Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Kanluwen wrote:Dude, GW didn't put any money into this movie.

Why? Because it's not a "sure thing". You don't funnel tons of money into it when you license out a property.

Unfortunately that's not the worst of it Kan. GW didn't just not put any money into this, they put no effort into it whatsoever. You want to see the difference between what they did do, and what they should have done, just look to THQ and what it does to promote the games Relic makes. GW should have acted as publisher for this movie, and fronted the money for what publishers usually front money for - marketing and promotion. They did none of that - they didn't even use their own internal marketing mechanisms (White Dwarf and their Webstore) to leverage any interest for this film. This forced Codex Studios to do it themselves.

Kanluwen wrote:
Dude. Go watch any animated movie out there and then look at GW's financials. They do not make half as much money as you think; at the very best with GW hemorrhaging money into the project-- we'd see something on par with Halo: Legends.

Except halo legends was decent to good and promoted/supported by Bungie waaay more than Ultramarines was by GW. There were trailers on xbox live, banners on the site and announcements in the halo 3 menus. GW didnt give a feth what was being done with their franchise, and it shows.

Oh wait...that's actually what we saw.
And I didn't "compare the feasibility of an MMO". I pointed out that GW once did a project using the licensing ideas that you put forwards. The people took the money and ran.

The Stargate franchise had the same thing happen with their "Stargate: Worlds" project.

You are comparing the two tho, in fact you just brought up a third. MMOs are notoriously unstable financially and completely dominated by an already entrenched product (blizzard), and almost all of the titles released with the intention of tapping this dominated market fail miserably almost within the first three months.

Sorry, I just dont buy understand the argument of "it wasnt made by GW so its totally not their fault that the movie sucked grot ass"

Are we setting the bar for own hobby so low that we get apologists for what could have been one of the most monumental moments in the history of GW?

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:Dude, GW didn't put any money into this movie.

Why? Because it's not a "sure thing". You don't funnel tons of money into it when you license out a property.

Unfortunately that's not the worst of it Kan. GW didn't just not put any money into this, they put no effort into it whatsoever. You want to see the difference between what they did do, and what they should have done, just look to THQ and what it does to promote the games Relic makes. GW should have acted as publisher for this movie, and fronted the money for what publishers usually front money for - marketing and promotion. They did none of that - they didn't even use their own internal marketing mechanisms (White Dwarf and their Webstore) to leverage any interest for this film. This forced Codex Studios to do it themselves.

I'm not sure that they should have "acted as publisher for this movie", but they definitely should have done marketing and promotion.

They did do advertising on the website though. Not much, but it was there. A few "What's New Todays", some reviews of it by the staff, announcements of those free screenings, etc.

Well either way...its going to assure us that there will be no more movies. Because it was pretty terrible to be honest and not just graphics wise.

Theres a short fanworks movie in the making; The Lord Inquisitor. Its supposedly very short but already its going to blow Ultramarines right out of the water.

Yeah...I've seen a few 'fan' movies.

I'd take Ultramarines over most of them.

Kanluwen wrote:Yeah...I've seen a few 'fan' movies.

I'd take Ultramarines over most of them.

That, I will agree with.

I thought it was gak. Biggest waste of 90 mins of my life.

L. Wrex

Kanluwen wrote:Yeah...I've seen a few 'fan' movies.

I'd take Ultramarines over most of them.

http://www.thelordinquisitor.com/

You'd take it over that? Ultramarines? the movie with no good story and no real action?

Mr Hyena wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:Yeah...I've seen a few 'fan' movies.

I'd take Ultramarines over most of them.

http://www.thelordinquisitor.com/

You'd take it over that? Ultramarines? the movie with no good story?

Doesn't really look better aesthetically and I see nothing saying the story will be better.

The animation, while incomplete, still looks better than Ultramarines though. The Grey Knights modeling too looks better.

The ultramarines movie just seemed so utterly bland and pointless. Its a shame; as it spoiled any chance of a proper movie in the future.

Mr Hyena wrote:The animation, while incomplete, still looks better than Ultramarines though.

To you.

To me, that first one(the warp rift opening) looks more like photoshop distortion(especially when it affects the planet's edge visibility) and the rest I can't see any appreciable difference between the animations.

So...what does Ultramarines do better? Its a pretty common feeling among community members that the movie was 'Uwe Bowl' quality.

Mr Hyena wrote:So...what does Ultramarines do better?

I never said it was better. I simply said that this one wasn't better. It looks about on par with Ultramarines animation-wise.

Your bias is coloring your reading comprehension.

Summarises it pretty well tbh.

Platuan4th wrote:

Mr Hyena wrote:The animation, while incomplete, still looks better than Ultramarines though.

To you.

To me, that first one(the warp rift opening) looks more like photoshop distortion(especially when it affects the planet's edge visibility) and the rest I can't see any appreciable difference between the animations.

Agreed.

There's also the fact that I'm not interested in seeing some fan's interpretation of the 40k universe. I'm interested in seeing GW and their licensee's interpretation of the 40k universe.

I don't enjoy the background of some fan's interpretation of the 40k universe. I enjoy the 40k universe as told by GW.

I liked it. It was very low budget. What you expect Serenity 40kified?

MechaEmperor7000 wrote: Second nail in the coffin came when one of the tactical marines lampshaded the fact that the 10 of them were being sent in to a warzone where 100 Imperial Fists died.

Duh cause they are ultra marines.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mr Hyena wrote:

Summarises it pretty well tbh.

HAHAHA

Lord Inquisitor looks like it actually has decently good animation, the textures are alot more noticable and realistic than in Ultramarines (where, due to lack of contrast and realistic lighting, most of it looked like the texture was just one solid color, with the details only evident if you really look close). However, with the Inquisitor name attached to it, they'll be expected to produce a story that not only has to meet the standards of normal 40k fiction, but go beyond. However, since it's an Inquisitor story, they can actually get away with having long stretches of calm and no action, but they have to do it well to make it convincing.

However, since this is a fan movie I'm assuming there's zero financial backing other than what the animators and actors pay out of their own pockets, and because GW will likely slap a lawsuit on them if they make money off of it, I'm guessing there's also going to be no profit for them. Even if they are producing an Ultramarine quality movie, then it's still a huge plus to them, as just imagine what they can do if they did have the financial backing and (failing that) incentive to make an income?

Kanluwen wrote:

Platuan4th wrote:

Mr Hyena wrote:The animation, while incomplete, still looks better than Ultramarines though.

To you.

To me, that first one(the warp rift opening) looks more like photoshop distortion(especially when it affects the planet's edge visibility) and the rest I can't see any appreciable difference between the animations.

Agreed.

There's also the fact that I'm not interested in seeing some fan's interpretation of the 40k universe. I'm interested in seeing GW and their licensee's interpretation of the 40k universe.

I don't enjoy the background of some fan's interpretation of the 40k universe. I enjoy the 40k universe as told by GW.

I'm sure alot of people, myself included, would like to see GW's interpretation of the universe.

But the thing is Ultramarines does not do that. Its just 10 marines prancing around a bleak landscape; with little plot than 'kill the daemons'.