Now I do doubt this movie will be even pleb tier, but you gotta hand it to the critics, they cannot be objective on judging it when they have literally no clue on the source material.
It's like BvS all over again, and the worse thing is that they will make it a new fucking meme too
>>70543106
>my vidya trash isn't respected by critics
why should it be?
>Critics compare movies in a genre to other films in a genre
The horror
>>70543106
i want /co/ and /v/ to leave
definitely shouldn't be respected, but it's vidya, it barely qualifies as cinema.
There's literally ~0% acting involved, let alone cinematography.
Have a fucking video game critic review it, dont give it the attention.
Thats my point
>Critics should rate movies on the amount of fan service in the movie instead of if it's competently made or not
A good movie is successful regardless if you know jack shit about the source material. Good documentaries are a great example of this, most people knew nothing about street art going into Exit Through the Gift Shop but enjoyed it because it was well made and not the subject matter.
If you NEED other source material for the movie to truly make sense, it doesn't make it deep. It just means it was a shitty movie that can't stand on its own legs.
>>70543106
a movie is, and must be, a separate entity from its source material. if it cannot sustain itself without pandering to the people who like the source material then it has no reason to exist as a movie.
anyway, every review of this movie makes it sound like a colossal misfire on every level so stop getting bent out of shape about it. When Hard to be a God came out there were many viewers, myself included, who were confused by the film's plot because we hadn't read the novel it was based on. Does this mean we thought the movie was automatically a piece of shit? No, it doesn't. The movie is a masterpiece regardless of whether you can follow all the nuances of the plot on a first viewing. Warcraft on the other hand sounds like it spends half its time paying shameless lip service to the fans of its source material without having anything else to justify its existence. Get over it. The movie is going to be a piece of shit.
>>70543553
>a movie is, and must be, a separate entity from its source material. if it cannot sustain itself without pandering to the people who like the source material then it has no reason to exist as a movie.
Said no one ever.
>>70543106
>they cannot be objective on judging it when they have literally no clue on the source material.
This is where you're wrong. They're movie critics. Their job is to judge whether something is a good movie. If it can't stand on its own merits, it's not a good movie.
>>70543140
Why is Marvel?
None of the people I know who want to see warcraft know there were games before world of warcraft.
>>70543106
>BvS sympathizers damage-controlling Warcrap with same arguments
Pottery
I'd say >inb4 Marvel is brought up for no reason but too late
>>70543106
>by Ethan "Eatin'" Sacks
you've got that backwards you retard. people who have invested hundreds of hours into the games are the ones who can't be objective. at that point seeing all this shit in a big budget movie is inherently interesting, good movie or bad
>>70543801
I cannot believe that there are people on this board that actually think piece of shit fantasy movies should exist that just pander to them. How the fuck is this a film board?
Why do people automatically assume fans only like the movie cause thy are fans of the game. If u knew anythig about game fans you'd know It's the opposite. Those autists are ruthless. If Warcraft was as terrible as critics say the fans would be he ones tearing t apart the most.
>>70544572
It could be a cult classic that is big from day one because there is a pre established cult
