Warcraft, the movie is amazing. Why is it getting such shitty reviews?

MyNameIsV

I simply can't say enough good things about the movie, and as a Warcraft lore fan and gamer I only spotted a few real issues.

Don't read below unless you want to find out the stuff I was disappointed about (contains spoilers).
Honestly, if you ever played and enjoyed ANY of the Warcraft games, this movie is for you.

Now, the issues.

-------------Spoilers-------------
- There is no shadow council. Gul'dan is pretty much it, and he is both a warrior and a warlock in this movie.
- No Blood of Mannoroth. In fact, the Fel (Bloodlust) is controlled entirely by the warrior/warlock mentioned above.
- Doomhammer is not a Frostwolf, but he is in the film.
- Medivh gets corrupted by the Fel and becoimes a demon. This is just dumb. He is also apparently in his late 20's instead of 60+
- Khadgar is a whiny pussy in the movie and a member of the Kirin Tor, not Medivh's apprentice.
- There were no pistols in the original Warcraft. They pretty much hit the FF button and landed on Warcraft 3. 
- The glowing eyes are as bad as everyone says they are.
- Thrall is Jesus in the movie, and his whole origin story is messed up.
-------------Spoilers-------------


Overall, the movie was awesome. I went in expecting garbage from all the reviews and was in for a treat.
Best videogame movie to date, and worth the price of admission, especially if you like the Warcraft lore.

DKLond

I liked it a lot too and gave it 7/10 on IMDb. I'm a pretty harsh critic, to boot.

I have absolutely NO idea why it's getting hammered by critics. I could understand a "mediocre" score - because the movie has flaws, and it's clearly not for everyone.

But I'm seeing terrible review after terrible review.

Very strange. I don't immediately recall having seen such disparity between critics and consumers before. Not to this extent.

Void425

They made  movie?  Probably failing because lack of advertisement.  They defiantly did not promote it like they did there game.

Phry

Void425 said:

They made  movie?  Probably failing because lack of advertisement.  They defiantly did not promote it like they did there game.

I think they did advertise it, certainly anyone who plays the game will be familiar with it.
I havent seen the film myself yet, i'll probably watch it when it goes to video, but grandson took his younger nephews to see it last weekend and they loved it, i think its probably a film that does appeal to the younger generation, though without seeing it myself i couldn't say why, it probably gained some new converts to the game though, at least from my families younger members.

Lokero

DKLond said:

I liked it a lot too and gave it 7/10 on IMDb. I'm a pretty harsh critic, to boot.

I have absolutely NO idea why it's getting hammered by critics. I could understand a "mediocre" score - because the movie has flaws, and it's clearly not for everyone.

But I'm seeing terrible review after terrible review.

Very strange. I don't immediately recall having seen such disparity between critics and consumers before. Not to this extent.

Heh, well...  Seeing how all of the critics and consumers gave the new Star Wars film such good ratings it's sitting between 82-90+%, I'm afraid I can never listen to either group again.  That movie's got one of the worst scripts I've ever seen, yet everyone raved about it.

Let's be honest, though.  Video game based movies are automatically going to be hammered.  That's just the way movie culture works.  I guess we can't blame them too much, given all the Uwe Boll style trash they've had to sit through.

I think the Warcraft film falls into a dead zone.  It's not the exact lore and specifics of the franchise the hardcores were expecting.  And, for non-fans, it's probably just a bit odd and hard to follow, in general.

I still think the biggest problem they have had is letting it be marketed as a WoW movie to lure in more ticket sales.  I wonder how many people walked out of the theatre saying "That's not how I remember WoW."

jmalmin

Only movie this year which has gotten a good review was the captain america civil war movie... To me the worst big movie to be released this year. Hated how they shit on the civil war storyline. Anyway warcraft was a good movie and it does not deserve the bad ratings its getting. I feel 95% of those who write reviews dont see the movie. listen to what other say or well wont get into the last part since only disney movies look to be getting good ratings so far this year. 

Volgore

Void425 said:

They made  movie?  Probably failing because lack of advertisement.  They defiantly did not promote it like they did there game.

Except for a few clips on tv i haven't seen too much advertising in my country as well.

For movies like these there are usually posters allover the city...at times to a point where i start to hate a movie because i'm getting nagged with ads in my face everywhere.

Universal Pictures seemed to be a little hesistant on this one.

Lokero

Void425 said:

They made  movie?  Probably failing because lack of advertisement.  They defiantly did not promote it like they did there game.

First, it's not "failing".  It's making plenty in ticket sales.  It's just getting bad reviews from critics.

Second, I have no idea where you've been if you haven't seen any advertisements.  They've been plastering this movie all over the place for months.  Television commercials alone offered at least as much marketing as any Hollywood blockbuster.

