Home› Everything else LEGO
Shopping at LEGO or Amazon?
Please use our links: LEGO.com • Amazon
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

CUUSOO Corner

1…2021232526…29

Comments

  • prof1515prof1515 Member Posts: 1,550
    I thought it looked horrible to begin with so this really doesn't change my mind on the set one way or the other. Pass.
    sidersdd
  • pillpodpillpod Member Posts: 273
    The original design looks so much more simple. TLG really made the hood and roof look complicated.
  • LegoFanTexasLegoFanTexas Member Posts: 8,404
    Wow, speechless at how truly horrible that is.

    Ugly as snot, complete waste of time...

    Everyone who actually knows what BTTF is is over 30 years old, the official model looks like something a kid would put together.

    http://lego.cuusoo.com/ideas/view/8889

    That, or something closer to it, with the 2 minifigs, would be interesting and worth considering. What is in that picture on the store flyer is just insulting.
  • BrixyBrixy Member Posts: 57
    Eek. It is ugly.
  • TheLoneTensorTheLoneTensor Member Posts: 3,937
    If I didn't know about this, and you showed me that picture, there is no way I would be able to tell that it was BTTF. Ok, mayyyybe by looking closely and seeing the flux capacitor, but still, ugh. And yeah, there better damn well be two particular minifigs (and a dog), and a terrorist VW bus, and two pines, and a hazmat suit, and plutonium.

    So are they actually trying to run Cuusoo into the ground? Please tell me someone's not making a salary of leading that thing.
  • CrowkillersCrowkillers Member Posts: 757
    I liked the original Cuusoo idea(which this final one has many features of) but there is just something about this one that doesn't quite look right...

    http://brickfanatics.co.uk/back-to-the-future-cuusoo-set-revealed/

    image
  • samiam391samiam391 Member Posts: 4,484
    Already being discussed over here:
    http://www.bricksetforum.com/discussion/4344/cuusoo-corner#latest

    But perhaps the un-containable rage from everyone will flood over into this thread too. It seems like people may need the extra writing space to vent ;o)
  • jadedancjadedanc Member Posts: 1,302
    That looks terrible :( The original had nice lines on it. This just looks like a hot mess.
  • CrowkillersCrowkillers Member Posts: 757
    Oh, I was looking for a topic and didn't see one... I figured someone had to be talking about this somewhere...
  • pillpodpillpod Member Posts: 273
    The only guess I have is that they had to hit a price point and this is the only design that could meet it. And I'm wondering what that price point is...maybe $45?

    I'll probably be a buyer for it eventually, but from this initial picture it looks like they could've made it a bit better.
  • CrowkillersCrowkillers Member Posts: 757
    How do I delete this thread..? No point in having another one...
  • LegoFanTexasLegoFanTexas Member Posts: 8,404
    ^ Whoever signed off on it needs to be fired, that is for sure...
  • TheLoneTensorTheLoneTensor Member Posts: 3,937
    So, anyone care to get a pool going on the price?

    My guess as it is (no minifigs in sight), $20.
  • mathewmathew Member Posts: 2,099
    prof1515 said:

    I thought it looked horrible to begin with so this really doesn't change my mind on the set one way or the other. Pass.

    Whatever man. The original model was simple yet instantly recognizable. This model is overly designed. Too much greebling for such a small model. Of course if the final model is transformable, includes mini figs, and is $35 or less I will be more impressed.
  • canuckcanuck Member Posts: 88
    The finished model looks decent except for the hood, I'm surprised http://www.bricklink.com/catalogItem.asp?P=4515 wasn't used because it's the piece used on the Cuusoo model http://lego.cuusoo.com/ideas/view/96 and is an in production part (used on UCS X-wing).
  • TheLoneTensorTheLoneTensor Member Posts: 3,937
    edited June 2013
    I can forgive some liberties when "Legoizing" something, but this is ridiculous.

    Let's compare...
  • LegoManiaccLegoManiacc Member Posts: 116
    Oh my, that's just not good...

    image
  • LegoFanTexasLegoFanTexas Member Posts: 8,404
    tensor said:

    So, anyone care to get a pool going on the price?

    My guess as it is (no minifigs in sight), $20.

    $20, maybe... still wouldn't buy it because it looks horrible...

    And I just rewatched BTTF a few months ago, love the movies, horrible stinking pile of junk LEGO set however.

    Did I mention that I think it sucks? :)
  • LegoManiaccLegoManiacc Member Posts: 116
    The BTTF license must have fallen through so they came up with "The Flying Pinto"

    image

    And still whiffed on that.
  • TheLoneTensorTheLoneTensor Member Posts: 3,937
    It could be a photo effect, but do I detect a light brick in there?
  • LegoRoccoLegoRocco Member Posts: 100
    Still seems interesting. I'll probably get it just because I love BttF so much
  • prof1515prof1515 Member Posts: 1,550
    mathew said:

    Whatever man. The original model was simple yet instantly recognizable. This model is overly designed. Too much greebling for such a small model. Of course if the final model is transformable, includes mini figs, and is $35 or less I will be more impressed.

