First of all, here is a rather low-quality recording of the new trailer for the movie. It's the only one I could find so if someone finds a better one feel free to post it.
The movie, overall, looks good from what I could see (again, it's a nice taste, but it doesn't really tell you much about what the story is actually about). From the seminar they had featuring one of the producers and Dan Abnett, it seems like they know what they're doing as far as keeping to the storyline. This was a point that they emphesized frequently (almost obnoxiously). Currently there is no news on who the villain is, as they refuse to give away the surprise.
However, several things were confirmed:
- It will be solely available for purchase directly from the Ultramarines movie website (though there is a possibility of a retail release).
- There will be some form of special box set release (with lots of bonus features and goodies).
- Definite BluRay release some time after normal DVD (possibly with extra never-before-seen scenes).
- Possible digital release.
- Soundtrack for the film will likely be sold seperately.
- There will be no well-known characters in the film (so we won't see the likes of Marneus Calgar and his ilk).
Well, they don't seem to be skimping out on the blood and violence! That means a lot to some folks in this community. Animation looks pretty standard, but I'd love to get a better video soon so I can see the models and textures a bit better.
The bit where two Marines are talking looks like a dialogue scene from Mass Effect.
Kid_Kyoto wrote:They are the defenders of humanity and by far the most boring are the Ultramarines!
Sigh... why couldn't we get an Inquisitor movie? I have 0 interest in this.
Probably because the Inquisition is a pretty weird place to start testing the waters for films involving the 40k properties?
I mean, let's face it. The Inquisition is so ridiculously pants-on-head stupid, even when operating amongst themselves, that doing a good Inquisition movie would mean rewriting all the Inquisition fluff or making something so convoluted(yet generic and patronizing, since it's a kind of "introduction" film to the property) that it would suck.
Ultramarines, while boring, are a pretty sure bet in terms of an introduction point. They're bland, but they're also the basis for how the vast majority of Astartes Chapters behave.
although the movie looks pretty cool, I do hope that the movie gets an update to its graphics. the space marine videogame trailer had better graphics than this!
The guy who walked in front of the camera also made me angry
Kid_Kyoto wrote:They are the defenders of humanity and by far the most boring are the Ultramarines!
Sigh... why couldn't we get an INquisitor movie? I have 0 interest in this.
Actually, I asked Dan during the Q&A why he chose the Ultramarines out of all 40k universe. I am heavily paraphrasing, but he said something along these lines:
"If you're going to start 40k in the genre of film, you have to start with Space Marines. They're the icon of the universe and that's an obvious choice. The choice for Ultramarines just seemed like it would be the smartest choice. We would love to do a Space Wolves movie, for instance, I mean I think we can all agree that they would be incredibly cool. However, they're quite an odd place to start because you would have to explain not only that they're Space Marines, but why they're also vikings in space. Ultramarines are by far the most iconic of the Space Marines because, more than any chapter, they really exemplify what the Space Marines are to the Imperium. Righteous defenders of everything the Imperium stands for. I know that even though they may be one of the 'boring' chapters, and some of you might gag at the mention of their name, but I assure you we are showing them in a light you have never seen before. One that I'm sure you will all enjoy."
They also mentioned doing an Inquisitor movie sometime in the future, which would likely have heavy inspiration from Eisenhorn.
Kid_Kyoto wrote:They are the defenders of humanity and by far the most boring are the Ultramarines!
Sigh... why couldn't we get an INquisitor movie? I have 0 interest in this.
And alot of people would have zero interest - well I won't use as harsh terms as you - but much less interest in an Inquisitor movie. Honestly, I'll get behind any 40k movie, because if it is a profitable venture for GW they will produce more movies. So while Ultramarines might not be super exciting to everyone, it's a good place to start. If they sell lots of DVDs of Ultramarines, we'll probably see a few more Space Marine movies fighting a variety of xenos races then they would probably branch out to other factions. I just really find it odd that anyone who is a fan of 40k would not be interested in a 40k movie of any kind. I'm sure there are tons of people, like me, who have been hoping for something like this for many years and it's finally a reality.
Kurgash wrote:Should have been Templars. Nothing says 40k like a bunch of armored men flinging themselves into a melee, at least then we'd know the enemy is Orks.
I do not agree. If I was the one tasked with choosing which Chapter to use for this movie, I would have looked at the following four criteria:
Chapter Name: The Black Templars are better than the Ultramarines, but still not great. I would have gone for something like the Angels of Vengeance or Deathwatch, something which sounds like it would have been an acceptable name for Space Marines in general.
Colour Scheme/Insignia: The Black Templars have a great colour scheme, and the Maltese cross is better than the upside-down Omega of the Ultramarines.
Feel: They're not the Blood Angels or Space Wolves, which is the most important thing.
Doctrine: This is where I feel the Black Templars fall flat. If you're going to make a movie about a melee-heavy Space Marine force, it would be better to use one of the chapters that are kitted out with that in mind, like the Blood Angels (jump packs) or first company Grey Knights (terminator armour and NFWs). And including powered armour and scout armour in the same squads would appear less logical than having scouts that operate independantly.
It's not really about the colour schemes but rather recognition, association and marketing.
Everybody knows about Ultramarines, they are the meat and two veg of 40K; they appeared first and have always been foremost in the books and SM chapters.
Then there is marketing. Trying to convince a parent of a kid, who are, arguably, the biggest customer of GW products, to watch a film about Deathwatch or Angels of Vengeance would be a traumatic argument.
Imagine if Buzz Lightyear was Soul Drinker or Angel of Chaos? The franchise would not do so well.
The whole idea is that the Ultramarines are a force of good above all. If you were to adopt a less orthodox chapter for a better colour the fans would be in disarray if that chapter were then diluted to appear good for the purposes of the film.
- It will be solely available for purchase directly from the Ultramarines movie website (though there is a possibility of a retail release).
It would be rather stupid if they didn't sell if from the GW stores as well, or at least for a while after the release. They would lose a lot of impulse buys.
I'd buy it from the store, but if I have to get it from a website I am not so sure.
Elmodiddly wrote:It's not really about the colour schemes but rather recognition, association and marketing.
Everybody knows about Ultramarines, they are the meat and two veg of 40K; they appeared first and have always been foremost in the books and SM chapters.
Then there is marketing. Trying to convince a parent of a kid, who are, arguably, the biggest customer of GW products, to watch a film about Deathwatch or Angels of Vengeance would be a traumatic argument.
Imagine if Buzz Lightyear was Soul Drinker or Angel of Chaos? The franchise would not do so well.
The whole idea is that the Ultramarines are a force of good above all. If you were to adopt a less orthodox chapter for a better colour the fans would be in disarray if that chapter were then diluted to appear good for the purposes of the film.
It was the crimson fists that appeared first then it was the blood angels in 2nd ed and the first codex was Space Wolves.
Elmodiddly wrote:Everybody knows about Ultramarines, they are the meat and two veg of 40K; they appeared first and have always been foremost in the books and SM chapters.
As SonOfRuss has already pointed out, this is not true.
Then there is marketing. Trying to convince a parent of a kid, who are, arguably, the biggest customer of GW products, to watch a film about Deathwatch or Angels of Vengeance would be a traumatic argument.
If the phrase "Angels of Vengeance" is enough to scare a parent off, wouldn't they have just as much of a problem with, you know, the actual movie!? Even that short clip shown at Games Day had a Space Marine being shot in the face and going down in a shower of blood.
Imagine if Buzz Lightyear was Soul Drinker or Angel of Chaos? The franchise would not do so well.
I hope you can recognise the difference between Toy Story, a kid's movie about kid's toys for kids, and Ultramarines, a movie about supersoldiers that set aliens on fire for a living.
The whole idea is that the Ultramarines are a force of good above all. If you were to adopt a less orthodox chapter for a better colour the fans would be in disarray if that chapter were then diluted to appear good for the purposes of the film.
Which is not a problem for either of the Chapters I suggested. We're not talking about the Flesh Tearers, here.
Claimh_Solais wrote:Anyone have the video in better quality yet ??!
we shode be happy the MAKE a 40K movie at all
I'm sure they said the same thing about the D&D movie as well.
And the D&D movie had a script that was written by someone unfamiliar with the source material, directed by someone who really didn't give a crap about their production, and starring D list actors.
Not the same situation here. Dan Abnett has pretty much single-handedly made 40k the way it is now.
Reprisal wrote:Looks cool so far. Is there any mention of which chapters besides Space Wolves that GW is also considering?
They're not considering Space Wolves (as far as we know)...I never said that. Dan Abnett just used Space Wolves as an example to express the reasons they chose Ultramarines.
Darth Bob wrote:- There will be some form of special box set release (with lots of bonus features and goodies).
The smart thing would be a Ltd. Ed. boxed set that contains each of the characters from the movie done as 40K Miniatures. This is what GWshould have done when Dark Crusade was released (a box with each of the 7 race's commanders decked out in their Wargear, all done in metal), and it is what they should do here.
Darth Bob wrote:- There will be some form of special box set release (with lots of bonus features and goodies).
The smart thing would be a Ltd. Ed. boxed set that contains each of the characters from the movie done as 40K Mi Iniatures. This is what GWshould have done when Dark Crusade was released (a box with each of the 7 race's commanders decked out in their Wargear, all done in metal), and it is what they should do here.
