I KNEW the movie would flop

[VirginiaIsForLovers]

I feel like the warcraft movie should have been made 6 or 7 years ago during the prime of Wotlk.

[beanman12345]

Here are some facts.
---50% of revenue generated from movies are done in the first week. There is a reason why movie companies want HUGE opening weekends, there is a reason people can generally safely predict a movie a flop or a hit.

^^^this is not however true in 100% case. there are most certainly outliers. Billion dollar movies don't follow this, and they are exceptionally rare. Free press in word of mouth and internet and such, also can sometimes make a movie continue to make good money long after release, and can ALSO have the inverse effect.

---a movie budget usually a drop in the bucket of what it needs to break even. Because these things don't include, prints, advertising, taxes, trade association, freight, handling, insurance, union fee's etc etc etc. So warcraft with 160 million budget needing 500m to break even is not unordinary this is 100% normal on most films.

Can easily give an example on the above^. Harry Potter order of pheonix, budget 150 million. Revenue made 940m. You saying thing "THAT'S HUGE!" Well because of the added costs above, which vary from movie to movie, this one may or may not have broke even. OH... and still made 3 more movies.

[Necroofeelya]

I feel like the warcraft movie should have been made 6 or 7 years ago during the prime of Wotlk.

I think that would have been a worse decision. Warcraft would not have stood a chance without the CG tech that we have now.

Just saw the movie and I truly thought it was amazing. Sure, I can see what everyone was talking about. The lore was VERY different. However, more of a alternate universe different. The right characters died as they were supposed too and the events still followed the lore with a twist. We have to all understand here. The lore of WoW is very complex. Much of it in bits and pieces. You would have to read the books, comics, AND play the game to get all of it.
For example, I am sure there are people that asked why the hell are the orcs leaving the planet. Because we damn well all know it wasn't just because of the "fel"
There was this WHOLE backstory to why their world got messed up, but if they actually included that into the movie to stay accurate. That would be easily a whole other movie.
The lore to all of the major characters was changed in an alternate universe way, but again. Because they needed to condense so much with characters that quite frankly have a very rich backstory that would take to long to explain.

The acting could have been done better. I am still very happy with the way the movie came out though and its a solid foundation to future Warcraft movies to come!

P.S Directors cuts too! When the movie comes out on disc it may just explain more! So they cut more out after already cutting a bunch out for the sake of no non-gamer is going to see a movie that is 3+ hours long about a game they dont play. They had to appease the casual movie goer as well when making this movie.

[quras]

SNIP...

Can easily give an example on the above^. Harry Potter order of pheonix, budget 150 million. Revenue made 940m. You saying thing "THAT'S HUGE!" Well because of the added costs above, which vary from movie to movie, it lost 137m actually. OH... and still made 3 more movies.

Unfortunately for your example above you'd have to know if warcraft was made as a net participation movie or not. I cannot find that answer anywhere. It seems many movie studios do it though so they can work the numbers.

Net participation/profit movies involve what might be considered "shady" accounting and thats the only reason that movie was considered to be a loss. In all actuality, it could have been in the black but worked in a way to make sure someone else took the cash hit.

http://deadline.com/2010/07/studio-s...ounting-51886/

Not the best example for profit or not much less sequels or not.

[dacoolist]

I don't think you quite understand how movies work...

- - - Updated - - -



Everyone who is saying it flopped clearly hasn't seen the film, or they are just neckbeards. Because everyone I know who saw the movie, and dont play the game. Liked it. Pretty much only complaint is the ending.

No no I liked it too - I mean, I guess I'm biased - although I figured it'd be like a 6.5/10 IF THAT, and to me, it was a SOLID 8.5/10, I think His point was that game movies ALWAYS seem like they are going to flop, as in, He was replying to a guy saying people COULD automatically throw the towel in before it begins. I liked the movie though, and glad you did too

(Also roahn, love the location: "In your base, killing your dudes" lol)

[baskev]

I said I assumed everyone who was arguing over how much it cost didn't read the front page (because *if they did there would be nothing to argue about*). If you read the front page, you'd know this, which means that either you're disregarding the information, or just ignoring it; It's that simple. If you did read it, you'd know that we don't know if it's a success just yet, although it looks like it from initial numbers.

As for you saying "but for a movie out a single week" in one sentence, then admitting the very next that the movie has been available for up to *three weeks* rather than just one week is sort of silly. It's not just been a week then - it's been a few weeks.

Sure, the major release might have happened this week in the US, but in other countries it's actually already starting to be removed from cinema listings from next week, because it's been displayed for a month at that point. I can't even find it in my local cinema *this week*(although if I'm willing to drive to a city an hour away, I'd be able to).

