First Warcraft Movie Review - SFX Magazine

[pkdrdoom]

UPDATE[/B]

Find below the reproduced text of the review...credit of course goes to SFX

"In attempting to make a movie that both please gamer purists and invites in newbies, Moon man Duncan Jones faced an unenviable task with Warcraft: The Beginning. And it's only one he has partially succeeded with.

This tale of warring races - with Humans seeing Orcs as invaders while the green (and grey and sort of pink-ish) meanies are actually fleeing a dying planet - has some impressively performance-captured CG creatures, explores both cultures and occasionally takes bold narrative chances.

But those positives are often outweighed by an overwrought script and acting that ranges from nuanced to the sort of theatrical proclmations that wouldn't sound out of place in an '80s fantasy adventure. Though it's fun to channel that spirit occasionally, Warcraft stumbles over an uneven tone. And the need to cram in lots of world-building while leaving story threads dangling for future is regrettable.

There's talk of portals and dark magic, loyalty and vengeance but chances are you've heard it all before. If this is the beginning, we're not completely convinced we'll be in it to the end."

Hey man

What is the name of the reviewer or critic thanks.

And which issue/month of the magazine is this?

[Obelisk Kai]

Hey man

What is the name of the reviewer or critic thanks.

And which issue/month of the magazine is this?

Jim Blakey has the byline, issue 275, Summer 2016.

[alturic]

First comment on the movie here, and I'm starting to see what people mean that the CGI is horrible. I'm unsure if it's due to the lighting (GoT is obviously very CGI heavy, but not very noticeable IMO) in the scenes or what, but I just watched that little excerpt on the front-page and the scene with real props and people looks stellar, the very next scene where they are on horses going through the actual town looks like some very, very, very bad CGI. Even some of the stills look terrible. It's really weird because for the motion-capture stuff, that looks pretty good. I just don't know what it is about some of the CGI scenes seemingly not being up to par with others. Perhaps it's a side-effect of HD/60 or something?

I don't pay for movies anyway, but even if I was still heavily invested in WoW I probably wouldn't pay to see the movie. :-/

[Deleted]

I do know the story of WC, I also know the condensing of multiple story lines and plots into one big lump. Why go for a "generic plot" when they could pick a thousand different stories to tell? Why butcher the lore when you can make a movie not butchering it using a different part of the lore? Stop defending retcons and terrible writing.

It's not a retcon because the movie adaptions is NOT CANON LORE
Seriously, why is this so hard for people to understand?

GAMES
AND
MOVIES
ARE
TWO
DIFFERENT
MEDIUMS

Changes has to be made to turn the story into a movie and to make the movie more compelling. Lore purism is so cancer it's ridiculous.

[Deleted]

$180M is still a lot of money. I know it could have been more and yes, perhaps it wasn't as huge a success as the studio had hoped... but I struggle with the contention of people who really, really disliked the movie that it's a steaming pile of excrement with absolutely zero redeeming value. I'm not a Snyder apologist even though I like his movies... part of me wishes the studio helmed another director for the purpose of expanding the DCEU but the other is glad that Snyder had a vision for the film and followed through with it in spite of everything.

Don't get me wrong, I don't outright hate the guy - his Dawn of the Dead remake & 300 are great, & Watchmen Director's Cut is IMO one of the greatest CBM Movies of all time (both are excellent source material adaptations), but he's just not good with Original Script. Sucker Punch was a joke, & Man of Steel was controversial enough that he ought to have been removed from any further DCEU helming all together, or at least given some supervision on something as big & important as BvS, so IMO it's not entirely his fault.

To be fair, he even did some great casting choices with Cavill & Batfleck (seriously didn't see Batfleck coming, the marketing was moronic on him), but his Superman execution was beyond idiotic. The moment he spoke up about throwing in that "Nolan Filter Tint" thing in Man of Steel, he should have been instantly shot down, but instead it just kept going, even through all the controversy, basically making things worse. The fact that WB-DC didn't even step in to reduce "Nolanization" after Man of Steel's controversy highlights how it wasn't "solely" Nolan's fault that BvS tanked, but overall, he was the guy at the helm, unfortunately.

Then of course there's the whole "every time he opens his mouth, he makes me want to hit him" thing, which is absolutely solely his own doing. Regardless, $180m is decent, but it's nowhere near what they expected to make, & that's the main problem.

- - - Updated - - -

I love how you seem so knowledgeable about all of the minute variations and details of the film when it hasn't even been released yet.