....That actually sounds quite epic. I would totally buy a box set like that if they'd come out with it. I mean, the did do a Gaunt's Ghosts model pack....why not do one for this new movie? Or for the new video games (Space Marine, Dark Millenium). If they published special rules or something, I'm sure people would happily buy them up.
I just can't wait till they do an Imperial Guard movie....hopefully we see SOME Guardsmen in this movie, even if they are just getting horribly slaughtered. Cause hey, what else are the IG for?
H.B.M.C. wrote:
The smart thing would be a Ltd. Ed. boxed set that contains each of the characters from the movie done as 40K Miniatures. This is what GWshould have done when Dark Crusade was released (a box with each of the 7 race's commanders decked out in their Wargear, all done in metal), and it is what they should do here.
Someone asked about the possibility of seeing the movie's characters in model form and they basically said "We have no involvement in that and it's up to GW. As of right now, we don't know."
Probably not going to see it. Looks like it'll fall into that uncanny valley of direct-to-DVD releases between really good, like the SG:1 finales, and the hilariously bad, like Megashark Vs. Giant Octopus.
Well, unless the animation quality stays the same. Then it has a chance of earning a place next to my copy of Megashark.
Im going off of the dead and impailed Imperial fists that the enemy will be Iron Warriors.
Just my speculation, but since there is already a corrolation of Ultras vs IW it makes sense to me.
Besides that fortress looks chaosy. I would have like to say Dark Eldar but there didnt seem to be enough DE architechture on the building they blew up.
Besides the Apothacary who was warding the Ultra CDR about glory makes me think that he was telling the CDR to be eary of their ancient foe, which now that I write it makes me think its an Alpha Legion ambush..? Hmmmm.
First, they show you shadows and smoke spending valuable seconds of the trailer in showing nothing. Then just a few quick shots of the same repeated marine. And it doesn´t look very impressive, just like the ones from the videogame.
The shots, the scope was really small, no wide shots, doesn´t feel epic. The only shots I like are the ship and the planet ones. The rest looks like a cheap TV series.
I really want something like the intros from the videogames, but this was... dissapointing.
Task and Purpose wrote:Im going off of the dead and impailed Imperial fists that the enemy will be Iron Warriors.
Just my speculation, but since there is already a corrolation of Ultras vs IW it makes sense to me.
Besides that fortress looks chaosy. I would have like to say Dark Eldar but there didnt seem to be enough DE architechture on the building they blew up.
Besides the Apothacary who was warding the Ultra CDR about glory makes me think that he was telling the CDR to be eary of their ancient foe, which now that I write it makes me think its an Alpha Legion ambush..? Hmmmm.
It makes perfect sense from a production stand point that the enemy would be Choas Space Marines. With the enemy being Chaos Space Marines the studio can just re-skin the Space Maine CGI model and not have to put the time and money into designing a completely different model and skins to go with it.
Task and Purpose wrote:Im going off of the dead and impailed Imperial fists that the enemy will be Iron Warriors.
Just my speculation, but since there is already a corrolation of Ultras vs IW it makes sense to me.
Besides that fortress looks chaosy. I would have like to say Dark Eldar but there didnt seem to be enough DE architechture on the building they blew up.
Besides the Apothacary who was warding the Ultra CDR about glory makes me think that he was telling the CDR to be eary of their ancient foe, which now that I write it makes me think its an Alpha Legion ambush..? Hmmmm.
It makes perfect sense from a production stand point that the enemy would be Choas Space Marines. With the enemy being Chaos Space Marines the studio can just re-skin the Space Maine CGI model and not have to put the time and money into designing a completely different model and skins to go with it.
That is soooo cheap, and lame and sounds like taking the project to the level of a Barbie DVD.
-"Why not making the movie a 90 minute close up of Terence Stamp reading the script?"
-"Can we afore that?"
BobbaFett wrote:The rest looks like a cheap TV series.
You're right, they should have broken the bank on a niche, not-even-direct-to-dvd movie so that it couldn't possibly turn a profit and we never get any more.
BobbaFett wrote:The rest looks like a cheap TV series.
You're right, they should have broken the bank on a niche, not-even-direct-to-dvd movie so that it couldn't possibly turn a profit and we never get any more.
Doubt they'll make much of a profit anyway, tbh. Niche audience, and with animation quality that's roughly on par with Andromeda they won't be getting much more than die-hard fans anyhow.
Really, it would have been better to go with Inquisition. Seeing what Damnatus was able to pull off with its meager budget, a decent quality grimdark Inquisition flick would be relatively easy to accomplish without blowing the bank on crappy CGI, and gives a much better introduction to the universe than Spess Mahreenz killing each other.
I dont care how the animation looks or if it doesnt come upto the standard of other CG movies.Its Ultramarines, its 40k and its gonna be wicked no matter what anyone says.
Task and Purpose wrote:Im going off of the dead and impailed Imperial fists that the enemy will be Iron Warriors.
Just my speculation, but since there is already a corrolation of Ultras vs IW it makes sense to me.
Besides that fortress looks chaosy. I would have like to say Dark Eldar but there didnt seem to be enough DE architechture on the building they blew up.
Besides the Apothacary who was warding the Ultra CDR about glory makes me think that he was telling the CDR to be eary of their ancient foe, which now that I write it makes me think its an Alpha Legion ambush..? Hmmmm.
While that would be awesome, clearly, I doubt that's going to happen!
The Legion's got a convoluted history.
Make it someone clearly evil AND with a history with the Ultras - make it Word Bearers!
They really should leave the Iron Warriors to the Imperial Fists, shouldn't they!
Well, I was thinking it would be more along the lines of Dawn of War 2, not this rather epic gothic stuff that reminds me of the older music stuff from those SSI games. Anyway, win.
I was excited by this originally but that looks dire, as already mentioned the DOW trailers are far superior. Granddad marine, acrobatic gym routine finish marine, dead imperial fists, one shot through the side of the chest death marine. I'm not a graphic artist and It's not like I was expecting pixar quality but it looks pretty low quality as well.
Still competes against the A-list movies. Well, sorta. GW's not planning on selling it to rental places like Family Video or Red Box, so I suppose only existing fans are going to know of its existence in the first place. Still, if it's competing against another Doctor Who series or the Sherlock Holmes movie with the T Rex and giant squid for my twenty bucks, it better be hilariously bad before I consider buying it.
I guess Marines are NOT potentially immortal, unless they mean in the "oops, you forgot to ask for eternal youth to go along with immortality" Greek curse sense...
dodgex1 wrote:I was excited by this originally but that looks dire, as already mentioned the DOW trailers are far superior. Granddad marine, acrobatic gym routine finish marine, dead imperial fists, one shot through the side of the chest death marine. I'm not a graphic artist and It's not like I was expecting pixar quality but it looks pretty low quality as well.
I agree completely. Even if you didn't care about the Warhammer 40,000 setting, the Dawn of War II trailer was entertaining. It's got verbal sparring instead of exposition, an amusing arms race where the Space Marines and Eldar keep countering each others' counterattacks instead of a bunch of Space Marines standing and shooting at an unseen foe, and a sense that the two factions really hate one another since their attacks were so vicious instead of just gory.
dodgex1 wrote:I was excited by this originally but that looks dire, as already mentioned the DOW trailers are far superior. Granddad marine, acrobatic gym routine finish marine, dead imperial fists, one shot through the side of the chest death marine. I'm not a graphic artist and It's not like I was expecting pixar quality but it looks pretty low quality as well.
I agree completely. Even if you didn't care about the Warhammer 40,000 setting, the Dawn of War II trailer was entertaining. It's got verbal sparring instead of exposition, an amusing arms race where the Space Marines and Eldar keep countering each others' counterattacks instead of a bunch of Space Marines standing and shooting at an unseen foe, and a sense that the two factions really hate one another since their attacks were so vicious instead of just gory.
This trailer just isn't a very good trailer.
Plus, when that Dreadnought grabbed that Banshee, and then turned on the heavy flamer... epic!
First, they show you shadows and smoke spending valuable seconds of the trailer in showing nothing. Then just a few quick shots of the same repeated marine. And it doesn´t look very impressive, just like the ones from the videogame.
The shots, the scope was really small, no wide shots, doesn´t feel epic. The only shots I like are the ship and the planet ones. The rest looks like a cheap TV series.
I really want something like the intros from the videogames, but this was... dissapointing.
I'd have to agree ......meh . Really underwelmed by that preview .
Still a chance that it could be pulled out.. but, the general decision making that went into the direction of the trailers/teasers so far is not giving me great hope, even if the design/technical aspects were spot on, the fact that the general consensus of their target audience (us) is 'meh' is not promising....
The trailer itself was crap... it's a minute of a geezer talking and then an incredibly old looking guy who's face barely moves when he talks. At least there was some blood. I'm not too impressed with the animations so far, but the modelling and textures are pretty decent. Still, I can almost guarantee everyone here will see it one way or another. I'm buying it right when it's released so that way even if I hear bad things it's already too late. Maybe the money will be able to go to making a better quality sequel
The first trailer for ULTRAMARINES: A Warhammer 40,000 Movie is released!
From http://ultramarinesthemovie.com/news This is the first trailor. See? ^
It's meant to be part of a series. As in, it is meant to make you want more, to want to see the next trailers/previews and then the movie.
The enemies aren't shown to leave you guessing, so you'll (again) watch the next trailers and finally the movie.
