Never seen the movie but this set looks awesome. I love the build and the minifigures look outstanding. The three new hair molds are a nice touch!

who?

Like the set more or less, perhaps more a personal age thing as watched the film when it came out originally.. but wonder about the timing here other than 30th Anniversary of HP 1, but HP 2 has been and gone in 2022, rumours of HP3 in the works but likely after this set has retired so can't see it as a massive seller other than a "spooky cottage addition" to your display.

Also.. minifig wise, where's Billy Butcherson ?

It astounds me how a set like this gets approved. I suspect that after the 10 thousand voters for this set have bought it... or not, it is way more expensive than expected, espically when compared to the Home Alone house... then its enter the realms of "heavily discount".

Who let those witches in that nice castle household
Great build sadly a little expensive for the none fans who might abuse the build and ignore the figs.

@PurpleDave said:
" @merman said:
"There were times a 2,100 piece Ideas set was ‘just’ €180 (Blacksmith)"

There was a time when gas cost five cents a gallon."

Thanks let me embrace the dark side
There was a time before twitter so we could only write angry letters no one cared about.
There was a time beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep
beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep
******** ******
Expensive lego ^%&^%^$^$&^*

Sorry couldn't resist

While I like--but don't *love*--the film, I think this set looks fantastic! The attention to detail is impressive, and I adore the minifigure designs!

That said, $230 is too pricey for me--especially since I don't consider the film a favorite. If the minifigures aren't too much on the aftermarket, I might see if I can pick up the Sanderson Sisters on BrickLink.

Wish they could have included a Black Flame or a printed Book.

@Binnekamp:
This was something that came up with Steamboat Willie, because of the two hats, but it turned out the hats were designed for the Disney CMFs and Steamboat Willie just happened to make it to market first (the Ideas designer got started working on it really early, possibly even before it went under review). So, that reaffirmed the "no new molds" rule for a while. Then Sesame Street came along, with new heads for everyone, and they made a side announcement that Ideas was now allowed to make new molds _if_they_felt_it_was_necessary_. As project submitters, the general public is still not allowed to post projects that obviously require new molds. Seinfeld is the only other instance I know of offhand, as at least once of the hairstyles is new for that set.

@lee_fett1980:
Maybe in Europe, but the Redford Theater in Detroit ran a screening of this film a few years ago, and they had a packed bus come in from I think Wisconsin (that's at least an 8-hour drive, each way). In the US, it has become a huge cult film. I mean, I don't care for the film. I can't even remember if I ever watched it, but I can't stand Bette Midler. The set looks really good, though, and I expect it will do well (in the US, at least).

@Fatoran:
Oh, I forgot Pooh, and I got two copies of that set.

@mediAFOL:
Define "proper minifig scale". Are you going strictly by height, or strictly by width?

I remember when this came out; didn't care for it then and I forgot all about it until today. Now they're going back to the well what, 30 years later? Reiterating the conclusion of my personal bias, Monster Fighters would be better to me but kudos to the fan designer for the effort and success.

Love how it looks ?? But I have the same feelings about the Home Alone set and still didn't buy it. Hope this won't be the case.
Those prints on figs are ?? Way better then in that Batman box)

Looks nice, will probably draw in some Castle/Medieval fans, but the too often repeated "but it's under 10 cent a piece" just doesn't work for everything.

In comparison, 21325 : Medieval Blacksmith was €150-€170 at launch (varied a bit per country) , so this costs 53% more then €150 in 2021.

Even considering Blacksmith did get price adjusted to €180 eventually in 2022, this still costs 28% more.

Bring on the Viking Village to compare with (2023 set, unlicensed, same IDEAS theme)

That said, discounts, parts lists and reviews can swing the judgement of the set in it's favor. (built some 2023 sets recently that came out bigger/more detailed then expected, when seen in person, instead of a (small) screen or static photos)

@ryanmer:
I see one other comment above yours that's a definite buy, and two more that are contingent on finding it on sale.

@R0Sch:
New hairstyle molds account for some of that price.

Looks really nice, but i am actually in the "I know the movie and think it is very average and unfunny, and the remaining LEGO budget for the year has already been reserved for the Avengers Tower, Gringotts and the Orient Express" camp.

But hey, really happy that the set looks as good as it does, and the minifigs are actually pretty accurate and look great. I am sure this will do very well in North America where this movie has become some sort of Halloween staple for many people.

Oh, and also really happy that that "witches hat and hair" mould has made it to an official set. It was originally intended for further Vidiyo sets, but we all know what happened there. I might actually pick up the minifigs of the three witches and put them in a random halloween display.

