Shopping at LEGO or Amazon?
Please use our links: LEGO.comAmazon
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

Lego and Warfare/Weapons

245

Comments

  • ringleheimringleheim Member Posts: 168
    ^Ouch...of course, once the sets were available we'd buy all yours too! :-p

    Anyway, regarding the national symbol on the Tiger tanks, they'd probably use an "iron cross" printed part/sitcker like they used for the Indiana Jones fighter plane set. Otherwise I wouldn't use it, either.
    Contrary to what we often see in bad American WWII films, almost all German tanks during the War featured a Balkenkreuz or cross design (not an Iron Cross) but certainly not a Hakenkreuz (swastika) either. I don't see the issue of markings being a problem if they actually made something like a Tiger tank. Heck, they could leave national insignia off the vehicle entirely, it wouldn't really detract from such a kit if done right.

  • Brewer51Brewer51 Member Posts: 248
    @ringleheim,

    I see your point about video games etc, but the difference is that Treyarch and Activision aren't companies who made their reputation making colourful, friendly bricks. They're a family business by trade, and taste aside - of course making a Tiger or Spitfire isn't bad taste, they're well known models that are classic and timeless, and I'm sure Lego would do a wonderful job on them, but is it a viable market for Lego? Is it worth the possible controversy (because no doubt there would be at least some), and would they make enough money from it?
  • ringleheimringleheim Member Posts: 168
    @ringleheim,

    I see your point about video games etc, but the difference is that Treyarch and Activision aren't companies who made their reputation making colourful, friendly bricks. They're a family business by trade, and taste aside - of course making a Tiger or Spitfire isn't bad taste, they're well known models that are classic and timeless, and I'm sure Lego would do a wonderful job on them, but is it a viable market for Lego? Is it worth the possible controversy (because no doubt there would be at least some), and would they make enough money from it?
    As I have already mentioned multiple times, I think a Lego WWII theme would be the most successful theme of all time for them and a massive commercial success. Maybe I'm off-base on that, but I doubt it. It would also appeal to non-Lego people who otherwise have an interest in military history generally, or WWII specifically.

    And As I also just stated, I see zero possibility for "controversy" of any kind so that is a non-issue. This is why I referenced video games and model kit sets. WWII is a very commonly accepted and popular "genre" for various things around the world. In the USA, we have several TV channels essentially dedicated to it, such is the interest in that time period. There are also at least three monthly magazines you can find at any Barnes & Noble dedicated to WWII. Interest in WWII is massive around the world, and it is not really "controversial" to be interested in it in any way.

    Regarding Lego's history of making happy colored houses, that is also irrelevant to the discussion. No one knows their history other than dedicated Lego geeks anyway (such as myself!), and most don't care what it is in any event.

    Does anyone here own a Mercedes, BMW, or Mitsubishi car? How about a lovely Hugo Boss suit? Hugo Boss designed the Waffen SS uniforms and then produced uniforms for the German government using Jewish slave labor. BMW and Mercedes used slave labor and put their engines in the airplanes that were killing people. Mitsubishi built some of the planes that bombed Pearl Harbor! And yet America is filled with Mitsubishi car dealerships, and thousands of happy Mitsubishi car owners I'm sure.

    You can't over-think this stuff. Sometimes a really cool Lego kit of a military aircraft is just a really cool kit of a military aircraft. It does not have to be analyzed more deeply than that.



  • Brewer51Brewer51 Member Posts: 248
    The controversy wouldn't come from Lego 'geeks', though, it'd come from non-Lego people that don't know anything about the history.

    I'm not even arguing with you, I was just offering up points for discussion, and I felt that comparing Lego to video games was a little naive, that was all.

  • RedbullgivesuwindRedbullgivesuwind Brickset's Secret HeadquatersMember Posts: 1,961
    I think it would be hugely contravousial. Mainly as lego would be abandoning long held beliefs. Feels a bit of betrayal of principle.

    Also how far do you take it? If you do a Spitfire do you make a ME 109? But then are you trivialising a brutal war. Because its becoming playable. While video games do use WWII as a area of war its not super realistic its much more a james bond theme. but with a toy its more personal. What about the vetrans as well how will they feel about it? playing WWII?
  • ringleheimringleheim Member Posts: 168
    I think it would be hugely contravousial. Mainly as lego would be abandoning long held beliefs. Feels a bit of betrayal of principle.

    Also how far do you take it? If you do a Spitfire do you make a ME 109? But then are you trivialising a brutal war. Because its becoming playable. While video games do use WWII as a area of war its not super realistic its much more a james bond theme. but with a toy its more personal. What about the vetrans as well how will they feel about it? playing WWII?
    Lego has already abandoned "long held beliefs" with dozens of releases which focus on violence, war, guns, swords, armor, and so on.

