76252 Batcave Shadowbox revealed!
Posted by Huw,
Here's the press release for this year's large DC Comics set:
76252 Batcave Shadowbox
3,981 pieces, rated 18+
$399.99 / £344.99 / €399.99
Available to VIPs at LEGO.com from 5th June
The LEGO Group announces its latest addition to the LEGO Batman Collection - the LEGO “Batman Returns” Batcave Shadow Box. An official collaboration with Warner Bros. Discovery Global Consumer Products and DC, this highly detailed set combines beautiful display pieces with iconic iconography perfect for ultimate Batman fans.
Based on the Warner Bros. Pictures’ “Batman Returns,” the set is incredibly detailed and features the full Batcave, inside a display box with a cutout in the shape of the iconic Batman emblem. At the heart of the set is the Caped Crusader’s Batmobile and, just like Batman’s Batcave, the set features clever functions and gadgets including the ability to move furniture, change images on the big screen, open a vault and open a door, and several light bricks.
In addition, the set comes with brand new minifigures of Catwoman and The Penguin, as well as various minifigures including Bruce Wayne, Alfred Pennyworth, and Max Shreck.
The new LEGO Batman Shadow Box set is available for LEGO VIPs from 5th June at LEGO.com/Batman and LEGO Stores. Available for all from 8th June 2023 priced at $399.99 / €399.99 / £344.99 / AU$599.99 / CA$519.99.
You will find more images on the set details page.
165 likes
199 comments on this article
UCS Black box
Also: LEGO trying not to fumble DC challenge (IMPOSSIBLE)
I really, really like this simply because it’s based on BATMAN RETURNS - my favorite Batman film and one without very much tie-in merchandise.
The price is pretty eye-watering, though, so there’s no way I’d ever buy this. Still, kinda nuts to me we’re getting a near half-$1000 set for a 30 year old movie that was mostly maligned at the time of release.
Gonna wager the odds of getting any of these figs in another set in the future are extremely low. That’s too bad.
A little pricey but much better than the last two d2cs for marvel
"I only build in black and sometimes dark grey..."
“Iconic iconography”
Who writes these?
Another Lego set (like the Question cube 71395) that makes for very boring box art and consequently poor display piece.
Plus that price for a square rectangle!
Amazing set - really unique.
And 11.3 cents per piece for a licensed set is not bad (although folks will inevitably complain about “excessive price” no matter the facts).
Swivel chair! Amazing
Gonna be honest, they should’ve got rid of the box design and just kept the Batcave. Bat symbol is cool and all, but when folded out it leaves a lot of dead space.
Better wear gloves to build that one!
Also: I really don't like it. I have no need for a LEGO suitcase.
Yes if they discount it, no otherwise.
I absolutely love the design of this set. The price however... ouch... I dunno why but it feels like it should only cost about half the price tag. Majority of the bits count seems to be the tile parts to make the outside flat which doesn't make it look worth the money. Its pushing 11.5ppp as it is.
Very cool. Looks unusually plain from the outside so I would always display it open and only close it if putting it in storage. I love the interior details though
1. It's like... how much more black could it be? And the answer is... none. None more black.
2. To pricey and too big for me. How about that Batmobile by itself for $30?
I think it's very cool. As a big Batman fan and collector of all things Batman, this will be a day one purchase. I love all of the small details and the shadowbox format.
I like the left half. The right half with the bat symbol just makes the set unnecessarily expensive.
This should have been a €350 set to the max. Compare it with the Ninjago City Market that has over 6000 pieces, has no license, 21 figs and costs €350
Already discounted on lego.com, US $399.99 and Germany €399,99
This is a great display piece and my world, not for me but wow.
If it's based on batman returns, the sides of the batmobile should come off so it turns into that slim batmissile thing
Very glad i own the limited edition batmobile. Feel like its an easy pass (even though i own almost every lego batman minifig ever made and am clearly into batman). This is just so much boring black brick for a very high price, i see no appeal at all... I need some colour now so i am gonna stare at my rivendell set for a while ;)
I like the figures, the Batmobile and some of the background builds, but I'm not sure that the concept of a shadowbox was necessary…
I suspect a lot of people will hate this, but I've been obsessed with this film since 1992. It's not my all-time favourite film (it's not even my all-time favourite Batman film), but it's the the film I get the most fascination out of. Does this set fully capture the appeal of Batman Returns? Not really. I already have a superior custom 1992 Catwoman to this (i.e. one that actually has leg-printing and a removeable cowl), and I'm disappointed at the threadbare array of minifigs (although kudos for including secondary character Max Shreck), one of which is simply another Batsuit. There were so many other minifigs, incouding Selina Kyle (in her civilian clothes), members of The Red Triangle Circus Gang, maybe another woman, like The Ice Princess, and Max's son, Chip, who is some ways fuels Max's plans, that could have been added to this selection. Then again, in view of the lack of leg-pringing across the board, maybe it's just as well some of those visually distinctive characters were apparently ignored. Request to anyone who has their own custom minifig business/knows someone who does: please, please, please can you consider doing customs for those aforementioned Batman Returns characters? Suffice to say, I'd be willing to pay for them (possibly *whisper it* a little over the odds).
All that said, I'll still be saving up for this. I love the innovative design. I love that it captures the unique look of the Batman Returns Batcave. I love that we finally get another opportunity to buy a minifig-scale 89/92 Batmobile (I know there was a Limited Edition 1989 Batmobile that came out a few years back with the release of 76139 ). And as a BIG Batman Returns devotee, it's an *eventual* must-have for me, just as (the admittedly superior) Rivedell set would have been a must-have for many Lord of the Rings fans.
And, as an aside, I love the accurate hairpiece they used for 1992-era puffy-haired Michael Keaton. I also wonder if that's Vichyssoise in that cup he's holding...
THIS IS BEAUTIFUL!!!!!!!!!
Friendly reminder that the best parts of this set are gonna be worth about $50 and sold separately come August ($5 polybag for the minifigure, rumored $45 Batmobile).
Gotta appreciate Lego trying to do a unique take on the batcave, they’ve already made a good few, so it makes for a pleasant change.
That box art is god awful though.
Oh no! Catwoman has a printed on face a black brick head! This will look a lot worse IRL.
Lego just cannot get printing light colours on dark bricks right. They've slightly improved from the mess that was Mercy, but not by much.
1) it’s now only $399.99 on Shop @Home in the US.
2) the Shop @Home page uses the Dark Knight Trilogy branding lol
This is a $150 set with another $250 gimmick unnecessarily incorporated. Very unfortunate for DC fans.
It really needed a slide, connected to an ironmaiden up top, for Bruce Wayne to come down.
"Ready?"
"I'll take the stairs..."
I love it, but I am not sure my love for it can be sustained to purchase because so many expensive sets have come and are still coming that make me pause. I have to be more choosy.
@AliveAndBricking said:
"
And, as an aside, I love the accurate hairpiece they used for 1992-era puffy-haired Michael Keaton. I also wonder if that's Vichyssoise in that cup he's holding..."
