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.

this is guna be epic...

Erzool wrote:this is guna be epic...

Hmm..

Welcome to Dakka.. .. a slight pointer whilst you're here : We prefer, to the point of insistence generally, that users take the time and effort to express themselves clearly, this, generally, precludes the use of "words" such as "guna", and does include the use of capital letters and the like.

It makes things much easier to understand, especially as we have many users who do not have English as their first language.

In future could you please take a little more time and effort with your posts please, you'll probably find this makes people more receptive to what you say and less dismissive of any expressed opinions.

Ta.

i like that there is such a positive reaction from the GW staff.

I can't wait for the end of the month.

Ha, loved the reaction video from the GW Veterans.

Did anyone actually think they were going to say anything other than; 'This film is amazing and awesome and brilliant and the best thing EVAR!' I mean, seriously?

L. Wrex

Yeah I'm not so sure about the reaction of the staff either as like you say they aren't going to say it was terrible. John Blanche did seem genuinely enthused about it which is a good sign but I still don't hold out a lot of hope for it.

The special edition or nothing till spring next year is a bit weird. Guess it must be an attempt to achieve maximum cash return from this.

Still reckon they would have sold more if they had included a limited edition mini in the special set and released both now just in time for christmas.

Myrthe wrote:Hey, "South Park" isn't beautifully rendered but it's still a lot of fun. The proportions and style in "The Clone Wars" cartoons aren't what I would have imagined but it's still one of my favorites to watch. Not all artists pen their Sunday comics in the latest style but they still manage to entertain.

I have to comment on this.

1. South Park isn't pretending to be realistic from an animation standpoint. In fact, the cheapness of the animation is a central conceit (it's meant to look like they're making it from crate paper - which the original episode was done in).
2. Clone Wars has a very specific art style to it, in the way the characters look, their porportions, etc. but the animation itself is still top notch.

By all accounts, Ultramarines is attempting to look as close to realistic as possible, yet it fails at that. Furthermore, bad animation =/= a 'different style'. Bad animation = bad animation.

Ultramarines, based off the trailer, has jerky animation that is of a lower quality than some fan-made projects (and I'm not specifically talking about 40K fan projects here). The movies in, say, Starcraft, a game from 12 years ago, look more advanced than this movie. Now, as I've said before, I've bought the movie because I want this to be a success so that we get more of them, but I'm not going to pretend that the poor animation is a style choice.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Myrthe wrote:Hey, "South Park" isn't beautifully rendered but it's still a lot of fun. The proportions and style in "The Clone Wars" cartoons aren't what I would have imagined but it's still one of my favorites to watch. Not all artists pen their Sunday comics in the latest style but they still manage to entertain.

I have to comment on this.

1. South Park isn't pretending to be realistic from an animation standpoint. In fact, the cheapness of the animation is a central conceit (it's meant to look like they're making it from crate paper - which the original episode was done in).
2. Clone Wars has a very specific art style to it, in the way the characters look, their porportions, etc. but the animation itself is still top notch.

By all accounts, Ultramarines is attempting to look as close to realistic as possible, yet it fails at that. Furthermore, bad animation =/= a 'different style'. Bad animation = bad animation.

Ultramarines, based off the trailer, has jerky animation that is of a lower quality than some fan-made projects (and I'm not specifically talking about 40K fan projects here). The movies in, say, Starcraft, a game from 12 years ago, look more advanced than this movie. Now, as I've said before, I've bought the movie because I want this to be a success so that we get more of them, but I'm not going to pretend that the poor animation is a style choice.

Please read and quote my ENTIRE post ... from the beginning of it, I agree that it is not brilliant or technologically current animation. Also, I am NOT at all "pretending that the poor animation is a style choice" as you infer. Rather, I am saying that this movie, irregardless of the style or quality, can STILL BE ENJOYABLE like other fun series if the nay-sayers would lighten-up on the animation-hatred a bit and give it a chance.

Who are your "all accounts" that said they are attempting to make Ultramrines look as close to realistic as possible ? How does one make an imagined, futuristic GrimDark universe look realistic ?

For someone who wants this movie to be successful you are certainly vociferous in it's detraction. Your singular purchase isn't going to offset your negativity. Negativity that will likely cost them sales ... especially when quoting only a portion of a post and distorting it's intent to suit your criticism.

