Delvarus Centurion wrote: If we were getting a blockbuster 40k film, what factions would you like to see in it?
I'd like to see World Eaters, Khorne daemons, Deathgaurd, Nurgle daemons against guard, sisters of battle, grey knights, Inquistion.
Space marines, Imperial guard, and Chaos. Maybe an opening scene with some xenos to show they exist, but add too much and you make what will already be a complicated setting a lot harder to process.
I'd want to see an Inquisition flick. Keep it tightly constrained, mystery/thriller plot. Imperium and Chaos, kind of a neo-noir style set on a hive world. It should function on its own without any additional knowledge of the 40k universe, but keep the focus small so the film doesn't have to butcher major 40k fluff to tell a good story.
I'd prefer to see something necromunda based, or an eldar vs humans story, which has potential. I figure less is more, i'd rather they focus on one or two factions instead of trying to go too epic or grand.
I would see it being a mostly action based film that starts with a brief summary of the setting kind of like what we got with lord of the rings fellowship of the ring. Cut to Imperial Guard versus Orks. Things are looking bad and in come the space marines to save the day and establish our space marine protagonist. Progress the story into there being a greater reason that the space marines are here and it is a chaos artifact. We see more action as the marines get it, but run across the eldar led by a strong female Farseer (Gotta meet that diversity quota). They disagree and fight briefly, but nothing decisive.
Chaos shows up and more fighting. Establishes the true antagonist by killing a likable space marine side character. Marines team up with an Inquisitor who is a real jerk, but dedicated. Story progresses as they do what they can to stop Chaos and stop them from achieving their goals with the artifact.
Insert filler content resulting in a great final battle between all parties up until this point where the mean Inquisitor is truly dedicated and loyal, but his interrogator goes traitor. Inquisitor near fatally wounded. Orks kill chaos sorcerer in funny way after an awesome psychic duel between the sorcerer and Librarian where the sorcerer is about to kill the Librarian. People laugh at this and the stunned reaction of the Librarian who then fights the orks. Marine side character (probably a chaplain or apothecary) kills the interrogator in a side duel that cuts between the duel of the captain and chaos lord. Eldar has mysterious words with the space marine captain.
Marine captain (protagonist) fights and only defeats the chaos lord by implied divine intervention. Chaos lord killed. Good guys win... Until it is revealed the entire point was a massive blood sacrifice. Insert daemons appearing. Our remaining heroes shrug at each other and charge the daemons as the screen fades with a depressing, but encouraging message displaying the nature of 40k.
Boom wrote a generic ass movie template in 5 minutes lol.
Oh and the Orks are comic relief the majority of the time.
Space marines vs. Tyranids. Like Starship Troopers (movie version), except with more space-Jesus. Space marines are killing bugs, and I suppose there's some kind of plot, but mostly just bolter porn. And then, at the end, when the space marines stand victorious on a pile of dead bugs the scene explodes and a Baneblade appears. Because IMPERIAL GUARD YEAH. Post-credits scene is more Imperial Guard killing stuff, setting up for the sequel that was the real point of the series from the beginning.
Tibs Ironblood wrote: I would see it being a mostly action based film that starts with a brief summary of the setting kind of like what we got with lord of the rings fellowship of the ring. Cut to Imperial Guard versus Orks. Things are looking bad and in come the space marines to save the day and establish our space marine protagonist. Progress the story into there being a greater reason that the space marines are here and it is a chaos artifact. We see more action as the marines get it, but run across the eldar led by a strong female Farseer (Gotta meet that diversity quota). They disagree and fight briefly, but nothing decisive.
Chaos shows up and more fighting. Establishes the true antagonist by killing a likable space marine side character. Marines team up with an Inquisitor who is a real jerk, but dedicated. Story progresses as they do what they can to stop Chaos and stop them from achieving their goals with the artifact.
Insert filler content resulting in a great final battle between all parties up until this point where the mean Inquisitor is truly dedicated and loyal, but his interrogator goes traitor. Inquisitor near fatally wounded. Orks kill chaos sorcerer in funny way after an awesome psychic duel between the sorcerer and Librarian where the sorcerer is about to kill the Librarian. People laugh at this and the stunned reaction of the Librarian who then fights the orks. Marine side character (probably a chaplain or apothecary) kills the interrogator in a side duel that cuts between the duel of the captain and chaos lord. Eldar has mysterious words with the space marine captain.
Marine captain (protagonist) fights and only defeats the chaos lord by implied divine intervention. Chaos lord killed. Good guys win... Until it is revealed the entire point was a massive blood sacrifice. Insert daemons appearing. Our remaining heroes shrug at each other and charge the daemons as the screen fades with a depressing, but encouraging message displaying the nature of 40k.
Boom wrote a generic ass movie template in 5 minutes lol.
Oh and the Orks are comic relief the majority of the time.
Unsurprisingly this reads a lot like the Warcraft film. It didn't really work there so I'm not sure it will work here either...
A Horus Heresy movie would probably do well. There's also a Helsreach "movie" floating around on YouTube that's pretty well done, hopefully it gets finished.
I dunno about a 40k movie, not sure it'd do all that well.. I think if I was asked to pitch a media show idea to the folks running GW, my pitch would be for an Eisenhorn Netflix series.
meleti wrote: I'd want to see an Inquisition flick. Keep it tightly constrained, mystery/thriller plot. Imperium and Chaos, kind of a neo-noir style set on a hive world. It should function on its own without any additional knowledge of the 40k universe, but keep the focus small so the film doesn't have to butcher major 40k fluff to tell a good story.
Yeah that would be cool, we'll see how the unofficial one pans out, that looks amazing though the voice actors are terrible, plus an American accent doesn't fit a 40k film at all in my opinion.
I've been the author to many. Good on you for knowing that there have been threads like this before.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Tibs Ironblood wrote: I would see it being a mostly action based film that starts with a brief summary of the setting kind of like what we got with lord of the rings fellowship of the ring. Cut to Imperial Guard versus Orks. Things are looking bad and in come the space marines to save the day and establish our space marine protagonist. Progress the story into there being a greater reason that the space marines are here and it is a chaos artifact. We see more action as the marines get it, but run across the eldar led by a strong female Farseer (Gotta meet that diversity quota). They disagree and fight briefly, but nothing decisive.
Chaos shows up and more fighting. Establishes the true antagonist by killing a likable space marine side character. Marines team up with an Inquisitor who is a real jerk, but dedicated. Story progresses as they do what they can to stop Chaos and stop them from achieving their goals with the artifact.
Insert filler content resulting in a great final battle between all parties up until this point where the mean Inquisitor is truly dedicated and loyal, but his interrogator goes traitor. Inquisitor near fatally wounded. Orks kill chaos sorcerer in funny way after an awesome psychic duel between the sorcerer and Librarian where the sorcerer is about to kill the Librarian. People laugh at this and the stunned reaction of the Librarian who then fights the orks. Marine side character (probably a chaplain or apothecary) kills the interrogator in a side duel that cuts between the duel of the captain and chaos lord. Eldar has mysterious words with the space marine captain.
Marine captain (protagonist) fights and only defeats the chaos lord by implied divine intervention. Chaos lord killed. Good guys win... Until it is revealed the entire point was a massive blood sacrifice. Insert daemons appearing. Our remaining heroes shrug at each other and charge the daemons as the screen fades with a depressing, but encouraging message displaying the nature of 40k.
Boom wrote a generic ass movie template in 5 minutes lol.
Oh and the Orks are comic relief the majority of the time.
The real question is, should the orks grunt or be fluent in a cockney accent. I prefer the latter.
From a writer's perspective, you want the story to revolve around someone the reader/audience connects with. Space Marine novels sell cos the audience is already invested through the game, to reach a wider audience you'd need the protagonist to be human. You can include as many Space Marines and Xenos as you want after that.
The reason Game of Thrones the TV show is so successful is because the intrigue, backstabbing and human frailty are what drive the plot. It's not about the dragons.
There was a line in one of the BRBs or Marine codexes which said that to most Imperial citizens the Space Marines are just legends and, for most citizens, seeing one means your end is pretty much nigh because if Marines are involved, something heavy is going down. Something to which the words 'extreme prejudice' are unfortunately attached.
TLDR: The movie needs to have a human and human concerns and passions at its heart. Otherwise, it's just the opening of Saving Private Ryan for two hours.
Banville wrote: From a writer's perspective, you want the story to revolve around someone the reader/audience connects with. Space Marine novels sell cos the audience is already invested through the game, to reach a wider audience you'd need the protagonist to be human. You can include as many Space Marines and Xenos as you want after that.
The reason Game of Thrones the TV show is so successful is because the intrigue, backstabbing and human frailty are what drive the plot. It's not about the dragons.
There was a line in one of the BRBs or Marine codexes which said that to most Imperial citizens the Space Marines are just legends and, for most citizens, seeing one means your end is pretty much nigh because if Marines are involved, something heavy is going down. Something to which the words 'extreme prejudice' are unfortunately attached.
TLDR: The movie needs to have a human and human concerns and passions at its heart. Otherwise, it's just the opening of Saving Private Ryan for two hours.
I don't agree, we have all loved the HH novels when they are based on a SM protagonist, you just have to write it well, surround the character with humans to express and develop human emotions etc, touch on the contrast between human emotions and that of an Astartes and it works very well. What we've learned from the novels though is every character, species etc. works well under the story arc of 40k. I think a combination of human and SM would be better as it highlights the richness of 40k, even humans there are many species and types i.e. Ogryns etc. I don't think either should be a single main protagonist I think there should be at least one main character for each faction fighting. Kinda like a band of brothers version of a film. I think though to do any 40k film justice it would have to be at least a trilogy in length. But they should laern from the Ultramarines film, that was all action and no story, that's why it was so bad in my opinion.
we have all loved the HH novels when they are based on a SM protagonist
Ah ah, no we did not.
You're telling me you didn't like the first three... I mean most of them have an Astartes protagonist, why would you read the series if you didn't like most of the protagonists.
Bobthehero wrote: I have no interest in them, so I didn't read them.
Read one at least, you really don't know what you are missing out on. Read a few chapters of Horus Rising, I promise you you wont be disappointed. I mean there isn't a faction I haven't read about, I find them all interesting, granted I collect nearly every faction lol I mean any faction is boring without the lore.
My point is, people who play 40k will obviously be okay with a space marine or even an Eldar protagonist. For a movie or series to be commissioned or optioned you'd need to aim for a wider demographic and make it accessible to the general non-gaming public.
When you boil it down, Astartes are genocidal killing machines. With the noted exception of the Salamanders, who believe burning people to death is still, somehow, okay. They also, and this is important, see the world differently to us. They ignore most wounds. THEY KNOW NO FEAR. They're hard to connect with from a movie audience perspective. You can't afford to get into the amount of exposition you can get away with in print when working with film.
So, you'll end up softening and humanising our hypothetical Astartes protagonist and having fans of the game disowning the whole project for removing the grimdark.
Now, a series based on Caiaphus Cain, arch, self-aware and cynical, that might work.
Banville wrote: My point is, people who play 40k will obviously be okay with a space marine or even an Eldar protagonist. For a movie or series to be commissioned or optioned you'd need to aim for a wider demographic and make it accessible to the general non-gaming public.
When you boil it down, Astartes are genocidal killing machines. With the noted exception of the Salamanders, who believe burning people to death is still, somehow, okay. They also, and this is important, see the world differently to us. They ignore most wounds. THEY KNOW NO FEAR. They're hard to connect with from a movie audience perspective. You can't afford to get into the amount of exposition you can get away with in print when working with film.
So, you'll end up softening and humanising our hypothetical Astartes protagonist and having fans of the game disowning the whole project for removing the grimdark.
Now, a series based on Caiaphus Cain, arch, self-aware and cynical, that might work.
I don't agree, when film companies make re-makes of things, they always fail unless they stay true to the actual original. Its like with superhero films or anime films like ghost in the shell, they are always terrible because instead of staying true to what works and what people already love, production companies instead alter the original thing that worked to try and appease a wider demographic. I mean the fans alone would would bring in a return on the project. So if you are doing an Imperium faction focus it would be silly to miss out SM on that basis. I mean in GW space marines sell, they always get the most focus and push.
Banville wrote: My point is, people who play 40k will obviously be okay with a space marine or even an Eldar protagonist. For a movie or series to be commissioned or optioned you'd need to aim for a wider demographic and make it accessible to the general non-gaming public.
When you boil it down, Astartes are genocidal killing machines. With the noted exception of the Salamanders, who believe burning people to death is still, somehow, okay. They also, and this is important, see the world differently to us. They ignore most wounds. THEY KNOW NO FEAR. They're hard to connect with from a movie audience perspective. You can't afford to get into the amount of exposition you can get away with in print when working with film.
So, you'll end up softening and humanising our hypothetical Astartes protagonist and having fans of the game disowning the whole project for removing the grimdark.
Now, a series based on Caiaphus Cain, arch, self-aware and cynical, that might work.
I don't agree, when film companies make re-makes of things, they always fail unless they stay true to the actual original. Its like with superhero films or anime films like ghost in the shell, they are always terrible because instead of staying true to what works and what people already love, production companies instead alter the original thing that worked to try and appease a wider demographic. I mean the fans alone would would bring in a return on the project. So if you are doing an Imperium faction focus it would be silly to miss out SM on that basis. I mean in GW space marines sell, they always get the most focus and push.
except that 40k fans alone are not eneugh to sell a 40k movie, a 40k movie would (especially if it invovled space marines) by necessity need to have a HUUUGE bugdet for special effects. This BTW is why I proposed a Eisenhorn based netflix series. they could mostly keep it down low, but the finalle of the first season would be the end of Xenos, a reasonably big conflict that would have space Marines.
Banville wrote: My point is, people who play 40k will obviously be okay with a space marine or even an Eldar protagonist. For a movie or series to be commissioned or optioned you'd need to aim for a wider demographic and make it accessible to the general non-gaming public.
When you boil it down, Astartes are genocidal killing machines. With the noted exception of the Salamanders, who believe burning people to death is still, somehow, okay. They also, and this is important, see the world differently to us. They ignore most wounds. THEY KNOW NO FEAR. They're hard to connect with from a movie audience perspective. You can't afford to get into the amount of exposition you can get away with in print when working with film.
So, you'll end up softening and humanising our hypothetical Astartes protagonist and having fans of the game disowning the whole project for removing the grimdark.
Now, a series based on Caiaphus Cain, arch, self-aware and cynical, that might work.
I don't agree, when film companies make re-makes of things, they always fail unless they stay true to the actual original. Its like with superhero films or anime films like ghost in the shell, they are always terrible because instead of staying true to what works and what people already love, production companies instead alter the original thing that worked to try and appease a wider demographic. I mean the fans alone would would bring in a return on the project. So if you are doing an Imperium faction focus it would be silly to miss out SM on that basis. I mean in GW space marines sell, they always get the most focus and push.
except that 40k fans alone are not eneugh to sell a 40k movie, a 40k movie would (especially if it invovled space marines) by necessity need to have a HUUUGE bugdet for special effects. This BTW is why I proposed a Eisenhorn based netflix series. they could mostly keep it down low, but the finalle of the first season would be the end of Xenos, a reasonably big conflict that would have space Marines.
I think we'd all be surprised, our fanbase is enough to keep GW it going. Its safe to say every fan will see it. GW make 100 million in sales in 6 months. Just the GW fan-base, say there are 1million of us buying a ticket for the cinema is 10 million in cinema tickets, DVD's would sell more than that, that's 20 millions there and that's being conservative, plus technology has come leaps and bounds, look at the Inquisitor film and that is just a fan made film. They could do a budget for 20 million as a minumum, which they could do but even at 50 million I think they'd make a fantastic return, then there would be all the sci-fi and geek fans, they'll run to see it and then you'll have regular public. If they made the film amazing, I think they'd do very well. I mean netflix could even do it. I mean we can't know what it'll sell bit we do know there are guaranteed sales and production companies now salavate when they here that, WOW, superhero films, anime etc. They are even making a battle angel alita film and that is an obscure manga in the west. Now with the profits GW rake in I wouldn't be surprised if a production company stuck its nose into 40k, plus the Ultramarine film was a failure not because of the fan base, it was a failure as it was terribly made. I just wish peter jackson would get off his fat ass and make a series of 40k or HH films, he is a fan.
If it were up to me I would start at 'Year 0'. A quiet, unspoiled earth viewed from space. The years would then start counting upwards, faster and faster. We would see the first rockets break away from the planet and more of it's surface become blackened with urban sprawl.
Space would become thicker and thicker with ships and stations. Backwards through the solar system we would see mars become engulfed in the ever expanding wave of construction.
The counter would continue all the way until the 31M where it would stop and we would be catapulted back down onto earth and would be introduced to the Emperor.
The first film would be an introduction to all the primarchs and would end with whispers in the dark tempting Horus.
The second Film would deal with the fall of Horus and the splitting of the Imperium and would end the Horus turning his eye to Terra.
The third film would be focused on the fate of the various primarchs and the battle for Terra. It would end with the wounded emperor and the tag line. 'In the grim darkness of the far future, there is only war.'
If this initial trilogy worked I would then launch a series of 'First Contact' Films for each of the races and how the Imperium first encountered them. I'd treat each faction similar to how Marvel has treated each superhero.
20 million budget is EXTREMELY small man. You CANNOT do a 40k movie like what you want on a 20 million budget. Not the big explosive space marine centric action movie you seem to want at least. movies in a similer genrea such as star wars, and the avengers flicks are all a budget in the 200 million range. even if you managed to cut that in half you're still looking at a 100 million dollar budget. Sci-fi is expensive.
Hollow wrote: If it were up to me I would start at 'Year 0'. A quiet, unspoiled earth viewed from space. The years would then start counting upwards, faster and faster. We would see the first rockets break away from the planet and more of it's surface become blackened with urban sprawl.
Space would become thicker and thicker with ships and stations. Backwards through the solar system we would see mars become engulfed in the ever expanding wave of construction.
The counter would continue all the way until the 31M where it would stop and we would be catapulted back down onto earth and would be introduced to the Emperor.
The first film would be an introduction to all the primarchs and would end with whispers in the dark tempting Horus.
The second Film would deal with the fall of Horus and the splitting of the Imperium and would end the Horus turning his eye to Terra.
The third film would be focused on the fate of the various primarchs and the battle for Terra. It would end with the wounded emperor and the tag line. 'In the grim darkness of the far future, there is only war.'
If this initial trilogy worked I would then launch a series of 'First Contact' Films for each of the races and how the Imperium first encountered them. I'd treat each faction similar to how Marvel has treated each superhero.
Yeah thats pretty much what I would have thought for the HH.
more to the point the heresy is a huuge interlocking story, you want your first movie to be stand alone so that if a sequal never gets made it's at least a solid cult classic.
Banville wrote: My point is, people who play 40k will obviously be okay with a space marine or even an Eldar protagonist. For a movie or series to be commissioned or optioned you'd need to aim for a wider demographic and make it accessible to the general non-gaming public.
When you boil it down, Astartes are genocidal killing machines. With the noted exception of the Salamanders, who believe burning people to death is still, somehow, okay. They also, and this is important, see the world differently to us. They ignore most wounds. THEY KNOW NO FEAR. They're hard to connect with from a movie audience perspective. You can't afford to get into the amount of exposition you can get away with in print when working with film.
So, you'll end up softening and humanising our hypothetical Astartes protagonist and having fans of the game disowning the whole project for removing the grimdark.
Now, a series based on Caiaphus Cain, arch, self-aware and cynical, that might work.
I don't agree, when film companies make re-makes of things, they always fail unless they stay true to the actual original. Its like with superhero films or anime films like ghost in the shell, they are always terrible because instead of staying true to what works and what people already love, production companies instead alter the original thing that worked to try and appease a wider demographic. I mean the fans alone would would bring in a return on the project. So if you are doing an Imperium faction focus it would be silly to miss out SM on that basis. I mean in GW space marines sell, they always get the most focus and push.
except that 40k fans alone are not eneugh to sell a 40k movie, a 40k movie would (especially if it invovled space marines) by necessity need to have a HUUUGE bugdet for special effects. This BTW is why I proposed a Eisenhorn based netflix series. they could mostly keep it down low, but the finalle of the first season would be the end of Xenos, a reasonably big conflict that would have space Marines.
I think we'd all be surprised, our fanbase is enough to keep GW it going. Its safe to say every fan will see it. GW make 100 million in sales in 6 months. Just the GW fan-base, say there are 1million of us buying a ticket for the cinema is 10 million in cinema tickets, DVD's would sell more than that, that's 20 millions there and that's being conservative, plus technology has come leaps and bounds, look at the Inquisitor film and that is just a fan made film. They could do a budget for 20 million as a minumum, which they could do but even at 50 million I think they'd make a fantastic return, then there would be all the sci-fi and geek fans, they'll run to see it and then you'll have regular public. If they made the film amazing, I think they'd do very well. I mean netflix could even do it. I mean we can't know what it'll sell bit we do know there are guaranteed sales and production companies now salavate when they here that, WOW, superhero films, anime etc. They are even making a battle angel alita film and that is an obscure manga in the west. Now with the profits GW rake in I wouldn't be surprised if a production company stuck its nose into 40k, plus the Ultramarine film was a failure not because of the fan base, it was a failure as it was terribly made. I just wish peter jackson would get off his fat ass and make a series of 40k or HH films, he is a fan.
Sorry, dude. I've some experience in writing stuff. You're talking 150 million US Dollars for anything that looks in any way epic plus, and I reiterate, plus, another at least 100 million in marketing. And that's at the lower scale of epic Sci fi.
Banville wrote: My point is, people who play 40k will obviously be okay with a space marine or even an Eldar protagonist. For a movie or series to be commissioned or optioned you'd need to aim for a wider demographic and make it accessible to the general non-gaming public.
