Options

Sam Raimi to direct World of Warcraft movie

123578

Posts

  • Options
    OlivawOlivaw good name, isn't it? the foot of mt fujiRegistered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Heartlash wrote: »
    Hachface wrote: »
    Yes because novelizations of video game franchises are always rip-roaring literary successes.

    They certainly do a better job than WoW. Richard Knaak knows how to write a fun, engaging novel.

    BTW, if you're expecting anything other than "good comic book-ish movie" in terms of "literary value" then I don't really know what to say. This movie is likely going to be entertainment oriented with a few hints of characterization and perhaps a dash of thematic sincerity. It's not fucking Dostoevsky.

    It's Sam Raimi

    Odds are it will have a significant amount of respect for the source material, plus a big heaping helping of cheese

    Which is A-OK with me because I like Sam Raimi movies and I would never have watched this movie if he hadn't signed on

    Olivaw on
    signature-deffo.jpg
    PSN ID : DetectiveOlivaw | TWITTER | STEAM ID | NEVER FORGET
  • Options
    HachfaceHachface Not the Minister Farrakhan you're thinking of Dammit, Shepard!Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Heartlash wrote: »
    Hachface wrote: »
    Yes because novelizations of video game franchises are always rip-roaring literary successes.

    They certainly do a better job than WoW. Richard Knaak knows how to write a fun, engaging novel.

    BTW, if you're expecting anything other than "good comic book-ish movie" in terms of "literary value" then I don't really know what to say. This movie is likely going to be entertainment oriented with a few hints of characterization and perhaps a dash of thematic sincerity. It's not fucking Dostoevsky.

    Well obviously. I think that the more firmly they play this as mindless fun the better it will be, especially if they give it a satrical edge. It's other people in this thread who seem to think that the actual plot might be worthwhile as anything but an excuse for CGI battle scenes.

    Hachface on
  • Options
    nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    It better have crazy ass goblins thats all I'm sayin

    nexuscrawler on
  • Options
    HyperAquaBlastHyperAquaBlast Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    My main question is why not just have blizzard do a full length CGI film? Their game movies are always amazing.

    HyperAquaBlast on
    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    HeartlashHeartlash Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Hachface wrote: »
    Heartlash wrote: »
    Hachface wrote: »
    Yes because novelizations of video game franchises are always rip-roaring literary successes.

    They certainly do a better job than WoW. Richard Knaak knows how to write a fun, engaging novel.

    BTW, if you're expecting anything other than "good comic book-ish movie" in terms of "literary value" then I don't really know what to say. This movie is likely going to be entertainment oriented with a few hints of characterization and perhaps a dash of thematic sincerity. It's not fucking Dostoevsky.

    Well obviously. I think that the more firmly they play this as mindless fun the better it will be, especially if they give it a satrical edge. It's other people in this thread who seem to think that the actual plot might be worthwhile as anything but an excuse for CGI battle scenes.

    I'd say Warcraft has about as much plot-potential as a film as the average comic-book movie. As we've seen, those can turn out pretty solid or fail miserably, and a lot of that success hinges on plot material.

    Heartlash on
    My indie mobile gaming studio: Elder Aeons
    Our first game is now available for free on Google Play: Frontier: Isle of the Seven Gods
  • Options
    HeartlashHeartlash Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    My main question is why not just have blizzard do a full length CGI film? Their game movies are always amazing.

    It takes them 6 months to produce 2 minutes of CGI, that's why.

    Heartlash on
    My indie mobile gaming studio: Elder Aeons
    Our first game is now available for free on Google Play: Frontier: Isle of the Seven Gods
  • Options
    HachfaceHachface Not the Minister Farrakhan you're thinking of Dammit, Shepard!Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    I'd say the stand-out successes of the comic book movies are Spider-Man and X-Men, both franchises with unusually good plotlines and characters for superhero comic books. Warcraft's setting seems like a mediocre D&D campaign.

    Hachface on
  • Options
    RUNN1NGMANRUNN1NGMAN Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    My main question is why not just have blizzard do a full length CGI film? Their game movies are always amazing.

    While that would be awesome, it would probably take them about 10 years to make.

