I love a bit of creepy LEGO, and this scene by Leonid An is probably as unsettling as they come. The Scala baby figure is a perfect foil for this grim tale of genetic experimentation. Lit from below in its artificial birthing pod, the infant’s eyes are covered, as it is slowly infused with whatever vile substance lingers in the second dome. The control panel has a retro-futuristic feel, with its rainbow displays and offset cartridges; an ominous bin of discarded limbs at its side. It’s just another example of the LEGO brick’s untapped uncanny potential.
So confused… this is Lego? I clicked on the part in BrickLink and then clicked on the sets that contain it… and they’re Lego? Does anyone know the history of this? I feel weird.
Basically, at one time several years ago LEGO said , “Hey, Barbies are pretty popular with girls, and we’d like to expand our range of sets to be more appealing to girls, what if we create a sort of hybrid?” That’s what themes such as Scala and Belville did, with larger barbie-like figures and giant molded pieces similar to what we see with Juniors sets today. I guess they weren’t popular since they stopped making them for quite a while until they had the idea to make the dolls minifigure sized, giving us minidolls in the Friends, elves, and Disney themes.
They did quite well in Europe for several years, as far as I’ve heard.
Scala (the worst offender) lasted 1997 to 2001, but Belville lasted between 1994 and 2008, so it would likely have been popular for quite some time, outside Lego’s traditional fan base.
Thanks for the explanation. That looks like a pretty shameful part of Lego history. Looking at the sets it seems like very little of it is brick built. It’s a shame because I guess technically it’s “pure” to use any of those elements in a Lego build but they are really out of place.