at best cost 30€, not 40€. There simply is nothing there to justify the price. Yet, here we are.
I'd rather LEGO bring back Midi-Scale sets rather than making this horrid downscaled minifigure sets."
Who sh!t in your cereal this morning?
This new scale is the way to go! 75301 X-Wing has been my favorite set in a handful of years, since the Mystery Machine was released. The last X-Wing and Po's X-Wing were a tiny 3 cm shorter but twice the price. Why would we want that? I really like this years' line.
It’s simple for me - I’d like the scale argument to be used so that we can see ships and vehicles TLG rarely make, or haven’t made at all.
I haven’t bought any of the new smaller scale ships because they’re repetitive subject matter and I have plenty of them already as an AFOL - if there was a reduced scale style UT-AT, SPHA-T or a host of other larger vehicles (particularly from the Prequel era) created at a smaller size but for the first time, I’d definitely be interested!
@MainBricker:
Wish granted: 75301
I don’t really understand all the comments about how the size of up the new x-wing (75301) is so much better than the size of the previous play scale model (75218). The difference between both is 3cm, barely more than an inch. They also have the same width and 75301 is actually thicker than 75218…
I got the new downscale Slave-1 and I really love it. It’s a very well built model. Very dense, somehow. I put it on display next to the UCS model and it looks like a father and a son.
What I have to say is this: If you think the normal sets are super accurate and the more affordable ones lack accuracy, look at some MOCs like--
- Inthert's X-Wing, Naboo Starfighter, TIE Fighter and B-Wing
- Jerac's X-Wing and TIE Fighters
- Juergen Wittner's Millennium Falcon,
- lamborghiniwafflesauce's A-Wing,
- Lewis Kiwi's landspeeder, AT-ST and AAT
- Edge of Bricks's Slave I, TIE Fighter and Razorcrest
You'll see that normal Lego sets are not as accurate as you thought, and the small step down (if any) to the affordable sets is insignificant compared to the difference between normal sets and MOCs. Most Star Wars sets are toys, not display models, so they might as well be cheap enough for children to afford. I resent not being able to get the sets I wanted when I was younger because they were too expensive.
I think this is a smart move. These are targeted at kids and for play. It makes sense to make them more accessible while sacrificing some detail. After all, the UCS range is where we can turn to get the most accurate versions of these
@eiffel006:
And the new Speed Champions are only 5/8” wider than their predecessors. But when a minifig stands only 1.5” tall, that effectively makes the new cars 10’ wide. At that width, I should be able to lay across the back seat with arms outstretched and not be able to touch both doors at the same time, when in reality I doubt I could do it even with both arms at my sides.
Yes, people are going on about how the new X-Wing is more accurately scaled...in response to all the people whinging about how it’s way too small. The size difference is identical, regardless of which you think is more accurate, but you’re not questioning why people are going all Chicken Little over the size reduction, especially when it’s pretty easy to demonstrate that they’re wrong about the size in relation to minifigs.
My 4-year-old son is desperate for "Boba Fett's ship" (his words, not TLC's), but can barely swoosh around the 20th Anniversary Slave 1, and forget about the UCS model. This new version is perfect for his little hands. For that reason alone, I am grateful that this "new scale" is happening.
I’ll be the first to admit that I was EXTREMELY skeptical when news first broke of the smaller vehicle renditions that were coming. “How could Lego possibly maintain the trend in quality and detail at lower piece counts?” I thought.
Happy to report that I’ve been proven wrong. I’m really impressed with the creativity and ingenuity shown in these new models. I’m hopeful that it also allows Lego to experiment a bit, and release sets that either haven’t been done before or are in need of a revamp.
I love my Imperial TIE Fighter, but only because it doesn't lose a lot in comparison with his bigger versions. For other sets, I would prefer to pay more for more details and fewer gaps)
This reduction in cost and parts were much needed.
When they get discounted on Amazon it's very tempting to buy them. £25 for the TIE Fighter? £35 for the X-Wing? That's very attractive. And they look great for that price and piece count (X wing nose excepted). And for some of us, having them in various scales is very appealing.
