Quantcast

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Just watched the movie, my quick impressions here !SPOILERS!

VolgoreVolgore Member EpicPosts: 3,872
edited May 2016 in World of Warcraft
So, i just came home from the cinema and thought i leave some very quick, incomplete first impressions here.


When i entered the cinema, i was the only person in there - i kid you not! I took a snapshot of the empty room with my mobile phone and sent it to my cousin. Can't see much on that pic, because the lights were already way down low, otherwise i'd post it here. After me 7 more people came to watch the movie. Good thing: nobody left during the movie.


I'm not a lore nerd, so the storyline didn't offend me. But even for what was told, the duration of about 2hrs was too little time.
Many terms and names get thrown around without introduction, as if every viewer would know them, i can see this alienating alot of people.

Did not like:
In my opinion lots of miscastings.
-Ben Foster as Medivh just did not fit
-the guy who played Khadgar -who was that again? Totally uninspired and ...boring.
-Lady Taria/Ruth Negga ..who?
-Travis Fimmel basicly played 90% Ragnar Lothbrok. His facial expressions, even some gestures...and if he didnt, he looked bland.
-Elves.. O-M-G they were bad, their ears and overall looks. Also a japanese elf! WTF!?

They shouldn't have casted b-level actors that then totally disappear underneath Orc CGI, but take unknown actors for the CGI and put more money into the casting of the characters we actually see.
Terribly cheap wigs on some of the male actors!


Dialogues were at times cringeworthy-hollywoodesque, esp. poor Garona. But ok.. the 13yr old have to understand the movie as well. Expect phrases and clichés.

Did like:
-The orcs. Huge, brutal. Hraaaagh!!! Incredible how they are portrait here, also the CGI. The Orc females were rough and brute. Draka was also incredibly well done.
-Dwarfs..although only short appearances, they are greatly done.
-Lots of little references to the game. A portal stone in the background (but in Elwynn Forest?), many weapons and pieces or armor you know from the game. Even some of the games' orc animations can be seen now and then.
-Garona is INCREDIBLY hot! I want to take her feet in my mouth!! In her first scenes she looks huge, exoctic and wild. Then unfortunately Hollywood happens to her and she turns into a green emo human with a borderline naive touch (thanks to her dialogue). Somebody in Hollywood didn't understand her character. Her combat in the movie was rather pitiful and her flawless silky skin, perfect complexion and teeth withener is not doing this exceptional character justice. They should at least have given her some scars, a rough accent and more fierce portrayal altogether.
-Gryphon flights were great

The CGI is WAY better than i remember it from the trailers. Also a generic, but solid musicial score -again no techno like in the trailer.

IMO the movie would have been better if it was the total WoW package, incl. undead, trolls and such, going for a trilogy.
I don't think Duncan Jones was the right guy for this movie, but then i can't think of somebody who would have been.

I can see why the movie sort of misses the mark for many viewers. But it looks like they weren't really sure what the mark was in first place and so the movie has an obvious identity crisis. Sometimes something too big too fail is also too big get done right.

Entertaining nonetheless, i enjoyed my time for 6.50eur.


*Edit: My score is 6.5/10


image
Post edited by Volgore on
«1

Comments

  • MikehaMikeha Member EpicPosts: 9,130
    Redbox
  • VolgoreVolgore Member EpicPosts: 3,872
    edited May 2016
    DMKano said:
    Personal score?

    Doesn't have to be all technical just gut feel
    6.5 out of 10. Too much hollywood for a better score, too awesome orcs for a 5.

    Great IP meets Hollywood, most of the time Hollywood wins.

    image
  • OhhPaigeyOhhPaigey Member RarePosts: 1,517
    Where do you watch it.  :(
    When all is said and done, more is always said than done.
  • AoriAori Member EpicPosts: 4,180
    Volgore said:
    So, i just came home from the cinema and thought i leave some very quick, incomplete first impressions here.