Oh, and
IMPERIAL FISTS TO FEATURE IN ULTRAMARINES MOVIE
We can now reveal that a second Space Marines chapter, the Imperial Fists, appear in the ULTRAMARINES movie, alongside their battle brothers, the Ultramarines.
From the same place.
...people don't read or research things before posting anymore.
Though hell, I probably don't do it enough.
Regardless, I'm excited for this movie if only for the fact that it's 40k, which has become like crack to me.
Lord_Inquisitor wrote:As in, it is meant to make you want more, to want to see the next trailers/previews and then the movie.
The enemies aren't shown to leave you guessing, so you'll (again) watch the next trailers and finally the movie.
So instead of learning from the trailers for movies like Iron Man, Avatar and Sucker Punch, GW decided the best way to drum up interest was to do the exact opposite, and not provide anything that would actually suggest what's coming is worth seeing?
At least their approach to marketing is consistent.
I think it's better doing this when working with a niche market. The people you're aiming the product at already know bunches about it, so they don't have to tell you everything.
And, again, it's the first trailer. Perhaps I'm wrong, and they'll immediately show the main "bad guys" of the movie in the next trailer. I'm trying to think of the trailers as one big uber-trailer once they all come out, but bleh. I'm tired and I think I confused myself.
Lord_Inquisitor wrote:I think it's better doing this when working with a niche market. The people you're aiming the product at already know bunches about it, so they don't have to tell you everything.
It's true that marketing it to a niche market of existing 40k fans would let you get away with leaving some things out. But if that's the case they left the wrong bits out and kept the wrong bits in.
40k fans don't need an opening narration about the nature of the 41st Millenium. We already know this stuff. What 40k fans need is to be convinced it's going to be a good40k movie. Hell, the trailer doesn't even mention that the screenplay was written by Dan Abnett, which should be a major selling point.
Hmm, true. I had actually forgotten about the whole intro >_>
Good point, actually.
Still, maybe that trailer was a silly "trial-run" to see what people want in the next one?
I tried to get psyched for this move but couldn't simply becasue it's yet another space marines project.
Never mind the fact that it looks pretty unpolished.
I'm glad to see that animation quality hasn't improved since 1995. It's good that they could get the guys that made the cutscenes for the last epic game to do an entire film.
Puke.
They should have hired the animation studio THQ uses for space marine cinematics. Or the guys they used for warhammer online.
It really wasn't that great having seen it in person. It's worth mentioning though that the entire budget for the film was probably on the same scale as the budget for the intro to DoWII.
But yea, overall I thought the marines looked too fat, the armor not very well textured, and let me just say I hope most of the talking is done with their helmets on. Sync seemed off. Let alone the much talked about age of the marines.
Nvs wrote:It really wasn't that great having seen it in person. It's worth mentioning though that the entire budget for the film was probably on the same scale as the budget for the intro to DoWII.
But yea, overall I thought the marines looked too fat, the armor not very well textured, and let me just say I hope most of the talking is done with their helmets on. Sync seemed off. Let alone the much talked about age of the marines.
With the budget for dawn of war two they should be able to produce much better visuals than that. Dawn of war IIs budget wasn't all that small.
ShumaGorath wrote:I'm glad to see that animation quality hasn't improved since 1995. It's good that they could get the guys that made the cutscenes for the last epic game to do an entire film.
Puke.
They should have hired the animation studio THQ uses for space marine cinematics. Or the guys they used for warhammer online.
Agree, I was really expecting something around the quality of DOW2s opening sequence, but I guess I expected too much. Oh well, maybe this is just a trial run, and the final product will be better quality.
But, it could still be worth watching even at that level of animation, the trailer just kind of sucked
With the budget for dawn of war two they should be able to produce much better visuals than that. Dawn of war IIs budget wasn't all that small.
DoW II was made by THQ, not Games Workshop. One of these is a electronic gaming company with an absolutely massive modelling and animation department with dozens of commercially successful games. The other is a comparatively small company with next to no modelling department and absolutely no animation experience, and a grand total of 3 successful games. Entirely different scale in the budgets here.
ShumaGorath wrote:I'm glad to see that animation quality hasn't improved since 1995. It's good that they could get the guys that made the cutscenes for the last epic game to do an entire film.
Puke.
They should have hired the animation studio THQ uses for space marine cinematics. Or the guys they used for warhammer online.
Agree, I was really expecting something around the quality of DOW2s opening sequence, but I guess I expected too much. Oh well, maybe this is just a trial run, and the final product will be better quality.
But, it could still be worth watching even at that level of animation, the trailer just kind of sucked
This DOES look like the dawn of war two opening sequence. The dawn of war two opening sequence isn't exactly stellar.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Laughing Man wrote:
With the budget for dawn of war two they should be able to produce much better visuals than that. Dawn of war IIs budget wasn't all that small.
DoW II was made by THQ, not Games Workshop. One of these is a electronic gaming company with an absolutely massive modelling and animation department with dozens of commercially successful games. The other is a comparatively small company with next to no modelling department and absolutely no animation experience, and a grand total of 3 successful games. Entirely different scale in the budgets here.
Not really. They are just in different fields. THQ does out of house work for cinematic animation and isn't in that different of a place then games workshop concerning that kind of work. As for the budget argument, if GW doesn't have the budget to put out a quality product, then why is it putting one out at all? Ignoring the fact that they likely could have found investor capitol for the project to up it's budget.
Laughing Man wrote:The other is a comparatively small company with next to no modelling department and absolutely no animation experience, and a grand total of 3 successful games.
It's not like Games Workshop just grabbed a bunch of redshirts and said "Congratulations! You're making a movie!" The people making the movie have made direct-to-DVD animated movies before.
And if your "3 successful games" are 40K, WHFB and LOTR, that's just completely wrong.
AlexHolker wrote:And if your "3 successful games" are 40K, WHFB and LOTR, that's just completely wrong.
GW makes another game system I don't know about?
But yes, you're right about them contracting out. Codex is apparently the wonderful people who brought us the Bionicle movies. I'm not entirely sure this is a good thing.
Oh, and figured out why all the marines look old: Apparently Codex is playing around with face capture software, which means that the Marine being played by Stamp gets to wear his lovely wrinked face too. Really, this might have been a better idea if their actors weren't all middle aged men...
AlexHolker wrote:And if your "3 successful games" are 40K, WHFB and LOTR, that's just completely wrong.
GW makes another game system I don't know about?
Well, consider, GW also makes: Epic 40k, Necromunda, Battlefleet Gothic, etc. etc. So yes, more than three games. More importantly, you have to note that there is a major difference between 40k and a video game. The closest thing to 40k in a video game sense would be a video game series like C&C, and not single games.
This movie looks fantastic. The only thing that could make this better would be to have the African American looking marines voiced by Marlan Wayans and Eddie Murphy.
General Hobbs wrote:
The only thing that could make this better would be to have the African American looking marines voiced by Marlan Wayans and Eddie Murphy.
Brother Murphy wrote:Brother, how much for a few frag grenades?
Brother Wayans wrote:Well Brother, for 20 credits you get the buffet with frag grenades, krag grenades and melta bombs!
Brother Murphy wrote:20 credit? Brother, I just need a few frag grenades.
Brother Wayans wrote:Looks around Here, take a few frag grenades
Absolutely pants...., and yet sooo typical of GW! The graphics are decades behind in quality, come on seriously, this looks like its fan made....I've been watching some of the trailers for the new Star Wars games, even the new Star Wars Force Unleashed II, and really, if GW arn't knocking out stuff of that quality then they shouldn't even bother....seriously! Unless they intend to give this "movie" away as a freebie on the cover of the next WD, then good luck.....
Delephont wrote:Absolutely pants...., and yet sooo typical of GW! The graphics are decades behind in quality, come on seriously, this looks like its fan made....I've been watching some of the trailers for the new Star Wars games, even the new Star Wars Force Unleashed II, and really, if GW arn't knocking out stuff of that quality then they shouldn't even bother....seriously! Unless they intend to give this "movie" away as a freebie on the cover of the next WD, then good luck.....
What a load of kak!
decades?
somehow I doubt you were even born in the 80's-90s, even less remember what animation was like in them.
Kanluwen wrote:Have you actually watched any recent animated movies?
I'll put this question down to stupidity, and end by saying...its your money and time, if you're so lost up GW's back passage as to think the quality of the "movie" is to latest CGI standards, then I wish you well and enjoy....but for your own sanity and to avoid the shock associated with the realisation that there is a whole other level of "quality" out there, please don't go looking anywhere else for a Sci Fi fix....oh, what am I saying.....of course you won't!
It's not a blockbuster theatrical wide release feature film so it'd be understandable that it's not quite Pixar level. It still looks good for what it is, a direct to DVD movie.
Iron Angel wrote:Your one angry person... i actually hope its going to be a good movie. Without being lost in passages somwhere .
Oh and please can you tell some great Sci Fi animated movies?
I'm not angry at all, its just the way you're reading my post.....
Plus, its takes more than great graphics to make a good movie! I can't comment on the content of Ultramarines, obviously, lets get that clear. I'm only talking about the graphic content! If we're discussing graphics alone, then here are some visually stunning Sci Fi movies, Final Fantasy, Avatar....
Iron Angel wrote:Your one angry person... i actually hope its going to be a good movie. Without being lost in passages somwhere .
Oh and please can you tell some great Sci Fi animated movies?
I'm not angry at all, its just the way you're reading my post.....
