I am a fan of the real Conan since only a pair of years. I saw the damn movie a long time ago... it?s entertaining but i don?t like it very much. And i had read some comics. The fact is, i never liked the character... until i read the original stories by Howard. And i realise that this character is really GREAT, the human being at his perfection.
Conan is not a boy scout like Sir Lancelot because he is a SURVIVOR but he is not a complete monster, either. He have ethics. He is a classic "die-hard" hero like Philipe Marlow or the Captain Blood.I love that tales because it reminds me the old Hollywood adventure movies.
I don?t understand why the writer of this article said that the people think on a childish he-man when they thinks on Conan. Actually, most of the people think on a raper, on an ugly viking, on a savage bandit, on an ogre with a huge sword. The character from the first movie. I start to appreciate this film (by his own merits) at the same age i start to hate it (by his lack of fidelity).
Conan are always fighting in dangerous situations... he lives in a wild world. Probably, at one ocasion, he had no chance, and he must kill a women or being sadistic in order to obtain information... but we NEVER see him do that kind of things in the original tales. Because he is a hero and we always see him saving good people from the villains. Even BATMAN need to piss but we never see Bruce Wayne in the bathroom. It?s the same. The barbarian is not Elric. The barbarian is not a George RR Martin character (thanks Crom!!). The barbarian is not like a Goblin or a Dark Elf. He is a hero who destroy evil warlocks, who have respect with women, who kill dangerous creatures, who save entire cities.
I started to read the Del Rey books with suspicion. Because i feared that the main character would hurt innocents. But when i read a couple of stories i realized that was no need to worry: the cimmerian always choose the right way. Maybe i sound a little christian but i?m atheist!
The main problem, in my opinion is: the REH scholars are still fighting against DeCamp vision. I don?t know why: that battle was finished a long time ago. No one remember who was this guy.
And DeCamp was not THAT bad. Okay, he was a liar and he manipulate the original texts... but he wrote some of the best "pastiche stories". And, in my opinion, he get the character right or, at least, better than other authors. When i read Roy Thomas adaptations of DeCamp?s stuff... i see Conan the Cimmerian. But when i see a man slapping a kid in "Dark Horse" comics... i see Clonan the Barbarian.
In Howard stories is very difficult to see a woman die. No one by our hero?s hand. And when it happens is: A - an epic, terrible, tragic event or B - a punishment.
Normally, Conan never lies. But he have no problem in lieing in order to protect friends.
Actually, a big battle was lost: the Millius vision of the character. A monstruos brute with no intelligence that thinks "the best in life is to kill". A guy with no morale at all, an assasin. The same kind of guy that appears in the Donelly/Oppenheimer script and the public will see in the upcoming Lionsgate s&s movie (Marcus Nispel, 2011).
Yes, i believe in good and evil. i?m ingenuous?
Sorry my english very much: i?m still battling with the language.
Edited by Evil Thoth-Amon, 15 September 2009 - 07:42 PM.