    When i entered the cinema, i was the only person in there - i kid you not! I took a snapshot of the empty room with my mobile phone and sent it to my cousin. Can't see much on that pic, because the lights were already way down low, otherwise i'd post it here. After me 7 more people came to watch the movie. Good thing: nobody left during the movie.



    Depends on the time you went, when I went to go see Captain America Civil War, place only had about 10 people during early afternoon on saturday opening weekend.
  • VolgoreVolgore Member EpicPosts: 3,872
    DMKano said:
    So Volgore it seems you went alone, how do you think Warcraft would be as a couples/date movie?
    Yes, this is crazy! I always frowned upon people going to the cinema alone. I always looked at it like it was a cry for help.
    Today circumstances caught up on me and i joined the ranks of the theater-solo'ers when my cousin bailed out at last second.

    Couple or date movie.. i wouldn't say so. I can imagine the miss getting bored and not really interested to follow the names and lingo. This is not exactly "The Notebook" material. Us males are more easy to entertain...watching orcs smash stuff makes us happy already.

    image
  • SavageHorizonSavageHorizon Member RarePosts: 3,432
    All i'm going to say is Travis Fimmel is a fucking top actor but don't take my word for it just check out the Vikings series. We are on season three so watch from the start it's fucking epic and imo on a par with Game Of Thrones.

    Just type in Vikings the most underrated show, he is Ragnar Lodbrok and fucking epic.

    You will thank me after watching it but start from season one. Anyone who knows how these series work will know that to go three seasons tells you a lot about a tv production.




  • ArglebargleArglebargle Member RarePosts: 2,838

    "....I watched Prometheus alone, it was a great experience for me."


    Wow, what drugs were you on??  I must need some of them...  ;)


    Scott is too self indulgent for me, certainly over the last decade or so.   Though he'd have probably done a more interesting job with the WoW movie. 

    If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.

  • aRtFuLThinGaRtFuLThinG Member UncommonPosts: 1,387
    Volgore said:

    -Garona is INCREDIBLY hot! I want to take her feet in my mouth!! In her first scenes she looks huge, exoctic and wild. Then unfortunately Hollywood happens to her and she turns into a green emo human with a borderline naive touch (thanks to her dialogue). Somebody in Hollywood didn't understand her character. Her combat in the movie was rather pitiful and her flawless silky skin, perfect complexion and teeth withener is not doing this exceptional character justice. They should at least have given her some scars, a rough accent and more fierce portrayal altogether.

    Well, Robin Thicke's ex-wife was a model so I think they choose an actress with a far too feminine feel for that role.

    The should've choose someone other female actress that has a bit more attitude for that role (if they are gonna choose someone who can't act anyways and can fight, should've choose Gina Carano).
  • Octagon7711Octagon7711 Member LegendaryPosts: 8,967
    Thanks for the review.  :)

    "We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa      "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are."  SR Covey

  • VolgoreVolgore Member EpicPosts: 3,872

    Scott is too self indulgent for me, certainly over the last decade or so.   Though he'd have probably done a more interesting job with the WoW movie. 

    I also thought of Ridley Scott, because imo he would have probably given the movie a more "urgent", dark/gritty and oppressive vibe. Or perhaps (the earlier) James Cameron. But in both cases i think the movie would have been rated 16 instead of 13, which is a no go for Blizzard.
    Also Guillermo del Toro who would have been more qualified than Duncan after he did great with Blade 2, Hellboy 1+2, Pan's Labyrinth and also not too bad with Pacific Rim as a pure action movie.

    But then these guys would most likely have told Blizzard how they make this movie, while Blizzard probably looked for somebody that they can tell how to make it.

    However, i think an IP like this needs a director that actually knows how to make movies and how to handle the scope of a heavyweight like Warcraft. While Duncan's "Moon" is a masterpiece, it worked totally different and Warcraft is a whole other beast.

    Peter Jackson was a good choice at that time for Lotro and i would say a once in a lifetime match. I guess Jackson chose to make Lotro, while Duncan was asked to do it by the powers that be.
    What Warcraft needed was his own Peter Jackson. Not the Michael Bays, Sam Raimis, Zack Snyders ...or Duncan Jones of this era.