    If a Lego WWII kit would be highly controversail, why aren't other subject matters, including "toys" or "games" children play with highly controversial? Toys or replica models of war machines do not trivialize a brutal war.

    Sadly, in a few years, there will not be too many veterans of WWII. They die at an alarming daily rate.

    Lastly, I disagree with you about WWII video games being not realistic. They are highly realistic. Many games feature mappings that are highly accurate to the actual locations where certain battles took place, the guns are accurate down to the noises they make and how many rounds they fire before re-loading, and the soldiers bleed and die when they are shot.

    You can argue a WWII video game is inherently more "controversial" or "offensive" than a simple inert Lego creation made out of plastic and which sits on a shelf. And yet WWII video games are not contoversial in this sense at all. They are highly accepted, popular, and played.
  • ringleheimringleheim Member Posts: 168
    The controversy wouldn't come from Lego 'geeks', though, it'd come from non-Lego people that don't know anything about the history.

    I'm not even arguing with you, I was just offering up points for discussion, and I felt that comparing Lego to video games was a little naive, that was all.

    I don't think a Lego kit of a Spitfire would be controversial in the slightest. I think comparing a Lego spitfire to a video game of WWII or a model kit of a spitfire is a perfectly sensible analogy. They are all games/toys of the same subject matter with the same broad issues applicable, and enjoyed by adults and children alike, just like Lego.

    This isn't directed at you Brewer51, but in general, I am amazed at the opposition in this thread to the general idea of a Lego kit depicting a WWII machine. I find that fascinating and I really wasn't anticipating that. If there is this much opposition from Lego enthusiasts, Lego is likely to never launch such a kit! What a pity.
  • legoDadlegoDad Member Posts: 529
    I'm all for WWII kits. I was an old school model builder and loved building Sherman Tanks, Panzers...aircraft carriers, battleships, bombers...etc. Some of my fondest memories of my older brother and I building and painting these kits.
    Wished Lego would come out with a WWII line...doesn't have to be mini-fig scale. Micro, midi and UCS scale would be fine. I just don't see them doing it though.
    Has to be based in a fictional license like Indiana Jones and the like to get something made. At least we have some of these from the Indy line. I LOVE my Flying Wing model!
  • rocaorocao Administrator Posts: 4,290
    And As I also just stated, I see zero possibility for "controversy" of any kind so that is a non-issue. This is why I referenced video games and model kit sets. WWII is a very commonly accepted and popular "genre" for various things around the world. In the USA, we have several TV channels essentially dedicated to it, such is the interest in that time period. There are also at least three monthly magazines you can find at any Barnes & Noble dedicated to WWII. Interest in WWII is massive around the world, and it is not really "controversial" to be interested in it in any way.
    Zero controversy? Really? Violence in video games is quite controversial. You don't have to take my word for it, but you can consider these as examples: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=video+game+war+controversy

    And documentaries on TV or information in publications is not the same as simulating or recreating, which is what toys and video games do.
  • LegoFanTexasLegoFanTexas TexasMember Posts: 8,409
    One thing that I just thought of...

    Lego makes products to sell world-wide...

    War toys sell very well in the United States, I wonder how well they would sell in France or Germany? Could you even sell a Tiger Tank in Germany? Perhaps, with "approved" markings I suppose.

    So if Lego made a tank, fighter, etc., what is the world wide market for such toys?
  • mressinmressin Lego City... erm LondonMember Posts: 843
    edited March 2012
    This isn't directed at you Brewer51, but in general, I am amazed at the opposition in this thread to the general idea of a Lego kit depicting a WWII machine. I find that fascinating and I really wasn't anticipating that. If there is this much opposition from Lego enthusiasts, Lego is likely to never launch such a kit! What a pity.
    Well, I wouldn't class it as "opposition" per se. But I'm not sure anymore what we are talking about. Is it whether TLG would make a profit out of war-themed sets, or whether war-themed toys are acceptable in general, or whether we want to have a war-themed set?

    Symbolism:
    This shouldn't be underestimated. I work in software localisation - almost no connection with toy production, yes - and I can tell you that especially with regards to the above-mentioned video games, what is acceptable and what not can differ dramatically. A number of WWII computer games are not available in Germany because they are too violent, or depict swastika, etc. Carlsberg, a major Danish brewery, had the swastika on its bottles until the '30s, when they removed it out of fear to be associated with the nazis.
    What I am trying to say with that is that sensitivities in different coutries are very difficult to judge. In the UK, the Spitfire is a celebrity in its own right - the plane that won the battle of Britain. In Germany, few people would know it. Even the Me 109 would be recognised by more people in the UK than in Germany. WWII planes are just not that widely known because when you bring up WWII in Germany, people think of Auschwitz and Dresden, not of the Me 109.
    A tiger tank, a nuke-carrying bomber... those are risky no matter how you turn it.