    RUNN1NGMAN on
  • Options
    HyperAquaBlastHyperAquaBlast Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Heartlash wrote: »
    My main question is why not just have blizzard do a full length CGI film? Their game movies are always amazing.

    It takes them 6 months to produce 2 minutes of CGI, that's why.


    So is thing supposed to come out tomorrow or what? Just saying that other then video games, Blizzard has always had quality cinematics and I just wonder why they don't pursue it harder with full length stuff. No one else comes close to what they do on there on that front and if they were to jump to actual hollywood movies then they'd probably be second only to Pixar quality wise if they put their mind to it.

    HyperAquaBlast on
    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    RUNN1NGMANRUNN1NGMAN Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Am I in the minority that I think a movies based off of the events in WC3 would make a much better movie than anything based on the plot of WoW? The overall plot of WC3 is pretty engaging when you consider all the things that happen. Also, a lot of people playing WoW never played WC3 and so it would be a good way to explain the back-story. The plot of WoW is pretty random and because of the necessities of a MMORPG has a lot of things happening that don't make a lot of sense considering the big picture.

    RUNN1NGMAN on
  • Options
    psychotixpsychotix __BANNED USERS regular
    edited July 2009
    Heartlash wrote: »
    My main question is why not just have blizzard do a full length CGI film? Their game movies are always amazing.

    It takes them 6 months to produce 2 minutes of CGI, that's why.


    So is thing supposed to come out tomorrow or what? Just saying that other then video games, Blizzard has always had quality cinematics and I just wonder why they don't pursue it harder with full length stuff. No one else comes close to what they do on there on that front and if they were to jump to actual hollywood movies then they'd probably be second only to Pixar quality wise if they put their mind to it.

    I doubt blizzard has the render farms of pixar. That's probably what's limiting them. I'm sure given the right resources they could do it.

    I'm sure if there is a warcraft movie, there will be a lot of CG in it.

    psychotix on
  • Options
    HeartlashHeartlash Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Hachface wrote: »
    I'd say the stand-out successes of the comic book movies are Spider-Man and X-Men, both franchises with unusually good plotlines and characters for superhero comic books. Warcraft's setting seems like a mediocre D&D campaign.

    Don't forget Batman, the franchise which gave us both this:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLZQ3OLEJWE

    and this:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jqq4j52Fb4

    That sort of discrepancy shows the potential for differing interpretations of evolving, large quantities of pop-source materials in a franchise like this.

    I'm trying to decide whether I think you're overplaying the quality of the X-Men/Spiderman source material (which is so vast that it's fair to say some of it is horrible, some of it is great) or underplaying the quality of Warcraft source material (which has gone downhill with WoW, but still has loads of potential for an entertaining, engaging film). But I think we're going to have to agree to disagree.

    **EDIT**

    Though I should also say that I may be basing too much of this on the few Diablo books I read, which were pretty good. I've read none of the peripheral Warcraft stuff, I just assume similar quality (as Blizzard tends to use the same authors).

    Heartlash on
    My indie mobile gaming studio: Elder Aeons
    Our first game is now available for free on Google Play: Frontier: Isle of the Seven Gods
  • Options
    -SPI--SPI- Osaka, JapanRegistered User regular
    edited July 2009
    My main question is why not just have blizzard do a full length CGI film? Their game movies are always amazing.
    Yeah, I mean that worked really well for Square.

    -SPI- on
  • Options
    HachfaceHachface Not the Minister Farrakhan you're thinking of Dammit, Shepard!Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    -SPI- wrote: »
    My main question is why not just have blizzard do a full length CGI film? Their game movies are always amazing.
    Yeah, I mean that worked really well for Square.

    Poor Sakaguchi.
    Although Advent Children could have been far far worse.

    Hachface on
  • Options
    HyperAquaBlastHyperAquaBlast Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    psychotix wrote: »
    Heartlash wrote: »
    My main question is why not just have blizzard do a full length CGI film? Their game movies are always amazing.

    It takes them 6 months to produce 2 minutes of CGI, that's why.


    So is thing supposed to come out tomorrow or what? Just saying that other then video games, Blizzard has always had quality cinematics and I just wonder why they don't pursue it harder with full length stuff. No one else comes close to what they do on there on that front and if they were to jump to actual hollywood movies then they'd probably be second only to Pixar quality wise if they put their mind to it.