Plus, its takes more than great graphics to make a good movie! I can't comment on the content of Ultramarines, obviously, lets get that clear. I'm only talking about the graphic content! If we're discussing graphics alone, then here are some visually stunning Sci Fi movies, Final Fantasy, Avatar....
If you say so then i was wrong.
Indeed it does take more... thats why Avatar and Final Fantasy both are very bad movies (at least to me). When we are talking graphics alone you are indeed correct.
But dont forget that those movies most likely had a way larger budget and also made it to theatres across the globe, while Ultramarines is a DVD production.
So i do believe its kind of unfair to compare those against each other..
Clone Wars for example is also not state of the art if you ask me. It looks horrible AND has a bad story.. I really like Ultramarines more and hope the story is better.
Well ok i bet i like the story better...
Ultramarines according to this trailer looks like a starcraft brood war cutscene. That is not acceptable by any stretch of the imagination. When they noted that it was the bionicle team doing the movie I didn't think they would just make a bionicle 40 thousand film.
Don't anyone think for a second this is going to be a full avatar/final fantasy. GW just dosnt have the budget for a amazing movie, but it will still appeal to the current 40k market. If it gets of the ground though we could expect another movie down the line with a better budget.
Does it really have to do with budget? I mean, sure the money you can spend means more goodies to play with, but who here really knows the breakdown of a movie budget? For all we know most of the money could be going towards expensive catering......for example....
But ok, check out these two preview scenes, now I'm sure the budgets of these companies are comparible to GW.....
Delephont wrote:Does it really have to do with budget? I mean, sure the money you can spend means more goodies to play with, but who here really knows the breakdown of a movie budget? For all we know most of the money could be going towards expensive catering......for example....
no actually we dont know the breakdowns of the budget. But it has to be for equipment and people to some degree. Expensive catering actually is not that unimportant either ^^ pros like to work in a good working environment .
On the preview scene, im not sure that these cars are so much better. I think they look good, no doubt about that.
I have some questions: Is the Ultramarines trailer in HD? Is the Ultramarine movie nearly finished? Are the cars in the trailer actual ingame graphics or in some way enhanced?
no actually we dont know the breakdowns of the budget. But it has to be for equipment and people to some degree. Expensive catering actually is not that unimportant either ^^ pros like to work in a good working environment .
On the preview scene, im not sure that these cars are so much better. I think they look good, no doubt about that.
I have some questions: Is the Ultramarines trailer in HD? Is the Ultramarine movie nearly finished? Are the cars in the trailer actual ingame graphics or in some way enhanced?
Cheers
Sorry, I linked the wrong scenes! I was thinking, whats this man talking about cars for? Try these instead!!
By the laws of internet discussions i have to disagree ... but well you are right these are way better.
Actually thanks for these links ^^ i didnt know of these. Which has to change obviously.
no actually we dont know the breakdowns of the budget. But it has to be for equipment and people to some degree. Expensive catering actually is not that unimportant either ^^ pros like to work in a good working environment .
On the preview scene, im not sure that these cars are so much better. I think they look good, no doubt about that.
I have some questions: Is the Ultramarines trailer in HD? Is the Ultramarine movie nearly finished? Are the cars in the trailer actual ingame graphics or in some way enhanced?
Cheers
Sorry, I linked the wrong scenes! I was thinking, whats this man talking about cars for? Try these instead!!
The thing is, cinematics like these (and the ones at the beginning of the Dawn of War games) are very, very expensive. There are studios (like Blur) who specialize in making 2 minute long cinematics for games like this. The kind of money you'd need to get them to make an entire film would be exorbitant. People think good animation just happens out of thin air without having any idea how it gets made.
I dont get why people are complaining so much about the quality of the graphics etc.
Sure, the trailer wasnt top-notch, and looks a little dated, but come on; do we actually want to see a piece of high art, or do we want to see giant space men shoot giant spikey space men with their space guns?
Also as mentioned, in game cinematics cost a huge amount of money, just look at the quality of say Square Enix cinematics (not sure if they do them in house or not) compared to just about every animated film out there.
del'Vhar wrote:
Sure, the trailer wasnt top-notch, and looks a little dated, but come on; do we actually want to see a piece of high art, or do we want to see giant space men shoot giant spikey space men with their space guns?
I would really like both ^^ but giant space men with space guns are ok for the moment .
del'Vhar wrote:Sure, the trailer wasnt top-notch, and looks a little dated, but come on; do we actually want to see a piece of high art, or do we want to see giant space men shoot giant spikey space men with their space guns?
That's the problem. The trailer does not show Space Marines shooting Chaos Space Marines. It shows Space Marines firing at an unseen target, then some Space Marines getting shot.
I'm not asking them to make Citizen Kane, all I want is for them to not make stupid mistakes. Making a trailer that throws away opportunities to make the movie appear entertaining is a stupid mistake.
Delephont wrote:Does it really have to do with budget? I mean, sure the money you can spend means more goodies to play with, but who here really knows the breakdown of a movie budget? For all we know most of the money could be going towards expensive catering......for example....
But ok, check out these two preview scenes, now I'm sure the budgets of these companies are comparible to GW.....
Game cinematic are what, a few minutes long? Of course they can afford to make good looking cinematic on a comparable budget, they only have to make it last for 1/20th the length at most.
Jericho wrote:Don't anyone think for a second this is going to be a full avatar/final fantasy. GW just dosnt have the budget for a amazing movie, but it will still appeal to the current 40k market. If it gets of the ground though we could expect another movie down the line with a better budget.
The trailer looked below the quality I would expect from the money a company like GW could put on the table. This looks like either a rush job or a poor studio, and given the nature of the bionicle films I would assume the latter.
Delephont wrote:Does it really have to do with budget? I mean, sure the money you can spend means more goodies to play with, but who here really knows the breakdown of a movie budget? For all we know most of the money could be going towards expensive catering......for example....
But ok, check out these two preview scenes, now I'm sure the budgets of these companies are comparible to GW.....
You know all this talk of budget, blah blah blah.....if I own an I.P and lets say its important to me for artistic reasons, and financial reasons, why would I want to do something that will damage it in some way?
My point is this, if you're gonna do it, do it right! Why a half assed effort that achieves little if nothing for the setting?
All you fan bois out there are making excuses for it, but the bottom line is, people are going to compare this "movie" with other Sci Fi movies, whether they be two minute long game trailers or big hit cinema affairs like Final Fantasy.....just a putting a WH40K movie out there for the sake of it is stupid, if they can't compete with the industry standard, then they should stick to doing what they can do.....heaven help us, there are enough calls for improvements on the things they say they are "specialist" at.......
Mr Mystery wrote:Whereas oddly, I tend to wait to see a film before writing it off. Yes, even Uwe Boll's 'efforts'.
But hey, clearly kneejerk reactions spouting bile are all the rage. Knock yourselves out guys!
Yup, this goes with everything on forums... Whining that nothing is previewed half done and then going off half cocked when it is. It isn't going to FF or Avatar, the budget will be much smaller and that means less server time for the graphics. What they do have is some top notch actors, and the potential to have a good storyline. In my personal opinion it looks ok, and will probably quite good. Remember this is GW testing the water, and if it makes money then there may be more budget for the next one and the films should get incrementaly better. How much did Monsters vs Aliens cost, and compare that with GWs turnover... see something relatively similar?
Ermm, sorry, isn't that the idea of a "preview"? to drum up interest in your product?
People look at the preview and make a judgement! How many times have you gone to a Cinema, seen a film preview, like Bridgette Jones for example, and thought meh, no way!.....whats the difference here? GW have put their best foot forward, and IMHO, stumbled....nuff said.
You compare GW making a film to the budgetary might of Bioware and Lucasarts? Really?
A teaser is just that; a teaser, to get people's juices going, to get people taling about it. It in no way is indicative of the finished film. Predators did it, as did 9, iirc UP did it too, with litle snippets that were not even in the film!
The stuff that you see in the cinemas which actually advertise the film as "Coming Soon" with clips from various sections of the film are trailers, teasers are completely different.
Delephont wrote:Ermm, sorry, isn't that the idea of a "preview"? to drum up interest in your product?
People look at the preview and make a judgement! How many times have you gone to a Cinema, seen a film preview, like Bridgette Jones for example, and thought meh, no way!.....whats the difference here? GW have put their best foot forward, and IMHO, stumbled....nuff said.
Difference between Ultramarines and Bridget Jones? I have an interest in Ultramarines, and none whatsoever in Bridget Jones. The trailers for both show what sort of film are (genre if you will).
But to say the film will be a crap representation of said genre, just from the trailer, is a little too judgemental.
I hate it when people argue the teaser/trailer thing as an excuse for most people not being excited or impressed. They put something out there, the goal of doing so, teaser OR trailer, is to create hype. If they failed, they failed, call it whatever you want, it doesn't change that!
Dont like the sound effects at all.
Bolters are shock and awe weapons, not pea shooters that sound lame and I never imagined power armour to sound like an empty suit of tin clanking about.
As for Abnett writing the story, THAT got me crap-all nervous. The guy is known to mangle marines like there is no tomorrow, anyone reading Eisenhorn or the Ghosts series will know what I mean. Marines are bumbling fools with the IQ of apes that die by the scores to common guardsmen and are even massacred by medieval blowpipe toting primitives when Abnett has his way.
Something tells me the poor ultramarines will be a chapter short after this movie is done.
Pyriel- wrote:Dont like the sound effects at all.