I still haven't got any motivation to watch the main series of films yet. I've only played the original LEGO Star Wars, the newer Battlefront II, and Jedi: Fallen Order. But after getting my first and for now only proper LEGO Star Wars set in 75226, and missing out on the Battle-Pack-in-all-but-name 75262, I kinda want 75300, 75301 and even 75302 and 75312.
The only thing stopping me is the fact that I'm not a Star Wars fan, so I can't think of a good enough reason to buy these as their combined retail price is a whopping 400 SGD :( But I'm really happy about the return to affordable playsets first and foremost.
When I was a kid, I wanted a Slave I set, but I never found the original on shelves. The $50 msrp for the Attack of the Clones and 2006 Empire Strikes Back editions was just too high for me at the time; this was before I had much of my own money and by the time the latter was out, it was over a month's allowance and there were lots of other items I wanted. I think I was able to buy Dengar online in one of my first online LEGO purchases. When it went out of print, I promised myself I'd buy the next version... the edition released four years later, though, was marked up thirty dollars more, my allowance was about the same, and I had my eye on a few other big sets instead at the time, so it again fell to the wayside. (It may be worth noting as a kid I'd always assumed Slave I was smaller than it is.)
By the time the 20th Anniversary Edition released, it was now marked up forty bucks further to $120 and I felt prepared to sink the money as an adult but burned to see such a huge increase - for the third time, the Slave I had a price jump I felt trouble following. I thought I found the new edition for a good price, but it turned out the seller shipped the 2010 edition instead and I couldn't get a refund. The older version seemed disappointing, too - the cockpit felt unfinished, the wings felt fragile, and it didn't feel like the interior space was used well at all. Some of the weapons were cool, but after so many years of anticipation, it felt like a letdown.
Boba Fett's Spaceship definitely isn't advanced as the Anniversary edition, which I still hope to buy one day, but it was exactly what I was looking for as a kid - an affordable one-man fighter with weapons, room for a pilot and cargo, and much better wings. Considering it's half the price point of the previous edition, it retains most of the necessary features besides the rotating cockpit and room for a full-size Carbonite Han. I think it looks a lot better than the 2010 version did though. (I don't think I'd say this if I'd bought the Anniversary edition though.)
To clarify a little, I wouldn't offer blanket praise here. I'm not satisfied with the Imperial Shuttle and understand the dislike of the TIE Fighter, so I wouldn't go as far as to say all future builds should look like this, but I definitely think these make good 'filler' between the normal-scaled ships. I'm absolutely planning to pick up the X-Wing, too. These are a godsend for kids who may want the iconic vehicles but only get ten bucks a week and I hope they remain a part of the line!
@darthsutius :
Transformers also has Masterpiece, which fills a similar role as UCS. I liked Skywarp so much that I bought two copies to display him in both modes. I would have done the same for Soundwave, but I also bought Soundblaster, which is just a simple recolor. Like UCS, however, Masterpiece makes it hard for many collectors to keep up with favorite designs (though partly that’s because they’re difficult to source).
However, I have not had that same experience for WfC vs SS models. I can’t recall buying a single WfC character without using the instructions the first time I transformed them. However, I recently bought 76 Thrust and 86 Wreck-Gar and figured out both from the box art. I’ve never heard of “Thrilling 30”, but the only one I can recall having to seek help with was Masterpiece Movie Series MPM-7 Bumblebee. The video I watched said that was a very common problem, though, due to how hard it is to see what’s going on in the instructions.]]
Ah, so - Studio Series 86 is a little different - those guys really belong in the other line, but due to some unknown reasons, some very simple figures have ended up in the Studio Series line. Put the Studio Series Devastator together, for example, and you'll see what I mean - that's not going to happen without instructions or a video guide ;-)
The older 'Generations' stuff wasn't necessarily complicated, so much as difficult and fiddly - which meant that if the plastic tolerances were slightly off, the toy could be really compromised. Things are generally a lot better these days - for the most part, the current releases are really solid and just WORK.
