I KNEW the movie would flop

[Deleted]

Interesting that they had to fraud in China to get the numbers high. Probably not the first time that happened with WoW.

[Sierra85]

The movie still wasn't that great. I enjoyed watching it, probably on a similar level to the first Avengers.

really? you put it on par with the first avengers? thats a greater complement than warcraft deserves TBH.

avengers 1 had so much more build up with the standalone movies... how can warcraft compare to that.

[OreoLover]

Sure, nobody knows, but that's not necessary, the numbers speak for themselves. Otherwise, any movie is good, even if it only got a couple thousand viewers, because who knows what those others who didn't bother to go and see it would have said about it if they saw it, right? (It doesn't work that way.)

I wouldn't put much weight into "the majority of people who watched the movie, liked it" either. How big is that majority? I saw both positive and negative reviews. If we look at ratings, then there are plenty of bad ones. If you say that we should only look at ratings from viewers, then sure, let's do this, but keep in mind that they are skewed by fanboys - on several sites, first and foremost IMDB, they voted *before* the movie was out "to show support" - it is telling, btw, that that particular rating decreased somewhat after the movie actually went live. /shrug

- - - Updated - - -



See above. It doesn't matter that many people didn't watch the movie. Yes, that's correct, but that's not how you tell whether a movie is bad or good, measuring just the number of those who bothered to view it is enough.

The average ratings (with either 10's or both 9's & 10's removed) actually went up. They went almost straight to 7 (very good given the removal of 9/10).

Measuring viewer numbers is only one of many metrics, when you're as vague as "good or bad."

[tankbug]

Even as a fan, I can't defend this as a high quality movie, I'd say it's mediocre. I enjoyed, but will not recommend it to anyone unfamiliar with warcraft. But it was a good "first try", and I hope they will make more. The movie would have flopped if it was released in north america alone, so I don't know what that means for any future plans, but we'll see. Duncan seems to be positive, depends on what Blizz and the film studios are thinking.

[rda]

The average ratings (with either 10's or both 9's & 10's removed) actually went up. They went almost straight to 7 (very good given the removal of 9/10).

I don't know where you get your ratings with 10s + 9s removed and why they matter, but here's how it is with the published ratings:

Current rating on IMDB: 7.6.

Here is a thread from a month ago on this very site that mentions it as being 8.8:

http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...ng-8-8-on-Imdb

And it was well into 9.x before then.

[Yourfired]

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?

What wait flop? ;P realy you talk like a premature ejaculation realy. Wel if you havent seen it yet you cant Judge

[In Ogres We Trust]

I'm just going to leave this here:

LotR Fellowship of the ring.... | Budget 109m |Domestic 315m | Worldwide 887m
LotR Two Towers................ | Budget 94m |Domestic 342m | Worldwide 934m
LotR Return of the King........ |Budget 94m |Domestic 377m | Worldwide 1141m

Hobbit Unexpected Journey... | Budget250m |Domestic 303m | Worldwide 1017m
Hobbit Desolation of Smaug... | Budget250m |Domestic 258m | Worldwide 960m
Hobbit battle of 5 armies........| Budget250m |Domestic 255m | Worldwide 955m

Avatar................................| Budget 425m |Domestic 760m | Worldwide 2788m


Civil war..............................| Budget 250m |Domestic 401m | Worldwide 1144m



Warcraft............................. | Budget 160m |Domestic 38m | Worldwide 372m



Sorry boys but Warcraft failed to expectation. Do these numbers reflect "`Avatar' and `Lord of the Rings' at the same time."?

Are you deliberately being obtuse, or does it come natural? Why are you even comparing Warcraft to LotR or the Hobbit, or for that matter, any of the other films that you mentioned?

- - - Updated - - -

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.

No, a flop is something that barely generates $10,000,000 in revenue; a movie that generates over $400,000,000 in revenue isn't a flop. Now, the onus is on the production, distribution, and marketing streams to give a sequel further appeal so that it generates significant interest outside of the traditional market for gaming movies.

[rda]

Are you deliberately being obtuse, or does it come natural? Why are you even comparing Warcraft to LotR or the Hobbit, or for that matter, any of the other films that you mentioned?

- - - Updated - - -

No, a flop is something that barely generates $10,000,000 in revenue; a movie that generates over $400,000,000 in revenue isn't a flop. Now, the onus is on the production, distribution, and marketing streams to give a sequel further appeal so that it generates significant interest outside of the traditional market for gaming movies.

He is comparing to other movies.

You have a hilarious definition of "didn't flop". (What about how much money did the movie cost to produce / market? That doesn't matter, huh?)

[OreoLover]

I don't know where you get your ratings with 10s + 9s removed and why they matter, but here's how it is with the published ratings:

Current rating on IMDB: 7.6.

