James Bond Lego Sets

So, looks like we will soon be getting some James Bond Lego sets, specifically ones involving Aston Martins:

I’m pretty excited. I’m all for 007 merch that isn’t $400, so between this and the Funko Pops, I’m pretty happy.


I know a lot of people have said that LEGO will never make Bond related sets because of the womanizing, sex, and violence but I don’t think that argument holds up since LEGO has produced sets from films with sex and violence such as The Dark Knight Rises, the DCEU, some of the Marvel movies, the Mission: Impossible Dimensions fun pack, etc. They’ve put out product from films that aren’t entirely family friendly. LEGO knows they have an adult audience so I don’t see any problem with them making sets from more mature themes. We’ll never see R-Rated material (no Game of Thrones LEGO sets) but Bond still falls under PG-13 like Marvel, DC, and Jurassic Park so I think it’s fair game.

Having said that I think they’ll be cautious and test the waters with a safe first sets which is just an Aston Martin DB5 with built in gadgets. They’ll probably say away from character based stuff until they see how this sets goes over.

Since it’s probably going to be vehicles based it will either be a Technic set like this one for the Bugatti:


Or a Creator set like the VW Bug and Mini Cooper.

Personally I’m hoping for the Creator theme myself as I’ve never been into their Technic sets. Who knows. Maybe it’s a LEGO James Bond video game.


I think Bond can be easily adapted to the LEGO universe. LEGO Batman (in both the videgames and film) proves a dark/adult character can still retain his personality while being presented in a fun, playful way. I’m sure the Moore era would be the template - gadgets and humour. The womanising aspect doesn’t have to be anything intense. So this is a positive first step. Let’s hope something substantial grows from here.

1 Like

As long as it’s not the Aston Martin that could fly , from James bond junior!

Hmmm. I’m sure it’ll be a one-off. If not, personally, I hope they stick to the series vehicles…

I’m a huge fan (and avid collector, filthy habit) of the Star Wars lego sets, but something just doesn’t sit right with me about full blown Bond movie sets…

A Live and Let Die set with Bond squaring off against Baron Samedi in Haiti would be neat, though. You could have the little casket and snake pieces, etc.

I think each movie could have a set to go with it. Example AVTAK could have the final GGB be the set. Casino Royale could have the gambling table. Goldfinger could have the laser scene. The possibilities are endless.

The official 007 facebook page just posted another tease with the Lego Copyright on the side of the image. A vehicle is looking increasingly likely.


As @Gobi-1 already mentioned, they only just unveiled the Bugatti as their new top range Technics model. Would they so soon push another top model from Aston? Hard to imagine Lego‘s Bond set doesn’t feature one or several AM‘s, but probably not in that huge, detailed, functional league.

Given Aston Martin were tagged into the twitter convo by Lego, I imagine DB5 will definitely be the first thing we see.

Here’s the link to the tease:

Given the Goldfinger quotes, I’m gonna say, yes we’re getting the DB-5.


The set will be revealed at the LEGO Store at Leicester Square on Wednesday July 18, at 10:07am.

From LEGO’s official social media accounts.

I’m going to take a guess and say that the set will contain 1,964 pieces and will retails for $199.99.


Yeah. I hope they don’t go the ‘luxury’ route. I’d be more interested in mainstream items that aren’t so expensive. The brand would get a much bigger foothold that way.

1 Like

It’s a tricky rope for them to tread, sharpshooter. On one hand, cheaper items would get the brand more recognition; on the other hand, it may ‘cheapen’ the brand and bring down the perception that james bond stands for luxury. That being said, they’ve slapped Bond on monopoly, pop vinyls and aftershave in recent years… I think they’re loosening their careful curation of Bond merchandise a bit.

All of which were marketed as high end collectibles. Given this is in partnership was Aston Martin, not exactly what you’d call the car company for the Everyman, expect the Lego to be the same thing.

None of those were high end collectables, and nor were they marketed as such. Monopoly was just like any other edition with bond slapped on it; nothing about it was marketed as a ‘premium’ version of monopoly. Pop vinyls are cheap mass-market products that anyone can afford easily; they’re the definition of pop culture merch for the everyman. The aftershave that i’m referring to was also a cheap-ish variety of scent.

Examples of luxury bond products would be the bond figures that go for ~300 dollars, barbour jacket, crocket and jones shoes, omega watch, aston etc…

I’d strongly argue that Lego fall into the category of Bond product for the everyman. Even the more expensive ‘creator’ sets like the modulars aren’t marketed as luxury items, and it’s likely not going to be any more expensive than the ‘standard’ millenium falcon sets that I imagine most kids are able to obtain from their parents.

I agree that most of the more recent 007 merchandise was aimed at a certain ‘affordable’ sector of the market as a whole, swatches, bathing trunks, collectible cars and so on. But I’m not entirely sure the more expensive stuff you mention isn’t chiefly much the same, only with a 0 or 00 more on the price tag. Often the jackets and shoes have certain quality issues, showing out-of-the-box wear or other flaws. In effect they are collector items not so much to be worn but owned and shown in a cabinet.

And the difference between an 007-themed Swatch and an 007-themed Omega is more in the eye of the beholder. Since today everybody has a little black-mirror item showing the time both would be likewise superfluous.

In the end I suspect all of these things tend to end up in glass vitrines and on cupboards - only some were a bit more expensive than others. If this Lego-thingy is an actual toy kids can have fun with it’s probably more useful than most of the other stuff.

What I mean is, up to a point most of these items are more or less a luxury, varying only in price tags, not so much in the individual worth they have for the people possessing them.

But all those are marketed as collectibles, they clearly have zero intention of revisiting (I say revisiting as that’s what they went for in the 60’s) the disposable produduct market. They are aiming at aftershaves, razors, and items known for being kept in boxes on a shelf.

Also, Is Bond really a brand needing a foothold? When you are the go to series for example of a whole genre, and the first thing said for when you want to recast a lead actor, I think it’s a safe assumption people know who you are.

Could be that’s no longer the point, getting to be known. At least not with the big brands, Marvel, Star Wars, Bond. Merchandising itself is a veritable percentage of the business, a sideline that turned into a mainline business plan and returns in its own right. Therefore it’s not a question of keeping the brand afloat and in the media; rather of balancing the number of items and choosing those with the best profit margins.

The comics are a good example, they’re not likely to ever corner the market, far from. But with the fans they seem popular enough, so much so that they branch out into spin-offs - in a shrinking market and against heavy competition. For Bond that’s quite extraordinary.

From what little we know this Lego set will likely also be of that particular nature, a collectible for die-hard fans with plenty of potential for successors.

That’s a point, Bond is in a rare situation with the books rights and the adaptation rights being held by different groups, yet having Merchandise that has a symbiotic relationship with each other so one can always be seen as promotion for the other, unlike the two you stated where all the merch is now under under the mouse eared shaped banner. I gather that this sort of relationship at Marvel with Fox was causing friction a few years ago, Marvel not wanting to be promoting what they saw as rival films.

If it’s over $100, it’s not much of a “toy.” And if it does cost that much, it’s still a Lego set, so it won’t be anything close to “screen accurate.” So either it’s a toy kids won’t be able to afford or a “high-end collectible” that looks like a toy, which you’d think would turn off adult collectors.

Then again, what do I know? My kids have a friend who, at age 11, saved up and bought a $400 “Death Star” Lego kit. Obviously there’s a lot of people out there – young and old – with more disposable income than I’ll ever have.