[Movie] Warcraft (June 2016)

[Frozen Death Knight]

Gollum is cleverly designed to be more sympathetic than what the technology allowed to at the time. He has huge eyes, nostrils, ears and mouth. Those proportions, common in cartoons, avoid the uncanny valley and distract you from the less detailed hair, skin and muscles. The orcs have very cartoony bodies, but their faces are mostly human, except for the mouth. The level of detail needed to emote as effectively is much higher, as the eyes aren't big enough to distract you from the rest.

Other great examples of clever design are Davy Jones, whose slimy skin helps a lot with unnatural lighting, as our eyes aren't nearly as used to it as they are to human skin, Caesar, who hides most of his anatomy under the fur, once again making us focus on his eyes and mouth, and the na'vi, who are a combination of Gollum's proportions and Davy's unusual skin.

The orcs are probably the first CG creatures who combine sympathetic human faces with realistic human skin. And easily the ones that have done so the best.

Indeed. The CGI in this movie is quite a landmark in the technology. In a way it was a good thing that the WarCraft movie was released at the time that it did. This amount of detail would not have been possible 4+ years ago at this scale.

[Deleted]

Just came back from watching the movie. The critics are definitely right about one thing: the film's pacing SUCKS. The first 20-25 minutes of the movie in particular BLITZ past you at light speed. They obviously cut out a lot of footage for whatever reason, and the end result is pretty horrendous. Otherwise I have never seen such amazing special effects in my life; on par with if not slightly better than Avatar.

Acting on the orc camp was enjoyable, human actors with the exception of Garona were mediocre. Film doesn't deserve more than a 5/10, but I love the Warcraft universe and the easter eggs were fun, so I'll give it a 6.5/10. I REALLY want it to succeed financially so we can get a (better) sequel but it deserves the low scores its getting from a critical standpoint. Story really wasn't 'cliche' but there are a lot of cliche fantasy tropes and one-liners.

I dunno bros. It definitely doesn't deserve a 1/10 or 3/10, i'd say it's about a 5/10 for the most part.

On par with if not slighty better then Avatar? What are you smoking dude, you need to get your eyes checked. So you are telling me that your CGI opinion is that a 7 year old movie is on PAR with the most cutting edge CGI movie to date? Come on man be real....just come on....Like read these lines back to yourself and think again....

[Tornwar]

He already did, in the battlecry mosaic.

I mean specifically for the movie. Like he did the concepts for the other orcs

[Soulwind]

I mean specifically for the movie. Like he did the concepts for the other orcs

Unlike Durotan and Orgrim, we have a fairly good idea of what Thrall looks like. I don't think they'll deviate too much from it.

Obviously they'll incorporate the actor to the model, like they did with everyone else. If it's Kebbell, then he'll resemble his father.

[Zulkhan]

Well even if it's Warcraft III stuff, if you have a whole novel about it, it means there's a bunch of details interspersed there which would add richness to the movie. The Arthas experience in the game has the very basics.

Exactly. Arthas' inner thoughts are explored a lot during the novel and reveals a considerable amount of details that couldn't even be barely perceived in WC3. Same about Sylvanas. The Arthas/Uther duel is also very good and quite dramatic.

Indeed. The CGI in this movie is quite a landmark in the technology. In a way it was a good thing that the WarCraft movie was released at the time that it did. This amount of detail would not have been possible 4+ years ago at this scale.

Tell that to the "this movie is 10 years late" crowd.

[Frozen Death Knight]

Tell that to the "this movie is 10 years late" crowd.

10 years ago the movie would have looked more like this:

[Deleted]

Sounds to me like it wasn't Duncan's decision on how the theatrical version was cut. It's like "I guess, I can see the reasoning behind it, I suppose..."

It never is the director's decision, only the top big names in Hollywood have the privilige of the final cut.

But yeah, it's like he made a movie about characters and the studios cut it into summer action blockbuster.

