cute mistakes happen
hey lawl i missed you man, but anyways the movie looks dope. Going to see it today in imax and 3D since I was only partially into WoW i only know partially of the story this movie is about, but i heard its non WoW player friendly also.no you can talk here
o I know, I watched the lores man. It was good in my opinion except for a couple thingsFor what it's worth, the Warcraft movie isn't about WoW, it's the story concerning the first of the RTS games.
--- Double Post Merged, , Original Post Date: ---
Thrall is the orc who gets enslaved right? Durotans son?Duncan Jones has sort of hinted recently that a sequel will be greenlit, so I think that's good news for fans. I'd be curious to see how he'd continue this new continuum within the lore, because he's said previously that he doesn't want to touch the Arthas storyline. So I guess a sequel would be about the Second War.
--- Double Post Merged, , Original Post Date: ---
In the lore, yeah. I haven't seen the movie yet, but I'm assuming they go in the same direction.Thrall is the orc who gets enslaved right? Durotans son?
theyre Thrall is going to be the next movie for sure, hopefully they dont forget to include important stuff this timeIn the lore, yeah. I haven't seen the movie yet, but I'm assuming they go in the same direction.
Oh really? Is that based on what happens in the movie, or? I mean, it makes sense to include him if they're moving to WCII stuff and expand the story of Draenor and everything. But I wouldn't be surprised if Duncan Jones makes even more changes with the general plotline. As far as I've heard, there's no real allusion to the Burning Legion or Demons in the first movie. Unless we're just supposed to assume the general audience could see that coming due to Fel magic existing.Overall, warcraft. I guess it makes sense that the next movie would focus on the second game... Finally get to see ner zul....
I'm not sure how it would all work within a single movie, plus Jones has said he doesn't want to touch Arthas' story.I gotta say, I am curious about how they would handle warcraft III. The game has an expansion and simply too much happens through it. Realistically speaking each campaign could easily be a movie. I guess they could reasonably end the story the next movie but the movie now easily sets up pretty much everything for warcraft III and even WOW eventually.
As far as I can tell the movie sticks very well to the lore though. So the whole thing is set up fairly well for the second games. We even saw baby thrall which at least hints at WIII events. As far as the burning legion, it wasn't specifically mentioned but the game sticks to the lore enough for it to make perfect sense. You have the fel, gul dan, mediv.... It all fits perfectly well. I haven't heard they specifically didn't want to make the arthas storyline but if they remove that then they have less to fit into the WIII events. Realistically speaking they could introduce the scourge without arthas. Instead we get ner zul in the next movie, the guy ends up turned by demons into the lich king and the next movie has the orcs and humans fleeing to kalimdor for their own reasons. It's still too much for a single movie but it is mostly doable.Oh really? Is that based on what happens in the movie, or? I mean, it makes sense to include him if they're moving to WCII stuff and expand the story of Draenor and everything. But I wouldn't be surprised if Duncan Jones makes even more changes with the general plotline. As far as I've heard, there's no real allusion to the Burning Legion or Demons in the first movie. Unless we're just supposed to assume the general audience could see that coming due to Fel magic existing.
I'm not sure how it would all work within a single movie, plus Jones has said he doesn't want to touch Arthas' story.
As far as adapting storylines from WoW, I think that'd be like adapting WC3 x10, because the story doesn't gel as well since telling a story isn't the main purpose of the game, compared to the RTS's and everything. Not sure how much it'd resemble the lore of the game tbh.
Hmm, the general outline, yes. But from what I've seen there are some rather large changes. They may seem minor in the first movie, but they sort of spread outwardly, affecting other things potentially.As far as I can tell the movie sticks very well to the lore though. So the whole thing is set up fairly well for the second games. We even saw baby thrall which at least hints at WIII events. As far as the burning legion, it wasn't specifically mentioned but the game sticks to the lore enough for it to make perfect sense. You have the fel, gul dan, mediv.... It all fits perfectly well. I haven't heard they specifically didn't want to make the arthas storyline but if they remove that then they have less to fit into the WIII events. Realistically speaking they could introduce the scourge without arthas. Instead we get ner zul in the next movie, the guy ends up turned by demons into the lich king and the next movie has the orcs and humans fleeing to kalimdor for their own reasons. It's still too much for a single movie but it is mostly doable.
--- Double Post Merged, , Original Post Date: ---
--- Double Post Merged, , Original Post Date: ---
--- Double Post Merged, ---
--- Double Post Merged, ---
Salty because you can't run it?cant wait till it sucks
nah its perfect so farSalty because you can't run it?