    I doubt blizzard has the render farms of pixar. That's probably what's limiting them. I'm sure given the right resources they could do it.

    I'm sure if there is a warcraft movie, there will be a lot of CG in it.

    Thats what I am talking about. Why even try any live action with this stuff anyways? Just CG the whole damn thing if you are going to do it.

    I don't really care since I don't care about the games or universe or this movie but I did watch WC3 and WoW cinematics many times cause they look so so good.

    HyperAquaBlast on
    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    -SPI--SPI- Osaka, JapanRegistered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Hachface wrote: »
    -SPI- wrote: »
    My main question is why not just have blizzard do a full length CGI film? Their game movies are always amazing.
    Yeah, I mean that worked really well for Square.

    Poor Sakaguchi.
    Although Advent Children could have been far far worse.
    Well I was thinking more Spirits Within, which was far far worse.

    -SPI- on
  • Options
    HeartlashHeartlash Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Heartlash wrote: »
    My main question is why not just have blizzard do a full length CGI film? Their game movies are always amazing.

    It takes them 6 months to produce 2 minutes of CGI, that's why.


    So is thing supposed to come out tomorrow or what? Just saying that other then video games, Blizzard has always had quality cinematics and I just wonder why they don't pursue it harder with full length stuff. No one else comes close to what they do on there on that front and if they were to jump to actual hollywood movies then they'd probably be second only to Pixar quality wise if they put their mind to it.

    I wasn't being hyperbolic. Literally, they've come out and said that it takes their team about 6 months to produce the CGI in a single CGI segment. In order to produce a fully CGI film in any kind of reasonable timeframe, they'd have to make vast changes to their production methods, which would probably result in the overall product not being as good as we'd hope based on their in-game CGI movies.

    Heartlash on
    My indie mobile gaming studio: Elder Aeons
    Our first game is now available for free on Google Play: Frontier: Isle of the Seven Gods
  • Options
    HyperAquaBlastHyperAquaBlast Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Hachface wrote: »
    -SPI- wrote: »
    My main question is why not just have blizzard do a full length CGI film? Their game movies are always amazing.
    Yeah, I mean that worked really well for Square.

    Poor Sakaguchi.
    Although Advent Children could have been far far worse.


    Oh and the reason that shit Square first did went no where was because the damn movie wasn't Final Fantasy. Have no idea who they were try cater to for that movie. It did look nice at the time though.


    edit: I was also talking about Spirts Within.

    HyperAquaBlast on
    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    HachfaceHachface Not the Minister Farrakhan you're thinking of Dammit, Shepard!Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    The Spirits Within was not absolutely terrible. It was also not Final Fantasy.

    Hachface on
  • Options
    urahonkyurahonky Resident FF7R hater Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Advent Children was good for the FF7 fanboy in me.

    urahonky on
  • Options
    CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Hachface wrote: »
    The Spirits Within was not absolutely terrible. It was also not Final Fantasy.

    An actual Final Fantasy movie would not have sold well outside of a niche of FFVII nerds.

    Couscous on
  • Options
    psychotixpsychotix __BANNED USERS regular
    edited July 2009
    Heartlash wrote: »
    Heartlash wrote: »
    My main question is why not just have blizzard do a full length CGI film? Their game movies are always amazing.

    It takes them 6 months to produce 2 minutes of CGI, that's why.


    So is thing supposed to come out tomorrow or what? Just saying that other then video games, Blizzard has always had quality cinematics and I just wonder why they don't pursue it harder with full length stuff. No one else comes close to what they do on there on that front and if they were to jump to actual hollywood movies then they'd probably be second only to Pixar quality wise if they put their mind to it.

    I wasn't being hyperbolic. Literally, they've come out and said that it takes their team about 6 months to produce the CGI in a single CGI segment. In order to produce a fully CGI film in any kind of reasonable timeframe, they'd have to make vast changes to their production methods, which would probably result in the overall product not being as good as we'd hope based on their in-game CGI movies.

