| Error creating thumbnail: File missing Join our Discord! |
| If you have been locked out of your account you can request a password reset here. |
Talk:Warcraft: The Beginning: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mNo edit summary |
StanTheMan (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
:: Bah, I was thinking it's certainly present enough for a curious party to see and it and go 'Is that maybe a real firearm or something?' Again, certainly more so than some other pages. Granted it may be a fictional gun but unlike a lot of that VG stuff this at least has a fairly decent basis in reality. I'll admit it's something of a stretch on both counts, still though. That said, I don't think it's fair to criticize pages for media from other countries; They might watch stuff and wonder what gun is what, too - and visit this page. Last I checked the site isn't just for popular films. (For the record, most of those 'obscure russian' titles actually have a fair bit more than two guns in them that I've seen). [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan|talk]]) 18:40, 1 December 2016 (EST) | :: Bah, I was thinking it's certainly present enough for a curious party to see and it and go 'Is that maybe a real firearm or something?' Again, certainly more so than some other pages. Granted it may be a fictional gun but unlike a lot of that VG stuff this at least has a fairly decent basis in reality. I'll admit it's something of a stretch on both counts, still though. That said, I don't think it's fair to criticize pages for media from other countries; They might watch stuff and wonder what gun is what, too - and visit this page. Last I checked the site isn't just for popular films. (For the record, most of those 'obscure russian' titles actually have a fair bit more than two guns in them that I've seen). [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan|talk]]) 18:40, 1 December 2016 (EST) | ||
:My comment about identification relates to just that - identification. All this page really says is "this is a fictional blunderbuss prop made specifically for the movie, not based on any real (particular) design", which isn't helpful. It's not so much about the obscurity of the medium and moreso about what IMFDb can say about its firearms as they relate to real guns, and in this case it's essentially nothing that couldn't be taken from a Warcraft wiki page or something (for the same reason that something like Halo isn't allowed, because the designs are almost entirely fictional and IMFDb can't say anything that the Halo wiki couldn't.) I do have to give the page author props for doing the page as good as they can, though (and I'm not necessarily opposed to allowing well-done pages slide even if they aren't entirely applicable under the normal rules.) --[[User:Sergeant Simpleton|Sergeant Simpleton]] ([[User talk:Sergeant Simpleton|talk]]) 21:13, 1 December 2016 (EST) | :My comment about identification relates to just that - identification. All this page really says is "this is a fictional blunderbuss prop made specifically for the movie, not based on any real (particular) design", which isn't helpful. It's not so much about the obscurity of the medium and moreso about what IMFDb can say about its firearms as they relate to real guns, and in this case it's essentially nothing that couldn't be taken from a Warcraft wiki page or something (for the same reason that something like Halo isn't allowed, because the designs are almost entirely fictional and IMFDb can't say anything that the Halo wiki couldn't.) I do have to give the page author props for doing the page as good as they can, though (and I'm not necessarily opposed to allowing well-done pages slide even if they aren't entirely applicable under the normal rules.) --[[User:Sergeant Simpleton|Sergeant Simpleton]] ([[User talk:Sergeant Simpleton|talk]]) 21:13, 1 December 2016 (EST) | ||
:: That's fair enough - I certainly like and appreciate that you keep it in that context about what can be said in terms of expertise, to which I do agree here it would be stretching it, as I said earlier. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan|talk]]) 02:29, 2 December 2016 (EST) | |||
=Moved= | |||
[[Image:Warcraft.jpg|thumb|300px|right|Warcraft (2016)]] | [[Image:Warcraft.jpg|thumb|300px|right|Warcraft (2016)]] | ||
Revision as of 07:29, 2 December 2016
I don't think this qualifies. Evil Tim (talk) 21:42, 30 November 2016 (EST)
- It seems to fit all of the exception criteria for a single firearm page. Certainly seems just as (if not more) eligible than some other one-gun media pages I've seen. StanTheMan (talk) 02:31, 1 December 2016 (EST)
- Well, the problem is the single gun rule requires the firearm to be real and identifiable. This one has a fictional "boomstick" that looks like a flintlock blunderbuss, but was probably never a functional firearm (because really, why would it be?) Evil Tim (talk) 02:41, 1 December 2016 (EST)
