blogs_blog_1497

This entire set is a mess.

i'm buying twelve and sending them to you at random dates over the next thirteen years

Wait

 

Are you saying dinosaurs don't like giant turkey legs?

No, you've got it all wrong, these are genetically modified to look like the publically accepted vision of dinos, not the real things.

 

Also, earth physics don't apply to the Jurrasic Park universe. And ice sinks.

 

Also, earth physics don't apply to the Jurrasic Park universe.

 

 

 

 

... I thought that was common knowledge? Unless I missed the memo, and it's actually possible to clone dinosaurs by extracting DNA from an amber encased mosquito.

 

Also, I don't really get the backlash against TLG. They're just a corporation selling plastic toys to kids. Toys which are going to make a whole lot of money, and are based on a movie which is also going to make a whole lot of money. To quote Will Ferrell, "it's just business."

Wait

 

Are you saying dinosaurs don't like giant turkey legs?

Actually, the legs of a turkey would at least make it slightly more accurate.  Still can't believe that this new movie didn't take the opportunity to change the way people see dinosaurs by giving them feathers.

 

It's like they're in it for the money rather than the science!

EDIT: I can't see the entry image, so I thought it was a generic No. Argh IPB.

... I thought that was common knowledge? Unless I missed the memo, and it's actually possible to clone dinosaurs by extracting DNA from an amber encased mosquito.

 

 

a) that was a joke about an oft-repeated bit of coverall explanation for errors in Bionicle, like sinking ice

 

b) what does extracting DNA from a mosquito have to do with physics? that's straight-up biology.

 

Also, I don't really get the backlash against TLG. They're just a corporation selling plastic toys to kids. Toys which are going to make a whole lot of money, and are based on a movie which is also going to make a whole lot of money. To quote Will Ferrell, "it's just business."

 

I'm glad a purely capitalist mindset that doesn't allow for anything else like care in your work is something to be forgiven for you. For me, trying to pass a mold that bears no resemblance to Gallimimus (even in Jurassic Park) as that creature is even more egregious than any other error they've made before.

 

I get that they wouldn't have made a new mold for a polybag. But in that case, please, for the love of God, don't try and force it as Gallimimus. Even calling it a raptor would feel less terrible than Gallimimus.

Okay, so, I'm not much of a nerdy sciencey kind of guy, but right now all I can think of is how awesome feathered dinosaurs would look in a modern movie. Seriously, picture it for a few seconds.

Wait

 

Are you saying dinosaurs don't like giant turkey legs?

 

Oh yeah, I should specify this one in particular certainly didn't; it was an herbivore, or at least that's the current consensus.

 

I'm glad a purely capitalist mindset that doesn't allow for anything else like care in your work is something to be forgiven for you. For me, trying to pass a mold that bears no resemblance to Gallimimus (even in Jurassic Park) as that creature is even more egregious than any other error they've made before.

 

I get that they wouldn't have made a new mold for a polybag. But in that case, please, for the love of God, don't try and force it as Gallimimus. Even calling it a raptor would feel less terrible than Gallimimus.

 

 

There's just one problem with that idea. The Jurassic park franchise already (erroneously) classifies another dinosaur as a raptor. You know, the one that Chris Pratt somehow managed to train, and which has been pretty much the star of the movies from the very beginning. More importantly, this polybag is in perfect cohesion with the rest of the theme, which is a microcosm of the entire Jurassic World franchise: a minimum amount of effort exerted to create a maximum amount of profit.

 

However, as I said, I don't blame TLG for this. They've had a string of unsuccessful licensed themes that contained a large number of new molds (Pirates of the Caribbean, Lord of the Rings, The Lone Ranger). I totally understand why they would gravitate towards a license that would require only a minimum of new pieces (I count about three new molds in the entire theme) and will likely reap untold amounts of profit. The real objects of blame are the executives who greenlighted what is almost certainly going to be a trainwreck of a film, not to mention the current state of hollywood in general.

You are presenting general arguments to a specific criticism. I am not talking about Jurassic World as a whole, or even Jurassic World sets as a whole. I'm talking about this specific polybag which is trying to pass something off as Gallimimus that only resembles it insofar as having the theropod bauplan. It is akin to using their rat mold as a Capybara, or their owl mold as an emu. This is entirely LEGO's fault, unless they were specifically asked to call it Gallimimus by the people of Jurassic World. It's a polybag. If they called it a raptor (which it far more closely resembles in terms of screen accuracy), I would have far less issue with it. It is, after all, pretty much a down-scaled version of the raptor mold. What I object to is the long-necked, toothless, herbivorous Gallimimus being assigned to this mold rather than literally any other coelurosaur.

 

Don't get me wrong, I am all for assigning blame to the idiots behind Jurassic World (albeit for different reasons than you, since we seem to fundamentally disagree on the role of science in science fiction). However, in this specific instance, this is almost definitely entirely on people from LEGO trying to stuff Gallimimus into the line without actually caring whether or not it resembles even the movie's Gallimimus.

 

(I also wasn't aware that Lord of the Rings was unsuccessful? It went on for quite some time for an unsuccessful theme.)

(I also wasn't aware that Lord of the Rings was unsuccessful? It went on for quite some time for an unsuccessful theme.)

 

Between the many reports of sets not selling or on clearance, and the lack of a third wave between the second and third waves of Hobbit sets, it's fairly certain that LOTR was. The jury is still out on whether the Tolkien license as a whole was unsuccessful (I've heard reports that the Hobbit sets have sold better) but as a whole it does not appear it did as well as Lego hoped it would, especially considering they temporarily discontinued the Kingdoms theme in its wake and then quickly rushed out a new generic castle theme alongside the second wave of LOTR. Overall, between POTC, LOTR, and The Lone Ranger, Lego's revivals of classic themes in licensed format have failed rather consistently.

As a raptorkin I'm offended by the portrayal of raptors as dumb animals who only care about chicken.

Somehow you managed to miss the point of an entry even more than last time you bothered to comment. Considering last time it was taking an obvious joke at face value, I have to say that's an accomplishment.

I liked somebody's explanation that the Gallimimus was actually the meat in the trap... but I guess they went and clearly labled the green lizard as the Gallimimus in the bottom corner so that explanation can't exactly fly...