Yes i get now that you are responding to everyone. But you quoted me. So its normal to think you where talking to me.
I did not disregard the info. But like i said before to you, i just do not read 1 site's info but i check other sources. So unlike you i do not read 1 site info but multiple sources. So not disregarding or ignoring it....just reading more then 1 pamphlet on a subject, its called informing yourself .

Your point that we do not know if its a success or failure is what i am trying to say to you 2 post already. Again what you previously typed towards me i read it like you think it will fail. All i said was that this are the numbers after 1 week.

Twisting my words are you. Yes its been out in 6 country's for more weeks then other country's. The rest have only had 1 week to watch it so far. A general launch of something can be called a main showing. And the rest called a pre showing/pre launch/early launch.

And yes it will drop with some of the movies. But removing from cinema's....if checked...could not find info about allot country's removing it. Checked several international ones. But i believe you that the ones its done bad in and had the early release would do that. But again thats like 5/6 country's of the 193? coutry's in the world........... Yeah local cinema's usually remove most movies after a short showing. Only big hits get long showings.

[zaino]

it might have not done as strong as hoped domestically but internationally is where the real deal came in

[beanman12345]

Unfortunately for your example above you'd have to know if warcraft was made as a net participation movie or not. I cannot find that answer anywhere. It seems many movie studios do it though so they can work the numbers.

Net participation/profit movies involve what might be considered "shady" accounting and thats the only reason that movie was considered to be a loss. In all actuality, it could have been in the black but worked in a way to make sure someone else took the cash hit.

http://deadline.com/2010/07/studio-s...ounting-51886/

Not the best example for profit or not much less sequels or not.

Um, there is absolutely nothing wrong with my example. Even if there was some shade and it was actually in the black. fuck it was in the black by 137m and not in the hole by 137. That would still put the break even over 800m on a 160m budget.

[dacoolist]

Here are some facts.
---50% of revenue generated from movies are done in the first week. There is a reason why movie companies want HUGE opening weekends, there is a reason people can generally safely predict a movie a flop or a hit.

^^^this is not however true in 100% case. there are most certainly outliers. Billion dollar movies don't follow this, and they are exceptionally rare. Free press in word of mouth and internet and such, also can sometimes make a movie continue to make good money long after release, and can ALSO have the inverse effect.

---a movie budget usually a drop in the bucket of what it needs to break even. Because these things don't include, prints, advertising, taxes, trade association, freight, handling, insurance, union fee's etc etc etc. So warcraft with 160 million budget needing 500m to break even is not unordinary this is 100% normal on most films.

Can easily give an example on the above^. Harry Potter order of pheonix, budget 150 million. Revenue made 940m. You saying thing "THAT'S HUGE!" Well because of the added costs above, which vary from movie to movie, it lost 137m actually. OH... and still made 3 more movies.

omfg, I didn't know it LOST money on the movie.. I freaken liked that movie big time when it released, still great to this day.. It made a SHIT TON of money.. I had no idea it lost money ((((( Well I guess only time will tell on warcraft, sucks that I thought they already made almost double their money

[Spotnick]

They didn't lose money.. they already covered the production costs (thank you China), now the rest is paying the marketing costs, and the movie will still do some money in theatres and there will be DVDs of course and pay per view and getting money from cable channels.

Now the question is, is that enough to justify a sequel.. I'm not sure.

But they won't lose money out of this and will make some.

So it didn't flop, but the US box office is disappointing for sure.

[Dracodraco]

Yes i get now that you are responding to everyone. But you quoted me. So its normal to think you where talking to me.
I did not disregard the info. But like i said before to you, i just do not read 1 site's info but i check other sources. So unlike you i do not read 1 site info but multiple sources. So not disregarding or ignoring it....just reading more then 1 pamphlet on a subject, its called informing yourself .

MMO champion is the main website for warcraft - when they report a number, I trust they've already done the research, which means I don't have to when the topic doesn't interest me *that* much.
Likewise, I responded to multiple people if you check my post - not just you. This should be an easy indication that I'm not just talking to you.

Your point that we do not know if its a success or failure is what i am trying to say to you 2 post already. Again what you previously typed towards me i read it like you think it will fail. All i said was that this are the numbers after 1 week.

And yet in my first post I go out of my way to state that I've not seen the movie and have no opinions regarding it, good or bad. I don't really care if it flops or not, because I'm not really that interested in the movie. You assume stuff when I write something entirely different :/

Twisting my words are you. Yes its been out in 6 country's for more weeks then other country's. The rest have only had 1 week to watch it so far. A general launch of something can be called a main showing. And the rest called a pre showing/pre launch/early launch.

I mean no offense to you, but "twisting my words are you" is not a proper sentence - it's a garbled grammatical mess, which doesn't help your point at all; Of course I'll have to assume and interpret some of the things you say when some of them do not make complete sense to me.