    Lego having made war-themed sets:
    As far as I am concerned, Lego has never done that. A Sopwith Camel and a Fokker Triplane in the "Sculptures" line, colourful and obviously unarmed jets in the creator line... those hardly constitute "war-themed sets". Whether it's historically accurate or not, I think the Fokker Triplane just doesn't stand for a war of destruction, but more for nostalgia. I don't see that in a gray battleship or tiger tank.
    I agree that the Indiana Jones sets are technically (very close to) WWII sets - but IJ remains an adventure movie series. WWII toy sets would in comparison have more of the tone of Saving Private Ryan, Flags of Our Fathers, etc.
    Vikings, knights, archers and cowboys are armed, yes. But they just have a different context than nazis, or gas masks, etc.

    Lego making war-based sets in the future:
    A TLG employee made a few enlightening comments in the monorail thread, particularly how TLG chooses what sets to make. From their focus-group heavy approach alone, I don't see them creating war-themed sets anytime soon, not even as models. It's just not that popular with the kids. That's probably why there are comparatively few WWII-themed toys in general.
    Last but not least: Whatever they do has to be compatible with the minifigure smile. And TLG is trying so hard to win over girls, and its prospects won't increase if there is GI Joe in the store right next to it.

    Do I want to see war-based sets?
    Uh, to be honest... I'll consider any set because I'm mainly interested in what I can do with the bricks. I'm not interested in olive-green as new colour, though. Lego has too many colours already for my taste. Purely as a set, I find sets with a fantastic background more interesting. So, before doing WWII-based planes, I'd rather have them pick up the license for Crimson Sky or Steampunk. ;) (But that will never happen...)
  • ringleheimringleheim Member Posts: 168
    edited March 2012
    ^ A Sopwith Camel isn't a war themed set? It's certainly not a popsicle stand, or Olivia's treehouse from the Friends line! I have to raise the BS flag here. Perhaps WWI is thought of popularly in a more nostalgic sense now as it is that much more removed from the collective memory of living people, but WWI was a horrible, brutal war that claimed millions of lives and a Sopwith Camel is nothing other than a war machine from that time period.

    But somehow that gets a pass because Lego already made it. But a Tiger tank is untinkable? Come on. You have to be consistent. If Lego wanted to stick to the purity of brightly colored things that have nothing to do with violence or conflict, like a house or grocery store or treehouse, fine. But they long since abandoned that position and the Camel and Fokker DR 1 are just 2 examples of that. Heck, in some of those Indiana Jones kits they actually made "Nazi" minifigures!

    And apparently if war, weapons of war, violence, and killing are part of a "fantasy theme" then it's OK.

    Does that mean we can sneak all of the WWII kits I would like to see in as part of a "Hogan's Heroes" theme of kits? (American comedy TV show set during WWII)...

    The fictional backdrop of a comedic TV show somehow makes that same Tiger tank fun and cute?

    Yes, the conversation has roamed all over the place. To reiterate, my point is that Lego's policy on "no war kits" is hypocritical at best, I personally would love to see some WWII kits, and I think they would be massively popular worldwide.

    But I agree with some posters here that Lego just ain't gonna do it.
  • ringleheimringleheim Member Posts: 168
    And As I also just stated, I see zero possibility for "controversy" of any kind so that is a non-issue. This is why I referenced video games and model kit sets. WWII is a very commonly accepted and popular "genre" for various things around the world. In the USA, we have several TV channels essentially dedicated to it, such is the interest in that time period. There are also at least three monthly magazines you can find at any Barnes & Noble dedicated to WWII. Interest in WWII is massive around the world, and it is not really "controversial" to be interested in it in any way.
    Zero controversy? Really? Violence in video games is quite controversial. You don't have to take my word for it, but you can consider these as examples: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=video+game+war+controversy

    And documentaries on TV or information in publications is not the same as simulating or recreating, which is what toys and video games do.
    There are people who exist to be offended by almost anything. In the USA, we have professionals of this type. And I suppose every now and again there is some group that lobbies to have violent video games removed from shelves or what have you....but for most the part, no, violence in video games is not controversial. War-themed video games (at least in the USA) are quite common and accepted.

    I'd like to reiterate that no one is calling for a Lego kit which "simulates" WWII killing. Although there already exists dozens of Lego kits which are entirely focused around killing of one sort or another!

    I would just like to see collector's grade, large scale kits depicting various machines from WWII as well as modern militaries around the world.