Obligatory "Allison, Allison, kiss me, I'm Allison" quote.

Honestly, my main let down with this is Allison's face print. It just doesn't fit the character like the other prints do. The witches are so detailed, and Max's face just really works, but then Allison's just looks like a reused print.

Very detailed build and I suppose the fans will be happy with it but I never cared for that movie so that's gonna be a pass for me.

Good for fans, this might pass as a Medieval House.

I love this movie and I will absolutely eventually get this set. But $230? Yikes man, yikes.

But like I said, someday!

Way out of my price range for a movie that's not super important to me, but more Halloween sets please! It looks great. The Sanderson sisters are instantly recognizable.

@lee_fett1980 said:
"I like the set, but I'd be surprised if there's the AFOL market for this one. It was always a bit of a cult classic, people really enjoy the film but not to the point that a lot will spend this much on this set. The second film wasn't that great either which won't help sales.

They've done a great job, but they could have gone with a more standard witches house without having the added cost of the licensing for Disney."

I'm not a big fan of the film, but having seen it, I appreciate that each of these minifigs has a distinctive character, which, theoretically, allows me to create my own stories with them (tbf, the film had an interesting concept, a decent aesthetic and an intriguing cast, but just failed to conjure any real magic for me in the final execution).

Suffice to say, I love the set (irrespective of the IP), but linking the set to a specific IP allows the designers to focus on specific details and references, and I appreciate a good Easter Egg, even for a film that mostly evokes a 'meh' from me.

Also, I love that a film which flopped on initial release, can be revived as a £200 Lego IDEAs set 30 years later. It gives one hope that almost any IP could potentially end up as a Lego set (assuming it's 'family-friendly').

This gets a big "meh" from me. I've never seen the movie, but at least the Ideas submission looked interesting. But as the LEGO Ideas team tends to do, they sucked most of the character out of it.

Also, awful, awful price. And what's with the render quality on these pics? The ones used on the box make it look like a knock-off.

@RaiderOfTheLostBrick said:
"I have absolutely no clue what's going on here, but if I grew up on Hocus Pocus like I did with Home Alone, I would get this in a heartbeat. The cottage is so well detailed and I could see this working as a haunted manor/medieval village building in a possible display. Heck, I can probably now do my dream MOC of the Salem Witch Trials!

Come to think of it, I've never seen the film. Is it any good?"

IMHO, no, not particularly, but does it really matter? It's still a great set, right?

That said, if you have any young kids, it may be worth using it as an excuse to watch the film together in order to familiarise yourself with the IP, so that you can at least appreciate the various Easter Eggs etc. And fwiw, the likeness of the minifigs to the actors (especially the three witches, played by Bette Midler, Sarah Jessica Parker, and Kathy Najimy) is top-notch.

Oh, and as it happens, the witches' backstory is inspired by the Salem Witch Trials, so it's definitely a great set for your dream MOC!

Yes, yes this will go nicely next to my Medieval Blacksmith.

Great parts pack - I imagine cool stuff like the grey skull, witch's hat and perhaps even the candle popping up in other sets as well, so fingers crossed for that.

Vinessa Shaw minifig!! Amirite??

@AliveAndBricking said:
"Also, I love that a film which flopped on initial release, can be revived as a £200 Lego IDEAs set 30 years later. It gives one hope that almost any IP could potentially end up as a Lego set (assuming it's 'family-friendly')."
Since one of the coming Ideas sets will be based on "Jaws", I think it's safe to say that the necessity to be family-friendly has gone out the window.
;-)

Couldn’t care less about Hocus Pocus or a Sanderson Sister but the house is good.

@AustinPowers said:
" @AliveAndBricking said:
"Also, I love that a film which flopped on initial release, can be revived as a £200 Lego IDEAs set 30 years later. It gives one hope that almost any IP could potentially end up as a Lego set (assuming it's 'family-friendly')."
Since one of the coming Ideas sets will be based on "Jaws", I think it's safe to say that the necessity to be family-friendly has gone out the window.
;-)
"

True, but I'm also not going to assume that my dream Alien 'Nostromo' set complete with Facehugger and blood-splattered Kane minifigure, is imminent.

Who is so hyped on Hocus Pocus that they are willing to spend 230 bucks?

I'm really pleased with this and although it may not be a day 1 purchase for me personally given the relatively high price it will definitely be bought before the end of the year, hopefully with a good GWP or points offer.

Like others have already commented it's a shame that Billy Butcherson has been omitted with only an homage with the gravestone.

The Sanderson sisters and the set overall look awesome though.

