Warcraft

I'd hardly have anything to fault about it, except for the weird king character, whom I found rather bland and unhelpful given that he was a king and his decisions (however they were at the end of the film) had a big impact. I liked the story, basically I found most of the characters likeable, or at least I didn't develop any aversion to them. I liked Orc Durotan the most, of course, as did many others. But it just didn't have that something that makes you fall in love with it, that makes you leave the theater excited. Yes, it was a fine spectacle and I wasn't bored, but for all the magic the characters had in the film, it didn't quite have real magic. A very strong 3 stars and I'm curious to see the sequel. (06/18/2016)

I got what I expected. A slightly above average fantasy film that tries to be spectacular and succeeds quite well, but unfortunately falls flat on its face due to the sometimes downright repulsive stylization (I get it, it's very subjective), but mostly due to the unfortunate casting of a good half of the main characters and the attempt to fast forward and untell everything. Because of this, it doesn't make any sense at all at times, the relationships between the characters don't work the way they probably should, and trying to show as many monsters, places, cities, spells and things as possible ruins a potentially interesting story that ends up being much more banal than it could have been. Fans will probably be thrilled, but all I got was an ordinary if fairly epic fantasy movie that was alternately quite entertaining and downright grating at times. On the other hand, I accept that it's the first film and they managed to deal the cards in such a way that the sequel could be quite interesting and I'll happily go see it in a few years. I definitely don't need to see First Clash again though. (05/15/2017)

I understand that it's hard to come up with something new when it comes to adapting a PC game, especially when you've got Blizzard's watchful eye on your back, and the thousands of fans who've spent hundreds of hours in WoW. Even so, the filmmakers could still have delivered more than just a recycled dumb fantasy cliché that you’ll immediately discard because you've seen it in plenty of other movies, computer games, or read it in the weaker fantasy titles that bookstores are full of. I was going to write exactly what Cervenak wrote, but he beat me to it, so I'll just repeat it - any 10 minutes of The Hobbit is more fun than 2 hours of Warcraft. I’m not going to mince words, it was boring. (08/13/2016)

Essentially, you could say that it’s a rather adequately made absolute fantasy movie with everything that goes with it. So no Tolkien-like more history than fantasy or something in the style of The Game of Thrones, where it’s only after the end of the first season that you realize that this isn’t exactly a movie from the middle ages, but that it contains traces of fantasy as well. With this movie, that is clear already with the first digital orc character that appears in the first scene. At that point I realized that there was no other way, as the entire world of Warcraft is based mainly on nations such as elves, orcs, goblins, dwarves or the undead and humans are rather an ancillary nation. Or they do have their place in all this, but it is comparable to that of the other races. So, it took me about half the movie to get used to this film world. It was incredibly colorful, and the digital effect guys did a lot of work as well and looking for a part of the real world in this movie would be as hard as looking for a beer in a crate of Bud Light. But the second half of the movie got me up from my chair and despite initially thinking that I might not watch the movie to the end, the final war scene actually satisfied me, more or less. This doesn’t mean I would need to see the sequel, but on the other hand, I must agree that Blizzard managed to keep an eye of everything. I guess fans of “WoW” or “DotA” will probably die of bliss. (10/03/2016)

A hodgepodge, which is not even bad enough to be ridiculously amusing in its unwanted stupidity (albeit flashy visuals or magic neon run style with bloody menacing glances, fingers ominously tapping and you can hear whispering something like "blablagrgrplopplopouch" are dangerously close to it) and at the same time it is not good enough to stand without any objections as a quality genre and not just as a video game B-rate movie pretending to be A-rate. Basically, when panoramas are being shown, the characters shut up and fight in a way that "someone randomly dies", it works well. In other words, yes, it works especially if it's essentially a variation on animations, as we know them directly from Blizzard. Despite how seriously it is taken, it also works in orc scenes, in which this is exactly what the movie Warcraft as a whole was supposed to be. But from the Alliance's point of view, everything is pure hell. In addition, in every second scene, it's more than obvious that the footage has been shortened a lot (some allegedly by up to forty minutes), but paradoxically it is not to the detriment. What is obvious is that the footage was shortened mainly due to removal of piffle. I mean what is like a torture when watching film adaptation of Warcraft. Even so, there is still more piffle than would be appropriate. Overall, it has vast potential, interesting story lines, decent battle scenes, sympathetic uncompromisingness of the main characters, but it also has C-rate dialogs, awkward actors (the real ones look like without life compared CGI orcs), appalling (however based on the original) stylization and gala show of the most original and ridiculous clichés from the department of "fantasy for losers". (06/18/2016)