  • ringleheimringleheim Member Posts: 168
    One thing that I just thought of...

    Lego makes products to sell world-wide...

    War toys sell very well in the United States, I wonder how well they would sell in France or Germany? Could you even sell a Tiger Tank in Germany? Perhaps, with "approved" markings I suppose.

    So if Lego made a tank, fighter, etc., what is the world wide market for such toys?
    Of course you can buy depictions of a Tiger tank in Germany, but various countries do indeed have laws prohibiting the use of a swastika on anything, including military model kits. Most model kit manufacturers get around this by dividing a swastika decal into 4 pieces that are un-recognizable as a swastika, until you line them neatly up on the vertical stabilizer of that JU-88, FW-190, or Bf-109 you are working on. They are typically blotted out on model kit box art.

    I would agree that a swastika sticker on a Lego German aircraft from WWII would just be "wrong", out of place, and I totally see that as a controversial thing. It would likely stir up trouble for Lego and they would never do it as a result, even if the swastika symbol greatly pre-dates Hitler's use of it starting in 1933 and it is a part of the world's history whether we like it or not. I am certainly not advocating for that sort of thing.

    I'll repeat myself for the 3rd or 4th time here--somehow a Fokker DR 1 is OK as a Lego kit, but a Spitfire is not? I will never understand the logic behind that.

    Either Lego is actually committed to making fun, cute, positive, happy things for children like a treehouse, pet shop, or cupcake store...or they aren't. And they have already shown that they are NOT committed to their original sensibilities on this topic. We have Nazi airplanes, Nazis, Viking raiders, knights, laser guns, and even depictions of actual machines of war (Fokker and Camel). OK, no big deal. Without those types of kits Lego would not exist today as a company! So then keep it going and give us some modern fighter jets, some WWI stuff, WWII stuff, some Napoleonic wars stuff, and so on! Not a big deal.
  • cheshirecatcheshirecat Member Posts: 5,332
    One small thing. Many of the video games you refer to have age restrictions. Whilst lego never would and for example tamya models dont, at that point any comparison is pointless.

    Not all camels were overtly military. The models released by lego weren't overtly military (no camouflage etc). Perhaps that shows tlg's outlook. For example we may get a British red arrows set but not a hawk in Indonesian markings and combat colouring.

    I'll have no problem with military sets but lego pride themselves on being different from the ranks of crap you see in toysrus.

    As an aside companies like tamya are worldwide so presumably the market is there.
  • RedbullgivesuwindRedbullgivesuwind Brickset's Secret HeadquatersMember Posts: 1,961
    edited March 2012
    One small thing. Many of the video games you refer to have age restrictions. Whilst lego never would and for example tamya models dont, at that point any comparison is pointless.
    Blast you said what I was going to say.
    Lego has already abandoned "long held beliefs" with dozens of releases which focus on violence, war, guns, swords, armor, and so on.

    If a Lego WWII kit would be highly controversail, why aren't other subject matters, including "toys" or "games" children play with highly controversial? Toys or replica models of war machines do not trivialize a brutal war.
    No they dont but you dont play with a model you play with lego which would be difficult to get by anyone. Lego to me hasnt abandoned this as these are allfantasy themes and they never depict violence towards each other. And there is a diffrence between fantasy and reality.
    Lastly, I disagree with you about WWII video games being not realistic. They are highly realistic. Many games feature mappings that are highly accurate to the actual locations where certain battles took place, the guns are accurate down to the noises they make and how many rounds they fire before re-loading, and the soldiers bleed and die when they are shot.

    You can argue a WWII video game is inherently more "controversial" or "offensive" than a simple inert Lego creation made out of plastic and which sits on a shelf. And yet WWII video games are not contoversial in this sense at all. They are highly accepted, popular, and played.
    I have yet to find a realistic war game at all. Medal of Honour perhaps the best known was always you vs the nazis on their own hardly realistic. And as Chesirecat has pointed out these games have age ratings so if your at the age to actually play (in a kids way) with lego you are certianly to young to playing these games.

    Anyway Ive emailed lego about it so may very well get a response soon.
  • cheshirecatcheshirecat Member Posts: 5,332
    I can't really think of a single recent WW2/MW FPS game that isn't far more realistic than any lego set. It may not be real in terms of damage/dying etc but in how it looks, the models etc its basically 100% accurate to all but the biggest history nuts. In a game its always likely that it will be you vs the rest of the world, but that doesn't detract from the reality of the immersion. And besides things like BF2 remove that me vs them thing, and mods like Forgotten Hope 2 are fairly accurate representations of WW2. IMO BF and its mods are better but thats another story.

    I would love to know how Ninjago doesn't depict violence towards each other.