I mean yea, you could be right, but at the moment you're making a lot of assumptions and coming off like quite the dick because of it.

Hey, maybe I am actually wrong. Maybe this is another case of bad marketing (I mean, come on, Dubstep Music on a Fantasy Trailer? Sci-Fi Posters? Fuck me, how stupid can you get), maybe the Trailer's tone is completely off by comparison to the movie, maybe they just think they'll attract more non-fans by not imitating the Hobbit's "dark & feely" Trailers, & going instead for "Dubstep, Action & Comedy!" but so far I've yet to see anything that blindly states to that, so yeah.

(POTENTIAL SPOILERS WARNING)
I just highly doubt Universal/Legendary will let them have the "Orcs win, Stormwind is destroyed, Garona does her thing, etc. ending" as I doubt they're actually convinced they're going to score well enough for even a Trilogy with this yet, so yeah, by extension I doubt they're going to let them do the risky "Not a Happy Ending" ending from WC1.

Assuming Medivh &/or Gul'dan are the "real behind the scenes" baddies of the movie, & the Orcs + Humans rally together to put an end to their generic "Plot to Destroy the World in some moronic over-the-top fashion," then it's more than likely the plan is for some sort of "Peace Treaty" ending, since Internment Camps would be too..... yeah. With a post-credits scene teasing the Legion as baddies in "Warcraft 2", in which tensions continue between the Orcs & Humans, even as they "rally together against a greater evil that threatens to annihilate Azeroth (enter Kalimdor)."

Alternatively, we might have an "Orcs on the run, cut off from Draenor" ending (enter Kalimdor), but that's not my first bet. It's also possible they'll do a splinter faction of Orcs breaking off from the main Horde force & turning into "Terrorist Extremists" which'll return as secondary villains in the sequels, but I'm not banking on that very much either, not unless "Warcraft 3" is a return to Orcs v. Humans, which would mean the Legion is nothing but a single-movie deal, which seems unlikely.

The only thing I can't factor in is Baby Green Jesus. Are they planning a time skip, or what? I mean, he's just a baby, so why even bother having him unless you're going to skip forward 20+ years? Is it just to excite the fans? "Oh, hey look, it's (Baby) Green Jesus! Unfortunately, since it's 35 years ago, we're focusing on his papa instead, so..... yeah."

- - - Updated - - -

Because WC1 is the beginning of the game franchise. Improving that story, while not particularly great by itself, fits best as "entry point" for a new movie franchise, which would eventually reach more interesting stories. Telling a "cool" story that lacked all the basics would have never achieved that at best and being another "videogame-movie failure" at worst, since you had to cram a shit ton of stuff into a single movie.

The lore wasn't "butchered" and people bitching about this aren't even capable to offer an half-decent argument to explain their disappointment. It's a fucking adaptation. Nothing "major" got changed, the flow of the story and its pivotal plot points are the same. Seriously, you can use every sort of argument against this movie, but "lol the lore" is absolutely the dumbest of all.

But for all I care, you can all keep crying, crouched in your corner. None of my business, really.



Except Orcs are the bad guys, the difference is that things are explored from their point of view aswell...which is exactly what happens in the novels. Durotan being a good guy and the Frostwolves being the "black sheep" of the Horde is perfectly loyal to the lore. Everyone actually understanding the lore and its characters wouldn't need more than 8 seconds of logical thought to realize that. The great "change" is them being relevant within a context they weren't originally, since they were conveniently cut away with that "off-screen exile" bullshit excuse, simply because Blizzard didn't even conceive these characters until WC3.

About the "two-dimensional characters", you should watch the movie before drawing such conclusions. From what little I read of the novelization, most characters sounds very loyal to their original incarnation. I'm not going to say anything else until I didn't watch the movie myself.

But anyway, whatever. Feel free to disagree. I argued about this shit just too many times already and I don't have the patience nor the time to waste for doing it all over again.

Orcs are being presented as "this guy (Gul'dan) did something bad to our planet, so now we're running away because it's dying. Some of us are warlike, but others aren't. Some of us want to live in peace with the Humans in what we hope will be our new home, whereas others don't."

It's oversimplifying their entire back story into the major highlights. I have no doubt there won't be a single Space Goat. There won't be a single mention of Ner'zhul's attempted corruption (even if he does show up at all), the Legion subsequently moving on to Gul'dan, the start of the Orc-Draenei War, the massive costs it had on both sides which led to Hellscream accepting Gul'dan's "Demon Blood" offer which resulted in him & his fellows turning red-eyed & green (well, aside from the Fel Magic spread), which in turn resulted in a massive Draenei slaughterfest, etc.

