CUUSOO Corner

cheshirecat

IMO @atkinsar has it spot on - its a balance between free PR when non lego fanbases get exposure to lego (even better when its from 'trusted' sources like actors/directors /writers etc) and the negative publicity of turning down project after project that gets 10,000 votes. Add in to that the overriding need not to damage the existing LEGO brand by producing sets that don't fit /aren't suitable for its core demograhpic.

Also remember international Cuusoo is still very new, over time IF cuusoo is successful TLG may move the balance with regard to the last issue. No company would want to risk its core business on a new, untested idea but as Cuusoo becomes less new and less untested TLG may stretch their boundaries of what is acceptable.

On the plus side (IMO) the more projects that are turned down for being unsuitable or unlicensable the more pressure they'll have to let through the other ideas. Western modular seems more more likely now.

atkinsar

^ I bet they're praying for it to hit 10k soon so they can deliver some good news!

atkinsar

...and how about this for as good as pre-approval on Peter Reid's Exo Suit:

"It would be great to have the opportunity to produce a set based on your work that has been featured in various LEGO-related publications."

(taken from the Official LEGO comments tab: http://lego.cuusoo.com/ideas/view/6135)

Redbullgivesuwind

^Having seen Peter Reid's other MOCs personally Id have given him a job at lego by now :-D.

There doesnt seen to have been to much bad publicity from the rejections of the Winchester and Serenity. Or none that a quick google search could find. I dont think they will take of license themes even if they are about as likely to get made as I am to become a comedian or singer. Look at how well its done. Pulled in loads of minevraft fans, and its been tweeted and talked about by celebraties advertising it which has to have raised its profile. Thats only good PR for lego. As much as I dislike Cussoo.

Good news is there are instructions coming for the serenity project so if you do want to build it...

bricksan

...and how about this for as good as pre-approval on Peter Reid's Exo Suit:

"It would be great to have the opportunity to produce a set based on your work that has been featured in various LEGO-related publications."

(taken from the Official LEGO comments tab: http://lego.cuusoo.com/ideas/view/6135)

I was talking to Peter at the weekend and he wants Mark Stafford to design it, when it hits 10k.

atkinsar

I bet he does! It is Mark's area of expertise though isn't it.

Everyone noticed that Cuusoo Corner now has a little spot on the home page.

bricksan

Nope.

But speaking of Mark have you seen his Warhammer 40k Space Marine on Cuusoo?

CCC

I don't see why it has to reach 10000 for Lego to make it if they are interested. If they think it will sell, they should make it.

bricksan

Now I see it, looks awesome :)

dougts

They might be making money right now, but today's kids grow up into tomorrow's adults, you need to give them something to grow into to. This may or may not be that item, but if you forever say "kids only", you might find yourself more limited than you want to be.

While I agree with this opinion, a 10-year old TV show that lasted 1 season and has only a very small (but passionate) fan base is hardly the type of IP that LEGO needs to worry about. Today's kids aren't growing up to be Firefly fans in large numbers

dougts

The whole thing about the Winchester (I liked but understand the decision) and the Serenity (not that bothered about) is starting to make me feel like TLG do not value the Adult market, so if they continue rejecting all the things the adults vote for I feel it is going to create a fair amount of negativity towards Cuusoo/TLG.

I don't think this tells us anything about LEGO's valuation of the adult market. So far they rejected two ideas from very obscure IPs that could also cause them unwanted negative press and controversy. Kind of a no-brainer really. Once some ideas from/for the adult market hit the threshold that are from big name licenses and/or don't have much potential for negative publicity, then we will know a lot more.

LegoFanTexas

While I agree with this opinion, a 10-year old TV show that lasted 1 season and has only a very small (but passionate) fan base is hardly the type of IP that LEGO needs to worry about. Today's kids aren't growing up to be Firefly fans in large numbers

10,000 votes says otherwise... :)

I love Firefly, so do many other people. But that isn't the point, Lego did not reject the model because of your reason, they did so because it isn't aimed at kids. Which means that Babylon 5 would get rejected as well, as would other adult topics.

But this is dishonest from TLG as well, LotR is not aimed at kids, it is PG-13, but should have been R, I would never let my 10 year old watch it. So why is Lego making LotR sets?

cavegod

Anyway enough of this Firefly vote for my speeder Bike!

http://lego.cuusoo.com/ideas/view/16412

CCC

^ Does it take the weight of an average AFOL?

bricksan

More news for you from Cuusoo:

http://legocuusoo.posterous.com/brand-standards-what-makes-an-appropriate-leg

Steve_J_OM

But this is dishonest from TLG as well, LotR is not aimed at kids, it is PG-13, but should have been R, I would never let my 10 year old watch it. So why is Lego making LotR sets?