Well, I'm screwed. Didn't even send a link about this set and my wife (HUGE Disney fan) already knows about it/wants it. Problem is we have no more room. Also doesn't help that I'm NOT a Disney fan (tolerate it for obvious reasons) and spooky/Halloween-ish stuff is not my cup o tea. Thanks Lego :(

The sloppiness of press releases continues, as

"the 2,316 piece set comprises a fully complete with favourite props inspired from the film"

is not fully complete since "house" is missing after "fully complete."

Never saw the movie (I suspect I'm the wrong age to have been interested in it). From my point of view, the minifigures of the sisters are garish and unimportant, although I'm glad to know that they do a good job of representing both the movie characters and the actresses involved. And, like the Blacksmith's house (which I've never bought, despite being something of a castle fan), this is wildly out of scale with most minifigure residences. The only thing it's in scale with is the Blacksmith's house, I suspect. But it's a beautiful rendition of a half-timbered house, much more so than the B.h. IMO, and I love all the details. Given the dollhouse construction style, it would make an interesting mate to the old Haunted House (yes, I have that, which makes me want this build *more* rather than less) even though I suspect it's out of scale with that build as well. Maybe I'll make a Halloween display using forced perspective so this would be a "gatehouse" and the H.H. would be higher up on a hill at a supposed distance.

There's a simple way to cut the price, I suspect after reading the comments. Those who really can't stomach what is (these days) actually a mid-level price for a set of this size and detail can go to Bricklink right after its release and buy the set without the minifigures. There's bound to be a good market for the minifigures alone, and there ought to be a fair to good market for the set without them.

In the "Lego ramshackle cottage" genre, this one is not as good as Old Fishing Store. It's visually muddier and has more exposed studs.

I don't think Hocus Pocus is big enough of a brand to encourage non-lego fans to buy the set. Whilst a set such as The Office will draw in fans of the show, there are much fewer avid fans of Hocus Pocus

@AustinPowers said:
" @AliveAndBricking said:
" @AustinPowers said:
" @AliveAndBricking said:
"Also, I love that a film which flopped on initial release, can be revived as a £200 Lego IDEAs set 30 years later. It gives one hope that almost any IP could potentially end up as a Lego set (assuming it's 'family-friendly')."
Since one of the coming Ideas sets will be based on "Jaws", I think it's safe to say that the necessity to be family-friendly has gone out the window.
;-)
"

True, but I'm also not going to assume that my dream Alien 'Nostromo' set complete with Facehugger and blood-splattered Kane minifigure, is imminent."
Well, would this suffice for a start?:

@PurpleDave : sometimes I am indeed kidding.
But who is Bruce supposed to be in this instance?
Bruce Willis?
Bruce Springsteen?
Bruce Almighty?
Bruce from Finding Nemo?
(At least the latter was a shark too. Or was the shark in "Jaws" called Bruce as well? If so I must have missed the line of dialogue.)

@MrBedhead : let's just agree that you constantly disagree with everything I say, and vice versa.
My opinion is no more arrogant than yours, since you seem to assume that you are right and I am not.
What you forget is that I am merely stating my personal opinion, not a fact or universal truth.
And in the grand scheme of things, my opinion is just as irrelevant as yours.
Still I have zero issue with your criticizing me. After all, where would we be if everyone agreed with everyone else all the time? "

You really do not understand that you come off as arrogant, do you? And that I do not give one cent about your opinion? But that I just wish you would stop spamming this forum with your "stickers bad / prints good" comments? And that stating that all these yuppies need simplified instructions, probably because in your blacn'n'white mind they are too stupid, is incredibly arrogant towards people who are just starting to get into the hobby? That is why I keep replying to your posts. Not because you voice your opinion. It is the way you do it.

Anyway, you do realise that you are promoting a completely unlicensed set, that is probably a stolen MOC, for which neither the original Alien designer, nor the MOC'er are seeing any revenue? Just because some Chinese clone company decided they could steal an idea and a design and just produce it with average quality bricks? That is really a high standard that you are setting for yourself, dude. Please keep these links and comments for your participation in the "lepin board" or similar.

@ryanmer said:
"Reading the rest of the comments, it appears that I'm the only person on Brickset Dot Com who (A.) has seen the movie, (B.) liked the movie, and (C.) intends to buy this set."

I'm with (A) and (C) after (D) discount.

Good set design, details, and figs. Price could definitely be better. But, I have a large Halloween display that this must join... someday.

@CopperTablet said:
"In the "Lego ramshackle cottage" genre, this one is not as good as Old Fishing Store. It's visually muddier and has more exposed studs."

