CONAN THE BARBARIAN (2011) in Current Horror, Sci-Fi and Fantasy Films Forum

0 Points

Forum Jump

CONAN THE BARBARIAN (2011)

Author	Comment
drmedula	CONAN THE BARBARIAN (2011)	Lead	[-]
Aug 19 11 9:51 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Well, it's opened, so we should start a thread for it. Early response has been decidedly mixed, especially among Robert E. Howard fans ( no suprise there, they're still debating the merits of the 1982 version!)
	Remove this ad
luluthebeast		#1	[-]
Aug 20 11 10:27 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I guess THE HELP whupped Conan's big ass last night..... ...and everyone else!
Scathach80		#2	[-]
Aug 21 11 10:36 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I felt that they managed to get things just right. Plot-wise, they managed to come up with something roughly similar to a Howard Conan tale, which Conan the Destroyer did, but without the flaws of that film. They had some shout-outs to the original stories in dialogue (references to Venarum, the Tower of the Elephant). Keep in mind, that they decided to go with an R-rating stands as highly unusual. The last Die Hard film only received a PG-13. I appreciate that they tried to make up for Conan the Destroyer (Red Sonja, and Kull). Last Edited By: Scathach80 Aug 21 11 10:39 AM. Edited 1 times.
luluthebeast		#3	[-]
Aug 21 11 4:08 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	While bare breasts are always nice, they certainly weren't needed if that's what gave it it's R. I thought Momoa was better than Arnold as Conan was smart and crafty in the books and comics and Arnold just looked to dumb to play him. Overall though, I liked the first one better, especially because of the final battle scene, which ended up being a big, dark CGI mess. And it wasn't edited very well, probably because Lang wasn't as good with a sword as Momoa was and they wanted to hide that. Either way, it looks like it's going to be a bigger bomb than GREEN LANTERN.
Godziwolf		#4	[-]
Aug 21 11 9:03 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	luluthebeast wrote: While bare breasts are always nice, they certainly weren't needed if that's what gave it it's R. I thought Momoa was better than Arnold as Conan was smart and crafty in the books and comics and Arnold just looked to dumb to play him. Overall though, I liked the first one better, especially because of the final battle scene, which ended up being a big, dark CGI mess. And it wasn't edited very well, probably because Lang wasn't as good with a sword as Momoa was and they wanted to hide that. Either way, it looks like it's going to be a bigger bomb than GREEN LANTERN. I doubt it. Green Lantern had 5x the budget.
ryanbrennan		#5	[-]
Aug 21 11 11:10 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Box Office Mojo reports a budget of $200 million for GREEN LANTERN. It had an opening weekend of $53 million and is at $194 million worldwide after nine weeks. CONAN cost $90 million and had an opening weekend of $10 million. It usually goes down from there. Perhaps it will be saved by overseas box office.
Bill Warren		#6	[-]
Aug 22 11 6:01 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Well, we saw CONAN today, liked it reasonably well. I don't think Jason Momoa is going to be a one-movie wonder.
gene phillips		#7	[-]
Aug 22 11 6:25 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I see that its imdb page specifies nudity, but I suspect it won't be from female leads Nichols and McGowan-- or even that there will be much of it. I'd be happy to be wrong of course! NATURALISTIC! UNCANNY! MARVELOUS!
DerGolem		#8	[-]
Aug 22 11 7:21 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	gene phillips wrote: I see that its imdb page specifies nudity, but I suspect it won't be from female leads Nichols and McGowan-- or even that there will be much of it. I'd be happy to be wrong of course! There are a bunch of topless slave girls who Conan takes out for a drink after liberating them. Also Nichols gets naked for some sexy time with the Cimmerian himself. McGowan's a no show though.
Bill Warren		#9	[-]
Aug 23 11 6:35 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I thought the two big fights toward the end, the one against the tentacled thing that lives in the tunnels below the dungeon (and looks like the model for the sought-after "mask"), and the one between Conan and the head bad guy, were over-edited into near-total incoherence.
Mark Redfield		#10	[-]
Aug 24 11 5:31 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	An interesting read-- a long answer from screenwriter Sean Hood, who did some script doctoring on Conan The Barbarian HERE. The question he answers? What's it like to have your film flop at the box office? Worth a look. Mark Redfield Visit www.redfieldarts.com <
	Remove this ad
Robert Troch		#11	[-]
Aug 24 11 1:46 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Not at all interested in this. Just the look of the movie is all wrong. Pretty much the SOS we have already seen. The fantasy world of Howard is nowhere to be seen in the look of this thing. Robert T.
Scathach80		#12	[-]
Aug 24 11 6:22 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Godziwolf wrote: luluthebeast wrote: While bare breasts are always nice, they certainly weren't needed if that's what gave it it's R. I thought Momoa was better than Arnold as Conan was smart and crafty in the books and comics and Arnold just looked to dumb to play him. Overall though, I liked the first one better, especially because of the final battle scene, which ended up being a big, dark CGI mess. And it wasn't edited very well, probably because Lang wasn't as good with a sword as Momoa was and they wanted to hide that. Either way, it looks like it's going to be a bigger bomb than GREEN LANTERN. I doubt it. Green Lantern had 5x the budget. They had Green Lantern toys in Toys R Us, I saw the fliers in the newspaper. Warner Bros. will walk away with more of the lucre from the toys, since they own DC, and thus own Green Lantern. Conan 2011 received an R-rating, which suggests it did not have a large toyline push. Also, the studio will not walk away with particularly much of the lucre from the toys. Quite a few people have decried film franchises turning into toy commercials (e.g. Batman Forever and & Robin, the Star Wars Prequels), and this may have contributed to the decline of the R-rated adventure film. Remember the problems that Batman Returns caused, with just a PG-13 rating? So, that this Conan film received an R-rating actually stood as a counterintuitive turn.
