really ..shocking ................... Grandma dont like animated violent orcs... // How can that be ... lol wtf ...The rest of your statement is also completely unfounded speculation and false ..
A good movie works non-fans and fans - because the acting, the story, the actual movie is good - do you agree?
So non-fans of Lord of the Rings would agree that LOTRO movies are actually pretty good.
Now Warcraft is bad not because of some "Blizzard/WoW hate train" - that's absurd. There is no conspiracy here.
What 123 movie critics have a bone to pick with Blizzard? lol
It's bad because it fails in basic things that a good movie has:
1. Good acting - it's not good in Warcraft 2. Good script - it's a mess in Warcraft 3. Comprehensible to non-hardcore fans - not even close
Again Warcraft fails at basics that would make it a good movie.
The reason why Warcraft is getting bad critic reviews is because of poor script, poor acting - it's a mess
No i dont agree.. many Bad movies do well .... for fans and non fans and Good means make money ... happens every year
really ..shocking ................... Grandma dont like animated violent orcs... // How can that be ... lol wtf ...The rest of your statement is also completely unfounded speculation and false ..
A good movie works non-fans and fans - because the acting, the story, the actual movie is good - do you agree?
So non-fans of Lord of the Rings would agree that LOTRO movies are actually pretty good.
Now Warcraft is bad not because of some "Blizzard/WoW hate train" - that's absurd. There is no conspiracy here.
What 123 movie critics have a bone to pick with Blizzard? lol
It's bad because it fails in basic things that a good movie has:
1. Good acting - it's not good in Warcraft 2. Good script - it's a mess in Warcraft 3. Comprehensible to non-hardcore fans - not even close
Again Warcraft fails at basics that would make it a good movie.
The reason why Warcraft is getting bad critic reviews is because of poor script, poor acting - it's a mess
123 Critic reviews - at 27% - including every reputable critic on the planet - even fans of warcraft agree that its fundamentally *not a good* movie.
Wake up and smell the carcass
Strange how you ommit the 83% audience approval ratng that comes from a bigger sample of 38,000 than the 123 talking head reviewers who want to get clks ... Very strange indeed...
No i dont agree.. many Bad movies do well .... for fans and non fans and Good means make money ... happens every year
You are moving the goalposts - when critics review movies it has nothing to do with "making money".
Movie reviews are done on acting, story, script, etc..... not performance at the box office.
Lol . no .. not moving any goalposts .... to investors , there is a bottom line .... Doesnt amtter if you hate it ... matters only if you buy it .................../end
No i dont agree.. many Bad movies do well .... for fans and non fans and Good means make money ... happens every year
You are moving the goalposts - when critics review movies it has nothing to do with "making money".
Movie reviews are done on acting, story, script, etc..... not performance at the box office.
If I listened to critics, I never would have gone to see Batman vs Superman and would have missed out on an awesome movie. Thankfully I'm capable of forming my own opinions and don't need a "professional" to do it for me.
I enjoyed the movie for multiple reasons & one of those being the nostalgia of when I used to play as a subscriber for two years a long time ago ... that being World of Warcraft, but I also played & still own the Warcraft Battle Chest. The movie didn't put me in awe, but it was a good movie. I splurged for the 3D & that was hit or miss like a lot of movies. I also think Blizzard's promotional tie-in with Regal Cinemas will add a bit of a resurgence to the WoW subscribing which I plan to partake of. I only play WoW occasionally via the free starter edition whenever I have that itch to scratch.
Tons of movies i loved that never received good ratings. The problem is ratings are often following some shallow criteria,when all i want is "entertainment".
As long as ideas make sense i am always good with it,if ideas just look stupidly bad then yes i will complain. I know when a movie is truly bad because just like with gaming,i'll pass on it rather quickly.If i make it through the entire movie then it was at least watchable and decent entertainment.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Got to say I really enjoyed it, the review I saw was pretty much on the ball about the film, I'm a big fan of Duncan Jone's 2 previous films (Moon and Source Code) and can't recommend them enough.
The film itself was really good, and at the end of it m 8 year old turned to me and just said "FOR THE HORDE" at the top of his voice, mission accomplished!
Moral of the story, ignore the critics (the clue is in their name) just go watch and make up your own minds, there's far to much doomsaying about everything these days.
“Nevertheless, the human brain, which survives by hoping from one second to another, will always endeavor to put off the moment of truth. Moist” ― Terry Pratchett, Making Money
123 Critic reviews - at 27% - including every reputable critic on the planet - even fans of warcraft agree that its fundamentally *not a good* movie.
That one line right there is the problem, critics. Critics suck at reviewing anything if people don't pay them for a good review they don't get it. If a critic says something sucks it is usually great. If they say it is great it is usually some mellow dramatic garbage that I would never watch.