Aww. Now, you've gone and reminded me of the Ruined House from the BrickLink Designer Program. https://www.bricklink.com/v3/designer-program/past/bdp-2021.page

Wish they would've made that one.

I've never seen the movie because I really can't stand one of the stars. The other two aren't my cup of tea either. But that being said this is an awesome looking set on it's own without figuring in those three characters. When I saw this up on Ideas I don't remember if I actually supported it but when it made it through review I knew it was a set I'll probably be getting because it is so interesting to me. For those who think this movie doesn't have a following I'm sorry to tell you that there are a lot of rabid Hocus Pocus fans around the world as evidenced by this set being designed by someone from Belgium so it's not just a US thing. Personally I really like this build just just the same as I really like the Home Alone House for the build rather than the movie it's based on. Will it be a day one purchase for me? I doubt it but I will get it eventually for my Medieval Village because it will definitely fit in.

And here we are, another step nearer to a Sex in the City set…
Now we need a Mannequin film set and we’ll also be a step nearer a Golden Girls set: win-win!

@AustinPowers said:
" @MrBedhead said:
"You really do not understand that you come off as arrogant, do you? And that I do not give one cent about your opinion?"
And that statement of course isn't arrogant at all. "

Seriously? You do not understand that me stating that I do not care about your opinion is de facto not arrogant? What should I say then? Oh, hail lord AustinPowers, I love your opinions and agree with all of them? I cherish them? That is seriously self-centered :D

@watcher21:
I worry that I'm going to need medical treatement for my eyebrow pretty soon, if it doesn't come back down someday. It was one thing when people would point to sets that were widely recognized as being great value when seeking proof that the latest set was overpriced, but it kinda destroys credibility when all the sets being pointed to as "great value" in comparison were widely accused of being too expensive. What changed? Did the fact that inflation has finally come knocking make all older sets suddenly "great value" because they were cheaper then than they'd be now? If so, I once again refer the comment board to five-cent gasoline.

@AustinPowers:
Bruce is the nickname they gave the mechanical shark used during filming (which I've seen in person on the Universal Studios Hollywood backlot tour). I don't think the shark in the movie is supposed to have any official name, but Jaws seems more likely. Still, Bruce is commonly how people refer to the shark from the film.

@karrit:
Najimy may not be someone I seek out, but I've seen her in a lot of productions, and honestly can't think of one time that I've hated her in a role. L.A. Story is the only thing I'd watch with Parker in it, and thankfully she has a rather small role. Anyone who remains, I'll pointedly avoid.

Doesn't seem scary enough to me. I would have preferred an update on 10228, but don't need to go through the 10k hoop for this to happen.

@purpledave

what? No Footloose for you (re: SJP)? Don't let the Guardians of the Galaxy know.

Strange being released in July as Halloween is months away, but a good Halloween set.

I could see that hair/witch hat combo being used in Harry Potter. Very nice set.

Too cheap, should be at least 500e

@MegaBlocks said:
"Strange being released in July as Halloween is months away, but a good Halloween set."

What are you talking about? Every holiday has it's devotees! Just as some people leave Christmas decorations up all year round, there are people who do love Halloween 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 364 days a year. (365 on leap years)

I came here for the Focus tune.

But it's all good. Great set!

Are those green lightning parts new?

"UNLIMITED POWER!"

@ozbrickcreator said:
"Are those green lightning parts new?

"UNLIMITED POWER!""

Nope. been around since 2007 in several marbled colors.

https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=59233pb01T=C

https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=59233pb02T=C&C=16

https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=59233T=C

Decent house and minifig design. Don’t really know or care for the source material. So will give this one a miss. Still, one step closer to other Ideas sets I might actually buy!

@AustinPowers:
Well, that apparently is where they got the name (Chum and Anchor are a little more obvious). However, Bruce is also Australian slang for a man, and the film was set in Australia because the Great Barrier Reef factors into the story. Ironically, due to the immense size of the shark in Jaws, it would absolutely have to be female, as they grow much larger (nearly twice as long) than males in that species. And I guess Chum has been identified as the only one of the three sharks to bear claspers (I choose to believe this was noted by shark biologists), meaning both Bruce and Anchor would be either female or gelded. Bruce and Anchor in FN are both small enough that they could be male or female, but Bruce’s girth does suggest a mature female, as males and developing females tend to be more streamlined. And just to pile on the trivia, Chum (the only obvious male of the trio) was played by notable Australian actor Bruce Spence.

@ohrmazd:
I _think_ I saw it once when I was in high school. If I did, I clearly wasn’t impressed.