When you boil it down, Astartes are genocidal killing machines. With the noted exception of the Salamanders, who believe burning people to death is still, somehow, okay. They also, and this is important, see the world differently to us. They ignore most wounds. THEY KNOW NO FEAR. They're hard to connect with from a movie audience perspective. You can't afford to get into the amount of exposition you can get away with in print when working with film.
So, you'll end up softening and humanising our hypothetical Astartes protagonist and having fans of the game disowning the whole project for removing the grimdark.
Now, a series based on Caiaphus Cain, arch, self-aware and cynical, that might work.
I don't agree, when film companies make re-makes of things, they always fail unless they stay true to the actual original. Its like with superhero films or anime films like ghost in the shell, they are always terrible because instead of staying true to what works and what people already love, production companies instead alter the original thing that worked to try and appease a wider demographic. I mean the fans alone would would bring in a return on the project. So if you are doing an Imperium faction focus it would be silly to miss out SM on that basis. I mean in GW space marines sell, they always get the most focus and push.
except that 40k fans alone are not eneugh to sell a 40k movie, a 40k movie would (especially if it invovled space marines) by necessity need to have a HUUUGE bugdet for special effects. This BTW is why I proposed a Eisenhorn based netflix series. they could mostly keep it down low, but the finalle of the first season would be the end of Xenos, a reasonably big conflict that would have space Marines.
I think we'd all be surprised, our fanbase is enough to keep GW it going. Its safe to say every fan will see it. GW make 100 million in sales in 6 months. Just the GW fan-base, say there are 1million of us buying a ticket for the cinema is 10 million in cinema tickets, DVD's would sell more than that, that's 20 millions there and that's being conservative, plus technology has come leaps and bounds, look at the Inquisitor film and that is just a fan made film. They could do a budget for 20 million as a minumum, which they could do but even at 50 million I think they'd make a fantastic return, then there would be all the sci-fi and geek fans, they'll run to see it and then you'll have regular public. If they made the film amazing, I think they'd do very well. I mean netflix could even do it. I mean we can't know what it'll sell bit we do know there are guaranteed sales and production companies now salavate when they here that, WOW, superhero films, anime etc. They are even making a battle angel alita film and that is an obscure manga in the west. Now with the profits GW rake in I wouldn't be surprised if a production company stuck its nose into 40k, plus the Ultramarine film was a failure not because of the fan base, it was a failure as it was terribly made. I just wish peter jackson would get off his fat ass and make a series of 40k or HH films, he is a fan.
Sorry, dude. I've some experience in writing stuff. You're talking 150 million US Dollars for anything that looks in any way epic plus, and I reiterate, plus, another at least 100 million in marketing. And that's at the lower scale of epic Sci fi.
yeah 20 million is "cheap budget slasher flick" territory.
And my prophecy has nearly been fulfilled already....
Only 2 or 3 more squares to go on this thread's bingo card Dakka. Still gotta hit the "GW will never give up merchandising rights" and "Hollywood will insist on a female love interest" to get there.
You would need at least $400 MILLION dollars in commitment for a 3 film deal, which would be filmed together, in order to get as much bang for your buck as possible.
The HH has been built up into such a huge story that a 3 film deal, to paint the broad stokes of what happened, would be a great way to launch the 40k IP. It would then set the viewer up to explore the 40k millenium though the game.
I think that GW would need to approach it with a good decade long plan similar to what Marvel has done.
Year 1 - Horus Heresy Part 1
Year 2 - Horus Heresy Part 2
Year 3 - Horus Heresy Part 3
With 2 faction specific films each year thereafter. You could launch further trilogies with Necromunda, Space Hulk. With large tent-pole pictures focusing on significant events like the 13th Black crusade, Battle for Macragge, etc with smaller more intimate stories based on rogue trader etc.
While the setting is there I do think it struggles with compelling, likeable characters.
Banville wrote: My point is, people who play 40k will obviously be okay with a space marine or even an Eldar protagonist. For a movie or series to be commissioned or optioned you'd need to aim for a wider demographic and make it accessible to the general non-gaming public.
When you boil it down, Astartes are genocidal killing machines. With the noted exception of the Salamanders, who believe burning people to death is still, somehow, okay. They also, and this is important, see the world differently to us. They ignore most wounds. THEY KNOW NO FEAR. They're hard to connect with from a movie audience perspective. You can't afford to get into the amount of exposition you can get away with in print when working with film.
So, you'll end up softening and humanising our hypothetical Astartes protagonist and having fans of the game disowning the whole project for removing the grimdark.
Now, a series based on Caiaphus Cain, arch, self-aware and cynical, that might work.
I don't agree, when film companies make re-makes of things, they always fail unless they stay true to the actual original. Its like with superhero films or anime films like ghost in the shell, they are always terrible because instead of staying true to what works and what people already love, production companies instead alter the original thing that worked to try and appease a wider demographic. I mean the fans alone would would bring in a return on the project. So if you are doing an Imperium faction focus it would be silly to miss out SM on that basis. I mean in GW space marines sell, they always get the most focus and push.
except that 40k fans alone are not eneugh to sell a 40k movie, a 40k movie would (especially if it invovled space marines) by necessity need to have a HUUUGE bugdet for special effects. This BTW is why I proposed a Eisenhorn based netflix series. they could mostly keep it down low, but the finalle of the first season would be the end of Xenos, a reasonably big conflict that would have space Marines.
I think we'd all be surprised, our fanbase is enough to keep GW it going. Its safe to say every fan will see it. GW make 100 million in sales in 6 months. Just the GW fan-base, say there are 1million of us buying a ticket for the cinema is 10 million in cinema tickets, DVD's would sell more than that, that's 20 millions there and that's being conservative, plus technology has come leaps and bounds, look at the Inquisitor film and that is just a fan made film. They could do a budget for 20 million as a minumum, which they could do but even at 50 million I think they'd make a fantastic return, then there would be all the sci-fi and geek fans, they'll run to see it and then you'll have regular public. If they made the film amazing, I think they'd do very well. I mean netflix could even do it. I mean we can't know what it'll sell bit we do know there are guaranteed sales and production companies now salavate when they here that, WOW, superhero films, anime etc. They are even making a battle angel alita film and that is an obscure manga in the west. Now with the profits GW rake in I wouldn't be surprised if a production company stuck its nose into 40k, plus the Ultramarine film was a failure not because of the fan base, it was a failure as it was terribly made. I just wish peter jackson would get off his fat ass and make a series of 40k or HH films, he is a fan.
Sorry, dude. I've some experience in writing stuff. You're talking 150 million US Dollars for anything that looks in any way epic plus, and I reiterate, plus, another at least 100 million in marketing. And that's at the lower scale of epic Sci fi.
That's ridiculous, 250 million dollars, yeah for a titanic type blockbuster. You wouldn't need anything at that scale. I mean look at the budgets that netflix work with. and look at the quality a simple fan made film can produce in the inquisitor film. Imagine what that guy could do with 20-50 million.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Grimtuff wrote: And my prophecy has nearly been fulfilled already....
Only 2 or 3 more squares to go on this thread's bingo card Dakka. Still gotta hit the "GW will never give up merchandising rights" and "Hollywood will insist on a female love interest" to get there.
This is such a well-trodden path.
Do you feel proud. Its just sad that jaded cop routine, no one cares.
Grimtuff wrote: And my prophecy has nearly been fulfilled already....
Only 2 or 3 more squares to go on this thread's bingo card Dakka. Still gotta hit the "GW will never give up merchandising rights" and "Hollywood will insist on a female love interest" to get there.
This is such a well-trodden path.
Yep. Investors want their money back, hence soooooo many movies sticking to a formula, especially, and I can't stress this enough, big budget action ones.
Therefore, to make it both practicable and in keeping with the integrity of the setting etc, you're looking at doing a more intimate movie. If you want to do space opera it'll cost lots of spondulicks and your soul. If you keep true to the source material you have to sacrifice scope. And that's it. Unless you get an investor who's willing to take a giant punt on the US film market (very conservative and notoriously needing to be spoon fed exposition) really taking to inhuman, gene modified killing machines killing lots of other random dudes for some vague purpose with roots in a mythical past which nobody even remembers anymore cos it was 10,000 years ago. Or because they hate anyone who isn't human. Because the human race is inherently superior. What's that Mr Producer? Why, yes. They do sound a lot like the SS in space.
Sooooo...a narrow focus Netflix series or mid-budget quirky war movie is realistically what we're looking at. Both could be done really well, by the way.
Hollow wrote: I don't think you have a grasp on how much this stuff costs. You would need AT LEAST that amount if you take into consideration marketing costs.
Just recently... Valerian cost near $200 million dollars with no large names attached.
Again for a blockbuster, sure but not these days the market has changed, you can do a lot more with a lot less. there have been plenty of 10-20 million budgets that have grossed hundreds of millions of dollars. Plus if they spent 200 million on a GW film and they had the right script directer cast etc. It would do well as the more money they spend on it the more average people will go see it, that is if it is a good film though.
Hollow wrote: Perhaps... Although think of the MASSIVE risk that was taken with LOTR.
Yeah that's why I mention peter jackson, a fan would take that risk. But I think in the future they'll probably be a 40k film. probably not a trilogy though, but it'd be amazing.
Delvarus Centurion wrote: It would do well as the more money they spend on it the more average people will go see it, that is if it is a good film though.
Look at transformers etc to see that this isn't the case. A film can be objectively terrible and the mouth breathing masses will flock to it like flies to gak. I don't know what people see in their minds eye when they imagine the 40k universe. I just think that to bring the various artwork to life, the scale and scope of the setting coupled with the huge amount of SFX that would be needed you are talking $200 Million as a starter.
And LOTR is one of the most popular novels ever written. It had a worldwide market of the entire English speaking world. There really was no risk involved as long as the director was decent and their vision was clear.
Anyway, what I'm seeing is Netflix Cain. Humour is good and because he's dealing with morons a lot of the time you have inbuilt exposition to help the audience out. Marines can stay in the background as this barely hinted at coming apocalypse. Like the White Walkers. You could have a shot of a battle barge slipping through space, inexorable and silent. And ominous.
Wrong. Fantasy cinema was seen as a money pit at the time and had been shackled with poorly performing projects throughout the 80's and 90's. This was far from a certain hit. The idea of filming all of them together was something that had never been tried before and the fact that the studio allowed for not 2 (As was Jackson's original pitch) but 3 films to be made for an original budget north of 250 MILLION dollars, to a little known director who up until that point hadn't helmed any significant projects.
The LOTR trilogy was a MASSIVE risk which could have sunk New line cinema if the first film had flopped.
Banville wrote: P. S. I think Pacific Rim cost about 185 million in production plus another 125 million in marketing. Again without any A list celebs involved.
It doesn't matter if they don't have an A-list cast, some projects will purposefully not use A-listers.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Hollow wrote: Wrong. Fantasy cinema was seen as a money pit at the time and had been shackled with poorly performing projects throughout the 80's and 90's. This was far from a certain hit. The idea of filming all of them together was something that had never been tried before and the fact that the studio allowed for not 2 (As was Jackson's original pitch) but 3 films to be made for an original budget north of 250 MILLION dollars, to a little known director who up until that point hadn't helmed any significant projects.
The LOTR trilogy was a MASSIVE risk which could have sunk New line cinema if the first film had flopped.
However he set the standard, it may be a risk but its been done successfully before. Its just a matter of a coin toss of them actually taking the risk.
Delvarus Centurion wrote: It doesn't matter if they don't have an A-list cast, some projects will purposefully not use A-listers.
Well it does matter. A LOT. The point is that you don't have A list names sucking up massive chunks of your budget like Robert Downey Jr taking $40 Million for Avengers. Or Depp for the 4th Pirates movie (Which cost over $400 Million Dollars) That was the point that was being made (which went completely over your head)
Delvarus Centurion wrote: It doesn't matter if they don't have an A-list cast, some projects will purposefully not use A-listers.
Well it does matter. A LOT. The point is that you don't have A list names sucking up massive chunks of your budget like Robert Downey Jr taking $40 Million for Avengers. Or Depp for the 4th Pirates movie (Which cost over $400 Million Dollars) That was the point that was being made (which went completely over your head)
That was my point, yes. I still don't think LOTR was that much of a risk, though. But this is all hypothetical.
Automatically Appended Next Post: So, what we're trying to decide is what would the movie look like? I'd love a 250 million epic, by the way.
Delvarus Centurion wrote: It doesn't matter if they don't have an A-list cast, some projects will purposefully not use A-listers.
Well it does matter. A LOT. The point is that you don't have A list names sucking up massive chunks of your budget like Robert Downey Jr taking $40 Million for Avengers. Or Depp for the 4th Pirates movie (Which cost over $400 Million Dollars) That was the point that was being made (which went completely over your head)
Yeah but they can make hundreds of millions on films without A-list celebrities, adding A-list celebrities isn't going to always up the price of a film, lots of times production companies will spend small budgets the film, spend more on an A-list cast and get results. Or if they chose not to get an A-list cast they can spend the majority on the actual production. or they can go all out with an A-list cast and and A-list production. Having an A-list cast doesn't mean it has to be a massive budget. Saying "that's 100 mil without an A-list budget" doesn't mean that your average budget without an A-list cast is always 100 mil.
If only there was a way of finding out about how these numbers work, what does a budget actually mean and how it is distributed..... if only.
Like if there was a website you could type 'Film budgets' into and it would give you a selection of other sites detailing all of this information and giving you a rundown of what the average cost of bringing a MID-LEVEL movie to market is (Spoiler alert! its $100 Million plus+ because this does exist, its called google you should try it sometime)
Hollow wrote: If only there was a way of finding out about how these numbers work, what does a budget actually mean and how it is distributed..... if only.
Like if there was a website you could type 'Film budgets' into and it would give you a selection of other sites detailing all of this information and giving you a rundown of what the average cost of bringing a MID-LEVEL movie to market is (Spoiler alert! its $100 Million plus+ because this does exist, its called google you should try it sometime)
Be an donkey-cave all you want. Even if the average is 100 million that isn't because there are no A-listers in all those movies.
Banville wrote: Anyway, what I'm seeing is Netflix Cain. Humour is good and because he's dealing with morons a lot of the time you have inbuilt exposition to help the audience out. Marines can stay in the background as this barely hinted at coming apocalypse. Like the White Walkers. You could have a shot of a battle barge slipping through space, inexorable and silent. And ominous.
Or Gaunts Ghosts. That's also work.
I’d agree with Ciphas Cain. Not sure if it’s the best entry to 40k if you want to sell the grimdark, but the humour can give the people who aren’t 40k fans something to enjoy. From what I’ve heard, the books themselves are relatively self-contained as well. The idea of a Netflix series is an interesting one, though I’m curious to see how it would be adapted while still keeping its pacing.
An IG movie itself would be interesting. When you consider that the guardsmen are just humans, it can make them more relatable than astartes. You can even sell viewers on more tense moments, since these vulnerable humans are standing down beings who are individually much more powerful than they are. Maybe a Band of Brothers sort of deal where you follow one squad?
A movie which tries to cover the major plotlines of the 40k universe is just a terrible, terrible idea on so many levels. Just no.
A much better idea is to use the setting for stories which are smaller in scope. My preference would be for a series of shorter character focused storylines in a comic book style. These individual storylines would be contained within a single overarching narrative.
Example:
Story A follows a Culexus assassin who has been sent to assassinate the planetary governor who has been corrupted by Chaos. Ends in failure.
Story B follows a Space Marine captain on the same planet a few months later as a full blown civil war has broken out. Ends with the opening of a warp rift and the onset of a daemonic incursion.
Story C follows an Inquisitor trying to recover an important artefact from the surface of the planet before implementing an exterminatus order.
Just do Storm of Iron, inflate the role of the one female guardswoman who survives the assault. Hawke can be made an even bigger role. Just need more intro to flesh it out,,but battle scenes are good to go.
bullyboy wrote: Just do Storm of Iron, inflate the role of the one female guardswoman who survives the assault. Hawke can be made an even bigger role. Just need more intro to flesh it out,,but battle scenes are good to go.
heck would the story be ANY differant if Hawke was a woman?
Necron are a good faction to start with. They are mechanical aliens hell-bent on eradicating all life, kinda like Terminators. The Necrons are somewhat simple to create through CGI, does not overlap with many other popular Sci-fi/fantasy opponents like the Orks with Orcs or Tyranids with Zerg or Tau with Trade Federation from Star Wars, and can be pretty cool in battle.
I made a post on Quora here. You can check it out.
Not really sold on that idea. From an human centric viewpoint the Necrons and their backstory are peripheral. They're important in the Eldar backstory but I think we can safely assume that within the boundaries of reality in which a 40k movie could exist, the storyline will be focused on The Imperium of Man vs Chaos. That's the central storyline. Chaos is the primary antagonist. I don't see how it can be anything else. If we're throwing ideas against the wall in the realm of hypotheticals, knock yourself out.
I think the Lord Inquisitor fan film was going the right way about it.
I'm not sure how well 40k would do in the mainstream cinema, it's a bit too niche. I don't think you could really inject too much humour into it to make it accessible if it were about Space Marines. You would need the human element. So something about guard. Perhaps the Last Chancers. I think they could probably do straight to digital/dvd releases well. Leave out the big names and concentrate on making it look good/having a good story. That's where Ultramarine failed imo.
Yeah but they can make hundreds of millions on films without A-list celebrities, adding A-list celebrities isn't going to always up the price of a film,
Yeah but they can make hundreds of millions on films without A-list celebrities, adding A-list celebrities isn't going to always up the price of a film,
Wow...
Well if they spend 10 million on the main budget and then get a few A-listers, its hardly going to cost 250 millions now is it. Jesus...
How bout you quote the whole comment, add some context:
"Yeah but they can make hundreds of millions on films without A-list celebrities, adding A-list celebrities isn't going to always up the price of a film, lots of times production companies will spend small budgets the film, spend more on an A-list cast and get results. Or if they chose not to get an A-list cast they can spend the majority on the actual production. or they can go all out with an A-list cast and and A-list production. Having an A-list cast doesn't mean it has to be a massive budget. Saying "that's 100 mil without an A-list budget" doesn't mean that your average budget without an A-list cast is always 100 mil."
You are just wrong, having an A-list cast doesn't mean its going to have a massive budget and quoting me out of context isn't going to make you right. Its a post you already read and replied to many comments back in the thread lol, you had to go back to find something lol
The point about A list stars that was made (Which is still flying completely over your head, its actually amazing to watch) Is that a film like Pacific Rim cost the best part of $200 Million without any A list celebs sucking up cash, more of the budget is seen on the screen and you get a clearer idea of what that kind of money gets you in terms of production design, SFX, scope and scale etc...
Tell me about the films that makes 'hundreds of millions' without significant names attached to the roles? Although you are right that not all film with A list talent needs to cost a fortune (Look at the likes of the Ocean films to see that) However, their deals include significant chunks of the films gross as a backdoor payment.
Look at the likes of Terminator 3. 30 Million to Arnie plus 20% of the films takings. This is an example of a 'Star vehicle' which demands huge paychecks.
I'd suggest you take a couple of minutes to look into how films are produced and costed, how budgets are formulated and why after doing this, you would understand that a 40k film at the very very least would cost $100 million for a small scale, intimate story.
Hollow wrote: The point about A list stars that was made (Which is still flying completely over your head, its actually amazing to watch) Is that a film like Pacific Rim cost the best part of $200 Million without any A list celebs sucking up cash, more of the budget is seen on the screen and you get a clearer idea of what that kind of money gets you in terms of production design, SFX, scope and scale etc...
Tell me about the films that makes 'hundreds of millions' without significant names attached to the roles? Although you are right that not all film with A list talent needs to cost a fortune (Look at the likes of the Ocean films to see that) However, their deals include significant chunks of the films gross as a backdoor payment.
Look at the likes of Terminator 3. 30 Million to Arnie plus 20% of the films takings. This is an example of a 'Star vehicle' which demands huge paychecks.
I'd suggest you take a couple of minutes to look into how films are produced and costed, how budgets are formulated and why after doing this, you would understand that a 40k film at the very very least would cost $100 million for a small scale, intimate story.
No we were talking about how much films would cost, saying this film reached 100 millions and without A-listers. I said whether there are A-listers or not is Irrelevant because you can have low budget films with A-listers and high budget films with A-listers. The film being 100 million without A-listers is irrelevant, you could have a 200 million dollar film without A-listers, a 20 million dollar film with A-listers.
"Tell me about the films that makes 'hundreds of millions' without significant names attached to the roles?" are you kidding, pacific rim, but that is regardless even if there were no 100 million films without A-listers, what does that have to do with anything, it would just prove the point I was making lol
"I'd suggest you take a couple of minutes to look into how films are produced and costed, how budgets are formulated and why after doing this, you would understand that a 40k film at the very very least would cost $100 million for a small scale, intimate story." I'd suggest you learn how to use logic.
Ok this is over... you are so utterly unaware of the points that are being made and how you have been, and are, so completely off base regarding this topic that it would be more fruitful talking to a stool, at least then it would have a leg to stand on.
Just wow... I'm constantly surprised at how ignorant and stupid people can be. However, when it is coupled with such confidence it's just depressing.
Hollow wrote: Ok this is over... you are so utterly unaware of the points that are being made and how you have been, and are, so completely off base regarding this topic that it would be more fruitful talking to a stool, at least then it would have a leg to stand on.
Just wow... I'm constantly surprised at how ignorant and stupid people can be. However, when it is coupled with such confidence it's just depressing.
He was saying 100 millon is a lot and that's what most things cost, also saying and that is without A-list actors, which means with A-list actors its going to cost more. Yeah I get that, But its still irrelevant, as A-list actors are not always going a) add a lot to the budget and b) or dictate the budget at all. You can have 10 million (overall) budget like Snatch that had Brad Pitt in it, or 50 million for the matrix. So again having A-list actors is irrelevant. Sure they can add to the films budget, but adding anything to the film is going to increase the budget. I used google this time lol
Hollow wrote: Ok this is over... you are so utterly unaware of the points that are being made and how you have been, and are, so completely off base regarding this topic that it would be more fruitful talking to a stool, at least then it would have a leg to stand on.