DKLond

Lokero said:

DKLond said:

I liked it a lot too and gave it 7/10 on IMDb. I'm a pretty harsh critic, to boot.

I have absolutely NO idea why it's getting hammered by critics. I could understand a "mediocre" score - because the movie has flaws, and it's clearly not for everyone.

But I'm seeing terrible review after terrible review.

Very strange. I don't immediately recall having seen such disparity between critics and consumers before. Not to this extent.

Heh, well...  Seeing how all of the critics and consumers gave the new Star Wars film such good ratings it's sitting between 82-90+%, I'm afraid I can never listen to either group again.  That movie's got one of the worst scripts I've ever seen, yet everyone raved about it.

Let's be honest, though.  Video game based movies are automatically going to be hammered.  That's just the way movie culture works.  I guess we can't blame them too much, given all the Uwe Boll style trash they've had to sit through.

I think the Warcraft film falls into a dead zone.  It's not the exact lore and specifics of the franchise the hardcores were expecting.  And, for non-fans, it's probably just a bit odd and hard to follow, in general.

I still think the biggest problem they have had is letting it be marketed as a WoW movie to lure in more ticket sales.  I wonder how many people walked out of the theatre saying "That's not how I remember WoW."

I liked the new Star Wars movie too, but as pure entertainment saturated with nostalgia.

Warcraft is a bit more than that, but not much.

But yes, I think you're on to something. Critics probably don't want to shame themselves by supporting a video game movie. Apparently, we're not quite there yet.

I wish that Bioshock movie wasn't cancelled - maybe it could turn things around.

I haven't followed marketing much, but I don't remember it being marketed as a WoW movie? I think that's just what people expected - because WoW is clearly the most recognisable part of the Warcraft franchise.

It would be all but impossible to separate yourself from WoW as a Warcraft movie - and it would make no sense in business terms. Obviously, you want people to see it - and you don't do that by emphasising that you're really a movie based on an ancient 1994 RTS game.

So, I think marketing has been the least of its problems.

loghorizon01

Nice to see that you guys enjoyed it. I really want to watch it this weekend but I am going out with my family and I can't convince them to watch it with me. I might have to sneak out tonight to watch it all by myself.

klash2def

Phry said:

Void425 said:

They made  movie?  Probably failing because lack of advertisement.  They defiantly did not promote it like they did there game.

I think they did advertise it, certainly anyone who plays the game will be familiar with it.
I havent seen the film myself yet, i'll probably watch it when it goes to video, but grandson took his younger nephews to see it last weekend and they loved it, i think its probably a film that does appeal to the younger generation, though without seeing it myself i couldn't say why, it probably gained some new converts to the game though, at least from my families younger members.

wait how old are you, just curious? 

Little-Boot

There is often a disconnect between critics and wider audiences. If you are a critic who sees a lot of films and has consequently become somewhat of an expert, you must identify the same tired tropes, plot devices, character arcs, structures etc, over and over again, particularly in blockbusters which tend to stick to a tried and tested formula. I imagine your threshold for what constitutes a good movie is a little higher than the average occasional film viewer.

And yes, Star Wars felt very paint-by-numbers.

DKLond

Little-Boot said:

There is often a disconnect between critics and wider audiences. If you are a critic who sees a lot of films and has consequently become somewhat of an expert, you must identify the same tired tropes, plot devices, character arcs, structures etc, over and over again, particularly in blockbusters which tend to stick to a tried and tested formula. I imagine your threshold for what constitutes a good movie is a little higher than the average occasional film viewer.

And yes, Star Wars felt very paint-by-numbers.

That would make sense if the very same critics didn't lavish praise upon the worst cases of what you're talking about, including the Star Wars movie.

Also, I'm pretty sure having seen literally at least a thousand movies qualifies me to speak about them with some authority.

As such, I don't recognise Warcraft as a particularly bad example of tired tropes and it's not quite as formula-driven as the average blockbuster.

That said, it's definitely not super original either.

But it's a genuine film - with genuine heart behind it. That, alone, should make it stand out in a good way, unless you really enjoy 100% business-driven movies.

maji

The film is okaish. It's ok for WoW players, but average at best for everybody else. It tries to feature too much stuff for the fans, which then just confuses the other people.

Why can we see there some guys with glowing eyes for half a second? What's up with those dwarves? Why are they shown as well for a second if they play no role whatsoever? And what's with those Kirin-Tor? What's their purpose? Goldshire? Do I have to remember that name?

TheGoblinKing

DKLond said:

Very strange. I don't immediately recall having seen such disparity between critics and consumers before. Not to this extent.

This happens everytime another Transformers movie hits or Adam Sandler makes another movie.

