Triple A movie wih gargantuan budget

>from the guys who brought you the DC Extended Universe

no wonder it looks like absolute shit

The nose knows

is that John Hamm?

edge?

The problem is that even if you use the best CG money can buy, the human eye is still going to be able to tell the difference and it won't really matter.

Case in point, Warcraft. Blizzard is often at the forefront of graphical quality and, despite the rest of that movie, the CG was incredibly detailed and well done, definitely some of the best there is. And yet whenever CG was spliced with live action footage, it didn't make a bit of difference.

The rest of the Harry Potter movies had the cartoony CG, and while that was largely due to the limitations of the technology at the time, personally I never complained about it and I don't feel compelled to complain now.

DELETE THIS RIGHT NOW

The CGI orcs in Warcraft looked more real than the human actors, though, specially the one using green make-up to look like a half-orc.

t. Urist

Farm me and my buddies plenty of plump helmets, we'll pick them up soon.

That subtle redpill in the back

You really think a company would put more than half the budget to CGI? Do you know understand how the industry works? What about advertising?

>goblin gangster
lmao

her name is goldstein on the pic idiot

Starring the heavy from TF2?

He looks jewish

They should've just hire Ron Perlman.

I think the question is: why CGI at all?

I'm reminded of that most recent Star Wars movie where they computer animated in Andy Serkis as pic related. Now, while that CG looked okay (certainly better than OP's pic), it was totally pointless and redundant since Serkis' character was just a dude with a fucked-up face. There's nothing about his character that wouldn't be possible to do with some make-up, he's just a creepy old guy.

The goblins in Harry Potter were all midgets wearing prosthetics in the first films, and they looked MUCH more real than the goblin in OP's pic. So the question is: why use CG when you can use something that's both cheaper and more effective?

They're not using midgets in costumes for the goblins this time? I thought they looked pretty good in Deathly Hallows.

>gargantuan budget

it'll be 40% to author fees
30% advertising
25% fraud
5% film production

How do we go from this to that?

Blizzard didn't make the CGI for Warcraft. ILM did. Why can't you videogame fags understand this?

They did. He's playing the goblin through motion capture

>Triple A movie
what

Antisemite !

same way we went from Lurtz to Azog

Where did you get that picture of Netanyahu? I've never seen it on any news site.

Ayyyyyyyy

I know it's usually video game terminology, but it works here. AAA movie properties are the ones with the biggest budgets and box office returns. Stuff like Star Wars, the Marvel movies, etc. Harry Potter is absolutely a AAA franchise, it's one of the biggest money makers ever put to screen.

But, much like with video games, having a AAA budget and notoriety does not at all translate to quality, even on a basic technical level. So stuff like OP's pic is made exponentially more embarrassing by the fact that it cost way more money to make than the average film.

kys moslem

Where did you get your outdated anti-semitism? I've never seen it in the 21st century.

...

>oh every wizard can access their dingets and blingets and chazwozzers in the vaults...after you use your magic to destroy Palestine forever EHEHEHEHE!!!
What did he mean by this?

oy vey

>implying this isn't realer than real life

I hate how they made the orcs twice the size of humans

is this a jew ?

>lil human boi intimidated by the BOC
HAH typical

Orcs are already taller than humans while horrendously hunched over, all the orcs in the movie stand up straight.

>orcs are
>posts picture from WoW

you''re stupid. warcraft orcs were roughly the same size as humans in the pre-wow games.

Oh wow, there's a fucking button to go straight to the microtransaction shop on the character page now. How do they keep getting away with it?

>Goldstein on the poster

>you're stupid for not playing ancient Warcraft games
Cred Forums has a very different idea of stupidity than the rest of the world

>Ancient
Warcraft 3 came out two years before WoW.

That's ancient so far as vidya toys go

You are pretty stupid for playing wow at all. Furthermore for letting it retcon the pre-wow warcraft.

It's really not. You're out of your element, Cred Forums.

>uses an RTS to determine scale
>calls others stupid

I guess a barracks has an area of about 3 square humans?

Yes?

Is this a Dumbledore Goblin?

I'm so sorry...

>hurr game is old so youre stupid

is right though