    It does look like it transforms and actually that part looks far better and more accurate than the original; I'd also wager that Lego's version is sturdier. However the original model was NOT "instantly recognizable". They both look like crap and neither is all that recognizable. A DeLorean just isn't easy to make in mini-figure scale with any kind of functionality (eg, capable of holding figures, etc). I didn't vote for the ugly little original and I won't bother with the ugly official model either.
  • 12651265 Member Posts: 1,141
    edited June 2013
    Overall, it's not that bad looking. If the car resembled the design of the hood and front on the original, it would of been an aesthetic improvement.

    I think many are overlooking that the original model showcased the Marty and Doc minifigures thus making the set appear better. If only the car was submitted, I don't believe it would of reached the 10K mark. By including the minifigures, completes the set. It would be a shame if no minifigures are included in the LEGO release.
  • LegoRoccoLegoRocco Member Posts: 100
    ^Couldnt agree more. The original car was good, but what drove everyone to support were the figs. I think we will see some, but not as good as m.togami's customs.
  • mathewmathew Member Posts: 2,099
    prof1515 said:

    mathew said:

    Whatever man. The original model was simple yet instantly recognizable. This model is overly designed. Too much greebling for such a small model. Of course if the final model is transformable, includes mini figs, and is $35 or less I will be more impressed.

    It does look like it transforms and actually that part looks far better and more accurate than the original; I'd also wager that Lego's version is sturdier. However the original model was NOT "instantly recognizable". They both look like crap and neither is all that recognizable. A DeLorean just isn't easy to make in mini-figure scale with any kind of functionality (eg, capable of holding figures, etc). I didn't vote for the ugly little original and I won't bother with the ugly official model either.
    It doesn't have to be to scale. That Kreo Enterprise that you were going about is completely inaccurate. Try to be just a little more consistent with your criticisms. As others have said, the big problem will be if there are no minifigs.
  • prof1515prof1515 Member Posts: 1,550
    edited June 2013
    mathew said:

    It doesn't have to be to scale. That Kreo Enterprise that you were going about is completely inaccurate. Try to be just a little more consistent with your criticisms. As others have said, the big problem will be if there are no minifigs.

    I didn't say it has to be to scale. However, what's the point in doing a small model near to mini-figure scale if it looks like crap.

    I am consistent in my criticisms. I think every Cuusoo set is crap. I also wasn't "going on" about Kre-O, just pleased that there was a Star Trek line. Try to be remotely intelligent and accurate in your responses.

    As for the Back to the Future mini-figures, they were fugly too.


  • LegoFanTexasLegoFanTexas Member Posts: 8,404
    Now children, play nice or we'll take your toys away... :)
    indigobox
  • RennyRenny Member Posts: 1,145
    OMG...that is horrid. That's one less set I will be buying this year. If it comes with the mini figures I will just get them separately and create my own Delorean.
  • mathewmathew Member Posts: 2,099
    prof1515 said:


    As for the Back to the Future mini-figures, they were fugly too.

    And you could do so much better...
  • prof1515prof1515 Member Posts: 1,550
    mathew said:

    prof1515 said:


    As for the Back to the Future mini-figures, they were fugly too.

    And you could do so much better...
    I didn't say I could. That doesn't change the fact that I find them f***ing ugly.

    If all you have is straw man responses, you should shut up.
  • 12651265 Member Posts: 1,141
    mathew said:

    prof1515 said:


    As for the Back to the Future mini-figures, they were fugly too.

    And you could do so much better...
    Such an immature response.

    Just because @prof1515 has an different take on the set than you: you shouldn't discredit his opinion.

  • mathewmathew Member Posts: 2,099
    1265 said:

    mathew said:

    prof1515 said:


    As for the Back to the Future mini-figures, they were fugly too.

    And you could do so much better...
    Such an immature response.

    Just because @prof1515 has an different take on the set than you: you shouldn't discredit his opinion.

    Opinions are like... everyone has one.
  • CrowkillersCrowkillers Member Posts: 757
    It doesn't seem quite right If Minifigs were part of the driving force behind this project getting to 10k supports and those minifigs are not included in the final product...
  • mathewmathew Member Posts: 2,099
    edited June 2013
    prof1515 said:

    mathew said:

    prof1515 said:


    As for the Back to the Future mini-figures, they were fugly too.

    And you could do so much better...
    I didn't say I could. That doesn't change the fact that I find them f***ing ugly.

