Ultramarines: The Movie

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

I have the collector's edition. I've enjoyed watching it. Could it have been better? Sure, but so could anything with a limited budget and the limitations of CGI technology of the time. If it were made today with the same budget and technology that went into Angels of Death, it would have been much better.

 

Of course you'd still have people saying they don't like it because Ultramarines.

bro, don’t try the ‘limitations of CGI at the time’ excuse.

There was plenty of solid CGI out there.

There was plenty of food CGI. They were just being cheap

Edited May 29, 2022 by Inquisitor_Lensoven

[Grotsmasha]

To be fair to the movie, I watched it this morning. Honestly, somehow, I dislike the things I disliked about it less now than I did. I'm going to go so far as to say, if it's been years since you watched it, I think you owe it to yourself to give it another chance.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

To be fair to the movie, I watched it this morning. Honestly, somehow, I dislike the things I disliked about it less now than I did. I'm going to go so far as to say, if it's been years since you watched it, I think you owe it to yourself to give it another chance.

I might try it again, but any chance that new found fondness is nostalgia based?

[Grotsmasha]

It's hard to quantify further than by saying its flaws bother me less than I know it used to. One explanation is I was band-wagoning way back when.

And as always with rewatches, I noticed more subtle detail, in this case, the slow build of dusk and grime on the armour.

[MegaVolt87]

The chappie was a psyker- were these guys actually supposed to be loyalist word bearers or something haha. 

[infyrana]

Never had a serious problem with it, enjoyed it for what it was.  They have had plenty of opportunities to expand on the small snippets they do amongst all the animations and games, intros and everything else to pull together for an epic series of movies.  But it would seem they just don't want to invest, they need a Dave Filoni and Jon Favreau but for GW instead of SW.

 

Still, I have gone back and watched it when I wanted a bit of sci fi entertainment in the setting, just don't have a copy atm :(

[Gederas]

I have the collector's edition. I've enjoyed watching it. Could it have been better? Sure, but so could anything with a limited budget and the limitations of CGI technology of the time. If it were made today with the same budget and technology that went into Angels of Death, it would have been much better.

 

Of course you'd still have people saying they don't like it because Ultramarines.

bro, don’t try the ‘limitations of CGI at the time’ excuse.

There was plenty of solid CGI out there.

There was plenty of food CGI. They were just being cheap

Look at the cast list again. The CGI wasn't them being cheap, it was that they blew all their budget on the voice actors :lol:

[Special Officer Doofy]

I just watched some of it on YouTube. It's cringey for sure. The cgi is not good even for the time, and I don't understand why everyone says they spent all the money on voice acting. There's only a few bigger names and that's it, and I'm not saying the voice acting itself is bad, but the dialog is pretty in line with bad bolter porn.

[StraightSilver]

I was lucky enough to go the premier for this. A few of us were invited along to Codex Pictures in London to see the movie at their screening room (mini cinema).

 

We got to talk to the film makers, and they plied us with a lot, and I mean a lot, of free beer.

 

I remember coming out, not a little bit squiffy, on an absolute high. I loved it, and there were cheers at some points.

 

I don't know how much of that was the beer, but I bought the limited DVD and have watched a few times since.

I will agree, it's not perfect, and it's much better with beer, but I am still fond of it.

The Land Speeder was definitely my favourite bit.

I would like to think they could revisit it at some point. Take the audio and leave it as is, but redo the animation. An Astartes level animated film, with that voice cast, could be something special.

And, although Codex pictures was set up specifically for this, if I remember correctly most of the team was made up of the people behind the Lego Bionicle TV show?

[Karak Norn Clansman]

I am to this day confused that a team got together and managed to produce a boring 40k action movie. What the heck?

 

Budget and limitations aside, I still cannot fathom the boring direction. It would have been much better use of limited resources to aim for some shorter, cheesy flick filled with over-the-top violence and quick movements. And plenty of atmospheric darkness in the surroundings to hide the quality of animations.