I mean ffs, even War Crimes showed Durotan ordering the slaughter of Draenei children - yeah, yeah, under the influence of Demonic Blood, bla bla bla, but that's the point; this is not how they were presented to us at first, & that's the problem. They're making them too human, in an attempt to get us to relate to them. They're not "the ruthless alien race that came invading" the way they were in the game, they're just "warlike immigrants" trying to make a new home for themselves on a foreign world because their old one died up because of this guy they haven't even bothered to kill for his atrocities yet, even though there doesn't seem to be any reason to let him live, now that they know it's Gul'dan's magic (they literally said it in a Trailer) that caused their homeworld's problems in the first place.

It's the same censored approach Blizzard took with Warlords of Draenor - trying to make it look like "they're not actually bad guys."

- - - Updated - - -

It's not a retcon because the movie adaptions is NOT CANON LORE

Changes has to be made to turn the story into a movie and to make the movie more compelling. Lore purism is so cancer it's ridiculous.

Retcon or not, going with a story & marketing this dumb is moronic.

[xskarma]

Moved to the Cinema forum, since that's what this deals with and not the game (though I understand it touches both subjects).

[Varitok]

It's not a retcon because the movie adaptions is NOT CANON LORE
Seriously, why is this so hard for people to understand?

GAMES
AND
MOVIES
ARE
TWO
DIFFERENT
MEDIUMS

Changes has to be made to turn the story into a movie and to make the movie more compelling. Lore purism is so cancer it's ridiculous.

THEN DON'T BASE IT OFF AN EXISTING PROPERTY!

Stop using it being two different mediums as an excuse to fuck up basic story points. Who are they trying to attract? Warcraft fans? because if it doesn't carry a lot of story elements of WoW then it isn't going to appeal to them. But no go ahead and keep shouting cancer in defense of shitty writing.

[Arbs]

These guys rated Civil War a 5/5. CW was good but not even close to a 5/5. THeir opinion holds no credibility imo

Agreed Civil Wars was great, but not the way people hyped it up. Same with Batman Vs Superman.

- - - Updated - - -

I fucking hate movie critics - greatest jackasses of all time. Critics in general actually.

I do expect Warcraft to be an OK movie though. OK as in, entertaining to watch. It's a fantasy movie after all, don't know what people are expecting.

The sad part some people actually take their review as a god sent & will not watch a movie if it gets bad reviews.

[Soulwind]

THEN DON'T BASE IT OFF AN EXISTING PROPERTY!

Stop using it being two different mediums as an excuse to fuck up basic story points. Who are they trying to attract? Warcraft fans? because if it doesn't carry a lot of story elements of WoW then it isn't going to appeal to them. But no go ahead and keep shouting cancer in defense of shitty writing.

Well, being the first adaptation of a universe originated on another medium, they didn't know they had to keep it the same.

Wait, what's that? There are hundreds of movies that are based on books, comics, TV series and even other movies? WHAT? They also change things from the original story?! And they were succesful and beloved by millions of people?! Madness!

[Deleted]

Well, being the first adaptation of a universe originated on another medium, they didn't know they had to keep it the same.

Wait, what's that? There are hundreds of movies that are based on books, comics, TV series and even other movies? WHAT? They also change things from the original story?! And they were succesful and beloved by millions of people?! Madness!

True.....

Wait, what's that? Game of Thrones Season 1 is basically a word-for-word adaptation of the novel, & it was near-universally acclaimed by both book & show fans alike, even all these years later?

Holy fuck! MADNESS!

[Soulwind]

True.....

Wait, what's that? Game of Thrones Season 1 is basically a word-for-word adaptation of the novel, & it was near-universally acclaimed by both book & show fans, alike, even all these years later?

Holy fuck! MADNESS!

http://gameofthrones.wikia.com/wiki/...ies_-_Season_1

[Deleted]

http://gameofthrones.wikia.com/wiki/...ies_-_Season_1

Ohmygod, they changed minute details that nobody gives a fuck about!

THE HORROR!

I guess this is the part where I bring up the age-old mantra of "TV is a different medium to book/comic/video game etc. so things will inevitably change, even in the most loyal of adaptations"? Not to mention the budget restrictions that caused them to have to chop off a few things regardless.........

[Soulwind]

Ohmygod, they changed minute details that nobody gives a fuck about!

THE HORROR!