@ineedabrick said:
"I came here for the Focus tune."

Far superior IP

I have no idea of what Hocus Pocus is, but the set looks quite nice and the minifigures are also of great quality (love the leg printing)
I also have no idea of what is going on with the comments of this article, but it's some great, if unintended, comedy!

I have no interest in these movies. I will not be spending any of my Lego budget. Better sets on the horizon.

@AustinPowers said:
"Don't know the source material, but the house looks nice.

Not 230 Euro nice though for me.
Therefor it's a pass.

Plus, anyone remember when a distinguishing feature of Ideas sets was prints only?
Alas. "

watch movie, movies

Wow so many people who never saw movie or heard bout it....

@Murdoch17 said:
" @MegaBlocks said:
"Strange being released in July as Halloween is months away, but a good Halloween set."

What are you talking about? Every holiday has it's devotees! Just as some people leave Christmas decorations up all year round, there are people who do love Halloween 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 364 days a year. (365 on leap years)"

Samhain

As Christianity gained a foothold in pagan communities, church leaders attempted to reframe Samhain as a Christian celebration.

The first attempt was by Pope Boniface in the 5th century. He moved the celebration to May 13 and specified it as a day celebrating saints and martyrs. The fire festivals of October and November, however, did not end with this decree.

In the 9th century, Pope Gregory moved the celebration back to the time of the fire festivals, but declared it All Saints’ Day, on November 1. All Souls’ Day would follow on November 2.
Neither new holiday did away with the pagan aspects of the celebration. October 31 became known as All Hallows Eve, or Halloween, and contained much of the traditional pagan practices before being adopted in 19th-century America through Irish immigrants bringing their traditions across the ocean.

Trick-or-treating is said to have been derived from ancient Irish and Scottish practices in the nights leading up to Samhain. In Ireland, mumming was the practice of putting on costumes, going door-to-door and singing songs to the dead. Cakes were given as payment.

Halloween pranks also have a tradition in Samhain, though in the ancient celebration, tricks were typically blamed on fairies.

Sorry if ruined Halloween any you

@djcbs:
Inflation is a rate of growth, not a fixed point. Just because inflation has gone down doesn't mean it takes prices down with it. You need negative inflation for that to happen, and you yourself just said that it's still +2.9%.

Interesting comments. I agree it will be a nice companion to Blacksmith, but both are far too large to put next to other Lego buildings, especially castle/pirate ones.
I do think it is strange to make a set of a very niche IP most people have never even heard of, including strong Disney fans, but at the same time give it a price to turn off a lot of non-Lego fans, as well as existing Lego fans.
Like if you want to tap into a specific market, okay fine, but you're going to need to encourage them, not create a set they may like...but can't afford.
Furthermore, yes I do believe Lego should have chosen either another IP that the general populace is more familiar with, (there are a number of far more internationally popular IPs that have sadly been ignored) or better still, an original non-IP based idea.
Is this set terrible? No I wouldn't say that. Is it overpriced? Definitely. Should it have been made? Maybe maybe not but since it was made it could have been marketed better.

@Brickchap:
Since development costs have to be spread out over the projected life of the set, the less they expect to sell, the more they need to charge to keep the set profitable. And that of course means less people will buy it, so it’s a bit of a vicious spiral.

For this, there’s definitely a cult following in the US (can’t speak for worldwide), and if they’re rabid enough, that may be all it takes to make this a success. I probably would have preferred something else from this review class, but that doesn’t mean I automatically think this will be a flop.

@Montyh7 : thank you. I couldn't have said it better.
Plus I also have had several similar calls to LEGO's customer service about the subject because of bad experiences with sticker quality. My dislike for stickers in LEGO sets doesn't come out of nowhere after all.

I don't mind stickers if they are good quality, like from some of the alternatives. But those from LEGO definitely aren't*. And most from alternatives are even worse, no doubt about it. It's just a select few companies that have managed to get it right.
But from the self-proclaimed quality leader one certainly should be able to expect better, especially at the premium prices they are asking.

*at least not anymore. When I was a kid LEGO used high quality vinyl like stickers that even after decades look just as bright as on day one (dare I add that colour matching back then was also excellent?) and that still cling onto the pieces like hell, whereas modern LEGO stickers often start to peel off almost in no time - if they even arrive on an uncrumpled sticker sheet to begin with, which from my experience is almost never anymore.

I don't doubt that @MrBedhead or others haven't had such bad luck and therefore consider my constant complaints about stickers annoying, but from where I'm coming from these complaints are more than justified.