 

Instead the lasting impression I am left with after watching the Ultramarines movie, is one of emptiness. Slow, desolate, boring emptiness.

 

Of course, it is better to try and fail, than to never try at all. It is far better to listen to the bowstring that broke than to never string a bow.

Edited May 30, 2022 by Karak Norn Clansman

[phoenix01]

 

I have the collector's edition. I've enjoyed watching it. Could it have been better? Sure, but so could anything with a limited budget and the limitations of CGI technology of the time. If it were made today with the same budget and technology that went into Angels of Death, it would have been much better.

 

Of course you'd still have people saying they don't like it because Ultramarines.

bro, don’t try the ‘limitations of CGI at the time’ excuse.

There was plenty of solid CGI out there.

There was plenty of food CGI. They were just being cheap

Yeah from big companies who can spend millions on their work.

 

I did a check of movies released in 2010 that were CGI animated. Some were films from big production houses like Toy Story 3, Shrek Ever After, and Megamind. Some were films like Tinkerbell and the Great Fairy Rescue, Space Dogs, and Care Bears Share Bear Shines. But what I'm not seeing is CGI animated movies that have realistic looking people. Do you know why?

 

I remember reading about how audiences are creeped out by realistic looking people in CGI. Movies like Final Fantasy the Spirits Within kind of realistic. That's why most CGI people are cartoony looking. Because there is something off-putting about realistic looking people that are CGI. Where you do see CGI realistic looking people is in video games. Fallout: New Vegas was released in 2010. Have you seen the quality of the CGI in that compared to say HALO Infinite which came out last year? Even with that, Codex Pictures used Image Metrics for the animation, the same people behind Assassin's Creed 2 and GTA 4. Not exactly amateurs.

 

What I'm saying is we can't compare a low budget film like Ultramarines the Movie at $8,900,000 to a big budget movie like Toy Story 3 at $200,000,000. There are limitations to the quality of CGI that little amount of money can buy compared to the money Disney can spend.

Edited May 30, 2022 by phoenix01

[Karak Norn Clansman]

In fact, the cutscenes in Starcraft (1998) could have given good clues. The makers of the cutscenes managed to get a lot of mileage out of limited means there. Something a bit like it, but 40k, would have been good fun to watch as a short movie.

 

Atmosphere, including good voice acting and music, trumps top-notch animations. I have lost count over games and films that have been rebooted for the worse, with bigger budget and flashier CGI and special effects.

 

Cramped dark corridors, on a starship or crustbound compound, would have been a good way to hide the limited graphics and create a more thrilling environment.

Edited May 30, 2022 by Karak Norn Clansman

[MegaVolt87]

Or the real takeaway, GW should actually drop real cash and not pocket change to make animation that will have mass market appeal and capture an audience for the IP outside the core fans that they are chasing.

[Slave to Darkness]

 if I remember correctly most of the team was made up of the people behind the Lego Bionicle TV show?

GW should have gotten a better animation studio involved, could be worse, it could have ended up looking like Transformers Beastwars.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

In fact, the cutscenes in Starcraft (1998) could have given good clues. The makers of the cutscenes managed to get a lot of mileage out of limited means there. Something a bit like it, but 40k, would have been good fun to watch as a short movie.

 

Atmosphere, including good voice acting and music, trumps top-notch animations. I have lost count over games and films that have been rebooted for the worse, with bigger budget and flashier CGI and special effects.

 

Cramped dark corridors, on a starship or crustbound compound, would have been a good way to hide the limited graphics and create a more thrilling environment.

I agree solid story and performance trumps effects to a certain degree, but the best story and best voice acting in the world couldn’t save a warhammer movie from being a stop motion claymation movie…and it doesn’t help that the story and writing weren’t top tier either.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

 

 

I have the collector's edition. I've enjoyed watching it. Could it have been better? Sure, but so could anything with a limited budget and the limitations of CGI technology of the time. If it were made today with the same budget and technology that went into Angels of Death, it would have been much better.