I can agree with you that the plot was rushed an horrible. They jumped right into it before the RTS story-line, 3 games before WOW, and didn't give any back story at all. Like most people say if the movie goer didn't have per-existing knowledge of the lore they were probably lost by the story. They just tried to do to much in a short amount of time, this lore was never meant to be fitted into a 2 hour time slot like that.
People who read reviews on a regular basis form opinions of the reviewers. They learn to recognise those they agree with and those they don't. For films and products in general.
And for many regular cinema goers it is not about "see Warcraft or not this week" it is about "see Warcraft or see X-Men or see Conjuring 2 or see ... this week".
The post-motem question is: what does the Warcraft box office numbers say about the state of WoW's playerbase - if anything. For it now looks certain that the film will make have over 50% of its revenue from China.
Apparently, there will be a Blu-Ray director's cut 20 minutes longer than the theatrical version. As usual, the hollywood "tie wearers" forced cuts where there shouldn't have been any.
Seriously every film does that these days! TV as well. Bait to lure "avid fans" into buying the disc.
And longer films mean fewer showings in cinemas. 3 showings of Warcraft rather than 4 possibly.
It's for people who know and love Warcraft and it's lore. The CGI is the best I have ever seen in a movie. I remember when Avatar came out, and even though I considered it a pretty SHIT awful movie, the CGI had me hooked. Same with Warcraft. But to be completely honest, the acting in Warcraft is awful and if you were someone seeing it (IE A CRITIC) who had no past history with Warcraft, you would probably say this movie totally sucks.
But from someone who has enjoyed the games over the years, despite the terrible acting, I've always loved the story of Warcraft and I thought it was a good representation with great CGI.
From seeing the previews, my biggest worry is how terrible and cheesy the CGI mixed with real human faces looks.
Joined 2004 - I can't believe I've been a MMORPG.com member for 20 years! Get off my lawn!
The movie only has a bad rap amongst critics. The audience is giving it a much higher rating even as high as 84. Glad to see that people will enjoy a movie regardless of how critics tell them.
The reason why it has a high score because the general public are staying away from it.
The positive reviews are coming from WoW fans.
Show this movie to your grandparents or someone who has no idea about Blizzard or Warcraft - they'll hate it.
really ..shocking ................... Grandma dont like animated violent orcs... // How can that be ... lol wtf ...The rest of your statement is also completely unfounded speculation and false ..
Lord of the Rings was horrible too then cause Grandma refused to see it also...
Saw it yesterday in IMAX/3D Loved it. As someone who has played since Beta Started I know a lot about the game. Would someone who doesn't know the lore enjoy it? Probably but not as much as someone who can pinpoint landmarks and zones. Like when Lothar landed in Stormwind at the Flight Path location.
Could care less what anyone else thinks.. I enjoyed it and it was worth the $36 we paid for our tickets..
Just because I'm a gamer doesn't mean I drive a Honda.
Apparently, there will be a Blu-Ray director's cut 20 minutes longer than the theatrical version. As usual, the hollywood "tie wearers" forced cuts where there shouldn't have been any.
Seriously every film does that these days! TV as well. Bait to lure "avid fans" into buying the disc.
And longer films mean fewer showings in cinemas. 3 showings of Warcraft rather than 4 possibly.
Just one example: If I hadn't watched the Director's Cut of "Kingdom of Heaven" by Ridley Scott, I'd still be thinking it's just an average, quite nice but incomplete movie which lacks character development depth. The extended cut completely changes that, notably for characters like Sybilla and her son.
Same goes for all the Lord of the Rings and Hobbit movies for different reasons: can't get enough of Middle-Earth, and Jackson masterfully represented it. So 20 more minutes of virtual Middle-Earth tour? Count me in!
It's also interesting to see how the Director's vision sometimes differs from what the Hollywood tie wearers force them to do.
And? Your statement: "As usual, the hollywood "tie wearers" forced cuts where there shouldn't have been any."
So you saying the director / team carefully created a 2 hour 34 minute film that was then savagely slashed? And you know this because you have seen the extra 20 minutes? And they had absolutely no idea of the realities of the cinema business? They were that bad at their job?
Directors / screenwriters / producers know the realities. Not only that they are skilled enough to produce both a cinema length version - that meets cinemas requirements to show N films a day and - a "totally unplanned" "totally unexpected" director's cut to drive disc sales.
And if you don't believe that extended editions are not intentional then you fully deserve that hat.
Edit: and yes extended editions can make some films better, extended boring films however can be even more boring!
Imagine if you knew nothing about Warcraft and weren't even a fantasy fan, say other than Game of thrones. Do you think you'd think the movie was nearly as good as you do now? That's probably a majority of the critics.