Critics hate Transformers so much it was actually making big news how they were mad they were screaming to the high heavens its the biggest trash ever made but Micheal Bay just keeps throwing in more explosions and hot chicks (plot? WE DON'T NEED NO STINKING PLOT!) and it goes on to make billions of dollars ( I for one agree tho. They are abominations to man-kind)

The Warcraft movie rocked btw :pleased:

Little-Boot

DKLond said:

Little-Boot said:

There is often a disconnect between critics and wider audiences. If you are a critic who sees a lot of films and has consequently become somewhat of an expert, you must identify the same tired tropes, plot devices, character arcs, structures etc, over and over again, particularly in blockbusters which tend to stick to a tried and tested formula. I imagine your threshold for what constitutes a good movie is a little higher than the average occasional film viewer.

And yes, Star Wars felt very paint-by-numbers.

That would make sense if the very same critics didn't lavish praise upon the worst cases of what you're talking about, including the Star Wars movie.

Also, I'm pretty sure having seen literally at least a thousand movies qualifies me to speak about them with some authority.

As such, I don't recognise Warcraft as a particularly bad example of tired tropes and it's not quite as formula-driven as the average blockbuster.

That said, it's definitely not super original either.

But it's a genuine film - with genuine heart behind it. That, alone, should make it stand out in a good way, unless you really enjoy 100% business-driven movies.

There is something about Star Wars that seems to bypass everyone's critical faculties. The film looked good (lens flares aside) but the plotting was uninspired, the main character was too much of a Mary-Su to be interesting (flaws are what make a good character), the main plot points where handled horribly (particularly a certain would be emotionally charged one). It was distinctly average.

But then the prequels also reviewed well.

timtrack

I enjoyed it a lot. It has this "unique" feeling to it that don't come around very often. I can't put my finger on exactly what, but it left a special mark in me. Granted i've logged inhuman amounts of hours in WoW over the years, but my girlfriend has never played it, and she really liked it as well. She's not even a gamer really, until recently 

Squishydew

I enjoyed the movie a lot but it definitely wasn't amazing, I'd say 7/10, just above average.
A few things really bugged me, like the relationship between lothar and garona felt completely shoehorned in, there was no place for it, and i cared absolutely 0% about lothars son when he died.  

I also felt like khadgars acting was considerably worse then the rest of the casts, and human armor looked quite fake, i get that they where trying to go for the game look, but it felt lazy and unfinished in between the mindblowingly amazing orc CGI.

I also LOVED Travis fimmel in vikings, but in warcraft he was just alright, felt a little out of place with his accent.

That all put aside, i was super happy with the movie, i felt giddy plenty throughout, and cant wait to see it again when It's out in retail stores.

DKLond

Little-Boot said:

DKLond said:

Little-Boot said:

There is often a disconnect between critics and wider audiences. If you are a critic who sees a lot of films and has consequently become somewhat of an expert, you must identify the same tired tropes, plot devices, character arcs, structures etc, over and over again, particularly in blockbusters which tend to stick to a tried and tested formula. I imagine your threshold for what constitutes a good movie is a little higher than the average occasional film viewer.

And yes, Star Wars felt very paint-by-numbers.

That would make sense if the very same critics didn't lavish praise upon the worst cases of what you're talking about, including the Star Wars movie.

Also, I'm pretty sure having seen literally at least a thousand movies qualifies me to speak about them with some authority.

As such, I don't recognise Warcraft as a particularly bad example of tired tropes and it's not quite as formula-driven as the average blockbuster.

That said, it's definitely not super original either.

But it's a genuine film - with genuine heart behind it. That, alone, should make it stand out in a good way, unless you really enjoy 100% business-driven movies.

There is something about Star Wars that seems to bypass everyone's critical faculties. The film looked good (lens flares aside) but the plotting was uninspired, the main character was too much of a Mary-Su to be interesting (flaws are what make a good character), the main plot points where handled horribly (particularly a certain would be emotionally charged one). It was distinctly average.

But then the prequels also reviewed well.

As do most of the superhero movies - which I consider to have some of the worst cases of cliché and predictable writing in Hollywood history.

So, I reject your suggestion that it's about critics being more experienced.

I think they're simply predisposed to dislike video game "geek" films - because they can't be "sophisticated" critics and enjoy such filth.

LorVim

I feel that this movie wasn't as bad as the majority of game movies i've watched. Top 2 or 3 for sure. Kind of partial to mortal kombat for w/e reason. 
I enjoyed the cgi aspect, I enjoyed Ragnar's(Fimmel) performance as Lothar. I enjoyed seeing the backdrop. Whats difficult for me is knowing the lore here and trying to figure out why it needed this adjustment?
 Movies from books and the changing of details haven't really to date given me this wtf happened kind of feeling. Just seemed to me that the better story is the lore.
Anyhow, beyond the changes +plus those mentioned by the op, wasn't the worst or best movie i've ever seen. 
As far as pro critics go, I don't think i have ever listened to them too much as i like everything they hate usually. I even liked man of steel and batman v superman.

