It's not the worst videogame movie ever, but it's definitely going to come up in the conversation.
So that's bad, yeah, but just how bad is it? With help from Google and The Numbers' movie comparison feature, I can tell you this: It's really bad.
I present to you...
An Incomplete List of Shitty Videogame Movies That Made More Money Than Borderlands
(in no particular order)
Warcraft ($439 million)
Max Payne ($88 million)
Doom ($59 million)
Street Fighter ($99 million)
Assassin's Creed ($241 million)
Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time ($336 million)
Hitman ($99 million)
Mortal Kombat (but Mortal Kombat is actually good) ($122 million)
Need for Speed ($194 million)
Five Nights at Freddy's ($297 million)
Uncharted ($401 million)
One big-budget, big(ish)-cast Hollywood film Borderlands managed to beat, which I bring up only because I paid good money to see it in theaters and I'm still sore about the whole thing, is Wing Commander, an utterly execrable celluloid waste of time and effort that bumbled to $11.5 million globally. Frankly I'm surprised it did that well.
need for speed is the best video game adaptation imo, completely captured the vibe of NSF Most Wanted (2005), fite me.
I also think Wow could have been decent, but there seems like there was some studio meddling or weird cuts that makes the movie disjointed as it weirdly shifts tone to being about love.
Wow was a difficult one to make. You've got the cliche of humans vs orcs, but in the context of Warcraft the orcs aren't pure evil antagonists. How do you make a swords and magic story where neither side are the bad guys?