Lego trolls. REALLY?

As much as I would like to say otherwise, I have to agreee. I guess I’m not the only one who saw the massive quantities of DM3 Mega Blocks sets that appeared at TJmaxx and the like.

2 Likes

I mean, The Angry Birds Movie =/= Trolls =/= Minions. It’s a false equivalency because you haven’t seen how the Trolls and Minions sets have preformed. Basically all that’s happened is that Lego announced that they were making sets based on movies you didn’t like so you’re throwing a fit about it.

6 Likes

I think a better term would be “extended merchandise”

Not necessarily. I have never been into Harry Potter, yet I don’t complain about the sets being bad. With movies based on kid’s movies (which their only true intent is to sell toys in the first place) it’s a completely different story.

1 Like

No. Actually the first trolls wasn’t that bad. Minions was painfully average, but that’s not why I say this. Licensed themes based on one single movie are bad. They make one wave of sets, which don’t sell because they’re not popular. Star Wars sells because everyone knows about it.

1 Like

Exactly. I didn’t mean for this to become a bash-fest. And your right, we don’t know what the sets will be like. Though personally I doubt they will be very good.

That’s actually the perfect term for this.

Edited For Double Post - BioKnight

1 Like

I’m just saying that it’s not the end of the world.

1 Like

Let’s be fair here. The Toy Story 4 sets, (which were actually based off a good movie) were straight up cash-grabs. I don’t see how it’s going to be any different with trolls and minions.

2 Likes

Nope. The Emoji move 2 will be the end of the world. (If it coems out.)

@LegoDavid True enough.

EDITED FOR DOUBLE POSTING - Spiderus Prime

People hated it too much so it won’t

I hope not. But You can never tell with the movie industry these days.

Let’s make a quick comparisent:
Here is the original Toy Story RC, released in 2010:


It’s a pretty good set, it’s surprisingly accurate to the source material, and has two pretty good minifigures.

The new version on the othe hand…

It’s an obvious cash-grab.

Yeah, I was kinda dissapointed by this too.

2 Likes

@LegoDavid

10766 and 7590 share source material but have vastly different purposes.

We must consider that a significant amount of time (9 years) has elapsed between their releases. These sets are made to appeal to a new generation of children who were not around when the 2010 wave was released. Also, the 2019 sets are made for the Juniors (or 4+) line. The sets are designed to be simpler and have large pieces so that younger kids can get into LEGO easily.

The 2010 set was made for the 20 USD price point and the 2019 at 10 USD. It is a lot harder to make an appealing set that can be sold at a $10 value because the budget is so limiting.

I don’t own either set but the value on 10766 looks about right. It includes a couple highly specialized pieces, a couple of printed parts, extra accessories, and a desirable minifigure (I liked the moulded heads from 2010 but how LEGO has used minifig heads here looks pretty good to me). All in all, this set looks to have appropriate value and has great play possibilities for the very low price. If I were in the target age group, I’d think this set would be a lot of fun.

7590 was sold for twice as much as 10766. That means the designers had more freedom to include greater realism, detail, and more features (including minifigs). Not to mention that this set is not Juniors, but was actually recommended for ages 6-12, so its build could be more complex. Accounting for the inclusion of a pull-back motor, the value on this set also seems good to me. However, if you try to buy this set on the secondary market today, you will be paying a lot more than is reasonable for this set, compared to its objective value.

If I were given the choice between the two sets, I like 7590 better, but I can appreciate 10766. Overall I definitely prefer the 2010 lineup of Toy Story sets, but it is unfair to call the entire new wave a cash-grab. LEGO is taking the opportunity to bring new, younger consumers into their base, with sets coinciding with the release of a G-rated kids movie.


And, to bring things a little bit back on topic, there is a chance that, like Toy Story 4 and The Incredibles 2, either Minions or Trolls 2 could be a Juniors line. Therefore you wouldn’t be the target audience and you have no obligation to buy the sets (you don’t even have the obligation to buy sets if you are in the target market. One of the great things about LEGO is that it can appeal to vastly different audiences.)

4 Likes

I hope so. But I’ll still hate it.

1 Like

Well said.

To be fair, I feel like the “4+” title is just an excuse for how poorly done those sets are. The original 2010 Toy Story sets were targeted at the same audience, yet they are so much better.
The way I see it, those sets are basically just a bunch of random side builds that have little to no effort put into them with a few popular characters thrown in.

Once again, can’t argue. I’ve always felt like the juniors theme was a cop out.

1 Like

Except they’re not, as the 4+ entails it’s meant for younger kids, whilst the other was meant for older ones

6 Likes

Whether they are for small kids or not, that doesn’t excuse the fact that they don’t really have much effort put into them.

It kinda does actually, small children aren’t ready for more advanced builds.

4 Likes