That guy just likes to be *edgy*, look at his other reviews: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/critic/alonso-duralde/
Even the titles of the reviews are clickbaits. :P
going to see it tomorrow with a couple of friends. and some never touched to warcraft. Will see the reaction, some of them are "difficult public"
A Statue has never been set up to honor a critic... A- WTF cares what some random 'critic' proclaims and B- WTF cares what others think. If you actually use RT as a bible of sort to determine if a movie is good or not, then you'll miss out on quite a lot.
the fanboyism is so strong here.. you guys would even defend this movie if it was the absolute worst movie in history. Not every bad critic is unjustified and there is usually some truth to what a good portion of reviews conclude.
Pretty much this. I'll decide whether I like the movie or not instead of letting some critic decide that for me. Same with games (I have a friend who is a big TotalBiscuit fan and won't touch anything if TB says it sucks...I can't imagine ever making a decision about buying a game based on what one dude said, no matter how famous he is).
Also...that looks like a pretty small handful of reviews. I think I'll give it some more time, especially seeing as how the movie isn't even out in the US (or several other places) yet.
Just look at some of those publications these so called critics work for: Variety, TheWrap, Daily Telegraph (UK) ...
Film reviews are nothing but overblown opinions anyway, what matters is whether you, the viewer, like it or not. Screw what everyone else thinks!
The problem I have with critical reviews is that they're often grading a movie on cinematic traits which may not always be relevant to the movie they're reviewing. Yes, a blockbuster film can be amazing but sometimes people want to check their brains at the door and enjoy a movie for exactly what it is. Michael Bay wouldn't have a career if this weren't the case.
That isn't to say I'm defending the movie -- I'm sure it's flawed -- but that perhaps the movie wasn't designed to be pleasing for critics and is more along the lines of a mindless hack-and-slash Orcs vs. Humans fantasy quasi-epic which may please audiences but alienate critics.
No review was as hilarious to read as The Guardian. Which is exactly why I don't look at 40% and think, "Oh no! This movie will suck!"
Retired Shaman Signature by Winter Blossom
Why would a summary of he plot have to be written like a novel? It's a leak 2 months before the movie released.
Yes, those two were scenes cut. But the rest is pretty accurate. Down to really small details (like the random human dude sucked dry by Gul'dan while he talks to Orgrim) <- not a spoiler. Orcs talk in this move! :P
It's only 5 reviews.
40% is too high. Trust me, it'll go down.
I saw the movie last night (premiere in austria) and while the movie is no Lord of the Rings or Game of Thrones, it is also not a Dungeons&Dragons or Max Payne. The movie is really, really well done and _by far_ the best video game movie out there. It definitely has its flaws but that is true for a lot for "normal" movies out there. Believe me, the movie is a solid 8/10 and that is waaaaaay more than I was expecting.
Well this stuff happens all the time. Early Versions have scenes, that wont ever show up in the end-product. The second to last scene would have been nice tbh. I felt like Varian was left out in this movie to set him up for later. I reckon we will see those scenes in the Deleted Scenes part of the Blue-Ray/DVD.
Oh, another Austrian Brother. Attendence was great yesterday.
I agree on the 8/10 part (I rated it 7/10 because I am a petty Lorenerd). Not sure about the Video Game Movie thing but I can't argue it is one of the better ones, yes.
I find it amusing that imdb is even listed. Of course a bunch of fanboys went and upvoted the film before they saw it.
That is actually pretty high for Rotten Tomatoes.
i9 9900K | Aorus Z390 Master | 32GB DDR4 | 2080 Ti | LG-UK650W