appernetly the new set revealed today is the boba fett UCS gunship - 75312

3 hours ago, joneyyy1981 said:

appernetly the new set revealed today is the boba fett UCS gunship - 75312

Aka Slave 1.  Also, at $50, it most definitely is not a UCS.

Edited June 26, 20214 yr by Loghamel

7 minutes ago, Loghamel said:

Aka Slave 1.  Also, at $50, it most definitely is not a UCS.

lol sorry, just see it says not hte UCS gunship lol

"I ain't leaving my ship at some dingy spaceport"

Wow! How good does the 20th anniversary “Slave I” look now? 
 

Brickfanatics review of the Slave 1 is very positive. For the price point, overall it’s a good effort.
However, for the adult builder the 20th anniversary set will be the one to get. Will be interesting to see how high bc the set will set, knowing that the UCS version will temper further run up in price.

Also, per The Brick Fan, the official name of the set will be “Bobba Fett’s Starship” and not Slave I. Apparently Disney is walking away from the original name so we may have seen the last “Slave I” labeled box ever.

10 minutes ago, Fcbarcelona101 said:

Also, per The Brick Fan, the official name of the set will be “Bobba Fett’s Starship” and not Slave I. Apparently Disney is walking away from the original name so we may have seen the last “Slave I” labeled box ever.

It’s been called a similar name since 1980, but we can call it Slave 1 as long as we want to.

 

16 minutes ago, Fcbarcelona101 said:

Also, per The Brick Fan, the official name of the set will be “Bobba Fett’s Starship” and not Slave I. Apparently Disney is walking away from the original name so we may have seen the last “Slave I” labeled box ever.

I should have kept my UCS Slave I.  Future UCS remakes are not going to have that name on the boxes.

That 20th Anniversary version is going to be

As soon as I saw the ship in Mandalorian, I instantly thought there was no way they were going to have "Baby Yoda" and a ship named "Slave I" in the same show.

I suspected a move like this would be coming.

Remember kids, murder is A-OK. The word "slave" is not ok. Disssssneeeeyyyyy...

 

Can we have the title changed back to Slave 1? Must we adhere to silly Disney requests as well?

Can we have the title changed back to Slave 1? Must we adhere to silly Disney requests as well?

I’m Mr OCD when it comes to formatting the titles on the site. You won’t get an argument from me.

Great moral lecture from a multi-billion dollar monopolist company that influences children with s**ist & racist images in movies, runs sweat shops in China & uses the most questionable business strategies in the industry.

If any company would know something about enslaving people, it would be this one. Ironic, Disney. Let's talk about the name of a ficticious starship. smh

 

I personally like the name change. It always felt awkward calling the ship Slave 1 to me. To non star wars fans, they would get so confused at the name......like they would be so confused and ask, "What is Slave 1?". Just my 2 cents.... Obviously each person is free to have their own opinion but I think the name change will help the marketability of the lego set to non star wars fans. As a result I think it's a good thing.

It's kind of like calling Miller Park AmFam Park. It'll take a while, and it's stupid, but I'll get over it.

No actual problems in the world will be solved.

15 minutes ago, cmartin33 said:

It always felt awkward calling the ship Slave 1 to me. 

It does not matter that it felt awkward. The ships name is, and always will be the Slave 1, no matter what somebody's thoughts are on the matter. 

Guess I'll be labeled a deadnamer now...

25 minutes ago, dennugsmello said:

Guess I'll be labeled a deadnamer now...

Or worse!

 

45 minutes ago, dennugsmello said:

Guess I'll be labeled a deadnamer now...

19 minutes ago, JimboJet said:

Or worse!

1 hour ago, cmartin33 said:

I personally like the name change. It always felt awkward calling the ship Slave 1 to me. To non star wars fans, they would get so confused at the name......like they would be so confused and ask, "What is Slave 1?". Just my 2 cents.... Obviously each person is free to have their own opinion but I think the name change will help the marketability of the lego set to non star wars fans. As a result I think it's a good thing.

Actually, if you read the lore around Slave 1, the name makes sense.  Slave 1 was one of six prototype prison ships (Slave 2, Slave 3, Slave 4, Slave 5, and Slave 6).  When Jango Fett stole the ship from the prison, he blew up the hanger bay so no one could follow.  Thus he destroyed the other prototypes (the other "Slave" ships).  The name is what it is AND it is literally a one-of-a-kind ship in the universe. 

Of course Disney could retcon the origin of the ship but all the EU material is still there.

There is of course another possibility.  If Favreau and Filoni do actually become in charge of Lucasfilm, they could reinstate the Slave 1 name.  That could cause this new set to become the collector item over and above the other Slave 1 sets.

LEGO can easily double their money with this build  Using the exact same ship, they just need to swap the minifigures, put a new set number, and call it "Jango Fett's Starship". Release both sets at the same time.  $$$$

52 minutes ago, exracer327 said:

Actually, if you read the lore around Slave 1, the name makes sense.  Slave 1 was one of six prototype prison ships (Slave 2, Slave 3, Slave 4, Slave 5, and Slave 6).  When Jango Fett stole the ship from the prison, he blew up the hanger bay so no one could follow.  Thus he destroyed the other prototypes (the other "Slave" ships).  The name is what it is AND it is literally a one-of-a-kind ship in the universe. 

Of course Disney could retcon the origin of the ship but all the EU material is still there.

There is of course another possibility.  If Favreau and Filoni do actually become in charge of Lucasfilm, they could reinstate the Slave 1 name.  That could cause this new set to become the collector item over and above the other Slave 1 sets.

That's great to here. I'm glad there is a backstory to the name that makes sense. The problem is, the majority of buyers don't know this backstory. So from a corporate perspective, the easiest thing to do is change the name. Alternatively, Disney could create another side TV show series that explains the name origin and backstory. But the easier solution is to change the name.

From a business perspective, this is how Disney is thinking.... How many casual Star Wars fans buy Slave 1 toys? How many die-hard star wars fans buy Slave 1 toys? How many clueless parents and grandparents buy Slave 1 toys as gifts? From a numbers perspective, the casual fans and clueless fans probably dwarf the size of the die-hard fans. By changing the name, you are increasing the appeal of the ship to those fans. Yes, you are also decreasing the appeal of the ship to the die-hard fans. But ultimately, this name change will probably increase sales overall due to the numbers mechanic explained above.

It also eliminates any future negative PR that could result.....just imagine a Karen going viral ranting about the name of the LEGO set not being kid-friendly. Yes, this would probably generate more sales but Disney is only about positive PR...they don't like negative PR at all.

Edited July 1, 20214 yr by cmartin33
Confused Disney with Lego before edit

From my understanding, the ship’s name has only been spoken once on-screen, during one episode of The Clone Wars.

5 minutes ago, Alpinemaps said:

From my understanding, the ship’s name has only been spoken once on-screen, during one episode of The Clone Wars.

BS, I remember this scene.

 

I tried doing some quick searches (honestly, not super in-depth) trying to find who or what groups were complaining about Boba's ship being named Slave 1.  I can't find anything except SW fans being upset the name was changed.  This seems like an unforced error on the part of Lucasfilm / Disney.