Just wow... I'm constantly surprised at how ignorant and stupid people can be. However, when it is coupled with such confidence it's just depressing.
That's par for the course with lovely Dev.
So I actually contribute to the thread here's my thoughts on a 40k film. It's not a great idea. The only faction that seems likely to have people outside the fans of Warhammer relate to it is Imperial Guard. Which is just a standard sci fi themed soldier movie and that seems....dull. There's no time to add the depth for things like the Eldar Fall unless you make it a series of films from the get go. Which is a ridiculous gamble financially.
Hollow wrote: Ok this is over... you are so utterly unaware of the points that are being made and how you have been, and are, so completely off base regarding this topic that it would be more fruitful talking to a stool, at least then it would have a leg to stand on.
Just wow... I'm constantly surprised at how ignorant and stupid people can be. However, when it is coupled with such confidence it's just depressing.
That's par for the course with lovely Dev.
So I actually contribute to the thread here's my thoughts on a 40k film. It's not a great idea. The only faction that seems likely to have people outside the fans of Warhammer relate to it is Imperial Guard. Which is just a standard sci fi themed soldier movie and that seems....dull. There's no time to add the depth for things like the Eldar Fall unless you make it a series of films from the get go. Which is a ridiculous gamble financially.
Par for the course lol like when you were debating with me about the Emperors trip to Molech, here's your qoute:
"Seems really stupid to wait centuries to fortify something important especially in a time when anyone could wander in." yeah if you actually read the book, you'd 'know' that the Emperor went to Molech in the Dark Age of technology, 20 millenniums ago." lol At least I have the common sense to read the book I'am arguing about.
The big draw of 40k is the setting, not any specific story, IMO. If you were going to make a 40k film the best thing to do would probably be to use the setting to make something like an Inquisitor movie. Something relatable with a strong story and character-driven, that just happens to utilise the 40k setting. Trying to go big-budget immediately with a full-blown Horus Heresy trilogy would be a recipe for disaster.
The reality is that the 40k universe is fairly well known but doesn't have anywhere near the popularity required for a studio to try to make a big budget film out of it. Warcraft was a much more popular property and the big-budget Warcraft film was pretty much a disaster, mainly because having a good setting doesn't automatically lead to telling a good story. One problem films like this tend to have is they try to squeeze in as many details as possible to please the fans while ignoring the fact they need to make a compelling story.
$20 million would get you nothing in today's market. As a comparison, Altered Carbon cost about $150 million, which is $15 million per episode, and that's without any big name stars attached. So $20 million gets you about an hour of high-quality sci-fi and that doesn't take into account economies of scale when making a series or the marketing costs. You can't make high quality films or TV series without a big budget and I don't see anyone taking that risk on 40k.
Slipspace wrote: The big draw of 40k is the setting, not any specific story, IMO. If you were going to make a 40k film the best thing to do would probably be to use the setting to make something like an Inquisitor movie. Something relatable with a strong story and character-driven, that just happens to utilise the 40k setting. Trying to go big-budget immediately with a full-blown Horus Heresy trilogy would be a recipe for disaster.
The reality is that the 40k universe is fairly well known but doesn't have anywhere near the popularity required for a studio to try to make a big budget film out of it. Warcraft was a much more popular property and the big-budget Warcraft film was pretty much a disaster, mainly because having a good setting doesn't automatically lead to telling a good story. One problem films like this tend to have is they try to squeeze in as many details as possible to please the fans while ignoring the fact they need to make a compelling story.
$20 million would get you nothing in today's market. As a comparison, Altered Carbon cost about $150 million, which is $15 million per episode, and that's without any big name stars attached. So $20 million gets you about an hour of high-quality sci-fi and that doesn't take into account economies of scale when making a series or the marketing costs. You can't make high quality films or TV series without a big budget and I don't see anyone taking that risk on 40k.
If I could give that guy making the fanmade Inquisitor film 20 million, firstly I would if I was like a billionaire and secondly I think he could make an amazing film from what I've seen. He just needs to get a better script and better voice actors.
Slipspace wrote: The big draw of 40k is the setting, not any specific story, IMO. If you were going to make a 40k film the best thing to do would probably be to use the setting to make something like an Inquisitor movie. Something relatable with a strong story and character-driven, that just happens to utilise the 40k setting. Trying to go big-budget immediately with a full-blown Horus Heresy trilogy would be a recipe for disaster.
Yep, this. Normal human main characters, and Inquisitor or a Rogue Trader would be good. This would be relatable to larger audiences, while not boring me death by being an two hours of special effects filled marine bolter porn and most importantly it would be something that could actually be done with a moderate budget.
Hollow wrote: Ok this is over... you are so utterly unaware of the points that are being made and how you have been, and are, so completely off base regarding this topic that it would be more fruitful talking to a stool, at least then it would have a leg to stand on.
Just wow... I'm constantly surprised at how ignorant and stupid people can be. However, when it is coupled with such confidence it's just depressing.
That's par for the course with lovely Dev.
So I actually contribute to the thread here's my thoughts on a 40k film. It's not a great idea. The only faction that seems likely to have people outside the fans of Warhammer relate to it is Imperial Guard. Which is just a standard sci fi themed soldier movie and that seems....dull. There's no time to add the depth for things like the Eldar Fall unless you make it a series of films from the get go. Which is a ridiculous gamble financially.
Par for the course lol like when you were debating with me about the Emperors trip to Molech, here's your qoute:
"Seems really stupid to wait centuries to fortify something important especially in a time when anyone could wander in." yeah if you actually read the book, you'd 'know' that the Emperor went to Molech in the Dark Age of technology, 20 millenniums ago." lol At least I have the common sense to read the book I'am arguing about.
Okay. I was responding to what you said about the book there. Anything to say about the subject at hand?
Banville wrote: From a writer's perspective, you want the story to revolve around someone the reader/audience connects with. Space Marine novels sell cos the audience is already invested through the game, to reach a wider audience you'd need the protagonist to be human. You can include as many Space Marines and Xenos as you want after that.
The reason Game of Thrones the TV show is so successful is because the intrigue, backstabbing and human frailty are what drive the plot. It's not about the dragons.
There was a line in one of the BRBs or Marine codexes which said that to most Imperial citizens the Space Marines are just legends and, for most citizens, seeing one means your end is pretty much nigh because if Marines are involved, something heavy is going down. Something to which the words 'extreme prejudice' are unfortunately attached.
TLDR: The movie needs to have a human and human concerns and passions at its heart. Otherwise, it's just the opening of Saving Private Ryan for two hours.
Absolutely agree.
The plot of "Legion" would make an incredible film imo.
Why not just a Ciaphus Cain adaptation?
Its mostly guardsman orientated, its light for a series set in Wh40k, and the main character has some charisma.
I would want to see a Warhammer 30k movie adaptation of the Horus Heresy novels, to an extent, similar to Lord of The Rings or Harry Potter, as in a series of novels to a series of movies. Of course a lot of it would have to be condensed or glossed over as no one is going to watch a movie series with 25ish movies in it, unless your Marvel. Although if it had to be 40k I'd have to go with an Imperial Guard movie or Inquisition movie, as there was already a Space Marines movie, and a gritty Saving Private Ryan-esque IG movie would be neat, or a horror-investigation-survival Inquisition movie would be pretty riveting, actually thinking about it I now want a movie of an Inquisitor of the Ordo Malleus and his retinue of Grey Knights (too be slaughtered of course) facing of with a horde of Daemons, or perhaps being hunted by a Greater Daemon through a fallen hive city or Space Hulk... Someone get on that...
Of course the problem as I see it with a "Blockbuster" movie is that they're probably going to get something wrong and its going upset a lot of us.
Ok ok, hear me out. We should make the movie to be about Ultramarines! In order to make it work, we'll have a squad of Ultramarine, who are out on their first mission. But they are tactical marines, not scout, nobody want to see scouts. It should be on a famous planet, like, say, Mithron. Let's say that the team is responding to some distress signal, it worked well in Alien. The distress signal should come from a shrine guarded by Imperial Fists, so we can show how the Ultramarines are the very best of the space marines and how a dozen of them wins where a hundred lesser space marines fall. We would set up the enemy to be black legion, plenty of CSM mooks to show being kill. Let's have the Ultramarine standard be a Chaos detector that starts burning when Chaos corruption is nearby too!
Delvarus Centurion wrote: You can have 10 million (overall) budget like Snatch that had Brad Pitt in it, or 50 million for the matrix.l
Jesus.... Those movies are 20 years old. Brad Pitt called Guy Ritchie to work with him after liking Lock Stock and took a percentage of takings rather than money up front. The Matrix had a production budget of over $60 million dollars. (The fact that you don't know that the production budget only accounts for about 50/60% of the total budget to bring a film to market shows how ignorant you are regarding this topic) and we will forget the fact that AGAIN Reeves took 10% of the films takings at the box office.
Why can't you just hold up your hands and say "Yeah, $20 million was way off base, I was wrong about that." and move on? You were wrong, are wrong and continuing to be so does nothing other than make you seem like an arrogant fool.
Yeah but they can make hundreds of millions on films without A-list celebrities, adding A-list celebrities isn't going to always up the price of a film,
Wow...
It's not often I agree with Hollow here, but yes- You need some known names. Not only for pulling power, but also if you cast a bunch of no-names they better have acted in something before, or you're paying a load of fines just to the SAG just to take a chance on someone.
Doing a film which was in the 40k universe, but not directly related would entertain me. It'd have to be a human centric story (not based around a space marine) though for us to get into it. Then once it's set down other spin offs could be done.
Even doing a pre fall human experience... maybe the war with the iron men. Or just a crime or supernatural film in space, but happens to be in the universe. A bit of hyperbole... Event Horizon could be something akin to that... that could be the first experience of humans touching the warp. I'm working through the Horus Heresy novels (I've just finished Fulgrim, but done HH1-3 and Flight of the Eisenstein) and I like the idea the warp is unknown, but those who do know about it either treat the entities in it like gods, and other people treat them just like creatures and from a rational point of view. On the HH I'm pretty bored of the gallant, straight up and down space marine captain who doesn't follow his legion into damnation with his human sidekick, and the captain is nearly the best warrior, but still beats the best warrior with sheer willpower and grit. It feels a little tired now, especially as I don't really fear for the space marines life as they're so sturdy (except for when they shoot other space marines). That's why it should be a human. Space marines also have to wear helmets a lot of the time, so I'd forget who was who and mostly didn't care which one was which... like in the Ultramarines movie.
A genestealer infestation would be cool too. It would start like a workers association, and you would probably support them as the industrial complex employing/enslaving the protagonist would be horrid. Then you'd begin to realise that something is up and then it'd introduce other factions, like kill teams, inquisitors (who you'd hate too as they burn everything), imperial guards/PDFs, arbites, underground psykers. Eventually they think they have exterminated (or avoided) the horde, but then the rest of the hive fleet turn up for round two.
Yeah. Personally I'd go genestealer infestation as a series. Let the audience side with the workers then introduce creepy elements a la Stranger Things. You'd need humour in it, too. Ratchet up the tension and get progressively darker. Our protagonist sacrifices everything to send out a distress signal. Two episodes pass as they hide from the increasingly zealous and deranged cultists. Then the Marines can come in at the end. Audience are happy to see them until they start purging the place. Fate of our hero is left ambiguous. Fade to black. I suppose GW would push for Ultramarines but the Carcharodons would be perfect for this final act.
My biggest issue with a film (or series for that matter) is not so much what it will be about, but who the target audience will be.
Lets be honest, a good whack of 40K's fan base are a younger age range. So do you make a movie an 18+ with all the grimderp themes and ultra-violence and cut out a good portion of your audience, or do you restrain it somewhat and aim for a lower age bracket so you can get more money into the theatre?
Inquisitor Gideon wrote: My biggest issue with a film (or series for that matter) is not so much what it will be about, but who the target audience will be.
Lets be honest, a good whack of 40K's fan base are a younger age range. So do you make a movie an 18+ with all the grimderp themes and ultra-violence and cut out a good portion of your audience, or do you restrain it somewhat and aim for a lower age bracket so you can get more money into the theatre?
I'd argue that most of GWs customers are over 18. At least the ones that matter. Educated professionals with spending power. GW tried pandering to impulse-buying 15 year olds, swinging from Mammy's purse strings and it didn't work. I'd be aiming at a 15s Certificate, or whatever the US equivalent is.
Inquisitor Gideon wrote: My biggest issue with a film (or series for that matter) is not so much what it will be about, but who the target audience will be.
Lets be honest, a good whack of 40K's fan base are a younger age range. So do you make a movie an 18+ with all the grimderp themes and ultra-violence and cut out a good portion of your audience, or do you restrain it somewhat and aim for a lower age bracket so you can get more money into the theatre?
I'd argue that most of GWs customers are over 18. At least the ones that matter. Educated professionals with spending power. GW tried pandering to impulse-buying 15 year olds, swinging from Mammy's purse strings and it didn't work. I'd be aiming at a 15s Certificate, or whatever the US equivalent is.
If a 40k film were to happen it would most likely be rated, at most, 12. The recent trend in films has been to go for the lowest age certificate possible in order to be available to as wide an audience as possible, You just need to look at the fact the last Terminator film was a 12, as was the last Die Hard film. In a generally risk-averse market I think it'd be highly unlikely the studio would aim for a 15 or higher certificate.
Inquisitor Gideon wrote: My biggest issue with a film (or series for that matter) is not so much what it will be about, but who the target audience will be.
Lets be honest, a good whack of 40K's fan base are a younger age range. So do you make a movie an 18+ with all the grimderp themes and ultra-violence and cut out a good portion of your audience, or do you restrain it somewhat and aim for a lower age bracket so you can get more money into the theatre?
I'd argue that most of GWs customers are over 18. At least the ones that matter. Educated professionals with spending power. GW tried pandering to impulse-buying 15 year olds, swinging from Mammy's purse strings and it didn't work. I'd be aiming at a 15s Certificate, or whatever the US equivalent is.
If a 40k film were to happen it would most likely be rated, at most, 12. The recent trend in films has been to go for the lowest age certificate possible in order to be available to as wide an audience as possible, You just need to look at the fact the last Terminator film was a 12, as was the last Die Hard film. In a generally risk-averse market I think it'd be highly unlikely the studio would aim for a 15 or higher certificate.
Which is pretty much my thinking. You'd have to...sanitise the movie to get the biggest audience in. Especially when trying to pitch a risky movie like 40K when you're trying to get funding. Or you need to get lucky enough to get a movie exec who was into the setting in the first place. Like LotR had when it was changed from two to three movies.
You're probably right. I'd still be pushing for that if I was writing it. The director and producers can chop away at it after it's done but I'd try and make it as spiky as possible. Of course cursing and swear words won't be in it, cos of the different dialect. Sexual violence, I don't see any need for. Nor sexual references outside of a romantic story arc. Threat, danger and violence are what you're going to be running past the censors. I don't see and reason to make it any worse or any more sanitised than Band of Brothers or the Pacific. I would try and make it as "real" as possible, so very little cartoon, Avengers stuff. And let's face it, if it's going to be realistic, there's no real way around depicting weaponised chainsaws or mass reactive rounds or genestealers in a way that isn't scary.
Inquisitor Gideon wrote: My biggest issue with a film (or series for that matter) is not so much what it will be about, but who the target audience will be.
Lets be honest, a good whack of 40K's fan base are a younger age range. So do you make a movie an 18+ with all the grimderp themes and ultra-violence and cut out a good portion of your audience, or do you restrain it somewhat and aim for a lower age bracket so you can get more money into the theatre?
You say this, but there's plenty of history where 18+ films have had toys and other things pushed towards children (Terminator, RoboCop, Aliens). Also, the film could be 18+ at the cinema, but where is all the money made? Is it at the box office, or is it the associated merchandise, DVD and other sales? Kids will watch the movie on streaming, DVD or TV, so don't worry about that and then can be drip fed toys and models and video games.
I can understand that GW will want to go for the widest demographic possible, but that wouldn't be the best move. That said, even if the movie was rubbish all the current fans would go see it, even if they did complain about it afterwards, so they've got some guaranteed income, but a crap movie will ruin future movies. Similiar to how I'm very sceptical about 40K video games or even Star Trek video games (some are ok, but there are loads of rubbish ones) people would become sceptical of future movies and it might take decades to recover.
But again, all of that said, GW has income and their shares are higher than ever without doing a movie, so why worry? The gamers complain about all the profiteering and commercialism, but still buy all the models and play the games, so a movie might not be any different.
For some reason chopping someone's head off and shooting them garners a low age rating (unless there is blood, or a puppy gets kicked) than two loving people being naked, so it probably would end up a 12 or 15, unless of course there were dark eldar or slaanesh involved. A sexually violent film would not be very popular and could alienate more than just an age range, but larger swathes of the population and get you banned in other countries... which could lead to other issues with your models etc.
Pretty much every movie in existence has had toys and merchandise at some point. My point is that if you're trying to pitch a movie (an experimental sci-fi at that) you're going to create an immediate barrier for yourself by making it an 18 or 15+. Any studio is going to worry when you cut out a big chunk of your audience. You need to be able to prove your movie will make money even without that section of viewers.
You say the fans will still go and see it even if it's crap. My memory reaches back to the Final Fantasy movie, Spirits Within and it disagrees quite strongly. And Final Fantasy has a much larger fan base than 40k does.
But a movie is unlikely to happen as you say, but it's usually in times of growth like GW is experiencing right now that companies would experiment. And as an aside, it's not Slannesh that would worry me being in a movie, it's Nurgle.
Inquisitor Gideon wrote: Pretty much every movie in existence has had toys and merchandise at some point. My point is that if you're trying to pitch a movie (an experimental sci-fi at that) you're going to create an immediate barrier for yourself by making it an 18 or 15+. Any studio is going to worry when you cut out a big chunk of your audience. You need to be able to prove your movie will make money even without that section of viewers.
You say the fans will still go and see it even if it's crap. My memory reaches back to the Final Fantasy movie, Spirits Within and it disagrees quite strongly. And Final Fantasy has a much larger fan base than 40k does.
But a movie is unlikely to happen as you say, but it's usually in times of growth like GW is experiencing right now that companies would experiment. And as an aside, it's not Slannesh that would worry me being in a movie, it's Nurgle.
I understand and can agree with your first statement. Studios would worry. Hopefully there are still the odd exceptions around there, but perhaps not for the millions required to make 40k good.
Final Fantasy was a bit of a flop. It also wasn't a good movie (at least in my own opinion), so it probably over performed. It also ruined their chances of making subsequent movies great and popular for a while (I've seen Kingsglaive, which is also weirdly paced, confusing but somewhat formulaic poop IMHO, but not seen advent children). Stats here: Budget:$137,000,000 (estimated) Opening Weekend USA: $11,408,853, 15 July 2001, Wide Release Gross USA: $32,131,830, 26 August 2001 Cumulative Worldwide Gross: $85,131,830 I wonder how much other stuff it sold, like games etc.
Why would Nurgle bother you? I know it'd be pretty gross... are you saying it'd bother you personally... or would bother the censors more... or both? Zombies and plague outbreaks may be easier to sell than sex crazed rape lobsters... although Hellraiser was a little kinky (especially the much later ones which show the cenobites as originally liking hedonism and pleasure, but eventually going for new realms of pain).
Nurgle would be a concern because of the visual impact. You can't get away from what it is, which is literal rotting bodies, disease, decay etc. You can't downplay or get away from that. Slaanesh is not just about sex. It's about excess, pleasure, perfection. You can easily play away from any sex aspect for another focus. Same way Khorne can be violent warriors or Tzeentch could be robed mages and schemers. Much easier immediate sell than Nurgle.
Inquisitor Gideon wrote: Nurgle would be a concern because of the visual impact. You can't get away from what it is, which is literal rotting bodies, disease, decay etc. You can't downplay or get away from that.
Pretty sure kids know what zombies are. I really think this worry about target demographic is a non-issue. Was Robocop 18+? Yes. Did that stop kids from seeing it and thinking it was awesome? Nope. Kids want to see things that are forbidden to them. Worrying about them seeing it is a waste of time, because they will see it.
Not to mention that the actual miniatures already have rotting, decaying bodies.
That's a mighty fine intestinal tract you have there.
Big difference when you're pitching to get a movie funded and made. Robocop, Alien and a tonne of others are all 18+, but they didn't already have an audience of younger kids. And a studio will want to know why you're excluding them from your target audience and as such cutting out their money. Also, static guts on a plastic model is vastly different from f/x you can get today.
Except you're not excluding them from your target audience, because adolescents will still want to see it, and if you try to market it towards them, chances are it will backfire spectacularly. See: Robocop 3, which was arguably more kid orientated. No one liked it. Even its "target audience"
In fact, if you really want to aim a movie towards adolescents, you make it more graphic, not less. Let the zombies have their guts. It worked for The Walking Dead, didn't it? This would especially be true in the case of a wh40k movie; most of the people going to see it would be wh40k fans, and there's a good chance they'll want to see it in all of its over-the-top, grimdark glory. Especially the adolescent ones. I mean, just look this old bit of artwork :
That guy has his spine hanging out. That's pretty brutal.
Age ratings are a dumb concept enforced by bureaucrats. It hurts good film making, not help it.
As you mention the Walking Dead I've got a question for those who know more about movie production than myself. How much do you think things like makeup would cost for a Warhammer film?
I'd expect it to be above average as for all the aliens, gore and general weirdness you have in 40k you'd need to make it all look good. I think like the Walking Dead it benefits a lot from good effects and that just adds effort onto making storylines and such.
