Well, the Warcraft movie is a bit rubbish.

[Redryhno]

Just a hint: It might have something to do with the hard labor of the people who make them.

And that hard labor doesn't mean shit if they don't know if something isn't as good as they may believe it to be. It means they can't realize it and go back and try again to make it better or do better the next time around.

No.

Any particular reason why you just say that? Or are you seriously going to try and make the argument that it doesn't matter because they tried their hardest?

 

[Thaluikhain]

I wish they made two movies at the same time and whichever version you saw either had the movie from the perspective entirely of humans or orcs. And then you'd have to watch both of them to get the whole story where everything makes sense but they'd both be complete movies telling the same story individually.

Bit gimmicky, but it'd at least be a bit different.

Now, would you make both movies tell the same story from different PoV, or would they contradict each other due to the biases of the orcs and humans both seeing themselves in the right?

 

[ecoho]

Sounded like the people involved were really out to make a go of it. Which might just be part of the problem.

Yeah that about sums it up. I've read enough reviews at this point to know EXACTLY what the problem was. Duncan Jones is a huge Warcraft fan, and set about trying to make a Warcraft film for other huge Warcraft fans. Which, according to huge Warcraft fans, he more or less succeeding in doing (with some bumps). People who are not huge Warcraft fans are left wondering WTF is going on and why they should care about the avalanche of cheese they are being subjected to.

As the film took the Chinese box office by storm, a sequel...or set of sequels...is a distinct possibility. Hopefully they'll find a better balance between fan service and making a functional movie if that turns out to be the case.

yeah sorry but no. they shouldn't do anything that makes this more "main stream" cause that's what fucked the movie this time around. they tried too hard to make it acceptable to the masses when all they need to do is follow what the plan was, you can tell were things were cut to make it more actiony and less the action drama it was supposed to be.

more to the point this is exactly what I wanted out of a first chapter of a series I played as a child on DOS, and many other fans agree with me. to the non fans out there its a mixed bag but it does make you, as one person said to me as we were leaveing, "wiki that shit" to find out more, which is what an adaptation of anything should do.

that's just my two cents take it or leave it.

 

[Odbarc]

I wish they made two movies at the same time and whichever version you saw either had the movie from the perspective entirely of humans or orcs. And then you'd have to watch both of them to get the whole story where everything makes sense but they'd both be complete movies telling the same story individually.

Bit gimmicky, but it'd at least be a bit different.

Now, would you make both movies tell the same story from different PoV, or would they contradict each other due to the biases of the orcs and humans both seeing themselves in the right?

I would imagine that from the orc pov they would see themselves as the good guys doing the right thing and the humans come along and ruin their chances at survival and seem like the bad guys.
In the human pov they'd have good reasons to do it that would never be revealed to the orcs because they'd be seen as the bad guys and possibly the cause of all the evil in the land.

The games always had two perspective story lines. Not sure that it would work or cause too much money to make work so I'm not surprised that they didn't. But it might have been cool.

 

[Hawki]

to the non fans out there its a mixed bag but it does make you, as one person said to me as we were leaveing, "wiki that shit" to find out more, which is what an adaptation of anything should do.

That's actually the last thing an adaptation should do. If you're adapting something, it has to be able to stand on its own. Plenty of film adaptations have succeeded in doing that.

Can't comment on whether Warcraft is one of those films, but if you have to read a wiki to understand what's going on in this, or any other adaptation, that's a reasonable complaint.

 

[Zhukov]

It is sad to see how gamers of all people are lining up to shit on the first decent videogame movie in years.
Wtf, are you stoned or something?

I refuse to lower my standards just because a movie is based on a video game.

Saluting a film as excellent because it manages not to be utter crap would just be desperate and a little sad.

Oh, and no I am not stoned. Which is a pity, because I imagine if I were then the movie would have been more enjoyable.

People kind of like it. Even though the critics don't.
So choose your side based on your history with the critics.

User reviews are a bad joke. Have been for years.

It's a bunch of people hurling perfect 10s in a frothing, frantic attempt to boost the score as high as they can to "balance out" the critics.

