Top: $410 million
Bottom: $90 million
How come the CGI in Warcraft is so superior to any other movie?
>>67001156
Blizzard is top tier in CGI, always was
>>67001156
skill
>>67001156
it looks lifer than life realer
REALER
>>67001156
A mix of prosthetic and CGI.
The days of CGI being cheaper to do is turning out to be bullshit, it's becoming much cheaper again to put a dude in some costume and then do little touch ups on the computer.
But where Warcraft film has used pure CGI? Looks shit, but their actual sets look great. I wish more films would keep to practical with only CGI when necessary.
>>67001156
How much of B vs S budget went to cgi and not to actors bloated salaries?
>>67001156
because you're including the marketing budget for BvS, and more goes into a movie's budget than just cgi.
also warcraft has some shady looking backdrops.
typical b8 shit
>>67001300
And here's the movie pro that is telling directors how to actually do movies
There's a reason as to why they literally never use costumes anymore
>>67001300
The sets look like shit too. Looks fucking cartoony. I get that they want to capture the WoW asthetics, but putting real-life actors in that world just doesn't work. They forget that the orcs aren't the only ones that have exaggerated, cartoony features in the game. The humans do too. They should have made it all animated or just done it live-action but with the old Warcraft 1 & 2 asthetic, where everything looked more grounded, including the orcs.
>>67001193
This, their weakness is plot though, by far.
>>67001504
They do, but it's a combination of prosthetics and CGI. CGI also isn't cheap if you want good CGI, CGI movies that are "good" tier in terms of CGI has to atleast have a budget of 100M
>>67001504
They use CG in big production mainly because the director doesn't have a big input in it.
The producers can do whatever they want with CG, but if you want to do everything practical, the director has to choose everything
>>67001300
>I wish more films would keep to practical with only CGI when necessary.
THIS
>>67001545
Name one big recent movie that used costumes
>>67001575
They do, Interstellar, TDK, Any Nolan film is Prosthetics + CGI.
CGI has weaknesses because of physics, it's just bad in recreating real-physics, also some effects like water as well, CGI is really good in making random people/objects/cars, any big movie that's said to use no CGI is a big lie.
Are you getting paid for this op?
>>67001616
Check Gravity, they tried to recreate the physics in space by placing her in a gravity-free zone and also used prosthetics with CGI put onto it later.
>>67001523
I can see some old John Blanche coming through there. I suppose I shouldn't be too surprised. He was influential af.
>>67001156
$410 million? Try half that.
Also, it's a safe bet you stink of piss.
>>67001156
Don't you get tired of reposting this?
>>67001663
That's not what I asked for
Honestly, hating on CGI is literally the "born in le wrong generation" of movies.
While you dinosaurs keeps whining the movie industry and common people are moving forward
>>67001156
Shill thread.
http://archive.4plebs.org/tv/search/image/OFrEyez3GleUbsCrQljeVA/
>>67001824
>"if you make a thread about a movie I don't like you're a shill!!!"
Nice logic
>>67001861
>same pic
>same filename
>same text
>over and over for weeks
Shill thread.
This garbage is going to flop hard and there's nothing you can do about it.
I wish they didn't try going for some "epic" LoTR-tier storylines and drama and just had some honest-to-god warfare for two straight hours. Just glorious Horde vs Alliance massacres left and right.
>>67001878
Whatever you say dude :^)
If it's going to flop so hard, why are you so defensive?
The movie is going to be become AT LEAST top 20 on the all time box office list.
>>67001156
Top spent their money on big name actors.
Bottom spent their money on design.
>>67001156
Am I wrong in saying that this should have came out years ago?
I have been a fan of warcraft and WoW forever, but my enthusiasm for the series has gone way down over the last couple of years. And I know im not the only one. Didn't WoW lose something like 8 million of their subscribers last year? Besides the gameplay being shit, the stories they have been telling are complete garbage. An eight year old could write better than the shit they've been spewing out lately.
>>67002595
WoW was a marathon of mistakes lorewise.
>>67001156
>$410 million
This is fucking disgusting. Can't wait for it to flop.
>>67002595
They lost 5 millions sub, but keep in mind that before WoD came out they had about the same amount. The cinematic and other advertisements boosted subs to Wrath levels, but the shittiness of the expansion drove off the people that had returned.
The movie and WoD are designed to exist contemporaneously, and had WoD been a success the movie would be getting massive amounts of hype.
Horde or Alliance, choose your side.
>>67001717
If that's not what you asked for then u misunderstood him
>>67001156
>>67001616
The Force Awakens used lots of puppets and costumes for the aliens. Some worked, some didn't work as well. But characters like Snoke, who was all CGI, looked fake as shit.
>>67001156
the BvS image obviously comes from a lower-quality encode of the trailer. There's a lot of artifacting, smearing, and other hallmarks of a low bitrate file
so the answer is that you have a high-quality warcraft trailer and a low-quality BvS trailer.
>>67002994
Alliance
Seriously, the horde is just a bunch of edgy tweens who ride Metzen's orc jesus cock
>>67002994
>>67003482
Fucked up, meant to reply to >>67002842
>>67002842
I serve only the Frozen Throne.
CGI is like oil paint
It can be used to create images of great beauty
But it requires skillful application
Blame the painter, not the paint
>>67001525
That is true, but Warcraft has so many races and possible storylines that it'd be cool for an extended universe.
>>67003402
I took both pictures from the highest quality
>>67003687
nah bro, just because something is 1080p doesn't mean it's high quality
i grabbed this from the apple trailers-hosted trailer.
>>67003719
Barely any difference and it still looks shit
>>67001156
What, the warcraft movie is CGI? I thought it was just in game footage with voice acting over the top lol
>>67003719I don't really feel there's anything wrong with this screen and I'm unironically excited to see the movie
>>67004016
(You)
>>67004253
Yo where Aquaman at?
the cgi on doomsday is actually decent. it's the design that's a little bland. of course, given the rumors about how he evolves the way he does in the comics, it will probably be fine.
meanwhile, the orc in warcraft has an acceptable design, but the cgi is a little too glossy to be convincing. they're pretty much the best at everything else, but i guess ILM is still working on its creature effects.
>>67001193
is Blizzard even involved in the production, besides maybe consulting?
>>67001193
This. They should give up dead games already and become a fantasy flick studio.
>>67001193
>>67004436
>>67005130
Blizzard is not doing the CGI, and besides, doing a blizzard cinematic takes multiple of months and is not a simple process