Only way to make it would be about a none lore character or a story that does not focus on any chapter. Because if you make a movie about say, ultramarines, everyone who hates ultramarines will not like it, or xeno players.
It would need to be a basic strong set in lore but out side of the main heresy story.
Honestly I never see it because no matter what you are going to not make a large portion or your fan base happy.
Backspacehacker wrote: Only way to make it would be about a none lore character or a story that does not focus on any chapter. Because if you make a movie about say, ultramarines, everyone who hates ultramarines will not like it, or xeno players.
It would need to be a basic strong set in lore but out side of the main heresy story.
Honestly I never see it because no matter what you are going to not make a large portion or your fan base happy.
What I really would like to see is a film adaptation of the All Guardsman Party. You can make a good series out of that.
Though as its based on a bunch of RPG games, changes might have to be made. Like dropping the whole Tau arc and them using pulse weapons at some point.
Ironicly I think they best way to bring 40k to the screen, would be a cartoon. Like what rough neck starship troopers was (yeah that's right feel old everyone) and follow around either a guard company or a kill team.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Except you're not excluding them from your target audience, because adolescents will still want to see it, and if you try to market it towards them, chances are it will backfire spectacularly.
See: Robocop 3, which was arguably more kid orientated. No one liked it. Even its "target audience"
In fact, if you really want to aim a movie towards adolescents, you make it more graphic, not less. Let the zombies have their guts. It worked for The Walking Dead, didn't it?
This would especially be true in the case of a wh40k movie; most of the people going to see it would be wh40k fans, and there's a good chance they'll want to see it in all of its over-the-top, grimdark glory. Especially the adolescent ones.
I mean, just look this old bit of artwork :
That guy has his spine hanging out. That's pretty brutal.
Age ratings are a dumb concept enforced by bureaucrats. It hurts good film making, not help it.
Irrelevant. If you make it more graphic, you're never going to get it past the 18 rating and you're never going to be able to get the younger audience in to make the money.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Except you're not excluding them from your target audience, because adolescents will still want to see it, and if you try to market it towards them, chances are it will backfire spectacularly. See: Robocop 3, which was arguably more kid orientated. No one liked it. Even its "target audience"
In fact, if you really want to aim a movie towards adolescents, you make it more graphic, not less. Let the zombies have their guts. It worked for The Walking Dead, didn't it? This would especially be true in the case of a wh40k movie; most of the people going to see it would be wh40k fans, and there's a good chance they'll want to see it in all of its over-the-top, grimdark glory. Especially the adolescent ones. I mean, just look this old bit of artwork :
That guy has his spine hanging out. That's pretty brutal.
Age ratings are a dumb concept enforced by bureaucrats. It hurts good film making, not help it.
Irrelevant. If you make it more graphic, you're never going to get it past the 18 rating and you're never going to be able to get the younger audience in to make the money.
Didn't stop Robocop, Predator and Aliens, now did it? You appear to be under the impression that an 18+ rating generates a magical forcefield that repels anyone under that age from watching it. It doesn't, age ratings are useless. If age ratings worked, then Call of Duty (rated M 17+) wouldn't be populated with 12 year olds.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Backspacehacker wrote: Ironicly I think they best way to bring 40k to the screen, would be a cartoon. Like what rough neck starship troopers was (yeah that's right feel old everyone) and follow around either a guard company or a kill team.
Well, that would solve the problems of portraying Space Marines and the like. Live Action? Quite difficult to do it convincingly, as you'd need a lot of CGI and prosthetics. Animation? Much easier.
I really think you could do an amazing HH movie series similar to Avengers (not in the kids comic style but in the way the universe is set up... IMO a cross between avengers and the batman series). What i mean by this is essentially give different factions their own movies in a greater universe until they all come together for the actual HH in the end.
Obviously, everyone on this board knows exactly how the HH ends but from an outside, it has all the greatness a true tragedy needs. It has a relatable villain and even all of the good guys are cast in shades of grey. Much of the HH could have been avoided other than a few tragic missteps. Great friendships and heartbreaking betrayals all on the backdrop of a setting that makes star wars look like kids play. After the main series, there is then thousands of amazing side movies you could make about anyone in the setting. Heck id love to see the actual great betrayal completely from Ollanius Pius pov (before they made him a perpetual)
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Except you're not excluding them from your target audience, because adolescents will still want to see it, and if you try to market it towards them, chances are it will backfire spectacularly.
See: Robocop 3, which was arguably more kid orientated. No one liked it. Even its "target audience"
In fact, if you really want to aim a movie towards adolescents, you make it more graphic, not less. Let the zombies have their guts. It worked for The Walking Dead, didn't it?
This would especially be true in the case of a wh40k movie; most of the people going to see it would be wh40k fans, and there's a good chance they'll want to see it in all of its over-the-top, grimdark glory. Especially the adolescent ones.
I mean, just look this old bit of artwork :
That guy has his spine hanging out. That's pretty brutal.
Age ratings are a dumb concept enforced by bureaucrats. It hurts good film making, not help it.
Irrelevant. If you make it more graphic, you're never going to get it past the 18 rating and you're never going to be able to get the younger audience in to make the money.
Didn't stop Robocop, Predator and Aliens, now did it?
You appear to be under the impression that an 18+ rating generates a magical forcefield that repels anyone under that age from watching it. It doesn't, age ratings are useless.
If age ratings worked, then Call of Duty (rated M 17+) wouldn't be populated with 12 year olds.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Backspacehacker wrote: Ironicly I think they best way to bring 40k to the screen, would be a cartoon. Like what rough neck starship troopers was (yeah that's right feel old everyone) and follow around either a guard company or a kill team.
Well, that would solve the problems of portraying Space Marines and the like. Live Action? Quite difficult to do it convincingly, as you'd need a lot of CGI and prosthetics. Animation? Much easier.
Removed! Rule #1 please - BrookM There will be no movie if you try and make it extreme. A studio is not going to fund a movie like this when you cut out a large portion of your revenue. And yes, the18 rating is a barrier, that's the point. You're not going to see a 12 year old walk unchallenged into a theatre to an 18+ movie.
And if you make it too sanitized you'll get a terrible film that no one's happy with. I'd rather have no movie than a trite, soulless one that's only there to make a buck. Nurgle zombies are not a problem. If it was fine for Walking Dead and any other zombie films to have stuff like that, I don't see why wh40k can't have them.
Look, I get that a studio might see it as a risk. But to me that's more of a bureaucratic problem than a film problem, and most of the problems are due to arbitrary restrictions and practices that hurt film making more than helping it. Underage people will try to see it anyway, so in practice it doesn't really do anything. Also, which rating system are we talking about? US or British? Because different countries have different rating systems. For example, in the United States a minor can see a R rated, provided he or she is accompanied by an adult. Which means that yes, a 12 year old can walk unchallenged into a 18+ movie in the United States, provided there's an adult present. I was thinking more of the American rating system.
It should start with very pleasant planet that is run by a benevolent planetary governor. An ideal place to live filled with positive people who know tomorrow will be a better day. Being chosen for the Imperial Tithe is considered an honour with boons provided to the family for members on the Tithe. Movie begins with a big celebration as the new "honoured" are selected and being picked up......cue Grimdark.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Except you're not excluding them from your target audience, because adolescents will still want to see it, and if you try to market it towards them, chances are it will backfire spectacularly.
See: Robocop 3, which was arguably more kid orientated. No one liked it. Even its "target audience"
In fact, if you really want to aim a movie towards adolescents, you make it more graphic, not less. Let the zombies have their guts. It worked for The Walking Dead, didn't it?
This would especially be true in the case of a wh40k movie; most of the people going to see it would be wh40k fans, and there's a good chance they'll want to see it in all of its over-the-top, grimdark glory. Especially the adolescent ones.
I mean, just look this old bit of artwork :
That guy has his spine hanging out. That's pretty brutal.
Age ratings are a dumb concept enforced by bureaucrats. It hurts good film making, not help it.
Irrelevant. If you make it more graphic, you're never going to get it past the 18 rating and you're never going to be able to get the younger audience in to make the money.
Didn't stop Robocop, Predator and Aliens, now did it?
You appear to be under the impression that an 18+ rating generates a magical forcefield that repels anyone under that age from watching it. It doesn't, age ratings are useless.
If age ratings worked, then Call of Duty (rated M 17+) wouldn't be populated with 12 year olds.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Backspacehacker wrote: Ironicly I think they best way to bring 40k to the screen, would be a cartoon. Like what rough neck starship troopers was (yeah that's right feel old everyone) and follow around either a guard company or a kill team.
Well, that would solve the problems of portraying Space Marines and the like. Live Action? Quite difficult to do it convincingly, as you'd need a lot of CGI and prosthetics. Animation? Much easier.
Removed! Rule #1 please - BrookM There will be no movie if you try and make it extreme. A studio is not going to fund a movie like this when you cut out a large portion of your revenue. And yes, the18 rating is a barrier, that's the point. You're not going to see a 12 year old walk unchallenged into a theatre to an 18+ movie.
I think you could still have plenty of grim darkness and battles without going to the R rating. Think movies like batman or ironman, plenty of people die its just not shown as arms being blown off and guts everywhere. I think you would want to keep the first several pg13 until you established a good solid base then do a side story that dials up the violence and see how it does. Save that for a saving private ryan style movie with guard or a true chaos movie full on gore.
A R rating is no longer seen by movie makers as the kiss of death thanks to the success of Deadpool.
that said I maintain a movie would proably be a less effective way to do it, a Netflix series focusing on an Inqusitor (adapt Eisenhorn maybe?) seems a MUCH better approuch. as a series allows you to really get into the setting without trying to cram a bajillion details into a 2 hour movie
BrianDavion wrote: A R rating is no longer seen by movie makers as the kiss of death thanks to the success of Deadpool.
that said I maintain a movie would proably be a less effective way to do it, a Netflix series focusing on an Inqusitor (adapt Eisenhorn maybe?) seems a MUCH better approuch. as a series allows you to really get into the setting without trying to cram a bajillion details into a 2 hour movie
I actually have had this exact discussion with a friend not long ago. We both agreed a "inquisitor" movie would be the perfect way to introduce the setting.
But even marvel let the other movies kinda make the way for Deadpool to have its successful R rating. obviously, id love the movie to be R but i think you could do a 40k setting justice and still keep to a pg13 at first simply by not graphically showing the death that takes place
Also, what do you think of Denzel as an inquisitor? Think kinda like man on fire
BrianDavion wrote: A R rating is no longer seen by movie makers as the kiss of death thanks to the success of Deadpool.
that said I maintain a movie would proably be a less effective way to do it, a Netflix series focusing on an Inqusitor (adapt Eisenhorn maybe?) seems a MUCH better approuch. as a series allows you to really get into the setting without trying to cram a bajillion details into a 2 hour movie
I actually have had this exact discussion with a friend not long ago. We both agreed a "inquisitor" movie would be the perfect way to introduce the setting.
But even marvel let the other movies kinda make the way for Deadpool to have its successful R rating. obviously, id love the movie to be R but i think you could do a 40k setting justice and still keep to a pg13 at first simply by not graphically showing the death that takes place
Also, what do you think of Denzel as an inquisitor? Think kinda like man on fire
Yeah, that would be cool. Seeing Samuel L Jackson as an Inquisitor could be great as well, if only for the potential Pulp Fiction references. "Gothic, melon-fether, do you speak it" "Say 'mon'keigh' again. Say 'mon'keigh' again, I dare you, I double dare you melon-fether, say mon'keigh one more Goddamn time!"
BrianDavion wrote: A R rating is no longer seen by movie makers as the kiss of death thanks to the success of Deadpool.
that said I maintain a movie would proably be a less effective way to do it, a Netflix series focusing on an Inqusitor (adapt Eisenhorn maybe?) seems a MUCH better approuch. as a series allows you to really get into the setting without trying to cram a bajillion details into a 2 hour movie
I actually have had this exact discussion with a friend not long ago. We both agreed a "inquisitor" movie would be the perfect way to introduce the setting.
But even marvel let the other movies kinda make the way for Deadpool to have its successful R rating. obviously, id love the movie to be R but i think you could do a 40k setting justice and still keep to a pg13 at first simply by not graphically showing the death that takes place
Also, what do you think of Denzel as an inquisitor? Think kinda like man on fire
Yeah, that would be cool.
Seeing Samuel L Jackson as an Inquisitor could be great as well, if only for the potential Pulp Fiction references. "Gothic, melon-fether, do you speak it" "Say 'mon'keigh' again. Say 'mon'keigh' again, I dare you, I double dare you melon-fether, say mon'keigh one more Goddamn time!"
As funny as that would be i dont think he would make a good inquisitor like Denzel..... Now later on making Samual Jackson a commissar would be awesome "ask if we should fall back one more mother time and I will send you to the emperor to ask him face to face"
Automatically Appended Next Post:
BrianDavion wrote: could work. really you'd need to craft an Inqusitor first and figure out what kind he is. is he a very cerebral type? an actiony type etc.
I was thinking similar to the one whos journal you read on Malifax. Torn between how far he can go for the emperor before being consumed by chaos itself. The internal struggle between doing what must be done and going to far. That why I wouldn't do an actually established inquisitor for the first movie but let him develop the character for himself. Thas why i said think man on fire where he has that internal struggle with his own demons
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Didn't stop Robocop, Predator and Aliens, now did it?
Which one of those had a 18+ rating exactly? For reference, in France, one of the only non-pornographic movie that almost got a 18+ rating was Martyrs (so something a bit… harder than those syfy movies), and that was overturned, because 18+ rating is the kiss of death in France: you can't show it in normal movie theaters. Predator, Alien and Robocop were all 12+ in France lol we rock.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: Ok ok, hear me out. We should make the movie to be about Ultramarines! In order to make it work, we'll have a squad of Ultramarine, who are out on their first mission. But they are tactical marines, not scout, nobody want to see scouts. It should be on a famous planet, like, say, Mithron. Let's say that the team is responding to some distress signal, it worked well in Alien. The distress signal should come from a shrine guarded by Imperial Fists, so we can show how the Ultramarines are the very best of the space marines and how a dozen of them wins where a hundred lesser space marines fall. We would set up the enemy to be black legion, plenty of CSM mooks to show being kill. Let's have the Ultramarine standard be a Chaos detector that starts burning when Chaos corruption is nearby too!
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Didn't stop Robocop, Predator and Aliens, now did it?
Which one of those had a 18+ rating exactly?
For reference, in France, one of the only non-pornographic movie that almost got a 18+ rating was Martyrs (so something a bit… harder than those syfy movies), and that was overturned, because 18+ rating is the kiss of death in France: you can't show it in normal movie theaters.
Predator, Alien and Robocop were all 12+ in France lol we rock.
Robocop was 18 in the UK, R in the states.
An R rating is 18+ unless with an adult. In that case it doesn't matter what age you are.
Alien has several ratings, depending on the year and what version it is.
In the UK it originally had an X rating, which is higher than a 18+. In 1987 it was rerated to 18+, and the directors cut was rerated to 15+ in 2003.
In the US it's an R for the theatrical release, but MA for the uncensored TV version and apparently was rerated to PG for the TV version.
Predator already had a rerating, but not as much as Alien.
In the UK it was 18+ on release, 15+ in 2013
In the US its R.
And all 3 movies are rated 12 in France. Which is interesting, because in my observation those movies tend to be popular with adolescent males.
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: Ok ok, hear me out.
We should make the movie to be about Ultramarines!
In order to make it work, we'll have a squad of Ultramarine, who are out on their first mission. But they are tactical marines, not scout, nobody want to see scouts.
It should be on a famous planet, like, say, Mithron.
Let's say that the team is responding to some distress signal, it worked well in Alien.
The distress signal should come from a shrine guarded by Imperial Fists, so we can show how the Ultramarines are the very best of the space marines and how a dozen of them wins where a hundred lesser space marines fall.
We would set up the enemy to be black legion, plenty of CSM mooks to show being kill.
Let's have the Ultramarine standard be a Chaos detector that starts burning when Chaos corruption is nearby too!
BrianDavion wrote: A R rating is no longer seen by movie makers as the kiss of death thanks to the success of Deadpool.
that said I maintain a movie would proably be a less effective way to do it, a Netflix series focusing on an Inqusitor (adapt Eisenhorn maybe?) seems a MUCH better approuch. as a series allows you to really get into the setting without trying to cram a bajillion details into a 2 hour movie
I actually have had this exact discussion with a friend not long ago. We both agreed a "inquisitor" movie would be the perfect way to introduce the setting.
But even marvel let the other movies kinda make the way for Deadpool to have its successful R rating. obviously, id love the movie to be R but i think you could do a 40k setting justice and still keep to a pg13 at first simply by not graphically showing the death that takes place
Also, what do you think of Denzel as an inquisitor? Think kinda like man on fire
Yeah, that would be cool.
Seeing Samuel L Jackson as an Inquisitor could be great as well, if only for the potential Pulp Fiction references. "Gothic, melon-fether, do you speak it" "Say 'mon'keigh' again. Say 'mon'keigh' again, I dare you, I double dare you melon-fether, say mon'keigh one more Goddamn time!"
As funny as that would be i dont think he would make a good inquisitor like Denzel..... Now later on making Samual Jackson a commissar would be awesome "ask if we should fall back one more mother time and I will send you to the emperor to ask him face to face"
Automatically Appended Next Post:
BrianDavion wrote: could work. really you'd need to craft an Inqusitor first and figure out what kind he is. is he a very cerebral type? an actiony type etc.
I was thinking similar to the one whos journal you read on Malifax. Torn between how far he can go for the emperor before being consumed by chaos itself. The internal struggle between doing what must be done and going to far. That why I wouldn't do an actually established inquisitor for the first movie but let him develop the character for himself. Thas why i said think man on fire where he has that internal struggle with his own demons
Yeah it really depends, I think thats the thing about an Inqusitor movie, Inqusitors come from so many differan t walks of life you could cast just about anyone in it.
bullyboy wrote: Just do Storm of Iron, inflate the role of the one female guardswoman who survives the assault. Hawke can be made an even bigger role. Just need more intro to flesh it out,,but battle scenes are good to go.
I would spend an unhealthy amount of time in the theatres watching this. Storm of Iron was my favourite 40k book.
Delvarus Centurion wrote: You can have 10 million (overall) budget like Snatch that had Brad Pitt in it, or 50 million for the matrix.l
Jesus.... Those movies are 20 years old. Brad Pitt called Guy Ritchie to work with him after liking Lock Stock and took a percentage of takings rather than money up front. The Matrix had a production budget of over $60 million dollars. (The fact that you don't know that the production budget only accounts for about 50/60% of the total budget to bring a film to market shows how ignorant you are regarding this topic) and we will forget the fact that AGAIN Reeves took 10% of the films takings at the box office.
Why can't you just hold up your hands and say "Yeah, $20 million was way off base, I was wrong about that." and move on? You were wrong, are wrong and continuing to be so does nothing other than make you seem like an arrogant fool.
Okay then, Under the Skin 13 million with Scarlet Johansson, Birdman 16 million etc. 20 million is not way off base, as films are made with that budget and less but that's not what we are arguing about, don't try and change the argument. We are talking about A-list starts being irrelevant when it comes to budgets, they can be in 13 million budget and 200 million so if they can be at both ends of the scale in budget then A-list actors are NOT factor in how much a budget is going to be, plus actors can get paid on the back end and not actually receive an upfront amount, so no actually you are wrong, and you know it.
Yeah it really depends, I think thats the thing about an Inqusitor movie, Inqusitors come from so many differan t walks of life you could cast just about anyone in it.
Delvarus Centurion wrote: You can have 10 million (overall) budget like Snatch that had Brad Pitt in it, or 50 million for the matrix.l
Jesus.... Those movies are 20 years old. Brad Pitt called Guy Ritchie to work with him after liking Lock Stock and took a percentage of takings rather than money up front. The Matrix had a production budget of over $60 million dollars. (The fact that you don't know that the production budget only accounts for about 50/60% of the total budget to bring a film to market shows how ignorant you are regarding this topic) and we will forget the fact that AGAIN Reeves took 10% of the films takings at the box office.
Why can't you just hold up your hands and say "Yeah, $20 million was way off base, I was wrong about that." and move on? You were wrong, are wrong and continuing to be so does nothing other than make you seem like an arrogant fool.
Okay then, Under the Skin 13 million with Scarlet Johansson, Birdman 16 million etc. 20 million is not way off base, as films are made with that budget and less but that's not what we are arguing about, don't try and change the argument. We are talking about A-list starts being irrelevant when it comes to budgets, they can be in 13 million budget and 200 million so if they can be at both ends of the scale in budget then A-list actors are NOT factor in how much a budget is going to be, plus actors can get paid on the back end and not actually receive an upfront amount, so no actually you are wrong, and you know it.
We have taken away the shovel yet he continues to dig....
Delvarus Centurion wrote: You can have 10 million (overall) budget like Snatch that had Brad Pitt in it, or 50 million for the matrix.l
Jesus.... Those movies are 20 years old. Brad Pitt called Guy Ritchie to work with him after liking Lock Stock and took a percentage of takings rather than money up front. The Matrix had a production budget of over $60 million dollars. (The fact that you don't know that the production budget only accounts for about 50/60% of the total budget to bring a film to market shows how ignorant you are regarding this topic) and we will forget the fact that AGAIN Reeves took 10% of the films takings at the box office.
Why can't you just hold up your hands and say "Yeah, $20 million was way off base, I was wrong about that." and move on? You were wrong, are wrong and continuing to be so does nothing other than make you seem like an arrogant fool.
Okay then, Under the Skin 13 million with Scarlet Johansson, Birdman 16 million etc. 20 million is not way off base, as films are made with that budget and less but that's not what we are arguing about, don't try and change the argument. We are talking about A-list starts being irrelevant when it comes to budgets, they can be in 13 million budget and 200 million so if they can be at both ends of the scale in budget then A-list actors are NOT factor in how much a budget is going to be, plus actors can get paid on the back end and not actually receive an upfront amount, so no actually you are wrong, and you know it.