Little-Boot

DKLond said:

Little-Boot said:

DKLond said:

Little-Boot said:

There is often a disconnect between critics and wider audiences. If you are a critic who sees a lot of films and has consequently become somewhat of an expert, you must identify the same tired tropes, plot devices, character arcs, structures etc, over and over again, particularly in blockbusters which tend to stick to a tried and tested formula. I imagine your threshold for what constitutes a good movie is a little higher than the average occasional film viewer.

And yes, Star Wars felt very paint-by-numbers.

That would make sense if the very same critics didn't lavish praise upon the worst cases of what you're talking about, including the Star Wars movie.

Also, I'm pretty sure having seen literally at least a thousand movies qualifies me to speak about them with some authority.

As such, I don't recognise Warcraft as a particularly bad example of tired tropes and it's not quite as formula-driven as the average blockbuster.

That said, it's definitely not super original either.

But it's a genuine film - with genuine heart behind it. That, alone, should make it stand out in a good way, unless you really enjoy 100% business-driven movies.

There is something about Star Wars that seems to bypass everyone's critical faculties. The film looked good (lens flares aside) but the plotting was uninspired, the main character was too much of a Mary-Su to be interesting (flaws are what make a good character), the main plot points where handled horribly (particularly a certain would be emotionally charged one). It was distinctly average.

But then the prequels also reviewed well.

As do most of the superhero movies - which I consider to have some of the worst cases of cliché and predictable writing in Hollywood history.

So, I reject your suggestion that it's about critics being more experienced.

I think they're simply predisposed to dislike video game "geek" films - because they can't be "sophisticated" critics and enjoy such filth.

Woe is me. Guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

DKLond

Little-Boot said:

DKLond said:

Little-Boot said:

DKLond said:

Little-Boot said:

There is often a disconnect between critics and wider audiences. If you are a critic who sees a lot of films and has consequently become somewhat of an expert, you must identify the same tired tropes, plot devices, character arcs, structures etc, over and over again, particularly in blockbusters which tend to stick to a tried and tested formula. I imagine your threshold for what constitutes a good movie is a little higher than the average occasional film viewer.

And yes, Star Wars felt very paint-by-numbers.

That would make sense if the very same critics didn't lavish praise upon the worst cases of what you're talking about, including the Star Wars movie.

Also, I'm pretty sure having seen literally at least a thousand movies qualifies me to speak about them with some authority.

As such, I don't recognise Warcraft as a particularly bad example of tired tropes and it's not quite as formula-driven as the average blockbuster.

That said, it's definitely not super original either.

But it's a genuine film - with genuine heart behind it. That, alone, should make it stand out in a good way, unless you really enjoy 100% business-driven movies.

There is something about Star Wars that seems to bypass everyone's critical faculties. The film looked good (lens flares aside) but the plotting was uninspired, the main character was too much of a Mary-Su to be interesting (flaws are what make a good character), the main plot points where handled horribly (particularly a certain would be emotionally charged one). It was distinctly average.

But then the prequels also reviewed well.

As do most of the superhero movies - which I consider to have some of the worst cases of cliché and predictable writing in Hollywood history.

So, I reject your suggestion that it's about critics being more experienced.

I think they're simply predisposed to dislike video game "geek" films - because they can't be "sophisticated" critics and enjoy such filth.

Woe is me. Guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

No problem

Shaigh

The problem for reviewers is that with the correct degree in arts you can dissect the story within minutes, rendering the movie into an awful experience. Its likely what happened with the warcraft movie and even though its petty they probably sharpened their pens to come up with something witty to write which they can tell their friends about afterwards.

Its probably a different experience if you have an emotional to the IP but reviewers never been there for the people that will watch CGI movies and think most of them are great.

Another thing is that its important to check which audience the reviewer write for instead of just checking aggregated scores on metacritic. People that rave on about Warcraft games and CGI movies usually don't read a morning paper.

scorpex-x

I don't know the lore of warcraft, I only played wow for 6-7 months.

I loved the film, really enjoyed it a lot more than I thought I would.

I think the hatred from critics was based purely on them delaying the US release, keep in mind critics do this for a living and delaying the release hurt them a lot.  They were just buttmad about that and scored it low to punish them.

finefluff

First half of the movie is boring and jumps around too much. The human characters aren't compelling either. There is hardly any time for us to get to know them. Second half is a bit better when the action picks up. I would rate is very low too if I wasn't already into warcraft. I can definitely see where the critics are coming from. 

hfztt

Having seen the trailer I have a hard time imagining taking those silly human costumes serious for 2 hours...

But I think my two boys wanna go see it, so I might just end up having to sit through it, so I prey the trailer misrepresents the film a lot and it is actually watchable.