I KNEW the movie would flop

[Dastreus]

Well I can't see how it's a quoted for truth thing as everyone I have spoken with who has seen the movie so far have said it was amazing.. huh predictions eh?

You mistake a statement as prediction. It is easy to assume that a video game movie will be garbage from the moment you hear about it.

[markos82]

A huge number of movies use far more green screen than you expect. The opening 17 minute long uncut continuous shot is a thing of beauty all by itself. The sound design was also impeccable. If you think that the cinematography and sound design were awful, you must be a troll. There is a reason it won awards for these things. Even though I expect you are going to say something ridiculous, I am going to ask. What is bad about green screen? What part of the movie had bad sound effects?

17 minutes of nothing. I see similar and even better looking cut scenes when I watch discovery channel with better music background and more appealing voice overs. If you gave Oscar for that then each and every episode on Discovery channel ( showing space ) should get one as well. Sound effects are awful, for the love of god remove sound in space, THERE IS NO SOUND IN SPACE. Gravity was supposed to be a realistic movie, but all we got was a Christopher Nolan's explosion ( or close to same ), neurotic astronaut thats screaming and panting for close to 80 min, and yeah weak acting of GC, that's drifting into outer space like a hero...

[gunchix]

That's exactly what it is.

- - - Updated - - -



You mean go for imdb because it has the highest rating?

Not talking about warcraft movie for this, I mean about all movies. tomatoes is a biased site. With weird contributors. Just look at sharknado on tomatoes... It's a site that people should stop visiting for their movie review info.

[DarkAmbient]

A huge number of movies use far more green screen than you expect. The opening 17 minute long uncut continuous shot is a thing of beauty all by itself. The sound design was also impeccable. If you think that the cinematography and sound design were awful, you must be a troll. There is a reason it won awards for these things. Even though I expect you are going to say something ridiculous, I am going to ask. What is bad about green screen? What part of the movie had bad sound effects?

This blew my mind when I first saw it:

[Deleted]

Reviews haven't been great. We all know that. I was worried about poor CGI and my expectations were overall rather low. I watched it last night and must say I was pleasently surprised. It wasn't a masterpiece, but I was entertained. There were moments where I laughed and moments where I was rooting for characters.

I don't know if it's a good or bad thing to know the universe already. I have only played WoW, so don't know much about lore from previous warcraft games.

Don't always take reviews seriously or at least don't let them prevent you from making your own opinion

[Osmeric]

Ahh yeah the warcraft movie isn't for warcraft fans, that's a solid argument.

PS - it's in like 9 "smaller" markets and it's already made 1/6th of it's budget back.

You left out the word "just". Also, a movie needs to make back considerably more than just the cost of making the movie, since marketing is also very expensive.

[Wolfbear]

I guess it was smart for them to bring the movie out in Europe first, as most people who go to see it enjoy it. Then their word of mouth might convince people in the US to go see it despite reviews from critics?

[Deleted]

according the numbers on the front page of mmoc, the movie only flopped in america...germany, russia, and china had huge numbers.

every single american fan will see this movie eventually, theyll just never admit to it. is funny to me

It's not out in America yet - these are 'predictions'.

[daywalker02]

Nearly every single thing about this post is incorrect.

1.) The movie isn't open in China.
2.) Lengendary Pictures bankrolled this movie, not Blizzard
3.) The movie studio will determine whether a sequel is made

On the other hand, you were kind of right about the amount of money it'd need to make to be profitable. Generally speaking, however, the Hollywood benchmark is double the production cost, so you'd be looking at around $320M worldwide box office cume for that to happen. That's not factoring marketing so the breakpoint of profitability for this movie is likely around the $400M range.

I am predicting close to 580 million or even more

what would be your prediction?

[deadman1]

FFS. Just read the materials yourself first and compare the total numbers. ~10 billion vs. ~10 billion dollars. That's all there is to say. Nobody gives a fuck about 'attendance'. It only shows that Europe still got a lot more potential to grow where the US does not. Win Europe. Bye.

Yes people do care about attendance, if 300 million people in the USA generate more box office sales per capita than 300 million people in europe, then that proves that more people in the USA attend movie which makes the USA A LARGER MARKET.

Again you keep changing the topic, now it's about "all of Europe" rather than "the markets that the warcraft movie is open in" and now it's about "market growth" instead of the ORIGINAL topic.

I'm not sure if something is being lost in translation or if you are just really hateful of the USA, but clearly you didn't read any of the websites I sent you. This is basic math

I'm 100% done with you, this conversation went from peaceful, you you being smug to you being downright rude and stubborn. It's a meaningless conversation if you refuse to accept objective facts.

[Deleted]

This blew my mind when I first saw it:

Composits of of two static or linear rotating real life shots is just a whole different league than adding full blown CGI objects/scenes behind or near greenscreened actors.

This 'I bet you didn't know' video is very much proof of that. A few of them are even very obvious. Of course you don't immediately think of a greenscreen because thats not the issues you see in the 'better' movies. What you see is exactly the same issues as the Warcraft movie suffers from. Perspectives are slightly off due to camera angles or focal point of the camera not matching and it just looks not allright. Lighting sources, direction, color or intensity don't match and it just doesn't look alright. And CGI almost always pops out like a red nose on a clown if its not just some speck in the background or everything got blurred or is pitch dark anyways. GGI snow, CGI smoke, CGI shadows, CGI reflective surfaces and we are not even at CGI particle effects for glowing shit.

I don't believe people are not trolling or whiteknighting here when they deny the visible issues in the movie. You would get headaches and have serious issues to balance your body for quite a while or focus on people if you where walking around with perspectives and errors like that in real life.

[chooi]

Yes people do care about attendance, if 300 million people in the USA generate more box office sales per capita than 300 million people in europe, then that proves that more people in the USA attend movie which makes the USA A LARGER MARKET.

Again you keep changing the topic, now it's about "all of Europe" rather than "the markets that the warcraft movie is open in" and now it's about "market growth" instead of the ORIGINAL topic.

I'm not sure if something is being lost in translation or if you are just really hateful of the USA, but clearly you didn't read any of the websites I sent you. This is basic math

I'm 100% done with you, this conversation went from peaceful, you you being smug to you being downright rude and stubborn. It's a meaningless conversation if you refuse to accept objective facts.

No, you didn't read my original post. I was referring to Europe as a whole all the time. Maybe read it again. And how can a smaller market (= less people) that nets around the same profit be a larger market? That's some serious spinning you are doing right there.

I agree on your last sentence: it's a meaningless conversation if you refuse to accept objective facts.

[upirlikhyi]

Right now, sitting at a disastrous score in RT. It begs the question to what Blizzard was thinking with this shit again.

What was the point?

Average Rating: 4.4/10
Reviews Counted: 19
Fresh: 4
Rotten: 15

19 votes counted is that you Katherine Harris?

[Deleted]

https://twitter.com/GiteshPandya/sta...590464?lang=en

Clearly a flop.

[grandgato]

You left out the word "just". Also, a movie needs to make back considerably more than just the cost of making the movie, since marketing is also very expensive.

I was under the impression that when a studio cites a budget value it includes the estimated marketing costs. Is that incorrect?

[Wildpantz]

Right now, sitting at a disastrous score in RT. It begs the question to what Blizzard was thinking with this shit again.

What was the point?

2nd highest grossing after deadpool in 2016

[quras]

So, in case the movie does make a decent amount of money and is not a huge flop, is this the next side-stepping tactic "It had no competition"?

It's a decent argument as to why more money might be brought in.

Making a bit of money isn't most concerns to be honest. It's more along the lines can it make enough to warrant a sequel so they can do something with all the holes they left in the film.

But one does have to wonder when talking about ticket sales. Does it have competition? If not, it's no wonder tickets sold more than normal.

[Osmeric]

I was under the impression that when a studio cites a budget value it includes the estimated marketing costs. Is that incorrect?

I was under the impression marketing costs were typically not included. Marketing isn't done yet, for one thing.

[Tart]

https://twitter.com/GiteshPandya/sta...590464?lang=en

Clearly a flop.

Let's see the total before we start dishing out the Oscars eh?

[Deleted]

Let's see the total before we start dishing out the Oscars eh?

Swing and miss, high grossing movies (which is what "flop" is related to) aren't very common on the main categories. But hey, considering the praise of the CGI, I would be surprised with technical Oscars.