@PurpleDave said:
" @Brickchap:
Since development costs have to be spread out over the projected life of the set, the less they expect to sell, the more they need to charge to keep the set profitable. And that of course means less people will buy it, so it’s a bit of a vicious spiral.

For this, there’s definitely a cult following in the US (can’t speak for worldwide), and if they’re rabid enough, that may be all it takes to make this a success. I probably would have preferred something else from this review class, but that doesn’t mean I automatically think this will be a flop."

Agreed. I do think fans of other suggested Lego set IPs would be more numerous than Hocus Pocus. But yeah I wouldn't argue this will be a flop, one thing I would say is I reckon if it were possible to survey future buyers of this set, most consumers would be people who just like the parts/want a medieval/pirate type building rather than Hocus Pocus fans.

I don't care about Hocus Pocus, but that's a very nice mill cottage build. It's a bit on the pricey side considering I got Medieval Blacksmith for less than half that price, but I'll keep an eye out for discounts.

"Bombarding", Lego are over-saturating the market, and quality control has dropped as they are stretching themselves too thin. Added to the supply issues during Covid, where perhaps if they produced less sets and more stock it would've been better.

@StyleCounselor said:
" @CCC said:
" @StyleCounselor said: "
I won't belabor the points I've made many times in these comments about stickers and color-matching. Suffice to say, I completely agree that Lego can afford (economics, space, etc.) to have printed parts on expensive sets (plus $200, at least) if they can pump out the plethora of expensive sets as they have been.

Don't excuse crappy stickers (and, boy! they have been crappy!!) because of stocking constraints, and then bombard us with a new giant set every month. It's too much."

You do realise that when they "bombard" you with sets it is up to you whether you want to purchase them or not? It may all be too much for you but I like that they are doing so many large sets. I don't buy very many of them at all. It means that occasionally one comes along that I really like.

As to whether LEGO can afford to go for all prints instead of stickers, of course they can. But guess who really pays for it, we'll know when that $250 set with some stickers becomes $280 with prints.
"

Of course you're right. Nevertheless, I believe it's a perception that's becoming widespread.

More to the point, if I know it's going to last (and stickers aren't the only issue, there's also color-yellowing and the extreme brittleness of dark red and red-brown), I would be much more inclined to pay that higher price."

I have sets on display that are 10+ years old and I have zero issues with stickers loosening or the like. Of course, this is my own experience only, but this makes me very sceptical towards people complaining about this. I would argue that at least some of them just use this as an excuse to proclaim their hatred for stickers.

Also, the brittleness of reddish brown has very likely been fixed. Of course, only time will really tell, but whereas I have had a few issues way back with reddish brown bricks breaking in sets of 2010 or earlier, I have had zero issues in the 100+ sets I put together the past 10 years.

@MrBedhead:
They have certainly claimed to have figured out what was causing the brittleness, and how to fix it, but only time showed that there was a problem, and only time can prove if their fix worked. Unfortunately, we don’t have hard dates on any of this. I bought a second copy of 7598, and when I recently pulled out a reddish-brown 6x8 plate, it snapped as easily as a cracker, so 2010 is clearly within the bad range. I’ve never heard any theories on the start date, though. And they only announced that they’d been aware of the problem and figured out how to prevent it after they’d had time to see if it worked, so we don’t really know an end date, either. For lack of anything more specific, I’ve been tentatively treating 2018 as the start of the safe period. I don’t remember specifically when we heard this problem was solved, but I probably rolled it back a year to account for the “waited to say anything” period.

We also don’t know exactly how long it takes for brittle colors to actually turn brittle, but ten years is probably long enough to prove stability. So, if parts from 2018 sets are still sturdy in 2028, that should indicate we’re in the clear. Then there’s just the issue of all the brittle stock on Bricklink, unopened sets that are likely to be full of brittle parts, and parts (especially minifigs) that were only produced during the brittle period.

@Ridgeheart said: "I don't like stickers. I leave my models naked and unstickered, if only so I can tell myself the filthy, wicked lie that I might someday want to reuse the parts that would otherwise go bestickered (though I won't). On the other hand, I'm not crazy about the print-quality of light-on-dark of recent years either, and I want TLG to do better.
"

I don't mind stickers too much, but I feel similar. If a (large) model really needs to be covered in decorated parts that are at the scale of the smallest parts to look like what it is meant to look like, then either it probably isn't that great a design or the decoration can be left off without worrying too much about it. The latter is where stickers outweigh prints as they give some choice (unless of course the unprinted part is also available, then there is choice if printed).