    Again, I wonder what sort of render farm blizzard has. Creating a few in game cinematics, well it wouldn't be worth having a pixar, or lucas arts sized render farm, that shit costs money. They already have the artists in house and if they partnered with a studio that had the raw hardware it might be possible.
    Though I should also say that I may be basing too much of this on the few Diablo books I read, which were pretty good. I've read none of the peripheral Warcraft stuff, I just assume similar quality (as Blizzard tends to use the same authors).

    It's just as good.

    psychotix on
  • Options
    HachfaceHachface Not the Minister Farrakhan you're thinking of Dammit, Shepard!Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Couscous wrote: »
    Hachface wrote: »
    The Spirits Within was not absolutely terrible. It was also not Final Fantasy.

    An actual Final Fantasy movie would not have sold well outside of a niche of FFVII nerds.

    Well. All you need to do to make it a real FF movie is include a chocobo, an airship, Shiva, Ifrit, Bahamut, and a guy named Cid.

    You can make any kind of movie you want out of those elements, and it would be an FF movie.

    Hachface on
  • Options
    SteevLSteevL What can I do for you? Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    I have to admit that I got a lot more interested in this movie when they announced Sam Raimi's involvement. I still have no idea if he or anyone can make a good movie out of this, though.

    It should also be noted that while all the gaming websites are referring to it as the "World of Warcraft" movie, the press release only refers to the Warcraft universe, only making mention of the game in the last paragraph. That gives me the impression it won't be set during the general time period as WoW or its expansions, as other people in the thread have already speculated.

    I really do need to beat The Frozen Throne one day.

    SteevL on
  • Options
    DanHibikiDanHibiki Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Couscous wrote: »
    Hachface wrote: »
    The Spirits Within was not absolutely terrible. It was also not Final Fantasy.

    An actual Final Fantasy movie would not have sold well outside of a niche of FFVII nerds.

    which would have been far better for them since FF nerds are far more important market then those who aren't.

    DanHibiki on
  • Options
    psychotixpsychotix __BANNED USERS regular
    edited July 2009
    SteevL wrote: »
    I have to admit that I got a lot more interested in this movie when they announced Sam Raimi's involvement. I still have no idea if he or anyone can make a good movie out of this, though.

    It should also be noted that while all the gaming websites are referring to it as the "World of Warcraft" movie, the press release only refers to the Warcraft universe, only making mention of the game in the last paragraph. That gives me the impression it won't be set during the general time period as WoW or its expansions, as other people in the thread have already speculated.

    I really do need to beat The Frozen Throne one day.

    WOW is a huge hit. Most people know what it is. By comparison, WC, WC2, WC3, whilel huge hits, are not as well known.

    It makes sense to market from your strongest title in the franchise.

    psychotix on
  • Options
    shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Qingu wrote: »
    Just because something is derivative doesn't mean it can't be entertaining.
    I guess I'm pickier about originality than you. I mean, if you write a fantasy story with forest-dwelling elves and tribal warrior orcs in it (or even a fantasy story with "fae" and "uruks" or whatever the fuck) who are functionally identical to the creatures in Tolkien's universe, unless you are doing very interesting things with these concepts or else ironically commenting on the genre or something (which Warcraft 3 sort of did, to be fair), that's just being lazy. I fucking hated Eragon for this reason, and I think Christopher Paolini ought to be dragged out and hung.

    Except that while Warcraft started out fairly generic, it's not all that generic anymore. It's pushed away from alot of the cliches. And, really, it's nothing much at all like Tolkien. It's a Warhammer derivative if it's anything.

    I mean, seriously, it seems obvious you don't know the setting much at all. Because even the complaints that your making that are valid are valid for the wrong reasons.

    shryke on
  • Options
    GoodKingJayIIIGoodKingJayIII They wanna get my gold on the ceilingRegistered User regular
    edited July 2009
    It's too early for me to have any kinds of feelings about this movie.

    I burnt out on Warcraft three years ago. So that's a no.

    Sam Raimi is very hit or miss with me. His directorial annoucement is a complete wash.

    Chris Metzen is involved in the project. That's something, I suppose. If he were writing the story or the script itself, then I might keep a closer eye on this one. But "working closely" with script writers could mean a lot of different things. So I'm wary.

