I KNEW the movie would flop

[CostinR]

No a flop would be it loosing money, if it breaks even, that is not a flop.

It is struggling to break even. It needs 450 million and now has close to 380.

[Shudder]

No a flop would be it loosing money, if it breaks even, that is not a flop.



The numbers i pulled were from wikipedia which were referenced from Box Office Mojo....sooo thats is a source dumbass.

The numbers you pulled? You didn't reply to me at all dude.

[Ilfayt]

A common complaint from non-fan critics that I find highly hypocritical, is that there are "Too many names" to keep track of.

What? Lets count them up: Khadgar, Medivh, Llane, Lothar, Gul'dan, Orgrim, Durotan, Blackhand, Garona, Draka. That's 10 total major named characters.

Is that a lot now? Because Star Wars The Force Awakens had way more: Poe, Finn, Rey, BB-8, Kylo Ren, Snoke, Dux, Phasma, Kaz Manada, Han, Leia, Chewie. That's 12 named major characters, and that's not even counting the three dozen minor ones that show up for a scene or two.

Another critically acclaimed movie, The Matrix had just as many: Neo, Morpheus, Trinity, Smith, Dozer, Tank, Switch, Apoc, Mouse, Oracle. That's 10.

Another highly acclaimed movie, Lord of the Rings, for the sake of discussion lets just talk about the first one, Fellowship of the Ring. There's Frodo, Sam, Pippin, Merry, Gimli, Legolas, Gandalf, Aragorn, Boromir, Elrond, Galadriel, Sauron, Saruman, and Gollum. That's FOURTEEN named major characters to keep track of. And not one person bitching about there being too many names.

What's the common denominator here? In neither of these movies did I ever hear anyone saying "man, that's a lot of names to remember, I keep forgetting who's who".

But then 8 out of 10 reviews from the Warcraft movie whine about there being too many names.

Hypocrite much?

I just wanted to respond to you because I actually DID have a hard time keeping track of characters in Lord of the Rings, yet not in the Warcraft movie. It's strange, but I think a big reason why is because in certain parts of the trilogy, you would be introduced to new characters that would immediately be 'froze' on their importance until much later. Example, Merry and Pippin who practically do nothing for the entire first movie, but play a major part in the following ones. Or the Eowyn, who is similarly 'weak' in her presence until the 3rd film. It felt that I really needed to go back and watch the previous film to remember who these characters were supposed to be as I watched them.

I think the Warcraft movie is much better about this because the characters have segregated stories. Other than Durotan, most of them are segregated to interactions with one of the two sides for over half the movie. You're following two 'groups' leading up to a conclusion where they clash. Very early on Garona leaves the orcs and spends most of the film with humans. Durotan isn't intermingling with the humans for more than one scene(the 'negotiations before the ambush'). Other than that they're kept to themselves until the ending really.

Really, it boils down to this. If you pulled out a chart and plotted 'character relations' on it, the Warcraft movie would be a very neat set of 2 circles with Garona in the middle.

[Ragedaug]

Saying it's the best video game movie is quite laughable. Desperately trying to cling to anything positive. Video game movies are horrible, being the best of the worst type of movie isn't an accomplishment. It's like a turd that has a roasted honey smell to it. It's still just a turd.

Here's the difference between you and me.

I watched the movie and decided for myself that I like it and that it was a good movie.

You listen to critics and have a live feed to Box Office Mojo to decide if a movie is good.

So you and I will likely never agree. We judge movies by different criteria. Do you judge a movie on the basis of you liking it, or do you judge a movie based on what everyone else thinks?

[phyx]

Except critical and financial. But sure, if we ignore those it is a success by every "reasonable" metric.

I bet you are not too happy now.

[Shudder]

Here's the difference between you and me.

I watched the movie and decided for myself that I like it and that it was a good movie.

You listen to critics and have a live feed to Box Office Mojo to decide if a movie is good.

So you and I will likely never agree. We judge movies by different criteria. Do you judge a movie on the basis of you liking it, or do you judge a movie based on what everyone else thinks?