Bolters are shock and awe weapons, not pea shooters that sound lame and I never imagined power armour to sound like an empty suit of tin clanking about.
As for Abnett writing the story, THAT got me crap-all nervous. The guy is known to mangle marines like there is no tomorrow, anyone reading Eisenhorn or the Ghosts series will know what I mean. Marines are bumbling fools with the IQ of apes that die by the scores to common guardsmen and are even massacred by medieval blowpipe toting primitives when Abnett has his way.
Something tells me the poor Ultramarines will be a chapter short after this movie is done.
Um what?
Something tells me you haven't read Eisenhorn or the Ghosts series as well as you think you have.
1) In the Eisenhorn series, all of 2 Loyalist Marines are killed(that I remember at least). The first one that comes close is a Deathwatch Marine, who gets ambushed by an Emperor's Children Marine. The second and third ones are from the Aurora Chapter during "The Triumphal" when the whole thing to release the Psykers happens. Those are Alpha+ Psykers, mind you. The kinds of Psykers who can rip tank regiments apart.
2) The first instance of Marines appearing in a Ghosts novel is in "First and Only". It's two Iron Warrior Marines, facing the entirety of the Tanith First and a regiment of Vitrian Dragoons. The Iron Warriors were brought down by a combination of sniper fire, rockets, plasma guns, and a hellgun at close range on maximum power that hit one of the shell holes from Gaunt's bolt pistol. That's "luck".
The second instance of Marines appearing in a Ghosts novel is in "Ghostmaker", and it's four Khorne Berzerkers ambushing a Basilisk convoy, and being counter ambushed at close range and cooked by flamers, plasma guns, rockets, and short range massed lasgun/storm bolter fire. Bear in mind that the Berzerkers were focused on ripping the Basilisks apart, and ignore the Ghosts during this. Berzerkers aren't well-known for moving away from their "RAWR SMASH!" for tactics, y'know.
The third instance is a single former Chaos Marine, Asphodel the Inheritor in "Necropolis". He dies to a blessed, master-crafted powersword. Again: "luck", and he still managed to scythe his way through several Ghosts and nearly killed Gaunt too.
The latest instance is kind of murky. It's implied that the Hunt Team in "Traitor General" are Traitor Astartes, but it's also entirely likely they're not. Power armor can be used by normal humans remember; and the rest of their descriptors don't seem Marine-ish but more like just genetically enhanced humans. They almost all die entirely to Gaunt's powersword, barring one who gets an entire friggin' satchel full of demo charges draped around his neck, another who gets his head blown of by three point-blank hotshot sniper rounds, and the final one who gets his head riddled with volleys of iron darts the size of a human being's arm being propelled at supersonic speeds by what amounts to a primitive railgun.
Enhanced regeneration or not, when you don't have a skull you're not getting back up.
So, tell me again what the problem is? Because I'm not seeing "scores" dying to common Guardsmen.
Mr Mystery wrote:Difference between Ultramarines and Bridget Jones? I have an interest in Ultramarines, and none whatsoever in Bridget Jones. The trailers for both show what sort of film are (genre if you will).
Your understanding of what a teaser or trailer is for is wrong. The purpose is not merely to inform the audence of what genre of movie it is. Any idiot could do that with a piece of paper that says "Ultramarines: The Movie. Genre: Military Sci-Fi." What a teaser or trailer is supposed to do is convince you that it is going to be a good movie, that you'd want to spend money to see. You want to see the movie, but is this because of this trailer, or despite it?
But to say the film will be a crap representation of said genre, just from the trailer, is a little too judgemental.
As Delephont said, this was their attempt, on their terms, to convince us the movie was worth seeing. If they can't even get that right, why should we give them the benefit of the doubt?
Pyriel- wrote:Dont like the sound effects at all.
Bolters are shock and awe weapons, not pea shooters that sound lame and I never imagined power armour to sound like an empty suit of tin clanking about.
As for Abnett writing the story, THAT got me crap-all nervous. The guy is known to mangle marines like there is no tomorrow, anyone reading Eisenhorn or the Ghosts series will know what I mean. Marines are bumbling fools with the IQ of apes that die by the scores to common guardsmen and are even massacred by medieval blowpipe toting primitives when Abnett has his way.
Something tells me the poor Ultramarines will be a chapter short after this movie is done.
Um what?
Something tells me you haven't read Eisenhorn or the Ghosts series as well as you think you have......
Bravo Kanluwen, my first reaction was also What!? Much better than my version which might have ended more painfully for me.
The latest instance is kind of murky. It's implied that the Hunt Team in "Traitor General" are Traitor Astartes, but it's also entirely likely they're not. Power armor can be used by normal humans remember; and the rest of their descriptors don't seem Marine-ish but more like just genetically enhanced humans. They almost all die entirely to Gaunt's powersword, barring one who gets an entire friggin' satchel full of demo charges draped around his neck, another who gets his head blown of by three point-blank hotshot sniper rounds, and the final one who gets his head riddled with volleys of iron darts the size of a human being's arm being propelled at supersonic speeds by what amounts to a primitive railgun.
Nope, those were 5 traitor marines (implied by the reactions of the other traitor forces to them) walking into the woods to hunt for some primitives who were hiding and were armed with electric bow slings (no where did it say supersonic speeds and even if it did so what, common bullets travel often at supersonic speeds so?).
All 5 died almost instantly after bumbling into the camp like common day idiots and besides "normal" people dont wear marine power armour.
No squad tactics, no planning, no thinking, just lets split up and rush headlong into whatever traps there might be since primitives who had never even seen a lasgun surely cannot bring down us space marines (wow how wrong they were).
Besides how do you allow your neck to be draped by a satchel charge by a normal human if you are a marine? Bumbling, slow reaction fools I´d say. If it was a bar fight between drunks I could have bought that.
In reality I couldnt imagine even getting close to a 2.5 meter, 1 tone monster moving three times as fast as I and cleaving scores of enemies with each lightning fast swipe of his 2m long chainsword and ripping of flesh with his armoured fingers (Gav Thorpe) but hey, somewhat someone just climbed up 3 meters using a nice ladder or so and draped a satchel charge around his neck while taking his time to set the timer, how nice of the marine to allow that to happen.
Your post reeked as much of desperate Abnett-marine defense as did my of downgrading Abnetts marines, hehe
At least the guy redeemed himself in the Iron Snake novel (finally a proper description of space marines) but then again the ending was a tad strange, a space marine shouldnt pee his pants at the sight of an ork nob and he also made 1-to-6 melee odds for marines vs common ork boys look like extremely demanding, something I highly doubt from all the SM vs ork canon fluff I have read.
You know one single company offing 50 000 orks (Kyme) almost without breaking sweat and here we have 1000 Iron Snakes (Abnett) pissing their collective pants over an ork assault.
But as said, its a nice start, hopefully the consistency will stay there but I still very much feat for the poor ultramarines.
You can't really use the "reaction of the other traitor forces to them" as an example for "Oh, they were Traitor Marines", when in similar 40k novels Kasrkin and other Stormtrooper forces get the same kind of implied awe by the Guard forces.
Also?
Nowhere did it say they were wearing Astartes Power Armor.
Plus the "draped satchel charge around his neck" was done by someone who dropped out of a tree two-ish stories above the member of the Hunt Team, who was in the midst of pulverizing one of the Nihtgane tree-platforms. That same person who did the satchel charge damned near killed herself doing it.
I really don't like to knock anything especially before it comes out but i'm really not loving what i've seen so far, I was hoping that it was going to be better than the DoW2 intro but it appears not only is it not going to be as good it's going to look like 80's beast wars! and I'm a huge 80's fan but I like my graphics a bit closer to the wh40k that GW have been re building for the last few years with the descriptions of how things are and the still shots on the Ultramarine movie site it could still be awesome but i'm a bit more nervous now and not quite as wxited in the pants as I was previously.
I'm still very excited about this movie, I love 40k fluff and finally I'll get to see a full length movie about it. I hope it does well enough that they'll do more in the future.
You can't really use the "reaction of the other traitor forces to them" as an example for "Oh, they were Traitor Marines", when in similar 40k novels Kasrkin and other Stormtrooper forces get the same kind of implied awe by the Guard forces.
And you cant simply assume they were simple beefed up human hunters.
You know the sword cuts both ways.
Nowhere did it say they were wearing Astartes Power Armor.
Nowhere did it say they werent.
Although my assumption is supported by their size, power armour, incredible strenght and weaponry not to mention the command status they had.
What is your hunter-in-tin-armour opinion based on?
Plus the "draped satchel charge around his neck" was done by someone who dropped out of a tree two-ish stories above the member of the Hunt Team, who was in the midst of pulverizing one of the Nihtgane tree-platforms. That same person who did the satchel charge damned near killed herself doing it.
And I find it incredible that a marine with all their auto senses (even should he be without helmet) failed to see a near naked barbarian sitting 4 meters up in the very same tree said marine was charging.
Truly, bumbling fools AND blind at that.
Anyway, it doesnt really matter as people have shown to display a very wide take on marine fluff. Personally I tend to follow the IA fluff but then there are people who take kindly to things like Counter spews out, marines getting beaten by medeval cavalry and a company of marines getting routed by a company of arbites.
I kind of hope we wont see that level of ridicule in the upcoming movie.
agreed! grandad marine looks real naff but hey smurfs die! winner! and also seconding that the final movie is hopefully of a better quality or else it will just ruin the huge efforts and build up this has been getting.
