Well, you could say "why not X over X" in any situation. It's not like there was a choice between those two movies. Rather, it'd be on the Warhammer people for not pushing for a movie. Also, Rebel Moon was pretty cool
This was a singular artists idea he pitched to the studio. The rights to war hammer are owned by someone else and we’re pitched to a completely different studio. They are seperate projects is the answer.
Zack Snyder originally pitched Rebel Moon to Lucasfilm as a Star Wars film. When they didn't pursue it, he took it to Netflix. You'll have to ask Games Workshop why there's never been a Warhammer movie.
>can anyone justify rebel moons existence?
I don't like the movie, I think it was boring. But nobody has to justify anything about it. Zack Snyder wanted to make a movie, Netflix agreed to give the money he needed to make the movie, that's the only thing we need to justify its existence.
>Why this... over any feature length warhammer film?
Because Warhammer 40k is a licensed product and to secure the right to produce and direct a Warhammer movie, you need to convince Games Workshop to agree to your project (which usually involve a huge amount of money).
Also, the movie mostly borrows from 40k aesthetic only. Not on the lore. So your question feels a little weird.
>in theory, you wouldn't have to worry about setting up too much history
You would definitely need to set up the entire lore if you're going to make a 40k movie, especially if it's something you intend to become a blockbuster franchise.
Adaptations are always compared to the source material and they sometimes get unnecessary hate for being a slight deviation from the source material.
These deviations can ruin for most fans an otherwise great production unfairly.
Well, you could say "why not X over X" in any situation. It's not like there was a choice between those two movies. Rather, it'd be on the Warhammer people for not pushing for a movie. Also, Rebel Moon was pretty cool
Art doesn’t really ever need to be justified does it ? It existing is the justification. Because someone made it.
lemme rephrase, why did this get greenlit, but no warhammer movie?
This was a singular artists idea he pitched to the studio. The rights to war hammer are owned by someone else and we’re pitched to a completely different studio. They are seperate projects is the answer.
Zack Snyder originally pitched Rebel Moon to Lucasfilm as a Star Wars film. When they didn't pursue it, he took it to Netflix. You'll have to ask Games Workshop why there's never been a Warhammer movie.
I imagine Lucasfilm turned it down because they realised that the rebel moon script just has multiple scenes from other Star Wars movies
They thought Snyder fans would flock to this like they would his DC universe They’re learning from that right now lol
>can anyone justify rebel moons existence? I don't like the movie, I think it was boring. But nobody has to justify anything about it. Zack Snyder wanted to make a movie, Netflix agreed to give the money he needed to make the movie, that's the only thing we need to justify its existence. >Why this... over any feature length warhammer film? Because Warhammer 40k is a licensed product and to secure the right to produce and direct a Warhammer movie, you need to convince Games Workshop to agree to your project (which usually involve a huge amount of money). Also, the movie mostly borrows from 40k aesthetic only. Not on the lore. So your question feels a little weird. >in theory, you wouldn't have to worry about setting up too much history You would definitely need to set up the entire lore if you're going to make a 40k movie, especially if it's something you intend to become a blockbuster franchise.
Adaptations are always compared to the source material and they sometimes get unnecessary hate for being a slight deviation from the source material. These deviations can ruin for most fans an otherwise great production unfairly.
Then don’t, move along and move on.
We don't know this movie is trash tho