We have taken away the shovel yet he continues to dig....
LOL no,
"It's not often I agree with Hollow here, but yes- You need some known names. Not only for pulling power, but also if you cast a bunch of no-names they better have acted in something before, or you're paying a load of fines just to the SAG just to take a chance on someone."
This is what you said, first of whether you need big names has nothing to do with the budget, you can have big names at either end of the spectrum of budget size, but there are films at either end of the spectrum that have no big names. Some directors will purposely not want big names like Prometheus and the squeal. Michael Fassbender was the only person that could be considered a big name but he was still not a big name by then by any reasonable standard, even big name actors will take gak pay for a specific role, if they "care" about it and gak like that.
Delvarus Centurion wrote: You can have 10 million (overall) budget like Snatch that had Brad Pitt in it, or 50 million for the matrix.l
Jesus.... Those movies are 20 years old. Brad Pitt called Guy Ritchie to work with him after liking Lock Stock and took a percentage of takings rather than money up front. The Matrix had a production budget of over $60 million dollars. (The fact that you don't know that the production budget only accounts for about 50/60% of the total budget to bring a film to market shows how ignorant you are regarding this topic) and we will forget the fact that AGAIN Reeves took 10% of the films takings at the box office.
Why can't you just hold up your hands and say "Yeah, $20 million was way off base, I was wrong about that." and move on? You were wrong, are wrong and continuing to be so does nothing other than make you seem like an arrogant fool.
Okay then, Under the Skin 13 million with Scarlet Johansson, Birdman 16 million etc. 20 million is not way off base, as films are made with that budget and less but that's not what we are arguing about, don't try and change the argument. We are talking about A-list starts being irrelevant when it comes to budgets, they can be in 13 million budget and 200 million so if they can be at both ends of the scale in budget then A-list actors are NOT factor in how much a budget is going to be, plus actors can get paid on the back end and not actually receive an upfront amount, so no actually you are wrong, and you know it.
None of those films you've mentioned are exactly "big science fiction epics" which warhammer 40k would pretty much demand being.
yes small artsy flicks can go foir substantially less, but 40k would by it's nature demand a HIGH budget. Thats the thing you're claiming a 40k movie could be made for 20 million, everyone else is saying that'd be unrelaistic for 40k. YOU'RE WRONG, no way about it.
Delvarus Centurion wrote: You can have 10 million (overall) budget like Snatch that had Brad Pitt in it, or 50 million for the matrix.l
Jesus.... Those movies are 20 years old. Brad Pitt called Guy Ritchie to work with him after liking Lock Stock and took a percentage of takings rather than money up front. The Matrix had a production budget of over $60 million dollars. (The fact that you don't know that the production budget only accounts for about 50/60% of the total budget to bring a film to market shows how ignorant you are regarding this topic) and we will forget the fact that AGAIN Reeves took 10% of the films takings at the box office.
Why can't you just hold up your hands and say "Yeah, $20 million was way off base, I was wrong about that." and move on? You were wrong, are wrong and continuing to be so does nothing other than make you seem like an arrogant fool.
Okay then, Under the Skin 13 million with Scarlet Johansson, Birdman 16 million etc. 20 million is not way off base, as films are made with that budget and less but that's not what we are arguing about, don't try and change the argument. We are talking about A-list starts being irrelevant when it comes to budgets, they can be in 13 million budget and 200 million so if they can be at both ends of the scale in budget then A-list actors are NOT factor in how much a budget is going to be, plus actors can get paid on the back end and not actually receive an upfront amount, so no actually you are wrong, and you know it.
None of those films you've mentioned are exactly "big science fiction epics" which warhammer 40k would pretty much demand being.
yes small artsy flicks can go foir substantially less, but 40k would by it's nature demand a HIGH budget. Thats the thing you're claiming a 40k movie could be made for 20 million, everyone else is saying that'd be unrelaistic for 40k. YOU'RE WRONG, no way about it.
Well you would likely use a no-named cast, could you imagine Jenifer Lawrence as a sister of battle lol for us fans it'd be ridiculous. 40k by its nature would be a high budget film, you obviously never saw the last one lol I never claimed it would be a high budget, I'd love it if it was, why do you think I said 20 million... I mean big film companies will berate you for using less budget than you were given, yeah that has more to do with the big executives expenses but people have an inflated view of how much a film can be made for.
When it comes to budget there are huge differences between genres so $20 million in one genre just doesn't get you the same quality as the same money in a different genre. If you're making a drama set in the present with a limited cast and limited number of locations your budget will stretch further. Birdman is actually a good example of that. It was a great story with relatively few locations and special effects that had no A-listers in it (Emma Stone was a recognised actress but not A-list and the film revitalised Michael Keaton's career so he doesn't really count either). It's also worth noting a lot of big-name actors will do smaller indy projects as favours or as a challenge or just for a change of pace. Something that's clearly some sort of "franchise" style project is almost certainly not going to fall into that category.
If you're making a sci-fi film or TV series the same budget would get you nowhere. CGI, practical effects and action sequences are some of the most expensive in the industry, after paying for big names. You just can't compare 2 completely different types of films and their budgets and declare you can make one with the same money as the other. That's why I brought up Altered Carbon earlier. It's extremely recent and very similar to what you'd need to do to create a 40k TV series. Sure, you could probably do it for less than $150 million with similar results, but you definitely couldn't do it for only 15% of that budget. For a decent movie you'd likely need at least $80-100 million. That's just what it costs nowadays for that sort of movie. At that point the studio needs to be pretty sure it's got a hit on its hands before it even greenlights pre-production.
One thing to keep in mind is fandom crossovers and who the target market is. Who'd the target market of a 40k movie be? (and don't just say 40k players ) it'd effectively be the geek crowd, Sci-fi fans, that sort of thing....
well thing is the market for "geek fare" is pretty crowded right now, what with star wars, Marvel, DC and plenty of other things. that means the 40k target market right now has a LOT of choice. So you're going to have to make a great movie because a 40k movie would be in direct compeition with the Avengers, and Star Wars etc.
Slipspace wrote: When it comes to budget there are huge differences between genres so $20 million in one genre just doesn't get you the same quality as the same money in a different genre. If you're making a drama set in the present with a limited cast and limited number of locations your budget will stretch further. Birdman is actually a good example of that. It was a great story with relatively few locations and special effects that had no A-listers in it (Emma Stone was a recognised actress but not A-list and the film revitalised Michael Keaton's career so he doesn't really count either). It's also worth noting a lot of big-name actors will do smaller indy projects as favours or as a challenge or just for a change of pace. Something that's clearly some sort of "franchise" style project is almost certainly not going to fall into that category.
If you're making a sci-fi film or TV series the same budget would get you nowhere. CGI, practical effects and action sequences are some of the most expensive in the industry, after paying for big names. You just can't compare 2 completely different types of films and their budgets and declare you can make one with the same money as the other. That's why I brought up Altered Carbon earlier. It's extremely recent and very similar to what you'd need to do to create a 40k TV series. Sure, you could probably do it for less than $150 million with similar results, but you definitely couldn't do it for only 15% of that budget. For a decent movie you'd likely need at least $80-100 million. That's just what it costs nowadays for that sort of movie. At that point the studio needs to be pretty sure it's got a hit on its hands before it even greenlights pre-production.
Sure there is a big difference, I'd love for there to be a massive budget, it could probably happen but the most realistic thing at present is a 20-50 million budget with a small production company. I mean we nearly have a film with that Inquisitor fan film. GW are probably waiting to see how that does before going the film route again. Look at resident evil degeneration, 75 million dollars and its amazing, you could easily do a good animated film for far less. It would look as seamless but it could still be great.
Slipspace wrote: When it comes to budget there are huge differences between genres so $20 million in one genre just doesn't get you the same quality as the same money in a different genre. If you're making a drama set in the present with a limited cast and limited number of locations your budget will stretch further. Birdman is actually a good example of that. It was a great story with relatively few locations and special effects that had no A-listers in it (Emma Stone was a recognised actress but not A-list and the film revitalised Michael Keaton's career so he doesn't really count either). It's also worth noting a lot of big-name actors will do smaller indy projects as favours or as a challenge or just for a change of pace. Something that's clearly some sort of "franchise" style project is almost certainly not going to fall into that category.
If you're making a sci-fi film or TV series the same budget would get you nowhere. CGI, practical effects and action sequences are some of the most expensive in the industry, after paying for big names. You just can't compare 2 completely different types of films and their budgets and declare you can make one with the same money as the other. That's why I brought up Altered Carbon earlier. It's extremely recent and very similar to what you'd need to do to create a 40k TV series. Sure, you could probably do it for less than $150 million with similar results, but you definitely couldn't do it for only 15% of that budget. For a decent movie you'd likely need at least $80-100 million. That's just what it costs nowadays for that sort of movie. At that point the studio needs to be pretty sure it's got a hit on its hands before it even greenlights pre-production.
Sure there is a big difference, I'd love for there to be a massive budget, it could probably happen but the most realistic thing at present is a 20-50 million budget with a small production company. I mean we nearly have a film with that Inquisitor fan film. GW are probably waiting to see how that does before going the film route again. Look at resident evil degeneration, 75 million dollars and its amazing, you could easily do a good animated film for far less. It would look as seamless but it could still be great.
I think GW are just not making films again rather than waiting. Seeing as they cost a bit and there's 0 guarantee of payoff.
Slipspace wrote: When it comes to budget there are huge differences between genres so $20 million in one genre just doesn't get you the same quality as the same money in a different genre. If you're making a drama set in the present with a limited cast and limited number of locations your budget will stretch further. Birdman is actually a good example of that. It was a great story with relatively few locations and special effects that had no A-listers in it (Emma Stone was a recognised actress but not A-list and the film revitalised Michael Keaton's career so he doesn't really count either). It's also worth noting a lot of big-name actors will do smaller indy projects as favours or as a challenge or just for a change of pace. Something that's clearly some sort of "franchise" style project is almost certainly not going to fall into that category.
If you're making a sci-fi film or TV series the same budget would get you nowhere. CGI, practical effects and action sequences are some of the most expensive in the industry, after paying for big names. You just can't compare 2 completely different types of films and their budgets and declare you can make one with the same money as the other. That's why I brought up Altered Carbon earlier. It's extremely recent and very similar to what you'd need to do to create a 40k TV series. Sure, you could probably do it for less than $150 million with similar results, but you definitely couldn't do it for only 15% of that budget. For a decent movie you'd likely need at least $80-100 million. That's just what it costs nowadays for that sort of movie. At that point the studio needs to be pretty sure it's got a hit on its hands before it even greenlights pre-production.
Sure there is a big difference, I'd love for there to be a massive budget, it could probably happen but the most realistic thing at present is a 20-50 million budget with a small production company. I mean we nearly have a film with that Inquisitor fan film. GW are probably waiting to see how that does before going the film route again. Look at resident evil degeneration, 75 million dollars and its amazing, you could easily do a good animated film for far less. It would look as seamless but it could still be great.
I think GW are just not making films again rather than waiting. Seeing as they cost a bit and there's 0 guarantee of payoff.
Yeah that's what I was saying but if that fan-film did good at sunshine or the other awards ceremonies they might change there minds if they did it right this time.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Robocop was 18 in the UK, R in the states.
An R rating is 18+ unless with an adult. In that case it doesn't matter what age you are.
Alien has several ratings, depending on the year and what version it is.
In the UK it originally had an X rating, which is higher than a 18+. In 1987 it was rerated to 18+, and the directors cut was rerated to 15+ in 2003.
In the US it's an R for the theatrical release, but MA for the uncensored TV version and apparently was rerated to PG for the TV version.
Predator already had a rerating, but not as much as Alien.
In the UK it was 18+ on release, 15+ in 2013
In the US its R.
And all 3 movies are rated 12 in France. Which is interesting, because in my observation those movies tend to be popular with adolescent males.
Woah those ratings are all over the place. Let me check the ratings for Martyr in the US and UK.
Oh, it's UK 18+ (LESS than Alien?), and US R?
Well that's weird. Let's go harder still with Thriller a cruel picture and Cannibal Holocaust.
Oh okay those movies are unrated in the US lol.
And for both the uncut version was banned in UK at least at some point .
Ratings are WEIRD man.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Nah, I got the reference. Its just that we don't talk about that movie 'round these parts.
*spits in a spittoon*
But it's the best official 40K movie ever made! What's not to love about it ?
Slipspace wrote: When it comes to budget there are huge differences between genres so $20 million in one genre just doesn't get you the same quality as the same money in a different genre. If you're making a drama set in the present with a limited cast and limited number of locations your budget will stretch further. Birdman is actually a good example of that. It was a great story with relatively few locations and special effects that had no A-listers in it (Emma Stone was a recognised actress but not A-list and the film revitalised Michael Keaton's career so he doesn't really count either). It's also worth noting a lot of big-name actors will do smaller indy projects as favours or as a challenge or just for a change of pace. Something that's clearly some sort of "franchise" style project is almost certainly not going to fall into that category.
If you're making a sci-fi film or TV series the same budget would get you nowhere. CGI, practical effects and action sequences are some of the most expensive in the industry, after paying for big names. You just can't compare 2 completely different types of films and their budgets and declare you can make one with the same money as the other. That's why I brought up Altered Carbon earlier. It's extremely recent and very similar to what you'd need to do to create a 40k TV series. Sure, you could probably do it for less than $150 million with similar results, but you definitely couldn't do it for only 15% of that budget. For a decent movie you'd likely need at least $80-100 million. That's just what it costs nowadays for that sort of movie. At that point the studio needs to be pretty sure it's got a hit on its hands before it even greenlights pre-production.
Sure there is a big difference, I'd love for there to be a massive budget, it could probably happen but the most realistic thing at present is a 20-50 million budget with a small production company. I mean we nearly have a film with that Inquisitor fan film. GW are probably waiting to see how that does before going the film route again. Look at resident evil degeneration, 75 million dollars and its amazing, you could easily do a good animated film for far less. It would look as seamless but it could still be great.
I think GW are just not making films again rather than waiting. Seeing as they cost a bit and there's 0 guarantee of payoff.
Yeah that's what I was saying but if that fan-film did good at sunshine or the other awards ceremonies they might change there minds if they did it right this time.
I really doubt that. At best they'd be nicer about fan films but they're not going to make films because some fan film did well.
In the wrong hands it could be like Stallone's Judge Dredd, in the right hands it could be like Karl Urban's. And to be honest in this instance the poorer one had the bigger budget. So although I agree it would require a hefty budget, more importantly it requires the right direction.
Slipspace wrote: When it comes to budget there are huge differences between genres so $20 million in one genre just doesn't get you the same quality as the same money in a different genre. If you're making a drama set in the present with a limited cast and limited number of locations your budget will stretch further. Birdman is actually a good example of that. It was a great story with relatively few locations and special effects that had no A-listers in it (Emma Stone was a recognised actress but not A-list and the film revitalised Michael Keaton's career so he doesn't really count either). It's also worth noting a lot of big-name actors will do smaller indy projects as favours or as a challenge or just for a change of pace. Something that's clearly some sort of "franchise" style project is almost certainly not going to fall into that category.
If you're making a sci-fi film or TV series the same budget would get you nowhere. CGI, practical effects and action sequences are some of the most expensive in the industry, after paying for big names. You just can't compare 2 completely different types of films and their budgets and declare you can make one with the same money as the other. That's why I brought up Altered Carbon earlier. It's extremely recent and very similar to what you'd need to do to create a 40k TV series. Sure, you could probably do it for less than $150 million with similar results, but you definitely couldn't do it for only 15% of that budget. For a decent movie you'd likely need at least $80-100 million. That's just what it costs nowadays for that sort of movie. At that point the studio needs to be pretty sure it's got a hit on its hands before it even greenlights pre-production.
Sure there is a big difference, I'd love for there to be a massive budget, it could probably happen but the most realistic thing at present is a 20-50 million budget with a small production company. I mean we nearly have a film with that Inquisitor fan film. GW are probably waiting to see how that does before going the film route again. Look at resident evil degeneration, 75 million dollars and its amazing, you could easily do a good animated film for far less. It would look as seamless but it could still be great.
I think GW are just not making films again rather than waiting. Seeing as they cost a bit and there's 0 guarantee of payoff.
Yeah that's what I was saying but if that fan-film did good at sunshine or the other awards ceremonies they might change there minds if they did it right this time.
I really doubt that. At best they'd be nicer about fan films but they're not going to make films because some fan film did well.
It might change their mind to some degree, especially now that science fiction films are doing so well. They've learned from before, So they have a lot to work with if they do it again. But it is a massive risk. If they took in other shareholders for just the film, and made it as an advertising move for the franchise, to get more hobbyists in, more than a profit move they could spread a lot of that risk.
Slipspace wrote: When it comes to budget there are huge differences between genres so $20 million in one genre just doesn't get you the same quality as the same money in a different genre. If you're making a drama set in the present with a limited cast and limited number of locations your budget will stretch further. Birdman is actually a good example of that. It was a great story with relatively few locations and special effects that had no A-listers in it (Emma Stone was a recognised actress but not A-list and the film revitalised Michael Keaton's career so he doesn't really count either). It's also worth noting a lot of big-name actors will do smaller indy projects as favours or as a challenge or just for a change of pace. Something that's clearly some sort of "franchise" style project is almost certainly not going to fall into that category.
If you're making a sci-fi film or TV series the same budget would get you nowhere. CGI, practical effects and action sequences are some of the most expensive in the industry, after paying for big names. You just can't compare 2 completely different types of films and their budgets and declare you can make one with the same money as the other. That's why I brought up Altered Carbon earlier. It's extremely recent and very similar to what you'd need to do to create a 40k TV series. Sure, you could probably do it for less than $150 million with similar results, but you definitely couldn't do it for only 15% of that budget. For a decent movie you'd likely need at least $80-100 million. That's just what it costs nowadays for that sort of movie. At that point the studio needs to be pretty sure it's got a hit on its hands before it even greenlights pre-production.
Sure there is a big difference, I'd love for there to be a massive budget, it could probably happen but the most realistic thing at present is a 20-50 million budget with a small production company. I mean we nearly have a film with that Inquisitor fan film. GW are probably waiting to see how that does before going the film route again. Look at resident evil degeneration, 75 million dollars and its amazing, you could easily do a good animated film for far less. It would look as seamless but it could still be great.
I think GW are just not making films again rather than waiting. Seeing as they cost a bit and there's 0 guarantee of payoff.
Yeah that's what I was saying but if that fan-film did good at sunshine or the other awards ceremonies they might change there minds if they did it right this time.
I really doubt that. At best they'd be nicer about fan films but they're not going to make films because some fan film did well.
It might change their mind to some degree, especially now that science fiction films are doing so well. They've learned from before, So they have a lot to work with if they do it again. But it is a massive risk. If they took in other shareholders for just the film, and made it as an advertising move for the franchise, to get more hobbyists in, more than a profit move they could spread a lot of that risk.
But why take a risk like that based on a fan film? A bad sci fi film isn't good advertising and sci fi films being more popular doesn't change the fact that a bad films a bad film.
Slipspace wrote: When it comes to budget there are huge differences between genres so $20 million in one genre just doesn't get you the same quality as the same money in a different genre. If you're making a drama set in the present with a limited cast and limited number of locations your budget will stretch further. Birdman is actually a good example of that. It was a great story with relatively few locations and special effects that had no A-listers in it (Emma Stone was a recognised actress but not A-list and the film revitalised Michael Keaton's career so he doesn't really count either). It's also worth noting a lot of big-name actors will do smaller indy projects as favours or as a challenge or just for a change of pace. Something that's clearly some sort of "franchise" style project is almost certainly not going to fall into that category.
If you're making a sci-fi film or TV series the same budget would get you nowhere. CGI, practical effects and action sequences are some of the most expensive in the industry, after paying for big names. You just can't compare 2 completely different types of films and their budgets and declare you can make one with the same money as the other. That's why I brought up Altered Carbon earlier. It's extremely recent and very similar to what you'd need to do to create a 40k TV series. Sure, you could probably do it for less than $150 million with similar results, but you definitely couldn't do it for only 15% of that budget. For a decent movie you'd likely need at least $80-100 million. That's just what it costs nowadays for that sort of movie. At that point the studio needs to be pretty sure it's got a hit on its hands before it even greenlights pre-production.
Sure there is a big difference, I'd love for there to be a massive budget, it could probably happen but the most realistic thing at present is a 20-50 million budget with a small production company. I mean we nearly have a film with that Inquisitor fan film. GW are probably waiting to see how that does before going the film route again. Look at resident evil degeneration, 75 million dollars and its amazing, you could easily do a good animated film for far less. It would look as seamless but it could still be great.
I think GW are just not making films again rather than waiting. Seeing as they cost a bit and there's 0 guarantee of payoff.
Yeah that's what I was saying but if that fan-film did good at sunshine or the other awards ceremonies they might change there minds if they did it right this time.
I really doubt that. At best they'd be nicer about fan films but they're not going to make films because some fan film did well.
It might change their mind to some degree, especially now that science fiction films are doing so well. They've learned from before, So they have a lot to work with if they do it again. But it is a massive risk. If they took in other shareholders for just the film, and made it as an advertising move for the franchise, to get more hobbyists in, more than a profit move they could spread a lot of that risk.
But why take a risk like that based on a fan film? A bad sci fi film isn't good advertising and sci fi films being more popular doesn't change the fact that a bad films a bad film.
Well they can gauge the response to it, if it just did well within the fan community then its a big no, but say it done well at these independent festivals/ceremonies like sundance, that would show that there is interest in other markets and with actual professionals within the film industry.
