18 replies to this topic

[ZackDavisson]

This was an interesting retrospective review of "Conan the Barbarian: Queen of the Black Coast" #1-6.

http://www.comicsbul...-life-and-love/

It is another reminder that this is who Dark Horse is really after with this series -- people who have little knowledge of Conan, have never read the books or the comics, and are just curious as to what is going on.

[Aquilonia]

This was an interesting retrospective review of "Conan the Barbarian: Queen of the Black Coast" #1-6.

http://www.comicsbul...-life-and-love/

It is another reminder that this is who Dark Horse is really after with this series -- people who have little knowledge of Conan, have never read the books or the comics, and are just curious as to what is going on.

I can`t tell if the writer`s opinion about the art will be the same after Lolos steps in.

[johnnypt]

Yep, pretty much. The title's settled in the past couple of months around the 15K mark, which is about 50% higher than it was before. However, it's exactly where it was when Conan The Cimmerian #25 came out almost two years ago. I'm guessing digital sales are adding to the overall total since it wasn't a factor back then, this is just comparing direct sales.

But going back and looking at the numbers and even accounting for some additional sales from digital, I'm starting to question the new readers premise. The drift downward is generally the same as it was for CTC (Cimmerian did start a little higher and ended up losing 50% of its total from #1). They're getting new ones for sure, but how many old ones are they losing now? Could it be that Road of Kings just wasn't what people were looking for and not their entire apporach to Conan? Is 10K-15K simply the sustainable long term audience for a Conan book? I'll be interested to see where the title is by issue #9.

[ZackDavisson]

Comics on the whole are shrinking in numbers. Everyone is fighting for larger pieces of an incredibly shrinking pie. "Road of Kings" was definitely a mis-step, and hurt the series. I think Dark Horse is looking to recover from that, and that is how Wood's Conan became a re-boot of the series.

More than sales, I think it is cool to see someone people who have never read anything Conan picking up the series and getting their first taste. Hopefully a few of them will be encouraged to try out the real stuff as well. Everyone needs a gateway.

I do wish there was more effort to keeping old fans happy along with introducing new fans. They aren't going to see overall improvement if they sacrifice the loyal readers for people who are just picking up some issues to see what the hype is about.

As for Lolos ... I am reserving my opinion until I see the actual book, but yeah ...

Either way ... Hour of the Dragon!!!

[Ironhand]

Fairbanks' review seems to suggest that Wood & Cloonan have accomplished a kind of JuJitsu in which, by depicting Conan falsely, they have led new fans into a true appreciation of Conan. ?

[Battleborn]

Fairbanks' review seems to suggest that Wood & Cloonan have accomplished a kind of JuJitsu in which, by depicting Conan falsely, they have led new fans into a true appreciation of Conan. ?

I couldn't have put it better Ironhand.

[ZackDavisson]

I don't really get the "depicting Conan falsely" bit. It isn't like every human is magically born with an innate knowledge of the greatness of Robert E. Howard's Conan, that they then chose to acknowledge or ignore.

I personally first heard about Conan is Starlog magazine, when they were showing sketch art for the planned movie. I was interested enough to check out the Carter / de Camp books from the library, then got hooked on Thomas' Marvel comic run, which I kept reading until about issue 200, along with Savage Sword of Conan when I could find it. I loved the Conan film. Still do.

I didn't actually read pure Howard Conan until much, much later (decades later), when I ordered the books from England. Unlike nowadays, real Howard was hard to come by.

And yes, I hate crappy Conan comics. But I think Wood's Conan is much more "Conan" than the Ron Marz / Bart Sears garbage. And if this series piques people's curiousity enough to pick up a Howard book .. so much the better.

Edited by ZackDavisson, 09 August 2012 - 06:17 PM.

[Roquefort Raider]

I don't really get the "depicting Conan falsely" bit. It isn't like every human is magically born with an innate knowledge of the greatness of Robert E. Howard's Conan, that they then chose to acknowledge or ignore.