Or are you suggesting I should place great weight on the opinions of these highly intelligent and articulate individuals [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/18.939273.23683032]?

 

[Zhukov]

A bunch of people hurl 10s, a bunch of other people hurl 0s. In the end, it does not matter. They balance each other out.

No they don't.

People who are angry about the nasty critics panning their precious movie are more likely to charge off to the internet to make things right.

And yes, you do have to judge a video game movie on merits of a video game movie.

Well, no, I really don't.

But okay, sure, I shall now judge Warcraft on merits of a video game movie. Here goes:

"Warcraft the video game movie is pretty good for a video game movie because video game movies are all crap. That's exactly the same as saying it's pretty rubbish as a movie."

That's why NOT GOTLOTR complaints are useless. It isn't because it isn't.

I haven't actually seen anyone make that complaint. Only a bunch of hilarious people shouting, "The critics just don't like it because it's not GOTLOTR!"

Hell, if anything the movie is trying too fucking hard to be "GOTLOTR". It's taking a setting with fish people and Ogrim Doomhammers and wizards turning each other into sheep and trying to present it TOTALLY SERIOUS DRAMA FOR SERIOUS PEOPLE.

Even if that was a good idea the actors don't have the chops to pull it off.

PS
Pay some attention to the Russian scores as well. In Russia, we don't need to 'balance out' your American critics because we don't read them, don't pay attention to them and generally don't consider them important. Russian critics did not pan the movie, but the numbers are pretty much the same.

I'm not American.

I'm willing to bet angry Russian fanboys act much the same as angry fanboys everywhere else.

 

[Evonisia]

Warcraft has great and bountiful amounts of lore, but next-to-none of the actual stories are particularly engaging[footnote]I mean, there's "Warcraft 3", and maybe the war between the Wyrmrest Accord and the Blue Dragonflight from "Wrath of the Lich King"?[/footnote]. A fanboy is going to latch on to the lore, and forget that the actual narratives of Warcraft are in dire need of reworking to make them not come off as an incoherent mess.

As a huge lore fan I'll eventually watch it just to see how much they put in, but it's sad that they forgot to make a good film out of it.

 

[ecoho]

to the non fans out there its a mixed bag but it does make you, as one person said to me as we were leaveing, "wiki that shit" to find out more, which is what an adaptation of anything should do.

That's actually the last thing an adaptation should do. If you're adapting something, it has to be able to stand on its own. Plenty of film adaptations have succeeded in doing that.

Can't comment on whether Warcraft is one of those films, but if you have to read a wiki to understand what's going on in this, or any other adaptation, that's a reasonable complaint.

not to understand it but to know more about it. basically its getting people to check out the source material. so what an adaptation is supposed to do.

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

to the non fans out there its a mixed bag but it does make you, as one person said to me as we were leaveing, "wiki that shit" to find out more, which is what an adaptation of anything should do.

That's actually the last thing an adaptation should do. If you're adapting something, it has to be able to stand on its own. Plenty of film adaptations have succeeded in doing that.

Can't comment on whether Warcraft is one of those films, but if you have to read a wiki to understand what's going on in this, or any other adaptation, that's a reasonable complaint.

not to understand it but to know more about it. basically its getting people to check out the source material. so what an adaptation is supposed to do.

Well look at my end. Until 1 or 2 years ago I did not know anything about the Warhammer universe (Both Fantasy and 40k)

But than I found out about Total War: Warhammer for Fantasy and Dawn of War 1/Space Marine for 40k and I am intreagued by both much that I have read up on the lore that intrested me such as the History of Brentonnia and the Horus Heresy.

 

[Remus]

Evil orc lives by the motto "You're horde or you're fuel". Yup, he's gotta die. What else is there to understand? The crotchety fellow with glowing eyes and horns sticking out of his back is not the hero of this story obviously and everyone else is either out to stop him or be corrupted by him. Everything else - locations, set pieces, lore references, aren't relevant to your enjoyment of the film, simply easter eggs for those "in the know". It's a morality tale with literal demons manipulating characters in the background. This film s only hard to follow if you fret the details and the details don't matter unless you recognize them without being mentioned outright. Don't look at it so hard and enjoy the spectacle of giant green men throwing horses at the normal sized people.