IMO there's a big difference between what is 'aimed at' kids and what is 'accessible by' kids. I said as much when the Winchester was rejected; people were drawing comparisons between the violence in Shaun of the Dead and instances of violence in the likes of Indiana Jones. While Indiana Jones does have a number of scenes across the trilogy which many would see as too gory for kids, it is on another planet to SOTD in terms of overall tone. It is still, IMO, a family-oriented film which is equally as accessible by adults and kids alike. The same can't be said for Shaun of the Dead.

I think the same applies to LOTR, Pirates of the Caribbean, and even Star Wars which many are using as a point of reference; you could pick out scenes in all of them which push the boundaries of what kids should see, but on the whole they're all very accessible. You'll probably disagree with me about LOTR there, but I honestly don't think that it warrants an R rating.

cavegod

^ Does it take the weight of an average AFOL?

Yes if you have the relevant driving licence.

Redbullgivesuwind

"May 8, 2012
LEGO CUUSOO has opened the floor for you to submit product concepts to us that we can consider for production. As of March 29, all new projects are first held in a queue and approved by a moderator before being posted to the site. We’re able to catch a lot more things this way, but some things are not obvious on the surface and we can't give every project a thorough review. Projects that are obviously over the line will be caught, but some will inevitably pass through."

Makes you wonder what people have been submitting.

Legogeek

More news for you from Cuusoo:

http://legocuusoo.posterous.com/brand-standards-what-makes-an-appropriate-leg

Well said LEGO. It will be interesting to see how LEGO CUUSOO evolves over the next few months...

Legogeek

IMO there's a big difference between what is 'aimed at' kids and what is 'accessible by' kids. I said as much when the Winchester was rejected; people were drawing comparisons between the violence in Shaun of the Dead and instances of violence in the likes of Indiana Jones. While Indiana Jones does have a number of scenes across the trilogy which many would see as too gory for kids, it is on another planet to SOTD in terms of overall tone. It is still, IMO, a family-oriented film which is equally as accessible by adults and kids alike. The same can't be said for Shaun of the Dead.

I think the same applies to LOTR, Pirates of the Caribbean, and even Star Wars which many are using as a point of reference; you could pick out scenes in all of them which push the boundaries of what kids should see, but on the whole they're all very accessible. You'll probably disagree with me about LOTR there, but I honestly don't think that it warrants an R rating.

Agree!

But even with ratings I don't think it is cut & dry....
LOTR is pushing the acceptability boundry if we consider the films and their content, however IMO the books and prior animated film versions were more age appropriate.
Would the ALIEN franchise pass muster? Or Terminator? How about Narnia? There is a lot that goes into the accepting process and we as fans need to simply accept LEGO's judgement. Hopefully changes in the CUUSOO process will address some of these issues.

atkinsar

^ This should certainly help clarify things, so I welcome this announcement.

@cavegod, your speeder bike rocks.

Bandit

Would the ALIEN franchise pass muster? Or Terminator?

Is this a serious question? Of course not.

How about Narnia?

Yes, of course -- those are PG rated family movies. And while I haven't seen any of them, I'm assuming there is nothing overtly religious about them.

Legogeek

Would the ALIEN franchise pass muster? Or Terminator?

Is this a serious question? Of course not.

Yes, I was serious. I'm not saying it should or shouldn't, but I am posing the question for people to think about it. Everyone's perceptions are different and one persons 'right' is another persons 'wrong'

How about Narnia?

Yes, of course -- those are PG rated family movies. And while I haven't seen any of them, I'm assuming there is nothing overtly religious about them.

I didn't even think about the religious undertones when I tossed that one in. It was more of a counter to LOTR.

ninjagolightly

One little line in the new statement (which is very well-written, kudos to LEGO):

"cruelty to real life animals"

Depending on what strand of animal-rights ideology they go with, that could easily be interpreted as ruling out a circus theme, which some people had been wishing for. I personally think such views are absurd, but it's one of those issues where the activists are very loudmouthed and LEGO might shy away from the potential controversy.

drdavewatford

Add me to the list of folks who think that these new guidelines are a big step in the right direction. None of them seem unreasonable. There appear to be a number of Devil's Advocates on here who are trying to argue along the lines of Star Wars being Like Shaun of the Dead etc., (and that's fine - it'd be really dull if everyone had the same opinion) but I suspect that in practice most if not all people who are actually familiar with the subject matter can see a clear distinction here. Sure there will always be grey areas, but I suspect that over time the rules will be progressively clarified so that there's less and less uncertainty.

Interesting also that when it comes to warfare, "Post W.W. II" appears to be the cut-off. So maybe we'll get that Spitfire yet....