And you're right about Masterpieces, very much a similar offering to the UCS Lego Sets, although Takara has jumped the shark with those recently with their quest to make toon accurate bots with realistic alt modes - massive parts counts and high paint usage equals extreme costs. $450+AU for Starscream? Yeah....nah thanks.
I think this is a great initiative by LEGO to get more affordable sets out to the public while retaining the quality level. I think they’re all too aware of the price creep that occurred in the 90s, but they responded by lowering set quality and attempting to increase revenue streams from areas where they had no experience.
I hope it works.
In my opinion the cheaper x-wing is as good or better than the 2018 one. I kind of hated the 2018 one because the engines were too far back, there was a big gap in them, the wing cannons were completely inaccurate, the front of the wings were a WHOLE BRICK thick and I didn't like how the switch for the wing mechanism was integrated. The nose design has never been done well, but that is one of the hardest things about building a Lego x-wing.
The new one fixes a lot of those things. It has a few flaws, but I think it is as good as any other x-wing Lego has produced.
@ForestMenOfEndor:
I own most of the different versions of Slave I and will continue to buy them. As a huge fan of the midi-scale line (however briefly it lasted), I’d actually like to see that revived (but not as SDCC exclusives!!!!!!!), and wonder what kids would think of stuff scaled down to the point where they couldn’t possibly fit a minifig inside, but could easily hold one ship in each hand to play out a dogfight scenario.
@LegoSonicBoy:
Seriously? The OT has a cultural impact on movies that really only compares to The Beatles for music, or LotR for fiction novels. It’s hard to imagine someone buying the sets to build and pointedly avoiding ever watching the films.
@darthsutius:
I’ve never cared for Starscream (he came across as a whiny coward in the old cartoon), and looking through the full list of regular Masterpiece products, anything that interests me is mostly just alt deco of the few I already own. The one real exception is Thrust. I really liked the fanblade wings as a kid, so there’s a degree of temptation there, but not enough that I’ve done anything about it yet.
@PixelTheDragon said:
"Personally, I think LEGO was overreaching (maybe greedy) when making the ships $80-$100. The models just ended up being way too big, way too expensive, and really put me off from buying any of them. I can't imagine what it must've been like for a kid to see one ship costs more than a brand-new videogame.
I personally am very happy with the smaller, more affordable builds! It makes each set feel a lot more within reach, if that makes sense. Now for the price of one of the old bigger kits, you can get two ships. It's great for play and display value. I hope to see more of them come along in the future! "
I agree with this entirely! I also like the bit of nostalgia for the original versions, which were smaller and lacking in detail. The adult in me loves trying to get things as close to the "real" thing as possible, but harkening back to LEGO Star Wars' own roots is fun too - and for a kid, those missing details aren't going to detract from the play value anyway!
IMO 6212/4502 is still best from X-Wings.
This has been the best thing Lego has ever done. I do already own an X Wing and TIE, but I bought the new ones because why not at these prices. Never had an Imperial Shuttle and I really wanted one, but the price was just so high, now I got one. Didn’t get the Slave I as I parted out the one from Cloud City on Bricklink, but if I can find it on sale one day I’ll probably get it as well.
Yes, I understand that they may have cut a few corners, but they are still much more detailed and better built than the larger sets that appeared at these prices 20 years ago. Plus every set is still designed to hold the minifigures which is what it’s all about.
While I can still see a need for some very large sets targeted towards adults, I really hope that these more affordable sets are the future of Star Wars. I’m disappointed at the price I had to pay for the Bad Batch Shuttle knowing that they could have designed it similarly to these sets (and eliminated the speeders).
@djcbs said:
"I absolutely loathe these downscaled sets.
I'm not at all convinced they were necessary at all. If LEGO was so concerned about pricing, they should just accept to take a bigger hit in the profits per set.
Not a single one of these new sets is good. Not one. They all have weird proportions and compromises that are too big for the price tag they still carry. The horrid TIE-Fighter, for example, should at best cost 30€, not 40€. There simply is nothing there to justify the price. Yet, here we are.
I'd rather LEGO bring back Midi-Scale sets rather than making this horrid downscaled minifigure sets."