 

[Redryhno]

No.

Any particular reason why you just say that? Or are you seriously going to try and make the argument that it doesn't matter because they tried their hardest?

Well, if you knew how creative people work and how professionals work, you'd already know the answer, right? They don't turn to the public for an advice. It does not work this way. You don't put an opinion of a non-professional higher that of a professional. That is why studios never hire random strangers to be consultants. If anything, they would hire a more professional guy to set things straight. It makes sense. Likewise an artist might turn to a better artist for an advice, but not to a random dolt who didn't like it.

As someone that very much is in a profession where creativity doesn't always meet expectations or standards of my customers, I'm going to have to call bullshit. Yes, I do ask my boss and better chefs for advice, but I also don't discount the people eating my food that don't like it. If they're willing to tell me what was wrong with it for them, I'm very much open to being told why.

Which is why people are criticizing bits of it that they feel are off. Whether or not they actually listen or ever see ANY of this, it's out there and there's a chance the next movie(if there ever will be) will know what it did wrong and what fans of the franchise but not the movie think could be better.

So stop with your "nerds shitting on a movie from a nerd franchise, how far we've fallen" routine. If someone likes the series enough to complain about it, it means that there's something worth being done right about it.

 

[Saelune]

I don't honestly know if this is a good or bad movie. I, as a non-Warcraft fan enjoyed it, particularly the magic, something Lord of the Rings severely lacks. But it seems a lot of the hate comes from non-fans, and its hard to tell what actual Warcraft people feel.

I also felt mislead by a lot of people's reactions. There was more action than people made it seem, and not as confusing for someone who isn't a fan to follow, but maybe I just played enough RPGs to follow along with what was presented.

 

[wings012]

The movie was badly paced. Especially at the start where they had to rush to gather the crew and did a scene transition every few minutes. It's not by any means hard to follow - it just doesn't feel good. We're here, we're there, we're rushing through the motions in an insipid and tepid manner. You can be as familiar or like the franchise as much as you want, but I think this is something that is objectively horrible. It feels almost as if they made a TV series, chopped up a few minutes from each episode and compiled it into a movie.

All the characters came off as rather one note. Cardboard cutouts needed to fill a role. With really wooden lines. If you are a Warcraft fan and veteran, maybe it's fine for you since you know all about them anyway. But taking the movie as a standalone work, the characters are all very sub par. So when shit finally befalls a few of them, you can't even manage to feel a little bad for them.

The 3D was straddling uncanny valley all the way. And WC's exaggerated designs and stuff kinda look really odd to me when mashed up with real actors. The Alliance's clothes and armour just looked so goofy to me. More of a personal gripe than anything.

There's action and its serviceable but doesn't really make up for all the other flaws. You have to slog through bad pacing and exposition to get to it and its played out by characters that are hard to be excited for, barring for the fact WC fans have their fan knowledge to fill in the gaps for them.

At the end of the day, it just isn't a particularly good movie. It is incredibly flawed I believe, objectively so.

I think it's fine to still like it. But people lauding it with 10s and shit are a tad delusional.

 

[deadish]

A film that seems convinced that it's parade of corny cliche is the stuff of epic mythmaking.

Blizzard's writing in a nutshell.

Delusions of grandeur are par for the course with their writing staff.

Edit: And I say this as a WoW player for over 8 years. I have long given up on their writing ever getting above the level of bad fan fiction and have decided to look elsewhere for a decent story.

 

[JUMBO PALACE]

It wasn't the worst movie I've ever seen but I did leave disappointed. The dialogue, acting, and "humor" were all pretty cringe worthy. When the boring human characters shut up and there was finally action on screen it was a decent time. The orcs were much more interesting and their hulking size and strength were characterized well. I would have preferred a movie focused solely on the orcs to be honest. I guess my most damning complaint is that it's just kind of boring. There's tons of time wasted watching boring characters do things other than fight orcs, including the least convincing and sympathetic father-son relationship ever put on screen.