    And for what Blizzard wanted (action movie +biggest possible commercial success +family friendly) i think Spielberg would have been the no1 choice.

    My 2 cents.


    image
  • DKLondDKLond Member RarePosts: 2,273
    Here's my review from IMDB:

    I'm a gamer - and I've played all the Warcraft games. I never particularly cared for the stories in those games, though, so I didn't go into this with much in the way of preconceived notions.

    Based on the trailer, I was expecting an underwhelming popcorn B-movie with bad CGI.

    I was pleasantly surprised.

    First of all, I have to say the CGI is absolutely gorgeous. I've seen a lot of movies, believe me, and this has to be one of the most convincing fantasy films in terms of visuals alone. The Orcs in particular - are amazing.

    Anyway, in terms of the heart of the film - the story, characters and the acting - it's sort of a mixture of good and bad. 

    The story itself is simple but effective - and it makes enough sense to give you a reason to care. That said, it's very high-fantasy stuff - and I'm sure some people will be turned off by the emphasis on extravagant magic and such.

    As for the acting, well, it's a mixed bag. 

    Ironically, the human characters face the most trouble here. Ben Foster as Medivh, for instance, doesn't seem to connect with his role. He looks and sounds as if he's struggling with the material - and as if he regrets being there. Travis Fimmel as Lothar is better, but he also seems to have a hard time just standing still and looking normal. It's as if he's constantly trying to emote something, which makes him over-act on more than one occasion. Paula Patton as Garona goes back and forth between powerful, genuine expression and cringe-worthy melodrama. Surprisingly, I found Ben Schnetzer the best and most convincing actor, playing Khadgar. He was fun and not at all the comic relief I expected him to be.

    On the opposite side of the coin, we have the Orcs - and to put it simply, they're ALL great. They look incredible and the actors behind them give them real weight and pathos. Durotan, Gul'dan and Blackhand are particularly convincing and masterfully executed. The whole movie might well be better if it was all about these guys.

    Now, for the action. It's amazingly well done. I saw the movie in 3D - and the live actors meshed convincingly with the animated models - and the action sequences were more or less perfect. I didn't detect a single "bad 3D" moment - which is extremely rare. Very exciting stuff, for sure.

    Speaking of 3D - something I generally don't care much for, this was an exception. Everything jumped out of the screen at you - and it didn't seem tacked on at all. The spectacle felt appropriately close to you - and the striking background images were just fabulous on a grand scale.

    Sadly, it's not all roses from there. 

    The ending was rushed - and everything wrapped up too quickly - and it didn't quite convince as a plausible series of events towards the end.

    There's a pretty serious lack of character development in the beginning of the film. The Orcs invade - and the humans seem strangely laid-back and almost casual in their initial response. Things happen without enough build-up. It's 20 or 30 minutes too short for the scale of what's going on, in my opinion.

    Unfortunately, there's also a somewhat unnecessary subplot involving the son of Lothar - and there's a problem with his acting and the age difference seems off. Lothar simply doesn't look or feel like a father to me. To make it worse, events related to father and son are too cliché and needed more impact.

    Things like these mean the movie isn't all it could have been.

    However, the critics are flat-out unfair - and if you're into fantasy movies and a touching spectacle, you need to go see this in the theater, and for once, you should go with 3D.

    I truly hope it will do enough business to warrant a sequel. Duncan Jones did well here, but he can do even better - and I'd love to see full justice done to the material.

    7/10
  • DKLondDKLond Member RarePosts: 2,273
    Volgore said:

    Scott is too self indulgent for me, certainly over the last decade or so.   Though he'd have probably done a more interesting job with the WoW movie. 

    I also thought of Ridley Scott, because imo he would have probably given the movie a more "urgent", dark/gritty and oppressive vibe. Or perhaps (the earlier) James Cameron. But in both cases i think the movie would have been rated 16 instead of 13, which is a no go for Blizzard.
    Also Guillermo del Toro who would have been more qualified than Duncan after he did great with Blade 2, Hellboy 1+2, Pan's Labyrinth and also not too bad with Pacific Rim as a pure action movie.

