Two questions there, really?
- Does it suck?
- Do I have to have played World of Warcraft to actually enjoy the flick?
Tomorrow is, like, the last day I’ll have for some time to be able to just go over to the movie theater at 11 AM and catch a flick. It’s this or X-Men: Apocalypse, and I don’t really care too much about the latest X-Men flick. Maybe if it was all part of the MCU, but it’s not and I don’t feel like keeping two sets of background information in my head.
Or maybe I could just sit on the reclining chair on the front lawn and take a nap. That has a certain appeal to it.
I saw it. I enjoyed it. The harsh reviews are odd. I can understand not liking the film, but the bad reviews are hostile to a degree that it really doesn’t warrant. I still liked it though. Warcraft (the RTS) or WoW knowledge is helpful, but not necessary. It’s not necessary to know that the big Tower is where you raided in BC to understand “A wizard lives there.”
.
I liked Apocalypse too, but Apoc himself is one of the weakest X-Men villains. He’s not bad in this and there are some pretty good scenes in the film, but as a whole it’s not quite as good as its parts.
Ars Technica had a whinefest of a “review” that complained because…I guess because he was too young to have played the original Warcraft? Even though half the characters in the movie are also in WoW, or at least referenced.
Moe,
I have a simple rule in deciding to watch a flick I know will be too straightforward fantasy or space opera for the supposed intelligentsia who write movie reviews: Follow the *audience* score on the Tomatometer. If it’s 75%+, it’s almost certainly a good watch. Warcraft is. And I knew it would indulge in the tropes too much for critics. They aren’t allowed to have fun at movies.
The statement “They aren’t allowed to have fun at movies” is pretty much true of any movie for some critics. It is not just the fantasy/sci-fi/superhero genre. Unless the film makes a statement, or fits a certain worldview, they do not like it.
–
It is kind of odd when you think about it. If you are reviewing films, you are going to run across films that do not fit your particular worldview. I would think as a disinterested reviewer, it should then be about how well the film is made and whether the performances were good.
For myself, I am thinking of a movie like Citizen Kane or the Godfather. I do not really enjoy either movie, however, in both cases you can see that the movies are incredibly well done and the performances are excellent.
–
However, on the other, other hand, I have also noticed so many movies are pretty much lenses on for the viewer. In other words, they often take away from the movie what they themselves took into the film, hence the reason two different people can take completely different interpretations away from the film. I am thinking of films like say The Passion of the Christ, which I had arguments with people online who said that the film was obviously anti-semitic. My point was that the film was making the statement about human frailty and evil in all it’s forms, and Jews were not singled out for showcasing that. It is not like the Roman soldiers who were shown as drunken, cruel, petty men were let off lightly. Or Peter who was selected to showcase moral cowardice. The point of the movie was to showcase all of human weakness and sin at it’s most depraved and base, and hence the need and also the depth of Christ’s sacrifice.
–
I guess the point I am trying to make when talking about this movie about a series of games is that movie reviews often show more about the reviewer (or viewer) than most people take at first glance.
No argument there. Remember the frothing SJW mob that was ready to devour Joss when he dared have Black Widow express pain at being rendered infertile by her handlers? How dare he make her act human? That more than spilled over in the reviews, as well.
—
Without going into the no-fly zone, it’s hard to get an honest, objective movie review on anything that so much as touches controversial material anymore. And of course, pretty much everything is controversial.
Howard Tayler liked it, and he said he hadn’t played the games since WC II.
Yeah. The problem is: I also have this urge to stick around at home and bake pies. Because then I’ll have pies.
Hmm. IF your prospects are either going to the movie alone, or baking pies alone, the pies may have a greater net-positive impact on your family, while still apparently providing adequate Moe-time.
By that, I mean: I likewise enjoyed but never moved beyond WC III, but have picked up WOW nuggets by social osmosis and will probably see it on Netflix. Regrettably, Netflix does not yet do pies.
Yes, plus I need the practice.
I saw the movie, and I liked it, and I didn’t get the criticism that there were “too many characters and storylines.” Sure, maybe if you’re a simpleton or something. I will admit that I might have had an easier time, having played both WCII and WoW, but if you can keep up with GoT or TWD (or, say, any Harry Turtledove book) you would probably be fine.
Also I think that the 3D was done really well–much better than in most movies. For one thing I’m pretty sure that it was shot in 3D, not converted afterwards.