[Deleted]

Did someone post a beautiful image of Durotan and Draka laughing earlier? Would love to upload it :]

[Deleted]

On par with if not slighty better then Avatar? What are you smoking dude, you need to get your eyes checked. So you are telling me that your CGI opinion is that a 7 year old movie is on PAR with the most cutting edge CGI movie to date? Come on man be real....just come on....Like read these lines back to yourself and think again....

I have perfect vision, thanks I acutally fly light air-craft part-time! The visuals are just that, on-par with if not slightly better than Avatar! They used lower polygonal models but the lighting, skin/sub-surface light-scattering was better, and the faces were also far better animated. Textures were also lower resolution which is why it doesn't look as "crisp" as Avatar, but on the whole it definitely stands up. There is one scene where Blackhand and Lothar confront each other, and the lighting is so well done that they stack up against each other incredibly well!

[tangocash]

Then you need to start taking control of them, go to a therapist, take meds or something. You cant find happiness from the outside world. It has to come from within yourself, starting with WAITING for the god damn movie and watching it and THEN commenting like a maniac. You are just making yourself look like a wannabe high horse jerk.

Erm where was I being a maniac or jerk? I've only been negative to trolls in this thread like Paradox.

[quras]

Maybe not fix it but make it better? If movie does well and considering the type of criticism it is receiving, there is little reason to not release DC on DVD/BR.

Oh I agree and some movies are made a little better with a DC. Some, it's nothing more than extra footage but really does nothing for the overall film..

[Zexz]

Sounds like they ran out of money as well. If some of the scenes would require more CGI work that shit isn't cheap.

Who knows, it could be that the scenes that were ready and obviously cut had both orc and human scenes, and that the rest would just be extra scenes.

[Deleted]

Oh I agree and some movies are made a little better with a DC. Some, it's nothing more than extra footage but really does nothing for the overall film..

And then there are movies like Blade Runner and Kingdom of Heaven. Is Warcraft the case? We don't know.

[Frozen Death Knight]

https://twitter.com/KristianNairn/st...71877437079552

Seems like Hodor has spoken. You guys had better watch the movie if you have not already.

[Deleted]

Well its your overall composure, im not saying you are a bad person. But you do have alot of opinions without seeing the movie.
You can pretty much graps the overall reaction from people that have seen the movie, it is good even really good for some.

When you write getting panic attacks from reviews thats when i think you went overboard, dont let your illnes take over like that.
Thus my remarks

[Tornwar]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warcraft_(film)

"It received generally negative reviews from critics and has grossed over $31 million."

No way, it has received MIXED reviews, only a few are negative! Wtf...

[Deleted]

I have perfect vision, thanks I acutally fly light air-craft part-time! The visuals are just that, on-par with if not slightly better than Avatar! They used lower polygonal models but the lighting, skin/sub-surface light-scattering was better, and the faces were also far better animated. Textures were also lower resolution which is why it doesn't look as "crisp" as Avatar, but on the whole it definitely stands up. There is one scene where Blackhand and Lothar confront each other, and the lighting is so well done that they stack up against each other incredibly well!

Hehe did you watch the movie in 3d or 2d? the cripsness you are talking about i dont agree on, i was just a bit fumbled about it not beeing better cgi-wise then
avatar. But you do have a right to your opinion

[Deleted]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warcraft_(film)



No way, it has received MIXED reviews, only a few are negative! Wtf...

It's wikipedia, anyone can change that.

[Deleted]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warcraft_(film)



No way, it has received MIXED reviews, only a few are negative! Wtf...

Then edit it.

[Wikiy]

I think they'd rather study Wowpedia than play the games.

One thing that you can't truly pinpoint on Wowpedia is how important something is. You need some sort of filter. Games have it, they leave in the truly important things.

- - - Updated - - -

No way, it has received MIXED reviews, only a few are negative! Wtf...

What counts for reviews in the movie world is critics' reviews in certified magazines, newspapers and similar. What doesn't count is random people on YouTube and the general audience. However nonsensical that may be, it simply is how it works because these people are the ones who're paid to do this stuff.

- - - Updated - - -

https://twitter.com/KristianNairn/st...71877437079552

Seems like Hodor has spoken. You guys had better watch the movie if you have not already.

As well as Bran.