    But then these guys would most likely have told Blizzard how they make this movie, while Blizzard probably looked for somebody that they can tell how to make it.

    However, i think an IP like this needs a director that actually knows how to make movies and how to handle the scope of a heavyweight like Warcraft. While Duncan's "Moon" is a masterpiece, it worked totally different and Warcraft is a whole other beast.

    Peter Jackson was a good choice at that time for Lotro and i would say a once in a lifetime match. I guess Jackson chose to make Lotro, while Duncan was asked to do it by the powers that be.
    What Warcraft needed was his own Peter Jackson. Not the Michael Bays, Sam Raimis, Zack Snyders ...or Duncan Jones of this era.

    And for what Blizzard wanted (action movie +biggest possible commercial success +family friendly) i think Spielberg would have been the no1 choice.

    My 2 cents.


    Jackson, Scott and Cameron are all have-beens. Their latest work has been utter dreck, with the possible exception of The Martian - which was a very by-the-numbers film, which is probably why it was received so well.

    No, this movie needed a geek with talent - and Duncan Jones was the right guy. The things that are wrong with the movie are mostly concessions made because it's subject to Hollywood suits who demand a certain level of mediocrity before they'll go along with financing it.

    If we're lucky, we'll get an extended cut - and I bet it's going to be even better.
  • Ashar1972Ashar1972 Member UncommonPosts: 24
    edited June 2016
    I just watched the movie yesterday and would give it a 6.5/10 as well, alright though it struggled to attain an epic feel to it. Interestingly, I got to the end of the film and would have comfortably sat through another half an hour if it meant fleshing out the story more.

    If Hollywood is capable of making movie adaptions with a sense of authenticity, then there is something disappointing in this film in that which it left out. I never got deep into the RTS, and came into WoW during TBC, so my main way into the story has been through the WoW MMO and the books. I'm disappointed that the story of the Draenei is left out completely, and in doing so a huge chunk of the backstory of the Orcs is omitted. In particular, what their culture was like before the corruption, about Ner'Zhul and Gul'dan, and Ogrim and Durotan (including their brief but important time with the Dranei.). Similarly, I'm disappointed that part of the epicness of including those stories, even if portrayed in a cut-up 10minute monologue etc., is the sense that this is part of an even greater story stretching 25,000 years+. 

    What did the movie gain by omitting this story? As far as I can tell, it enabled Guld'an to be the 'discoverer' of Fel magic without giving even a hint of how he did so. It seems like a poor trade-off to me. When we look at the lore deviations (which were described as "minor" by Blizzard), I think it only fair to ask, what did we gain for such sacrifices? Whether it's Dalaran, Garona, missing the incursion into Stormwind, etc., I'm not convinced those gains were that good for how they warp the story from what we have come to know

    Prior to the movie there were a lot of people in the various forums worried about the CGI. I think their concern was misplaced, or personal. In this trade-off I think we gained a lot, and it was the right decision to make. I hope the director's cut will fill out the gaps directorial and production decisions created. The cinematography to me was really good. The acting was fine, but the scriptwriting let that down a bit,

    Back to Hollywood and adaptations. I think this is familiar to me and the Dune movie. While it told a coherent story, if one has an insight into the book we know that critical information was left out., and that reduced the grand scale of things. Sticking with this example, the Dune miniseries managed to pull it off exponentially better. Perhaps this is the treatment that WoW cinema needs. I'd even go one step further and say that making the game/books into a tv series like A Games of Thrones would actually suit the telling of the lore much better and still be very successful.
  • Jean-Luc_PicardJean-Luc_Picard Member LegendaryPosts: 8,295

    "....I watched Prometheus alone, it was a great experience for me."


    Wow, what drugs were you on??  I must need some of them...  ;)


    Scott is too self indulgent for me, certainly over the last decade or so.   Though he'd have probably done a more interesting job with the WoW movie. 