It's SUPPOSED to be cold!
I also love that they captured Keaton's curly hair.
Ouch $520 CAD...that's a lot for a Lego black briefcase (with foldout playset).
@MegaBlocks said:
"Oh no! Catwoman has a printed on face a black brick head! This will look a lot worse IRL.
Lego just cannot get printing light colours on dark bricks right. They've slightly improved from the mess that was Mercy, but not by much."
At the very least if Catwoman's face turns out completely white like Mercy's it WON'T be an error.
Leg printing is a very important factor for me personally and in a £350 set, I will hold that set to a higher standard, I will expect more and I will be more nitpicky.
With that in mind, I'm stunned there is no leg printing on a single figure there.
im gonna add a handle to my copy and use the set as a briefcase
Bit on two minds with this. On the one hand, I do very much like how it looks, and it is something they haven't done before.
On the other hand though.....that black box obviously uses a heck of a lot of pieces, resulting in a price tag way out of sync with the actual display value of what is inside of it. It basically looks like maybe a €200 set at most, but at the same time I totally get why it isn't. As great as it looks, it makes for a though sell I think.
No leg or arm printing, it truly feels like 1992.
The Batmobile is missing one of the large bricks at the front in at least one picture.
My first take is why is it so boxy. But then I wonder, does this make it easy to have a future Wayne Manor build placed on top a lá Jabba’s palace on top of the Rancor pit?
I’m not the biggest Batman fan, but on the 0.1% chance that turns out true the cool factor alone would force me to buy both sets, lol.
Legoshop in the US has it priced at $399.99?
I wonder how many of those nearly 4000 pieces go into making up the black box itself?
Too expensive in Brazil. Also, the set is ugly.
Yes! Yes! Yes!
Wow, this looks awful to me. It's out of my price range so I would never even consider buying it, but it's too dark(yes, I know) and it doesn't allow all of the details to be properly viewed. I would probably have to have a connection to the movie for it to look good, and I don't. I'm curious to see how well it will sell though.
You can't properly display this open on a shelve because of the dumb angle limitation.
And you can't properly display this closed 'cause it's otherwise just a massive black box.
Who on Earth at LEGO greenlit this design? The idea isn't bad, but the execution is terrible.
Also, stickers on a 450€ set? Nope.
Devoting the pieces to a Wayne manor portion on top would’ve been preferable to the logo case. It would provide more design interest and more play actions. As it is, the set reminds me of fan creations seen at many lego conventions: earnest but awkward.
What is the alternate suit with new cowl mold supposed to represent? I feel like I’m missing something.
Thankfully no Batman fan, as the very thought of my middle-aged eyes trying to decipher so many black pieces in the instructions...
Price on Lego.com US: $399.99
https://www.lego.com/en-us/product/batcave-shadow-box-76252
Would be cool without the suitcase.
@tmtomh said:
"Amazing set - really unique.
And 11.3 cents per piece for a licensed set is not bad (although folks will inevitably complain about “excessive price” no matter the facts)."
You really need to look at what you get, not just price per piece. People saying the price is excessive isn’t a complaint. It’s an opinion. For this, you get a big box that opens up and reveals a rather shallow vignette essentially.
methinks LEGO needs better designers. And a filter. Stop releasing every design that comes your way.
@SMC said:
"Already discounted on lego.com, US $399.99 and Germany €399,99"
Thanks -- unsurprising to see yet another inaccuracy in a LEGO press release!
That also explains why the UK price seemed so reasonable compared to elsewhere.
I love the Alfred minifigure - I was watching ‘curse of the crimson alter’ the other night and whenever I see Michael Gough I always think of him as either the Toymaker or Alfred - such a great actor! I don’t get Christopher Walken vibes off the Max minifigure though - more Beethoven- did Batman ever fight him?
Although it's way out of my price range, I like the concept of the shadow box. I understand all the complaints on display issues but I think the idea is quite inventive. You guys just need a plinth in the middle of your room to display this square box! ;-)
The best part of this set is that they've improved on the 40433 Batmobile design. I'm definitely waiting for the rumored 1989 Batmobile set that will be released this summer. And the 30653 polybag. =-)
The box and cutout (and smaller cutout over the batmobile) is the best bit of this set - if you want a batcave, I think there are more interesting sets for that...
Not personally a batman fan, but quite impressed by this. Shame about the the price though.
Kuni : Ahhh, a red snapper. Mmmmm, very tasty. Okay, Weaver, listen carefully. You can hold on to your red snapper...
[Hiro-san emerges, carrying a table with a box]
Kuni : ...or you can go for what's in the box that Hiro-san is bringing down the aisle right now! What's it gonna be?
[Phyllis Weaver has difficulty in choosing as the audience point to the box]
Phyllis Weaver : I'll take the box. The box!
[the audience applauses]
Kuni : You took the box? Let's see what's in the box!
[Hiro-san opens the box; the audience gasps. There is a silence]
Kuni : Nothing! Absolutely nothing! STUPID! You're so STU-PIIIIIIIIIIID!
Ah yes, a dust collector 3000. Now with Batman theme!
It's the Bat-dust magnet!
I wonder if a Wayne Manor will be released to be placed on top of this model later.
@danieglass said:
"What is the alternate suit with new cowl mold supposed to represent? I feel like I’m missing something."
I've seen a theory that it's there so you actually have a Batman that can sit in the Batmobile...
June 5th is my 29th birthday.
Overpriced crap. Instant pass.
I can't afford it, but I can imagine stealing it.
Pretty disappointed by this. I can only think of the potential this set had... remember how successful the Daily Bugle was both as a fantastic set and the way it revitalised Marvel? That was my reaction when I first heard the rumour, but the end result is pretty lacking. I'm sure most Super Hero fans would have preferred to see a comic based D2C playset with a plethora of first time minifigures (Oracle, Hush, Mad Hatter, Azrael, Lucius Fox),long overdue remakes (Ra's Al Guhl, Calendar Man, Deathstroke, Bane) and the essentials (Batman, Robin, Joker, Harley Quinn) battling it out. I really like the concept of the model, but when LEGO DC has been struggling for the last few years, this shouldn't be high on LEGO's priority list if they want the theme to continue thriving.
Now onto the shadowbox itself. The idea is good in theory, but when the entire model is in black (and sometimes very, very dark grey), it really limits the displayability and overall aesthetics. A '66 Batcave would be a much better choice in this regard. In addition, although I like all of them, there just aren't enough minifigures to justify the price. And just how many stickers are dotted around the model? I guess it doesn't help that I find the Burton series a bit overrated as well, but that's more of a problem with me than the intended audience of the set.
I guess my wallet will sleep happy tonight knowing I'm not wasting my hard earned money on a black box, but I'm not sure that I will. Maybe one day LEGO DC will undergo a renaissance, but it sure ain't today.