It's been out for more than two weeks in *24* countries according to http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0803096/releaseinfo - not six. Where do you get six from? Likewise, the France release is labelled "premiere", just as it is; Prelaunch/early launch/pre showing isn't an actual thing outside of the US. We just have premieres in most other countries, to the best of my knowledge.

And yes it will drop with some of the movies. But removing from cinema's....if checked...could not find info about allot country's removing it. Checked several international ones. But i believe you that the ones its done bad in and had the early release would do that. But again thats like 5/6 country's of the 193? coutry's in the world........... Yeah local cinema's usually remove most movies after a short showing. Only big hits get long showings.

Aaaand this is exactly what I mean. I can't make any sense of the first half of this. Literally the only thing of this that makes sense to me is you saying that local cinemas will remove movies after a short showing. Everything prior to that? I've got no fucking clue. Are you trying to say that the countries the movie did badly in has it removed quickly? And that you can't find when it'll be removed in china? Because that's what I make of it.

Lastly, the release date is only known for 64 out of your 193 countries - so realistically, a little under half of the countries we know it'll be shown in, has had it available for a few weeks. 193 Is an arbitrary number that doesn't make sense here, because fucking obviously it's not gonna be shown in countries such as north korea, so including every last country on the planet is silly.

[quras]

Um, there is absolutely nothing wrong with my example. Even if there was some shade and it was actually in the black. fuck it was in the black by 137m and not in the hole by 137. That would still put the break even over 800m on a 160m budget.

and the reason why it's a bad example is because you don't know the numbers because of that very shady accounting. It could have well have been in the black by 400M making the break even point around 550M or so which would be acceptable. In that example and how the studio worked it, it's hard to tell exactly what the real break even point is because of how they worked the numbers.

omfg, I didn't know it LOST money on the movie.. I freaken liked that movie big time when it released, still great to this day.. It made a SHIT TON of money.. I had no idea it lost money ((((( Well I guess only time will tell on warcraft, sucks that I thought they already made almost double their money

The truth is it probably didn't given how that movie was done and the shady accounting.

http://deadline.com/2010/07/studio-s...ounting-51886/

[TheTaurenOrc]

Can easily give an example on the above^. Harry Potter order of pheonix, budget 150 million. Revenue made 940m. You saying thing "THAT'S HUGE!" Well because of the added costs above, which vary from movie to movie, it lost 137m actually. OH... and still made 3 more movies.

omfg, I didn't know it LOST money on the movie.. I freaken liked that movie big time when it released, still great to this day.. It made a SHIT TON of money.. I had no idea it lost money ((((( Well I guess only time will tell on warcraft, sucks that I thought they already made almost double their money

They actually claim they lost more $167m total in fact, but also around the same time this was leaked there was also a lot to news articles claiming the shaddy-ness of it all.

How the studio was claiming expenses and interest from subsidiary companies, and the main reason why? To avoid paying proceeds to contracts that were negotiated on a % of the Net instead of the Gross.

I'd take that example with a pinch of salt.

[beanman12345]

and the reason why it's a bad example is because you don't know the numbers because of that very shady accounting. It could have well have been in the black by 400M making the break even point around 550M or so which would be acceptable. In that example and how the studio worked it, it's hard to tell exactly what the real break even point is because of how they worked the numbers.



The truth is it probably didn't given how that movie was done and the shady accounting.

http://deadline.com/2010/07/studio-s...ounting-51886/

So, going by your own made up numbers if they Shaded it so much break even was 550m, on a 160 budget, AND MY Point and reason to use it as an example on a movie that 160 million budget with 550m break even is completely normal. Bless your heart dude, I just don't have the patience so i'm moving on.

[Hightotemz]

Warcraft still needs to open in 14 more international markets, I believe it's happening this weekend. The movie will easily break into the top 200 grossing movies of all time(Excluding inflation) by the time it's off the circuit. So expect a sequel at this point in time. I for one will be thanking the Chinese for this.

[Kantoro]

Your use of the word flop is incorrect, please go back and learn your words again.

[OrcsRLame]

I really liked the movie, but I'm such a Warcraft nerd that was a foregone conclusion. Perhaps more important, is I went to see the movie with my dad, and he liked it. This was his first experience with Warcraft anything ever. After the movie I questioned him about the plot, if he could follow what was going on and if it made sense. He said that he got the sense in the first 10 minutes or so that there was a lot of history and backstory that he didn't know, but once he figured out what was going on it was very easy to follow. He also said that he was expecting Medivh's gift to Garona to come into play at the end, but since it didn't it must be setup for a sequel. He also guessed correctly that Gul'dan is not the highest block on the totem pole, but is in fact a servant of something much worse.

