1290 replies to this topic

[ThuleanWarrior]

I think it's obvious what killed the movie:
Millennium pushing for reusing the plot of the Milius movie, which is incompatible with a Conan proper movie.
And when taken out of the context of the Milius movie itself, that mere plotline is generic trite.
Because of this, it was a failure already at the script level. Utterly beyond rescue. Sean Hood made it better, but face it, with the premise used a withwhile Conan movie simply cannot be made. The lacklustre score and editing certainly didn't help, but really, the forced Milius references killed it.

Yes.

Everyone is saying that this is not a remake but essentially it was. Same basic story minus the slavery because everyone bitched about that. Same story but not presented as well.

[Taranaich]

There will be no more talk of Howard's work as good fantasy literature worthy of discussion by any serious scholars or new fans as everyone will assume that this movie is representative of Howard's work. There will be no new generation of fans from this film seeking out the original works because anyone who enjoyed the movie is most likely nearly illiterate.

Not if I, or any of the other Howard fans here, have anything to do with it. The only way people will stop talking about REH as good fantasy literature worthy of discussion by serious scholars or new fans is if WE stop doing this. The only way there will be no generation of new fans is if WE don't keep spreading the word of REH. Even in the darkest of circumstances, we cannot lose hope.

[Roargathor]

Alright, just got back from seeing it. I brought my woman with me to check it out in 2d. While it's fresh in the mind I thought I'd get my first impressions down. SPOILERS ALERT!!!!

The good: Visuals were great. Action was fun and brutal. Costume design was decent. Characters were a bit shallow, but still felt as if they could have walked off the pages of a Howard tale as he usually described the thugs and villains in a brief but detailed fashion. Jason Momoa delivered a great Conan. I loved how he interacted with everyone, friend or foe. Some scenes really did have a Howard feel to them and made me smile.

The bad: The story was weak. Dialogue was shit at times. The volume was louder than some metal concerts I've been to, distracting us from the action on screen. I hate shaky cam. The sound track was totally forgettable. The direction was poor. This movie felt rushed, not because of the pacing (though that was ridiculous and all over the place). No this isn't me being a civilized movie snob, it's the truth.

The ugly: Characters and scenes doing shit that makes no F---ing sense abound. Marique leaving claws in the dirt so Conan can find them? A ship being towed across the land.. when Artus's ship seems to always be close by... IN THE OCEAN! Conan pulling armor out of his ass, wearing it for a few minutes then putting it back up his ass. Conan always leaving his Pirate friends because "It's something I have to do alone", only to walk 1/4 mile a way from the ship for.... A sex scene, just because. No other reason. How is that bad? Watch it and tell me how well it fits. The Birth scene was silly. Not a good idea to open a Conan movie with a joke, wait that wasn't supposed to be funny? Conan gags Tamara... Which is fine, only it was cheesy and comedic rather than practical. Conan stuffs another wad of cloth into Remo's mouth before giving him a catapult ride... No Remo doesn't spit it out.. Apparently hyboreans don't have that reflex. No, the camera follows him through the air... Was this supposed to be awesomer in the 3d version? Because it was complete shit from my seat.

I don't know. I was teased throughout the movie with slices of Howard's world, but those slices were thin and sparsely placed between chunks of cheese and lard which tasted allot like Kull the conqueror and Scorpion king. While I was watching, I was trying not to think, just take it all in and enjoy what I could. After processing it all I have come to the conclusion that Hollywood hates Howard, and Howard fans. They must simply take Conan and his world for a joke. Maybe they really tried to give us a decent Conan flick, but it seems they failed again. This movie, despite it's efforts to deliver a new and interesting take on our favorite barbarian, has succeeded in only adding another coat of cheesy shit to the franchise.

I was hoping that this movie was the stepping stone from which more Howard tales could leap from, but I don't think that is possible. Like Amsterdamaged said, this movie wasn't made for civilized people... Unfortunately civilized people are the ones who pay for sequels, and this movie won't generate enough revenue to warrant one. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't see it happening. The enthusiasm and is there, but the direction and writing are totally absent.

Overall I'm torn. Half of me is with Amsterdamaged, the other with Taranaich. I can appreciate what it is for what it is, and walk away from it all with a cheap fun time (and 2 free passes due to complaining about the volume), but I know that this movie isn't going away. It will likely fade from the memory of the average movie goer, but for Conan fans, this is going to be a topic of discussion and debate for many moons to come. I guess I can say that I didn't expect much more than to see a dude looking more like Howard's Conan than Ahnuld running around a world that looks like Howard's hyborean age kicking ass for 112 minutes. I still think we deserve more than that.

So I'm both grateful and pissed off at the same time. I liked it for what it tries to do and the glimpses of Howard's Conan we get to see, but I hate it for the lack of effort to polish the story and direction. Overall I feel the movie was half assed. I give it a "C" being generous because it's the only Conan movie we're gonna see for a loooong time. That is all.

Edited by Roargathor, 20 August 2011 - 10:26 AM.

[Boot]

Question: Does the 3D version contain scenes not shown in the 2D version?

I see different movie times for the film. 2:09 at my theater. 1:52 at Movietimes.com.