    So a big "meh" from me so far. There's still plenty of time to get excited I suppose. This movie's not coming for what, three years at least? They could do some good things. But it'll probably just be another steaming pile of licensing poop.

    GoodKingJayIII on
    Battletag: Threeve#1501; PSN: Threeve703; Steam: 3eeve
  • Options
    MvrckMvrck Dwarven MountainhomeRegistered User regular
    edited July 2009
    It was stated at the 07 Blizzcon that Metzen was penning the first draft of the script, and will be on board as co-executive producer. While I know that title is handed out like candy in the film world, I would like to believe that Activision Blizzard has enough pull (and intelligence) that they are going to make sure he has near final say on everything. This is their #1 IP, allowing anyone outside the company free reign to fuck it up goes against every bit of dedication to quality they have shown since the studio started.

    For those that state the Warcraft universe is generic fantasy...I don't know what to tell you. I suspect you believe any work is "generic" in it's genre. The guy that complained blizzard didn't bother to change the name of orcs to something else. Of course they didn't. They're orcs. One of the most agonizingly awful things to do is to take a easily understood concept and change the goddamn name to make it seem more surreal. Clocks for chronometers, bathrooms to personal refresher stations and similar crap. If 95% of the speech is english, just go with the flow and don't make your story needlessly complex.

    I do hope the movie takes itself somewhat seriously. Obviously, LOTR proved you can have well based humor in a serious fantasy setting. I think Metzen has a fair enough sense of humor that he won't destroy the overall tone of the movie with needless pandering jokes. I don't need to see Epic Movie: Warcraft edition with the main character going up to someone else, tapping him on the shoulder and saying "Hi" 10 times to get 10 different responses. Or random sheep exploding.

    Actually I take that back. Random sheep exploding would be funny, regardless of the context of the movie.

    Mvrck on
  • Options
    ZealotZealot Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Actually I take that back. Random sheep exploding would be funny, regardless of the context of the movie.

    This needs to be a scene after the credits.

    Zealot on
    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    QinguQingu Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Mvrck wrote: »
    For those that state the Warcraft universe is generic fantasy...I don't know what to tell you. I suspect you believe any work is "generic" in it's genre. The guy that complained blizzard didn't bother to change the name of orcs to something else. Of course they didn't. They're orcs. One of the most agonizingly awful things to do is to take a easily understood concept and change the goddamn name to make it seem more surreal. Clocks for chronometers, bathrooms to personal refresher stations and similar crap. If 95% of the speech is english, just go with the flow and don't make your story needlessly complex.
    Orcs were invented by Tolkien less than 60 years ago. I can understand calling things elves and vampires and shit and molding those tropes into new shapes. Those have been around for a while.

    But recycling "orcs" is not even trying. I mean, someone pointed out that they're not even that similar to Tolkien's orcs anyway, outward appearances aside. They have a tribal shamanistic warrior culture. Tolkien's orcs were just cartoon evil.
    I do hope the movie takes itself somewhat seriously. Obviously, LOTR proved you can have well based humor in a serious fantasy setting.
    Why? LoTR took itself extremely seriously. Warcraft does not take itself seriously. Most of my interactions with the third game involved some degree of intentional ridiculousness.

    And I don't really care that Warcraft's setting is unoriginal ... because the game appears to be self-aware and silly about it. Which is totally cool. I mean, I really liked the third game. My original complaint, which spun off into this longer debate, is with the idea that people actually take it seriously and think it has earnest, non-ironic worth as a fantasy setting.

    Qingu on
  • Options
    GoodKingJayIIIGoodKingJayIII They wanna get my gold on the ceilingRegistered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Qingu wrote: »
    Mvrck wrote: »
    For those that state the Warcraft universe is generic fantasy...I don't know what to tell you. I suspect you believe any work is "generic" in it's genre. The guy that complained blizzard didn't bother to change the name of orcs to something else. Of course they didn't. They're orcs. One of the most agonizingly awful things to do is to take a easily understood concept and change the goddamn name to make it seem more surreal. Clocks for chronometers, bathrooms to personal refresher stations and similar crap. If 95% of the speech is english, just go with the flow and don't make your story needlessly complex.

    Orcs were invented by Tolkien less than 60 years ago.

    No they weren't.