    I also enjoyed Prometheus. Not for its plot holes, of course, but for the visuals which are, as always with Ridley Scott, fabulous. I own all Scott movies on Blu-Ray, and each one is an enjoyable ride even when it's not fabulous like Blade Runner or Alien. For instance, I prefer "Kingdom of Heaven" (Director's cut) to the more popular yet in my opinion overrated "Gladiator". I found his take on "Robin Hood" interesting, I'd love to see a follow up of that movie too.
    "The ability to speak doesn't make you intelligent" - Qui-gon Jinn in Star Wars.
    After many years of reading Internet forums, there's no doubt that nor does the ability to write.
    CPU: Intel Core I7 9700k (4.90ghz) - GPU: ASUS Dual GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER EVO 8GB DDR6 - RAM: 32GB Kingston HyperX Predator DDR4 3000 - Motherboard: Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Ultra - PSU: Antec TruePower New 750W - Storage: Kingston KC1000 NVMe 960gb SSD and 2x1TB WD Velociraptor HDDs (Raid 0) - Main display: Samsung U32J590 32" 4K monitor - Second display: Philips 273v 27" monitor - VR: Pimax 8K headset - Sound: Sony STR-DH550 AV Receiver HDMI linked with the GPU and the TV, with Jamo S 426 HS 3 5.0 speakers and Pioneer S-21W subwoofer - OS: Windows 10 Pro 64 bits.


  • DKLondDKLond Member RarePosts: 2,273
    edited June 2016
    Prometheus was abysmal, in my opinion.

    Then again, I'm one of those strange people who care about writing and plausible characters.
  • Jean-Luc_PicardJean-Luc_Picard Member LegendaryPosts: 8,295
    DKLond said:
    Prometheus was abysmal, in my opinion.

    Then again, I'm one of those strange people who care about writing and plausible characters.
    The visual were abysmal?

    "The ability to speak doesn't make you intelligent" - Qui-gon Jinn in Star Wars.
    After many years of reading Internet forums, there's no doubt that nor does the ability to write.
    CPU: Intel Core I7 9700k (4.90ghz) - GPU: ASUS Dual GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER EVO 8GB DDR6 - RAM: 32GB Kingston HyperX Predator DDR4 3000 - Motherboard: Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Ultra - PSU: Antec TruePower New 750W - Storage: Kingston KC1000 NVMe 960gb SSD and 2x1TB WD Velociraptor HDDs (Raid 0) - Main display: Samsung U32J590 32" 4K monitor - Second display: Philips 273v 27" monitor - VR: Pimax 8K headset - Sound: Sony STR-DH550 AV Receiver HDMI linked with the GPU and the TV, with Jamo S 426 HS 3 5.0 speakers and Pioneer S-21W subwoofer - OS: Windows 10 Pro 64 bits.


  • DKLondDKLond Member RarePosts: 2,273
    DKLond said:
    Prometheus was abysmal, in my opinion.

    Then again, I'm one of those strange people who care about writing and plausible characters.
    The visual were abysmal?

    No, the movie was abysmal :)
  • Jean-Luc_PicardJean-Luc_Picard Member LegendaryPosts: 8,295
    edited June 2016
    DKLond said:
    DKLond said:
    Prometheus was abysmal, in my opinion.

    Then again, I'm one of those strange people who care about writing and plausible characters.
    The visual were abysmal?

    No, the movie was abysmal :)
    Some parts of the scenario were indeed bad. The movie is beautiful, though. And the making of on the Blu-Ray disc is impressive, so much is not CGI but hand crafted.
    Scott definitely didn't lose his talent for filming, hopefully he'll get a better writer for the follow up.

    More recently, The Martian was excellent, too.