I think you’re in the minority on this one. They won’t be for everyone, but they definitely fill a gap in the market that was getting bigger each year. Affordable, and smaller, versions of iconic sets is definitely welcome, even if not by all.
As for a business just taking the financial hit on the chin, lol. That’s all I will say about that.
@MainBricker said:
"I haven't bought a single one of these downsized sets for the simple reason that I have enough of them already (I bought all the 1999 stuff, and then went for the remakes in 2012).
They're not an improvement, I can understand that the sets were getting too expensive. But now we get these sets and UCS, no in-between.
I would like to see true minifigure scale sets."
I’m a little confused when you say no in-between. The sets they’ve been releasing before these downscaled ones were the in between. They weren’t UCS, but they also weren’t small.
As for true minifigure scale sets, you would be looking at $200+ sets which moves them in the wrong direction of where they’re trying to be.
I absolutely love the smaller scale. I have the Tie and Salve 1. I'll admit, the Tie is a bit oddly proportioned, but the Slave 1... My god, is it good. Nice handleable size, detailed, and the build was great!
I plan on getting the X-wing, and the Shuttle is sorely tempting. But right now, I'm more curious as to what they plan to release in the future. I wonder if there's any feasible way to downscale the Falcon...
@GlassBoxTesting said:
"Having skipped 75218 because of the price I held out little hope for replacing my 6212 so was very excited when 75301 came out - it sits pride of place in my collection after a few modifications to turn it into a blue squadron fighter"
Hello!
I agree. But Luke's fighter in Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi, and even in Rise of Skywalker was a T-65B by then. Oh and the designation was still Red 5 even then.
I welcome this. However the X-Wing that Luke flew during the Empire Strikes back and yes Return of the Jedi, and by the time we get down to Rise of Skywalker, was a T-65B.
It seems that Incom was heavily invested into the Rebellion......
@DoctorWho8 said:
"I welcome this. However the X-Wing that Luke flew during the Empire Strikes back and yes Return of the Jedi, and by the time we get down to Rise of Skywalker, was a T-65B.
It seems that Incom was heavily invested into the Rebellion......"
The T-65B X-wing Starfighter is the only variant which appears during the Original Trilogy. There is no canonical information about its presumed predecessor, the T-65A.
@CapnRex101:
Granted, it came from EU sources, but the only confirmed predecessor I’ve heard of is the Z-95 Headhunter. For the T-65, looking at military convention shows a few possibilities. Depending on the plane, the A variant is usually either a conventional plane or a single-seated plane. For the X-Wing, the B variant might be a VTOL, with the A variant a budget CTOL version. Or the A variant could exclude the astromech, and either require the pilot calculate hyperdrive routes, or have no hyperdrive capabilities. In either case, you can see that the A variant would be unappealing to a military force that basically moves from one temporary base to the next, often on a moment’s notice.
Alternately, the designation was assigned by someone who was familiar enough with real aircraft naming conventions to know that letters often follow the numbers, but not enough to really know what they mean.
One final unlikely possibility would be that the A variant was a prototype, with the B variant being the main production model.
@PurpleDave: Perhaps building the sets will convince me to finally watch the main series of films through. To be fair, the films are a lot to take in. At the very least, I've already had some exposure through the video games. Never say never, I guess.
@PurpleDave - Canonically, the Z-95 Headhunter and ARC-170 Starfighter both influenced the X-wing Starfighter. Since we know that subsequent developments of the X-wing include the T-70 and T-85, I think the 'B' designation identifying minor design variation seems most plausible, as you mentioned. Perhaps the T-65A could be a lighter version or one including a tandem cockpit, should any stories require such features.
@LegoSonicBoy:
The individual movies aren’t that long, running 121-132 minutes each for the original trilogy, and 133-142 minutes each for the prequels. Skip the Disney sequels.
So you’re looking at about 12-3/4 hours total runtime for the six Star Wars movies, or just 6-1/4 hours if you stick to the OT. You could watch the OT in a single sitting if you’ve got the day off. For six movies, you could space them out one per day over a week.
If you do watch the prequels, be aware that Ep1 was written for a younger audience than the other films.