Besides, I think there are rumours of a Burton Batmobile coming separately right? I might get that instead (I'm trying to collect all the minifigure scale film based Batmobiles).
I think it's probably too expensive for me – and no leg printing, even on Catwoman?! – but my biggest takeaway is that I sincerely hope that isn't the final box art because there's a big missing piece on the Batmobile on the back image – the arch piece over the right wheel is missing!
I can't see anyone has mentioned this, but where is the turntable for the batmobile?!! How is he going to back it out with no rear visibility in a cave??!!!
But I do love Batman Returns - it is visually stunning.
Catwoman needs leg printing.
Panther Woman! Or is it Cat Maul?
Hang on, this is at least 116cm wide when it's fully open. Bloody hell! If I was to get it, I'd have to knock through a wall of the apartment to open the thing fully.
I don't care about Batman, but this set is very creative! Nice to see something different.
That is alot of black.... But I will download the instructions and build the batmobile. Missed out on the last minifig scale Keaton batmobile that was a GWP with the huge one.
I'd have much preferred this to have been a large scale 1966 Batmobile, as an accompaniment to 76139
@WemWem:
The Batman with rubber cowl is already out there in a polybag.
@danieglass:
There are times when the Batsuit is displayed behind glass, and the cape isn’t billowing when it’s in an enclosure. The rubber caps also doesn’t work with seats, but that shouldn’t require a whole second Batsuit.
@Darth_Dee said:
""I only build in black and sometimes dark grey...""
beat me to it
I see it comes with Doc Brown for some reason. (No idea who that leftmost minifigure is supposed to be.)
"I don't know about you, Miss Kitty, but I feel so much yummier."
square rectangle!
- Who writes these?
This is pretty cool—I adore shallower, vignette-style builds up against a flat wall—but the rectangular box shapes is just super perplexing. When rumors first dropped, I was hoping to see something organic-shaped, almost geode-like.
It's a real shame that so many pieces are going toward just the black box because the batcave build itself is awesome.
A great looking, brilliantly designed set, but fortunately of no interest to me... A 1966 Batcave would have been a different story!
Nice.
Honestly, every time I promise myself I'll buy less they release something else cool. Oh well, I'll get it and THEN I'll buy less....
@RaiderOfTheLostBrick said:
"Pretty disappointed by this. I can only think of the potential this set had... remember how successful the Daily Bugle was both as a fantastic set and the way it revitalised Marvel? That was my reaction when I first heard the rumour, but the end result is pretty lacking. I'm sure most Super Hero fans would have preferred to see a comic based D2C playset with a plethora of first time minifigures (Oracle, Hush, Mad Hatter, Azrael, Lucius Fox),long overdue remakes (Ra's Al Guhl, Calendar Man, Deathstroke, Bane) and the essentials (Batman, Robin, Joker, Harley Quinn) battling it out. I really like the idea of a shadowbox, but when LEGO DC has been struggling for the last few years, this shouldn't be high on LEGO's priority list if they want the theme to continue thriving.
Also, I really like the shadowbox concept, but when the entire model is in black (and sometimes very, very dark grey), it really limits the displayability and aesthetics of the model. A '66 Batcave would be a much better choice in this regard. In addition, although I like all of them, there just aren't enough minifigures to justify the price. And just how many stickers are dotted around the model? I guess it doesn't help that I find the Burton series a bit overrated as well, but that's more of a problem with me than the intended audience of the set.
I guess my wallet will sleep happy tonight knowing I'm not wasting my hard earned money on a black box, but I'm not sure that I will. Maybe one day LEGO DC will undergo a renaissance, but it sure ain't today.
Besides, I think there are rumours of a Burton Batmobile coming separately right? I might get that instead (I'm trying to collect all the minifigure scale film based Batmobiles)."
Couldn't agree more, sums up my thoughts perfectly.
@rslotb said:
" square rectangle!
- Who writes these?
"
Me!
Meant black rectangle. It's so uninspiring that I've become oxymoronic.
That bat symbol side just kills it for me. Probably $100 for empty space. Unfortunate pass, I was really excited when it was announced. Figures look good
Bricklinked the parts for 40433 when it came out.
If this new one is a large improvement when seen from all angles might look at what parts I need to convert one to the other, looking at it, a lot of the parts are still there, the 8 arches that I remember being tricky to aquire are still used in this new one, so hopefully not too much.
This is also dependent on if the rumours of the stand alone set pan out.
@PurpleDave said:
" @WemWem :
The Batman with rubber cowl is already out there in a polybag."
Yeah, I'd seen that and I'll probably buy it if I see it floating around. But that one was already available with the previous Burton vehicles, right?
Seeing how none of the other exclusive figs from those sets have resurfaced in other releases, I expect it'll be the same for Max, Penguin, Catwoman and Alfred.
EDIT: Ah, the polybag IS different because the Batman from the UCS Batmobile and Batwing has the 1989 chest symbol. I should have realized that!
It's a cool idea and well executed, but it also feels like half the pieces just go into building a large black square. Definitely a set for someone with way too money burning a hole in their pocket, not a very reasonable purchase for anyone else.
One thing that annoys me a bit about the box is how they highlight the features. Like a swiveling chair or some sliding doors. Which all seem very basic to me, hardly worth highlighting.
Doesn't make the set any less, but it doesn't do a great job of selling this set either.
@TheMikeStrikesBack said:
"“Iconic iconography”
Who writes these?"
Chat GPT
@WizardOfOss said:
"One thing that annoys me a bit about the box is how they highlight the features. Like a swiveling chair or some sliding doors. Which all seem very basic to me, hardly worth highlighting.
Doesn't make the set any less, but it doesn't do a great job of selling this set either."
That chair swivel call out box had me in tears. :o)
That Catwoman is a huge miss, should have had dedicated headgear and all-around printed hip and legs, and come with alternative messy hair. On a set this expensive, it's making zero sense to me why this minifig should be so, so basic.
Great design and concept overall, but let's be honest, fans will only be here for the minifigs if they are spectacular, and they REALLY dropped the ball on this one.
Not a batman fan, but I like the concept of this, though Lego seems to have gone very Polly Pocket lately on an awful lot of themes.
Won't get it though, I have way too many expensive sets on my list which take priority, like Riverdell.
big flop incoming...
50 shades of….black?
This is the DC equivalent of that Black Panther bust, it's just a vastly overpriced black box.
Would like that Batmobile though.
The shadowbox aspect kills the possibility of my buying the set, as well as the potential for a fully three-dimensional Batcave experience. Until now, I bought every LEGO Batcave as they were produced. But not this one.
Compare this to the Daily Bugle and one can only conclude the LEGO design team has a vast enthusiasm gap between Marvel and DC sets. If this is the best they can do, I'll happily return to the days of no new DC sets. This is a good example of "be careful what you wish for."
Yep that is a black box
Wow its nearly 10 years since Lego Ideas turned down the Assault on Wayne Manor which looked like a lot of fun to build and play with for all ages, whereas I can see this taking a lot of patience and are there a 1000 black pieces just for the outside of the box?