There's a scene in the trailer that is not in the film I saw where a character stabs a spear at Khalar Zim--a spear that Zim ducks real fast and then laughs about almost getting his face pierced. It looks like a strictly 3D scene, so I was wondering if little things like that are in the 3D version.

[ThuleanWarrior]

Not sure. I saw the 2D version and I do not remember that spear ducking scene. I doubt it would help the film though. Seems like they would be the same.

[norse_sage]

Word. Our effort is need now more than ever.

[theagenes]

Well I honestly don't know what to make of this film. I have mixed feelings. I thought it was enjoyable as a low budget S&S movie and I was entertained, but goddammit I wanted so much more than this. After a decade of following this project through its various incarnations, this was a real let done.

Jason was great. He could be Conan for this generation, no doubt. But I'm afraid he will never get the chance now. This is not a vehicle that will launch a franchise.

[rich bonk]

I really liked this movie, which came as a big surprise to me. It wasn't perfect, but it was like the best damn Savage Sword of Conan adaptation by Roy Thomas and Buscema of a de Camp and Carter epic you ever read. In fact, I actually felt like I was in the middle of a Howard saga frequently throughout. And that is mainly because of Jason's terrific character. But he is not the Barry Smith Conan. This movie skips that period. he is the full grown, mature super-confident and worldly wise Buscema Conan of People of the Black Circle or Jewels of Gwahlur, and as crazy-sly as Howard ever made him. Sure, there was too many quick cheat CGI edits, but it was ten times better than any of the old De laurentius junk like the original Arnold films, Sonja or Kull. I knew going in it was going to be better than that but I didn't expect it to be this cool. Very, very many cool parts. One reason it was cool was the heavy use of horror, something which i have always felt was essential to a Weird Tales epic. The sets and scenes were very beautiful, in spite of the weird feeling that Oppenheimer and Donnelly never laid eyes on a Hyborian map. But that makes it all the more surprising how well it turned out. It will be easily worth getting on DVD and watching again from time to time. Oh well, I'm not that hard to please when you get right down to it.

I was thinking pretty much the same thing! It was a "Savage Sword of Conan" on film. If Frazetta's classic Conan painting, standing on the skulls, represented Howard's Character, then this film would be an Ernie Chan inked, John Buscema pin-up masterpiece! I thought that Momoa portrayed the character very well; he was a great choice for the role...His sword handling seemed natural. I enjoyed the film for what it was - good fun! I'll own this on DVD, by Crom!

[ThuleanWarrior]

^Which Frazetta painting has Conan standing on skulls? I'm curious and would like to see this painting. It represented Howard's Conan after all and I am a HUGE Conan fan so I would like to know. I have never seen it before.

Edited by ThuleanWarrior, 20 August 2011 - 12:36 PM.

[Freebooter]

Hello all,
I will see the movie this afternoon. But y'all have as varied responses as possible, from yea to nea! I am looking foward to seeing it. But some time back I remember Peter Jackson was to direct it. I was elated, then I heard he backed out of it for some reason. I was so dissappointed and saddened by that. I felt, no telling how the movie will turn out now. And based on y'all's very varied feelins adn reviews, I will just have to find out today. I still wish Peter had done it with the same depth that he did LOTR.
FB

[rich bonk]

^Which Frazetta painting has Conan standing on skulls? I'm curious and would like to see this painting. It represented Howard's Conan after all and I am a HUGE Conan fan so I would like to know. I have never seen it before.

Actually, there are one or two identifiable skulls, some ribcage, an arm off to the left and a girl clinging to his leg. I'm sure I didn't have to elaborate on the piece, everyone knows it (except for you, evidently). I believe I used the word, "If" - IF that famous Frazzeta painting (which you've never seen) represented Howard's Conan...

[theagenes]

REH scholarship isn't going away because of this; that's for damn sure.

And I hate to blame CPI/Paradox for this movie. I think Fred tried his best to salvage this thing, but it was a hopeless task. The question now is where do we go from here?

[norse_sage]

The horror is that the biggest loser here is going to be Paradox, the very same who have championed our cause since day one.
They are the ones who will struggle big time to get any more REH movies off ground, and who knows how this will affect comic and book sales.
Whereas Millennium and LGF, the a$$holes chiefly responsible for everything wrong here, will get a tax deduction, blame Conan for not being relevant, and then muck up other properties.

[theagenes]

Comment: It's interesting the pronounciations used in the film. Acheron is not "Awk-er-on", as I've always said it and heard it. It's "Ah-sure-on", with the "ch" taking on the "sh" sound. And "Hyrkania", which I've always thought of as "Her-conn-ee-ah" sprouts another syllable and becomes "High-er-Cain-ee-ah".

I'm glad you brought that up, because the pronounciation of Acheron drove me crazy! Every time someone said ASHuron it dragged me out of the movie. You're absolutely right that it should be pronounced A-kher-on. It's a well-known name from Greek mythology (river of the underworld). How do you screw up something like that? Was there no one involved in this film that knew this?

[Crawley]

^Which Frazetta painting has Conan standing on skulls? I'm curious and would like to see this painting. It represented Howard's Conan after all and I am a HUGE Conan fan so I would like to know. I have never seen it before.

