Page 14 of 14 FirstFirst ...
4
12
13
14
  1. #261
    Quote Originally Posted by Tackhisis View Post
    Warcraft was 8-something, now it is 7.4.
    Ghostbusters were 4.1, not it is 5.3.

    Warcraft is just a B movie with expensive (but not A+) CGI and some very expensive CGI characters.
    Any serious A movie is better than it by default, because in A movie you have some standards of script and acting.
    That CGI was beyond A+, never seen anything look that realistic in a movie before. It really made me believe those orcs were live action.

    Ghostbusters doesn't have standards for the script, that why proton packs are described as not killing ghosts then they use them to kill ghosts.

  2. #262
    Quote Originally Posted by Jotaux View Post
    That CGI was beyond A+, never seen anything look that realistic in a movie before.
    There was less than 10 HD models with proper animation, and those are orc protagonists. The rest of orcs was badly animated and made of copypasted bits. Everything else was either barely passable (Gul'dan, gryphon, magic FX) or outright laughable (Medivh transformation, the golem, direwolves, etc.)

  3. #263
    this movie was released at the worst time possible, Most people this was aimed at were suffering from "movie Fatigue" as a TON of blockbuster movies had come out right before it. i know i for one did not go mainly because i had already taken my family to see at least 4-5 other major movies before this one came out and it gets expensive.

    Had this been a December release id bet it had done Much better

  4. #264
    Quote Originally Posted by Tackhisis View Post
    There was less than 10 HD models with proper animation, and those are orc protagonists. The rest of orcs was badly animated and made of copypasted bits. Everything else was either barely passable (Gul'dan, gryphon, magic FX) or outright laughable (Medivh transformation, the golem, direwolves, etc.)
    Maybe it was hard to tell with your camrip?

  5. #265
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Tackhisis View Post
    There was less than 10 HD models with proper animation, and those are orc protagonists. The rest of orcs was badly animated and made of copypasted bits. Everything else was either barely passable (Gul'dan, gryphon, magic FX) or outright laughable (Medivh transformation, the golem, direwolves, etc.)
    You clearly know nothing about CGI... or movies

    The special effects in Warcraft were pretty much the highest standard of any movie -- pioneering techniques used by ILM that will now be in all their future projects

    Literally the best team in the world at special effects debuted their new toolkits in that movie

    SJWs show their ignorance at every turn, it's amazing

    - - - Updated - - -

    FYI just tracked this down for the blind people who didn't realise the FX in warcraft were amazing



    https://youtu.be/0ROUcUrhXYo

  6. #266
    Quote Originally Posted by Elian View Post
    I think their biggest mistake was Travis Fimmel and Paula Patton.
    Their biggest mistake was a bland script.

    I eagerly watch Preacher every week. Dominic Cooper and Ruth Negga are fucking great to watch in it.

    They were both fucking boring in Warcraft.

  7. #267
    Quote Originally Posted by Xarim View Post
    The special effects in Warcraft were pretty much the highest standard of any movie
    How does the new hair renderer defines the rest of CGI?

  8. #268
    Not sure if it has been posted yet, but Duncan has said that he's not sure if he'll get a chance to do a sequel. Its apparently not up to him:

    http://www.gamespot.com/articles/is-.../1100-6442033/

  9. #269
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Tackhisis View Post
    Warcraft rating is sinking.
    Ghostbusters rating is raising.

    You cannot cheat the system.
    Ghostbusters will go down, it wasn't that great of a movie.

  10. #270
    Deleted
    I found the movie rather boring, cheesy and forgettable, i also didn't consider majority of the CGI good (orc throwing horse, worgs, the golem, medevh, and other stuff) i doubt a sequel will occur

  11. #271
    Herald of the Titans Berengil's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Tn, near Memphis
    Posts
    2,967
    Quote Originally Posted by Xarim View Post
    You clearly know nothing about CGI... or movies

    The special effects in Warcraft were pretty much the highest standard of any movie -- pioneering techniques used by ILM that will now be in all their future projects

    Literally the best team in the world at special effects debuted their new toolkits in that movie

    SJWs show their ignorance at every turn, it's amazing

    - - - Updated - - -

    FYI just tracked this down for the blind people who didn't realise the FX in warcraft were amazing



    https://youtu.be/0ROUcUrhXYo
    Well, Xarim, I'm no SJW by any measure. And I though the movie looked bad. In addition to being boring.

    And having scattershot pacing.

    And having a piece of unexpressive wood...I mean Travis Fimmel in a central role.

    You're European, right? I thought you guys prided yourselves on having sophisticated tastes. This thing was almost as shtty ( but not quite) as the D&D movie.

    Best Fantasy Movie? LotR: RotK

    runners up? the original Conan the Barbarian, and Beastmaster

    But, putting aside our obviously differing opinions: Why do you think the movie did so much better outside of North America than within it?

  12. #272
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Berengil View Post
    Well, Xarim, I'm no SJW by any measure. And I though the movie looked bad. In addition to being boring.

    And having scattershot pacing.

    And having a piece of unexpressive wood...I mean Travis Fimmel in a central role.

    You're European, right? I thought you guys prided yourselves on having sophisticated tastes. This thing was almost as shtty ( but not quite) as the D&D movie.

    Best Fantasy Movie? LotR: RotK

    runners up? the original Conan the Barbarian, and Beastmaster

    But, putting aside our obviously differing opinions: Why do you think the movie did so much better outside of North America than within it?
    Honestly, I think the critics hit it without thinking, the same way they are currently praising ghostbusters without thinking: it's hive-mind mentality and why critics so often get things wrong

    I'm not saying it's an instant classic, but like currently well-regarded movies that bombed at the time I think it will grow in popularity post-release because it is energetic and oddly confident

    It reminds me a lot of Predator (the Schwarzenegger movie) which was panned by critics and kind of flopped when it came out, but that people kept watching on video until everyone realised: yeah this is kind of a fun movie

  13. #273
    Quote Originally Posted by Xarim View Post
    Honestly, I think the critics hit it without thinking,
    Honestly, not much thinking was necessary.
    "There is a pervasive myth that making content hard will induce players to rise to the occasion. We find the opposite. " -- Ghostcrawler
    "The bit about hardcore players not always caring about the long term interests of the game is spot on." -- Ghostcrawler
    "Do you want a game with no casuals so about 500 players?"

  14. #274
    Quote Originally Posted by Hubcap View Post
    I thought it made big money in China?
    Big money in China =/= success
    I am not Voting Trump because I support him, its about keeping a Career Criminal out of office that mishandles classified information.
    Beta males can cry on how I will not vote for their brood mother.
    Quote Originally Posted by Shinra1 View Post
    Have you even considered the perspective of the 'violent' muslims?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •