Box Office: 'Warcraft' Is A $430 Million Flop
- Thread starter Samtemdo8_v1legacy
- Start date
Recommended Videos
A lot of people are put off by the endings (yes, plural) of Return of the King and/or its running time. That might be it.Skatalite said:
I wouldn't be too worried either. The Hobbit trilogy is still clearly less popular than the LotR trilogy on the Tomatometer, and that includes user ratings. Rankings look fine to my mind - we have an excellent first trilogy be followed by an overall good prequel trilogy.
Which is ironic, considering watching Hobbit trilogy takes more time than reading the original. Hell, you could easily finish RotK if you skip appendixes.Hawki said:
...and if you imagine you managed to skip garbage "gastric funnies", hamfisted "love story", Azog being there for no reason whatsoever, battle of 5 armies without goblins and WITH an orc army that never even existed (and with Isengard-level armor, no less), then you might even suspect which way means time better spent.
Sadly, it's all hindsight - though I can blame myself for not figuring out what was visible in the trailers and certain choices that screamed "focus groups first!":/ My excuse - PJ earned himself a decent amount of trust with OT - even despite its flaws - and stories about production horrors tend to be drowned out by merketing. Probably yet another reason it would be nice to know marketing budgets - which one is more interesting anyway: how much money went to actors or to people and companies who manage the hype?
I fast-forwarded the final Hobbit movie and skipped cinema altogether after 1st. I guess fast-forwarding Warcraft either means I learned my lesson or than it was even less interesting. Or both. Travis Fimmel was playing Travis Fimmel and I get enough of that from Vikings; the rest made me either cringe or shrug. Jackson managed to screw up with what was essentially a kids book, but he had to make an effort against the original. This one here feels like it was painful partially because there had to be some homage to the original, which says a lot about its quality when dragged out of its gameplay armor. Te fact it took them SO long to make a movie also meant many players had enough time to get cynical
I'm personally still really hoping on a directors cut. Like really hoping.Lykosia said:
Duncan was so enthusiastic throughout the whole thing and it felt like there was so much attention to detail, that I feel judgement on the version we got when 40 minutes were cut from the editors own cut and bits screwed around with is slightly off. I don't feel like I got to watch the movie I was supposed to see. I mean, a directors cut isn't going to save the human characters all being stoned as fuck or the King being as charismatic as Father Paul Stone, but it might fix the pacing issues and fill in some of the blanks or oddities. It all felt very rushed.
OT: All the Orc Scenes I really enjoyed(particuarly the Gul'dan and Durotan scenes), they were great and they ironically felt much more alive and realistic. Their actors seemed to be far more into what they were doing, Durotan and Draka had some pretty good chemistry and the Orcs were all much easier to connect with.
The CG also felt much better in motion though the mix of CG and Humans still felt off, the opening scene with Garona at The Dark Portal was particularly jarring. And the problem was the Orcs looked like Warcraft Orcs, but hyper realistic and put next to real humans, which ruined the scale, when Warcraft Humans are much less far apart from the Orcs; I mean it was always going to be a problem but I felt they could perhaps made the Orcs a bit less big just for visual cohesiveness. The orcs are fucking MASSIVE compared to real humans.
I wasn't exactly blown away by the movie, nor did I board the hype train because video game movies, but lore snarls and tangles aside I was pleased with what I saw on its own merits. It didn't frustrate me, I enjoyed my time with it and when the end of the movie came I was surprised two hours had already passed. I'm unlikely to watch it again without a directors cut but it was what it was, and what it was wasn't bad. It has potential so long as they learn if they get a sequel.
Yes because when the movie revealed the people of the production team (the writers, the actors, the director, etc.) I was a bit bummed out that not only have I not heard of these people, but they all made rather mediocre things so I had my concerns, how can such mediocre talent would possibly do a Warcraft movie justice?Zhukov said:
Then the trailers came out and I was rather please out how Warcraft-y it did looked. So I imagind the plot in my head of all the stuff they revealed in trailers and interviews and it was much better than what we got.
But again I was just supporting this movie because as a kid I WANTED Arthas' story to be adapted into a movie and I don't care how fucking cliche it was, it was my first encounter and I have not watched Darth Vader, or Arthurian stories prior to seeing the story of Arthas the Lich King.
That is all I want and if someone adapts that story faithfully and with justice my life will be content.
I'm going to be incredibly unpopular with this but I think the Arthas storyline is far too long and complicated to be made into a single movie.
Having read "the last guardian", I thought that would be a good story to make into a movie and that is exactly what they did. That is not to say the last guardian is better than the Arthas story-line (it isn't), but it is far easier to movify.
Having read "the last guardian", I thought that would be a good story to make into a movie and that is exactly what they did. That is not to say the last guardian is better than the Arthas story-line (it isn't), but it is far easier to movify.