Legogeek

I thought this one was interesting:

•Alcohol in any present day situation

What exactly does that mean.... hmmm, so it's okay to portray alcohol in past situations... like a western theme? ;oP

cheshirecat

I think most have put up some existing licenses as counter arguments to the 'its rated R' arguments. Which probably says more about the rubbish US rating system than anything else.

cheshirecat

Is Kelly's heroes kid appropriate?

LegoFanTexas

More news for you from Cuusoo:

http://legocuusoo.posterous.com/brand-standards-what-makes-an-appropriate-leg

Yes, and LotR does not pass their "death, killing, blood" test...

What bothers me is the lack of consistency, not the rules. I get that Firefly is perhaps not Lego material, But if it is not, then PotC and LotR is not either.

dougts

While I agree with this opinion, a 10-year old TV show that lasted 1 season and has only a very small (but passionate) fan base is hardly the type of IP that LEGO needs to worry about. Today's kids aren't growing up to be Firefly fans in large numbers

10,000 votes says otherwise... :)

I love Firefly, so do many other people. But that isn't the point, Lego did not reject the model because of your reason, they did so because it isn't aimed at kids. Which means that Babylon 5 would get rejected as well, as would other adult topics.

But this is dishonest from TLG as well, LotR is not aimed at kids, it is PG-13, but should have been R, I would never let my 10 year old watch it. So why is Lego making LotR sets?

For the record, I'm a Firefly fan too. But I can take off my fan glasses enough to see the relevant truth here - it's a very niche IP with a small cult following. 10,000 votes a Cuusoo really isn't some huge pile of cash waiting for LEGO - certainly not enough to overcome the risks involved.

I also didn't say that's why they rejected it, I was responding specifically to your point about kids growing into adult consumers - which I agree with - but that LEGO needn't worry about such things with such a niche IP. This point has merit in relationship to an IP like LOTR much more so than one like Firefly. LOTR is mainstream and has stood the test of time. Kids are MUCH more likely to grow into adult consumers of LOTR products then they are of Firefly products. It's just sheer numbers. And of course their are new Tolkien movies upcoming, which certainly helps as well.

So, yes, the current relevance and popularity of an IP certainly matters - maybe it's not the main reason, or even a stated reason of why Firefly was reject, but it likely plays a part. Take the exact same premise and insert it into multi-billion dollar a year cash cow IP (like SW), and perhaps it does pass muster? We just don't know.

LegoFanTexas

For the record, I'm a Firefly fan too. But I can take off my fan glasses enough to see the relevant truth here - it's a very niche IP with a small cult following.

Fan glasses! You think I have fan glasses on!?!? :)

Yea, a bit, I get the problems here. The funny thing is, I recently rewatched the series with my wife, it was very uneven, but most first seasons are as they are figuring it out. The original Star Trek is better in our memory than most of those episodes really were, but hey, it was better than nothing. :)

The problem Firefly has today of course is competition, Star Trek was unique at the time, Firefly today is "just another sci-fi series", except that it wasn't. As pointed out, it was not a ship full of "good guys" off to fight the "bad guys". In fact, the Alliance wasn't evil, it was just a big government that most of its people probably were happy to support, these guys did lose the war after all.

But that made it real, honest, gritty, and interesting, unlike most of the crap on TV these days.

I will repeat my point again, but then I'll drop it... My kids can watch LotR when they grow up and make their own choices, they are way too violent for kids. But then this is one of my grips with the media these days (at least in the USA), we allow our kids to see almost any amount of violence, but if a topless girl shows up, that's it, the kids are scarred for life, better call the FCC!!!

It is just insane... Violence is bad, but I guess our world is filled with it...

Bustin

Now that Lego has clarified what War vehicles were allowed...

http://lego.cuusoo.com/ideas/view/24

I really would like to see the Willy's Jeep garner a strong support base.

Bandit

I think most have put up some existing licenses as counter arguments to the 'its rated R' arguments. Which probably says more about the rubbish US rating system than anything else.

I'm not sure if you're implying there have been licenses based on R rated movies - but there has never been a license of a property with an R rated movie, and there never will be.

cheshirecat

No I wasn't.

ninjagolightly

I'm not sure if you're implying there have been licenses based on R rated movies - but there has never been a license of a property with an R rated movie, and there never will be.

Never say never.
Money talks, bovine excrement walks.
People who are trying to convince themselves that there is in fact some "bright line" that is never crossed are fooling themselves, that's all. The line will always be blurred by the shadow of money.
Firefly is indeed a niche property that doesn't cast much of a money shadow, making it easy to draw a nice glittering line.
I'll lay down one marker: within a few years we will see a LEGO property based on some videogame that is in essence a first person shooter, whatever hand-waving LEGO might do to say otherwise. There will be some juicy opportunity on some megahit that is not TOO gory for the rationalization of the moment, and they will take the money and run.
Most of those other standards will be bent too.
I'm not accusing or defending it, I'm saying that's how business works, and it's the path LEGO is on.

andhe

"Cruelty to REAL LIFE animals"...?