@CapnRex101:
The EU did have a tandem cockpit X-Wing, didn’t it?
@LegoSonicBoy said:
" @PurpleDave: Perhaps building the sets will convince me to finally watch the main series of films through. To be fair, the films are a lot to take in. At the very least, I've already had some exposure through the video games. Never say never, I guess.
If you are interested in watching SW, I would say just go for the original trilogy, its rather simple and easy to enjoy. Then if you were interested, you could watch the prequel trilogy which at least offers a pretty solid backstory to the OT. Just whatever you do, as PurpleDave suggested, skip the sequels and do your brain cells a favor, I dont recommend wasting them. "
This scale is preferable, IMO, as these craft are easier to integrate into a large carrier MOC, which is the kind of LSW stuff I find intriguing.
@NotProfessorWhymzi:
Actually, sitting on a punji stick might be just the distraction one needs to get through the sequels in one sitting.
@Goujon said:
"It will be interesting to see how Ninjago will do this if the rumours are true. I think they can do it, the only thing I don’t like about the x wing and tie fighter is the lack of retractable gear on the x wing"
Surely there is some kind of "hack" that can put a retractable front landing gear on this.
I know there currently isn't an UCS x-wing available, but after having 4 X-wing in a row that were €90-€100 each from 2015-2020, it's good that they went down to €55 on this one without overly downsizing it.
However, I don't like the direction of 4+ models trying to fill the gap of the €20-€30 models instead of just 250-300-ish piece regular builds.
@NoNaCl said:
" @Goujon said:
"It will be interesting to see how Ninjago will do this if the rumours are true. I think they can do it, the only thing I don’t like about the x wing and tie fighter is the lack of retractable gear on the x wing"
Surely there is some kind of "hack" that can put a retractable front landing gear on this."
Use the technique from 75218.
Even though these newer and smaller designs lack as much detail, I still like them. I've never owned a regular TIE Fighter before, and after buying 75300 I love it and wish to even get a couple more.
@NotProfessorWhymzi said:
[[ @gorf43 said:
[[ @LegoSonicBoy said:
[[ @PurpleDave: Perhaps building the sets will convince me to finally watch the main series of films through. To be fair, the films are a lot to take in. At the very least, I've already had some exposure through the video games. Never say never, I guess.
If you are interested in watching SW, I would say just go for the original trilogy, its rather simple and easy to enjoy. Then if you were interested, you could watch the prequel trilogy which at least offers a pretty solid backstory to the OT. Just whatever you do, as PurpleDave suggested, skip the sequels and do your brain cells a favor, I dont recommend wasting them. ]]]]
I guess it is pretty hard to enjoy the sequels when you perpetually have a stick up your butt.]]
LOL
@PurpleDave said:
" @LegoSonicBoy:
The individual movies aren’t that long, running 121-132 minutes each for the original trilogy, and 133-142 minutes each for the prequels. Skip the Disney sequels.
So you’re looking at about 12-3/4 hours total runtime for the six Star Wars movies, or just 6-1/4 hours if you stick to the OT. You could watch the OT in a single sitting if you’ve got the day off. For six movies, you could space them out one per day over a week.
If you do watch the prequels, be aware that Ep1 was written for a younger audience than the other films."
Well this is quite the opinionated post. There are plenty of people who would say that the prequels aren’t worth watching, or that they were only saved by the Clone Wars animated show that came out many years later. Personally I think that Disney did a much better job with the sequels than Lucas did with the prequels, they are much more enjoyable. Not to mention Lucas didn’t rely on models to create special effects for the prequels like he did in the originals. As a result the quality of the special effects in the originals have withstood the test of time. The CGI used to create the prequels looked fake at the time of their release and are absolutely pathetic by today’s standards.
As for episode 1, certainly Jar Jar is there for kids, but it is easily the least kid friendly movie of the bunch. The movie mostly revolves around very confusing politics and is very light on action. My kids enjoyed watching the pod race and battles on Naboo, but found everything taking place on Corruscant to be unbearable to watch. It was the only movie of the 11 movies that they weren’t completely mesmerized by.