Again, I'm happy to finally get a movie - any movie - that showcases my favorite hobby. It's not like there's a glut of them on the market and I'm not going to detract from it for a lack of cutting-edge technological CGI magic. Sit back, watch it, and then make a complete and informed review of it. Until then, people are judging a book by it's cover.

Thank you for quoting me. Did you have anything to say?

H.B.M.C. wrote:Thank you for quoting me. Did you have anything to say?

Right ... very telling attitude.

Thanks for the snarkiness, your Highness.

Myrthe wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Myrthe wrote:Hey, "South Park" isn't beautifully rendered but it's still a lot of fun. The proportions and style in "The Clone Wars" cartoons aren't what I would have imagined but it's still one of my favorites to watch. Not all artists pen their Sunday comics in the latest style but they still manage to entertain.

I have to comment on this.

1. South Park isn't pretending to be realistic from an animation standpoint. In fact, the cheapness of the animation is a central conceit (it's meant to look like they're making it from crate paper - which the original episode was done in).
2. Clone Wars has a very specific art style to it, in the way the characters look, their porportions, etc. but the animation itself is still top notch.

By all accounts, Ultramarines is attempting to look as close to realistic as possible, yet it fails at that. Furthermore, bad animation =/= a 'different style'. Bad animation = bad animation.

Ultramarines, based off the trailer, has jerky animation that is of a lower quality than some fan-made projects (and I'm not specifically talking about 40K fan projects here). The movies in, say, Starcraft, a game from 12 years ago, look more advanced than this movie. Now, as I've said before, I've bought the movie because I want this to be a success so that we get more of them, but I'm not going to pretend that the poor animation is a style choice.

Please read and quote my ENTIRE post ... from the beginning of it, I agree that it is not brilliant or technologically current animation. Also, I am NOT at all "pretending that the poor animation is a style choice" as you infer. Rather, I am saying that this movie, irregardless of the style or quality, can STILL BE ENJOYABLE like other fun series if the nay-sayers would lighten-up on the animation-hatred a bit and give it a chance.

Who are your "all accounts" that said they are attempting to make Ultramrines look as close to realistic as possible ? How does one make an imagined, futuristic GrimDark universe look realistic ?

For someone who wants this movie to be successful you are certainly vociferous in it's detraction. Your singular purchase isn't going to offset your negativity. Negativity that will likely cost them sales ... especially when quoting only a portion of a post and distorting it's intent to suit your criticism.

Again, I'm happy to finally get a movie - any movie - that showcases my favorite hobby. It's not like there's a glut of them on the market and I'm not going to detract from it for a lack of cutting-edge technological CGI magic. Sit back, watch it, and then make a complete and informed review of it. Until then, people are judging a book by it's cover.

Ya, saying we are negative and too picky is crazy when we are talking about facts. Look at that last line from you. 'I'm happy to get a movie, any movie that features my hobby'. Don't you and your camp have any standards? You act like everyone else is unreasonable, yet then say you guarantee to be happy no matter what without having seen it? Ya... super reasonable.

I wouldn't care if you felt that way and didn't say anything to those who feel differently. But if you are going to argue and call names like negativity, I have to say grow the hell up. Our problem isn't that it was low budget graphics. TOur problem is it was badly done low budget graphics. If we can't have an opinion about the graphics which we have seen, how the hell do you have an opinion about anything else since it's not out yet? How can you buy a MOVIE then not care about how it looks? Stories without visuals are usually called books sir. Movies tend to prioritize the visual moving picture type stuff.

You can't defend the graphics by saying they don't matter. You can't defend the graphics by fantasizing about how good everything else will be based on nothing. You can't write a review on something you have never seen. If we want to talk graphics, we can, it's out there to be seen. If you want to talk story or the enjoyment of the movie, keep your damn yaps shut, you don't know a goddam thing about it yet. This in particular to a certain 'lady' who decided to use some choice words in a recent post.

Don't make a childish argument based on your HOPES (the movie on the whole will be amazing) then yell at people just giving a personal opinion on given FACTS (Graphics and Animation), which no one on this forum should take away, and react like we walked in and pissed on your Christmas tree. It is not a hypocritical move to criticize something yet still wish it the best. There's a reason criticism is part of school and professional work. Most adults invite it and listen to it so they can get better at what they do. Or, to put it in other terms, don't fart then get upset with people for saying it stinks.

