LEGO Marvel Gargantos Showdown 76205 Monster Building Kit with Doctor Strange, Wong and America Chavez for Ages 8+ (264 Pieces)

Product Information

An illegal technique is not one that causes undue stress to the parts, but one that is _recognized_ to cause undue stress to the parts. There are tons of high-stress techniques that have never been considered for an official set, and therefore remain off the list. I created one myself, about two decades ago. It’s probably not on the list, because it’s so stressful that you almost need to use furniture to force the connections. On a more serious note, people like to make fun of the phrase or what it refers to, but this design flaw fully and precisely meets the definition. This is the kind of thing LEGO strives to avoid in their designs, and this specific issue was a miss on their part. But you start to understand why the designation is meant to be taken seriously, even with the use of the word "illegal". Especially with the use of that word. The word "illegal" has other meanings than just "the LEGO Police are coming to get you". Publishing this was absolutely the right thing, and you should not be more forgiving on this. These are standards Lego has set for themselves (and they are a good thing, since they try to prevent the pieces from braking/ making connections that are really hard to separate). As a consumer I absolutely love this stance and I expect my product to not have these kinds of flaws.

Panke ist the best known, true. He's very polemic, also true. But he's not the only one reviewing off-brands; others do that, too, and in a much friendlier manner. Because the grey pieces are splayed inwards slightly the stud of one of them does not align with the stud receptor on the bottom of the 1x6 plate. The fake awe from online reporters at Disney including queer characters for the billionth time never ceases to exist. Now it’s gonna extend to their licensed LEGO products, too?

169 comments on this article

Kids playing with it? There’s always the possibility that the parts weren’t fully seated during assembly, in which case the intersections may not have happened and no stress resulted. I’ve seen grown adults half-attach parts when they were in a rush or not paying attention. It’s for this reason that Master Model Builders use rubber mallets to seat the parts on glued models. Not only is it less abusive on your fingers, but the impact can help close up gaps several layers down. It seems likely to me that the tile either represents a specific movie prop separate from the character's costume (as you suggested in another comment), or was designed for another set we haven't seen yet and was included here as a sort of a bonus detail/"Easter egg"— sort of like the LEGO Dots rainbow prints that made an early appearance in the Trafalgar Square set. But the designers certainly have managed to include plenty of LGBTQ+ characters in past sets without any sort of obligation to call it out in the sets themselves. Interestingly, trying a digital build as well, Stud.io doesn't throw up a collision warning, even though the parts clearly overlap visually." An illegal technique is not one that causes undue stress to the parts, but one that is _recognized_ to cause undue stress to the parts. There are tons of high-stress techniques that have never been considered for an official set, and therefore remain off the list. I created one myself, about two decades ago. It’s probably not on the list, because it’s so stressful that you almost need to use furniture to force the connections."

Doctor Strange regularly encounters outlandish creatures, memorably including the threatening Shuma-Gorath! The appealing 76205 Gargantos Showdown instead provides another impressive monster, whose poseable tentacles appear very reminiscent of Shuma-Gorath. I'd agree, I don't actually have an issue with the AT-AT set. A construction method that requires a degree of skill to disassemble I feel is fine for a large complex set and the intended audience for it. Plus this isn’t complaining about a set being innaccurate to a movie, not including X character, or something that’s more up to preference. This highlights a possible problem with the building experience - which is the main draw to buy LEGO over other toys.Growth is one thing, but quality control is important, a LEGO set isn't a video game software you can just patch/update digitally. The eye is definitely the most attention-grabbing part of the model, with two mudguards forming an effective pair of eyelids. While the upper eyelid is connected by clips, the model is constructed in such a way that it remains static. Judging from the box image, I was hoping the eyelid would have some degree of movement to allow the monster different expressions. Alas, it was not to be. On the plus side, the open studs at the end of tentacles means minifigures and other pieces can be easily connected to the arms. This gives the set a surprising amount of play value, and I enjoy pitting him against the minifigures.

The aforementioned scaly design becomes especially apparent when viewing this model from behind, where various slopes and wedge plates are employed to splendid effect. The resulting shape looks great and avoids interfering with the articulated tentacles because those ball joints remain relatively exposed. I must admit I have been contemplating whether publishing this article was the right thing to do. I suspect someone in LEGO's Christmas has been runied as a result of the problem, either through worry or having to work out what to do. As a side note, in the comics Gargantos is a villain of Namor the Sub-Mariner that resembles a giant green octopus. While this model could definitely be mistaken for a deep-sea creature, some people think this set more closely resembles the Doctor Strange villain Shuma-Gorath. The set name might be a red herring to protect valuable plot secrets…or it could just be the result of Marvel shuffling old names around for trademark protection purposes. We’ll have to wait until the movie comes out to know for sure. You did the right thing, Huw. It's possible, and very important, to call out these quality issues in an objective but kind and human manner. Like others I think this article does a much better job of that. LEGO does want to know about these quality issues. Maybe they cancelled 40489 because they caught whatever issue it was just in time. (I've heard rumors to something entirely different but I'm not going to quote them here.) Just because these issues come up post-production doesn't mean LEGO has fallen off as a company or they stopped caring altogether. It just means even the most stringent of processes isn't 100% foolproof. Well, that's three Lego lesbians, from three different fictional universes. (Tracer, Batwoman, and now America Chavez.) Wonder when they'll get around to the other letters because they've got the L covered. Although I guess 40516 could count..."

Minifigures

On the digital front, the parts visibly intersect each other in Studio 2.0, but it does not flag the connection as an error (it usually does, but there are a number of situations where it doesn't). No idea if the parts exist in the consumer LDD so I haven't tested in it. I wonder if the issue in Studio 2.0 is present in the internal LDD as well.