Actually, there are one or two identifiable skulls, some ribcage, an arm off to the left and a girl clinging to his leg.  I'm sure I didn't have to elaborate on the piece, everyone knows it (except for you, evidently).  I believe I used the word, "If" - IF that famous Frazzeta painting (which you've never seen) represented Howard's Conan...

I believe you guys are referring to the Frazetta painting on the Cimmerian page via this link:

http://www.thecimmerian.com/the-art-of-frank-frazetta-robert-e-howard-part-one/

[stonecold-mike]

I really liked this movie, which came as a big surprise to me. It wasn't perfect, but it was like the best damn Savage Sword of Conan adaptation by Roy Thomas and Buscema of a de Camp and Carter epic you ever read. In fact, I actually felt like I was in the middle of a Howard saga frequently throughout. And that is mainly because of Jason's terrific character. But he is not the Barry Smith Conan. This movie skips that period. he is the full grown, mature super-confident and worldly wise Buscema Conan of People of the Black Circle or Jewels of Gwahlur, and as crazy-sly as Howard ever made him. Sure, there was too many quick cheat CGI edits, but it was ten times better than any of the old De laurentius junk like the original Arnold films, Sonja or Kull. I knew going in it was going to be better than that but I didn't expect it to be this cool. Very, very many cool parts. One reason it was cool was the heavy use of horror, something which i have always felt was essential to a Weird Tales epic. The sets and scenes were very beautiful, in spite of the weird feeling that Oppenheimer and Donnelly never laid eyes on a Hyborian map. But that makes it all the more surprising how well it turned out. It will be easily worth getting on DVD and watching again from time to time. Oh well, I'm not that hard to please when you get right down to it.

I was thinking pretty much the same thing! It was a "Savage Sword of Conan" on film. If Frazetta's classic Conan painting, standing on the skulls, represented Howard's Character, then this film would be an Ernie Chan inked, John Buscema pin-up masterpiece! I thought that Momoa portrayed the character very well; he was a great choice for the role...His sword handling seemed natural. I enjoyed the film for what it was - good fun! I'll own this on DVD, by Crom!

Yep. This post is just what I felt the film was! I very much enjoyed it! Looking foreward to a very likely extended cut!

[Black Indy]

There will be no more talk of Howard's work as good fantasy literature worthy of discussion by any serious scholars or new fans as everyone will assume that this movie is representative of Howard's work. There will be no new generation of fans from this film seeking out the original works because anyone who enjoyed the movie is most likely nearly illiterate.

Not if I, or any of the other Howard fans here, have anything to do with it. The only way people will stop talking about REH as good fantasy literature worthy of discussion by serious scholars or new fans is if WE stop doing this. The only way there will be no generation of new fans is if WE don't keep spreading the word of REH. Even in the darkest of circumstances, we cannot lose hope.

Over the last 12+ years, the exposure of the real words of Robert E. Howard has exploded on the literary scene. It is not slowing down - through the efforts of 99% of the people here on this forum, plus the REH Foundation, REHupa, rehinnercircle, Two-Gun Raconteur, the late Cimmerian blog and other numerous positive REH blogs - Howard's literary legacy will continue to grow. Within 4 years, every word he ever wrote will be available.

A crappy movie about Conan won't hurt that legacy: every movie so far about a REH character has been CRAP. And we all know why: BECAUSE THESE MOVIES WERE NOT ABOUT THE CHARACTER PORTRAYED BY REH! The strength of Robert E. Howard's writing will carry on. The torch stays lit.

I wept in the darkness as I watched this movie. I consoled myself with some real REH when I got home. Much better now.

Black Indy

[Freebooter]

Question: Just why did Peter Jackson decide not to do it as I have heard, and if he did do it, do you think the movie would have been better or worse?
FB

[MilkManX]

I saw it last night. 2d XD or whatever they made me pay a few dollars more for a bigger screen and nicer chairs..

I enjoyed it.

Was it REH's Conan....not really. Was it fun? Yes.

I think visually it looks really good and the feel of Howards world was there.

Could it have used a better director? Most certainly. I think Michael Bassett runs circles around Nispel.

My hope is that it sells enough tickets to get a REH Adaptation done.

I think Momoa was good as Conan and under a better director WHO understands REH and is doing an adaptation he can really shine.

I give it a C+

[Braden Poirier]

I saw the new Conan last night, and found it to be ok.

Roargathor hit every point that I felt home, so I won't go into depth on my thoughts of the movie.

I will add that I unfortunately saw it in 3D (no 2D showings nearby), and immediately was thrown off by the god awful use of the 3D tech. You could visually see where they cut into the frames of the movie to separate elements in the shots to create "Depth". In the torture scene with the Jailor, his teeth did not look attached to his mouth, there was massive cuts and tears in the scenery of the cimmerian villages, etc etc. Very, very poorly done and was clearly an unnecessary cost added to the movie that would have been better used elsewhere.

AVOID THE 3D VERSION IF YOU CAN.

Edited by Braden Poirier, 20 August 2011 - 04:45 PM.