Myrthe wrote:Right ... very telling attitude.

Thanks for the snarkiness, your Highness.

Oh give me a break. Did your browser not load the ""?

I thought that made my tone quite obvious.


And all my opinions are based upon the trailer and the published material at the website (that would be the 'all accounts' I mentioned). The facial animation and design along with the way everything else has been rendered, from interiors to weapons to vehicles/armour/etc. tends to indicate that they're not going for a highly stylised version of 40K (ala Clone Wars) nor any form of caricature. That, to me at least, says that they’re going for realism. Realism =/= photo-realistic, it just means realistic proportions, movement, and so on.

And based on the trailer – and I stress again that I am basing this off the trailer and not the movie as we have not seen the movie, so I cannot pass judgement on the product as a whole beyond what we’ve been shown – this movie does not have any sense of realism. The animation is poor. The movements are jerky. The rendering is sub-par. It looks fake, it looks like a bad computer game cut-scene from 15 years ago.

I’m not expecting a Blur Studios level of animation – clearly the budget for such a thing was not there (Aside: Do we have any confirmation about how much or how little capital GW put into this venture yet?) – but I’m not going to make excuses for bad animation and bring up examples like Clone Wars and South Park which have nothing to do with this being a bad animation (the former of which has excellent animation, and the latter of which has intentionally primitive animation).

Don't take it personally HBMC. Some people in this thread seem to have their entire self image wrapped up in this movie. A criticism on it is like kicking their grandmother in the face. They also tend to get upset when you argue your point logically, nothing must disrupt their fervent belief that everything will be awesome no matter what.

I didn't think people could have religious levels of 'faith' in a CG movie about man-dolls lol

those of us who are looking forward to the movie do have standards.

the standard is 1) storyline is sufficiently grimdark, 2) movie opens door for more of the same.

we can be assured of the 1st, the 2nd is a good possability.


Graphics quality isn't a super high quality. mediocre is better then horrible. the graphics are mediocre for sure, but we really couldn't expect better with the movies budget. anyone who has taken a Film history course will be aware of the huge deal making a movie is and would appreciate what is happening.

MajorTom11 wrote:
Ya, saying we are negative and too picky is crazy when we are talking about facts. Look at that last line from you. 'I'm happy to get a movie, any movie that features my hobby'. Don't you and your camp have any standards? You act like everyone else is unreasonable, yet then say you guarantee to be happy no matter what without having seen it? Ya... super reasonable.

I wouldn't care if you felt that way and didn't say anything to those who feel differently. But if you are going to argue and call names like negativity, I have to say grow the hell up. Our problem isn't that it was low budget graphics. TOur problem is it was badly done low budget graphics. If we can't have an opinion about the graphics which we have seen, how the hell do you have an opinion about anything else since it's not out yet? How can you buy a MOVIE then not care about how it looks? Stories without visuals are usually called books sir. Movies tend to prioritize the visual moving picture type stuff.

You can't defend the graphics by saying they don't matter. You can't defend the graphics by fantasizing about how good everything else will be based on nothing. You can't write a review on something you have never seen. If we want to talk graphics, we can, it's out there to be seen. If you want to talk story or the enjoyment of the movie, keep your damn yaps shut, you don't know a goddam thing about it yet. This in particular to a certain 'lady' who decided to use some choice words in a recent post.

Don't make a childish argument based on your HOPES (the movie on the whole will be amazing) then yell at people just giving a personal opinion on given FACTS (Graphics and Animation), which no one on this forum should take away, and react like we walked in and pissed on your Christmas tree. It is not a hypocritical move to criticize something yet still wish it the best. There's a reason criticism is part of school and professional work. Most adults invite it and listen to it so they can get better at what they do. Or, to put it in other terms, don't fart then get upset with people for saying it stinks.

Wow ... talk about over-reaction and being entrenched in a camp !!

Are you being intentionally obtuse and insulting to stir the pot for nothing ?! I cannot voice my opinion and happiness about getting a 40K movie without having my thoughts belittled and misquoted? Being positive is not being a fanboi nor is offering a differing perspective. I'd rather look through "rose-colored glasses" than "crap-colored" ones. If the whole movie sucks, I'll say as much but I choose to reserve judgement rather than fly off the handle irrationally. All I suggested was that the nay-sayers give it a chance. But go ahead, preach your NEGATIVE preceptions and knock my POSITIVE ones while on your pulpit.