Here is a thread from a month ago on this very site that mentions it as being 8.8:

http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...ng-8-8-on-Imdb

And it was well into 9.x before then.

"but keep in mind that they are skewed by fanboys - on several sites, first and foremost IMDB, they voted *before* the movie was out "to show support" - it is telling, btw, that that particular rating decreased somewhat after the movie actually went live. /shrug" -- That's why they matter. Removing 9's and 10's removes most "fanboy skew" and shows a number which has gone up, and then held steady.

I did the math based on IMDB reporting, same source as your info:

(5-29) http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...2#post40584792
(6-12) http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...6#post40840056

As of now (6-21, 15 minutes ago), 10's removed = 7.5 average, 10's+9's removed = 6.6 average.

[rda]

"but keep in mind that they are skewed by fanboys - on several sites, first and foremost IMDB, they voted *before* the movie was out "to show support" - it is telling, btw, that that particular rating decreased somewhat after the movie actually went live. /shrug" -- That's why they matter. Removing 9's and 10's removes most "fanboy skew" and shows a number which has gone up, and then held steady.

I did the math based on IMDB reporting, same source as your info:

(5-29) http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...2#post40584792
(6-12) http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...6#post40840056

As of now (6-21, 15 minutes ago), 10's removed = 7.5 average, 10's+9's removed = 6.6 average.

Sure, fanboys are likely to put 10 or 9, but non-fanboys put 10s and 9s as well and by removing just plain all 10s and 9s you can get a number that is artificially lower than it "really" is and so get fake "growth" of the supposedly "real" rating.

[OreoLover]

you can get a number that is artificially lower than it "really" is and so get fake "growth"

It's not meant to be directly accurate, it's meant to be representative. That's what averages do. I'm not sure you understand?

[In Ogres We Trust]

He is comparing to other movies.

You have a hilarious definition of "didn't flop". (What about how much money did the movie cost to produce / market? That doesn't matter, huh?)

It's not a hilarious definition of the term, flop. It's merely an accurate representation of a film that dominated the genre while grossing $400,000,000 too date. As I said, the interest and potential revenue are there, so the onus is on the production, distribution, and marketing teams to take it over the final hump for the sequel (as well as a StarCraft and Diablo film, etc.). This is merely the first step in Activision-Blizzard's attempt at monetizing their IPs over a different medium. Get over yourself!

P.S. Also, he's comparing the film to one of the most popular stories ever written, i.e. Tolkien's universe, so, yes, in that regard, the comparison is unwarranted (it's the equivalent of comparing the Warcraft film to Star Wars or Star Trek).

[Sierra85]

Now, the onus is on the production, distribution, and marketing streams to give a sequel further appeal

They probably think they did the best with what they had, but TBH the marketing was atrocious and so was the distribution. Go look up the way the movie was released in different countries all at different times. Pathetic in this day and age!

Then on the production side of things, we could argue, but the biggest thing that hurt this film was casting. All the human characters were straight up garbage actors.

[rda]

It's not meant to be directly accurate, it's meant to be representative. That's what averages do. I'm not sure you understand?

I don't see how it is representative. Your entire hypothesis, if you look into it in detail, is that fanboys are voting predominantly 9/10 and so removing 9/10 improves the signal. But since other people are voting 9/10, too, the ratio of fanboys/real votes is important. If that ratio stayed constant, your analysis would have been fine, but it can shrink or grow creating a fake signal. In this case, you get growth. Good. That can be fake growth. That's what I am saying. Don't measure that way, the results aren't useful. (And the kicker is: it doesn't matter whether the ratio that I am talking about grows or shrinks, you can get fake growth both ways.)

[murbaez]

I feel like from just this one movie, everyone has become a expert film analyst/ marketing genius that understands everything that is going on in the film industry and can give valid comps according to date/timed to the second/and revenue accrued. I'll admit that i'm completely clueless, but some of this stuff is pretty hilarious. Like you might as well make some graphs and put them up on a powerpoint at this point.

[rda]

It's not a hilarious definition of the term, flop. It's merely an accurate representation of a film that dominated the genre while grossing $400,000,000 too date. As I said, the interest and potential revenue are there, so the onus is on the production, distribution, and marketing teams to take it over the final hump for the sequel (as well as a StarCraft and Diablo film, etc.). This is merely the first step in Activision-Blizzard's attempt at monetizing their IPs over a different medium. Get over yourself!

P.S. Also, he's comparing the film to one of the most popular stories ever written, i.e. Tolkien's universe, so, yes, in that regard, the comparison is unwarranted (it's the equivalent of comparing the Warcraft film to Star Wars or Star Trek).

I don't get it.

When checking whether or not the movie is "a flop", does it matter whether it paid for itself? If yes, then Warcraft likely didn't pay for itself yet, see the thread. If no, then your definition of "not a flop" is hilarious.