I judged it on cringey dubstep trailers and decided not to waste my time. I've passed on movies for less. I mean it's great that you enjoyed it, and I'm glad it was made so you and others who did go see it were entertained. But it flopped, it didn't make money, it might break even in dvd land. The odds of a sequel at this point are low unless Zowie decides to make a movie for China and it goes straight to dvd for the US.

[Aquinan]

The numbers you pulled? You didn't reply to me at all dude.

? You quoted me and called my numbers BS? I posted the wiki numbers, that had a source. Not sure what else you want.

"As of June 19, 2016, Warcraft has grossed $37.7 million in North America and $339.9 million in other territories for a worldwide total of $377.6 million, against a budget of $160 million.[3] According to The Hollywood Reporter"

[Shudder]

? You quoted me and called my numbers BS? I posted the wiki numbers, that had a source. Not sure what else you want.

Look at our quote chain you never gave me numbers that's why I said "made up numbers".

[Ragedaug]

I judged it on cringey dubstep trailers and decided not to waste my time. I've passed on movies for less. I mean it's great that you enjoyed it, and I'm glad it was made so you and others who did go see it were entertained. But it flopped, it didn't make money, it might break even in dvd land. The odds of a sequel at this point are low unless Zowie decides to make a movie for China and it goes straight to dvd for the US.

There's the bait...going by so slowly...would be so easy to reach out...should I bite...

- - - Updated - - -

Look at our quote chain you never gave me numbers that's why I said "made up numbers".

Yeah, google is hard. I have to share sources with my mom too. She has trouble looking stuff up.

[Shudder]

There's the bait...going by so slowly...would be so easy to reach out...should I bite...

- - - Updated - - -



Yeah, google is hard. I have to share sources with my mom too. She has trouble looking stuff up.

Are you saying I should go see every movie to see if it was worth watching? I mean I have a job, I have family and friends and hobbies. I need sleep to live that takes up a lot of my time. I just don't have the time to watch the thousands of movies that come out every year. I barely have time to even watch all the trailers for every movie. So yeah, I do judge movies based on the trailers and decide what looks good to me and what doesn't. I go see the ones that look appealing like everyone else on the planet does.

He didn't quote me a source he posted it as a reply to the thread earlier which I did not read. I'm not reading the entire thread I'm only coming here when I get the notification that someone replied to me. Then I read a couple responses and leave. His number is 450, mine is sourced at 500. It's the same crap, it's above what the movie is at now. He's trying to tell me my source is wrong but his is right, we are both quoting websites so he's being ridiculous. If you actually check neither site has proof they're going by "industry sources".

[Ragedaug]

Are you saying I should go see every movie to see if it was worth watching? I mean I have a job, I have family and friends and hobbies. I need sleep to live that takes up a lot of my time. I just don't have the time to watch the thousands of movies that come out every year. I barely have time to even watch all the trailers for every movie. So yeah, I do judge movies based on the trailers and decide what looks good to me and what doesn't. I go see the ones that look appealing like everyone else on the planet does.

This is going to be kinda crazy, so bear with me. Another thing you could do it base it off what other similar minded folks are saying. I dunno, maybe like folks you hang out and chat with on internet forums. If you see an overwhelmingly positive response, that may mean it's worth the risk. To be honest, that's what I did. From what I saw from the trailers, I was going to wait until it was streaming before I watched it. Then when the "normal person" reviews started rolling in, very few people didn't enjoy the movie, so I figured I would check it out. I've been a Warcraft fan for 22 years now, starting with the story this movie is based off, so I was really happy I did.

He didn't quote me a source he posted it as a reply to the thread earlier which I did not read. I'm not reading the entire thread I'm only coming here when I get the notification that someone replied to me. Then I read a couple responses and leave. His number is 450, mine is sourced at 500. It's the same crap, it's above what the movie is at now. He's trying to tell me my source is wrong but his is right, we are both quoting websites so he's being ridiculous. If you actually check neither site has proof they're going by "industry sources".

The base line rule-of-thumb, or oversimplification from the movie industry is that a movie has to earn twice what it cost to break even. There's quite a few sources on the internet where you will see that.

