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.

 Kain wrote:
. If I were to ask some clansman in the scottish High Lands or a Welsh Sheep Farmer about Warhammer he'd probably give me the oddest look before walking away. If I asked a random Londoner, I'd get maybe a very vague sort of recollection, but nothing truly concrete.

Alright, then, Mr. Scientist. I'll ask for your scientific evidence now. Prove this statement. Go on.

No, you can't do it, and I can't prove mine either. But this is a forum discussion, not a scientific experiment. My evidence may be anecdotal in a sense, but most young people in the UK tend to think in roughly the same mindset. That's why everyone's into Hollister (especially true a year or two ago), for example. However, even if my evidence is entirely anecdotal, as a resident of the UK I still have a more credible opinion of the general UK public opinion that a foreigner. There's no disputing that.

 Kain wrote:

There simply aren't enough players of the game to have anywhere near the cultural relevance you are describing.

You don't need to play to know about something. I can tell you that most people in the UK will have heard of warhammer, because there's a Gameworkshop in most cities, many people know (or know of) people who play, many people have wandered into a GW looking for an Xbox, many adults will have grown up with the hobby or with someone who played the hobby, because 15-20 years ago, warhammer was going fairly strong here.

Again, I can't say, because I don't live in the US, but I imagine that this isn't really true over the US as the GW stores will be more spread out and GW hasn't been over there as long. The internet is probably the way you find out about 40k.

 Kain wrote:

Warhammer is a niche franchise known mostly to internet geeks and wargamers

Again, I could ask for evidence. But this brings back the above point. In the US, or in South Africa, where you are, there's probably less GW stores per km squared than here in the UK. And, as it hasn't been over there as long, people have had less time to be exposed to it. As a result, you come up with this opinion. However, in the UK, as I said, GW's been around longer and there's a higher density of them. Here, Warhammer isn't known quite so exclusively to internet geeks and wargamers as you might think.

 Psienesis wrote:

Fairly sure that I, being a resident of the UK, have a more credible opinion over yourself, being a resident of South Africa, with regards to the attitude of UK residents. That's like me telling you what South Africans thought of Nelson Mandela's passing.

Are you a sociologist? No? Then your opinion on what society thinks is unqualified and just as valid as mine, which is to say not at all.

You're still missing the point completely. I don't need to be a sociologist, a scientist or a genius to know, roughly, what people in the UK think and do. I have lived here all my life and have spent my entire life being immersed in UK culture. No amount of sociology textbooks is going to give you better knowledge of UK culture than having grown up and lived there for 20 odd years. Having people from the US or South Africa or wherever telling me I don't know people in the UK is ridiculous. Yes, I can't judge every single person's feelings, but I have met, spoken to and interacted with far, far, far more UK residents that you have, purely from having lived here for 20 years. No, I'm not a sociologist, I don't need to be.

Actually, you do, because otherwise all you're providing us with is an uninformed opinion. Have you done surveys? Do you have actual data other than what you believe to be true? No? Then what you think is true or what you've experienced is not a case-study. It's the same reaction I have to a someone with a degree in Business telling me all about the "lies of Climate Change". This guy's background isn't in climate study. His opinion is uninformed and without value.

I've lived in the US the majority of my life (though I am comparatively well-traveled), but I cannot claim to speak for all of the US when it comes to matters of what it is Americans like and do not like. I might make fun of Americans based on stereotypes, memes and perceived commonalities... but I have no real way of knowing whether most Americans prefer their couch to a La-Z-Boy recliner while watching TV. My opinion, as some guy off the street, doesn't mean anything. I don't have the background or the education, let alone the data, to make a sweeping statement about American citizens. Ideally, if one is going to say something like "60% of Americans prefer needles in their eyes to rabid weasels being set upon their privates", one would need to have some data to back up that claim, poll data, scientific research, something. Otherwise, you might as well add the caption that your info is coming from statsoutofmyass.com. Incidentally, that is the source of the above-mentioned Needles In Your Eyes vs Rabid Weasels on Your Jimmy survey (1987, MIT).