I guess this is the part where I bring up the age-old mantra of "TV is a different medium to book/comic/video game etc. so things will inevitably change, even in the most loyal of adaptations"?

Or the part where a season of Game of Thrones lasts more than ten hours, unlike two hour movies.

[Deleted]

Or the part where a season of Game of Thrones lasts more than ten hours, unlike two hour movies.

I guess this is the part where I mention how "A Game of Thrones" is 1,000 pages long, & Warcraft - Orcs v. Humans...... isn't?

Your average 200-300 page book can easily fit in a 2-2.5 hour movie quite faithfully, if only the Director/Script writer wants to make it a loyal, faithful adaptation. If they don't, & they go to town (especially with the endings, Hollywood loves to fuck with endings), then you can end up with anything from "Interview With the Vampire" to "John Carter."

P.S. Just for the record, overall a season of Game of Thrones doesn't last quite 10 hours. Average episode runtime is about 50-55 minutes, & that's including Opening & Closing Credits. Only a handful of episodes (total, counting the entire Series) have ever hit/breached the 60-minute mark.

[Varitok]

Well, being the first adaptation of a universe originated on another medium, they didn't know they had to keep it the same.

Wait, what's that? There are hundreds of movies that are based on books, comics, TV series and even other movies? WHAT? They also change things from the original story?! And they were succesful and beloved by millions of people?! Madness!

There is a difference between tweaking and butchering. Don't release a book telling people this is how it happened and then release a movie telling people how it happened differently.

I won't take it being a movie as an excuse. Don't release two conflicting things about one subject. Stop being such a condescending asshole.

[Soulwind]

There is a difference between tweaking and butchering. Don't release a book telling people this is how it happened and then release a movie telling people how it happened differently.

I won't take it being a movie as an excuse. Don't release two conflicting things about one subject. Stop being such a condescending asshole.

You must have hated Civil War, then.

[Deleted]

You must have hated Civil War, then.

Ridiculous comparison. Civil War has 8 core issues & about 100 tie-ins. There is literally no way to turn it into a faithful movie adaptation, even if you only focus on the 8 core issues (Civil War 01-08) & just the major characters' tie-ins (Spider-Man, Iron Man, Captain America) since that's still a minimum of 20 issues total. Regardless, even then you'd still be losing massive amounts of events occurring throughout in the background (tie-in issues) like Wolverine doing bla bla bla, & bla bla bla, while the Thunderbolts are bla bla bla, bla bla bla.

Besides the fact that Marvel doesn't even have the movie rights to the Mutants, & they haven't even introduced half the cast of Civil War in the MCU yet, that is.

Regardless, at least Captain America: Civil War actually adapts the source material in broad strokes. If you want to talk about one of the worst CBM adaptations of all time, Age of Ultron is the way to go. I'm not sure if you're familiar with the source material, but the only real connection between the Comic Book & the movie is Ultron itself. Other than that, the movie is its own thing completely.

[RobertoCarlos]

You can tell the movie looks like a low budget high school competition flick from the screen shots of the movie. Or "80s adventure" as the reviewer put it. Just look at the screen shots of Ben Foster and the other wizard. Incredibly disappointing.

[Zulkhan]

Stop being such a condescending asshole.

What do you expect? I mean, you keep bitching while barely knowing of what the hell you talk about. Bitching for the sake of bitching, literally.

[Nynax]

I wonder how Warcraft ratings will look in comparison to The Force Awakens.

I mean, The Force Awakens was basically a launch (or relaunch) of a new (but old) cinematic Universe. And even though it did well, most of that was due to nostalgia. The movie itself though had so many similarities to A New Hope that it practically could have been an alternate universe version. I at least did not leave the theaters feeling astounded, just "that was a good movie."

So it makes me wonder how many WoW players will see it just to see it. How many non-WoW but played Warcrafts 1-3 will see it just to see it. And how many gamers will see it just because it's the biggest budgeted video game movie in history. I know non-WoW players that are simply hoping Warcraft launches video game movies the same way Comic Book movies got launched. And then there's non gamer genre fans, Harry Potter or Lord of the Rings fans, that are usually just hungry for any big budget fantasy movie that comes out. And finally the wider audience that's learned to love comic book movies, just might be interested in this new thing too.

Don't forget the lessons from WoW either. What we see posted on forums is not actually representative of the majority playerbase that isn't on forums. And the same is going to hold true for the movie. Honestly I think only time will tell, and that it's not possible to predict this movies success or failure.