But to say the film will be a crap representation of said genre, just from the trailer, is a little too judgemental.
C'mon, I never said the film would be a crap representation of said genre, I said the graphics suck! Big difference.....the first DUNE movie with sting was a crap representation of the genre / Dune setting, AND it had crap graphics, but thats a different point.
It could well be that the story is amazing....I doubt it, cause if GW can't get the fluff "right" in novel form, they have no hope of doing it in movie format, but that remains to be seen. You know, if the story line is great, it will outweigh the crapiness of the visuals.....I guess we'll have to wait and see.
From page 32 of Traitor General. It is obvious that Uexkull is a chaos marine and has four others at his command. This is the squad sent into the Until that the Tanith and Nihtgane kill.
The etogaur had been gone for five minutes when Uexkull arrived. Attended by a coterie of four Chaos Marines, Uexkull clanked down the long hall in his burnished power armour, vapour wisping from the smoke-stacks rising from his back. He towered over Desolane, but still made an effort to bow.
..."A Patrol annihilated."
..."Astartes?"
"No, I don't think so." Desolane said. The huge warrior looked disappointed. "But mission specialists..."
If you've already made up your mind that it sucks, don't go buy it. There's no reason to just sit though it if you've decided ahead of time it's bad. But if you are able to keep an open mind between now and then, buy it and watch it. I'm going to. I like the subject matter, and I've seen much worse than the trailer showed, so I'm gonna buy it, as long as it's not a $50 DVD. Only thing I'm worried about, now that it occurred to me, is that GW will decide to charge game prices instead of DVD prices for their DVD.
burad wrote:But if you are able to keep an open mind between now and then, buy it and watch it.
++An open mind is like a fortress with its gates unbarred and unguarded++
Games Workshop has seen fit to provide evidence of their level of skill. Ignoring that evidence is foolish. Now, future trailers might remedy this failure, or reviewers might reveal that the creators are simply far worse at making trailers than they are at making movies, but unless this conflicting evidence comes to light I will not be buying a bad movie just because it has Space Marines in it.
What makes you think I am? I'm saying these days I don't pay to see a movie unless I have a reason to think they're worth the price.
Iron Man had a great trailer. Avatar was directed and produced by the man responsible for many of my favourite movies. Primer had great word of mouth support. Unless Ultramarines can do something similar, I'm not going to buy it.
On a different tangent, I'm really not sure why GW decided to go with a craptastic studio like the one they did, best known for a kid's movie. Surely they've got enough name recognition to try to net themselves an actual studio with an actual budget, instead of whoring themselves to the basement dwellers who browse the B-movie racks?
Elmodiddly wrote:You compare GW making a film to the budgetary might of Bioware and Lucasarts? Really?
Why not, it's quite typical for producers to get funding from other sources. GWs turnover is irrelevant as the movie should be being financed by third parties who've been sold on the idea of the film and think it worth investing in.
cadbren wrote:Why not, it's quite typical for producers to get funding from other sources. GWs turnover is irrelevant as the movie should be being financed by third parties who've been sold on the idea of the film and think it worth investing in.
You think GW could have retained the rabid level of IP control that they are use to in that situation? Once someone starts giving you money, they're going to want a say.
I hate the looks of the movie. eh.
Space marines are suppose to retain their youth. In all the books i have read. They look young. And the helmets= fail
I'm sorry but thumbs down. If Dispatch films has 1 single CGI guy make a badass thing! Then these guys should be able to be able to make it look like a flipping badass movie! But no they make it look like a two yearold split paint on the bar and called it art.
I'm sorry but this is truly a disappointment! Now if you excuse me my older brother is telling me that he wants to make a live action flim for 40k
Like I said, if you've already made up your mind, don't buy it. I've seen LOTS worse, in live action movies as well. I've seen rocket ships on strings with sparks coming out the back (i'm pretty old). Doesn't mean it isn't a good story. If graphics are that important to you, I'm afraid real life is going to be somewhat disappointing as you get older.
Considering the never-ending parade of gak that comes out of Hollywood anymore, I'm just excited to have a film to watch that has a bit to do with something that I care about.
Wow...such HATE for something that hasn't even COME OUT YET.
What about the cost of the ACTORS? Do you think that MAYBE, just MAYBE, that was a HUGE portion of the budget?
I, for one, am glad that they got GOOD talent to voice the movie. I've seen AMAZING animation get RUINED by bad voice acting.
Yes, I am not too happy with the look of the film, but a good story and good acting can mitigate a LOT of bad animation.
You know what I think? I think people are ticked off because it is a GW product. Plain and simple.
Over and over again, on this site, people spit nothing but venom at GW.
I hate this, or I hate that.
"It's Space Marines! I hate Space Marines!!! HURRR!!!"
"Why can't it be about Squats!?!"
"If I were in charge, I would..."
You know what? If you all hate GW products, management choices, or the "IP protection" tactics that GW employs...then STOP PLAYING THE GAME.
Dang, you all make me want to leave this site for other places where people actually LIKE our hobby.
Just once, I would like to see a topic on this site where people actually felt good about a GW product. Where posters were actually EXCITED about something that GW was going to put out.
Instead, I have to read through 16 "I hate GW" posts, before I can get to the ONE post that actually has something beneficial to say.
CaptainLoken wrote:Wow...such HATE for something that hasn't even COME OUT YET.
What about the cost of the ACTORS? Do you think that MAYBE, just MAYBE, that was a HUGE portion of the budget?
I, for one, am glad that they got GOOD talent to voice the movie. I've seen AMAZING animation get RUINED by bad voice acting.
Yes, I am not too happy with the look of the film, but a good story and good acting can mitigate a LOT of bad animation.
You know what I think? I think people are ticked off because it is a GW product. Plain and simple.
Over and over again, on this site, people spit nothing but venom at GW.
I hate this, or I hate that.
"It's Space Marines! I hate Space Marines!!! HURRR!!!"
"Why can't it be about Squats!?!"
"If I were in charge, I would..."
You know what? If you all hate GW products, management choices, or the "IP protection" tactics that GW employs...then STOP PLAYING THE GAME.
Dang, you all make me want to leave this site for other places where people actually LIKE our hobby.
Just once, I would like to see a topic on this site where people actually felt good about a GW product. Where posters were actually EXCITED about something that GW was going to put out.
Instead, I have to read through 16 "I hate GW" posts, before I can get to the ONE post that actually has something beneficial to say.
So, what you're saying is.....you want to go to a place where people say nothing but good things about the company you support.....interesting.
I think you're guilty of placing the context of the "negative" posts in a black and white scenario, those who say good things love GW and those who say the trailer is crap hate GW.....what you need to consider, at least from my comments, is that I'm judging a piece of work that has been placed, purposefully, in my lap to be judged! thats what a trailer is for....do you understand that point? If the trailer was awesome, what would be the vested interests of anyone to state otherwise (yes, I know there are trolls out there...) but you'd recognise a troll, simply by the fact that they couldn't back up their statements!
I have backed up my statement by showing you alternative animated Sci Fi shorts and recommending other animated Sci Fi films for comparrison! Now, good a good film is a matter of opinion....and if you really like the quality of the trailer, then nobody can tell you that you are wrong, or a you're fan boi, etc etc....however, at the same time, what gives you the grounds to simply label everyone who is not impressed by the trailer as a GW hater?!?!? this forum is for debate, so simply debate your point, explain why you think its good.....pose a counter opinion....but for the love of god, don't go round stating that everyone is a GW hater, because they have nothing good to say about a product! thats childish and adds nothing to the conversation.
Where ever you go, people will have different opinoins to you, learn to live with this! and learn to debate. No one is asking you to change your mind, so simply respect the views of others....that way you will enjoy the forums.
Iv worked in the 3D industry but mainly as a character animator. I know enough about 3D to face palm when I watch that UM video.
Bad (facial) animation, bad modeling (most anyway), bad camera angles, bad design...
Im just going to stay positive and hope when it does come out many of the bugs (the whole thing) will have been fixed. I have faith in the Emperor though. GW won't let us down.
Loken, I assume there's some reason (or reasons) you want to watch a Warhammer 40,000 movie.
Is it to listen to a voiceover describing the 41st Millenium?
Is it to listen to some old guy in powered armour talk?
Is it to watch Space Marines standing there shooting at nothing in particular?
Is it to watch Space Marines get shot by nothing in particular and fall over dead?
No? Then perhaps you'll understand why a trailer that does not contain humour, intrigue or badassery fails to inspire confidence.
I'm sure I've said it in a previous post, over the years we as gamers have all said "wow how cool would it be for a 40k movie to be made." Now they've made one everyone is slating it!!!!!!!!!!!! I don't understand. I for one am really looking forward to this coming out and have already made space on my already groaning and full dvd shelves for this, the first official 40k movie of all time!!!!!!!!!! so there :p
A certain amount of fanboy venom is always expected by the industries that cater to them.
Take film for example. It's a joke to them.
The Internet is a communication tool used the world over where people can come together to bitch about movies and share pornography with one another. -Holden, Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back
darthmatty wrote:I'm sure I've said it in a previous post, over the years we as gamers have all said "wow how cool would it be for a 40k movie to be made." Now they've made one everyone is slating it!!!!!!!!!!!! I don't understand. I for one am really looking forward to this coming out and have already made space on my already groaning and full dvd shelves for this, the first official 40k movie of all time!!!!!!!!!! so there :p
Indeed. I'm surprised that all those fans of Avatar complained when Shyamalan released Last Airbender. They should be grateful that a movie got made at all, the ingrates! They should all just shut up and buy the movie!