Slipspace wrote: When it comes to budget there are huge differences between genres so $20 million in one genre just doesn't get you the same quality as the same money in a different genre. If you're making a drama set in the present with a limited cast and limited number of locations your budget will stretch further. Birdman is actually a good example of that. It was a great story with relatively few locations and special effects that had no A-listers in it (Emma Stone was a recognised actress but not A-list and the film revitalised Michael Keaton's career so he doesn't really count either). It's also worth noting a lot of big-name actors will do smaller indy projects as favours or as a challenge or just for a change of pace. Something that's clearly some sort of "franchise" style project is almost certainly not going to fall into that category.
If you're making a sci-fi film or TV series the same budget would get you nowhere. CGI, practical effects and action sequences are some of the most expensive in the industry, after paying for big names. You just can't compare 2 completely different types of films and their budgets and declare you can make one with the same money as the other. That's why I brought up Altered Carbon earlier. It's extremely recent and very similar to what you'd need to do to create a 40k TV series. Sure, you could probably do it for less than $150 million with similar results, but you definitely couldn't do it for only 15% of that budget. For a decent movie you'd likely need at least $80-100 million. That's just what it costs nowadays for that sort of movie. At that point the studio needs to be pretty sure it's got a hit on its hands before it even greenlights pre-production.
Sure there is a big difference, I'd love for there to be a massive budget, it could probably happen but the most realistic thing at present is a 20-50 million budget with a small production company. I mean we nearly have a film with that Inquisitor fan film. GW are probably waiting to see how that does before going the film route again. Look at resident evil degeneration, 75 million dollars and its amazing, you could easily do a good animated film for far less. It would look as seamless but it could still be great.
I think GW are just not making films again rather than waiting. Seeing as they cost a bit and there's 0 guarantee of payoff.
Yeah that's what I was saying but if that fan-film did good at sunshine or the other awards ceremonies they might change there minds if they did it right this time.
I really doubt that. At best they'd be nicer about fan films but they're not going to make films because some fan film did well.
It might change their mind to some degree, especially now that science fiction films are doing so well. They've learned from before, So they have a lot to work with if they do it again. But it is a massive risk. If they took in other shareholders for just the film, and made it as an advertising move for the franchise, to get more hobbyists in, more than a profit move they could spread a lot of that risk.
But why take a risk like that based on a fan film? A bad sci fi film isn't good advertising and sci fi films being more popular doesn't change the fact that a bad films a bad film.
Well they can gauge the response to it, if it just did well within the fan community then its a big no, but say it done well at these independent festivals/ceremonies like sundance, that would show that there is interest in other markets and with actual professionals within the film industry.
You seem to be missing the point as usual. Even if a fan film does well that doesn't really justify making a film of 40k especially one that captures such a narrow view of 40k.
Slipspace wrote: When it comes to budget there are huge differences between genres so $20 million in one genre just doesn't get you the same quality as the same money in a different genre. If you're making a drama set in the present with a limited cast and limited number of locations your budget will stretch further. Birdman is actually a good example of that. It was a great story with relatively few locations and special effects that had no A-listers in it (Emma Stone was a recognised actress but not A-list and the film revitalised Michael Keaton's career so he doesn't really count either). It's also worth noting a lot of big-name actors will do smaller indy projects as favours or as a challenge or just for a change of pace. Something that's clearly some sort of "franchise" style project is almost certainly not going to fall into that category.
If you're making a sci-fi film or TV series the same budget would get you nowhere. CGI, practical effects and action sequences are some of the most expensive in the industry, after paying for big names. You just can't compare 2 completely different types of films and their budgets and declare you can make one with the same money as the other. That's why I brought up Altered Carbon earlier. It's extremely recent and very similar to what you'd need to do to create a 40k TV series. Sure, you could probably do it for less than $150 million with similar results, but you definitely couldn't do it for only 15% of that budget. For a decent movie you'd likely need at least $80-100 million. That's just what it costs nowadays for that sort of movie. At that point the studio needs to be pretty sure it's got a hit on its hands before it even greenlights pre-production.
Sure there is a big difference, I'd love for there to be a massive budget, it could probably happen but the most realistic thing at present is a 20-50 million budget with a small production company. I mean we nearly have a film with that Inquisitor fan film. GW are probably waiting to see how that does before going the film route again. Look at resident evil degeneration, 75 million dollars and its amazing, you could easily do a good animated film for far less. It would look as seamless but it could still be great.
I think GW are just not making films again rather than waiting. Seeing as they cost a bit and there's 0 guarantee of payoff.
Yeah that's what I was saying but if that fan-film did good at sunshine or the other awards ceremonies they might change there minds if they did it right this time.
I really doubt that. At best they'd be nicer about fan films but they're not going to make films because some fan film did well.
It might change their mind to some degree, especially now that science fiction films are doing so well. They've learned from before, So they have a lot to work with if they do it again. But it is a massive risk. If they took in other shareholders for just the film, and made it as an advertising move for the franchise, to get more hobbyists in, more than a profit move they could spread a lot of that risk.
But why take a risk like that based on a fan film? A bad sci fi film isn't good advertising and sci fi films being more popular doesn't change the fact that a bad films a bad film.
Well they can gauge the response to it, if it just did well within the fan community then its a big no, but say it done well at these independent festivals/ceremonies like sundance, that would show that there is interest in other markets and with actual professionals within the film industry.
You seem to be missing the point as usual. Even if a fan film does well that doesn't really justify making a film of 40k especially one that captures such a narrow view of 40k.
Of course it doesn't automatically justify it, but if you actually read my comments rather than, being determined in trying to prove me wrong, you'd understand that it 'could' justify them in thinking it'll be a good idea. There is no right or wrong when it comes to them 'hypothetically' choosing to create a film. There is no way for you to prove that they wouldn't. Joining in one the 'yeah Delvarus is always wrong' is irrelevant, to your actual argument, its a nice buzz phrase to add, as everyone that I've argued with before does because I proved them wrong, they love coming out the woodworks. I've had debates with one or two intelligent people on here, the rest of you are all average intelligence and because you are insecure you band together and stroke each others egos. When I'm wrong I always admit it, you people are too insecure to do that, you just try your best to prove me wrong, even when its a subjective or hypothetical claim. That's why you always use other people saying 'yet again he's wrong' instead of actually proving me wrong. I don't need to make friends and find solace in consensus to feel like I'm right. I mean you's are all the same to me, but any thread I'm on, you follow me like flies and you all try and contradict me, its funny.
Let's take Dredd as a marker here. No A-listers, cult following, limited self contained storyline that non-comic fans can enjoy, $45 million budget. Tweak the visuals a little and you've got....
Slipspace wrote: When it comes to budget there are huge differences between genres so $20 million in one genre just doesn't get you the same quality as the same money in a different genre. If you're making a drama set in the present with a limited cast and limited number of locations your budget will stretch further. Birdman is actually a good example of that. It was a great story with relatively few locations and special effects that had no A-listers in it (Emma Stone was a recognised actress but not A-list and the film revitalised Michael Keaton's career so he doesn't really count either). It's also worth noting a lot of big-name actors will do smaller indy projects as favours or as a challenge or just for a change of pace. Something that's clearly some sort of "franchise" style project is almost certainly not going to fall into that category.
If you're making a sci-fi film or TV series the same budget would get you nowhere. CGI, practical effects and action sequences are some of the most expensive in the industry, after paying for big names. You just can't compare 2 completely different types of films and their budgets and declare you can make one with the same money as the other. That's why I brought up Altered Carbon earlier. It's extremely recent and very similar to what you'd need to do to create a 40k TV series. Sure, you could probably do it for less than $150 million with similar results, but you definitely couldn't do it for only 15% of that budget. For a decent movie you'd likely need at least $80-100 million. That's just what it costs nowadays for that sort of movie. At that point the studio needs to be pretty sure it's got a hit on its hands before it even greenlights pre-production.
Sure there is a big difference, I'd love for there to be a massive budget, it could probably happen but the most realistic thing at present is a 20-50 million budget with a small production company. I mean we nearly have a film with that Inquisitor fan film. GW are probably waiting to see how that does before going the film route again. Look at resident evil degeneration, 75 million dollars and its amazing, you could easily do a good animated film for far less. It would look as seamless but it could still be great.
I think GW are just not making films again rather than waiting. Seeing as they cost a bit and there's 0 guarantee of payoff.
Yeah that's what I was saying but if that fan-film did good at sunshine or the other awards ceremonies they might change there minds if they did it right this time.
I really doubt that. At best they'd be nicer about fan films but they're not going to make films because some fan film did well.
It might change their mind to some degree, especially now that science fiction films are doing so well. They've learned from before, So they have a lot to work with if they do it again. But it is a massive risk. If they took in other shareholders for just the film, and made it as an advertising move for the franchise, to get more hobbyists in, more than a profit move they could spread a lot of that risk.
But why take a risk like that based on a fan film? A bad sci fi film isn't good advertising and sci fi films being more popular doesn't change the fact that a bad films a bad film.
Well they can gauge the response to it, if it just did well within the fan community then its a big no, but say it done well at these independent festivals/ceremonies like sundance, that would show that there is interest in other markets and with actual professionals within the film industry.
You seem to be missing the point as usual. Even if a fan film does well that doesn't really justify making a film of 40k especially one that captures such a narrow view of 40k.
Of course it doesn't automatically justify it, but if you actually read my comments rather than being determined in trying to prove me wrong, you'd understand that it 'could' justify them in thinking it'll be a good idea. There is no right or wrong when it comes to them 'hypothetically' choosing to create a film. There is no way for you to prove that they wouldn't. Joining in one the 'yeah Delvarus is always wrong' is irrelevant, to your actual argument, its a nice buzz phrase to add, as everyone that I've argued with before and proved them wrong love coming out the woodworks. I've had debates with one or two intelligent people on here, the rest of you are all average intelligence and because you's are insecure you band together and stroke each others egos. When I'm wrong I always admit it, you people are too insecure to do that, you just try your best to prove me wrong even when its a subjective or hypothetical claim.
Take your own advice. I'm reading the comments you're making and I'm stating why I disagree, it's not about me being right. A single 40k film isn't a great idea because even if it does well it can only really reflect one faction well which would probably be Guard or an Inquisitor as other people have said. That's not a great representation of 40k because you can't go in depth into the background that well.
You need to stop ranting about insecurities and how much better you are.
Slipspace wrote: When it comes to budget there are huge differences between genres so $20 million in one genre just doesn't get you the same quality as the same money in a different genre. If you're making a drama set in the present with a limited cast and limited number of locations your budget will stretch further. Birdman is actually a good example of that. It was a great story with relatively few locations and special effects that had no A-listers in it (Emma Stone was a recognised actress but not A-list and the film revitalised Michael Keaton's career so he doesn't really count either). It's also worth noting a lot of big-name actors will do smaller indy projects as favours or as a challenge or just for a change of pace. Something that's clearly some sort of "franchise" style project is almost certainly not going to fall into that category.
If you're making a sci-fi film or TV series the same budget would get you nowhere. CGI, practical effects and action sequences are some of the most expensive in the industry, after paying for big names. You just can't compare 2 completely different types of films and their budgets and declare you can make one with the same money as the other. That's why I brought up Altered Carbon earlier. It's extremely recent and very similar to what you'd need to do to create a 40k TV series. Sure, you could probably do it for less than $150 million with similar results, but you definitely couldn't do it for only 15% of that budget. For a decent movie you'd likely need at least $80-100 million. That's just what it costs nowadays for that sort of movie. At that point the studio needs to be pretty sure it's got a hit on its hands before it even greenlights pre-production.
Sure there is a big difference, I'd love for there to be a massive budget, it could probably happen but the most realistic thing at present is a 20-50 million budget with a small production company. I mean we nearly have a film with that Inquisitor fan film. GW are probably waiting to see how that does before going the film route again. Look at resident evil degeneration, 75 million dollars and its amazing, you could easily do a good animated film for far less. It would look as seamless but it could still be great.
I think GW are just not making films again rather than waiting. Seeing as they cost a bit and there's 0 guarantee of payoff.
Yeah that's what I was saying but if that fan-film did good at sunshine or the other awards ceremonies they might change there minds if they did it right this time.
I really doubt that. At best they'd be nicer about fan films but they're not going to make films because some fan film did well.
It might change their mind to some degree, especially now that science fiction films are doing so well. They've learned from before, So they have a lot to work with if they do it again. But it is a massive risk. If they took in other shareholders for just the film, and made it as an advertising move for the franchise, to get more hobbyists in, more than a profit move they could spread a lot of that risk.
But why take a risk like that based on a fan film? A bad sci fi film isn't good advertising and sci fi films being more popular doesn't change the fact that a bad films a bad film.
Well they can gauge the response to it, if it just did well within the fan community then its a big no, but say it done well at these independent festivals/ceremonies like sundance, that would show that there is interest in other markets and with actual professionals within the film industry.
You seem to be missing the point as usual. Even if a fan film does well that doesn't really justify making a film of 40k especially one that captures such a narrow view of 40k.
Of course it doesn't automatically justify it, but if you actually read my comments rather than being determined in trying to prove me wrong, you'd understand that it 'could' justify them in thinking it'll be a good idea. There is no right or wrong when it comes to them 'hypothetically' choosing to create a film. There is no way for you to prove that they wouldn't. Joining in one the 'yeah Delvarus is always wrong' is irrelevant, to your actual argument, its a nice buzz phrase to add, as everyone that I've argued with before and proved them wrong love coming out the woodworks. I've had debates with one or two intelligent people on here, the rest of you are all average intelligence and because you's are insecure you band together and stroke each others egos. When I'm wrong I always admit it, you people are too insecure to do that, you just try your best to prove me wrong even when its a subjective or hypothetical claim.
Take your own advice. I'm reading the comments you're making and I'm stating why I disagree, it's not about me being right. A single 40k film isn't a great idea because even if it does well it can only really reflect one faction well which would probably be Guard or an Inquisitor as other people have said. That's not a great representation of 40k because you can't go in depth into the background that well.
You need to stop ranting about insecurities and how much better you are.
Well you did think it was a lapse of understandingin my case, so you did think there was a right or wrong in this hypothetical situation, rather than just stating your opinion against mine.
I love ranting, I piss off you all off just by proving you wrong on something and then you's band together to say stuff like 'you are always wrong etc. So I have no need to make friends with people that are already pissed off with me. As for your insecurities and me being more intelligent than you, that's just fact. Normally I'd be humble and civil but not with you lot, especially because you all report me for ridiculous infractions and try to get my comments deleted.
pm713 wrote: You not seeing what I mean is different to there being right and wrong.
You don't. It's tiring and inconsiderate of you. Despite that I really don't care about you or your mental issues.
Well that you thought, I didn't understand obviously has no bearing whatsoever, as if you read what I was actually saying, I obviously did understand, either you thought I didn't understand and you were 'right' or you didn't understand what I was saying, which I don't think is the case because you obviously did understand what I was saying. but its either one, or you are just using the 'you don't understand' because other people are saying that and you think that will bolster your opinion, especially in view of the other people on the thread.
I'm not inconsiderate, unless I'm prompted to be. I have great and civil conversations on this website, just not with you usual suspects. You band together insult me, report me and then you project onto me what you are doing, saying I'm inconsiderate. I don't take it personal, I was having a civil argument with you, (even with the insults we've thrown at each other in the past) until you did the predictable 'yet again you don't understand'. Yet you do this in the comfort of the mob, who agree with you and pat your back, regardless if you are right or wrong.
Pre-empting another argument: Yes I'm going to bring up another thread, but since you do the 'always wrong' thing, you are guilty of the same thing, just in a less detailed way.
I mean no one ever banded about this 'you are wrong as usual', until I was wrong on one point and now you have just grabbed hold of that like crack and are trying to use that as: usual behaviour from me, I admitted I was wrong and it was on a thread that I stated a fact, you all disagreed with, me for ten threads, forgetting what I originally said as you all ended up agreeing with me, yet you's did anything but say you were wrong, you's just reported me, for continuing the debate. We changed the subject and I was wrong, that it was improbable that Malcador could be the Emperor, I didn't even say it was impossible and bam here we are,.. small victories. People that are secure about their intelligence don't mind being wrong and admitting they are. and we certainly don't find solace in groups, when we are wrong.
Okay. I'm going to bring this back to the lands of rational on topic discussion.
1. Yes, a movie can be made set in the 40k universe for 20-50 million. But that movie would not be a sweeping epic.
2. If you had 200 million, then yes, you can make whatever the hell kind of movie you want.
3. Each of these types of movies could be decent.
4. Script and storyboards will be torn apart purely due to budgetary constraints.
I know this because I wrote a relatively successful (for Ireland with a population of 4.5 million) novel set during the 1798 Rising. A few people were interested in turning it into a screenplay but the sheer scale of it was prohibitive, without Spielberg or somebody dumping a truckload of cash into the project.
Sonetimes cloth just has to be cut to suit your measure.
pm713 wrote: A single 40k film isn't a great idea because even if it does well it can only really reflect one faction well which would probably be Guard or an Inquisitor as other people have said. That's not a great representation of 40k because you can't go in depth into the background that well.
You don't need to 'go in depth', you just need to convey the general feel. The grimdark, the surreal fuckedupness of the Imperium. Something between Sin City and Brazil in tone. Get Terry Gilliam to direct, that would go long way.
pm713 wrote: A single 40k film isn't a great idea because even if it does well it can only really reflect one faction well which would probably be Guard or an Inquisitor as other people have said. That's not a great representation of 40k because you can't go in depth into the background that well.
You don't need to 'go in depth', you just need to convey the general feel. The grimdark, the surreal fuckedupness of the Imperium. Something between Sin City and Brazil in tone. Get Terry Gilliam to direct, that would go long way.
So how do you have things like Eldar or Orks? The things that separate 40k from generic sci fi aren't easily done in a single film and generic sci fi in 40k isn't great. You can have the darkness of the imperium but not the surrounding context of it which makes things look poorly overdone.
So how do you have things like Eldar or Orks? The things that separate 40k from generic sci fi aren't easily done in a single film and generic sci fi in 40k isn't great. You can have the darkness of the imperium but not the surrounding context of it which makes things look poorly overdone.
You don't need to shove everything in one film. Ultimately 40K is about imperium. Chaos or Genestealer cultists would be good adversaries.
So how do you have things like Eldar or Orks? The things that separate 40k from generic sci fi aren't easily done in a single film and generic sci fi in 40k isn't great. You can have the darkness of the imperium but not the surrounding context of it which makes things look poorly overdone.
You don't need to shove everything in one film. Ultimately 40K is about imperium. Chaos or Genestealer cultists would be good adversaries.
I doubt GW or anyone is going to make the next MCU. It's not just about the Imperium though. They get enough favouritism.
So how do you have things like Eldar or Orks? The things that separate 40k from generic sci fi aren't easily done in a single film and generic sci fi in 40k isn't great. You can have the darkness of the imperium but not the surrounding context of it which makes things look poorly overdone.
You don't need to shove everything in one film. Ultimately 40K is about imperium. Chaos or Genestealer cultists would be good adversaries.
I doubt GW or anyone is going to make the next MCU. It's not just about the Imperium though. They get enough favouritism.
It has always been mainly about Imperium; like it or not, the other factions exist to be the adversaries of the Imprium. And when I said 'you don't need to shove everything in one film' I didn't mean to imply that there would necessarily be more films, merely that a film needs to have a cohesive focus. I think Urban's Judge Dredd film is good example of the sort of scope that would be feasible.
So how do you have things like Eldar or Orks? The things that separate 40k from generic sci fi aren't easily done in a single film and generic sci fi in 40k isn't great. You can have the darkness of the imperium but not the surrounding context of it which makes things look poorly overdone.
You don't need to shove everything in one film. Ultimately 40K is about imperium. Chaos or Genestealer cultists would be good adversaries.
Well you can focus on two major factions, but you can also add a lot more and have them pretty much just be a support section in the film. Have them fighting in the background, have the protagonists interact with them here and there.
You could easily have a SM film with Guard fighting alongside them, or CSM and daemons or even the less likely alliances like Orks and Chaos, which are always funny, or the orks fighting alongside just because its fun, taking no real side.
Skinflint Games wrote: Let's take Dredd as a marker here. No A-listers, cult following, limited self contained storyline that non-comic fans can enjoy, $45 million budget. Tweak the visuals a little and you've got....
Necromunda - the movie
Dredd's a good example. It was made relatively cheaply, had a known but not A-list star, and was pretty well received by critics and fans. It also didn't do anywhere near well enough for the studio to want to make a sequel. That shows how tough a 40k film would be. Dredd had a known license, was a good film with a very modest budget and it was still a "failure" as defined by the studio. Unfortunately that's all that matters to the bean counters who fund these things.
I think the best chance of getting a 40k film made is if you get an extremely enthusiastic director or producer on board, as happened with the LotR films, or if you can get a bankable star to take it on as a passion project, as Ryan Reynolds did with Deadpool. You need something prior to starting production that will alleviate the risk for the studio.
Skinflint Games wrote: Let's take Dredd as a marker here. No A-listers, cult following, limited self contained storyline that non-comic fans can enjoy, $45 million budget. Tweak the visuals a little and you've got....
Necromunda - the movie
Dredd's a good example. It was made relatively cheaply, had a known but not A-list star, and was pretty well received by critics and fans. It also didn't do anywhere near well enough for the studio to want to make a sequel. That shows how tough a 40k film would be. Dredd had a known license, was a good film with a very modest budget and it was still a "failure" as defined by the studio. Unfortunately that's all that matters to the bean counters who fund these things.
I think the best chance of getting a 40k film made is if you get an extremely enthusiastic director or producer on board, as happened with the LotR films, or if you can get a bankable star to take it on as a passion project, as Ryan Reynolds did with Deadpool. You need something prior to starting production that will alleviate the risk for the studio.