And for reference, I have told my dad basically nothing about Warcraft. He knows there's a game called World of Warcraft that I enjoy, and I told him to expect explosions and really big swords. Not sure if my dad's just a genius or if critics are retarded for saying the movie was hard to follow... Maybe a bit of both.

[beanman12345]

They actually claim they lost more $167m total in fact, but also around the same time this was leaked there was also a lot to news articles claiming the shaddy-ness of it all.

How the studio was claiming expenses and interest from subsidiary companies, and the main reason why? To avoid paying proceeds to contracts that were negotiated on a % of the Net instead of the Gross.

I'd take that example with a pinch of salt.

Yes, Alice 2. 170 million budget. 540 break even point. Should we take that as a pinch of salt? How about provide examples instead.

[TheTaurenOrc]

Warcraft still needs to open in 14 more international markets, I believe it's happening this weekend. The movie will easily break into the top 200 grossing movies of all time(Excluding inflation) by the time it's off the circuit. So expect a sequel at this point in time. I for one will be thanking the Chinese for this.

That sounds cute... Top 200 grossing movies of all time!!!!!!1!!

If anyones wondering thats >$440M. It also on track to be the lowest % domestic grossing movie on that list by a long, long way.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, Alice 2. 170 million budget. 540 break even point. Should we take that as a pinch of salt? How about provide examples instead.

Not arguing that taking the studios cost then doubling it is a very good indicator for a break even point. I was just pointing out that order of the phoenix that had a budget of $150M, grossed $940M and 'apparently' still lost $160M was shit example. Sorry dude that you picked a crap example, I was just pointing that out.

[baskev]

MMO champion is the main website for warcraft - when they report a number, I trust they've already done the research, which means I don't have to when the topic doesn't interest me *that* much.
Likewise, I responded to multiple people if you check my post - not just you. This should be an easy indication that I'm not just talking to you.

And yet in my first post I go out of my way to state that I've not seen the movie and have no opinions regarding it, good or bad. I don't really care if it flops or not, because I'm not really that interested in the movie. You assume stuff when I write something entirely different :/

I mean no offense to you, but "twisting my words are you" is not a proper sentence - it's a garbled grammatical mess, which doesn't help your point at all; Of course I'll have to assume and interpret some of the things you say when some of them do not make complete sense to me.

It's been out for more than two weeks in *24* countries according to http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0803096/releaseinfo - not six. Where do you get six from? Likewise, the France release is labelled "premiere", just as it is; Prelaunch/early launch/pre showing isn't an actual thing outside of the US. We just have premieres in most other countries, to the best of my knowledge.


Aaaand this is exactly what I mean. I can't make any sense of the first half of this. Literally the only thing of this that makes sense to me is you saying that local cinemas will remove movies after a short showing. Everything prior to that? I've got no fucking clue. Are you trying to say that the countries the movie did badly in has it removed quickly? And that you can't find when it'll be removed in china? Because that's what I make of it.

Lastly, the release date is only known for 64 out of your 193 countries - so realistically, a little under half of the countries we know it'll be shown in, has had it available for a few weeks. 193 Is an arbitrary number that doesn't make sense here, because fucking obviously it's not gonna be shown in countries such as north korea, so including every last country on the planet is silly.

1. Yes mmo champion is the Main world of warcraft site ( and most warcraft) does not mean they have/know everything. And you said to me that i did not read the info on the main page...again i researched more the 1 site's info.
And again I responded to your quote of ME. If you talk about my bad hair color, then say i hate people with bad hair color. Then its not weir people think that you are talking about them.

2. Again you are assuming stuff yourself. I never said that you where wrong to dislike anything or say anything!!! you are twisting my words again...like a epic troll.

3. Yes i forgot the >> , <<. I am not english/american. Sue me for not knowing a other language for 100%. And its bad....but not that bad.

4. okay more country's. Only info i found was 6. still 26 is a bigger number. But still not all the major markets. But i will admit that is longer out in more markets then i taught. As for the pre launch etc....that term is used allot in games and movies. ( more in games). Early showings and what not. And again my point is that you can say the movie is out for x weeks. But not for allot of bigger/as big country's in the world.

5. It spelled And....not Aaaand ( if we want to be a grammar troll). Yes i am saying they do that. Have seen in several times in smaller cinema's. And the second thing i do mean i can not see/find info about when in witch country its going to be removed.

6. 193 is the current amount of recognized country's in the world. And yes there are many country's that it will not show. But that was not the point i was making.


And all of your "rants" towards me are they necessary? All i said , was in response to what you said to me, when quoting me. And all i said was that 280 mil in the first week/ 2 weeks is not that bad. And we need 2 wait to judge if its a flop.

Kinda sad how you are trolling.