[Movie] Warcraft (June 2016)

[jdbond592]

You mean the 6.9 on reddit, the score that many on this same thread said months before the movie came out?

Voted in by whopping 250 people? Sigh..

[Soulwind]

They measure the positive things said in a review versus the negative things said. Only 58% of the review was positive.

So if I said:

- The movie is a masterpiece.

- Except for this minor thing.

- And that minor thing.

it would be a 33%?

[Deleted]

Voted in by whopping 250 people? Sigh..

Time to eat your own words.

Yeah because if I didn't give it 8 or 9 out of 10, you would care, right? Surely you are not claiming you are open to all reviews? Go to reddit right now. It is littered with reviews from fans and non-fans and I don''t mean critics. Regular people.

[Zoibert the Bear]

So if I said:

- The movie is a masterpiece.

- Except for this minor thing.

- And that minor thing.

it would be a 33%?

Sentiment analysis and natural language processing are smarter than that. They can weight positive/negative sentences about different entities based on word choice.

Very simplified example:
Masterpiece: 100 points
Except + minor thing: -10 points
+ And + minor thing: -10 points

Again, totally simplified and streamlined example, but you get the picture.

[Frozen Death Knight]

They measure the positive things said in a review versus the negative things said. Only 58% of the review was positive. Yes, it should techincally be in the C+ range if you were going by percentages but, since that can mean many different things, they only use actual scores(like 3/5) when giving a review a grade. If they use something non-standard, like letter grades or no score, then they evaluate the review as per the aforementioned criteria.

Let's all be frank here, the Metacritic as well as the Rotten Tomatoes systems are flawed, especially Metacritic. Having the website determine what score a review gave from 10-100 when no such score was given in the review is incredibly stupid for one. Also, I have seen Rotten Tomatoes reviews that were rated as Rotten despite that when you actually read them, they are not even that harsh, or even dislike the movie that they reviewed.

Reviews would frankly be a lot better if we stopped trying to quantify a qualitative experience. The quality should be determined by what is being said and not what it is being scored.

[tangocash]

I feel like if Tango doesn't like it, she'll feel like I betrayed her, lol.

I just think it's being treated unfairly Idk. It can't be worse than BvS or Captain America? Give me a break. Does the world hate fantasy films now? Excalibur, Willow, Legend, Labryinth, Ladyhawke, Beastmaster, Never Ending Story are some of my favorite films and I want to see them come back

[phyx]

It's just fun to watch you guys squirm, to be honest. This was meant to be second coming of Jesus, no less. Screw lore nerds and their whining. Duncan, the lord, will save us. This is like the best thing ever. Now I see you guys are so down you barely even try to defend this movie. Reduced to "have you seen the movie, everyone else lies"!

If by everyone else you mean critics who are, numbers wise, in a ridiculous minority, then yes, it is weird that audiences like it, even general ones, and critics pretend like its the worst movie ever made. I feel like, if you give Warcraft a 2 out 5, then literally any other video game/high fantasy movie has to be scored on the other side of that 0.

[ezioda004]

Time to eat your own words.

^This.
Jesus, stop being a hypocrite jbond592.

[tangocash]

Btw this movie has been compared to Excalibur, Willow, Legend, Labryinth, Ladyhawke, Beastmaster, Never Ending Story, what's wrong with that? It's also been compared to LOTR and people are thinking it should live up to LOTR. Why isn't it okay to veer in a different direction of fantasy?

[Frozen Death Knight]

The quality is determined by what is said. If more negative things are said it gets a lower score. More positive things, a high score. It's a quick benchmark that you can then look deeper into. Nobody ever said they were perfect, but they exist and many people look at them before spending $40+ going to the movies. I don't necessarily look at just the score on either, but a quick glance tells me the general thoughts of critics. Then it has all the bigger reviews in a single spot. That means I don't have to go to 50 sites to find them. I just open new tabs for each one I'd like to read, usually a mix of the various reviews. Makes life easier for anyone who's not a complete moron.

Is that not what a moron would do? Not actually read what is being said, but instead go by a score that in the end does not really matter that much? Sounds like the moronic thing to do if anything.