    Similarly, Castles, Vikings and Romans may appear fantasy now but only because of the time passed. Would the English civil war be equally fantasy? Only a few 100 years after the castles and before the height of pirates. Is pirates fantasy? What about US war of Independence or Napoleonic battles - perhaps only 50 years after the pirates and 50 years before the western themes.
  • mressinmressin Lego City... erm LondonMember Posts: 843

    A Sopwith Camel isn't a war themed set? It's certainly not a popsicle stand, or Olivia's treehouse from the Friends line! I have to raise the BS flag here. Perhaps WWI is thought of popularly in a more nostalgic sense now as it is that much more removed from the collective memory of living people, but WWI was a horrible, brutal war that claimed millions of lives and a Sopwith Camel is nothing other than a war machine from that time period.

    But somehow that gets a pass because Lego already made it. But a Tiger tank is untinkable? Come on. You have to be consistent. If Lego wanted to stick to the purity of brightly colored things that have nothing to do with violence or conflict, like a house or grocery store or treehouse, fine. But they long since abandoned that position and the Camel and Fokker DR 1 are just 2 examples of that. Heck, in some of those Indiana Jones kits they actually made "Nazi" minifigures!
    This argument seems to be along the lines of a rule of proportion:
    a) Lego made a Sopwith Camel/Fokker Triplane.
    b) Sopwith Camels/Fokker Triplanes were war machines in a horrible, brutal war claiming millions of lives.
    c) Any war machine from any brutal war claiming millions of lives is fair game.
    d) Lego can make a Tiger tank.

    To me, this seems to disregard what the Tiger tank and the Sopwith Camel/Fokker Triplane are associated with. In reality, it is a lot more complex:

    a) Obviously, Lego has no compuctions against producing models of "weapons of war" in the "Sculptures" line, as apparently another Sopwith Camel is scheduled for release in 2012.
    b) This begs the question why, when they already released that airplane eleven years ago, they're not going for a different one this time. Why not the Spitfire instead, an elegant and iconic airplane that is generally held in good regard? (And hey, maybe they're going to actually do it one day.)
    c) I think that's because most people will recognise the Sopwith Camel as a biplane first, and a weapon of war later. Biplanes have a certain romance and nostalgia to it: Freedom, simpler times and so on.
    d) A Spitfire, on the other hand, would be instantly recognisable as weapon through it's camouflage pattern (see @cheshirecat).

    This is just my interpretation. I wasn't there. But it seems to fit the fact that Lego has released various jet fighters in happy colours, and few to none in camouflage, grey or green. It's less the "historic reality" and more the appearance.

    And apparently if war, weapons of war, violence, and killing are part of a "fantasy theme" then it's OK.

    Does that mean we can sneak all of the WWII kits I would like to see in as part of a "Hogan's Heroes" theme of kits? (American comedy TV show set during WWII)...

    The fictional backdrop of a comedic TV show somehow makes that same Tiger tank fun and cute?
    I believe it's about acceptability, not fun and cute. A Tiger tank on its own will never be acceptable. But if you can shoehorn it into a fun adventure license, it will be. I guess the (fictional) tank from Indy 3 probably had the best chances yet for a 20th century tank to appear in a Lego set. At least I am not aware of any tanks outside the SW theme.

    Yes, the conversation has roamed all over the place. To reiterate, my point is that
    Lego's policy on "no war kits" is hypocritical at best, I personally would love to see some WWII kits, and I think they would be massively popular worldwide.

    But I agree with some posters here that Lego just ain't gonna do it.
    I disagree on the "hypocritical". Ever since the minifigure's inception, Lego has balanced on the edge. The 80's castle theme could have knights and halberds (and fortresses, for that matter) because it's generally more acceptable (and you wouldn't have a theme without). The early space themes had no blaster, no laser and so on, but there was virtually no space set where your imagination couldn't make out cannons, phasers and so on. Of course Lego always called those "ion collectors". ;) Remember the astronaut's megaphones?

    And now, SW flows over with firearms because the theme has given Lego the excuse to do it. Maybe Lego also needed a theme to do it in, to keep up with Mega Blocks and GI Joe. Every second set in every second theme sports at least one flick missile, and some shoot them actually quite effectively (Slave I, Earth Defense HQ). Exo Force and Mission Mars sport a lot of - effectively - practical projectile shooters. Yes, this is a far cry from the 80's sets.
    However, note how sanitized TLG keeps Lego City. Has there ever been a flick missile or sidearm in Lego City? (I honestly don't know, but have seen neither.)