That is quite true, but Conan is more than a brand name. The stories written by Howard are there for anyone to read and study if they want to create Conan stories that are true to the source material. Since people differ, interpretations will vary; but I doubt most fans would truly object (or at least not strenuously) to an interpretation that differed from there but was rooted in Howard's prose. For example, there are many things I would have done differently from Tim Truman had I had the responsibility to adapt Black Colossus or Iron shadows in the moon. Still, I see that he was true to what had actually been written by Howard. The same thing happens with several of the "probable outlines" of Conan's career; I have big reservations regarding many of them (particularly Dale Rippke's), but I appreciate the level of scholarship that went into them and the respect they show for the original tales.

I personally first heard about Conan is Starlog magazine, when they were showing sketch art for the planned movie. I was interested enough to check out the Carter / de Camp books from the library, then got hooked on Thomas' Marvel comic run, which I kept reading until about issue 200, along with Savage Sword of Conan when I could find it. I loved the Conan film. Still do.

That makes one of us, my friend. The movie's character was the antithesis of Conan, psychologically speaking. He accepted imprisonment and slavery; he reacted to events instead of forcing them; he bore deep emotional scars. He didn't show gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth; he showed a general apathy sometimes interrupted by tantrums. I suspect that while many fans of the movie became Howard fans later on, a very small number of the stories became fans of the movie.

And yes, I hate crappy Conan comics. But I think Wood's Conan is much more "Conan" than the Ron Marz / Bart Sears garbage. And if this series piques people's curiousity enough to pick up a Howard book .. so much the better.

Well, I'm glad you confirm what I thought about the Marz/Sears preview pages, which caused me to steer well clear of the book. As for Wood and Cloonan, sales do suggest that more people are interested... although I'd rather have Conan and Bêlit in the Black Kingdoms (or better yet, on the western sea) than in Cimmeria.

[Arg0naut]

I agree that "burning with life and love" struck me as wrong, too. But I found things came into proper focus in the next panel, which suggests that "love" is a euphemism for carnal pleasure. In that sense I can't complain. Though the particular phrasing sounds a little more hollywood than the source material, I also feel that it's fairly close to the line in QofBC: "Let me live deep while I live."

I haven't read any Conan comics, but I have to admit, based on those three sample pages... I liked what I saw--I hope I'm not being heretical

[Ironhand]

I don't really get the "depicting Conan falsely" bit. It isn't like every human is magically born with an innate knowledge of the greatness of Robert E. Howard's Conan, that they then chose to acknowledge or ignore.

Of course people are not "born with an innate knowledge of the greatness of Robert E. Howard's Conan". All the more reason for a writer to learn about REH's Conan, and not depict him falsely to uninitiated readers.

[bairfanx]

I agree that "burning with life and love" struck me as wrong, too. But I found things came into proper focus in the next panel, which suggests that "love" is a euphemism for carnal pleasure. In that sense I can't complain. Though the particular phrasing sounds a little more hollywood than the source material, I also feel that it's fairly close to the line in QofBC: "Let me live deep while I live."

I haven't read any Conan comics, but I have to admit, based on those three sample pages... I liked what I saw--I hope I'm not being heretical

It was not a euphemism. By the end of the first arc, it's pretty clear that Conan has greater feelings than lust for Belit, which seems to be reciprocated by her ability to swallow at least some of her pride in the seventh issue. If you liked what you saw, Arg0naut, give it a shot. I definitely thought it was worth both my time and money.

As to heretical, I don't really get this "false Conan" idea that's being tossed around; it feels incredibly divisive, almost childish. What is it about this Conan that doesn't mesh with the old? While I haven't read the REH material, everything I've read about it has painted it as embodying the same core that the current Dark Horse stories do. That is, except for the racism. And the misogyny. And while you can say that they were a product of the times REH was writing, that doesn't actually excuse them, nor should any perceived allegiance to some established canon hinder a writer who is telling a good story.