 

[IamLEAM1983]

I'm not surprised it bombed.

See, Warcraft's lore is dense, and "dense" is a euphemism. It's thick, opaque, not terribly subtle, and not nearly as riveting as a lot of WoW or early Warcraft aficionados would believe. The universe's only stroke of genius - and even that is debatable - is making the Orcs out to be Noble Savages (TM) instead of the previously-standard Dumb Green Bruisers ? la Games Workshop (also TM). And yes, I know the Burning Legion reduced the Orcs to the above-mentioned status, I know Gul'dan's plan started out of desperation and later spiralled out of control into pure lust for power - but it doesn't make the notion of Dumb Orcs any less trite.

That density is easier to swallow when it's stretched over hundreds of hours of play time, and diluted by dozens upon dozens of instances of NPCs going "I need X number of Y objects, so kill everything in Zone Z for me." Add to that the fact that it's hard to care about the lore implications of what you're doing when you're coordinating a twelve-man Raid; and you're left with the impression that said lore doesn't really matter.

Add to that a painstaking amount of care displayed by Duncan Jones that would've honoured other projects, and you're left with a movie that's inscrutable if you haven't kept up with the lore. A cousin of mine went and saw it as Generic Fantasy Movie #23456, and came out of the theatre with a ton of unanswered questions. Ben Foster's Medivh might've been picture-perfect, the spell effects might've been spot-on and Magni Bronzebeard's recreation might've been awesome - they're all just name-drops, the movie being stuck working alongside a checklist to make sure it's as painstakingly faithful as possible.

That makes a case for the more common form of Hollywood game adaptations, in which only basic concepts are retained, and in which lore tends to be streamlined. As it stands, I doubt "Warcraft: The Beginning" will ever get its sequel and final third chapter. I've heard that foreign box offices have been kinder towards it, but I don't know how much this means in terms of generated profits.

 

[Disco Biscuit]

I'm not surprised it bombed.

See, Warcraft's lore is dense, and "dense" is a euphemism. It's thick, opaque, not terribly subtle, and not nearly as riveting as a lot of WoW or early Warcraft aficionados would believe. The universe's only stroke of genius - and even that is debatable - is making the Orcs out to be Noble Savages (TM) instead of the previously-standard Dumb Green Bruisers ? la Games Workshop (also TM). And yes, I know the Burning Legion reduced the Orcs to the above-mentioned status, I know Gul'dan's plan started out of desperation and later spiralled out of control into pure lust for power - but it doesn't make the notion of Dumb Orcs any less trite.

That density is easier to swallow when it's stretched over hundreds of hours of play time, and diluted by dozens upon dozens of instances of NPCs going "I need X number of Y objects, so kill everything in Zone Z for me." Add to that the fact that it's hard to care about the lore implications of what you're doing when you're coordinating a twelve-man Raid; and you're left with the impression that said lore doesn't really matter.

Add to that a painstaking amount of care displayed by Duncan Jones that would've honoured other projects, and you're left with a movie that's inscrutable if you haven't kept up with the lore. A cousin of mine went and saw it as Generic Fantasy Movie #23456, and came out of the theatre with a ton of unanswered questions. Ben Foster's Medivh might've been picture-perfect, the spell effects might've been spot-on and Magni Bronzebeard's recreation might've been awesome - they're all just name-drops, the movie being stuck working alongside a checklist to make sure it's as painstakingly faithful as possible.

That makes a case for the more common form of Hollywood game adaptations, in which only basic concepts are retained, and in which lore tends to be streamlined. As it stands, I doubt "Warcraft: The Beginning" will ever get its sequel and final third chapter. I've heard that foreign box offices have been kinder towards it, but I don't know how much this means in terms of generated profits.

You don't even have to make it so barebones, just tell less of the story from fewer angles. This isn't just about dense lore, it's about the goal of this movie being nothing more than brand establishment and the aforementioned name-dropping. They had to show off everything that would make people like Slo and Samted wet themselves with joy, make the maximum number of branded products, toys, etc.