This is really simple. I'll stand in my "yay" camp and look at things hopefully and you stand in your "nay" camp an look at things critically. In the mean time, I'll anxiously await your perfect cinematic CGI vision of 40K as much as I wait for this one.

I didn't start this nor will I continue to perpetuate it. Bitch amongst yourselves ...

GreyDeath, Granted. All I am saying is simply this. It is not WRONG if someone is disappointed by the graphics. Nor is it wrong is some of those that do not like the visuals choose not to watch. It's their choice.

No one is saying 'we have decided the graphics suck, therefore no one must enjoy this movie'. I just think it is only fair that the street go both ways.

I have said it before like 20 times in this thread, I hope the movie is enjoyable overall, and those looking forward to it are rewarded and excited by their purchase. I wish it the best. I can still say that, even if I think the graphics are extremely amateur.

Is it really so crazy to just let people like what they like, be it graphics or story, and not yell at them for liking one or the other more based on personal taste??? There are plenty of movies that are just eye-candy, with garbage stories, that are still fun for what they are worth. Some people just like visual spectacle, and for them, they will most likely pass this up completely. It's not a plus to have mediocre anything.

I'm not pissed that some people don't care about graphics. I am pissed when those people start getting rude and name calling simply because others do care about it, and have a differing personal opinion. That's slowed. No post of mine or anyone else's that I can recall did the same from the other side of the conversation. Yet somehow we are the one's on the high horse.

Myrthe. You argue against yourself. I am not entreched in the graphics suck camp. I am entrenched in the people have the right to their opinion camp. You are saying wait til the movie comes out to decide anything and that is positive. I am saying that the graphics are out to be judged, anyone is allowed to like or dislike them right now as they see fit. If someone had knocked the story at this point, I would be saying exactly the same as you, give it a chance, we don't know.

Be fair, people having a personal opinion is their RIGHT. It's not negative or positive. You are allowed to have yours however you want, but you shouldnt tell others what they are or are not allowed to think about their own preferences. Nor should you take it personally if someone thinks differently about what they like. I like Chocolate Shakes not Strawberry ones. Does that upset you? If not, neither should liking story or graphics more. It's not negative. It's just what I like.

MajorTom11 wrote:Granted. All I am saying is simply this. It is not WRONG if someone is disappointed by the graphics. Nor is it wrong is some of those that do not like the visuals choose not to watch. It's their choice.

No one is saying 'we have decided the graphics suck, therefore no one must enjoy this movie'. I just think it is only fair that the street go both ways.

I have said it before like 20 times in this thread, I hope the movie is enjoyable overall, and those looking forward to it are rewarded and excited by their purchase. I wish it the best. I can still say that, even if I think the graphics are extremely amateur.

Is it really so crazy to just let people like what they like, be it graphics or story, and not yell at them for liking one or the other more based on personal taste??? There are plenty of movies that are just eye-candy, with garbage stories, that are still fun for what they are worth. Some people just like visual spectacle, and for them, they will most likely pass this up completely. It's not a plus to have mediocre anything.

I'm not pissed that some people don't care about graphics. I am pissed when those people start getting rude and name calling simply because others do care about it, and have a differing personal opinion. That's slowed. No post of mine or anyone else's that I can recall did the same from the other side of the conversation. Yet somehow we are the one's on the high horse.

OK, for some reason, I feel the need to respond. Again.

PLEASE read my initial post ... the ONE that was only partially quoted that started this "discussion". It was my ONLY post (at the time) and, again, began with the caveat that the graphics weren't great. I think you are reading WAY too much into my comments and are being WAY too sensitive to my use of the word 'negative". Picking a portion of a post, distorting it's original intent and using to suit a contrary argument is, in my mind, negative. Being overly-critical and dismissive without having all the facts is negative. If one doesn't have a positive opinion, one has a negative one.

I agree that the street should go both ways. That's why I originally posted my thoughts in what is an overwhelmingly critical thread.

As you said, you've already posted in this thread "like 20 times". Why so much time and effort to belabor your opinions while crashing down on ONE post that offers a different perspective? I was not discounting other peoples' critical opinions, only suggesting that they temper them and "wait and see" rather than dismiss what can still be enjoyable for them. I never said they were wrong to see things the way they do. I agreed that the CGI wasn't anything special. I was not name-calling or being rude. Your being irrationally "pissed off" is no excuse for you to be, either. And, BTW, using the word "slowed" is, well, more than a little rude.