Perhaps I should submit my unicorn circus MOC after all, if cruelty to imaginary animals is accepted :p

Bandit

Never say never.
Money talks, bovine excrement walks.
People who are trying to convince themselves that there is in fact some "bright line" that is never crossed are fooling themselves, that's all. The line will always be blurred by the shadow of money.

I'll lay down one marker: within a few years we will see a LEGO property based on some videogame that is in essence a first person shooter, whatever hand-waving LEGO might do to say otherwise. There will be some juicy opportunity on some megahit that is not TOO gory for the rationalization of the moment, and they will take the money and run.

Lol, that is *so* not how the Lego Group works. I am 100% confident that will never happen.

LegoFanTexas

Lol, that is *so* not how the Lego Group works. I am 100% confident that will never happen.

Today, perhaps... but times change, people change, employees change...

Nothing stays the same forever...

dmg111

The primary problem with Firefly, IMO, is the fact that one of the characters - a main character - is a prostitute. You would not be able to make a set without her. I don't think it would've been rejected if this were not the case. The violence was never really over the top, and I do not remember any blood or gore at all.

LegobrandonCP

500 supporters needed! http://lego.cuusoo.com/ideas/view/1787 This will probably reach the goal by the end of this week.

effalcon

one can hope :D

ninjagolightly

Some admin should probably figure out how to fold the comments on the frontpage posts on this topic into the actual forum, because it really makes no sense to have the discussion split across multiple news posts and this thread. For one thing, it's killing the discussion in this thread, all the comments go to the news post replies.

ninjagolightly

The primary problem with Firefly, IMO, is the fact that one of the characters - a main character - is a prostitute. You would not be able to make a set without her. I don't think it would've been rejected if this were not the case. The violence was never really over the top, and I do not remember any blood or gore at all.

That is not, however, the reason that LEGO cited.
Make of it what you will.
Basically, they are winging it on all this stuff. Not necessarily a bad thing.

ninjagolightly

Today, perhaps... but times change, people change, employees change...

What is considered PG-13 changes. Probably changes faster than any of those other things.

dmg111

The primary problem with Firefly, IMO, is the fact that one of the characters - a main character - is a prostitute. You would not be able to make a set without her. I don't think it would've been rejected if this were not the case. The violence was never really over the top, and I do not remember any blood or gore at all.

That is not, however, the reason that LEGO cited.
Make of it what you will.
Basically, they are winging it on all this stuff. Not necessarily a bad thing.

All I see is a generic 'the Firefly TV show and Serenity film contain content that is not appropriate for our core target audience of children ages 6-11' - nothing specific. Did they make a separate announcement with a specific reason?

ninjagolightly

All I see is a generic 'the Firefly TV show and Serenity film contain content that is not appropriate for our core target audience of children ages 6-11' - nothing specific. Did they make a separate announcement with a specific reason?

Read up a few paragraphs:

"We are sorry to inform you that your LEGO CUUSOO project "Firefly Serenity " has been removed to reflect the new Project Guidelines (lego.cuusoo.com/guidelines), which do not allow content related to realistic or extreme violence."

LegoFanTexas

*puts flame suit on*

^ And the Sopwith Camel does not depict "realistic or extreme violence"?

The rejection doesn't bother me, the Lego policy doesn't bother me...

What bothers me is the dishonest double standard... Of course TLG can do whatever they want, but they lose the moral high ground when they do this.

Either have a policy, or don't... if you apply it unevenly, you simply look foolish. In my opinion anyway. :)

Si_UKNZ

This is all getting too political, so how about another great Cuusoo model that needs some support
http://lego.cuusoo.com/ideas/view/10475#
best modular on there, that I've seen.

LegoFanTexas

:) Passion flows freely when talking about things that people love...

Regarding the link you just posted, that courthouse is nice, but it looks like a short modular... and too much like the Town Hall... to get made. Unless I'm missing something?

That brings up another question... Would anyone want Lego to start putting out 2 modular buildings a year, one in the spring and one in the fall, keeping 4-6 of them on the market at one time?

Redbullgivesuwind

^No I have a limited budget and everytime something expensive comes along I die a little and have to start saving :-D.

As for my two pence I cant honestly think of anything where lego has broken its own rules. All the themes that lego have running are fantasy or in the case of the sopworth camel a war that is far removed from public memory.

I think with the war comment they have made is very fair. Anything post world war two is going to inflame emotions and anger that a multi national corperation will attract. Vietnam would kill the far east market, the war in Iraq would, well we all know what will happen in that case!