I think it's great, it's just too expensive. I'm guessing I'm not the target audience, $400 is not something I can justify for a Lego set. I sure with they made interesting sets like this that didn't require a $100k/year salary to purchase
$400 is a big "no" from me. Lego is making it really easy to pass on so many of these 18+ sets.
This is really good, based on my favourite superhero movie. Still way too expensive for me, I hope the Catwoman minifig gets released in a smaller set.
As a huge Batman fan and collector of Batman LEGO, this is cool … but too expensive and hate the idea of a ‘box’. I torn between the choice of having the Batmobile added to the set. The screen and computers plus the minifigs are the best thing about the set. Finally, a new Batman set, but alas not for me.
@Bricky_Dee_Williams said:
"1) it’s now only $399.99 on Shop @Home in the US.
2) the Shop @Home page uses the Dark Knight Trilogy branding lol
This is a $150 set with another $250 gimmick unnecessarily incorporated. Very unfortunate for DC fans."
I use 10 cents/piece when I price these things out and this is priced reasonably.
@PurpleDave said:
" @WemWem:
The Batman with rubber cowl is already out there in a polybag.
@danieglass:
There are times when the Batsuit is displayed behind glass, and the cape isn’t billowing when it’s in an enclosure. The rubber caps also doesn’t work with seats, but that shouldn’t require a whole second Batsuit."
Ahhhh, that makes sense. Thank you for the explanation :)
Just realized this is literally a $400 LEGO black box within an 18+ branded black box.
If anyone does buy this, my thoughts will be, save it in the box. Don't even open it. Cause as this set is pricey, this set can also be very valuable later.
@danieglass said:
"Just realized this is literally a $400 LEGO black box within an 18+ branded black box."
Leela: "So what you think you just explained to us is that..."
Farnsworth: "Correct! This box contains our own universe!"
@RaiderOfTheLostBrick:
A lot of Batman fans don’t like the Adam West series, which already got a Batcave set. Regarding the other option, I could take that as well, but preferably not to the exclusion of this, which looks amazing. It’s on par with the UCS-scale movie Bat-craft in my book, and it gives me hope that some of the absent Dark Knight trilogy minifigs might show up someday.
Regarding the future of the theme, I’m kinda getting the impression that while Marvel gets some budget-friendly sets for the kids, the DC theme is beginning to focus almost exclusively on the adult collector market. If that’s true, I can roll with it. I’d certainly like to see more characters available, but I also can’t forget how hard 2017 was on my bank account.
@WemWem:
89 Batmobile, 89 Batwing, and GWP Batmobile all had the 89 chest emblem with the wonky triple tail, and the cape billows to his left. 92 Batcave and 92 Batman polybag have the Batman Returns emblem that looks more like the traditional silver age shield and the cape billows to his right.
@ambr:
Batman/DC being a current theme at that time, that project was doomed for automatic rejection.
Worst
Box art
Ever
But quite a sweet set when opened. It's pricey, however I'll take this over the Black Panther Bust or UCS Hulkbuster any day of the week.
@tmtomh said:
"Amazing set - really unique.
And 11.3 cents per piece for a licensed set is not bad (although folks will inevitably complain about “excessive price” no matter the facts)."
Stop measuring the value of the sets through the price to piece ratio. It is irrelevant in modern LEGO. Thank you.
That's $400 of nope. Seriously, how big of a Batman fan do you have to be?! Why is there no Batcave in the style of Rivendell, huh? Would be so, so much more appealing. This is just a plain boring black box and Batman doesn't deserve to have such a boring set.
Compared to LEGO Batman Movie sets this is almost insulting.
I think by the time you finish building this, you'll be crying out to use a red, blue, yellow, white, pink, orange or green brick.
Anything except another flippin' black or grey brick!!!
So if you have this displayed closed on a shelf how do you open it? I'm willing to bet 100% that the open side will not be able to support itself cantilevered in the air. You will have to take it off the shelf and put it on a large table to open it. Get rid of the super unnecessary front half and keep the batmobile platform, and just have it swing out at a 45-degree angle. Add a proper gallery of bat family costumes instead of the lame tools. What a terrible design.
I like the look of the set, but at that price it's a no from me.
Perhaps with the right discount I might reconsider.
@ZeeMike said:
" @tmtomh said:
"Amazing set - really unique.
And 11.3 cents per piece for a licensed set is not bad (although folks will inevitably complain about “excessive price” no matter the facts)."
Stop measuring the value of the sets through the price to piece ratio. It is irrelevant in modern LEGO. Thank you."
Stop telling other people how they should choose to value and enjoy LEGO sets. It is irrelevant in modern LEGO. Thank you.
From one side, I would love Lego to make a great Batman D2C set, just because I'm a huge Batman fan. But from another side, I'm glad they messed up this one soooo bad, because now I don't have to spend 400$ on a black box with some Batman vibes.
If LEGO had left off the front panel with the Bat Symbol, and made it just slightly smaller, so that they could knock off 100-150 bucks from the retail price, I'd perhaps consider it. It's unnecessarily big and way too expensive. And I'm saying that as someone who LOVES that film.
It looks great when you zoom in on the details, but from afar, without proper lighting, it's basically just a dark box in which you can't really make out much. While that is in keeping with the source material, you still want to properly see the details. You'll probably see dust and finger prints collecting on this before you can make out all the cool stuff going on inside.
@Peter_X said:
"Very glad i own the limited edition batmobile. Feel like its an easy pass (even though i own almost every lego batman minifig ever made and am clearly into batman). This is just so much boring black brick for a very high price, i see no appeal at all... I need some colour now so i am gonna stare at my rivendell set for a while ;)"
Although it's not visible here, this new batmobile has the pop-up machine guns triggered by spinning a cog that sticks out from the side. But I guess we can add that ourselves when they release the instructions.
I quite like this. Might get it and build a Wayne Manor to sit on top of it
I appreciate the creativity but I don’t think it reads well in pictures. It’s all just black & gray...but when you can get a good look at it in person I bet it works.
It would’ve been cooler also if they black wall was rocky like a cave or a big door like in the LEGO Movie version.
Featuring referential references
*confused screaming*
I appreciate them being creative.
I suspect rivendell and ninjago city are going to leave a big enough crack in my wallet for this to slip through, though.
On the product page of the LEGO website it states "For added convenience, a digital version of the set’s building instructions can be found on the LEGO Builder app." Isn't that true of every set or is this a sly way of saying the set will not include an instruction booklet?
I can't decide if LEGO is efforting to feed OR eradicate our FOMO with the continuing release of such large AFOL-centric sets. I find myself both extending my LEGO budget beyond reason at the same time telling myself that it's okay to just let some of these go.