    We have many excellent directors, seems nowadays that the hardest is to find talented writers for the scripts...
    "The ability to speak doesn't make you intelligent" - Qui-gon Jinn in Star Wars.
    After many years of reading Internet forums, there's no doubt that nor does the ability to write.
    CPU: Intel Core I7 9700k (4.90ghz) - GPU: ASUS Dual GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER EVO 8GB DDR6 - RAM: 32GB Kingston HyperX Predator DDR4 3000 - Motherboard: Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Ultra - PSU: Antec TruePower New 750W - Storage: Kingston KC1000 NVMe 960gb SSD and 2x1TB WD Velociraptor HDDs (Raid 0) - Main display: Samsung U32J590 32" 4K monitor - Second display: Philips 273v 27" monitor - VR: Pimax 8K headset - Sound: Sony STR-DH550 AV Receiver HDMI linked with the GPU and the TV, with Jamo S 426 HS 3 5.0 speakers and Pioneer S-21W subwoofer - OS: Windows 10 Pro 64 bits.


  • DKLondDKLond Member RarePosts: 2,273
    edited June 2016
    DKLond said:
    DKLond said:
    Prometheus was abysmal, in my opinion.

    Then again, I'm one of those strange people who care about writing and plausible characters.
    The visual were abysmal?

    No, the movie was abysmal :)
    Some parts of the scenario were indeed bad. The movie is beautiful, though. And the making of on the Blu-Ray disc is impressive, so much is not CGI but hand crafted.
    Scott definitely didn't lose his talent for filming, hopefully he'll get a better writer for the follow up.

    More recently, The Martian was excellent, too.

    We have many excellent directors, seems nowadays that the hardest is to find talented writers for the scripts...
    I'd say it was a pretty movie - but I wasn't too impressed by that aspect. 

    For instance, the "alien creatures" in the movie were really quite terrible - and looked like jelly or rubber. That's a pretty big step down from the Alien.

    I expected more from Scott - which I consider to be the absolute master of cinema visuals.

    The Martian was a completely by-the-numbers film - which I suppose is fine. I thought it was "meh", personally. I also despised the token "genius" character.

    In the end, though, I just care too much about characters and writing. The characters in Prometheus was insultingly stupid and their actions made no sense at all.

    It was really staggeringly bad in that way - and no amount of pretty visuals could save it.

    Not for me, that is.

    As for writers, I doubt that's the problem. The problem is the same as always in Hollywood - it's just gotten worse.

    As in, it's not the artists calling the shots - it's the suits. Suits can't think a creative thought to save their lives - so they just go through a checklist of "perceived" success criteria.

    Today, that means a ton of spectacle. Writing, plausibility and characters don't really matter - unless they're extreme in some way.
  • Jean-Luc_PicardJean-Luc_Picard Member LegendaryPosts: 8,295
    DKLond said:

    As in, it's not the artists calling the shots - it's the suits. Suits can't think a creative thought to save their lives - so they just go through a checklist of "perceived" success criteria.
    Aye that's true, and sadly Scott has been victim of those suits many times.
    Just compare the theatrical version of "Kingdom of Heaven" with the director's cut...
    "The ability to speak doesn't make you intelligent" - Qui-gon Jinn in Star Wars.
    After many years of reading Internet forums, there's no doubt that nor does the ability to write.
    CPU: Intel Core I7 9700k (4.90ghz) - GPU: ASUS Dual GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER EVO 8GB DDR6 - RAM: 32GB Kingston HyperX Predator DDR4 3000 - Motherboard: Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Ultra - PSU: Antec TruePower New 750W - Storage: Kingston KC1000 NVMe 960gb SSD and 2x1TB WD Velociraptor HDDs (Raid 0) - Main display: Samsung U32J590 32" 4K monitor - Second display: Philips 273v 27" monitor - VR: Pimax 8K headset - Sound: Sony STR-DH550 AV Receiver HDMI linked with the GPU and the TV, with Jamo S 426 HS 3 5.0 speakers and Pioneer S-21W subwoofer - OS: Windows 10 Pro 64 bits.


  • DKLondDKLond Member RarePosts: 2,273
    DKLond said:

    As in, it's not the artists calling the shots - it's the suits. Suits can't think a creative thought to save their lives - so they just go through a checklist of "perceived" success criteria.
    Aye that's true, and sadly Scott has been victim of those suits many times.
    Just compare the theatrical version of "Kingdom of Heaven" with the director's cut...
    The director's cut is better, but the movie is still mediocre to me. It's very beautiful, though.