- For me, it's a flintlock blunderbuss (of course, a modern reproduction), with some mock ups to make it look more fantasy. I don't know, is this gun was fired in the movie, or not (in the last case, it's non-firing prop). Also, may be useful to rename the section "boomstick" to "blunderbuss"? Pyramid Silent (talk) 11:57, 1 December 2016 (EST)
- I don't think a generic flintlock blunderbuss prop really warrants a page - it'd be one thing if it were clearly a real, historical firearm, but this is a completely fictional prop that probably doesn't even fire. You have to consider that IMFDb is a resource for people trying to identify guns in media they've seen, and it's very unlikely anyone is going to stumble around trying to find out what the weapon used was. The only time fictional guns really deserve a pass is if they're clearly based or built off of real guns (see Blade's MAC-11s) or if they play a very prominent role in the film/game/show/whatever (see the Samaritan in Hellboy) - and usually only if the source already features a lot of real firearms that would qualify the page anyway. This doesn't really fit either of those. --Sergeant Simpleton (talk) 15:15, 1 December 2016 (EST)
- For me, it's a flintlock blunderbuss (of course, a modern reproduction), with some mock ups to make it look more fantasy. I don't know, is this gun was fired in the movie, or not (in the last case, it's non-firing prop). Also, may be useful to rename the section "boomstick" to "blunderbuss"? Pyramid Silent (talk) 11:57, 1 December 2016 (EST)
- Well, the problem is the single gun rule requires the firearm to be real and identifiable. This one has a fictional "boomstick" that looks like a flintlock blunderbuss, but was probably never a functional firearm (because really, why would it be?) Evil Tim (talk) 02:41, 1 December 2016 (EST)
identify guns in media they've seen Which is why i wonder why someone keeps making all these pages for obscure russian (or wherever they are from) movies with like two guns in them. Who seriously is watching those movies and then showing up here?--AnActualAK47 (talk) 16:02, 1 December 2016 (EST)
- I had found the screen used gun. I'm not sure, but it's looks similar to real historical blunderbusses, like this and this. Pyramid Silent (talk) 16:12, 1 December 2016 (EST)
- Bah, I was thinking it's certainly present enough for a curious party to see and it and go 'Is that maybe a real firearm or something?' Again, certainly more so than some other pages. Granted it may be a fictional gun but unlike a lot of that VG stuff this at least has a fairly decent basis in reality. I'll admit it's something of a stretch on both counts, still though. That said, I don't think it's fair to criticize pages for media from other countries; They might watch stuff and wonder what gun is what, too - and visit this page. Last I checked the site isn't just for popular films. (For the record, most of those 'obscure russian' titles actually have a fair bit more than two guns in them that I've seen). StanTheMan (talk) 18:40, 1 December 2016 (EST)
- My comment about identification relates to just that - identification. All this page really says is "this is a fictional blunderbuss prop made specifically for the movie, not based on any real (particular) design", which isn't helpful. It's not so much about the obscurity of the medium and moreso about what IMFDb can say about its firearms as they relate to real guns, and in this case it's essentially nothing that couldn't be taken from a Warcraft wiki page or something (for the same reason that something like Halo isn't allowed, because the designs are almost entirely fictional and IMFDb can't say anything that the Halo wiki couldn't.) I do have to give the page author props for doing the page as good as they can, though (and I'm not necessarily opposed to allowing well-done pages slide even if they aren't entirely applicable under the normal rules.) --Sergeant Simpleton (talk) 21:13, 1 December 2016 (EST)
- That's fair enough - I certainly like and appreciate that you keep it in that context about what can be said in terms of expertise, to which I do agree here it would be stretching it, as I said earlier. StanTheMan (talk) 02:29, 2 December 2016 (EST)
Moved
Warcraft: The Beginning is a 2016 fantasy action film, the first in a planned series based on Blizzard Entertainment's best-selling strategy/role-playing games. Travis Fimmel leads the cast as Anduin Lothar, a knight of the armies of the kingdom of Azeroth, which is invaded by orcs from another dimension.
The following guns appeared in the film Warcraft: The Beginning:
Blunderbuss
The only firearm used in the film is the fictitious "boomstick", a blunderbuss-style pistol that fires an exceptionally large lead ball. It is produced by the dwarf kingdom for Azeroth's soldiers, who, despite their unfamiliarity with the new weapon, use them to great effect against the orcs.
"A mechanical marvel... it's a boomstick."
King Magni Bronzebeard (voiced by Michael Adamthwaite) opens a case with a newly-forged boomstick inside, along with the lead shot and powder horn.