Think rather than using bricks to create a box, maybe they should’ve made a more complete bat cave. Not for me
@yellowcastle said:
"I can't decide if LEGO is efforting to feed OR eradicate our FOMO with the continuing release of such large AFOL-centric sets. I find myself both extending my LEGO budget beyond reason at the same time telling myself that it's okay to just let some of these go."
I think it's OK to let go of this one. It makes an interesting theoretical parts pack and we've ALLLLL wanted a true-to-scale Batcave...but this is a *very very specific* Batcave, and I think it's OK if the shadowbox effect is a turnoff. I agree with a lot of people that it's wasted space that could have been skipped to lower the price.
Batman's been interpreted many times over for 80+ years. Ideally, a true Batcave comes with a Joker card, a T-Rex, and a giant Penny. At this point, most of us should be on our way to customizing our own Batcaves, and *none* of them should be considered "wrong." (Seriously, I'm slowly building my own rectangular Batcave on two 32 x 32 plates with a bunch of BURP bricks for the surrounding structure. Maybe it's a little boring, but by God does it have a T-Rex.
It's very nice. I like it. But......
No arm or leg printing. Huge amount of space used to give special attention to displaying... a drill... a wrench... a socket wrench... a lug wrench... a hammer... an adjustable wrench... a hex wrench.... an oil can... a screwdriver. More than a minifig worth of space to specially display a screwdriver?!! What the hell is going on?
Definitely could have been more creative down in that quadrant. Looks like someone was late with their design homework, and did a quickie finish job.
At the same price point, Marvel got 76178, which functions as both a displayable Lego structure and a homage to a superhero's place of employment. The Bat-Cave is a larger structure, to be certain, but I'm not sure if a PC tower-esque black box of bricks is the direction we want to take AFOL sets.
76178 is genius because it appeals to Marvel purists, non-Marvel AFOL fans with cities, KFOLs, and non-fans who can appreciate a large Lego building. This is much more niche.
@hawkeye7269 said:
" @ZeeMike said:
" @tmtomh said:
"Amazing set - really unique.
And 11.3 cents per piece for a licensed set is not bad (although folks will inevitably complain about “excessive price” no matter the facts)."
Stop measuring the value of the sets through the price to piece ratio. It is irrelevant in modern LEGO. Thank you."
Stop telling other people how they should choose to value and enjoy LEGO sets. It is irrelevant in modern LEGO. Thank you."
So in your eyes a set with 30 large baseplates and a set with 30 1x1 studs has the same price to piece ratio hence is the same value / worthiness / display factor. Got it.
If anything, the weight of the set and how the pieces contribute to the display factor should be more of a consideration than a ratio number that tells you how much of a buyer's remorse you have after the purchase. That is why I see price-to-piece ratio irrelevant with all the large LEGO display models coming out right now.
I really like the concept. This is a great way to build and display a detailed interior scene without having worry about shoehorning it into a proportionate building. It seems so much more cave-like as it's fully enclosed.
I'm one of the many NO responders in the survey though. I wouldn't consider buying this, but I like to kid myself I'll MOC something similar for the Samurai X Cave or any GotG ship.
@PurpleDave said:
"89 Batmobile, 89 Batwing, and GWP Batmobile all had the 89 chest emblem with the wonky triple tail, and the cape billows to his left. 92 Batcave and 92 Batman polybag have the Batman Returns emblem that looks more like the traditional silver age shield and the cape billows to his right."
The cape on this Batman is still billowing to the left, but the helmet itself appears to have different shaping with longer, pointier ears and a less rounded forehead.
Compare:
https://images.brickset.com/sets/AdditionalImages/76252-1/76252_alt8.jpg
https://images.brickset.com/sets/AdditionalImages/76139-1/76139_1to1_MF_03_Ver1.jpg
@ZeeMike said:
" @hawkeye7269 said:
" @ZeeMike said:
" @tmtomh said:
"Amazing set - really unique.
And 11.3 cents per piece for a licensed set is not bad (although folks will inevitably complain about “excessive price” no matter the facts)."
Stop measuring the value of the sets through the price to piece ratio. It is irrelevant in modern LEGO. Thank you."
Stop telling other people how they should choose to value and enjoy LEGO sets. It is irrelevant in modern LEGO. Thank you."
So in your eyes a set with 30 large baseplates and a set with 30 1x1 studs has the same price to piece ratio hence is the same value / worthiness / display factor. Got it.
If anything, the weight of the set and how the pieces contribute to the display factor should be more of a consideration than a ratio number that tells you how much of a buyer's remorse you have after the purchase. That is why I see price-to-piece ratio irrelevant with all the large LEGO display models coming out right now."
It's obviously a better metric than 'eye-test', weight, or any other. It's a 'metric'. It's not a determinate. It helps to measure. That's it. It's useful. So, people will use it. Don't try to police the world. Let it goooooooooo.....
Once again: BIGGEST BEST SET EVER is really: Meh, overpriced mess.
This would look spectacular with a lighting kit. But $400, even though less than the rumored $450, is still far too much for what this is. If I wanted to put the Batcave in a shadowbox, I'd go buy a display case. Cut out a batsymbol from construction paper if I really needed that effect as well.
It's a cool idea, but compare it to a Rivendell, or any other 400-500 dollar set and this black box just isn't that pleasing to the eye. And at this price it's a expensive non aesthetic display piece. It doesn't help it lacks contrast, the colors are realistic, but detrimental to the shadow box effect.
@Vladtheb said:
"I quite like this. Might get it and build a Wayne Manor to sit on top of it"
I was thinking it would be a great stand for my 70922. Bruce trying to do his chill Batman stuff with a noisy-ass roommate above causing trouble!
Love it! I thought, oh too monochromatic from the leaks, but it looks like a badass set to have on display.
Wish Lego would make an official lighting kit for this but will definitely have to get one now.
Little too pricey (like about $50 too high) but will save up for this one.
@legoDad42 said:
"Love it! I thought, oh too monochromatic from the leaks, but it looks like a badass set to have on display.
Wish Lego would make an official lighting kit for this but will definitely have to get one now.
Little too pricey (like about $50 too high) but will save up for this one."
Hopefully, by the time we save up, it will be discounted down to meet us halfway. ;)
Gonna' have to mod out that waste of space area with all the tools so spread out on the bottom.
Good place to have a bat-suit gallery.
Yes, this lifestyle photo shows EXACTLY how this set should be displayed...
https://images.brickset.com/sets/AdditionalImages/76252-1/76252_alt5.jpg
@legoDad42 said:
"Gonna' have to mod out that waste of space area with all the tools so spread out on the bottom.
Good place to have a bat-suit gallery."
Nice idea!
Would love to see someone make a big Bat-Castle build out of this as an alternate build, so many black bricks.
@pic10F206 said:
"The Batmobile is missing one of the large bricks at the front in at least one picture. "
I just spotted that, no doubt the un-corrected box art will reach a higher price on the aftermarket
@ZeeMike said:
" @hawkeye7269 said:
" @ZeeMike said:
" @tmtomh said:
"Amazing set - really unique.