    In any way, while I don't know if a "no war games" stance exists at TLG, I still don't see that they ever created a "war-themed" set in any sense of the word.
  • princedravenprincedraven Essex, UKMember Posts: 3,768
    Not going into details, but I am a father of 2 boys and I do NOT want TLG to make war based sets.
    I slightly understand the idea of making model sets aimed 100% at AFOL's of planes that are considered a work of art, but IMO I do not want my boys playing with minifig scale war machines.
    I have to admit I find it a tad strange that AFOL's would want to build tanks, why would you want to make a model of something designed to kill people? It may just be me though.
  • mressinmressin Lego City... erm LondonMember Posts: 843
    Good point, @princedraven. Out of curiosity, would you give them SW or Ninjago sets and if yes, what is the difference for you?

    (No spite or innuendo, just curiosity. I wouldn't advocate war sets either.)
  • princedravenprincedraven Essex, UKMember Posts: 3,768
    edited March 2012
    ^ It's funny, because I could sit here and try to justify in words (fictional/good v evil/etc) why I am happy for them to play with SW and Ninjago, but if I was being honest the real reason is that my gut tells me it is fine.

    My gut would not be happy at all with the idea of a tank rolling down the center of Lego City and leaving a trail of body parts...
  • mressinmressin Lego City... erm LondonMember Posts: 843
    Thanks. :)

    The defense rests.
  • cheshirecatcheshirecat Member Posts: 5,332
    Of course - it can be done anyway...

    image

    Is there really that much difference to this...

    image

    Its clearly got great big guns for shooting things.

    And this is just amazing...

    image
  • mressinmressin Lego City... erm LondonMember Posts: 843
    edited March 2012
    Aside from the camouflage paint, you mean?

    I get your point. They're both war machines with guns, designed to destroy.

    But in Lego's paying customer base (parents), they are perceived to be about as different as Raiders of the Lost Arc is to Saving Private Ryan, A New Hope is to Schindler's List, Return of the Jedi is to Black Hawk Down.
  • cheshirecatcheshirecat Member Posts: 5,332
    edited March 2012
    ^ I disagree because you're expanding one object into a two hour film. As AFOL's we may just leave that Lego clone wars tank on a shelf - a child playing with it is going to turn the turret, point it at yoda and try to kill that poor little green creature. Same with the chicken walkers on Endor - hell we see one actually kill an ewok. Im no shrink but I'm guessing to a 6 year old a dead ewok is as upsetting (if not more so) than a dead german/british/american soldier. I know for sure that a dead disney lion is FAR more upsetting than just about anything!

    (To be honest I wouldn't let my children at their age watch any of those films apart from star wars including any of the Indiana Jones films. I also know my wife would be fine with the clone wars tank or a chicken walker but if I came home with a Lego Tiger Tank with cute little panzer troops I'ld have more than a little explaining to do. Although I think she'd have trouble rationalising that and just get mad and tell me I shlould know better)
  • princedravenprincedraven Essex, UKMember Posts: 3,768
    There is a reason that Little Red Riding hood has a wolf in the story and not an evil murdering cannibal.
    Children know that wolves dont talk, or dress up or eat grandma's.
    Same goes in this situation.
    My son knows if he picks up a SW hovering droid tank thing (cant for the life of me think its name), he is holding an imaginary vehicle, driven by imaginary droids, shooting at an imaginary little green man.
  • mressinmressin Lego City... erm LondonMember Posts: 843
    edited March 2012
    @cheshirecat, can I just ask why you'd let your kids watch Star Wars, but not Indiana Jones or Saving Private Ryan?

    Isn't that a contradiction since you state yourself that Star Wars is actually more upsetting for them? Obviously you have exposed them to the cruelty that is The Lion King.

    (Again, no spite. Just curious.)
  • cheshirecatcheshirecat Member Posts: 5,332
    Once to the Lion King - wont be doing that again. Although to be honest, even I have a little cry when watching that.

    as for the first question - well Raiders of the Lost Arc is genuinely too scary at the end, and possibly when he burns his hand, and possibly many other places for a young child in my opinion. Star wars has a degree of violence, introduces death but itsn't actually scary. I'm more interested in limiting my childrens exposure to Fear than anything else I suppose.
  • mressinmressin Lego City... erm LondonMember Posts: 843
    edited March 2012
    I see. So Saving Private Ryan, Black Hawk Down, GI Joe would be ok? Those aren't scary, are they?