It wasn't a well written movie. It did have it's moments but it was designed for fans of the franchise. not people new to it as it was very unfocused with weak dialogue.
Well, after 7 hours of previews and ads, I died. Then, when I stopped being dead, the Warcraft movie finally started. It was awesome. My main gripe is that is needed to be another 1-2 hours longer to flesh out a few things, but hey the director's cut is going to be so worth it. I was really worried about the CGI based on the trailers. I was wrong, it was fantastic. King Llane was King Lame though. Lothar was so good as was khadgar.
Reports of Garona's scenes being super campy and cliché are waaaaaaaay overblown and in reality only fill a few minutes of screen time total.
I saw it today, and as a fan who has played since Warcraft 2, I would say it was just OK. It was really all over the place during the first two acts, with tons of short one-minute-long scenes trying to show little snippets of everyone and everything...if I hadn't had previous knowledge of this world and these characters and had been dealing with "fantasy name overload", I definitely would have been lost. Some of the acting and direction were subpar, and while the CGI was good, any time you mix live-action with CGI and green screen you're going to get some jarring transitions even with the best digital artists.
I think the reviews are a pretty good representation of it. It's an unfocused film with some questionable direction and casting, but if you're a fan of the games, some cool fan-service "easter eggs" and a fairly solid third act will have you leaving the theater having enjoyed yourself for the most part.
Comments
I had fun once, it was terrible.
The problem is ratings are often following some shallow criteria,when all i want is "entertainment".
As long as ideas make sense i am always good with it,if ideas just look stupidly bad then yes i will complain.
I know when a movie is truly bad because just like with gaming,i'll pass on it rather quickly.If i make it through the entire movie then it was at least watchable and decent entertainment.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Got to say I really enjoyed it, the review I saw was pretty much on the ball about the film, I'm a big fan of Duncan Jone's 2 previous films (Moon and Source Code) and can't recommend them enough.
The film itself was really good, and at the end of it m 8 year old turned to me and just said "FOR THE HORDE" at the top of his voice, mission accomplished!
Moral of the story, ignore the critics (the clue is in their name) just go watch and make up your own minds, there's far to much doomsaying about everything these days.
― Terry Pratchett, Making Money
I can agree with you that the plot was rushed an horrible. They jumped right into it before the RTS story-line, 3 games before WOW, and didn't give any back story at all. Like most people say if the movie goer didn't have per-existing knowledge of the lore they were probably lost by the story. They just tried to do to much in a short amount of time, this lore was never meant to be fitted into a 2 hour time slot like that.
And for many regular cinema goers it is not about "see Warcraft or not this week" it is about "see Warcraft or see X-Men or see Conjuring 2 or see ... this week".
The post-motem question is: what does the Warcraft box office numbers say about the state of WoW's playerbase - if anything. For it now looks certain that the film will make have over 50% of its revenue from China.
And longer films mean fewer showings in cinemas. 3 showings of Warcraft rather than 4 possibly.
Joined 2004 - I can't believe I've been a MMORPG.com member for 20 years! Get off my lawn!
Could care less what anyone else thinks.. I enjoyed it and it was worth the $36 we paid for our tickets..
Lets see your Battle Stations /r/battlestations
Battle Station
So you saying the director / team carefully created a 2 hour 34 minute film that was then savagely slashed? And you know this because you have seen the extra 20 minutes? And they had absolutely no idea of the realities of the cinema business? They were that bad at their job?
Directors / screenwriters / producers know the realities. Not only that they are skilled enough to produce both a cinema length version - that meets cinemas requirements to show N films a day and - a "totally unplanned" "totally unexpected" director's cut to drive disc sales.
And if you don't believe that extended editions are not intentional then you fully deserve that hat.
Edit: and yes extended editions can make some films better, extended boring films however can be even more boring!
It wasn't a well written movie. It did have it's moments but it was designed for fans of the franchise. not people new to it as it was very unfocused with weak dialogue.
Well, after 7 hours of previews and ads, I died. Then, when I stopped being dead, the Warcraft movie finally started. It was awesome. My main gripe is that is needed to be another 1-2 hours longer to flesh out a few things, but hey the director's cut is going to be so worth it. I was really worried about the CGI based on the trailers. I was wrong, it was fantastic. King Llane was King Lame though. Lothar was so good as was khadgar.
Reports of Garona's scenes being super campy and cliché are waaaaaaaay overblown and in reality only fill a few minutes of screen time total.
What do movie critics generally hate: SciFi/Fantasy and anything with Tyler Perry in it.
Mystery solved.
~~ postlarval ~~
I think the reviews are a pretty good representation of it. It's an unfocused film with some questionable direction and casting, but if you're a fan of the games, some cool fan-service "easter eggs" and a fairly solid third act will have you leaving the theater having enjoyed yourself for the most part.