Then there's this: http://www.wsj.com/articles/china-helps-ease-hollywoods-wounds-1465765019

Which is no accident. Wanda[footnote]The company which owns the most theaters in China by the way[/footnote] acquired Legendary Pictures ahead of this, so there was never any doubt about making a healthy profit regardless of domestic reception.

Beyond that, I'm willing to guess that the die-hard fans in this thread are also from the foreign cinema market?

 

[IamLEAM1983]

You don't even have to make it so barebones, just tell less of the story from fewer angles. This isn't just about dense lore, it's about the goal of this movie being nothing more than brand establishment and the aforementioned name-dropping. They had to show off everything that would make people like Slo and Samted wet themselves with joy, make the maximum number of branded products, toys, etc.

Then there's this: http://www.wsj.com/articles/china-helps-ease-hollywoods-wounds-1465765019

Which is no accident. Wanda[footnote]The company which owns the most theaters in China by the way[/footnote] acquired Legendary Pictures ahead of this, so there was never any doubt about making a healthy profit regardless of domestic reception.

Beyond that, I'm willing to guess that the die-hard fans in this thread are also from the foreign cinema market?

I don't know about your last statement, but everything else seems pretty likely to me. I do remember that the French market received an unusual deal: Warcraft ticket preorders came with a one-month subscription to the MMO.

It just seems odd. Unless you're the type to go starry-eyed at the sight of Toby Kebell's Durotan and to act like Blizzard is your personal Disney, there's not a lot of incentive to even *watch* this. Plus, how many average subscribers are there, currently? Five million or thereabouts? Wasn't the subscriber base on a landslide, just a year back?

All I see is a lot of pomp and chest-puffing, while there's a lot more organic offerings to choose from in the Fantasy Movie market. Even Peter Jackson's Hobbit trilogy fares better than this, and the three original LotR movies are still hard to beat to this day: world-building is done through camera work, set design and soundtrack composition; and the characters never go out of their way to explain things. The first movie's entrance shot into the Shire is all banter and whimsical music, and it manages the task of translating Tolkien's Anthropologist diatribe in "Concerning Hobbits" into audio-visual format. You *understand* who and what the Hobbits are, and nobody in the involved shots says a single word about it.

 

[wizzy555]

You don't even have to make it so barebones, just tell less of the story from fewer angles. This isn't just about dense lore, it's about the goal of this movie being nothing more than brand establishment and the aforementioned name-dropping. They had to show off everything that would make people like Slo and Samted wet themselves with joy, make the maximum number of branded products, toys, etc.

Then there's this: http://www.wsj.com/articles/china-helps-ease-hollywoods-wounds-1465765019

Which is no accident. Wanda[footnote]The company which owns the most theaters in China by the way[/footnote] acquired Legendary Pictures ahead of this, so there was never any doubt about making a healthy profit regardless of domestic reception.

Beyond that, I'm willing to guess that the die-hard fans in this thread are also from the foreign cinema market?

I don't know about your last statement, but everything else seems pretty likely to me. I do remember that the French market received an unusual deal: Warcraft ticket preorders came with a one-month subscription to the MMO.

It just seems odd. Unless you're the type to go starry-eyed at the sight of Toby Kebell's Durotan and to act like Blizzard is your personal Disney, there's not a lot of incentive to even *watch* this. Plus, how many average subscribers are there, currently? Five million or thereabouts? Wasn't the subscriber base on a landslide, just a year back?

All I see is a lot of pomp and chest-puffing, while there's a lot more organic offerings to choose from in the Fantasy Movie market. Even Peter Jackson's Hobbit trilogy fares better than this, and the three original LotR movies are still hard to beat to this day: world-building is done through camera work, set design and soundtrack composition; and the characters never go out of their way to explain things. The first movie's entrance shot into the Shire is all banter and whimsical music, and it manages the task of translating Tolkien's Anthropologist diatribe in "Concerning Hobbits" into audio-visual format. You *understand* who and what the Hobbits are, and nobody in the involved shots says a single word about it.

I think you'll find that Ian Holme monologues the "Concerning Hobbits" descriptions over the visual scenes. So you are told who the Hobbits are very explicitly.

Of course they used the device of him writing a book, but still.