    My point is the distinction between a war movie and an adventure flick.
  • cheshirecatcheshirecat Member Posts: 5,332
    edited March 2012
    No not at all as they are all far too violent and not for children at all. But its the film that determines the violence not the presence of a tank.
  • cheshirecatcheshirecat Member Posts: 5,332
    Also if you look at my post a couple above I do say that star wars is the only one of the films mentioned that i'ld consider letting them watch.
  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 19,764
    Not my own work, but they need to be posted here ...

    image

    You stupid boy.

    image

    They don't like it up 'em.
  • mressinmressin Lego City... erm LondonMember Posts: 843
    No not at all as they are all far too violent and not for children at all. But its the film that determines the violence not the presence of a tank.
    Exactly my point then. War movies are not for kids. And I guess TLG stays away from what might be perceived as war toys to keep its family-friendly reputation clean. Because a lot of people share your wife's resentiments.
  • MinifigsMeMinifigsMe Member Posts: 2,844
    I said it at the beginning, but the thread is still going so I'll repeat it, there is a clear distinction between violence in a fantasy environment and in real life, historical or present day. I'd rather boys didn't play fighting games, but that's not going to happen, but having it based on SW is very different to playing Alies vs Nazis. If the target audience is under 10, I wouldn't expect them to be playing COD (nor GofW which is vaguely fantasy). But they would be playing mario and Harry potter games - there's still violence there (squished mushrooms, wands at dawn) but it's different to real weapons.

    I think you'd find very few mothers who like buying their child real life war based toys, even if they inevitably do at some point. Lego is a 'safe' thing to buy, to ask the grandparents for etc... Of course boys being boys they probably still have minifigs fighting and build tanks out of their bricks, but to knowingly buy 'real' people that fight is another thing entirely.
    And of course girls would be even less interested than they are in themes like ninjago, which at least has beautiful building, dragons and Nya.

    Education about the World Wars, Nazis and everything else is important, but playing games about them isn't educational.
  • cheshirecatcheshirecat Member Posts: 5,332
    Lord of the Rings Trilogy - PG, 12, 12. Yet suitable for a childs toy?

    There are plenty of war films I'ld happily let 11 year old boys watch - that I watched indeed, more so than two towers or return of the king.

    Kelly's Heroes, Guns of Navarone, Where Eagles Dare - all rated PG.

    As I said before, its not the presence of tanks, rather the content of the film or the story chosen by the director thats the issue. Or as goldie looking chain pointed out, guns don't kill people, robbers do.

    @Savage_Steel - Fairly sure that there's a chunk of research that shows kids don't differentiate particularly well between fantasy and reality. Adults do, children don't. Star wars games played in the play ground are just as violent as any other - is it not just our own adult decency that is more offended by an allies-v-nazis game than a clones-v-droids?

    Lets also be honest (and not meaning to make this go way of track) - you only have to watch a new hope to see that there is at least some resemblance between star wars and WW2 - certainly in aesthetic if nothing more.
  • BrickDancerBrickDancer Dunes of TatooineMember Posts: 3,639
    ^I'm sure there are plenty of Lego fans that would like to see more military vehicles or ships, including myself. But I think the conversation has gone full circle now.

    Taste and perception is highly subjective from person to person, country to country. So now we're splitting hairs on shades of grey/bley on the topic of what is acceptable violence and what is not. Let's just agree that we won't all agree. =)

    In the mean while, what you can do to get your fix of Military Lego is buying instructions from those chinese clone brands that have F-117 Stealth fighters, US Tanks and Jeeps, Apache helicopters. Just use Lego bricks and your mission is accomplished is it not?
  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 19,764
    ^ It's not just the quality of the pieces that are bad in those clone sets, the design of the models is fairly poor too.

    You might as well design your own than copy the clones.
  • YellowcastleYellowcastle Northern VirginiaAdministrator, Moderator Posts: 5,206
    I see. So Saving Private Ryan, Black Hawk Down, GI Joe would be ok? Those aren't scary, are they? My point is the distinction between a war movie and an adventure flick.
    Black Hawk Down is terrifying as are many parts of Saving Private Ryan. When my son gets of age, I'll be very cautious in what he's allowed to watch and when.
  • bellybutton290bellybutton290 Member Posts: 453
    Interestingly the film clasifiers in the uk (bbfc) class lotr etc as which are PG or PG-13 in the us as containing"fantasy violence" and clearly more 15 or 18, NC-17 or R rated material, saving private ryan etc, as simply ”violence” (with the added info for detail) therefore I presume lego are also working along these lines and making this same distinction.
  • LegoFanTexasLegoFanTexas TexasMember Posts: 8,409
    Black Hawk Down is terrifying as are many parts of Saving Private Ryan. When my son gets of age, I'll be very cautious in what he's allowed to watch and when.
    Have you read the book "Blackhawk Down"?

    I have... The movie is tame compared to the real thing...

    Notice the US Soldiers are not gunning down kids in the movie. They did in the book and in real life (if a 10 year old picks up an AK-47 and starts shooting at you, you have to shoot him).