    GoodKingJayIII on
    Battletag: Threeve#1501; PSN: Threeve703; Steam: 3eeve
  • Options
    HachfaceHachface Not the Minister Farrakhan you're thinking of Dammit, Shepard!Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Qingu wrote: »
    Mvrck wrote: »
    For those that state the Warcraft universe is generic fantasy...I don't know what to tell you. I suspect you believe any work is "generic" in it's genre. The guy that complained blizzard didn't bother to change the name of orcs to something else. Of course they didn't. They're orcs. One of the most agonizingly awful things to do is to take a easily understood concept and change the goddamn name to make it seem more surreal. Clocks for chronometers, bathrooms to personal refresher stations and similar crap. If 95% of the speech is english, just go with the flow and don't make your story needlessly complex.

    Orcs were invented by Tolkien less than 60 years ago.

    No they weren't.

    I'm afraid so.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orc#Etymology_of_the_word_.22orc.22

    Hachface on
  • Options
    QinguQingu Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Orcs were invented by Tolkien less than 60 years ago.

    No they weren't.
    They were according to Wikipedia, easily the best source of nerd etymology.

    What exactly did you have in mind? (Not to be argumentative, I'm genuinely curious here)

    Actually, I think a case can be made that Tolkien "invented" the archetypes of elves and dwarves. Before Tolkien, both were basically ephemeral species of fairies, like Santa Claus' little helpers (interchangeably dwarves and elves). They had no discernible cultural attributes.

    Qingu on
  • Options
    psychotixpsychotix __BANNED USERS regular
    edited July 2009
    Qingu wrote: »
    Mvrck wrote: »
    For those that state the Warcraft universe is generic fantasy...I don't know what to tell you. I suspect you believe any work is "generic" in it's genre. The guy that complained blizzard didn't bother to change the name of orcs to something else. Of course they didn't. They're orcs. One of the most agonizingly awful things to do is to take a easily understood concept and change the goddamn name to make it seem more surreal. Clocks for chronometers, bathrooms to personal refresher stations and similar crap. If 95% of the speech is english, just go with the flow and don't make your story needlessly complex.
    Orcs were invented by Tolkien less than 60 years ago. I can understand calling things elves and vampires and shit and molding those tropes into new shapes. Those have been around for a while.

    But recycling "orcs" is not even trying. I mean, someone pointed out that they're not even that similar to Tolkien's orcs anyway, outward appearances aside. They have a tribal shamanistic warrior culture. Tolkien's orcs were just cartoon evil.
    I do hope the movie takes itself somewhat seriously. Obviously, LOTR proved you can have well based humor in a serious fantasy setting.
    Why? LoTR took itself extremely seriously. Warcraft does not take itself seriously. Most of my interactions with the third game involved some degree of intentional ridiculousness.

    And I don't really care that Warcraft's setting is unoriginal ... because the game appears to be self-aware and silly about it. Which is totally cool. I mean, I really liked the third game. My original complaint, which spun off into this longer debate, is with the idea that people actually take it seriously and think it has earnest, non-ironic worth as a fantasy setting.

    Look at warhammer for an example (which is valid since WC is based off it). Part of warhammer has fairly developed characters, part of it can be fairly dark, and at times it does take itself seriously. The on the other hand you have goblin catapults, skaven blowing themselves up left and right, and general idiocy like blood bowl where it very much mocks itself.

    Warcraft could go either way. If they wanted to make a serious movie they could, if they wanted to make a gag real... they could. Some of the stuff in the instruction books is rather "serious fantasy" esque. A lot of stuff in the game is "lol, stop poking me, splooding sheep"

    And LoTR did not take itself that seriously all the time. Remember Tom Bombadil?

    It really depends on the person looking at the franchises.

    I'll see your male warcarft player cosplaying a female elf and raise you .....

    180px-Faggotry_forest.jpg
    Actually I take that back. Random sheep exploding would be funny, regardless of the context of the movie.