And 11.3 cents per piece for a licensed set is not bad (although folks will inevitably complain about “excessive price” no matter the facts)."
Stop measuring the value of the sets through the price to piece ratio. It is irrelevant in modern LEGO. Thank you."
Stop telling other people how they should choose to value and enjoy LEGO sets. It is irrelevant in modern LEGO. Thank you."
So in your eyes a set with 30 large baseplates and a set with 30 1x1 studs has the same price to piece ratio hence is the same value / worthiness / display factor. Got it.
If anything, the weight of the set and how the pieces contribute to the display factor should be more of a consideration than a ratio number that tells you how much of a buyer's remorse you have after the purchase. That is why I see price-to-piece ratio irrelevant with all the large LEGO display models coming out right now."
1) That's not what I said.
2) If you're going to use an example, use a realistic one? Pretty sure there's never been a 3 baseplate set, let alone a 30.
3) Your original comment was making a universal claim - "it is wrong to use this metric" - but I am not. You are trying to tell someone they're wrong for valuing LEGO a certain way; I'm trying to point out that different fans can value sets different ways, and that's totally fine. The value of a set is almost entirely subjective - there's no absolutely right or wrong way to determine it.
4) To give you an example - What I most enjoy from LEGO is the assembly of parts - so, FOR ME, the more parts, the better, even if they're smaller parts. So, an Architecture set is something I enjoy, because I get a lot of parts to put together and the experience lasts longer as a result. YOU don't have to value LEGO that way - value it however you want! - But don't come and tell me, or the original person you're responding to, how to enjoy my hobby.
@StyleCounselor said:
" @ZeeMike said:
" @hawkeye7269 said:
" @ZeeMike said:
" @tmtomh said:
"Amazing set - really unique.
And 11.3 cents per piece for a licensed set is not bad (although folks will inevitably complain about “excessive price” no matter the facts)."
Stop measuring the value of the sets through the price to piece ratio. It is irrelevant in modern LEGO. Thank you."
Stop telling other people how they should choose to value and enjoy LEGO sets. It is irrelevant in modern LEGO. Thank you."
So in your eyes a set with 30 large baseplates and a set with 30 1x1 studs has the same price to piece ratio hence is the same value / worthiness / display factor. Got it.
If anything, the weight of the set and how the pieces contribute to the display factor should be more of a consideration than a ratio number that tells you how much of a buyer's remorse you have after the purchase. That is why I see price-to-piece ratio irrelevant with all the large LEGO display models coming out right now."
It's obviously a better metric than 'eye-test', weight, or any other. It's a 'metric'. It's not a determinate. It helps to measure. That's it. It's useful. So, people will use it. Don't try to police the world. Let it goooooooooo....."
I imagine we all agree that it is a ‘metric’, but it clearly isn’t as good or useful a metric as weight. The example of ten baseplates vs ten 1x1 tiles makes that obvious and beyond question.
Wow I am not a fan of batman but here, I am bluffed
@StyleCounselor said:
" @legoDad42 said:
"Love it! I thought, oh too monochromatic from the leaks, but it looks like a badass set to have on display.
Wish Lego would make an official lighting kit for this but will definitely have to get one now.
Little too pricey (like about $50 too high) but will save up for this one."
Hopefully, by the time we save up, it will be discounted down to meet us halfway. ;)"
Yes! I'm with you Style. See if Amazon can help us out with one of their discounts sometime this year.
Thx my friend.
Oh, with the mod, I think the only issue could be depth. Like the Batmobile platform tucks in neatly into that spot so the figures have to be very flush to the wall.
Batman: Relax, everybody, I'm here.
Emmet Brickowski: Batman!
Batman: [to Wyldstyle] What's up, babe?
Wyldstyle: Batman
Emmet Brickowski: What?
Wyldstyle: Oh, sorry. Batman, this is Emmet. Emmet, this is my boyfriend. Batman.
Batman: I'm Batman.
Emmet Brickowski: That's your boyfriend? Batman, huh? Where did you guys meet?
Wyldstyle: It's actually a funny story. Right, Bat...?
[she turns to see Batman has disappeared]
Bad Cop: There he is!
Batman: "Police" to meet you, Bad Cop.
Bad Cop: Batman! The pleasure is all "spine"!
Batman: Guess what, you big dumb baby? Your car is a baby carriage.
[Batman transforms Bad Cop's vehicle into a baby carriage and it start plummeting to the ground]
Emmet Brickowski: Oh, no. Your boyfriend's gone.
Batman: Hey, babe.
Emmet Brickowski: What?!
@ZeeMike:
Basing the price strictly by piece count has a proven track record going back to the 1970’s, but you do have to sensibly account for price drivers like minifigs, bigfigs, large animals (horses and larger, especially with articulation), and of course basolates. Your example set would almost certainly cost $150, and still wouldn’t be that great a value gauged strictly by weight. And basing the price strictly by weight fails to account for labor and transportation costs, which are each individually a larger share of the final MSRP than the amount of plastic in the box.
Pushing “price per stuff” is a great sound bite if you’re trying to commoditize YouTube views, but it’s not quantifiable. And price per weight, while possible to quantify, would require an enormous investment in data collection to even incorporate into set reviews in any meaningful way.
@FuddRuckus:
Interesting. I was going by 30653, which very distinctly looks like it has the cape going the other way. The masonry brick and the LEGO logo on the stud are oriented normally, so it’s not a case of someone accidentally flipping the photo 180°. Maybe it’s just a weird quirk of the angle the polybag minifig is shown from?
@hawkeye7269:
I know of one set that came with three 48x48 baseplates (red, yellow, and blue). You got a table thrown in for free, but the basplates cost something like $50-60 each.
@Darth_Dee said:
""I only build in black and sometimes dark grey...""
Emmet Brickowski: So, uh... Hey, guys? I think we're about to crash into that big box...
Batman: Yeah, but it's gonna look really cool.
[as they crash through the box, Batman's vehicle leaves a Bat-signal in the middle of it]
The set only comes in black.
And very very dark grey.
Hmm... I feel like having the stuff behind it when closed makes the outside of the box stand out more than it should. The focus should be on the Bat symbol, and it would if it were a solid colour. But because there is a jumble of stuff behind it, the solid outside box becomes more focal.
The black plastic box comes inside a black cardboard box. Batman would be proud. He must've been part of the focus test.
400 dollars is too much for me.. Yeah yeah I get the PPP brigade will come out and defend it, but its likely most people looking at this are not going to worry about PPP. I think at this price, Ill bricklink the Batmobile and buy the 1992 batman in the poly that is due out. As for the other figures? Im not a completionist so while Shreck, Catwoman, and Penguin would be interesting to have, not really worth 400 USD to me.
I’m usually one to whinge and moan and generally be Mr negative Nancy but I actually like this. It would look good properly lit up inside it whilst closed. Won’t pay full price for it though.
Wow Lego like putting this Batman minifigure in expensive sets! I’d like the Batmobile from this set, with Batman as a set.