I think that Lego should go back to making Large Scale Models like they were before because let's face it most of the purchasers are adults or young adults. Kids don't really go out and buy Lego their parents do and they're not going to spend that kind of money
I realize that Lego is a kid base company but most of the sets that come out are targeted towards adult
I know that I get peeved when they bring up these small sets they look okay but they don't look the way they're supposed to look it just looks cheap
@Josh103 said:
"I think that Lego should go back to making Large Scale Models like they were before because let's face it most of the purchasers are adults or young adults. Kids don't really go out and buy Lego their parents do and they're not going to spend that kind of money
I realize that Lego is a kid base company but most of the sets that come out are targeted towards adult
I know that I get peeved when they bring up these small sets they look okay but they don't look the way they're supposed to look it just looks cheap"
I can absolutely guarantee that the majority of LEGO Star Wars sets are purchased by, or for, children. Sometimes the online community makes it feel otherwise though, admittedly.
@alfred_the_buttler:
Two members of my LUG are of the opinion that Star Wars now consists of just three movies (unlike me, one of them _didn’t_ find himself wanting to chuck his drink at the screen before the first line of dialogue is uttered in The Forced Remake, which is about how long it took me to decide that film was garbage).
Sure, the prequels probably would have been better served if Lucas had continued to hire new directors to bring his vision to life, and if he hadn’t gotten divorced (or at the very least convinced his ex-wife to come back and help edit the films like she did with the OT). But the prequels at least told an original story. The sequels just retold the OT story with some new stuff mixed in. Rey is a classic Mary Sue. Every time she gets in a difficult situation that she’s not familiar with, she magically discovers that she’s an expert at that, too, just like every other problem she’s encountered. Luke at least had to grow over the course of three movies, and stumbled a few times along the way. Anakin did more than just stumble. Rey...just coasted through to the end.
But that has nothing to do with why I said Ep1 was written more for kids. At 2-1/4 hours, it’s well beyond the 90-minute mark targeted by most feature films targeted at an adolescent audience. That’s about how long the average young kid will pay attention to a film before wanting to do anything else. But it gets away with it, for a few big reasons. First, one of the main characters is also a young kid, who acts and sounds like a young kid. Trash his performance all you want, but Jake Lloyd is no Haley Joel Osmont, and he feels more natural and less Hollywood-natural as a result. Rather than being written and acted for us grown-ups, he was aimed square at his contemporaries.
The next thing is Jar-Jar. Again, one of the most-cites reasons to hate the prequels, and in particular the first prequel. I read a retrospective review several years ago, and like most of us who grew up on the OT, the author _HATED_ Jar-Jar. But then he watched the film with a regular audience during a matinee. Kids everywhere, and it, as you point out, the movie even starts off with politics, so it didn’t take long for kids to start looking for anything but the movie to capture their attention (a difficult prospect in a crowded movie theater).
Then Jar-Jar appeared. The author claimed that as soon as he showed up on screen, every kid was enraptured, unable to do anything but watch the rest of the film. They all sat down, faced forward, and shut up until the credits rolled. And as much as he gets under everyone else’s skin, I can totally see little kids being entranced by Pied Piper Binks.
And then there’s the podrace itself. It’s full of goofy competitors, with borderline cartoon physics (for all the violent crashes you see, nobody actually dies), and the announcer has none of the gravitas you’d expect from a race where several of the competitors should have perished. Compare it to Ep3 where we actually see Anakin cut down a child Jedi, and later get dismembered and burnt to a crisp.
@PurpleDave, I guess agree to disagree. There may have been characters that kids liked, but I don’t think it was written for kids at all, or was anymore kid friendly than the others. Revenge of the Sith is really the least kid friendly, and it got a PG-13 rating for that reason.
@monkyby87:
https://screenrant.com/star-wars-phantom-menace-disney-sequels-george-lucas-vision/
https://www.thathashtagshow.com/2019/05/30/george-lucas-defends-the-prequels-star-wars-is-for-kids/
Remember, the whole reason he started making these movies was because he remembers fondly going to watch Saturday morning serials as a kid. Everything about these movies, from the opening crawl to the sensationalist titles, screams “Saturday morning serials”. The fact that you can legally declare “Jedi” as your religion in the UK just shows how badly everyone lost sight of that fact over the decades since.
