Please use our links: LEGO.com • Amazon
Brickset.com is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, the Amazon.com.ca, Inc. Associates Program and the Amazon EU Associates Programme, which are affiliate advertising programs designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
It seems that he gets his freebie box way before anyone else, so no one really gets a chance to do anything both timely and better.
It's also worth remembering that for at least half the people on EB, English isn't even their main language, but most of the time you could never tell!
I'm much more of a fan of minifigures than building/sets and so the reviews I've read lack the details/imaginative suggestions that I'm seeking. If you look at my profile, in particular the more recent Brickset minifigure reviews (Space Alien / Disco Dude/ Mariachi Guy), you'll see there is plenty to write about. (Of course, the question is, does anyone care?)
Some things aren't so obvious from a picture and since I have a passion for minifigures, I tend to notice 'historical' facts about individual molds/pieces.
I guess I'm looking for people similar to myself, those who see minifigures more than 'decorations' for the sets or the equivalent for amusement.
I tend to be disappointed in the minifigure reviews in general and wonder if anyone else is wishing that the reviews would cover more details, and what those are.
So with that said, as for the original question regarding cmf REviews, it's difficult to really consider the purpose of one, beyond expressing one's own opinion.
But we live and die by our actions, so if you have something original and interesting to say, why not go for it, see if you find an audience.
Back to whitefang for a moment: I thoroughly applaud anybody trying to write with humour, or achieve a particular tone, in a non-native language. That's no easy feat, so i appreciate the effort he goes to in attempts to be both informative and conversational.
As a native english speaker, i often find occasions of broken english and other unusual turns of phrase interesting of themselves (albeit as a purely academic detour, and unrelated to the review itself), as it makes one consider the words and phrases being reached for, and whether my re-interpretation would be true reflection of the spirit of the message or not.
Most of the text is unnecessary of course, as a product preview is always going to be about the images mainly, but there's the occasional nugget regarding parts or themes in the written word, which can be interesting sometimes. Though i tend to skip the statistical analysis bit for, beyond the basic numbers per box, that's a pretty redundant exercise.
Sorry - I wouldn't have bothered to read it and wouldn't read another one. Definitely no need for CMF reviews a picture says it all.
Similarly i assume @cheshirecat is referring to @1UPminifig's post above mine.
In my view, no they are not needed, and there are way too many words. There are about 350 words before you even get to the description of the minifig parts. I'll also continue to look at photos and ignore weighty reviews that say nothing to me.
PS. Clutchers for the baseball team name is not a reference to Clutch Powers. It has the same origin though. Clutch is a reference to the strength of the hold of bricks when assembled together, something that lego gets right compared to other brands. A clutcher is also someone that holds something, so the name for a lego baseball team makes perfect sense.
Under the browse minifiguer section of Brickset there is a database with all the photos of the Star wars minifigs and from all themes for that matter. Hope that helps.
Then again, I'm biased!
If you don't care to read them, fine. We each select which LEGO appeal to us, and let the other stuff fly by. I would not not knock the fine work he so lovingly does because it does add a lot to the LEGO community. He prepares these reviews because he adores LEGO. I have spent time with him (and his wife) in Singapore and Billund; he is a swell guy, who is willing to help anyone. We need more folks like him.
Personally I think there are two elements to getting it right. For a start you should consider their character and discuss either how similar to source material a figure is or whether they effectively represent a particular character in your opinion. Does the Hun Warrior look like a Hun Warrior?
The other factor for me is the pieces and prints. If you think a component is particularly useful, detailed or simply new I would always mention it rather than just describing what it is as the photos tell you that. The only case in which you should describe what is in the photo is when you think it is unclear what something is. C-3PO's restraining bolt in the Sandcrawler set is a perfect example of when it is appropriate.
Finally it is obviously important to avoid trying to make a review everything to everyone. Ensure the text compliments the images rather than the other way around and readers are able to take what they want from your review, whether that actually involves reading any of it or just looking at the pictures.
Those are my thoughts on the subject. Having reviewed plenty of Minifigures I can appreciate the challenges involved but I like to think I have found a nice balance.