Just because you believe that British young people all tend to like the same things is not supported by data, and anecdotally certainly doesn't seem to be the case, what with the backlash against certain groups over there that have been evidenced on these forums (and how's that for pulling data out of thin air?). So I am disinclined to believe sweeping statements about any ethnic group or nationality, or even just a sociological group, regardless of origins, without numbers to back it up. Most often because such sweeping statements tend to be very negative, so I am inclined to disbelieve them at first glance. Just how I trained my mind.

 The Shadow wrote:
*Snipped QQing*

You made a positive claim, ergo, you must prove it.

I made a negative claim, by the rules of debating I am not obligated to prove it because a negative can't be proven.

Try again kid.

If you cannot do this, then you must concede the argument. End of story.

Uh oh, the k bomb has been dropped.
*hides behind ADL*

In other, less passive aggressive, news. I wouldn't mind seeing a Red Dawn-esque film about the Necrontyr biotransference. You don't even have to worry about making hundreds of suits of power armour. Just give the Necrontyr the Star Trek treatment, chuck in some CGI terminators, boom a decent 40k movie for a fraction of the price.

Durandal wrote:
Just find the guys from Relic that made the DOW intro movies and have them animate 20 three minute scenes, like the Clone Wars miniseries (the cartoon, not the CGI Lucas followup).

Have the same guy direct.

Then go for a movie with a similar plot to the Ultramarine game. Show the initial ork invasion. Show the guard heroically dying en-mass. Then drop your space marine squad and have them rip up in style like the battle scene from 13 Assassins. Have the handful of survivors embark to the next mission with the remaining IG squad in tow.

No need for complicated subplots. No need for romance. Just one big action scene.

This sounds like my worst nightmare of a 40k movie.....I really hope nothing like this is ever made. Awful, the 40k world is rich and deep in culture and life. That should be exploited at every turn.

Psienesis wrote:Actually, you do, because otherwise all you're providing us with is an uninformed opinion. Have you done surveys? Do you have actual data other than what you believe to be true? No? Then what you think is true or what you've experienced is not a case-study. It's the same reaction I have to a someone with a degree in Business telling me all about the "lies of Climate Change". This guy's background isn't in climate study. His opinion is uninformed and without value.

I've lived in the US the majority of my life (though I am comparatively well-traveled), but I cannot claim to speak for all of the US when it comes to matters of what it is Americans like and do not like. I might make fun of Americans based on stereotypes, memes and perceived commonalities... but I have no real way of knowing whether most Americans prefer their couch to a La-Z-Boy recliner while watching TV. My opinion, as some guy off the street, doesn't mean anything. I don't have the background or the education, let alone the data, to make a sweeping statement about American citizens. Ideally, if one is going to say something like "60% of Americans prefer needles in their eyes to rabid weasels being set upon their privates", one would need to have some data to back up that claim, poll data, scientific research, something. Otherwise, you might as well add the caption that your info is coming from statsoutofmyass.com. Incidentally, that is the source of the above-mentioned Needles In Your Eyes vs Rabid Weasels on Your Jimmy survey (1987, MIT).

Just because you believe that British young people all tend to like the same things is not supported by data, and anecdotally certainly doesn't seem to be the case, what with the backlash against certain groups over there that have been evidenced on these forums (and how's that for pulling data out of thin air?). So I am disinclined to believe sweeping statements about any ethnic group or nationality, or even just a sociological group, regardless of origins, without numbers to back it up. Most often because such sweeping statements tend to be very negative, so I am inclined to disbelieve them at first glance. Just how I trained my mind.

Kain wrote:

 The Shadow wrote:
*Snipped QQing*

You made a positive claim, ergo, you must prove it.

I made a negative claim, by the rules of debating I am not obligated to prove it because a negative can't be proven.

Try again kid.

If you cannot do this, then you must concede the argument. End of story.

Alright, you two, browse some discussion threads on this forum. Find a few cases of people giving their opinions. Do they back it up with scientific evidence? Of course they don't. This is a discussion forum, not a think tank. In that thread in General Discussions a while back, about "what's wrong with WHFB" or something, there were multiple cases of people saying "oh, in my community/group, there's plenty of WHFB players and it's a well received game". Did anyone jump on them and demand scientific evidence? Of course they didn't. Honestly, I think that you two just can't accept that some people think negatively about your toy soldier game.