@PurpleDave said:
" @alfred_the_buttler:
Two members of my LUG are of the opinion that Star Wars now consists of just three movies (unlike me, one of them _didn’t_ find himself wanting to chuck his drink at the screen before the first line of dialogue is uttered in The Forced Remake, which is about how long it took me to decide that film was garbage)."
Yet you stayed to watch the entire movie instead of walking out and demanding a refund.
@PurpleDave said:
" @alfred_the_buttler:
Two members of my LUG are of the opinion that Star Wars now consists of just three movies (unlike me, one of them _didn’t_ find himself wanting to chuck his drink at the screen before the first line of dialogue is uttered in The Forced Remake, which is about how long it took me to decide that film was garbage).
Sure, the prequels probably would have been better served if Lucas had continued to hire new directors to bring his vision to life, and if he hadn’t gotten divorced (or at the very least convinced his ex-wife to come back and help edit the films like she did with the OT). But the prequels at least told an original story. The sequels just retold the OT story with some new stuff mixed in. Rey is a classic Mary Sue. Every time she gets in a difficult situation that she’s not familiar with, she magically discovers that she’s an expert at that, too, just like every other problem she’s encountered. Luke at least had to grow over the course of three movies, and stumbled a few times along the way. Anakin did more than just stumble. Rey...just coasted through to the end.
But that has nothing to do with why I said Ep1 was written more for kids. At 2-1/4 hours, it’s well beyond the 90-minute mark targeted by most feature films targeted at an adolescent audience. That’s about how long the average young kid will pay attention to a film before wanting to do anything else. But it gets away with it, for a few big reasons. First, one of the main characters is also a young kid, who acts and sounds like a young kid. Trash his performance all you want, but Jake Lloyd is no Haley Joel Osmont, and he feels more natural and less Hollywood-natural as a result. Rather than being written and acted for us grown-ups, he was aimed square at his contemporaries.
The next thing is Jar-Jar. Again, one of the most-cites reasons to hate the prequels, and in particular the first prequel. I read a retrospective review several years ago, and like most of us who grew up on the OT, the author _HATED_ Jar-Jar. But then he watched the film with a regular audience during a matinee. Kids everywhere, and it, as you point out, the movie even starts off with politics, so it didn’t take long for kids to start looking for anything but the movie to capture their attention (a difficult prospect in a crowded movie theater).
Then Jar-Jar appeared. The author claimed that as soon as he showed up on screen, every kid was enraptured, unable to do anything but watch the rest of the film. They all sat down, faced forward, and shut up until the credits rolled. And as much as he gets under everyone else’s skin, I can totally see little kids being entranced by Pied Piper Binks.
And then there’s the podrace itself. It’s full of goofy competitors, with borderline cartoon physics (for all the violent crashes you see, nobody actually dies), and the announcer has none of the gravitas you’d expect from a race where several of the competitors should have perished. Compare it to Ep3 where we actually see Anakin cut down a child Jedi, and later get dismembered and burnt to a crisp."
I’m not going to deny that the sequels were remakes of the originals, but they were enjoyable remakes. And in the case of Last Jedi, I would argue it’s one of the best Star Wars films. I think my main complaint with the sequels is that Rise of Skywalker completely ignored Last Jedi. But if you don’t like it, that’s cool, I’m pretty sure Disney laughed all the way to the bank with those films so I can’t be alone in enjoying them.
You are also right that kids love Jar Jar, but unfortunately he doesn’t provide 2 hours of slapstick to entertain kids, he provides probably about 20 minutes.
The fact that it is the only movie that revolves around a child should have made it an excellent kids movie, but it simply isn’t. Lucas focused so much on confusing politics, most of which only make sense to adults after watching episodes 2 and 3 plus the Clone Wars, that kids simply can’t stand watching it. My kids absolutely refuse to watch episode
Interesting article, the smaller sets are for those who want to play with them and easier to collect more of them and still have space to play with them all at once. I am glad that they are having a come back as older sets have become collectables and over-priced, while the new sets usually appear at a discount at some time. They may not be accurate, but that adds to the charm, so long as there is always space for the mini-figs inside!