[Soulwind]

Let's all be frank here, the Metacritic as well as the Rotten Tomatoes systems are flawed, especially Metacritic. Having the website determine what score a review gave from 10-100 when no such score was given in the review is incredibly stupid for one. Also, I have seen Rotten Tomatoes reviews that were rated as Rotten despite that when you actually read them, they are not even that harsh, or even dislike the movie that they reviewed.

Reviews would frankly be a lot better if we stopped trying to quantify a qualitative experience. The quality should be determined by what is being said and not what it is being scored.

I think scores have a reason to exist. They're quick answers for people who don't really care about reviews, they just want to know "how much" the reviewer liked the movie.

On the other hand, if a reviewer chooses not to give a score, or uses a different scale than 0-100, nobody shouldn't make up one for them. Either metacritic expands their system to list unrated and letter-graded reviews as such, or they don't include those at all.

As for RT, it measures positivity in a very simplistic way, just like IMDb measures popularity.

None of these will tell you if you'll enjoy the movie better than a well-reasoned review. Particularly from reviewers you share your taste with.

That's why word of mouth can make a movie succesful despite the critics' opinion. You know and trust your friends more.

[jdbond592]

If by everyone else you mean critics who are, numbers wise, in a ridiculous minority, then yes, it is weird that audiences like it, even general ones, and critics pretend like its the worst movie ever made. I feel like, if you give Warcraft a 2 out 5, then literally any other video game/high fantasy movie has to be scored on the other side of that 0.

You know what, have at it. Your words can't change anything. That's the only thing that matters..

- - - Updated - - -

Is that not what a moron would do? Not actually read what is being said, but instead go by a score that in the end does not really matter that much? Sounds like the moronic thing to do if anything.

You want someone to read 50 reviews for every film? How many reviews did you read for Apocalypse? Have you seen it?

[Frozen Death Knight]

I think scores have a reason to exist. They're quick answers for people who don't really care about reviews, they just want to know "how much" the reviewer liked the movie.

On the other hand, if a reviewer chooses not to give a score, or uses a different scale than 0-100, they shouldn't make up one. Either metacritic expands their system to list unrated and letter-graded reviews as such, or they don't include those at all.

As for RT, it measures positivity in a very simplistic way, just like IMDb measures popularity.

None of these will tell you if you'll enjoy the movie better than a well-reasoned review. Particularly from reviewers whose taste you share with.

That's why word of mouth can make a movie succesful despite the critics' opinion. You know and trust your friends more.

I really do not like rating systems, which is why I really do not use it for anything unless a site is forcing me to put a score to write anything. The only type of "scoring system" that I think is alright is thumbs up and thumbs down. They are more effective in telling if someone thinks something is good or not without trying to quantify the entire thing on a scale that people can not even agree on how something should be scored.

[Frozen Death Knight]

Did you read my post? Directly before the part you bolded I talk about opening tabs to read a mix of reviews(good, mixed and bad) from various sites that look like they're worth reading. It's one of the benefits of the site, I don't have to look all over for reviews. They have the links right there for me...

I did read that. I am simply stating why the scoring system is encouraging this behaviour. You might actually read the reviews, which I think is good of you, but not everyone bothers to do so and just goes by the score instead.

[phyx]

I didn't realize you were out there asking every single person who saw the film what they thought of it. From what I've been seeing the audiences aren't exactly giving it 10/10. Plenty of hardcore fans who should absolutely love this thing giving it 6 or 7/10. That means there are going to be quite a few people who aren't hardcore fans that will give it less than that. Sorry, but that's just reality.

- - - Updated - - -

From what I've been reading, and I read quite a lot, the ones who absolutely love give it much higher than 6, because you know, they love it. When I said general audience, I meant general, meaning 'the general sentiment' among general public is that of 6-7, which for a high fantasy flick like this is not bad at all, in my humble opinion, because people are not used to this level of fantasy, and Warcraft is breaking that new ground. So far, its seems it fared quite well among French, British, German and Danish people. Granted, those 1st screenings are mostly filled with fans, so thats a bit skewed, but personally, if I as a fan think that Warcraft is good enough to make me happy, I'm ok with that. I don't need it to be good for someone else. I don't care. I'm sure the movie will make enough money to get the sequel approved (maybe a higher budget, too), and then they can fix shit they screwed up this time.