So, please, let your anger go. Read the post without reading into it. We're talking a glorified cartoon about toy soldiers, here.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Myrthe wrote:Right ... very telling attitude.

Thanks for the snarkiness, your Highness.

Oh give me a break. Did your browser not load the ""?

I thought that made my tone quite obvious.
quote]

"Break" given ... yes, the orkicon didn't load.

Sorry for my snarkiness.

Myrthe, you are right. I apologize. There have been so many posts that were more aggressive than yours and I jumped to too extreme a conclusion.

Honestly, thank you for calling me on it, and I appreciate you taking the time instead of writing me off as someone who wouldn't be able to listen.

Cheers!

The video would be so much more baller if it didn't feature those damn space marines. A dark heresy style one would be better, then again it was already attempted and shot down pretty hard, though the video does exist somewhere in germany. Forget the name though...

juraigamer wrote:The video would be so much more baller if it didn't feature those damn space marines.

You're kidding right? You really think that a company's first foray into the world of movie-making would be better if they didn't use their flagship product?

Well I am buying it I don't care if it has sup par animation it is something I want to see written by one of my favorite BL authors the nay Sayers continue with your rant.

MajorTom11 wrote:Myrthe, you are right. I apologize. There have been so many posts that were more aggressive than yours and I jumped to too extreme a conclusion.

Honestly, thank you for calling me on it, and I appreciate you taking the time instead of writing me off as someone who wouldn't be able to listen.

Cheers!

No worries and no hard feelings. Thanks for the comments and the apology. And sorry to you and any if I offended. That's wasn't my intent as, I hope, my previous posts explained.

Now, back to our regularly scheduled program ...

If they're releasing a plain version next year I'll consider buying that.

For my own part, any 40k franchise product lives and dies by its visuals for one reason. The visual aspects of 40k are the only interesting thing about it. The backstory itself is puerile and distasteful, crafted ham-fistedly by legions of Games Workshop hacks. Take away the memorable illustrations (heck, just take away John Blanche's work) and what you have left is a putrid mess of ideas poorly conceived and executed. Which is what this "film" is clearly shaping up to be: "A tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."

Grey Templar wrote:anyone who has taken a Film history course will be aware of the huge deal making a movie is and would appreciate what is happening.

bs. By that standard, any movie at all is an awesome achievement. Counterexamples to this are very easy to find. Bloodrayne. Postal. Freddy Got Fingered. Mega Shark vs. Giant Octopus. Sometimes a terrible movie done for too little money is just a terrible movie done with too little money.

Agamemnon2 wrote:For my own part, any 40k franchise product lives and dies by its visuals for one reason. The visual aspects of 40k are the only interesting thing about it. The backstory itself is puerile and distasteful, crafted ham-fistedly by legions of Games Workshop hacks. Take away the memorable illustrations (heck, just take away John Blanche's work) and what you have left is a putrid mess of ideas poorly conceived and executed. Which is what this "film" is clearly shaping up to be: "A tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."

My thoughts exactly.

This thread is generating a lot of Mod Alerts - can we all just calm down at this point?

Or, would it be too in character if I killed this thread?

Just goes to show the level of GW fanboism that prevails, that many would like to close down any discussion around the viability of a GW product....interesting, and sad.

I just thank all that is holy and some things that aren't it's not in 3D

Alpharius wrote:This thread is generating a lot of Mod Alerts - can we all just calm down at this point?

Or, would it be too in character if I killed this thread?

Be yourself is all that you can do Alphy...

Seriously, this thing is spinning in circles, I still vote that the discussion be picked up when the entire film can be evaluated sans both wishful thinking/faith beliefs OR sweeping negative comments condemning the entire product for one aspect. Would be nice for everyone (including myself) not to poop all over someone else's personal preferences just because it conflicts with their vision of what the movie will actually be.

I chant your name sir, lock this mother down until it is time for an 'Ultramarine Movie is out! What did you think?' thread!

Probably a good idea, given that it is all up in the air until then, and this thread is getting a bit... heated.

Plus, come on!

Alpharius, putting a round into an Ultramarine thread?

What's not to love?

See you all when the movie is finally released!