And while I am not overly familiar with Conan, that last bit is something that plagues the bulk of mainstream comics. There are, in fact, Batman fans who would describe Nolan's Batman as "false" in the way some of you do Wood's Conan. He uses guns frequently and has willingly let multiple people die when he could have saved them. Oh, and he quit being Batman. And yet you will be hard-pressed to find any but the most ardent, hard-lined comic book fans agreeing with the idea that Nolan had a false Batman, because it's a pretty ridiculous idea, considering that it is probably the best superhero series in the existence of cinema.

[RobP]

As to heretical, I don't really get this "false Conan" idea that's being tossed around; it feels incredibly divisive, almost childish. What is it about this Conan that doesn't mesh with the old? While I haven't read the REH material......

At the risk of sounding divisive or childish if you get the chance to read the REH material you might get the "false" Conan idea. After all REH was the guy who invented the character

[johnnypt]

As to heretical, I don't really get this "false Conan" idea that's being tossed around; it feels incredibly divisive, almost childish. What is it about this Conan that doesn't mesh with the old? While I haven't read the REH material, everything I've read about it has painted it as embodying the same core that the current Dark Horse stories do. That is, except for the racism. And the misogyny. And while you can say that they were a product of the times REH was writing, that doesn't actually excuse them, nor should any perceived allegiance to some established canon hinder a writer who is telling a good story.

Before you make comments like that, I suggest you go and actually read the stories. You criticize people who are complaining about the way Conan is being portrayed, but essentially admit you have no idea what they're talking about. Then you call stories you've never read racist and misogynistic. The first six issues are pretty good comic books, but I'm not convinced at all that the changes made to the story and to Conan's character were necessary to make the comic version better.

Ah, just saw Rob got here before me!

[Taranaich]

I'm breaking my moratorium to address a few things.

As to heretical, I don't really get this "false Conan" idea that's being tossed around; it feels incredibly divisive, almost childish. What is it about this Conan that doesn't mesh with the old? While I haven't read the REH material...

everything I've read about it has painted it as embodying the same core that the current Dark Horse stories do. That is, except for the racism. And the misogyny. And while you can say that they were a product of the times REH was writing, that doesn't actually excuse them, nor should any perceived allegiance to some established canon hinder a writer who is telling a good story.

Just as well absolutely nobody I am aware of is bemoaning the lack of racism and misogyny that mark the lesser Conan stories, and it's the height of strawmen to suggest otherwise. I don't recall a single person complaining that the adaptation wasn't 1930s enough, and if I'm mistaken, then I most assuredly don't share that opinion. If that's really the only difference you can tell between Wood's Conan and Howard's Conan without reading the stories, I have to call your sources into question.

It's actually really easy to define how something is "false Conan": does Conan act in a way that is directly contradictory to how he would react in another story? Conan throughout the entirety of the first two issues of "The Argos Deception" acts antithetically to every example of Conan in captivity in the original stories. Is a city, place, or culture depicted in a way that is directly contradictory to REH's descriptions? The Pictish Wilderness, for all the three panels in which it appears, is completely wrong, as is practically everything I've seen from Cimmeria. Are events depicted in a manner directly contradictory to Howard's descriptions? Again, to use an absolutely tiny example that, alone, would be utterly minor, but is symptomatic of the bigger problem: Howard has Conan flee from the Argossean authorities without turning his head. Wood changes that to Conan fleeing from the Argossean authorities while turning his head to sneak a cocky smile back at them. Again, that alone is negligible, but it's that sort of thing which leads to the upcoming Cimmeria arc, which is - just like "The Argos Deception" - impossible given what we know of the period between the first and second parts of QotBC.

Wood got a lot right, no doubt: he definitely seemed to get Belit in the first few issues, and I appreciate some of his ideas, like the expansion of N'Gora and N'Yaga. But he did some things that are in stark defiance of Howard's original story, which is in

And while I am not overly familiar with Conan, that last bit is something that plagues the bulk of mainstream comics. There are, in fact, Batman fans who would describe Nolan's Batman as "false" in the way some of you do Wood's Conan. He uses guns frequently and has willingly let multiple people die when he could have saved them. Oh, and he quit being Batman. And yet you will be hard-pressed to find any but the most ardent, hard-lined comic book fans agreeing with the idea that Nolan had a false Batman, because it's a pretty ridiculous idea, considering that it is probably the best superhero series in the existence of cinema.