It should've folded up. Revealing Wayne manor.
the fact that this is based on the keaton movies and not the comics limited the figure selection so badly and it just looks like a mess when viewed through the front when closed without proper lighting
@Doctor_Hugh said:
" @StyleCounselor said:
" @ZeeMike said:
" @hawkeye7269 said:
" @ZeeMike said:
" @tmtomh said:
"Amazing set - really unique.
And 11.3 cents per piece for a licensed set is not bad (although folks will inevitably complain about “excessive price” no matter the facts)."
Stop measuring the value of the sets through the price to piece ratio. It is irrelevant in modern LEGO. Thank you."
Stop telling other people how they should choose to value and enjoy LEGO sets. It is irrelevant in modern LEGO. Thank you."
So in your eyes a set with 30 large baseplates and a set with 30 1x1 studs has the same price to piece ratio hence is the same value / worthiness / display factor. Got it.
If anything, the weight of the set and how the pieces contribute to the display factor should be more of a consideration than a ratio number that tells you how much of a buyer's remorse you have after the purchase. That is why I see price-to-piece ratio irrelevant with all the large LEGO display models coming out right now."
It's obviously a better metric than 'eye-test', weight, or any other. It's a 'metric'. It's not a determinate. It helps to measure. That's it. It's useful. So, people will use it. Don't try to police the world. Let it goooooooooo....."
I imagine we all agree that it is a ‘metric’, but it clearly isn’t as good or useful a metric as weight. The example of ten baseplates vs ten 1x1 tiles makes that obvious and beyond question.
"
Even weight becomes subjective. I have plenty of baseplates. They're not rare of expensive to obtain. Some with the large ugly pieces. I also have plenty of waste plastic around my house. I don't need more.
I'd rather pay for a small, good meal, cooked with love than a ton-o-grease at Mickey's slophouse, burger window. The important things to me are exciting brick designs and prints on minifigs.
Weight might become a better metric for me than PPP if it were more readily available. PPP, dimensions, design, prints, eye-test, how many cool parts- these are what I use to determine whether to spend my money.
Yet, no one should be condemned or shutdown regardless of the metric they prefer.
All I see is a pile of black bricks, ripe for Blacktron building.
And some dark grey, I guess.
I got the other two Burton's Batman UCS sets, but this one feels a bit off. The price is high, as I don't think you get enough stuff for $520 (I don't do PPP, I look at a set as a whole).
The other two (car and plane) were a must have from the moment I saw the press release, but this one not so much. I'm not sure what's wrong with it per se but something is.
Figures are solid, and the box feature is nice.
@madforLEGO:
Nah. If you feel the set is just generally too expensive for you to afford, I can respect that. Most people don't have unlimited budgets, and have to draw some sort of line. "More than I have in the bank" is definitely a quantifiable metric, albeit one that's different for everyone.
@sipuss said:
"No leg or arm printing, it truly feels like 1992."
Does this batman even need leg printing?
Like, WHAT do you even put as leg printing? The 1992 Batman costum is mostly all black, sure there's some details but how do you add more black on the black? Catwoman maybe, but that'd just be a few more extra zipper lines.
Although I feel we should have gotten a few more figures, 7 figures just feels way to low for an expensive set like this.
I haven't read through ALL of the messages here, but has anybody noticed that the front passenger fender of the Batmobile is missing a piece in the picture with the Batcave open, but not with the Batcave box closed?
@zipper said:
"I haven't read through ALL of the messages here, but has anybody noticed that the front passenger fender of the Batmobile is missing a piece in the picture with the Batcave open, but not with the Batcave box closed?"
Maybe Bruce was working on it with the box opened?
tbh the penguin minifig looks disappointing to me
@PurpleDave said:
@hawkeye7269:
I know of one set that came with three 48x48 baseplates (red, yellow, and blue). You got a table thrown in for free, but the basplates cost something like $50-60 each.]]
They weren't all the same size, but the time cruiser magic mountain came with three baseplates.
I like it, i think it’s a good compromise. The 76502 Batcave was nowhere near the level of this one. The 2016 Batcave reminded me a lot of the Hoth UCS play set. It just didn’t feel like a worthy display piece. Having this as one consolidated “brick” is clever. The back of the model was going to be blank or unusable anyways. Making it a folding “cave” was a brilliant use of dead space.
@Brickerika:
The torso has a very understated armored pattern to it, which the minifig print kind of exaggerates due to the use of white lines. The legs have an extremely minimal design, and adding print would have basically done nothing more than acknowledge that yes, they noticed the minifig has legs. Bruce and Alfred would not benefit from leg print at all, and adding print to Penguin's legs would have just made them look really bad. It's Catwoman and Shreck who look like they're only wearing the top half of their costumes.
@zipper:
A few people have noted the missing piece, yes.
@Hellscream:
Well, if you open it up to sets that happen to include three baseplates, the famed Yellow Castle had five. The center was a 16x32 baseplate, and the sides were built on 8x16 baseplates that would swing open. Closed, however, it had a basic 32x32 footprint. But what I was referring to is actually 4509, which is a pocketed playtable that came with three XL baseplates in primary colors.
@danieglass:
To add to what I said about the Batsuit earlier, I've been looking up images of the actual movie props used in both films. The 89 Batsuit appears to have had the chest emblem incorporated into the suit itself, where the Returns Batsuit had it molded into the cowl. Photos of prop suits that have gone up for auction show the body glove without the boots, gloves, belt, cape, or cowl, and there's just an oval pocket with two holes (probably used to fasten the cowl to the chest).
However, if you look at the minifigs, the 89 Batman has no emblem on the chest. It's only included on the rubber cape/cowl. Given how unique that triple tail design is, it's a shame that you can't get a plain minifig of the 89 Batsuit. One other thing that may have prompted the inclusion of a cowled and standard version of the Returns Batsuit is that I believe Batman tears his cowl off in the sequel, but the emblem stayed attached to his chest armor. Besides the display case, this would allow you to put Bruce's head and hair on the standard Batsuit.
@zipper said:
"I haven't read through ALL of the messages here, but has anybody noticed that the front passenger fender of the Batmobile is missing a piece in the picture with the Batcave open, but not with the Batcave box closed?"
Yes, that was mentioned at least once already.
Oh no!
@sipuss said:
"No leg or arm printing, it truly feels like 1992."
Savage.
Closest thing we'll get to a Siouxsie and the Banshees set, so I have to get it!
I'ld love to get it, it's an amazing set but price is as impressive as the set. I loved how the interior looks, the Keaton-mobile and overall the box style design. Oh well, I can always download the hi-res pictures and post it on my wall...
@Ridgeheart said:
" @StyleCounselor said:
" @Vladtheb said:
"I quite like this. Might get it and build a Wayne Manor to sit on top of it"
I was thinking it would be a great stand for my 70922. Bruce trying to do his chill Batman stuff with a noisy-ass roommate above causing trouble!"