Regardless of your point, Dredd was an awesome film though, loved it. They took it seriously unlike the first one, even though that touched on far more of the lore of the comics, but then again the comics were never serious.
Well you can focus on two major factions, but you can also add a lot more and have them pretty much just be a support section in the film. Have them fighting in the background, have the protagonists interact with them here and there.
No you cant because it costs money and only pointlessly detracts from the plot. As I said, for moderate budget Chaos or Genestealer cults would be good opponents. They operate in small scale and can mostly be played by human actors. Then you can have a brief appearance by a purestrain genestealer or a daemon, which will eat more of the budget.
Well you can focus on two major factions, but you can also add a lot more and have them pretty much just be a support section in the film. Have them fighting in the background, have the protagonists interact with them here and there.
No you cant because it costs money and only pointlessly detracts from the plot. As I said, for moderate budget Chaos or Genestealer cults would be good opponents. They operate in small scale and can mostly be played by human actors. Then you can have a brief appearance by a purestrain genestealer or a daemon, which will eat more of the budget.
Suppose, but if it was a animated film, then it would be much easier.
Another example (again with Karl Urban, coincidentally) - Priest, 2011, $60 million. If anyone's seen it, it's hive cities, theocracy, intensively trained warrior monks with superhuman abilities and "vampires" that look and act suspiciously like Genestealers. You could just slap a GW logo on something like that and call it done.
Well you can focus on two major factions, but you can also add a lot more and have them pretty much just be a support section in the film. Have them fighting in the background, have the protagonists interact with them here and there.
No you cant because it costs money and only pointlessly detracts from the plot. As I said, for moderate budget Chaos or Genestealer cults would be good opponents. They operate in small scale and can mostly be played by human actors. Then you can have a brief appearance by a purestrain genestealer or a daemon, which will eat more of the budget.
Suppose, but if it was a animated film, then it would be much easier.
Skinflint Games wrote: Another example (again with Karl Urban, coincidentally) - Priest, 2011, $60 million. If anyone's seen it, it's hive cities, theocracy, intensively trained warrior monks with superhuman abilities and "vampires" that look and act suspiciously like Genestealers. You could just slap a GW logo on something like that and call it done.
Well you can focus on two major factions, but you can also add a lot more and have them pretty much just be a support section in the film. Have them fighting in the background, have the protagonists interact with them here and there.
No you cant because it costs money and only pointlessly detracts from the plot. As I said, for moderate budget Chaos or Genestealer cults would be good opponents. They operate in small scale and can mostly be played by human actors. Then you can have a brief appearance by a purestrain genestealer or a daemon, which will eat more of the budget.
Suppose, but if it was a animated film, then it would be much easier.
As long as it looks like this:
14 years on and that is still just for me
Yeah that was good film, had a kinda 40k vibe to it.
Well you can focus on two major factions, but you can also add a lot more and have them pretty much just be a support section in the film. Have them fighting in the background, have the protagonists interact with them here and there.
No you cant because it costs money and only pointlessly detracts from the plot. As I said, for moderate budget Chaos or Genestealer cults would be good opponents. They operate in small scale and can mostly be played by human actors. Then you can have a brief appearance by a purestrain genestealer or a daemon, which will eat more of the budget.
The best I can see you doing for xenos armies is either have genestealers/chaos armies as you say or have smaller presences of them as an overlord of sorts. Like an independent human planet with Eldar rulers could be done in an interesting way and I think you could set up some cool scenes with Wraithguard.
Well you can focus on two major factions, but you can also add a lot more and have them pretty much just be a support section in the film. Have them fighting in the background, have the protagonists interact with them here and there.
No you cant because it costs money and only pointlessly detracts from the plot. As I said, for moderate budget Chaos or Genestealer cults would be good opponents. They operate in small scale and can mostly be played by human actors. Then you can have a brief appearance by a purestrain genestealer or a daemon, which will eat more of the budget.
The best I can see you doing for xenos armies is either have genestealers/chaos armies as you say or have smaller presences of them as an overlord of sorts. Like an independent human planet with Eldar rulers could be done in an interesting way and I think you could set up some cool scenes with Wraithguard.
Or harlequins, I think you could have a really cool small scale film with them traveling through the webway, changing things to set a certain future in place, fighting daemons in the webway,. fighting Ahriman etc. The only thing though is an non-40k audience wouldn't get aliens dressing like jesters, they'd be like 'what the hell is this.'
Well you can focus on two major factions, but you can also add a lot more and have them pretty much just be a support section in the film. Have them fighting in the background, have the protagonists interact with them here and there.
No you cant because it costs money and only pointlessly detracts from the plot. As I said, for moderate budget Chaos or Genestealer cults would be good opponents. They operate in small scale and can mostly be played by human actors. Then you can have a brief appearance by a purestrain genestealer or a daemon, which will eat more of the budget.
The best I can see you doing for xenos armies is either have genestealers/chaos armies as you say or have smaller presences of them as an overlord of sorts. Like an independent human planet with Eldar rulers could be done in an interesting way and I think you could set up some cool scenes with Wraithguard.
Or harlequins, I think you could have a really cool small scale film with them traveling through the webway, changing things to set a certain future in place, fighting daemons in the webway,. fighting Ahriman etc. The only thing though is an non-40k audience wouldn't get aliens dressing like jesters, they'd be like 'what the hell is this.'
Harlequins don't really work as an overlord character. Only shadowseers suit the role and they look really weird to outsiders. Travelling through the Webway seems like a movie about travelling down a motorway - something can happen and be interesting but they probably won't and if it does the solution is probably drive away fast. It could do as a short film or something though.
Well you can focus on two major factions, but you can also add a lot more and have them pretty much just be a support section in the film. Have them fighting in the background, have the protagonists interact with them here and there.
No you cant because it costs money and only pointlessly detracts from the plot. As I said, for moderate budget Chaos or Genestealer cults would be good opponents. They operate in small scale and can mostly be played by human actors. Then you can have a brief appearance by a purestrain genestealer or a daemon, which will eat more of the budget.
The best I can see you doing for xenos armies is either have genestealers/chaos armies as you say or have smaller presences of them as an overlord of sorts. Like an independent human planet with Eldar rulers could be done in an interesting way and I think you could set up some cool scenes with Wraithguard.
Or harlequins, I think you could have a really cool small scale film with them traveling through the webway, changing things to set a certain future in place, fighting daemons in the webway,. fighting Ahriman etc. The only thing though is an non-40k audience wouldn't get aliens dressing like jesters, they'd be like 'what the hell is this.'
Harlequins don't really work as an overlord character. Only shadowseers suit the role and they look really weird to outsiders. Travelling through the Webway seems like a movie about travelling down a motorway - something can happen and be interesting but they probably won't and if it does the solution is probably drive away fast. It could do as a short film or something though.
I already stated they look weird to outsiders, I was just saying it would be cool, but it would work for 40k fans I think. What do you mean overlord, is that a typo? Obviously they wouldn't be in the webway all the time, my point is they can go from destination to destination, battle to battle, leaves a lot of situations and room for writers to create a really cool script. Though I still personally would like to see an Astartes film.
Well you can focus on two major factions, but you can also add a lot more and have them pretty much just be a support section in the film. Have them fighting in the background, have the protagonists interact with them here and there.
No you cant because it costs money and only pointlessly detracts from the plot. As I said, for moderate budget Chaos or Genestealer cults would be good opponents. They operate in small scale and can mostly be played by human actors. Then you can have a brief appearance by a purestrain genestealer or a daemon, which will eat more of the budget.
The best I can see you doing for xenos armies is either have genestealers/chaos armies as you say or have smaller presences of them as an overlord of sorts. Like an independent human planet with Eldar rulers could be done in an interesting way and I think you could set up some cool scenes with Wraithguard.
Or harlequins, I think you could have a really cool small scale film with them traveling through the webway, changing things to set a certain future in place, fighting daemons in the webway,. fighting Ahriman etc. The only thing though is an non-40k audience wouldn't get aliens dressing like jesters, they'd be like 'what the hell is this.'
Harlequins don't really work as an overlord character. Only shadowseers suit the role and they look really weird to outsiders. Travelling through the Webway seems like a movie about travelling down a motorway - something can happen and be interesting but they probably won't and if it does the solution is probably drive away fast. It could do as a short film or something though.
I already stated they look weird to outsiders, I was just saying it would be cool, but it would work for 40k fans I think. What do you mean overlord, is that a typo? Obviously they wouldn't be in the webway all the time, my point is they can go from destination to destination, battle to battle, leaves a lot of situations and room for writers to create a really cool script. Though I still personally would like to see an Astartes film.
I mean overlord. The man behind the ruler. The puppetmaster.
I know. That's a very small audience and going from destination to destination seems poor for a film script unless you spend a tiny about of time in each place. I think it could do well as a tv series though.
I feel like no movie could really do 40k justice. Maybe a mini serious could cover a small sliver but it's far to big a setting to cover more than the tiniest drop in 2 and a half hours.
Movies are dead. Netflix/HBO binge watch series are WAY better. Watch all six seasons of Game of Thrones and ask yourself if they could have done anything with movie format.
40k is the same. Season one, pick a faction. Every1 or 2 episodes, they deal with a threat from a different faction. It gets everyone in by the end of the first season.
Season 2, pick a different faction and repeat. Recurring characters bind it all together.
Now, still a risk? Yes.
Still a huge budget? Yes.
My point is just that if you're dreaming about 40k on screen, why dream about it in a medium that is problematic for telling such complex and robust stories with such an incredible diversity of character types.
Well you can focus on two major factions, but you can also add a lot more and have them pretty much just be a support section in the film. Have them fighting in the background, have the protagonists interact with them here and there.
No you cant because it costs money and only pointlessly detracts from the plot. As I said, for moderate budget Chaos or Genestealer cults would be good opponents. They operate in small scale and can mostly be played by human actors. Then you can have a brief appearance by a purestrain genestealer or a daemon, which will eat more of the budget.
The best I can see you doing for xenos armies is either have genestealers/chaos armies as you say or have smaller presences of them as an overlord of sorts. Like an independent human planet with Eldar rulers could be done in an interesting way and I think you could set up some cool scenes with Wraithguard.
Or harlequins, I think you could have a really cool small scale film with them traveling through the webway, changing things to set a certain future in place, fighting daemons in the webway,. fighting Ahriman etc. The only thing though is an non-40k audience wouldn't get aliens dressing like jesters, they'd be like 'what the hell is this.'
Harlequins don't really work as an overlord character. Only shadowseers suit the role and they look really weird to outsiders. Travelling through the Webway seems like a movie about travelling down a motorway - something can happen and be interesting but they probably won't and if it does the solution is probably drive away fast. It could do as a short film or something though.
I already stated they look weird to outsiders, I was just saying it would be cool, but it would work for 40k fans I think. What do you mean overlord, is that a typo? Obviously they wouldn't be in the webway all the time, my point is they can go from destination to destination, battle to battle, leaves a lot of situations and room for writers to create a really cool script. Though I still personally would like to see an Astartes film.
I mean overlord. The man behind the ruler. The puppetmaster.
I know. That's a very small audience and going from destination to destination seems poor for a film script unless you spend a tiny about of time in each place. I think it could do well as a tv series though.
It would be bad for a script if it was only battle 'from place to place' but if there was a story arc behind the conflict it could be really good. Like fighting chaos in one aspect to get a relic to bring the Emperor back and then fighting Inquisitors that have clocked on and are trying to stop them, and then fighting Imperials to try and get to terra. Then trying to get passed the Custodes to get to the Emperor. There is plenty there for a good script.
Wait don't you use to have a marine avatar? I thought you played marines!
I do, and I think they're cool in a war game. I just think they're boring as characters in a story. They're psycho indoctrinated fanatical killers. You can humanise them, but ultimately such attempts dilute them. Marines have forsaken a big part of what makes us human in order to protect the rest of the humanity. The only way that I could see a marine being an interesting character in a story were if it was some sort of lone marine among normal(ish) humans (like a Deathwatch marine in an inquisitors retinue) and you could contrast his inhumanity against the humans.
Still not a great film zipping from place to place following a poor story. That doesn't really change my points.
I'm not trying to change your points, there are many great 40k books with the same type of story. Plus the zipping about is just the mechanism to get about, they aren't going to spend the whole film zipping about, what matters is what they do in-between the times they zip about. Ever see quantum leap, they didn't just spend the time explaining the leap.
I agree with Crimson, Marines would make a lousy focus, BUT they should still apper as Space Marines are THE 40k poster boys. So how would I have them apper, simple, let's take the Inqusitor idea. I tend to belive that absolute BEST idea for a 40k show would be a netflix series focused on an Inqusitor so I'll use that as my template but you could easily do a movie of this as well.
the movie starts with the Inqusitor and his retuine investigating something, thery follow a complex trail of crumbs chasing a big bad, a chaos cult or if you wanted to keep to one planet a genestealer cult. (a chaos cult strikes me as more likely to have a good 'villian' leading the cult though) plenty of adventures and action follow, and they finally reach the end game, which necessities a biiiiiig battle as they attempt to capture the cult's leader. and for this big battle? Space Marines show up. Now the Space Marines are depicted as walking demigods, we first see one in action as our heros are struggling with an adversary. (a chaos space marine maybe? Something big dangerous and threatening) and then a loyalist space marine shows up and single handedly takes it down, Showing us that "yeah Marines are bad asses"
In short use Marines Sparingly, but make sure when they do show up the audiance is left in awe of them.
BrianDavion wrote: I agree with Crimson, Marines would make a lousy focus, BUT they should still apper as Space Marines are THE 40k poster boys. So how would I have them apper, simple, let's take the Inqusitor idea. I tend to belive that absolute BEST idea for a 40k show would be a netflix series focused on an Inqusitor so I'll use that as my template but you could easily do a movie of this as well.
the movie starts with the Inqusitor and his retuine investigating something, thery follow a complex trail of crumbs chasing a big bad, a chaos cult or if you wanted to keep to one planet a genestealer cult. (a chaos cult strikes me as more likely to have a good 'villian' leading the cult though) plenty of adventures and action follow, and they finally reach the end game, which necessities a biiiiiig battle as they attempt to capture the cult's leader. and for this big battle? Space Marines show up. Now the Space Marines are depicted as walking demigods, we first see one in action as our heros are struggling with an adversary. (a chaos space marine maybe? Something big dangerous and threatening) and then a loyalist space marine shows up and single handedly takes it down, Showing us that "yeah Marines are bad asses"
In short use Marines Sparingly, but make sure when they do show up the audiance is left in awe of them.
Yeah that would be cool, doesn't have to be completely focused on Astartes, but the original film failed because it was all action and no plot really, the plot was basically a shrine world sends a signal they come find the source fight chaos and a daemon prince comes aboard their ship. I think they could do an actually interesting version of an Astartes film.
BrianDavion wrote: I agree with Crimson, Marines would make a lousy focus, BUT they should still apper as Space Marines are THE 40k poster boys. So how would I have them apper, simple, let's take the Inqusitor idea. I tend to belive that absolute BEST idea for a 40k show would be a netflix series focused on an Inqusitor so I'll use that as my template but you could easily do a movie of this as well.
the movie starts with the Inqusitor and his retuine investigating something, thery follow a complex trail of crumbs chasing a big bad, a chaos cult or if you wanted to keep to one planet a genestealer cult. (a chaos cult strikes me as more likely to have a good 'villian' leading the cult though) plenty of adventures and action follow, and they finally reach the end game, which necessities a biiiiiig battle as they attempt to capture the cult's leader. and for this big battle? Space Marines show up. Now the Space Marines are depicted as walking demigods, we first see one in action as our heros are struggling with an adversary. (a chaos space marine maybe? Something big dangerous and threatening) and then a loyalist space marine shows up and single handedly takes it down, Showing us that "yeah Marines are bad asses"
In short use Marines Sparingly, but make sure when they do show up the audiance is left in awe of them.
Yeah that would be cool, doesn't have to be completely focused on Astartes, but the original film failed because it was all action and no plot really, the plot was basically a shrine world sends a signal they come find the source fight chaos and a daemon prince comes aboard their ship. I think they could do an actually interesting version of an Astartes film.
You can do an intreasting film about anything if you're creative eneugh I suppose. Another reason why a space marine film would be a bad idea is Space Marines know most of the stuff about the setting so it'd make exposition somewhat difficult.
An Inqusitorial warband includes people from all walks of life, including people who would be ignorant of an aweful lot. this would allow easy exposition of things, as we are told, who Horus was, what chaos is, etc.
BrianDavion wrote: I agree with Crimson, Marines would make a lousy focus, BUT they should still apper as Space Marines are THE 40k poster boys. So how would I have them apper, simple, let's take the Inqusitor idea. I tend to belive that absolute BEST idea for a 40k show would be a netflix series focused on an Inqusitor so I'll use that as my template but you could easily do a movie of this as well.
the movie starts with the Inqusitor and his retuine investigating something, thery follow a complex trail of crumbs chasing a big bad, a chaos cult or if you wanted to keep to one planet a genestealer cult. (a chaos cult strikes me as more likely to have a good 'villian' leading the cult though) plenty of adventures and action follow, and they finally reach the end game, which necessities a biiiiiig battle as they attempt to capture the cult's leader. and for this big battle? Space Marines show up. Now the Space Marines are depicted as walking demigods, we first see one in action as our heros are struggling with an adversary. (a chaos space marine maybe? Something big dangerous and threatening) and then a loyalist space marine shows up and single handedly takes it down, Showing us that "yeah Marines are bad asses"
In short use Marines Sparingly, but make sure when they do show up the audiance is left in awe of them.
Yeah that would be cool, doesn't have to be completely focused on Astartes, but the original film failed because it was all action and no plot really, the plot was basically a shrine world sends a signal they come find the source fight chaos and a daemon prince comes aboard their ship. I think they could do an actually interesting version of an Astartes film.
You can do an intreasting film about anything if you're creative eneugh I suppose. Another reason why a space marine film would be a bad idea is Space Marines know most of the stuff about the setting so it'd make exposition somewhat difficult.
An Inqusitorial warband includes people from all walks of life, including people who would be ignorant of an aweful lot. this would allow easy exposition of things, as we are told, who Horus was, what chaos is, etc.
I agree with you, the Inquisitorial focus with Astartes as a support would probably be best but I'm just saying an Astartes focus film could still be done really well.
I'm watching Full Metal Jacket right now, and I can't help wondering about a 40k version - maybe Astartes, maybe Guard, following their training and then being deployed to war.. the novel "Fifteen Hours" was basically this, might make a good starting point.
Skinflint Games wrote: I'm watching Full Metal Jacket right now, and I can't help wondering about a 40k version - maybe Astartes, maybe Guard, following their training and then being deployed to war.. the novel "Fifteen Hours" was basically this, might make a good starting point.
They have to have a 40k equivalent of the drill sgt.
Skinflint Games wrote: I'm watching Full Metal Jacket right now, and I can't help wondering about a 40k version - maybe Astartes, maybe Guard, following their training and then being deployed to war.. the novel "Fifteen Hours" was basically this, might make a good starting point.
They have to have a 40k equivalent of the drill sgt.
Training Sgt Classius: where you from private?
pvt Dulars: Cadia, Sir!
tsgt: oh well isn't that nice . there's only 2 thing that come from Cadia, Purple eyes and warp taint. and you already got the purple eyes.
Skinflint Games wrote: I'm watching Full Metal Jacket right now, and I can't help wondering about a 40k version - maybe Astartes, maybe Guard, following their training and then being deployed to war.. the novel "Fifteen Hours" was basically this, might make a good starting point.
They have to have a 40k equivalent of the drill sgt.
Training Sgt Classius: where you from private?
pvt Dulars: Cadia, Sir!
tsgt: oh well isn't that nice . there's only 2 thing that come from Cadia, Purple eyes and warp taint. and you already got the purple eyes.
Lol the first heretic, people forget that there were heretics on Cadia before it became the gate warden.
Skinflint Games wrote: I'm watching Full Metal Jacket right now, and I can't help wondering about a 40k version - maybe Astartes, maybe Guard, following their training and then being deployed to war.. the novel "Fifteen Hours" was basically this, might make a good starting point.
They have to have a 40k equivalent of the drill sgt.
Training Sgt Classius: where you from private?
pvt Dulars: Cadia, Sir!
tsgt: oh well isn't that nice . there's only 2 thing that come from Cadia, Purple eyes and warp taint. and you already got the purple eyes.
Lol the first heretic, people forget that there were heretics on Cadia before it became the gate warden.
Skinflint Games wrote: I'm watching Full Metal Jacket right now, and I can't help wondering about a 40k version - maybe Astartes, maybe Guard, following their training and then being deployed to war.. the novel "Fifteen Hours" was basically this, might make a good starting point.
They have to have a 40k equivalent of the drill sgt.
Training Sgt Classius: where you from private?
pvt Dulars: Cadia, Sir!
tsgt: oh well isn't that nice . there's only 2 thing that come from Cadia, Purple eyes and warp taint. and you already got the purple eyes.
Lol the first heretic, people forget that there were heretics on Cadia before it became the gate warden.
no most people don't forget.
I just wanted to tell everyone I know that bit of lore lol
Still not a great film zipping from place to place following a poor story. That doesn't really change my points.
I'm not trying to change your points, there are many great 40k books with the same type of story. Plus the zipping about is just the mechanism to get about, they aren't going to spend the whole film zipping about, what matters is what they do in-between the times they zip about. Ever see quantum leap, they didn't just spend the time explaining the leap.
Dunno if this was already said, but from GW consolidated report
"The Warhammer settings are incredibly rich and evocative backdrops. They’re populated by more than three decades of
fantastical characters and comprise of thousands of exciting narratives. Going forward, we want to make it easier than ever for
people to engage with and immerse themselves in our IP. To that end, I have a small, senior team to help me find new partners
to help us bring the worlds of Warhammer to life like never before. Together, we’ll explore animation, live action and more, while
ensuring we do no harm to our core miniatures business."