Simonbarsinistr wrote:This thread has become moviepoopchute.com
It's all it ever was.
Laughing Man wrote:
darthmatty wrote:I'm sure I've said it in a previous post, over the years we as gamers have all said "wow how cool would it be for a 40k movie to be made." Now they've made one everyone is slating it!!!!!!!!!!!! I don't understand. I for one am really looking forward to this coming out and have already made space on my already groaning and full dvd shelves for this, the first official 40k movie of all time!!!!!!!!!! so there :p
Indeed. I'm surprised that all those fans of Avatar complained when Shyamalan released Last Airbender. They should be grateful that a movie got made at all, the ingrates! They should all just shut up and buy the movie!
I think the point is that maybe the nerdrage could wait until we've seen the movie. The cast in this film is amazing, so maybe it will be a more character driven story. I know that won't sit well with a lot of the the "BAWWW I LIKE EXPLODY MOVIE" crowd though.
Monster Rain wrote:I think the point is that maybe the nerdrage could wait until we've seen the movie. The cast in this film is amazing, so maybe it will be a more character driven story. I know that won't sit well with a lot of the the "BAWWW I LIKE EXPLODY MOVIE" crowd though.
Then perhaps the trailer ought to have emphasized that, rather than a thousand shots of Ultramarines dying to glancing hits to the chest.
Monster Rain wrote:I think the point is that maybe the nerdrage could wait until we've seen the movie. The cast in this film is amazing, so maybe it will be a more character driven story. I know that won't sit well with a lot of the the "BAWWW I LIKE EXPLODY MOVIE" crowd though.
Then perhaps the trailer ought to have emphasized that, rather than a thousand shots of Ultramarines dying to glancing hits to the chest.
The heroes dying in droves is grimdark, n'cest pas?
Also, John Hurt doing the voice over in the trailer is enough to get me to watch the movie.
I want to say that I speak from personal experience of having at least tried to do the only previous attempt at an official GW movie: BloodQuest. There's a very low quality copy of our early teaser somewhere on youtube.
Back in the late 90's I worked on a series called Roughnecks: The Starship Troopers Chronicles. One of the big problems with it was that it was going on air at a time that meant it had to be suitable for SEVEN year olds. I'm not joking! So while it had its moments, it was eviscerated before it even began.
Roughnecks was done for approximately $300K per half hour episode (actually 22 minutes allowing for credits and ads), with perhaps 10% "money shots" and the rest "good enough". I figured we could do a one-hour TV movie for a million dollars as a proof of concept and go on from there.
In light of the experience that lead to, I think there are a whole range of things that need to be considered.
First and foremost is that GW have turned down endless offers of high-budget big studio productions because they didn't want to sell out.
When I approached them back in 1999, they send me what was known in-house as the "F--- off and die" letter. This was basically a list of all the things they would never allow, e.g. happy meals, lunchboxes, space marines with girlfriends, etc, etc, etc.
They made it very clear that they would rather have a hardcore "R" rated film that made no money than compromise the fluff and make a boatload of cash. This wasn't entirely altruistic - their reasoning was that toning it down for the sake of a "PG" certificate would dilute the very essence of "there is only war".
We dealt with their objections one by one and eventually agreed in early 2000, on an option to do BloodQuest.
I remember threads just like this on Dakka at the time. I remember spending hours here winning over the "Doubting Thomases". There was one guy who phoned the Chairman of GW in England to tear him a new one, then phoned back to say that actually we were okay people and maybe it would be a decent movie after all.
The long and short of it is that the events of 9/11 put us back significantly and then Final Fantasy came along and pretty much killed us completely. My business partner and I almost bankrupted ourselves, and I destroyed my health.
It still galls me that we couldn't pull it off. I had tears in my eyes when I saw the first Dawn of War intro, because it was very much the kind of look we hoped to achieve - although even now I still think my 10-year old Dreadnought was better than theirs!
Incidentally, an old render of my LandRaider is in my "welcome to dakka" thread.
On a final note, my opinion of GW improved 1,000,000% as a result of my dealings with them. They're good people.
As to this one? I'd say give it a chance. I don't know their timetable or how representative what we've seen so far is of the end product. I am, however, 100% sure that none of the Space Marines will have girlfriends or pet bunny rabbits, and that you won't see any Ultramarines: The Movie happy meals or lunchboxes...
CaptainLoken wrote:Wow...such HATE for something that hasn't even COME OUT YET.
Calm down son. I'm basing all my opinions simply on the trailer. I make no assumptions of the quality of the final product. I think that, from the trailer, the movie looks lame. The voices seem detached from the people speaking, an the animation looks jerky and unprofessional. It may change when the final release comes out, but given that all we have to judge so far is the trailer, how can I say I like it when I don't?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
BloodQuest wrote:Back in the late 90's I worked on a series called Roughnecks: The Starship Troopers Chronicles. One of the big problems with it was that it was going on air at a time that meant it had to be suitable for SEVEN year olds. I'm not joking! So while it had its moments, it was eviscerated before it even began.
That show ruled!!! I was so sad that you guys didn't get to do the final episodes.
And some of the shots from Bloodquest, not that there were many, looked fine. I remember the movement of the Marines was a little awkward (but no one had made Marines animate before, and they were early shots), but the space shots looked fantastic.
H.B.M.C. wrote:That show ruled!!! I was so sad that you guys didn't get to do the final episodes.
Thanks! I have truly come to hate Sony over the years. I never saw the last few episodes - I think it ended with a clip show, didn't it?
H.B.M.C. wrote:And some of the shots from Bloodquest ... looked fine. I remember the movement of the Marines was a little awkward (but no one had made Marines animate before, and they were early shots), but the space shots looked fantastic.
Yes, we did the motion-capture and it looked great, but the file got corrupted before the final render got done so we basically had to rotoscope the preview to recreate the animation in time for some deadline or other.
I really would love to revisit it at some point. Maybe tart up some of the old models and do some texturing on them.
Sorry to hear that your creation never came off, even more sad to hear that it affected your health.
Obviously, my comments before were and are based on the trailer.....but I feel I need to question your statements about GW's attitude when it comes to the whole PG rating etc. I don't doubt the truth of your statements, it just seems, well, unlike GW, especially when you consider they're games and books.
The WH40k game is so obviously aimed at children, it hurts, so on what grounds do / could they justify that their films should be aimed at adults?!? In terms of the "F**k off and die" letter, well, I wish they would issue a similar "do's and dont's" to their novel writers, wouldn't that be awesome, books that actually followed a set of WH40K rules, and not the fevered drivel the writer wakes up with that day and scrawls on paper!
Delephont wrote:In terms of the "F**k off and die" letter, well, I wish they would issue a similar "do's and dont's" to their novel writers, wouldn't that be awesome, books that actually followed a set of WH40K rules, and not the fevered drivel the writer wakes up with that day and scrawls on paper!
Actually that did happen. After C.S. Goto's line of books, Black Library got itself a good set of rules to stop anything like his books ever happening again.
Delephont wrote:In terms of the "F**k off and die" letter, well, I wish they would issue a similar "do's and dont's" to their novel writers, wouldn't that be awesome, books that actually followed a set of WH40K rules, and not the fevered drivel the writer wakes up with that day and scrawls on paper!
Actually that did happen. After C.S. Goto's line of books, Black Library got itself a good set of rules to stop anything like his books ever happening again.
Seriously? How did you find out about that?....I mean, this is big news! Are they ( Black Library ) discounting C.S. Gotos work as non cannon? whats the deal......tell tell tell.....
I don't have the specific details because I've not read into them all that much. You're better off asking in the Black Library thread. There are numerous mentions of the 'draconian' rules that BL writers now apparently have to follow.
BloodQuest wrote:I want to say that I speak from personal experience.....
Simon Coombs
Thanks a lot for posting Simon.
Being a (LW)3D guy myself I followed Bloodquest production news pretty closely and was pretty disappointed when you ceased production.
Pleased to hear you're up on your feet again, the news sounded pretty dire when BQ shut down.
I think it's pretty hard for anyone outside film to realise how hard it is to get any project on its feet and how much work is involved.
It's also unbelievably easy for projects to fall over as well.
H.B.M.C. wrote:That show ruled!!! I was so sad that you guys didn't get to do the final episodes.
Thanks! I have truly come to hate Sony over the years. I never saw the last few episodes - I think it ended with a clip show, didn't it?
Simon
It did end with a kind of montage episode, celebrating the life+death of Razack. But that one episode never actually aired, and you can only get it on the DVD set.
Evilgnome wrote:Being a (LW)3D guy myself I followed Bloodquest production news pretty closely and was pretty disappointed when you ceased production.
Pleased to hear you're up on your feet again, the news sounded pretty dire when BQ shut down.
I think it's pretty hard for anyone outside film to realise how hard it is to get any project on its feet and how much work is involved.
It's also unbelievably easy for projects to fall over as well.
If you're a lightwave user, you might want to check out my website - lots of thrilling stuff about screamernet and a number of plugins to download - link on my profile page.
It really is a nightmare getting these things done, and pretty depressing when you see some of the gak that actually makes it!
