Warcraft Movie Ratings & Box Office Stats

[StoPCampinGn00b]

Here are the three main movie / show rating sites (for English speakers I presume) showing some Warcraft movie rating statistics.

Here's IMDb.com showing detailed statistics for all who rated on their site. IMDb usually has the most votes.

Here's RottenTomatoes.com ratings, and it shows that the movie just sits so terrible with critics. Yes, it's lower than the new TMNT. And this shows the biggest difference between critic and audience ratings I've ever seen.

MetaCritic.com This one just further notches up the harsh divide by the scale of which movies are rated. Warcraft is the #1 highest rated current movie by users and 3rd to last according critics?!

So...

And how WarCraft is comparing in the $ business:
http://deadline.com/2016/06/warcraft-conjuring-2-now-you-see-me-2-weekend-box-office-1201770307/
Go go China?

I just watched it hours ago since it finally came out in the U.S and I loved it. 10/10 for how much I enjoyed it, and a generous 8/10 if I would rate it if I didn't know WarCraft lore. Review maybe later.

Murglrgrlgrlrlrlrl

 

[Eagle XI]

There was too much rampant.. cant exactly say retcon either but "artistic freedom" involved, both in the graphics and scenario, that was obviously done for easily appealing to the wow playing masses but that lowered the immersion for me as i would have rather preferred to see the original unit designs of wc1 in action, rather than their 'updated' modern forms.

They should have made an bhutanese passport joke with that asian elf, missed opportunity there. The murloc was funny to spot.

Not a fan of those exaggarated on-steroid orcs either, the body proportions used throughout wc3 cinematics were way more believable, at some point i thought why they(humans) just dont poke these 'baloons' with a lance and get over with it.

And finally the real reason of my disappointment: i expected to see much more actual battles, i mean ffs its "warcraft", there was too much talk only unskippable cinematics(lol) involved.

 

[Zwiebelchen]

That's why I don't care about critis oppinions. 26%? Really? I mean, I would have accepted like 60% for obvious flaws especially due to the neglect of casual audience (that doesn't know the source material), but COME ON, you rate this movie lower than trash like Angry Birds and even friggin' Neighbours 2? Why? Not enough slapstick in Warcraft?
Like, seriously, what the fuck is wrong with them?


But, really, they cut 40 minutes out of the Warcraft movie? Feels like this was a bad decision... I could imagine these 40 minutes to really help the movie pacing.

 

[IcemanBo]

Warcraft movie:

The given action was not very complex and predictable.
The story was rather badly/artificially constucted than slowly and properly progressed.
Graphics/Animations were done very nicely and it was fun to view the the world, it's nature, all the orcs, etc. Good job don here Blizzard!
Besides maybe a very few exceptions the characters were not able to build a special intimacy towards the viewer - so the personal feeling kept pretty intrepid and cold, even in (wanted) emotional moments.
The movie has also some weak points from the logic's point of view and so sometimes situations arise out of nothing, so that the viewer has no good chance to completly follow the sequence and to mentally comprehend the new action.

Story lets some good room to move, and I definitly will watch also the other movies to get more of the plot.

Finaly -- sadly, the content and implementation solely don't really knock somebody's socks off, but it's nevertheless worth watching for someone interested in the Warcraft universe. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I rate 6/10.

\Bosetti, your movie tester

 

[pyf]

[...] But, really, they cut 40 minutes out of the Warcraft movie? Feels like this was a bad decision... I could imagine these 40 minutes to really help the movie pacing.

It was a wise decision for a theater release.

Do extended cut versions really help that much movies, regarding pacing ?
For Warcraft, wait for the Director's Cut edition(s) and find out.

Warcraft movie:

The given action was not very complex and predictable.
The story was rather badly/artificially constucted than slowly and properly progressed.
[...]
Besides maybe a very few exceptions the characters were not able to build a special intimacy towards the viewer - so the personal feeling kept pretty intrepid and cold, even in (wanted) emotional moments.
The movie has also some weak points from the logic's point of view and so sometimes situations arise out of nothing, so that the viewer has no good chance to completly follow the sequence and to mentally comprehend the new action.

Meow ?
http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/...snyder_s_screenwriting_book_save_the_cat.html

Miaou ?
https://www.slate.fr/story/75812/recette-blockbuster-pourquoi-tous-films-americains-se-ressemblent

Graphics/Animations were done very nicely and it was fun to view the the world, it's nature, all the orcs, etc. Good job don here Blizzard!

...or rather Industrial Light and Magic (ILM), and others in the SPFX / VFX departments (Weta Workshop, Rodeo FX...) ?
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0803096/fullcredits/

Blizzard is only credited one time, for concept art. Nothing more.

-----------

To find out how any movie fares commercially, I highly recommend Box Office Mojo. Site is updated daily.

Warcraft page here :
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=main&id=warcraft.htm

 

[A Void]

Despite my previous determination that this movie is going to fail, it proved me wrong. I loved those little references, characters, story build-up. Finally the movie felt too short, it deserved atleast 4 hours to fully explain and emerge itself into the vast lore of this World. And that was the reason, it didn't quite explain anything to new people who didn't play games or read the books. That's why It came to a conclusion that it lacked introduction, many people hardly understood the lore behind why should they care about Orcs or Humans. Why is the Orc world dying? Who are these characters?

The bad ratings were because people weren't introduced to this franchise, the movie ended on a short notice without any conclusion. We know what happens next, but they don't.

Overall, I give it 10/10

 

[pyf]

According to Deadline.com, industry sources tell that breakeven is at $500M worldwide (though there is some heated debate about it).
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0803096/board/nest/258278756?p=1

 

[terrio]

they just didnt pay critics, thats why so low

 

[Pharaoh_]

Some critics are hilarious.
Check this article out and you will realize what I mean. The guy says that it was the cheapest CGI on screen. So, what about Piranha 3D, Sharknado and other related films? Exaggeration to garner attention is one thing, but being illiterate is another.

 

[A Void]

Yeah, "professional critics". Good thing I never cared about critic reviews, user reviews are always more honest and better.

 

[Rheiko]

It has always been better to check things out ourselves and get our own opinion than to trust other people's opinions.
I hate how the low rating makes people don't want to watch it even though the rating itself isn't always right.