[OreoLover]

Considering this started with Rotten Tomatoes...

Warcraft is the lowest (7th of 7) critic-rated, of the current 7 Top Box Office films.

It is the third highest (3rd of 7) viewer-liked.

Finding Dory (94% Critic, 91% Viewer)
The Conjuring (77%, 87%)
Warcraft (29%, 81%)
Central Intelligence (66%, 76%)
X-Men: Apocalypse (48%, 72%)
Now You See Me 2 (34%, 64%)
TMNT: Out of the Shaddows (36%, 55%)

- - - Updated - - -

I don't see how it is representative. Your entire hypothesis, if you look into it in detail, is that fanboys are voting predominantly 9/10 and so removing 9/10 improves the signal. But since other people are voting 9/10, too, the ratio of fanboys/real votes is important. If that ratio stayed constant, your analysis would have been fine, but it can shrink or grow creating a fake signal. In this case, you get growth. Good. That can be fake growth. That's what I am saying. Don't measure that way, the results aren't useful. (And the kicker is: it doesn't matter whether the ratio that I am talking about grows or shrinks, you can get fake growth both ways.)

The results are useful, because they take from a static range as a representative of that range. That range (1-8; 1-9) grew over the course of the movie release, and has held steady since. I understand what you're saying, but it isn't correct in nullifying the represented information. (And the kicker is: that growth and steadiness occurred with "hater" votes left in and "lover" votes removed)

[Kharli]

Considering this started with Rotten Tomatoes...

Warcraft is the lowest (7th of 7) critic-rated, of the current 7 Top Box Office films.

It is the third highest (3rd of 7) viewer-liked.

Finding Dory (94% Critic, 91% Viewer)
The Conjuring (77%, 87%)
Warcraft (29%, 81%)
Central Intelligence (66%, 76%)
X-Men: Apocalypse (48%, 72%)
Now You See Me 2 (34%, 64%)
TMNT: Out of the Shaddows (36%, 55%)

yeh the problem is, Critics are the worst people to listen to, most of the time

the reasons are very simple.

1.a critict can be told to go review a movie, which they don't want to, because the company they are working for needs a review on that movie and they are the only one available at that date.
, which that person does not like intiatialy from trailers etc, this will affect their review, no matter how much they try not to.
2. Video Game Adoptation movies, have not done well in the past(in the cases of VGA Movies. )
3. some of those movies are also rather well known and from well known makers. Finding Dory being the most glareing.

[Darktbs]

yeh the problem is, Critics are the worst people to listen to, most of the time

the reasons are very simple.

1.a critict can be told to go review a movie, which they don't want to, because the company they are working for needs a review on that movie and they are the only one available at that date.
, which that person does not like intiatialy from trailers etc, this will affect their review, no matter how much they try not to.
2. Video Game Adoptation movies, have not done well in the past(in the cases of VGA Movies. )
3. some of those movies are also rather well known and from well known makers. Finding Dory being the most glareing.

I don't believe critics are a bad thing,but the critics we receive from the movie weren't critics.And before someone say "Just because say the movie its bad you fanboy." What does the subscription numbers of WoW have to do with how good the movie is?

[TheDestinatus]

They probably think they did the best with what they had, but TBH the marketing was atrocious and so was the distribution. Go look up the way the movie was released in different countries all at different times. Pathetic in this day and age!

Then on the production side of things, we could argue, but the biggest thing that hurt this film was casting. All the human characters were straight up garbage actors.

That's harsh, I actually find the guy that played medivh to be an incredibly intense actor when put into the right scenario. I think you'll find the script and flexibility the actors had probably contributed more to them being badly portrayed characters. I like the Frostwolf aspect of the movie, it fits the lore but thats about it as far as I'm concerned. The way Blackhand dies is wrong, Stormwind not being destroyed is wrong, Dalaran flying is wrong, Orgrim Doomhammer being "a goodish guy" is wrong but that was ruined prior to the movies release. Sexual chemistry wrong, reason for leaving Draenor is wrong, Humans using Orcish traditions to settle disputes is wrong. The entire movie is just a cluster fuck of stupid, rushed clap trap. They fucked it, they got what they deserve and if they do decide to do a sequel I expect it will probably be even worse. More characters to write badly and more screen time for Travis to stone face and orc love #orcsarenttheproblem

I shudder to imagine how they would portray Turalyon because hes my favorite character and they have to write about him looking up to/respecting/admiring Lothar, and in the context of the first movie that would be impossible to do unless he was suffering from massive head trauma or an IQ of 27.

Have to lay some of the blame on Duncan as well, I don't get why people think Moon is a good movie, maybe its something to do with the context but the actual movie itself just isn't that good and the direction for this movie wasn't any better.