You sir, are a credit to your name."
Brother... salut.
@Hellscream @PurpleDave
10159 has 6 baseplates. Four 32x32, one 32x16, and one 16x16.
If you're looking for strictly baseplates in a box, then 9370 has 10, it is under the "Dacta" umbrella tho. I don't know what else you might find if you dig thru the "educational" stuff, I'm sure some of the "classroom packs" will high numbers of baseplates.
@legoDad42 said:
" @StyleCounselor said:
" @legoDad42 said:
"Love it! I thought, oh too monochromatic from the leaks, but it looks like a badass set to have on display.
Wish Lego would make an official lighting kit for this but will definitely have to get one now.
Little too pricey (like about $50 too high) but will save up for this one."
Hopefully, by the time we save up, it will be discounted down to meet us halfway. ;)"
Yes! I'm with you Style. See if Amazon can help us out with one of their discounts sometime this year.
Thx my friend.
Oh, with the mod, I think the only issue could be depth. Like the Batmobile platform tucks in neatly into that spot so the figures have to be very flush to the wall. "
Good eye! Foresight is ten times more valuable than hindsight. We'll make it work.
You already know you're one of the good ones that make ALL of this work. Raise 'em right LegoDad!
@279 said:
" @Hellscream @PurpleDave
10159 has 6 baseplates. Four 32x32, one 32x16, and one 16x16.
If you're looking for strictly baseplates in a box, then 9370 has 10, it is under the "Dacta" umbrella tho. I don't know what else you might find if you dig thru the "educational" stuff, I'm sure some of the "classroom packs" will high numbers of baseplates."
You absolute mad lad
Is this DC trying make some money, or flop like rest company?
Think would of looked better if possible that was inside a cave instead of cube...2k pieces cube box?
@danieglass said:
"Just realized this is literally a $400 LEGO black box within an 18+ branded black box."
Two black boxes for the price of one, who says Lego charges too much? Sounds like a deal to me.
To much for bunch of black and gray bricks and some minifigs
Had this been based on the animated series or the dark knight trilogy, this would have been an instant buy for me. But this Batcave design is just not as memorable for me to justify a purchase. I’ll have to wait for MOCers to adapt this set in order to make a decision.
I like the set very much. Just the price will not make me buy it. And I appreciate the mostly black and grey parts. Now some people are complaining about that, but the colours seem much more useful than a pile of teal, light yellow and pink parts.
With the lighting, it should look great. Having it fold up seems very handy with limited space. You could even easily stack another set or box on top.
I am on the fence about this one. It does look nice and is a neat concept, but I have no clue where I would display it. Will probably wait and see if this becomes available with a discount sometime next year, and how cool it would look with lighting from companies like Light My Bricks.
Has anyone pointed out that this set includes a Batmannequin?
Do people read the comments when they get 190+ deep?
@MVives said:
"Yes, this lifestyle photo shows EXACTLY how this set should be displayed...
https://images.brickset.com/sets/AdditionalImages/76252-1/76252_alt5.jpg"
I mostly agree, I think it'd be best in the corner of a room with the busy side "open" and the Batmobile and the "front" closed similar to that image, maybe with some lighting or something hidden by the cave side to accentuate the bat logo.
Seriously conflicted by this set. Looks amazing, great selection of minifigures, but its around £100 more than I like to spend on a single set. And for a set of this price I would at least expect figs with arm and leg printing. But if LEGO were to release the Bat Ski Boat from "Batman Returns" with a price tag of around £200 - £250 and including at least those Catwoman and Penguin figs? That would be a day one purchase for me.
@Degora said:
"This is the DC equivalent of that Black Panther bust, it's just a vastly overpriced black box.
Would like that Batmobile though. "
Hopefully this will be 40-50% off like the Black Panther Bust & Hulkbuster were here in Australia!!
@gdeligne:
So if they put a computer in the middle of a stark, white room, you’d prefer that?
@kdu2814:
Actually, the question of why they included it was raised, and answered.
It looks to me like the fold-up bat-suit compartment provides the eyes and face of the bat when the box is closed. That's very clever. (I initially thought it was the computer core reels that formed the eyes, but nope.)
This looks like something I am more than likely to buy. And then put on the big pile of "too big to display" sets. Yes, I am strange that way...
I do own the other two Batman sets (not built yet of course), so it fits right in. And I really, really do like these movies from back then. [I also don't mind the newer, more gloomy ones]
I have to say, though. It does look very, very black...
@kfr said:
"This looks like something I am more than likely to buy. And then put on the big pile of "too big to display" sets. Yes, I am strange that way..."
I'm the same. I have a few UCS sets still sitting in their boxes. I keep trying to make room, but still fill the shelves with mid sized and smaller sets.
I need more display cases. I got the room, but little time to rearrange.
I can't unsee the three pairs of buttocks on the front.
@legoDad42:
I have 10188 still wearing its “raincoat” from when I bought it on the 30% convention discount at Brickworld Chicago. The nearby stores were both sold out, so I headed in to the downtown Chicago store during a monsoon because that was my only option. They took the largest shopping bag they had, cut a slit in the bottom, and dropped it over the shipper carton which had a few adhesive handles that would fit through the slot. Got it home, set it down, and I don’t think I’ve moved it even once in nearly 14 years.
@PurpleDave said:
" @legoDad42:
I have 10188 still wearing its “raincoat” from when I bought it on the 30% convention discount at Brickworld Chicago. The nearby stores were both sold out, so I headed in to the downtown Chicago store during a monsoon because that was my only option. They took the largest shopping bag they had, cut a slit in the bottom, and dropped it over the shipper carton which had a few adhesive handles that would fit through the slot. Got it home, set it down, and I don’t think I’ve moved it even once in nearly 14 years."
Wow! Sounds alot like me. I got a 30% on my 10188 too (Lego store opening here in Queens back in '09 from a store manager friend hooking me up on the down low). Still have it in the box sealed. I got another one without figs for parts real cheap ($100).
Every time I make new space, I end up displaying another semi-large set or mid-range sized kits.
I hear ya' my friend.
@legoDad42:
We got hefty discounts, possibly 30%, when my LUG helped out during the Grand Opening for the one store in Michigan. I ended up buying stuff I normally wouldn't have, just because I could get it at such a steep discount. I didn't come close to hitting the spending cap they had in place for the discount purchases, but I'd look at a box and see even a single minifig that I was interested in, and add it to the pile. And then I don't think I opened any of them.
@TheMikeStrikesBack said:
"“Iconic iconography”
Who writes these?"
This is why I never read the marketing gunf anymore!
The cave is cool but it looks a bit ugly when closed. I wish they had instead put the bat logo on the back built in front of a yellow wall, would have looked a lot nicer.
Could Lego perhaps offer a "mini" version set that we mere mortals could afford??? $600.00AUD is too much for a black plastic box. Oh wait; The Harry Potter train tracks omitted from its big set would cut its price down by a third...