Psienesis, I never said that "Oh, 64.28% people in the UK hate warhammer" or anything like that. I said that I have seen numerous, unrelated incidents of stigma against warhammer and the wargaming hobby in general. Back to the above point. I don't need to back this up with scientific evidence.

Kain, seriously? Seriously? Rules of debating? Like I said, this is a FORUM for God's sake! The rules of debating mean as much here as the rules of football. Maybe I should say "oh actually you can't quote my post and argue against it because that was typed within my first protected minute"?

Durandal wrote:

No need for complicated subplots. No need for romance. Just one big action scene.

This is another issue I forgot to mention. All good films need good characterisation, strongly put-together characters. A romance is pretty much a necessity as well, though of course how far it is developed varies from film to film. GW would probably use Space Marines as their protagonists in their film, and the unflinching dedication to the emperor of these characters would simply not work. Such a thing'd be fine on one character, but your main character and much of the rest of the cast, with no change in character? That's doomed to fail.

Like I say, a lot of the lore would have to be re-worked. Space Marines cut and pasted from the 40k lore wouldn't cut it in a cinematic release.

 Lobukia wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Abnett has written some good books. He's also written one of the two BL books I stopped reading because they were so bad (Brothers of the Snake) and his last 40k movie, Ultramarines, was awful.

Really? First 40k novel I read was BotS, and I loved it.

I agree. It wasn't my first 40k novel, but I certainly enjoyed it.

 Kain wrote:
GW can't afford to finance a two hundred million dollar movie.

You know that movies are financed by investors right? GW wouldn't be the one to put up the money; various investors that were convinced the movie would make money would. If they could convince a group of rich people to pay for it then it would get made. If they couldn't convince a bunch of rich people to pay for it then it was probably a really bad idea to begin with.

Knockagh wrote:
I would rather see a guard based movie with a little space marine presence. Guard based movie would have a wider appeal I think. Throw in some or two marines and some mechanicum dudes. But the story should be told from a guardsmans perspective.

It was already made. It was called Starship Troopers.

 The Shadow wrote:
Anyone who knows the film industry at all will know that a 40k movie, taken directly from the 40k Universe, would not work.

Completely depends upon the angle taken. There are plenty of Inquisition stories that would work well, for example Eisenhorn. He starts off as a completely likable character and power armour is minimized. It's all in how you present the universe. Don't present the Imperium as a totalitarian government at first, let that come through as the story progresses and the main character changes sides... Heck there could easily be a Tau angle in here.

Heck, Dune was made into a movie.. twice. That background is deep, presents a universe that is nothing like this one, and in TV form were apparently the highest rated shows on Syfy.

clively wrote:

 The Shadow wrote:
Anyone who knows the film industry at all will know that a 40k movie, taken directly from the 40k Universe, would not work.

Completely depends upon the angle taken. There are plenty of Inquisition stories that would work well, for example Eisenhorn. He starts off as a completely likable character and power armour is minimized. It's all in how you present the universe. Don't present the Imperium as a totalitarian government at first, let that come through as the story progresses and the main character changes sides... Heck there could easily be a Tau angle in here.

Oh yeah, I totally agree. There are some aspects of the 40k lore that would work very nicely indeed. However, I'm pretty sure that, if GW got this opportunity, they'd want to push their Space Marines. After all, they're the army that bring the most people into the hobby already.

But yeah, the Inquisition is something that would work well on screen. I also think the Eldar would have a large positive effect on a 40k movie, not as the protagonists, but rather as a supporting role. The Eldar's fickleness would translate brilliantly into film. Are the Eldar really on the side of our Space Marine protagonists? Or will they turn on them when they least expect it? Character(s) like that, of whose loyalty you can't be sure, work brilliantly in many story-telling formats.

Quentin Tarantino or James Cameron as director.

I just had an idea! The problem with these threads (and I have seen a lot of them) is that they are on a forum called Dakkadakka. We are all (probably) 40k fans, what needs to be done at some point is post a quick summary of a 40k story that would work as a movie (and mention it is from a franchise called warhammer 40k) on some other forum (rules permitting of course) and ask people of they think it could work as a movie.