 

Of course you'd still have people saying they don't like it because Ultramarines.

bro, don’t try the ‘limitations of CGI at the time’ excuse.

There was plenty of solid CGI out there.

There was plenty of food CGI. They were just being cheap

Yeah from big companies who can spend millions on their work.

 

I did a check of movies released in 2010 that were CGI animated. Some were films from big production houses like Toy Story 3, Shrek Ever After, and Megamind. Some were films like Tinkerbell and the Great Fairy Rescue, Space Dogs, and Care Bears Share Bear Shines. But what I'm not seeing is CGI animated movies that have realistic looking people. Do you know why?

 

I remember reading about how audiences are creeped out by realistic looking people in CGI. Movies like Final Fantasy the Spirits Within kind of realistic. That's why most CGI people are cartoony looking. Because there is something off-putting about realistic looking people that are CGI. Where you do see CGI realistic looking people is in video games. Fallout: New Vegas was released in 2010. Have you seen the quality of the CGI in that compared to say HALO Infinite which came out last year? Even with that, Codex Pictures used Image Metrics for the animation, the same people behind Assassin's Creed 2 and GTA 4. Not exactly amateurs.

 

What I'm saying is we can't compare a low budget film like Ultramarines the Movie at $8,900,000 to a big budget movie like Toy Story 3 at $200,000,000. There are limitations to the quality of CGI that little amount of money can buy compared to the money Disney can spend.

bruh, final fantasy w/ squall way back in like 2003 had better animation. More anime styles people, but sorry I’d rather have CGI anime space marines that look good over what they gave us.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

I am to this day confused that a team got together and managed to produce a boring 40k action movie. What the heck?

 

Budget and limitations aside, I still cannot fathom the boring direction. It would have been much better use of limited resources to aim for some shorter, cheesy flick filled with over-the-top violence and quick movements. And plenty of atmospheric darkness in the surroundings to hide the quality of animations.

 

Instead the lasting impression I am left with after watching the Ultramarines movie, is one of emptiness. Slow, desolate, boring emptiness.

 

Of course, it is better to try and fail, than to never try at all. It is far better to listen to the bowstring that broke than to never string a bow.

right? Like a 45 minute movie in an under hive exterminating cultists and a few traitor marines would have been so much better.

And if there were limitations to human face making with CGI, then they should have come up with a reason for them to keep their helmets on the whole movie or at least most of it.

[XeonDragon]

A mate of mind summed up this movie perfectly: "It is so bad it's awesome". 

[phoenix01]

 

 

 

I have the collector's edition. I've enjoyed watching it. Could it have been better? Sure, but so could anything with a limited budget and the limitations of CGI technology of the time. If it were made today with the same budget and technology that went into Angels of Death, it would have been much better.

 

Of course you'd still have people saying they don't like it because Ultramarines.

bro, don’t try the ‘limitations of CGI at the time’ excuse.

There was plenty of solid CGI out there.

There was plenty of food CGI. They were just being cheap

Yeah from big companies who can spend millions on their work.

 

I did a check of movies released in 2010 that were CGI animated. Some were films from big production houses like Toy Story 3, Shrek Ever After, and Megamind. Some were films like Tinkerbell and the Great Fairy Rescue, Space Dogs, and Care Bears Share Bear Shines. But what I'm not seeing is CGI animated movies that have realistic looking people. Do you know why?

 

I remember reading about how audiences are creeped out by realistic looking people in CGI. Movies like Final Fantasy the Spirits Within kind of realistic. That's why most CGI people are cartoony looking. Because there is something off-putting about realistic looking people that are CGI. Where you do see CGI realistic looking people is in video games. Fallout: New Vegas was released in 2010. Have you seen the quality of the CGI in that compared to say HALO Infinite which came out last year? Even with that, Codex Pictures used Image Metrics for the animation, the same people behind Assassin's Creed 2 and GTA 4. Not exactly amateurs.