That has to be the right way to spell it, because as the guy who focuses on minfiguers
getting that wrong would make me a crappy reviewer.
( checks reviews)
Glad that spelling didn't end up in the reviews!
I've schemed through some of his series reviews and there quite decent with the pictures being the highlight ( especially the group shots)
Sadly your reviews seem to be the exception rather then the rule on this site.
(* Before there is an overreaction, I did provide an example of the reviews I was writing. There was someone who commented that I had 350 words before I get to build. I have several paragraphs for the polybag that are slightly different each review - because I keep finding something new!)
I recently had to talk with Huw because someone had done - what could be best described as a retaliatory/aggressive action - against my Brickset profile. For a few reasons, I believe someone did so because they were misunderstanding things from this forum thread. Huw was a great help (thanks Huw!)
From the earliest responses to my post, the satisfaction from minifigure reviews came from good photos and a short, well-written overview (the majority response, though, was that it was unnecessary to review them). For me, these just aren't enough. And I wonder if there is a small segment of others that feel the same way.
I never mentioned that any reviews were "bad", or that all were not good. I used "in general" as a composite term, the overall - think of calculating averages from math class. And all I said was that I was personally disappointed the majority of the time. Just like the disappointment someone gets if they get a slice of a delicious cake but the its cut too thin to be satisfying.
Since discovering Brickset a few years ago, my personal favorite reviewers have been CapnRex101 and Odeinoichus and I appreciate the details that they put into their minifigure reviews (whether individual or in sets). I won't be crass enough to mention those who are my least favorite review/ers and would ask that no one make an assumption.
I'm sorry for this long-winded post but there seems to be some confusion about my use of there term "in general" in the above quote.
Please be aware that its possible I don't know of the same Lego/Minifigure websites, reviewers, reviews, etc. that you do. Please, tell me about them rather than assuming that my vague/unspecified comments relate to any specific site/reviewer or review.
I'm aware that my preferences for minifigure reviews are not the majority's preference. I didn't say I could write better reviews or that what I want in a review should be what everyone does in their reviews (though I think I'm in competition for writing long ones).
I started this thread because I really wanted to learn more about what people liked in their minifigure reviews, and find (hopefully) someone like myself. It was never meant be a comment on any reviewer, review or site. Or to offend anyone. Or to start an argument.
(Sincerely, nice idea!)
I just find the language he uses a little strange. There are probably 4-6 minifigs per series that he cannot believe how fabulous it is that lego have produced such a fabulous minifig and that he could never have believed how fantastic and fabulous the figure is and that he could never have believed they could have been produced in such a fantastic way by lego.
Also English is not WhiteFang's first language; I believe it is Chinese, and it is difficult for him to write perfectly in English. But I almost always understand what he is saying. (And my Chinese vocabulary consists of five words, so thank god he does them in English.)
He is quite positive in his reviews because he adores LEGO. So yes, he is biased from that point of view. With that in mind, it is neat to see him so excited about a CMS. He talks about LEGO this way in real life, too! I can understand how someone could view him as being too positive in his reviews, and that is fine, too.
The parts I like the most in his reviews are the photos. They are outstanding and really help show the details of each figure. This is hard to discern from packaging and other materials associated with CMS.
It is great seeing a discussion of CMS reviews. I am open to comments from all points of view and love collecting the little critters.
And yet I want to read reviews and see photos BEFORE the figs hit the stores because the box photos are too small and limited to see all the figs and their details.
As for the topic at hand, I have to say - I enjoy reading (and writing) more thoroughly detailed reviews, regardless of whether or not it's a single minifigure or an enormous set. While pictures are worth a thousand words, sometimes they can't convey the words that actual words can. That might not be for everyone, but of course it's not. You can't please all of the people all of the time. At the end of the day, write reviews that you would want to read if written by someone else, and you'll find an audience.
- to read a particular person's review;
- to obtain someone else's perspective.
I'm gonna side with CCC on this one, it's most likely a reference to the building version of clutch. However either are very possible, I'm just happy it's not in reference to Clutch Powers.
The sooner that movie is forgotten the better....