@PurpleDave said:
" @MrBedhead :
They have certainly claimed to have figured out what was causing the brittleness, and how to fix it, but only time showed that there was a problem, and only time can prove if their fix worked. Unfortunately, we don’t have hard dates on any of this. I bought a second copy of 7598 , and when I recently pulled out a reddish-brown 6x8 plate, it snapped as easily as a cracker, so 2010 is clearly within the bad range. I’ve never heard any theories on the start date, though. And they only announced that they’d been aware of the problem and figured out how to prevent it after they’d had time to see if it worked, so we don’t really know an end date, either. For lack of anything more specific, I’ve been tentatively treating 2018 as the start of the safe period. I don’t remember specifically when we heard this problem was solved, but I probably rolled it back a year to account for the “waited to say anything” period.

We also don’t know exactly how long it takes for brittle colors to actually turn brittle, but ten years is probably long enough to prove stability. So, if parts from 2018 sets are still sturdy in 2028, that should indicate we’re in the clear. Then there’s just the issue of all the brittle stock on Bricklink, unopened sets that are likely to be full of brittle parts, and parts (especially minifigs) that were only produced during the brittle period."

Unfortunately, my experience indicates that the troublesome era spans at least 2007 ( 7662 et al) to 2013 (LOTR sets and dark red in Galaxy Squad).

The good news is that fragility and brittleness are not extremely prevalent. Some, if not most, parts seem fine. Even among the same part number, many are fine and then one just cracks apart like a wafer. Plates and cheese slopes or anything especially thin that has a lot of stress is of course susceptible to cracking. But, some pieces just crumble to bits. It's REALLY shocking when it happens.

I now have a quart-sized bag of broken dark red, reddish-brown, and battle droid parts.

@StyleCounselor:
From personal experience, and anecdotal evidence, if one part goes bad, you're likely to have others do so. My first experience of this was from a giant bag of dark-red 1x2 plates I'd accumulated from the first few years of LUGBulk. I was building a wall with them, and about 10% of them had no resistance when I pushed them down. Turns out one entire side was shearing off. The rest of the bag has only gotten worse over time.

My second experience was during setup at Detroit Symphony Orchestra in 2009. I was preparing to place a 10" Christmas tree, which doesn't hold well on bare baseplates. I had started adding a base using reddish-brown 4x4 quarter-round plates to represent the patch of bare earth that you usually see under a flourishing evergreen. As soon as I pushed the first part down, it shattered, spraying splinters a few inches away. The other three matching parts were all bad as well.

Anyways, it's nice to finally see _some_ year range attached to this problem, but I don't really trust yet that 2013 is the end date. We're ten years out from that, so a few more years worth may yet turn brittle over the next five years. Again, based on when they announced the problem had been solved, I would be surprised if we keep seeing parts produced in 2018 and beyond turn brittle, but if 2013 really is the end point then that means they sat on the announcement for over five years.

Anyways, besides the fact that I've never opened the vast majority of my LotR/Hobbit sets, I'm worried about some of my Batman and DCS sets, plus most of the comic book TMNT sets came out in 2013.

@PurpleDave said:
" @StyleCounselor :
From personal experience, and anecdotal evidence, if one part goes bad, you're likely to have others do so. My first experience of this was from a giant bag of dark-red 1x2 plates I'd accumulated from the first few years of LUGBulk. I was building a wall with them, and about 10% of them had no resistance when I pushed them down. Turns out one entire side was shearing off. The rest of the bag has only gotten worse over time.

My second experience was during setup at Detroit Symphony Orchestra in 2009. I was preparing to place a 10" Christmas tree, which doesn't hold well on bare baseplates. I had started adding a base using reddish-brown 4x4 quarter-round plates to represent the patch of bare earth that you usually see under a flourishing evergreen. As soon as I pushed the first part down, it shattered, spraying splinters a few inches away. The other three matching parts were all bad as well.

Anyways, it's nice to finally see _some_ year range attached to this problem, but I don't really trust yet that 2013 is the end date. We're ten years out from that, so a few more years worth may yet turn brittle over the next five years. Again, based on when they announced the problem had been solved, I would be surprised if we keep seeing parts produced in 2018 and beyond turn brittle, but if 2013 really is the end point then that means they sat on the announcement for over five years.

Anyways, besides the fact that I've never opened the vast majority of my LotR/Hobbit sets, I'm worried about some of my Batman and DCS sets, plus most of the comic book TMNT sets came out in 2013."

Wow! My first thought was, 'I wonder if someone could really get hurt with such a poorly made product.'