    If all you have is straw man responses, you should shut up.
    You seriously think that this is superior to the CUUSOO BttF set?!
    image
    yys4u
  • 12651265 Member Posts: 1,141
    mathew said:



    Opinions are like... everyone has one.

    That's original.....only strengthens your immaturity.
  • mathewmathew Member Posts: 2,099
    To be fair, we only have one picture to go by. I'll save final judgement when I see it in person.
  • yys4uyys4u Member Posts: 1,093
    What I think happened is the Cuusoo model looks like 1:1 scale for a minifigure, but LEGO operates in a "minifigure scale" where houses, cars, and planes, all FIT minifigures, but aren't technically to an actual scale. So the original model was the wrong scale and they changed it to coincide with the way LEGO builds their models. I actually think it looks ok. Granted the original looked like a brilliant display piece, this one looks like something that could be targeted to kids for play.
  • doriansdaddoriansdad Member Posts: 1,337
    edited June 2013
    "You'll have to forgive the crudeness of this model."

    This is heavy :(
    T_Larsadello25
  • yys4uyys4u Member Posts: 1,093
    yys4u said:

    What I think happened is the Cuusoo model looks like 1:1 scale for a minifigure, but LEGO operates in a "minifigure scale" where houses, cars, and planes, all FIT minifigures, but aren't technically to an actual scale. So the original model was the wrong scale and they changed it to coincide with the way LEGO builds their models. I actually think it looks ok. Granted the original looked like a brilliant display piece, this one looks like something that could be targeted to kids for play.

    I take it back, I was comparing this link
    http://lego.cuusoo.com/ideas/view/8889

    I thought that was the original. The actual original Cuusoo Delorean looks to be the same scale as the one LEGO made...
  • T_LarsT_Lars Member Posts: 104
    Why is the windshield angled so far into the roof? I can't get over that.
  • T_LarsT_Lars Member Posts: 104
    Well... after dumping the western modulars, that stupid Atlas model getting 10,000 votes, and now seeing what they did to the Delorean I'd say I'm done with Cuusoo.
  • T_LarsT_Lars Member Posts: 104
    Well... after dumping the western modulars, that stupid Atlas model getting 10,000 votes, and now seeing what they did to the Delorean I'd say I'm done with Cuusoo.
  • LegoFanTexasLegoFanTexas Member Posts: 8,404
    ^ Yep, I haven't voted on anything in many months, and am unlikely to do so in the future with this junk coming out.

    Either they have people running it who don't know what they are doing, or they just don't care.

    Cuusoo is by and for AFOLs, people who are pretty hardcore into LEGO, they should be at least paying attention to the fans and providing what is asked for.

    Only making cheap junky sets they think they can cheaply sell lots of is not the path to success.

    BTTF is a nice IP, but it is an old IP with nothing much new in a long time to support it.

    BTW, if anyone is a big fan of BTTF, checkout the BTTF: The Game, on Steam, well worth the $20 I paid for it, many hours of fun and it clearly pays attention to the movies and the time travel challenges. Lots of fun!
  • HokieJoe99HokieJoe99 Member Posts: 351
    I'm not really a fan of either version. I mean, where are the flick fire missiles?
    y2joshBumblepantsyys4uLegoFanTexasjasorbassbisonYellowcastle
  • y2joshy2josh Member Posts: 1,996
    I'm looking at this set and thinking, "Wow... that is truly awful. Who would even entertain the notion of buying this?"

    Then again, I thought the same thing about Minecraft, and look what happened there. BttF is a little less 'the hot, current fad,' of course, so we'll see what happens. I doubt I'll pick one up either way.
  • AySeaAySea Member Posts: 66
    I’m not overly impressed with the final thing shown in that image. I love Back To The Future, so will probably get this at some point, but the orignal design submitted was definately better. That bonnet just looks hideous.
  • TechnicNickTechnicNick Member Posts: 279
    Ugh. Ten times worse than every single BTTF moc out there, and I've seen loads. They really couldn't have done worse.
  • BumblepantsBumblepants Member Posts: 7,535
    The stepped-hood kills it for me. There are how many slope bricks in the Lego library? 100? 200? and staggering flat plates was the best they could do? Ugh.
  • DiggydoesDiggydoes Member Posts: 1,079
    I don´t get the Tiles that form the Hood?!?!? Why did they remove the Slope from the original design???
  • vitreolumvitreolum Member Posts: 1,406
    I was quite excited about this and expected lego to improve the model not turn it into ... this. But I will probably get it and modify it a bit, especially if it will include minifigs. Maybe it won't be that bad as it seems from this angle.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Shopping at LEGO.com or Amazon?

Please use our links: LEGO.com • Amazon

Recent discussions • Categories • Privacy Policy • Brickset.com

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Sign In Register

Categories

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.