It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
I will begin this article by saying that I am not here to give a full blown review of Warcraft: The Beginning. What I am here to do is try to synthesize why Warcraft and World of Warcraft players might adore...and dislike...the movie based on a series of games that millions have loved over the past two plus decades.
Comments
A couple of fun photos from the premier event.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
"SPOILERS"
Why was Durotan even in the film? His only pupose was to stare at the camera with those puppy eyes. And the only time his wife got to shine she died. Both seemed like interesting characters, they just didnt do anything with them...
Would have liked to have seen the corruption of the orcs, the war on outland, etc....
Do you need to have played it to understand the movie?
Why not go to Monria it's the best place to start your virtual life in Entropia Universe
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
No, the movie's story is different to the books and to the game in some small and some not so small details.
I watched the movie without any lore knowledge and got interested in the whole story after, so i started to read alot about the original lore and currently even read two books.
From my perspective now, that is with a little more background info, looking back at the movie i find it's story sort of irritating and too trivial at times. The movie throws stuff, names, locations and characters at you with too little explanation.
I'm glad that i watched the movie with no idea about it and went with the books after that and not the other way around. This way things can only get better and everything opens up much more -while with about every movie there is, people always say that after reading the book first, whatever movie was disappointing to them.
I'm still looking forward to seeing it.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I am also going to start by saying, I really, really enjoyed this movie. After suffering years of Hollywood movies, this was the first one that focused first on telling a story, and while there was a lot to get two in a two hour movie, I felt the pacing was a appropriate and really enjoyed the subtle hints at the backstory, rather than bogging down the movie with tons of exposition. It sort of made you delve deeper into the conversations to glean what you could, and as well as encourage some research outside of the movie, how is this a bad thing?
Commenting on the lore changes, I think all of them are explainable, and getting too hung up on the canon of this time period is sort of silly. We need to remember that the original story was a game adaptation, and was never written with the intention of it being part of the big screen. That came later. Orgrim Doomhammer was a friend of Durotan, and suspicious of Gul'dan and the Shadow Council. Clearly they decided they wanted to do something different with his character than they had before for the sake of narration and story, much like they changed Garona a bit. Honestly though, Garona being a half-orc in the original lore only worked because they had been coming to Azeroth for years before the first invasion. Having her be the illegitimate child of a wandering Guardian of Tirisfal (Medivh ) and an orc made way more sense as an explanation, then the non-explanation from the original lore. Back to Orgrim, I think it's clear that he will not be the next Warchief of the Horde, as he sort of spit in Gul'dan's face and walked away. Though I do imagine he organizes the resistance against the Legion and leads the charge against him in the Broken Isles still. And sure, Orgrim originally was the one who assassinated Blackhand for being the puppet of the Shadow Council, but it was WAY cooler to have Lothar do it IMO. Khadgar became a bigger character later, and I think explaining his start in the series like this rather than as the apprentice of Medivh from the start was still a bit more exciting and fleshed out his character much more. The lack of Demon blood is explainable, that they didn't want a 'R' rating on the movie, pure and simple. King Llane's character was changed from being weak and indecisive to heroic, I loved Dominic Coopers portrayal and the writing, Bravo Jones! Lastly, all the 'missing backstory' everyone complains about, you can find in books and lore online, you do not need it to be in a feature film, and not every fantasy series has to be done like GoT. If you liked the LotR movies, than you should have no problem with a bit of creative license, and you can tell Jones really loves and appreciates the movies.
So in summary, if you don't expect every movie released to be an uninspired carbon copy of the original lore, completely unchanged, you may have something to complain about. Otherwise, recognize that for a adaptation like this, this movie had some serious chops, and deserves a ton of praise for being a cut above most fantasy films made to date. I would argue (and this is coming from a huge fan of the LotR trilogy) that Warcraft was a way more entertaining and deep film. I have not been to see repeat showings of a movie in theaters like this since Dark Knight and the LotR's triolgy. I enjoyed it way more than the new Star Wars, and it is easily my favorite fantasy film of all time. I am willing to debate anyone on the points they don't like about the movie, as I feel people are overly critical for many reasons. 1. Too rigid on the lore adaptation. Look, they wanted some things to change to flesh out the story a bit, and I feel they did a great job of it. 2. Automatically think any kind of video game film adaptation is no good, and will ignore reality to stand by that fact. 3. Outright dislike fantasy films in general and CG. 4. Think it has to have Robert Downey Jr. or some other overpaid actors to make a good film. I'm super happy that Patton and Foster were the largest name actors on the ticket, because the movie remained about the characters and not *Insert A List Actor Here* playing *Lead Role Character*. 5. Think that every film must have 30-45 minutes of exposition so they can *get* the story line. Movies used to be about subtle hints to more story, not out right explaining every little thing. Pick up a book, do some research about the characters. Sure, some small things might be different, but the general story was still largely untouched and the essence of the characters was pretty much not affected. 6. There is nothing wrong with doing several movies, and leaving the story to develop and grow in later films, just because it did not start and end the first war so the second one could be about the second war, means even less movies and story telling and I think that would be a shame. 7. Everyone that complains about it not being set during the fall of Lorderon should just deal. If you want that story, go play Warcraft 3, its got enough cut scenes and cinematics for the time being, whereas the First and Second War's really didn't have more than a rolling text screen and the missions themselves to tell the story.
What about being a hipster? Isn't that the best part of the movie for you?
Why not go to Monria it's the best place to start your virtual life in Entropia Universe
1. Huge numbers in China point to WoW's popularity in China.
2. As a (Chinese) quota film backers get 25% of the Chinese box office revenue.
3. We were not the only company that financially backed the film.
4. Maybe the film will turn a profit one day but until then we have classed it as advertising..
5. We are open to a Chinese film company producing a Warcraft sequel filmed in China in Chinese that we don't financially back. Pandas, wirefu and WoW!
Conversely there are things they would prefer not to talk about.