Studies in lego miniature.

April 19, 2007 9:56 AM

Although there is something appealing about large models in the Lego world, such as a 3,000+ piece Star Destroyer, there is a bonsai-like appeal to mini- and micro- scene creations, such as Chris Deck's approach to modelling the same Star Destroyer in just seventeen pieces. Through clever and unorthodox thinking, a menacing 5 story tall AT-AT can be produced in in a mere 41 pieces.
posted by boo_radley (33 comments total)

Chris Deck's specialty of Star Wars minis isn't the entire scope of this intriguing hobby, though. mocpages.com has an entire directory dedicated to not just space ships, but an enormous array of intricate landscapes and buildings, including this light-up cityscape and alien abduction.

Of course, when your subject is one of the world's most largest and most recognizable buildings, you have a lot of leeway on how "micro" your micro representation is. There's also this amazing model of Minas Tirith which manages to be a micro-scale model despite dozens of studs across, made by Bruce at MicroBricks.
For intricate studies of more mundane objects, visit Moko's blog. Miniature beds, sinks and other items designed with a minimum of bricks and a brilliant eye.

[all of this started with a visit to Brothers-brick]
posted by boo_radley at 9:56 AM on April 19, 2007

Until now I never realized the AT-AT was so... kawaii.

I am disturbed by this realization.
posted by Foosnark at 10:02 AM on April 19, 2007

On preview: doh.
posted by Foosnark at 10:02 AM on April 19, 2007

I just know somebody is thinking MeTa to complain about the empty lines at the end of your post.
posted by spock at 10:12 AM on April 19, 2007

Death Star != Star Destroyer
posted by evilangela at 10:14 AM on April 19, 2007

That's the Death Star. Nerd War apon you.
posted by French Fry at 10:14 AM on April 19, 2007 [1 favorite]

Very charming and cute however. lego joy: the "man" legs on the AT-AT are... fantastic.
posted by French Fry at 10:16 AM on April 19, 2007

Death Star != Star Destroyer

Indeed. Your nerd license is hereby revoked. Turn in your pocket protector.
posted by Rangeboy at 10:18 AM on April 19, 2007

Thank god someone else geeked out first and called out the Death Star thing.

Great post though.
posted by dozo at 10:18 AM on April 19, 2007

Oh, jesus.
posted by boo_radley at 10:19 AM on April 19, 2007

Huh. If I want to really irritate his mother, I could always blow $200 to get my son the star-destroyer one, if I can find one on eBay.
posted by pax digita at 10:19 AM on April 19, 2007

See, I was going to use a star destroyer, but then I saw the death star, and that worked in better with the tiny model because it was cuter, and oh god I am not good with Star Wars how did I get here.
posted by boo_radley at 10:20 AM on April 19, 2007 [1 favorite]

Those are so small. S-M-all. (We forgive your faux-pas, boo. It was like a Star Wars spoonerism.)
posted by steef at 10:35 AM on April 19, 2007

This is totally totally cool. Thanks so much boo_radley.
posted by grouse at 10:38 AM on April 19, 2007

Yeah. I would have been fine if you had said it was a can of pork, as long as the links lead to tiny lego awesomeness.
posted by French Fry at 10:49 AM on April 19, 2007

Here's the LEGO Star Destroyer.
posted by Democritus at 10:50 AM on April 19, 2007

Could a LEGO Star Destroyer beat a LEGO Battlestar?
posted by Midnight Creeper at 10:51 AM on April 19, 2007

A friend of mine was big into the Lego Star Wars vehicles a few years ago. He had just gotten done building one of them (I think it was the X-wing). Just for fun, we decided to try to figure out how big a model Death Star would be in the same scale. It worked out to about one and a half kilometers in diameter. We wanted to try to figure out how many pieces that would be, but then we got distracted by something shiny.
posted by quin at 11:05 AM on April 19, 2007

This totally inspires me to go out and buy a bunch of Lego and build mini things and put them all over my cube.

Now, if only I had a cube...
posted by TheNewWazoo at 11:05 AM on April 19, 2007

"Now, if only I had a cube..."

...then you could have lots of little cubes in your cube.