True stories:
At one pitch meeting, we'd explained that if Leonatos failed then thousands of planets and untold billions of lives would be at stake, blah, blah, blah. The exec says "But what's his motivation?" He really felt that we needed some back story about Leonatos coming from a broken home or some such BS.
After 9/11 we were told no-one wanted "war stories", but did we have anything for a gay/lesbian audience.
Later still a senior exec at Sony vetoed a deal because he had previously approached GW and been knocked back. His attitude was "if I didn't get to make a 40K movie, why should you?"
BloodQuest wrote:At one pitch meeting, we'd explained that if Leonatos failed then thousands of planets and untold billions of lives would be at stake, blah, blah, blah. The exec says "But what's his motivation?" He really felt that we needed some back story about Leonatos coming from a broken home or some such BS.
It's as if they cannot grasp the concept that someone would decide fighting an enemy is the right thing to do, without personal circumstance clouding their judgement.
After 9/11 we were told no-one wanted "war stories", but did we have anything for a gay/lesbian audience.
We're men. We always want "war stories". As for gays and lesbians... they're men and women like everyone else. As long as you aren't shoehorning heterosexual romances into everything, they should like it just fine.
BloodQuest wrote:
If you're a lightwave user, you might want to check out my website - lots of thrilling stuff about screamernet and a number of plugins to download - link on my profile page.
It really is a nightmare getting these things done, and pretty depressing when you see some of the gak that actually makes it!
True stories:
At one pitch meeting, we'd explained that if Leonatos failed then thousands of planets and untold billions of lives would be at stake, blah, blah, blah. The exec says "But what's his motivation?" He really felt that we needed some back story about Leonatos coming from a broken home or some such BS.
After 9/11 we were told no-one wanted "war stories", but did we have anything for a gay/lesbian audience.
Later still a senior exec at Sony vetoed a deal because he had previously approached GW and been knocked back. His attitude was "if I didn't get to make a 40K movie, why should you?"
Sad, but true.
Simon
It's so tough to get things going, with so little trust. I guess people with $ think they know what sells, even when they don't.
The irony is when something truly edgy succeeds the same people who wouldn't back it because of their own lack of imagination then back copycat productions.
I checked the LW plugs, I'll have to take a closer look for next time I use LW in production.
PS: Marines would appeal to a Gay audience wouldn't they....... ducks for cover...
Evilgnome wrote:Being a (LW)3D guy myself I followed Bloodquest production news pretty closely and was pretty disappointed when you ceased production.
Pleased to hear you're up on your feet again, the news sounded pretty dire when BQ shut down.
I think it's pretty hard for anyone outside film to realise how hard it is to get any project on its feet and how much work is involved.
It's also unbelievably easy for projects to fall over as well.
If you're a lightwave user, you might want to check out my website - lots of thrilling stuff about screamernet and a number of plugins to download - link on my profile page.
It really is a nightmare getting these things done, and pretty depressing when you see some of the gak that actually makes it!
True stories:
At one pitch meeting, we'd explained that if Leonatos failed then thousands of planets and untold billions of lives would be at stake, blah, blah, blah. The exec says "But what's his motivation?" He really felt that we needed some back story about Leonatos coming from a broken home or some such BS.
After 9/11 we were told no-one wanted "war stories", but did we have anything for a gay/lesbian audience.
Later still a senior exec at Sony vetoed a deal because he had previously approached GW and been knocked back. His attitude was "if I didn't get to make a 40K movie, why should you?"
Sad, but true.
Simon
This is soo funny. It reminds me of the range of Orange Mobile Phone adds you see when you go to the Cinema....you know, the ones where famous actors approach Orange for funding on their next project, and the Orange Exec do everything they can to change it and make it all about Orange Mobile Phones....
Reading your experiences makes me think those "interviews" must be more based on real life then I previously thought
I mean, the motivation thing I can understand to a point.....yes, there are billions of lives at stake, but why does this individual care?...yes, we know, because he's been vetted by his Chapter and it is his Emporer given duty to care! Thousands of hours of indoctrination will have that effect on you I guess.....but would someone coming into WH40K via a movie grasp this point quickly enough to accept it?!?!
Gay and Lesbian though, really? I mean, why should someones sexual orientation have anything to do with anything.....to be honest, I belive that the Primarch of the Emporers Children was homosexual (from the books), but, it doesn't come up as a definate, and being a hetersexual male, I personally didn't need to go there directly (no disrespect to our homosexual members, its just not part of my group of interests)
from a 3d animators point of view, the animation is stale there is no movement when they talk, BUT they have avoided the zombie eyes that so many cgi films end up with
Looks pretty awful. When a game that came out 6 years ago has better CG and animation in its opening title then a movie today, there is something wrong.
Callousness wrote:Looks pretty awful. When a game that came out 6 years ago has better CG and animation in its opening title then a movie today, there is something wrong.
Delephont wrote:It reminds me of the range of Orange Mobile Phone ads
I remember seeing one with a Lord of the Rings actor last time I was in England, but wasn't aware there were more. Are they on youtube or anything?
Also, I didn't mean to make it sound like they wanted us to make a gay warhammer movie - more like dump 40k and make a completely different movie for a gay audience. I've just realised - dammit - I could've made Brokeback Mountain!
Anyway, to get back to the original subject, while I'm not exactly blown away by the current trailer I'm sufficiently aware of the process to assume (hope?) that there's more and better to come.
And would just say that while he may be a great asset to the film, I don't think John Hurt is the right pick for the trailer voiceover.
Please stop using this word so much in your posts. It makes you look really ignorant.
Um, no it doesn't. If he was using it as an pejorative, such as "that's gay" it would. Instead he's using it to describe people who are homosexual. Which is a perfectly acceptable use for it. PC has a limit people.
Please stop using this word so much in your posts. It makes you look really ignorant.
Why should the word gay be any more or less offensive than Homosexual? Did you know Ford Motor Company has a company approved social society specifically for its homosexual empolyees, and they officially use the word Gay and Lesbian in the title....
Back on topic though, someone told me not more than 2 hours ago, that its actually cheaper to make a mixed media film than a full on CGI film?!?!? Is this true? I can't believe it is....but they are from the industry (well, computer games industry anyway...)
Delephont wrote:someone told me not more than 2 hours ago, that its actually cheaper to make a mixed media film than a full on CGI film?!?!? Is this true?
Broadly speaking it is true, although film budgets and accounting have more lies than statistical reports and campaign promises put together.
Think back to not my favourite film (FF:TSW). The estimated budget was $137M in 2001. When you consider that the actors would only have been paid for a few days voice work, no location costs, etc, that's a huge saving that got spent somewhere else.
Please stop using this word so much in your posts. It makes you look really ignorant.
Um, no it doesn't. If he was using it as an pejorative, such as "that's gay" it would. Instead he's using it to describe people who are homosexual. Which is a perfectly acceptable use for it. PC has a limit people.
PCism has allowed ignorance to flourish. It was the homosexual men who promoted the word gay to mean homosexual male, before that the word meant happy, joyful. The word is widely used by homosexuals, probably because it's easier to say and write; typically in names of groups like 'Gay, Lesbian and Transgender...'
Personally I try to avoid pcisms where possible as if someone wants to take offence at you they will regardless of what words you use.
It's all propaganda, GW does well in this field too. Just look at the rabid responses you see on here and elsewhere when it comes to intellectual property in relation to that company and the paranoia espoused about something as simple as casting your own (non-GW) parts or using GW bits to texture a one-off terrain piece and people wonder how the nazis and the communists were able to turn people against each other, to spy on their neighbours, turn their parents in - it starts with telling people they're ignorant to use certain words because the "State" says so.
Back on topic .... again....Would a space marine getting hit have blood splash out like that? It looks a bit like someone dropping a stone in a bucket of blood rather than what I'd expect. It doesn't seem to take into consideration the armour or the carapace or the fused ribs, just where is all that blood coming from and if there is so much damage then there should be bits of bone, carapace, armour, organs in the mix too. I wonder too at what can shoot through two layers of ceramite armour because if it's that easy to shoot a marine then why are they wearing that extra armour in the first place?
It's like the stormtroopers in Star Wars, their armour appeared to be useless so why did they wear it?
cadbren wrote:Back on topic .... again....Would a space marine getting hit have blood splash out like that? It looks a bit like someone dropping a stone in a bucket of blood rather than what I'd expect. It doesn't seem to take into consideration the armour or the carapace or the fused ribs, just where is all that blood coming from and if there is so much damage then there should be bits of bone, carapace, armour, organs in the mix too. I wonder too at what can shoot through two layers of ceramite armour because if it's that easy to shoot a marine then why are they wearing that extra armour in the first place?
It's like the stormtroopers in Star Wars, their armour appeared to be useless so why did they wear it?
I think you're looking too far into this! Space Marines are tough when it suits the story line, they die in droves when it suits the story line.....its just the way things are! As for the Stormtroopers, well, we know they were originally intended as cnnon fodder....until people thought they looked cool...then George Lucas made them more "badass"....Republic Commandos anyone
cadbren wrote:Would a space marine getting hit have blood splash out like that?
Of course! They've got 2 hearts pumping away and there prolly alot of internal pressure due to all the implants that are crammed in there. I imagine that you'd make a hole and the blood will just shoot right out! That's why they need Laraman cells.
Hordini didn't write:
"Sergeant Cadmus knew in the depths of his pounding double heart that he would always stand behind his battle brothers. The cover provided by his battle brothers had proved crucial in previous battles. This struggle would be no different."
.