I speculated that it would have to be a situation with a tall build that fell over because of the product failing (like a building). I didn't post my speculation here because I figured that it was too far-fetched with reddish-brown to be used in a tall build.

But, of course! Trees!! That's a huge threat. I'm glad no one was hurt.

Lego better read this and take some action to replace their malfeasance. US lawyers love to hammer big companies- especially dumb ones that take no action to remove their dangerous product. That's where punitive damages come into play. Those aren't based on the harm caused, but on the amount necessary to get a big company to take action.

You're right to be worried about those LOTR sets. But, I've never had to replace more than about a dozen parts in any large set. Keep your fingers crossed!!

@StyleCounselor:
It's a 10" tree (not 10', which I don't think I'd want to attempt without a steel core), so shorter than most Modulars, and unlikely to hurt anyone larger than a minifig if it topples over. And it wasn't even out of the bag when the other parts broke. It was the act of pressing the quarter-round plates down onto the baseplate that caused them to suffer a spontaneous structural integrity failure.

That said, one of the other members of my LUG absolutely did build a dark-red skyscraper, starting about a year ago, which ultimately reached a height in the 6-7' range. And I started showing him pictures of some of the parts that had fractured. Ironically, the only building we've ever had topple to the floor was built from dark-bley, and that was specifically the result of someone ramming a motorized scooter into the table it was on.

@PurpleDave said:
" @StyleCounselor:
It's a 10" tree (not 10', which I don't think I'd want to attempt without a steel core), so shorter than most Modulars, and unlikely to hurt anyone larger than a minifig if it topples over. And it wasn't even out of the bag when the other parts broke. It was the act of pressing the quarter-round plates down onto the baseplate that caused them to suffer a spontaneous structural integrity failure.

That said, one of the other members of my LUG absolutely did build a dark-red skyscraper, starting about a year ago, which ultimately reached a height in the 6-7' range. And I started showing him pictures of some of the parts that had fractured. Ironically, the only building we've ever had topple to the floor was built from dark-bley, and that was specifically the result of someone ramming a motorized scooter into the table it was on."

Dark red skyscraper sounds awesome! The extra danger would definitely add an appropriately ominous touch to it as well.

I wonder if anyone has been hurt by shards of brittle Lego? Those broken shards can be quite sharp.

@StyleCounselor:
Um...my LUG did a "firewalk" thing a few years ago, but instead of burning coals, it was a tarp covered in LEGO bricks (I opted out). Placement was partly based on style (I believe the winner rotated around while walking forward and singing "Witch Doctor"). One unfortunate individual decided to long-jump the thing. He looked okay when he walked off the end of the bricks, but I immediately realized he was going to have trouble. By the time I was able to get back with bandages and such, he was bleeding freely. So, a bit of an extreme case of "stepping on a LEGO brick", and that's with "child-safe" edges. Imagine doing that on broken shards of bricks. Or maybe don't.

Oh, and that's the only time we've done that event.

@PurpleDave said:
" @StyleCounselor:
Um...my LUG did a "firewalk" thing a few years ago, but instead of burning coals, it was a tarp covered in LEGO bricks (I opted out). Placement was partly based on style (I believe the winner rotated around while walking forward and singing "Witch Doctor"). One unfortunate individual decided to long-jump the thing. He looked okay when he walked off the end of the bricks, but I immediately realized he was going to have trouble. By the time I was able to get back with bandages and such, he was bleeding freely. So, a bit of an extreme case of "stepping on a LEGO brick", and that's with "child-safe" edges. Imagine doing that on broken shards of bricks. Or maybe don't.

Oh, and that's the only time we've done that event."

There's always one.

@PurpleDave said:
" @djcbs:
Inflation is a rate of growth, not a fixed point. Just because inflation has gone down doesn't mean it takes prices down with it. You need negative inflation for that to happen, and you yourself just said that it's still +2.9%."

Yeah, except for the tiny detail that, the reduction of the inflation rate in Denmark HAS already drove down the prices of things like transportation, raw matter, etc in Denmark. Which means the pressure LEGO claimed they were feeling and that led to the absurd price hikes, has passed. So what we now have is LEGO's operating costs down but the same prices which means their profit margins went up even more than they already were.
Proving - which is what matters to me - that the price hikes were NOT caused by inflation but by LEGO simply wanting to raise their profit margins. They could have absorbed the temporary price hikes in production by reducing their profit margins. They didn't. They wanted to keep them high and then take the advantage to increase them as it was known that the price hikes on things like raw materials would be temporary.

I don't like how the outside of the building looks at all. Kind of bleh honestly. But then again I might have been spoiled by the excellent blacksmith set. Hard to top that.