Daaark

I can't wait to see it! I am a fan of all 3 movies (and Red Sonja too). The only sore point I see is that Mako is dead, and we won't be able to have Akiro the wizard narrating the movie like he did the other two. He promised us both times that the story of Conan becoming King was a story to be told another time, and now he isn't around to tell it to us!

The 2011 movie wasn't as good as I'd hoped. I just think the editing and the pacing killed it. It's a problem a lot of movies have.

I think people are taking the Viking comments too literally. It was a passing comment to explain a basic concept to someone who wasn't necessarily familiar with the world Conan lives in.

I've enjoyed every incarnation of Conan that I have come across. Just like I enjoy pretty much every incarnation of Batman. I have a shelf with all the Batman blus released so far,.So I have campy 60s Batman, gothic 80s batman, campy 90s batman, gritty Frank Miller batman, Nolan Batman, etc... I can enjoy all of them equally, and none of them have any effect on my enjoyment of the other.

Just like I can have and enjoy lots of movies about Santa Claus. He can be a drunk bank robber who pees on himself. He can be the old man who takes his holiday back from the guys in Halloween town who tried to steal it and do it better. He can be a series of people, with the current one being Tim the Toolman Taylor. Or he can be a guy who needs his brother Fred to help him stop the IRS from seizing his assets.

Conan can exist in many forms just like the above. And I don't see how any Conan can be the 'true Conan' when he has been around in so many forms over the last decade. All versions of Conan were official at the time of their creation, and the fandom is split up across all his incarnations. You cannot be true to Conan for everyone, you can only pick the bits and pieces you like from the various incarnations.

IMO, just like there are things about Bob Kane's original Batman I didn't like, there are things about REH's Conan I don't care as much for. People talk in this thread about how the rights holders are cheaply exploiting him, but I feel REH didn't define him too well either, and just used him as a tool for whatever story he wanted to write. And if that story was rejected, well, it was easy to re-title it, and swap out Conan or his other poorly defined doppelganger for each other and no one would know the different.

REH's Conan has many convenient and conflicting skills and traits. He's super strong, and over 6 feet tall, yet he moves like, and has the reflexes of a jaguar. He's a great warrior, master thief, commander, leader, but also a scholar who can read a dozen languages, and decipher ancient symbols and writings. Everything but sorcery. Who needs a supporting cast when your generic to a fault character has every skill needed, and plays both sides of the fence on every possible trait? No matter what happens, he has the tools to get the job done, and he's never out of his element.

Personally, I like that he has been refined down over the years, and given more specific characterization. I prefer the huge, savage, muscular guy from the Frazetta paintings, the comics, and the films. Characters are best when they have specific strengths and weaknesses!