 

What I'm saying is we can't compare a low budget film like Ultramarines the Movie at $8,900,000 to a big budget movie like Toy Story 3 at $200,000,000. There are limitations to the quality of CGI that little amount of money can buy compared to the money Disney can spend.

bruh, final fantasy w/ squall way back in like 2003 had better animation. More anime styles people, but sorry I’d rather have CGI anime space marines that look good over what they gave us.

And Final Fantasy VIII had a $30,000,000 budget so.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

 

 

 

 

I have the collector's edition. I've enjoyed watching it. Could it have been better? Sure, but so could anything with a limited budget and the limitations of CGI technology of the time. If it were made today with the same budget and technology that went into Angels of Death, it would have been much better.

 

Of course you'd still have people saying they don't like it because Ultramarines.

bro, don’t try the ‘limitations of CGI at the time’ excuse.

There was plenty of solid CGI out there.

There was plenty of food CGI. They were just being cheap

Yeah from big companies who can spend millions on their work.

 

I did a check of movies released in 2010 that were CGI animated. Some were films from big production houses like Toy Story 3, Shrek Ever After, and Megamind. Some were films like Tinkerbell and the Great Fairy Rescue, Space Dogs, and Care Bears Share Bear Shines. But what I'm not seeing is CGI animated movies that have realistic looking people. Do you know why?

 

I remember reading about how audiences are creeped out by realistic looking people in CGI. Movies like Final Fantasy the Spirits Within kind of realistic. That's why most CGI people are cartoony looking. Because there is something off-putting about realistic looking people that are CGI. Where you do see CGI realistic looking people is in video games. Fallout: New Vegas was released in 2010. Have you seen the quality of the CGI in that compared to say HALO Infinite which came out last year? Even with that, Codex Pictures used Image Metrics for the animation, the same people behind Assassin's Creed 2 and GTA 4. Not exactly amateurs.

 

What I'm saying is we can't compare a low budget film like Ultramarines the Movie at $8,900,000 to a big budget movie like Toy Story 3 at $200,000,000. There are limitations to the quality of CGI that little amount of money can buy compared to the money Disney can spend.

bruh, final fantasy w/ squall way back in like 2003 had better animation. More anime styles people, but sorry I’d rather have CGI anime space marines that look good over what they gave us.

And Final Fantasy VIII had a $30,000,000 budget so.

and? Are you trying to say that GW didn’t have the funds to invest in this movie to get some decent quality animation in 2010?

[Helias_Tancred]

I never understood all the nitpicky hyper-film critique butthurt that's always followed this movie. It's as if some people were serious investors in its production and got financially burned by it?

 

It was GW's first foray at making a Warhammer 40k animated movie. There were cool moments like the land speeder or the heavy bolter firing, and there were some poorly done moments too. The story was very simple and standard fare for the genre. They had some very good voice actors. The CGI was not good, and was the low point of the movie. But it was watchable.

 

It was what it was.

 

At the time I was thrilled to have seen it, realizing it's flaws but having faith that as time went on better Warhammer 40k productions would come out. 

[Son of Sacrifice]

 

 

 

 

 

I have the collector's edition. I've enjoyed watching it. Could it have been better? Sure, but so could anything with a limited budget and the limitations of CGI technology of the time. If it were made today with the same budget and technology that went into Angels of Death, it would have been much better.

 

Of course you'd still have people saying they don't like it because Ultramarines.

bro, don’t try the ‘limitations of CGI at the time’ excuse.

There was plenty of solid CGI out there.

There was plenty of food CGI. They were just being cheap

Yeah from big companies who can spend millions on their work.

 

I did a check of movies released in 2010 that were CGI animated. Some were films from big production houses like Toy Story 3, Shrek Ever After, and Megamind. Some were films like Tinkerbell and the Great Fairy Rescue, Space Dogs, and Care Bears Share Bear Shines. But what I'm not seeing is CGI animated movies that have realistic looking people. Do you know why?