Then the 450M specific to Warcraft estimate is also sourced on several internet sites, so it's hard not to find those two numbers when stumbling around for Warcraft reviews. That said, the 450M is much closer to the industry rule of thumb, so it seems more likely then 500M, but I'm still confounded why anyone who has no interest in watching the movie or it's sequels would care. I would like to watch the sequels and I still don't care how much money it makes. I don't care how it stacks up against the movies of all time, I don't care how it stacks up to movies this year, and I don't care that it's the top grossing video game adaption of all time. The thing I do care about - I spent $10 to watch it and was glad I did.

[Shudder]

This is going to be kinda crazy, so bear with me. Another thing you could do it base it off what other similar minded folks are saying. I dunno, maybe like folks you hang out and chat with on internet forums. If you see an overwhelmingly positive response, that may mean it's worth the risk. To be honest, that's what I did. From what I saw from the trailers, I was going to wait until it was streaming before I watched it. Then when the "normal person" reviews started rolling in, very few people didn't enjoy the movie, so I figured I would check it out. I've been a Warcraft fan for 22 years now, starting with the story this movie is based off, so I was really happy I did.


The base line rule-of-thumb, or oversimplification from the movie industry is that a movie has to earn twice what it cost to break even. There's quite a few sources on the internet where you will see that.

Then the 450M specific to Warcraft estimate is also sourced on several internet sites, so it's hard not to find those two numbers when stumbling around for Warcraft reviews. That said, the 450M is much closer to the industry rule of thumb, so it seems more likely then 500M, but I'm still confounded why anyone who has no interest in watching the movie or it's sequels would care. I would like to watch the sequels and I still don't care how much money it makes. I don't care how it stacks up against the movies of all time, I don't care how it stacks up to movies this year, and I don't care that it's the top grossing video game adaption of all time. The thing I do care about - I spent $10 to watch it and was glad I did.

Because arguing on mmochamp forums is more fun to me than seeing the movie. And the 500m number was posted on this very site by chaud lol.

[Ragedaug]

Because arguing on mmochamp forums is more fun to me than seeing the movie. And the 500m number was posted on this very site by chaud lol.

As much as I like and respect Chaud, him posting what someone else is speculating doesn't make it any more correct. It's still speculation.

[Osmeric]

I think it's ironically appropriate that the movie's box office is dependent on the China take.

After all, the active accounts number from Blizzard became dependent on those low-ARPU accounts in China to stay inflated for so long.

The China box office could be similarly misleading, if the studio gets a lesser share there.

[Aquinan]

He's trying to tell me my source is wrong but his is right, we are both quoting websites so he's being ridiculous. If you actually check neither site has proof they're going by "industry sources".

Think we had a miscommunication, I don't think I was arguing w/ you, nor was I saying your source was wrong. Think i might have quoted the wrong post talking to someone else sorry.

[Cooper]

As much as I like and respect Chaud, him posting what someone else is speculating doesn't make it any more correct. It's still speculation.

It's not speculation when the people who came up with the $500 million number (Deadline) probably have actual industry sources that gave them the number.

[Relapses]

As much as I like and respect Chaud, him posting what someone else is speculating doesn't make it any more correct. It's still speculation.

"This information doesn't correlate to my predisposition on this subject, therefore it's false."

...I think you might be late to the Republican national conference.

[Shudder]

Think we had a miscommunication, I don't think I was arguing w/ you, nor was I saying your source was wrong. Think i might have quoted the wrong post talking to someone else sorry.

Yeah and I didn't see your post on numbers so that was another miscommunication so we're all good.

[Somewutdamaged]

Where are these numbers coming from? According to IMDB, the budget for the movie was 160m... They're far passed that now

[Cyfir]

Where are these numbers coming from? According to IMDB, the budget for the movie was 160m... They're far passed that now

160m was production. Promotions and Advertising was another ~100m. The numbers you're seeing for sales are gross, meaning total ticket sales. So, take the theater's cut out of there, factor in P&A, and you're looking at ~500m gross as the break even.