The problem here is there are several fundamental differences between Conan and Batman.

Conan was created solely by Robert E. Howard. Batman was a collaborative creation of Bob Kane and Bill Finger.
Conan was created purely from Howard's own desire to sell a series character to Weird Tales. Kane was comissioned by Detective Comics to create a new superhero to rival Superman.
Howard had the rights to Conan until his death. Kane sold away the rights to Batman early on his career.
Howard was the only one to write Conan stories until his death. Kane employed ghosters as early as 1943.
Conan is a licensed character in comics and any other medium than print. Batman originated in comics.
Even 75 years after his death, many people consider the best original Howard stories to be the definitive Conan in terms of quality and influence. Plenty of people have created stories which have vastly eclipsed the original Bob Kane stories in both regards.

So yes, it is silly to say that Nolan's Batman is not a "true Batman," because there is no "true" Batman in the same way that there is a true Conan.

Another major difference: The Dark Knight Rises is not a direct adaptation of any issue of Detective Comics, nor are any of Nolan's other Batman films: at most, they take cues from some of the more famous recent comics (The Dark Knight Returns, Knightfall and No Man's Land for TDKR). "Queen of the Black Coast" is an expanded adaptation of a Robert E. Howard story. Right there in the title. So I think there's a bit of a difference between a film based upon the central tenets of a character established in the decades since its creation, and a direct adaptation of one of the original stories.

[Ironhand]

My signature is already pinned at the maximum size, so I'll have to post this Conan quote in the text body instead.

"Step into this cell and I'll varnish the floor with your brains!"
--Conan, in The Scarlet Citadel

Woods' Clonan doesn't seem to have the balls to say any such thing.

[KG Thunder]

My signature is already pinned at the maximum size, so I'll have to post this Conan quote in the text body instead.

"Step into this cell and I'll varnish the floor with your brains!"
--Conan, in The Scarlet Citadel

Woods' Clonan doesn't seem to have the balls to say any such thing.

This might be anal, but isn't the quote "Free my hands and I'll varnish this floor with your brains!"?

[Slashing Sword]

My signature is already pinned at the maximum size, so I'll have to post this Conan quote in the text body instead.

"Step into this cell and I'll varnish the floor with your brains!"
--Conan, in The Scarlet Citadel

Woods' Clonan doesn't seem to have the balls to say any such thing.

Woods' Cloonan the "meek" Barbarian: "You can have my fur undy to varnish the floor, but please do not hurt me! If you hurt me, you will have to bear the wrath of Belit, the "confused" Queen of the Argos waters & Cimmerian wilderness!"

Edited by Slashing Sword, 15 August 2012 - 07:21 AM.

[Ironhand]

My signature is already pinned at the maximum size, so I'll have to post this Conan quote in the text body instead.

"Step into this cell and I'll varnish the floor with your brains!"
--Conan, in The Scarlet Citadel

Woods' Clonan doesn't seem to have the balls to say any such thing.

This might be anal, but isn't the quote "Free my hands and I'll varnish this floor with your brains!"?

I was going from wetwear memory.

[Ironhand]

My signature is already pinned at the maximum size, so I'll have to post this Conan quote in the text body instead.

"Step into this cell and I'll varnish the floor with your brains!"
--Conan, in The Scarlet Citadel

Woods' Clonan doesn't seem to have the balls to say any such thing.

Woods' Cloonan the "meek" Barbarian: "You can have my fur undy to varnish the floor, but please do not hurt me! If you hurt me, you will have to bear the wrath of Belit, the "confused" Queen of the Argos waters & Cimmerian wilderness!"

"If you step into this cell I will just die!"
--Clonan the Wuss, in Clonan the Barbarian

Edited by Ironhand, 16 August 2012 - 02:12 AM.