Where the f— are my golden minidolls? My thoughts on the 10th anniversary of LEGO Friends

Am I the only one unimpressed with the celebration of the 10th anniversary of Friends?

While I may not the primary demographic for the theme I am an unapologetic Friends fan. I genuinely think it’s the best overall LEGO theme.

I was super excited for the anniversary and now that we have seen what’s happening I am just… underwhelmed. Particularly when you compare it to the Ninjago 10th anniversary in 2021.

The key 10th anniversary set is 41703 Friendship Tree House. It contains 1114 pieces and 4 minidolls, is labelled as an 8+ set and contains 2 of the 5 main Friends characters.

Let’s compare that to Ninjago. For the Ninjago 10th anniversary the big set was 71741 Ninjago City Gardens. It contains 5685 pieces and 19 minifigures. It is marked as a 14+ set and contains a version of all the main Ninjago characters.

Why is the Ninjago 10th anniversary set 5 times the size, with a version of every main character, and targeted at an older builder?

For the Ninjago anniversary we were also given golden minifigures spread across a lineup of legacy sets that paid homage to the history of the theme. It was a great way to celebrate the past and add something cool to collect for fans. Where the fuck are my golden minidolls?

LEGO has released a bunch of resources for the LEGO Friends anniversary including some great sketches and images of prototype designs. It’s a neat little look at the development of the theme and I appreciate getting to look at that. I have included all of that below.

That resource pack also included the official logo for the Friends 10th anniversary. This is it…

Why did they pick that character to celebrate the 10th anniversary of Friends? You have a theme with 5 main characters and you choose a character that was added in 2021 to be the one character on your anniversary logo? COME ON! It would be like putting Jacob Kowalski on a logo to celebrate Harry Potter’s 20th anniversary.

I don’t have a problem with the character. I don’t have a problem with Friends adding new characters. I don’t have a problem with Friends increasing gender balance in the sets by adding more male minidolls.

What I have a problem with is the lack of respect the theme seems to have been given in it’s 10th year. It’s almost like LEGO is so concerned about the future of the theme that they can’t take time out to celebrate what came before.



13 thoughts on “Where the f— are my golden minidolls? My thoughts on the 10th anniversary of LEGO Friends

  1. James Reply

    Just goes to show that slicing people in half is infinitely cooler than the play and the power of friendship.

  2. Steven Reply

    I don’t care about the mini dolls anyway. They usually just go straight in the Lego bin, never to be seen again. They should celebrate Friends Anniversary by introducing normal minifigures.

  3. Luke Reply

    Maybe friends just has a younger audience and they don’t think anybody would buy or be interested in a large set?
    Honestly, if it’s been around for 10 years I really think they should have more faith in the brand and be willing to produce something BIG. Maybe not Ninjago city big, but if they did something Modular adjacent that would be sure to bring interest!

      • Michael Post authorReply

        I was sent a review copy of that one but haven’t had a chance to build it yet. I like it and I think it could have been a better option for the 10th anniversary if they’d expanded it. For example have an apartment for each of the 5 main characters that had callbacks to past sets and showcased their personalities.

  4. Tanyara Reply

    BRING FORTH A FRIENDS MODULAR!! I feel so ripped off too, I love Friends, even though I still hate the mini figs it’s my favourite theme as well, I feel like this is such a “token” anniversary, not a “real” one like the Ninjago one was last year… damn shame!

  5. Agent 86 Reply

    I’m very surprised we didn’t get a Friends “Modular”. Main Street Building isn’t bad, but it could have been a Modular (or a lot closer to the Modular standard) which may have brought a lot more Lego lovers to the Friends theme.

  6. Lyn Reply

    I agree. I’ve enjoyed the Friends builds and it was a great idea to introduce them. However, I’ve never been impressed with the Friends mini figures. Too Barbie and Ken. Looking at the prototypes I’d have much preferred the first three.

  7. jeanette Reply

    On a different perspective and given the recent Lego research, the 10th anniversary would have been an opportune time to end the theme and the gender stereotypes that go with it. My love of Lego began in the 70’s and as a female lego fan and I personally find the Friends line offensive and a step backwards. I can’t see why sets like dog washes and cupcake stands could not be introduced into the normal city/town theme, without all of the gender bias of course, starting with a reset of the colour schemes.

    • Michael Post authorReply

      I see the “gender bias” issue differently. Why can’t boys enjoy sets that are pink and flowery? Who decided that something that is pink is for girls?

      Friends sets are full of fun and adventure. Fun and adventure aren’t gender specific.

  8. Bryce Reply

    My daughter finds the friends sets more appealing than other Lego ( Elves was the best and DC S.H.G. second) and significantly prefers the Minidolls over Minifigures as they are more humanoid in appearance. 10 years longevity would indicate that they work for the target group.

    • Michael Post authorReply

      My son is a huge fan of Friends. Sadly he missed the DC Super Hero Girls sets. He has watched the DC S.H.G show on Netflix and really enjoyed it.

  9. Bruce Reply

    Regarding LEGO Friends, my kids wouldn’t care. The LEGO Friends sets that they own are occasionally built then forgotten about. However, LEGO Elves are still played with every day.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.