HUMOR! AHR AHR!!
posted by zoogleplex at 11:09 AM on April 19, 2007

quin, you just reminded me of the time my brother and I were looking at a 1/48th scale model of a "Dauntless" SBD and thinking about building a replica of the Big E's flight deck and "island" (superstructure) -- we realized that even if we got the thing started, we wouldn't be able to use much of our basement for anything else.
posted by pax digita at 11:33 AM on April 19, 2007

I don't know any kid who ever put together the giant 1,000+ piece Lego sets; we were always putting together ramshackle spaceships and airplanes out of whatever pieces didn't get lost under the couch that week. As such, people like Chris Deck are more faithful followers of the Lego ethos than the people Lego itself hires to build those huge, accurately modelled sculptures out of 2x4 blocks. What kid had millions of 2x4 blocks in every colour imaginable at their disposal? We were lucky if we had enough wheels to put together the crazy 18-wheeler double-decker big-rig with lasers and missile launchers we could see in our minds' eye. One day... one day...
posted by chrominance at 12:48 PM on April 19, 2007 [2 favorites]

quin, you just reminded me of the time my brother and I were looking at a 1/48th scale model of a "Dauntless" SBD and thinking about building a replica of the Big E's flight deck and "island" (superstructure) -- we realized that even if we got the thing started, we wouldn't be able to use much of our basement for anything else.

I saw that basic setup (can't remember which carrier it was; I don't think it was the Enterprise) at an air museum in Wisconsin. And it was hella cool.
posted by COBRA! at 1:06 PM on April 19, 2007

3,000 pieces? Pfft.
posted by Rock Steady at 1:13 PM on April 19, 2007

This brings back memories of my waning days as a lego-maniac. Unsatisfied with the (upon reflection, rather substantial) collection of legos I had in creating vast dioramas, I decided to scale things down substantially. A small handful of pieces was a gigantic spaceship, with a crew so tiny they were invisible. A single piece could be a dome of a future city. It took a little to convince my brother to change scope so drastically, but when we did, the natural disasters and space battles were truly apocalyptic.

I wonder where I packed my legos ...
posted by chemoboy at 2:16 PM on April 19, 2007

"I don't know any kid who ever put together the giant 1,000+ piece Lego sets; we were always putting together ramshackle spaceships and airplanes out of whatever pieces didn't get lost under the couch that week."

Yep, that was me too. Legos were my primary toy, we didn't have all that much money, so I didn't get quite the pile of fancy new toys that many other kids got, so I would just build my own "playsets" out of Lego bricks. Mom could afford to buy another Lego set every year, so eventually I had quite a lot of them!

Last time I was in a toy store, I was kind of dismayed to find that there weren't any big sets of just... plain, assorted blocks. Everything on the shelf was those pre-made sets of specific items, lots of Star Wars sets for instance, with all sorts of custom shapes made just for those sets. Apparently you can't just buy a box of 500 or 1000 assorted pieces anymore, unless you order plain bricks from the Lego website. When I was a kid in the early 70's, there just wasn't quite such a variety of pieces - I remember when blue, yellow and black came out! Wow! After just red, white and transparent, that was mind-blowing! :)

I think it might dampen creativity to make all these pre-set kits - I think it was highly stimulating to us kids to be forced to try to build complex things from just plain ol' bricks.

I remember making a pretty serviceable Fokker Triplane (with motorized propeller!), but I was annoyed that I didn't have enough red bricks, heh! Plus tons of Star Trek stuff, cities, dirigibles, buildings with elevators... just out of a big box of random pieces.
posted by zoogleplex at 3:27 PM on April 19, 2007

Chris Deck's approach to modelling the same Star Destroyer

I agree that it doesn't matter what you call it, it's still cool. But I have to mention another point of order. Death Star or Star Destroyer, it's not the same one. The little 17-piece guy is the Death Star, destroyed in the Battle of Yavin; the 3000-piece kit is the Death Star II, destroyed four years later in the Battle of Endor.
posted by Soulfather at 4:19 PM on April 19, 2007

Nerd.
posted by boo_radley at 5:00 PM on April 19, 2007

We were so poor we used breadsticks and croutons found out back in the dumpsters behind the Olive Garden.
We used to dream of Legos.
I hate my mother.
posted by Dizzy at 7:40 PM on April 19, 2007

Soulfather: you mean this one?
posted by gergtreble at 9:23 PM on April 19, 2007

and oh god I am not good with Star Wars how did I get here.

It's a trap!
posted by dhartung at 9:30 PM on April 19, 2007 [2 favorites]

Last time I was in a toy store, I was kind of dismayed to find that there weren't any big sets of just... plain, assorted blocks.

The last Lego patent expired in 1988. If Lego had stuck to making normal blocks, they wouldn't have been able to compete with other manufacturers. By doing Star Wars, Sponge-Bob, etc, tie-ins and cross-licensings, they can differentiate themselves and make a buck.
posted by sebastienbailard at 10:46 PM on April 19, 2007

If Lego had stuck to making normal blocks, they wouldn't have been able to compete with other manufacturers.

I dunno. Even as a kid I knew that Tyco Blocks sucked.
posted by grouse at 1:41 AM on April 20, 2007