    Yes, this must be done.

    psychotix on
  • Options
    GoodKingJayIIIGoodKingJayIII They wanna get my gold on the ceilingRegistered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Hachface wrote: »
    Qingu wrote: »
    Mvrck wrote: »
    For those that state the Warcraft universe is generic fantasy...I don't know what to tell you. I suspect you believe any work is "generic" in it's genre. The guy that complained blizzard didn't bother to change the name of orcs to something else. Of course they didn't. They're orcs. One of the most agonizingly awful things to do is to take a easily understood concept and change the goddamn name to make it seem more surreal. Clocks for chronometers, bathrooms to personal refresher stations and similar crap. If 95% of the speech is english, just go with the flow and don't make your story needlessly complex.

    Orcs were invented by Tolkien less than 60 years ago.

    No they weren't.

    I'm afraid so.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orc#Etymology_of_the_word_.22orc.22

    From that very same article.
    Tolkien wrote:
    I originally took the word from Old English orc.
    The word *orcné (attested in the plural orcnéas) is a hapax legomenon in the poem Beowulf. It is generally supposed to contain an element -né, cognate to Gothic naus and Old Norse nár, both meaning "corpse". The usual Old English word for "corpse" is líc, but -né appears in dryhtné "dead body of a warrior", where dryht is the name of a military unit (vaguely translated "band", "host", etc.). In *orcné, if it is to be glossed as "orcus-corpse" the meaning may be "corpse from Orcus (i.e. the underworld)" or "devil-corpse", understood as some sort of walking dead.

    If you've read Tolkien, you know that orcs are basically that, undead elves. The modern understanding of orcs is taken from Tolkien, sure, but it's incorrect to say he invented them.

    Orcs as undead or demons or corrupted faerie creatures existed long before he came along.

    GoodKingJayIII on
    Battletag: Threeve#1501; PSN: Threeve703; Steam: 3eeve
  • Options
    QinguQingu Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    psychotix wrote: »
    And LoTR did not take itself that seriously all the time. Remember Tom Bombadil?
    Okay. LoTR did take itself seriously as soon as JRR Tolkien stopped getting high and realized he actually needed to write something instead of just making up Hobbit appendix shit as he went along.

    Qingu on
  • Options
    ArchArch Neat-o, mosquito! Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Qingu wrote: »
    Orcs were invented by Tolkien less than 60 years ago. I can understand calling things elves and vampires and shit and molding those tropes into new shapes. Those have been around for a while.

    But recycling "orcs" is not even trying. I mean, someone pointed out that they're not even that similar to Tolkien's orcs anyway, outward appearances aside. They have a tribal shamanistic warrior culture. Tolkien's orcs were just cartoon evil.

    Damnit dude.

    Seriously. So what if some old guy invented "Orcs" 60 years ago and everyone went "Oooo hey here is a cool idea for a creature to write a story about!"

    Someone had to invent vampires, elves, manticores, dragons, and every other mythical fantasy creature ever at some point.

    If you are gonna toss down that elves and vampires are tropes you need to accept that the shit Tolkien penned has become a trope in the same vein as those.

    Arch on
  • Options
    QinguQingu Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    The word *orcné (attested in the plural orcnéas) is a hapax legomenon in the poem Beowulf. It is generally supposed to contain an element -né, cognate to Gothic naus and Old Norse nár, both meaning "corpse". The usual Old English word for "corpse" is líc, but -né appears in dryhtné "dead body of a warrior", where dryht is the name of a military unit (vaguely translated "band", "host", etc.). In *orcné, if it is to be glossed as "orcus-corpse" the meaning may be "corpse from Orcus (i.e. the underworld)" or "devil-corpse", understood as some sort of walking dead.

    If you've read Tolkien, you know that orcs are basically that, undead elves. The modern understanding of orcs is taken from Tolkien, sure, but it's incorrect to say he invented them.
    1. I don't remember any undead warrior from Beowulf.

    2. That's quite a stretch. Similarly, George Lucas didn't invent the concept of The Force ... Isaac Newton did?

    Qingu on
  • Options
    ArchArch Neat-o, mosquito! Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Qingu wrote: »
    psychotix wrote: »
    And LoTR did not take itself that seriously all the time. Remember Tom Bombadil?
    Okay. LoTR did take itself seriously as soon as JRR Tolkien stopped getting high and realized he actually needed to write something instead of just making up Hobbit appendix shit as he went along.

    Oh god dammit
    :x

    Arch on
Sign In or Register to comment.