 

I remember reading about how audiences are creeped out by realistic looking people in CGI. Movies like Final Fantasy the Spirits Within kind of realistic. That's why most CGI people are cartoony looking. Because there is something off-putting about realistic looking people that are CGI. Where you do see CGI realistic looking people is in video games. Fallout: New Vegas was released in 2010. Have you seen the quality of the CGI in that compared to say HALO Infinite which came out last year? Even with that, Codex Pictures used Image Metrics for the animation, the same people behind Assassin's Creed 2 and GTA 4. Not exactly amateurs.

 

What I'm saying is we can't compare a low budget film like Ultramarines the Movie at $8,900,000 to a big budget movie like Toy Story 3 at $200,000,000. There are limitations to the quality of CGI that little amount of money can buy compared to the money Disney can spend.

bruh, final fantasy w/ squall way back in like 2003 had better animation. More anime styles people, but sorry I’d rather have CGI anime space marines that look good over what they gave us.

And Final Fantasy VIII had a $30,000,000 budget so.

and? Are you trying to say that GW didn’t have the funds to invest in this movie to get some decent quality animation in 2010?

Why are you being so belligerent? What do you know about animation, film production or GWs finances back in 2010? Bruh.

[Cyrox]

I remember buying this, watching it, then selling it.

 

I couldn't get over the fact that they managed to get the space marine helmet shape so wrong, its just.. off

 

Also the running/walking as though they were on the sea bed just makes it hard to watch.

 

Its like the Star Wars Holiday Special - everyone should watch it once, then leave it at that.

 

Ok maybe its not that bad, but it was a missed opportunity.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Always enjoy watching it.

[phoenix01]

 

 

 

 

 

I have the collector's edition. I've enjoyed watching it. Could it have been better? Sure, but so could anything with a limited budget and the limitations of CGI technology of the time. If it were made today with the same budget and technology that went into Angels of Death, it would have been much better.

 

Of course you'd still have people saying they don't like it because Ultramarines.

bro, don’t try the ‘limitations of CGI at the time’ excuse.

There was plenty of solid CGI out there.

There was plenty of food CGI. They were just being cheap

Yeah from big companies who can spend millions on their work.

 

I did a check of movies released in 2010 that were CGI animated. Some were films from big production houses like Toy Story 3, Shrek Ever After, and Megamind. Some were films like Tinkerbell and the Great Fairy Rescue, Space Dogs, and Care Bears Share Bear Shines. But what I'm not seeing is CGI animated movies that have realistic looking people. Do you know why?

 

I remember reading about how audiences are creeped out by realistic looking people in CGI. Movies like Final Fantasy the Spirits Within kind of realistic. That's why most CGI people are cartoony looking. Because there is something off-putting about realistic looking people that are CGI. Where you do see CGI realistic looking people is in video games. Fallout: New Vegas was released in 2010. Have you seen the quality of the CGI in that compared to say HALO Infinite which came out last year? Even with that, Codex Pictures used Image Metrics for the animation, the same people behind Assassin's Creed 2 and GTA 4. Not exactly amateurs.

 

What I'm saying is we can't compare a low budget film like Ultramarines the Movie at $8,900,000 to a big budget movie like Toy Story 3 at $200,000,000. There are limitations to the quality of CGI that little amount of money can buy compared to the money Disney can spend.

bruh, final fantasy w/ squall way back in like 2003 had better animation. More anime styles people, but sorry I’d rather have CGI anime space marines that look good over what they gave us.

And Final Fantasy VIII had a $30,000,000 budget so.

and? Are you trying to say that GW didn’t have the funds to invest in this movie to get some decent quality animation in 2010?

 

Congratulations, you win the Internet Argument Award for today. That plus $6 will get you a Starbucks coffee.

 

Why do I even bother posting on this website?