Still not a great film zipping from place to place following a poor story. That doesn't really change my points.
I'm not trying to change your points, there are many great 40k books with the same type of story. Plus the zipping about is just the mechanism to get about, they aren't going to spend the whole film zipping about, what matters is what they do in-between the times they zip about. Ever see quantum leap, they didn't just spend the time explaining the leap.
So you're just arguing for the sake of it.
No, I'm not, you are saying it wouldn't be a good script I'm saying it would.
Still not a great film zipping from place to place following a poor story. That doesn't really change my points.
I'm not trying to change your points, there are many great 40k books with the same type of story. Plus the zipping about is just the mechanism to get about, they aren't going to spend the whole film zipping about, what matters is what they do in-between the times they zip about. Ever see quantum leap, they didn't just spend the time explaining the leap.
So you're just arguing for the sake of it.
No, I'm not, you are saying it wouldn't be a good script I'm saying it would.
Your only suggestion has been a story of fighting in lots of different places and going between them. Which sounds terrible to me.
Still not a great film zipping from place to place following a poor story. That doesn't really change my points.
I'm not trying to change your points, there are many great 40k books with the same type of story. Plus the zipping about is just the mechanism to get about, they aren't going to spend the whole film zipping about, what matters is what they do in-between the times they zip about. Ever see quantum leap, they didn't just spend the time explaining the leap.
So you're just arguing for the sake of it.
No, I'm not, you are saying it wouldn't be a good script I'm saying it would.
Your only suggestion has been a story of fighting in lots of different places and going between them. Which sounds terrible to me.
The harlequins getting a relic to wake up the Emperor is not just fighting, they have to fight to accomplish that, stop being purposely obtuse.
the problem with harliquins getting a relic to wake up the emperor is 1: A movie where Eldar are the feature race proably is a bad idea (like it or not 40k centers around the Imperium, a 40k movie would be best served with an Imperium protagionist) 2: there's no way they can actually acheive it. (and we've SEEN the eldar make a beeline for the emperor before in war of the beast it ended in the Custodes slaughtering them)
BrianDavion wrote: the problem with harliquins getting a relic to wake up the emperor is 1: A movie where Eldar are the feature race proably is a bad idea (like it or not 40k centers around the Imperium, a 40k movie would be best served with an Imperium protagionist) 2: there's no way they can actually acheive it. (and we've SEEN the eldar make a beeline for the emperor before in war of the beast it ended in the Custodes slaughtering them)
They don't have to achieve it, the film could be them getting as close as they can, but this argument is based on that i think it could be cool, I already said it wouldn't work as people would thin aliens dressed as jesters would be weird, I was just commenting on a another post where someone said they'd like to see an eldar focused film, I'd rather see an imperial or chaos focus pm713 is trying just arguing that it would be boring.
BrianDavion wrote: the problem with harliquins getting a relic to wake up the emperor is 1: A movie where Eldar are the feature race proably is a bad idea (like it or not 40k centers around the Imperium, a 40k movie would be best served with an Imperium protagionist) 2: there's no way they can actually acheive it. (and we've SEEN the eldar make a beeline for the emperor before in war of the beast it ended in the Custodes slaughtering them)
They don't have to achieve it, the film could be them getting as close as they can, but this argument is based on that i think it could be cool, I already said it wouldn't work as people would thin aliens dressed as jesters would be weird, I was just commenting on a another post where someone said they'd like to see an eldar focused film, I'd rather see an imperial or chaos focus pm713 is trying just being arguing that it would be boring.
Why would it be cool? From an outside perspective it's weird space elves fighting to get a relic to to an Emperor. From an inside perspective it's Harlequins doing something colossally stupid and it would make no sense. Both require a lot of boring exposition in and it's just a bad idea from start to finish. Although I have no idea what that last sentence says I am sure you never admitted the film wouldn't work.
BrianDavion wrote: the problem with harliquins getting a relic to wake up the emperor is 1: A movie where Eldar are the feature race proably is a bad idea (like it or not 40k centers around the Imperium, a 40k movie would be best served with an Imperium protagionist) 2: there's no way they can actually acheive it. (and we've SEEN the eldar make a beeline for the emperor before in war of the beast it ended in the Custodes slaughtering them)
They don't have to achieve it, the film could be them getting as close as they can, but this argument is based on that i think it could be cool, I already said it wouldn't work as people would thin aliens dressed as jesters would be weird, I was just commenting on a another post where someone said they'd like to see an eldar focused film, I'd rather see an imperial or chaos focus pm713 is trying just being arguing that it would be boring.
Why would it be cool? From an outside perspective it's weird space elves fighting to get a relic to to an Emperor. From an inside perspective it's Harlequins doing something colossally stupid and it would make no sense. Both require a lot of boring exposition in and it's just a bad idea from start to finish. Although I have no idea what that last sentence says I am sure you never admitted the film wouldn't work.
I said people who are not fans would not get aliens dressed as jesters, it would work as a film just for 40k fans. Harlequins do whatever keeps their race alive, their reasons for doing things have always been shrouded in mystery; they have, however, helped the Imperium many times, they have even helped Chaos. They helped CSM in primogenitor, as their goals also helped the harlequins mission, plus eldar have always known that the Imperium are important for their existence, as the Imperium is the main force that holds chaos back in the galaxy. I mean the eldar brought back Girlyman, If bringing the Emperor back would somehow help them, then they would do that. It would seem colossally stupid to someone that didn't know a lot about the lore A lot of boring expositions, yeah that's your opinion and its a short sighted one, again they aren't just going to be traveling around in the film, have a bit of imagination Last sentence had a typo but you still knew what it meant, seriously you are just being a bit ridiculous now.
BrianDavion wrote: the problem with harliquins getting a relic to wake up the emperor is 1: A movie where Eldar are the feature race proably is a bad idea (like it or not 40k centers around the Imperium, a 40k movie would be best served with an Imperium protagionist) 2: there's no way they can actually acheive it. (and we've SEEN the eldar make a beeline for the emperor before in war of the beast it ended in the Custodes slaughtering them)
They don't have to achieve it, the film could be them getting as close as they can, but this argument is based on that i think it could be cool, I already said it wouldn't work as people would thin aliens dressed as jesters would be weird, I was just commenting on a another post where someone said they'd like to see an eldar focused film, I'd rather see an imperial or chaos focus pm713 is trying just being arguing that it would be boring.
Why would it be cool? From an outside perspective it's weird space elves fighting to get a relic to to an Emperor. From an inside perspective it's Harlequins doing something colossally stupid and it would make no sense. Both require a lot of boring exposition in and it's just a bad idea from start to finish. Although I have no idea what that last sentence says I am sure you never admitted the film wouldn't work.
I said people who are not fans would not get aliens dressed as jesters, it would work as a film just for 40k fans. Harlequins do whatever keeps their race alive, their reasons for doing things have always been shrouded in mystery; they have, however, helped the Imperium many times, they have even helped Chaos. They helped CSM in primogenitor, as their goals also helped the harlequins mission, plus eldar have always known that the Imperium are important for their existence, as the Imperium is the main force that holds chaos back in the galaxy. I mean the eldar brought back Girlyman, If bringing the Emperor back would somehow help them, then they would do that. It would seem colossally stupid to someone that didn't know a lot about the lore A lot of boring expositions, yeah that's your opinion and its a short sighted one, again they aren't just going to be traveling around in the film, have a bit of imagination Last sentence had a typo but you still knew what it meant, seriously you are just being a bit ridiculous now.
Oh yes keeping your race alive by freeing a genocidal god who'll kill them asap. Great plan. If you think the Emperor being back is a good thing for the Eldar then you don't understand the lore at all.
Yes you keep saying they won't just travel around. But what do they do that makes them interesting as protagonists in a film? Fighting? Chatting? Quiet meditation? All those things are much better done in writing.
No I really didn't. That's why I mentioned it, I don't mind a typo at all but if I can't understand what you're saying then you need to clarify. But yes, it is ridiculous that after all the edits you do there are still mistakes like that.
It's entirely possible (although not plausible) that Eldrad (or Asurman) actually made a deal with Empy before the Heresy. I highly doubt it, but he is old enough. Very *very* few Eldar are that old, though.
Humans make the most interesting protaganists. Look at Watchmen. Night Owl was the main character. He is more or less how we experienced the world of Watchmen. He was relatively normal compared to the more compelling characters of that world, which made him an easier vantagepoint.
Or Mass Effect. Shepard was human. And I think that made the story connect with the audience so much better. Through him, we saw Turians and Quarians.
Similarly, the plot could involve Eldar. Their machinations could be everpresent. But having the frame of reference being human makes it easier to make the story resonate.
BrianDavion wrote: the problem with harliquins getting a relic to wake up the emperor is 1: A movie where Eldar are the feature race proably is a bad idea (like it or not 40k centers around the Imperium, a 40k movie would be best served with an Imperium protagionist) 2: there's no way they can actually acheive it. (and we've SEEN the eldar make a beeline for the emperor before in war of the beast it ended in the Custodes slaughtering them)
They don't have to achieve it, the film could be them getting as close as they can, but this argument is based on that i think it could be cool, I already said it wouldn't work as people would thin aliens dressed as jesters would be weird, I was just commenting on a another post where someone said they'd like to see an eldar focused film, I'd rather see an imperial or chaos focus pm713 is trying just being arguing that it would be boring.
Why would it be cool? From an outside perspective it's weird space elves fighting to get a relic to to an Emperor. From an inside perspective it's Harlequins doing something colossally stupid and it would make no sense. Both require a lot of boring exposition in and it's just a bad idea from start to finish. Although I have no idea what that last sentence says I am sure you never admitted the film wouldn't work.
I said people who are not fans would not get aliens dressed as jesters, it would work as a film just for 40k fans. Harlequins do whatever keeps their race alive, their reasons for doing things have always been shrouded in mystery; they have, however, helped the Imperium many times, they have even helped Chaos. They helped CSM in primogenitor, as their goals also helped the harlequins mission, plus eldar have always known that the Imperium are important for their existence, as the Imperium is the main force that holds chaos back in the galaxy. I mean the eldar brought back Girlyman, If bringing the Emperor back would somehow help them, then they would do that. It would seem colossally stupid to someone that didn't know a lot about the lore A lot of boring expositions, yeah that's your opinion and its a short sighted one, again they aren't just going to be traveling around in the film, have a bit of imagination Last sentence had a typo but you still knew what it meant, seriously you are just being a bit ridiculous now.
Oh yes keeping your race alive by freeing a genocidal god who'll kill them asap. Great plan. If you think the Emperor being back is a good thing for the Eldar then you don't understand the lore at all.
Yes you keep saying they won't just travel around. But what do they do that makes them interesting as protagonists in a film? Fighting? Chatting? Quiet meditation? All those things are much better done in writing.
No I really didn't. That's why I mentioned it, I don't mind a typo at all but if I can't understand what you're saying then you need to clarify. But yes, it is ridiculous that after all the edits you do there are still mistakes like that.
The Harlequins have done similar things in the past, the Eldar woke up Guiliman and he was given the order to kill all xenos at sight, by the Emperor and yet they still woke him up.
"Yes you keep saying they won't just travel around. But what do they do that makes them interesting as protagonists in a film? Fighting? Chatting? Quiet meditation? All those things are much better done in writing." Well writers have written from the perspective of the Eldar many times, like in path of the Warrior so it would be similar to that. You are just being obtuse.
I edited it, but I forgot to take out word, wow that's never been heard of. If we are talking about grammar, ever heard of a comma.
Here play the comma game
"Oh yes keeping your race alive by freeing a genocidal god who'll kill them asap. Great plan. If you think the Emperor being back is a good thing for the Eldar then you don't understand the lore at all."
If you criticise someones grammar, you had better have perfect grammar, when doing so. I never correct peoples grammar because its social media, most people like myself type in a stream of consciousness and don't care that its perfect because its 'social media'. I edit, more to add extra points than to fix grammar. I don't care if its not grammatically perfect. You do, yet you can't even display perfect grammar yourself lol I'd just advise you to stop being a douche. You don't think the idea would be interesting, good leave it at that, its getting boring, you nipping at my heels.
There's a difference between a Primarch and the Emperor. Namely one has godlike power and the other doesn't.
You edited 4 times last I saw it. Most people make intelligible sentences on the first try.
You're acting like I criticised you for using the wrong your. I brought it up because I literally couldn't understand what you said and you seemed to be addressing directly.
Do you see the irony in you saying that? Considering you're absolutely awful in general on this forum and at least once you've gone on a rant about you're superior to everyone.
pm713 wrote: There's a difference between a Primarch and the Emperor. Namely one has godlike power and the other doesn't.
You edited 4 times last I saw it. Most people make intelligible sentences on the first try.
You're acting like I criticised you for using the wrong your. I brought it up because I literally couldn't understand what you said and you seemed to be addressing directly.
Do you see the irony in you saying that? Considering you're absolutely awful in general on this forum and at least once you've gone on a rant about you're superior to everyone.
I edited it 4 times, that's great you noticed. You could understand what I said, as you even expressed what I said, so what is the point of saying "that doesn't even make any sense." its just petty. I always do awful on here yada yada yada. You're a complete moron, mate. so yeah I'm superior to you in every way. You're the one that keeps arguing with we, I couldn't care less about you lol. I don't need to prove I'm smarter than you by constantly arguing with you; you obviously do.
I still really like the inquisition idea. I think you could even do it like the show "true detective" where each season is a new inquisitor facing some new threat. It would allow you to slowly introduce an audience to the scope of the 40k universe, without trying to stuff it all in at once.
pm713 wrote: There's a difference between a Primarch and the Emperor. Namely one has godlike power and the other doesn't.
You edited 4 times last I saw it. Most people make intelligible sentences on the first try.
You're acting like I criticised you for using the wrong your. I brought it up because I literally couldn't understand what you said and you seemed to be addressing directly.
Do you see the irony in you saying that? Considering you're absolutely awful in general on this forum and at least once you've gone on a rant about you're superior to everyone.
I edited it 4 times, that's great you noticed. You could understand what I said, as you even expressed what I said, so what is the point of saying "that doesn't even make any sense." its just petty. I always do awful on here yada yada yada. You're a complete moron, mate. so yeah I'm superior to you in every way. You're the one that keeps arguing with we, I couldn't care less about you lol. I don't need to prove I'm smarter than you by constantly arguing with you; you obviously do.
No I saw that the last sentence started with my username and assumed it was directed at me which is different to me knowing what you said afterwards. Yes Delvarus you got me, I argue with you on Dakka to feel superior because you're SO smart.
pm713 wrote: There's a difference between a Primarch and the Emperor. Namely one has godlike power and the other doesn't.
You edited 4 times last I saw it. Most people make intelligible sentences on the first try.
You're acting like I criticised you for using the wrong your. I brought it up because I literally couldn't understand what you said and you seemed to be addressing directly.
Do you see the irony in you saying that? Considering you're absolutely awful in general on this forum and at least once you've gone on a rant about you're superior to everyone.
I edited it 4 times, that's great you noticed. You could understand what I said, as you even expressed what I said, so what is the point of saying "that doesn't even make any sense." its just petty. I always do awful on here yada yada yada. You're a complete moron, mate. so yeah I'm superior to you in every way. You're the one that keeps arguing with we, I couldn't care less about you lol. I don't need to prove I'm smarter than you by constantly arguing with you; you obviously do.
No I saw that the last sentence started with my username and assumed it was directed at me which is different to me knowing what you said afterwards. Yes Delvarus you got me, I argue with you on Dakka to feel superior because you're SO smart.
Its good you can recognise that, you'll grow from that realisation.
Keep in mind that making a movie JUST for the fans would be a HORRIABLE idea. Because they've already got our money, A 40k movie would certainly have to appeal to the fans but it would ALSO have to serve as something of a "gateway drug" to 40k for new people. it would have to be accessable eneugh to push forward sales. thus it would need to be something understandable to people, and something that could propell sales. Thus obscure factions of aliens are a bad protagionist.
I definatly agree a netflix series is the way to go. oddly Ciaphas Cain is a good model for how to do it, he's interacted in some fashion or another with every major race in 40k.
BrianDavion wrote: Keep in mind that making a movie JUST for the fans would be a HORRIABLE idea. Because they've already got our money, A 40k movie would certainly have to appeal to the fans but it would ALSO have to serve as something of a "gateway drug" to 40k for new people. it would have to be accessable eneugh to push forward sales. thus it would need to be something understandable to people, and something that could propell sales. Thus obscure factions of aliens are a bad protagionist.
I definatly agree a netflix series is the way to go. oddly Ciaphas Cain is a good model for how to do it, he's interacted in some fashion or another with every major race in 40k.
I know, I just mean that a Harlequin film would be cool, I wasn't advocating for it to be made. Did you see the fan-film above^ show that to a production company or a exec producer and it'd blow their socks off.
Well, that pretty well demonstrates why a Space marine centric film would suck. I hope that the actual film is really about that woman carrying a baby, she instantly seemed way more interesting than any of these giant armoured lunks spouting cliches with their identical and comically overdone booming voices.
Well, that pretty well demonstrates why a Space marine centric film would suck. I hope that the actual film is really about that woman carrying a baby, she instantly seemed way more interesting than any of these giant armoured lunks spouting cliches with their identical and comically overdone booming voices.
Not saying it should be Astartes focused, we know that Astartes focus stories can be rich and well developed. The action of Astartes fighting, however is far more entertaining than a guardsman pointing a flashlight at the enemy.
Well, that pretty well demonstrates why a Space marine centric film would suck. I hope that the actual film is really about that woman carrying a baby, she instantly seemed way more interesting than any of these giant armoured lunks spouting cliches with their identical and comically overdone booming voices.
To be fair they seemed like badly done Marines. A Marine centric film would be better if you fixed the moving, talking, script and added someone interesting. Like a Guard squad being escorted or something.
Well, that pretty well demonstrates why a Space marine centric film would suck. I hope that the actual film is really about that woman carrying a baby, she instantly seemed way more interesting than any of these giant armoured lunks spouting cliches with their identical and comically overdone booming voices.
oddly the woman carrying the baby might be the best thing TO focus on for a Heresy short. rather then focus on the Marines, focus on the people around the Marines as these demi-gods go to war, a bit like the transformer movies I suppose.
This is the fan film that I feel has best captured 40K. However, it plays more like a dramatized reading of a book and the exposition would have to lightened up in tone, I think (and the visuals redone - works for a fan film, but not a feature film). Overall, I could see this being a story that could do well.
You couldnt do anything mass-market 40k themed (Netflix, HBO or movie) without making the main character a standard human.
Pretty much all stories with a wild and fantastical setting need you to identify with the main/viewpoint character. It gives you a sense of "I have no idea what's going on but that guy doesn't either". They learn as we learn.
Often the main character is critical in the end due to their actions, but relatively powerless compared to companions.
This is why the ideal scenario is where a new guardsman is posted to a platoon who are sent to suppress something prosaic like a rebel uprising which quickly escalates to a chaos cult (we learn about chaos and psykers with him)
Then the Astartes come in (we learn about marines)
Then a chaos incursion breaks out (we learn about the warp and daemons)
Then a Xenos species (probably an uneasy alliance between an Aeldari farseer and SM librarian to suppress chaos)
Then, perhaps briefly, a small fraction of the power of the imperium... showing their glorious glittering power.
Then just as the credits roll, we discover the entire thing was all part of the Farseer's plan to distract the Imperium from their real goal.
If it's successful, the 2nd and 3rd movie can introduce inquisitors, different chapters of marines, some type of Imperial civil war/conflict set up by the Aeldari etc, then the Imperium discoving they are being played by the space elves and a final conflict against them.
All the while you might slowly develope that grimdark thought that "hold on the Aeldari are just trying to survive and the Imperium seem like genocidal bastards"
40k has to be treated like you're in the middle of an onion and every time you find a new layer of mad, it turns out just to be a stepping stone of mad.
Silentz wrote: You couldnt do anything mass-market 40k themed (Netflix, HBO or movie) without making the main character a standard human.
Pretty much all stories with a wild and fantastical setting need you to identify with the main/viewpoint character. It gives you a sense of "I have no idea what's going on but that guy doesn't either". They learn as we learn.
Often the main character is critical in the end due to their actions, but relatively powerless compared to companions.
This is why the ideal scenario is where a new guardsman is posted to a platoon who are sent to suppress something prosaic like a rebel uprising which quickly escalates to a chaos cult (we learn about chaos and psykers with him)
Then the Astartes come in (we learn about marines)
Then a chaos incursion breaks out (we learn about the warp and daemons)
Then a Xenos species (probably an uneasy alliance between an Aeldari farseer and SM librarian to suppress chaos)
Then, perhaps briefly, a small fraction of the power of the imperium... showing their glorious glittering power.
Then just as the credits roll, we discover the entire thing was all part of the Farseer's plan to distract the Imperium from their real goal.
If it's successful, the 2nd and 3rd movie can introduce inquisitors, different chapters of marines, some type of Imperial civil war/conflict set up by the Aeldari etc, then the Imperium discoving they are being played by the space elves and a final conflict against them.
All the while you might slowly develope that grimdark thought that "hold on the Aeldari are just trying to survive and the Imperium seem like genocidal bastards"
40k has to be treated like you're in the middle of an onion and every time you find a new layer of mad, it turns out just to be a stepping stone of mad.
problem is guardsmen are kept ignorant, the best way to fill people in would be an Inqusitor with the "everyman" being a new acyolyte. It woul;d be very VERY easy to bring in the nesscary exposition for the setting because said Acyolyte may not KNOW it.
YEAH. Post-credits scene is more Imperial Guard killing stuff, setting up for the sequel that was the real point of the series from the beginning.
) it'd effectively be the geek crowd, Sci-fi fans, that sort of thing....
for me
!