@jdbond592 Thanks man, I didn't think I could change your mind.

I try to stay away from topics like these avoiding any kind of argumentation because it doesn't result in anything other than time wasted, but some of these arguments, on these very forums triggered me. The level of blatant hatred, fanboism, and pure ignorance is staggering. I will never understand the human need to shit all over something just to shit all over something. I guess the need for doing that comes within the individual, and his deeper issues, and maybe this is just a coping mechanism to protect oneself. Have arguments, present it in a fitting manner, and have a discussion, because this shit is just poison.

[tangocash]

Nothing wrong with being a cult classic if you're not interested in sequels(with the exception of NeverEnding Story). The only other one of those that made any money was Exaclibur. It wasn't exactly huge, but King Arthur has typically always been something of a draw and it only cost $11 mil to make.

I actually hated LOTR(no offense to anyone here it was just boring for me) I could've passed out from boredom and I watch A LOT of films including really weird ones like Naked Lunch, Gozu(fucking DERANGED), the Skin I live in(beautiful), and Let the Right One In(which I loved). But I love all of those 80's fantasy films listed though. If this is anything like Excalibur, Willow, or Neverending Story I will cry.

[Thontor]

I would never in my life go to rotten tomatos for a movie review and Warcraft was clearly better than a, what, 40?

Rotten tomatoes just compiles critic reviews and the score tells you how many of them were positive (6/10 or higher). A score of 40 means 40% of critics liked the movie.

That review only works for fans. Again, do you want an objective review or fan review? You are mistaken in thinking someone who knows each and every character in movie, doesn't look deep into their personalities, can give you an honest review.

I want a fan review. Because I am a fan. If I want to know how much I will like the movie, it makes sense to listen to opinions of people who like the same stuff I do.

^This.
Jesus, stop being a hypocrite jbond592.

Pretty much

[Lethora]

IDK, when the people giving it 6's and 7's are hardcore fans it's an issue. I'm not talking about people who aren't used to this level of fantasy, I'm talking about people who have played the games, read fantasy books(not necessarily WC) and want this level of fantasy.

Every single one of my friends who watched the movie, gave it 8-10 out of 10, regardless of whether they play or not. I rate it 8/10 myself, because there's definitely some room for improvement. Also, I hope there's an extended version releasing some time later this year, I really want to see all the scenes that didn't make it into final 2 hrs.

[Frozen Death Knight]

You want someone to read 50 reviews for every film? How many reviews did you read for Apocalypse? Have you seen it?

No, I have no seen X-men Apocalypse, nor am I interested in watching it. It is also completely irrelevant since I am actually reading or watching a bunch of reviews of movies that I actually am considering watching beforehand, or sometimes I just watch a film without prior knowledge to start off with a blank slate, and then read the reviews to see what other people thought. You bringing X-Men: Apocalypse up as an argument is just completely nonsensical.

Also, you do not need to read every, single review ever made, and I never made such an argument. What I do think is that it is actually a good idea to read/watch the reviews you do come across instead of just looking at the score and nothing else.

[phyx]

IDK, when the people giving it 6's and 7's are hardcore fans it's an issue. I'm not talking about people who aren't used to this level of fantasy, I'm talking about people who have played the games, read fantasy books(not necessarily WC) and want this level of fantasy.

- - - Updated - - -

Of course, there will be hardcore fans that hate it, adore it, think its the best shit ever, be indifferent, as well as regular non-Warcrafty people with the exact same sentiments. Point is, anecdotal evidence is not evidence. Like @Lethora said, his hardcore friends gave it an 8. Also anecdotal and not applicable on a larger scale.

So far, from the stuff I read (excluding Reviews), I'd say for general non-Warcraft audience the movie scored about a 6, while for the fans the average would be closer to 7-7.5. Im ok with that, for now, because there was a lot of stuff that was done for the first time for this movie, although I must say I would be disappointed if that was to happen to the potential sequel.