    Scott is extremely competent in technical terms, but I don't think much of him as a storyteller. For that, he's entirely too reliant on a well written script - and it seems he can't pick a good one to save his life.

    Probably too arrogant and complacent these days.
  • scorpex-xscorpex-x Member RarePosts: 1,030
    Great film! The massive success it's having outside of America will hopefully mean they make a trilogy and maybe more Blizzard titles get converted.  It would suck for the potential to be lost and Blizzard step out after one movie.

    Thankfully America isn't the be all and end all of things these days, and the critics don't have anywhere near as much power as they think they do.  So here's hoping!
  • Jean-Luc_PicardJean-Luc_Picard Member LegendaryPosts: 8,295
    DKLond said:

    Scott is extremely competent in technical terms, but I don't think much of him as a storyteller.
    Blade Runner. Thelma and Louise. American Gangster.
    "The ability to speak doesn't make you intelligent" - Qui-gon Jinn in Star Wars.
    After many years of reading Internet forums, there's no doubt that nor does the ability to write.
    CPU: Intel Core I7 9700k (4.90ghz) - GPU: ASUS Dual GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER EVO 8GB DDR6 - RAM: 32GB Kingston HyperX Predator DDR4 3000 - Motherboard: Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Ultra - PSU: Antec TruePower New 750W - Storage: Kingston KC1000 NVMe 960gb SSD and 2x1TB WD Velociraptor HDDs (Raid 0) - Main display: Samsung U32J590 32" 4K monitor - Second display: Philips 273v 27" monitor - VR: Pimax 8K headset - Sound: Sony STR-DH550 AV Receiver HDMI linked with the GPU and the TV, with Jamo S 426 HS 3 5.0 speakers and Pioneer S-21W subwoofer - OS: Windows 10 Pro 64 bits.


  • DKLondDKLond Member RarePosts: 2,273
    DKLond said:

    Scott is extremely competent in technical terms, but I don't think much of him as a storyteller.
    Blade Runner. Thelma and Louise. American Gangster.
    Blade Runner is mesmerizing - but also pretty dull.

    As for the other two, I find both overrated.

    But, as I said, when the script is good - he can tell a good story. To me, that means the writer is the storyteller - and Scott just facilitates the story with his excellent grasp of visuals.

    But we don't have to agree :)
  • Jean-Luc_PicardJean-Luc_Picard Member LegendaryPosts: 8,295
    DKLond said:
    DKLond said:

    Scott is extremely competent in technical terms, but I don't think much of him as a storyteller.
    Blade Runner. Thelma and Louise. American Gangster.
    Blade Runner is mesmerizing - but also pretty dull.

    As for the other two, I find both overrated.

    But, as I said, when the script is good - he can tell a good story. To me, that means the writer is the storyteller - and Scott just facilitates the story with his excellent grasp of visuals.

    But we don't have to agree :)
    We are apparently disagreeing like gentlemen - a nice change on these forums :)
    So what would be a good movie for you? You have an example?
    "The ability to speak doesn't make you intelligent" - Qui-gon Jinn in Star Wars.
    After many years of reading Internet forums, there's no doubt that nor does the ability to write.
    CPU: Intel Core I7 9700k (4.90ghz) - GPU: ASUS Dual GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER EVO 8GB DDR6 - RAM: 32GB Kingston HyperX Predator DDR4 3000 - Motherboard: Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Ultra - PSU: Antec TruePower New 750W - Storage: Kingston KC1000 NVMe 960gb SSD and 2x1TB WD Velociraptor HDDs (Raid 0) - Main display: Samsung U32J590 32" 4K monitor - Second display: Philips 273v 27" monitor - VR: Pimax 8K headset - Sound: Sony STR-DH550 AV Receiver HDMI linked with the GPU and the TV, with Jamo S 426 HS 3 5.0 speakers and Pioneer S-21W subwoofer - OS: Windows 10 Pro 64 bits.


Sign In or Register to comment.