@darkstonegrey:
You can’t competently discuss the successes and shortcomings of a thing if you’ve never actually seen it. And I did get a full refund for the last sequel.
@PurpleDave said:
" @ForestMenOfEndor:
I own most of the different versions of Slave I and will continue to buy them. As a huge fan of the midi-scale line (however briefly it lasted), I’d actually like to see that revived (but not as SDCC exclusives!!!!!!!), and wonder what kids would think of stuff scaled down to the point where they couldn’t possibly fit a minifig inside, but could easily hold one ship in each hand to play out a dogfight."
My son was totally into micro/mini/midi-scale ships . . . until he decided that everything should accommodate minifigures. Of course, on the other end, I avoid the UCS line for that very reason, so maybe chip/block, acorn/oak?
@ForestMenOfEndor:
Given the shape of the Millennium Falcon and Star Destroyer, if there’s not enough room for a minifig to crawl inside like a play fort, it’s orobably possible to hollow them each out just a tiny bit. The Nebulon B, not so much. There’s not much in the way of dead space in that design.
Well, I just feel these sets are in the right direction, especially for ship models that get produced a lot. Say they downscale a Millennium Falcon. I bought the 2019 one, 75257, being it was a childhood dream for me to own a millennium falcon. That said, If they do downscale it, I know it isn't for me since I already bought one. However, to those that want to get a Falcon, a potential downscale would be wonderful for them without spending too much. Same with the 2021 Slave 1, 75312, I wanted a Slave 1 but, like someone said in this thread, the other and older variants just became too expensive and 75243 was $120. Too much! Now, getting 75312, I have basically the same item but smaller. The way it can hold all features of 2019 is nice for only like more than half the price drop.
Well for me, I'd say these sets are a good step in the right direction. Not everyone is obligated to buy these sets, especially if you have previous versions of it. For example, the Millennium Falcon. I currently have 75257. The set itself is nice although that $160 price tag was something. That said, seeing as the vehicle is popular, it will eventually be downscaled. It would've been better if I paid less, but that said, it would end up being better for others to also get a Falcon without spending that 160. The same case with the Slave One, I wanted one but all models are too expensive. Especially the 20th anniversary for $120, now 200+ aftermarket. Yikes! But 2021's variant, 75312, is a welcome inclusion giving the same package for just smaller size with all the same features
@Josh103:
You know who really buys most of these sets? Parents, for their kids. And the larger these sets get, they more they’re pricing themselves out of their primary market. For many years, many AFOLs have mistakenly believed we buy more than half of all product sold, with nothing but hastily written napkin stats to back them up. For many of those years they have believed we only accounted for a few percent of sales. Then a funny thing happened. They introduced the VIP program, which allows them to track spending habits. For the first time they knew who was buying how many sets for whom. And the numbers showed both sides were wrong. In total, AFOLs were buying around 25% of all sets sold, so we’re a significant, but still minority share of their total market base.
These numbers have probably shifted a bit, due to a combination of the fact that they’ve since started cranking out high-end D2C sets, combined with the rise of pandemic buyers, but there’s also the number of AFOLs who have grown tired of buying the same vessel time and again balancing things out. Don’t deluded yourself with the idea that these non-UCS sets are primarily sold to adults, though. If they were, they wouldn’t make endless repeats of X-Wings. Besides, the other three aside, if you want an X-Wing to display next to your UCS Millennium Falcon, UCS Imperial Shuttle, and UCS Slave I, this X-Wing is the closest they’ve come to matching that same scale.
I know I’m coming to this conversation a bit late, but I just want to weigh in firmly on the side of approval for this initiative. Even as an adult fan myself, I appreciate that TLG is still keeping kids in mind with this theme, and also that classic vehicles and vessels from this saga are not only available but affordable. And as noted, some past renditions of classic SW vehicles have actually been oversized for minifigures anyway.