DerGolem		#13	[-]
Aug 24 11 6:58 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Scathach80 wrote: Godziwolf wrote: luluthebeast wrote: While bare breasts are always nice, they certainly weren't needed if that's what gave it it's R. I thought Momoa was better than Arnold as Conan was smart and crafty in the books and comics and Arnold just looked to dumb to play him. Overall though, I liked the first one better, especially because of the final battle scene, which ended up being a big, dark CGI mess. And it wasn't edited very well, probably because Lang wasn't as good with a sword as Momoa was and they wanted to hide that. Either way, it looks like it's going to be a bigger bomb than GREEN LANTERN. I doubt it. Green Lantern had 5x the budget. They had Green Lantern toys in Toys R Us, I saw the fliers in the newspaper. Warner Bros. will walk away with more of the lucre from the toys, since they own DC, and thus own Green Lantern.� Conan 2011 received an R-rating, which suggests it did not have a large toyline push. Also, the studio will not walk away with particularly much of the lucre from the toys.� Quite a few people have decried film franchises turning into toy commercials (e.g. Batman Forever and & Robin, the Star Wars Prequels), and this may have contributed to the decline of the R-rated adventure film. Remember the problems that Batman Returns caused, with just a PG-13 rating? So, that this Conan film received an R-rating actually stood as a counterintuitive turn.� Its true that this new Conan didn't get a tie-in action figure line to help make back its money. However I don't think that has anything to do with it being R rated. Aliens (1986) was rated R, like its predecessor and the majority of its sequels, and yet had a very lucrative and prolific toy line, via Kenner, at the time. Kenner also produced toys for Terminator and RoboCop (both R rated) and a different company made toys for the R rated Starship Troopers. Basically, back in the day they used to make toys out of everything regardless or ratings and target demographics. I remember being a kid going to toy stores and seeing toys for movies I would have never been allowed to see because they were R or even PG-13. I think the fact that the only movies that get toys made nowadays are either Disney animated films or superhero movies speaks more to the decline of the American toy industry in the face of the advent of video games and other such media then it does to the idea that toys somehow resulted in fewer R rated action films. Last Edited By: DerGolem Aug 24 11 7:02 PM. Edited 1 times.
Badfinger		#14	[-]
Aug 25 11 12:42 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Mark Redfield wrote: An interesting read-- a long answer from screenwriter Sean Hood, who did some script doctoring on Conan The Barbarian HERE. The question he answers? What's it like to have your film flop at the box office? Worth a look. Thanks for the link. That was interesting as are the comments that follow it.
drmedula		#15	[-]
Aug 25 11 1:24 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	The producers have blamed the film's failure on "brand equity"; a fancy way of saying that, despite the character's ongoing success in video games, bookstores, and comics, he JUST WASN'T POPULAR ENOUGH. (It's been pointed out that a "brand" that had a LOT less "Equity"- PLANET OF THE APES- managed to overcome that little problem by MAKING A REALLY GOOD MOVIE).
luluthebeast		#16	[-]
Aug 25 11 2:35 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I guess they don't want to admit they made a crappy movie.
Robert Troch		#17	[-]
Aug 25 11 4:26 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Badfinger wrote: Mark Redfield wrote: An interesting read-- a long answer from screenwriter Sean Hood, who did some script doctoring on Conan The Barbarian HERE. The question he answers? What's it like to have your film flop at the box office? Worth a look. Thanks for the link. That was interesting as are the comments that follow it. Yes interesting, but the bottom line seems to be that this is a lousy movie. I first saw the trailer a few months ago and just said to myself...What does all this have to do with Conan? The look chosen for the film was very disappointing. Conan should be special and that trailer contained nothing that was special. That alone was enough to turn me off and I didn't bother to see it. Now I am very glad I didn't waste my money. Robert T.
frightenstein		#18	[-]
Aug 25 11 6:42 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	This was a terrible film. It is nothing but a bunch of vignettes strung together and called a film. The second I found out Marcus Nispel was the director I knew it would be terrible. This man can't make a decent film. Sad thing is Jason Momoa has definite potential as Conan. Bad directing and a bad script doomed this franchise, not brand equity. They sold this film terribly as well. I only saw it because I love the stories. Too bad I wanted a Conan franchise and I think this will kill Momoa's career.
luluthebeast		#19	[-]
Aug 25 11 7:13 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	frightenstein wrote: and I think this will kill Momoa's career. I don't, he was great in GAME OF THRONES, plus he was the only good thing in CONAN, much closer to the book/comic book version than Arnold was.
frightenstein		#20	[-]
Aug 26 11 2:01 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	True but he headlined this and it was a colossal failure. Sean Hood the writer who tried to punch up the script has written an article basically saying it is not his fault and it has gone viral. This thing tanked big time and it isn't a week old.When I saw it it was myself and two other people in the theater in its first week of release. I really hope it doesn't kill his career. He was the only thing I liked about the film. It is easy for Hollywood to never give a guy like Momoa another big shot because the perception is this dude has just been on Baywatch and Stargate and had a bit part in Game of Thrones. I really liked Game of Thrones but apart from a cool rant and short fight he just sat around and glowered for the most part. I'm not sure how much mileage his performance will have in Hollywood. Again I would love to see a good Conan film with Momoa as the character. There were fleeting glimpses of the character Robert E. Howard wrote in Momoa's performance.
	Remove this ad

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Add Reply

Yuku free message boards

CONAN THE BARBARIAN (2011)

CONAN THE BARBARIAN (2011)