    In addition, there is an important part of the book left out, when one of the four chalks is at risk of being overrun. They have just a few men, dozens of gunmen are advancing down the street towards them under cover of women and children as human shields. Once within about 100-150 yards, the US Soldiers have no choice but to shoot everyone, if they don't their position will be overrun and they'll be killed and the mission put in danger.

    But few people want to pay money to go to the movies to watch hundreds of women and children gunned down by US Soldiers.

    War is hell and it sure as heck isn't pretty.
  • YellowcastleYellowcastle Northern VirginiaAdministrator, Moderator Posts: 5,206
    My father was a helicopter pilot in the Navy and shares your sentiments on the book. Steering back on topic and for many of these same reasons, I'm ok with TLG avoiding military sets.
  • Si_UKNZSi_UKNZ NZMember Posts: 4,179
    turn the turret, point it at yoda and try to kill that poor little green creature.
    Yoda is not a poor little creature, he's a weapon. And a muppet.
    Either one justifies it.

  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 19,764
    turn the turret, point it at yoda and try to kill that poor little green creature.
    Yoda is not a poor little creature, he's a weapon. And a muppet.
    Either one justifies it.

    And he sold his soul to vodafone, so deserves it even more.
  • MrBerreMrBerre Member Posts: 246
    In the 'Police' sets, when you look through the booklets, the criminals are just getting involved in such things as stealing apples from a tree. You never see them actually committing any violent crime, because that's not how they're intended.
    http://www.brickset.com/detail/?set=3661-1
    http://www.brickset.com/detail/?Set=4854-1
    http://www.brickset.com/detail/?Set=7286-1
    http://www.brickset.com/detail/?Set=7279-1

  • andheandhe UKMember Posts: 3,460
    I think this thread shows exactly why TLG would avoid anything war/military related, because its just too controversial. Look at the backlash they got from bringing out the friends sets! Imagine the outcry if they produced a modern army theme.

    I think the vehicles in themes like pharaoh's quest are the closest you'll see to military vehicles in a mainstream theme. And even then they are fighting monsters, not humans.
  • MrBerreMrBerre Member Posts: 246
    However, note how sanitized TLG keeps Lego City. Has there ever been a flick missile or sidearm in Lego City? (I honestly don't know, but have seen neither.)
    This is a *Duplo* set: http://www.brickset.com/detail/?set=5817-1

    "Ah," you'll say, "but that's for shooting at that target."

    "Sure," I'll reply, "so what about this one: http://www.brickset.com/detail/?Set=9480-1 ? Or http://www.brickset.com/detail/?Set=9483-1 ? Or http://www.brickset.com/detail/?Set=9486-1 ? Or http://www.brickset.com/detail/?Set=8426-1 ? Or http://www.brickset.com/detail/?Set=8424-1 ? Or http://www.brickset.com/detail/?Set=8638-1 ? Yes, those are sets from 'Cars 2' -- that still leaves the fact that these cars have machine guns."
  • mressinmressin Lego City... erm LondonMember Posts: 843
    edited March 2012
    [removed] Just realized my reply wasn't really propelling the debate forward.
  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 19,764
    ^^

    Don't even think about what is going on in the foreground of this one then...
    image

    One of my favourite Duplo sets.
  • RedbullgivesuwindRedbullgivesuwind Brickset's Secret HeadquatersMember Posts: 1,961
    This is the email that I got from lego.

    Dear Jon,

    Thanks for getting in touch with us.

    I think your LEGO WWII themed series, Spitfire as an ultimate model would make a brilliant LEGO® set.

    We have a team of experts in Denmark whose job it is to dream up new LEGO sets, themes and toys. They tell me it actually takes years to plan everything. They need to test all the new ideas, talk to the factory about how to make them, work out what sort of box is needed and then deliver the new sets to all the shops in 130 countries! This means that there's a good chance they're already working on something similar to your idea.

    You sound like a huge LEGO fan! Are you already in the LEGO Club? If you'd like to join, it's free! We'll even keep you up to date with all the new toys and send you free LEGO magazines!

    All you need to do is go to www.LEGOclub.com and sign up, or ask your parents to call one of our experts on 0845 60 60 668 and let them know you want to join.

    We wish we could use your idea right now. I will be passing your feedback onto our team in charge of this area.

    Thank you again for contacting us. If you have any further questions, please feel free to reply to this email or call one of our friendly experts on 00800 5346 5555 (Monday - Friday, 8am-5pm).

    Happy building!

    Zsolt K****
    LEGO Direct
  • LegoFanTexasLegoFanTexas TexasMember Posts: 8,409
    Boy, there is a form letter if there ever was one. :)
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.

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.