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

0 Points

Forum Jump

CONAN THE BARBARIAN (2011)

Author	Comment
Dudley Manlove		#21	[-]
Nov 8 11 3:59 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Dear me. 3 things that stuck me when watching this pile last night. 1 Can you ever have too many fights???? Well this film proves yes...........and they go on and on and on and on!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! for example the sand monsters/ghouls whatever they were fight......... dear me. It just did not end. 2 The scene with young Conan killing the Indians(?) at the start was great but it was clear the kid was a !$%%!%* ruthless psycho killer!!!! even Hell Boy %*!! himself when he came back to the village with the severed heads. But then as a grown up he becomes a happy go lucky adventurer like he was channelling The Rock????????? Did the Cimmerians have child councellors???? he change was just too jarringly wierd and inconsistant. 3. So Conan cant find evil Steven Lang and travels their world searching with his mates, but as soon as he finds out who he is..................OH HIM!!!!! THEY ALL SAY!!!!!!!!!!! Yeah we know him! What???? So not one of his fellow travellers who know the bad guy as a badass of epic proportions ever once thought to mention him to Conan??? Poor plotting.
	Remove this ad
Badfinger		#22	[-]
Nov 19 11 2:21 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Watched this last night and it was pretty dismal. I was bored through the entire film. Loads of fake looking cgi blood splatter and dull fight scenes. The female lead was horribly miscast and came off very badly.
luluthebeast		#23	[-]
Nov 19 11 4:40 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Well, considering it's 90 million budget (not including prints and promo) and it's international gross of only 49 million, I don't think we have to worry about a sequel to this pile.
ScareBear		#24	[-]
Nov 26 11 11:36 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	We liked it and we both have read the Howard novels (my husband the new ones).
bromstaker		#25	[-]
Dec 2 11 10:46 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I caught this a few nights ago on pay-per-view. I liked it. Not great by any means, but entertaining enough. I liked it better than the Arnold films. I read some of the Conan stories when I was a teenager, and I thought both the film and in particular Jason Mamoa were a lot closer to the Robert E. Howard stories than the Arnold films.
oldmanster		#26	[-]
Dec 3 11 1:49 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Bought a copy of the DVD and I'm not sorry. The film has good points and bad points, but it's generally enjoyable. Biggest problem for me was the lack of a Basil Poledouris score. Sandahl Bergman remains much preferable to the female lead in both Destroyer and this new film. And I wish there was a better sense of humor to be found herein. But... not deal killers. This new effort is decent enough, with the high points being Stephen Lang and Rose McGowan. Momoa is okay, I guess, but nearly as inarticulate as Arnie. ... Reed
drmedula		#27	[-]
Dec 13 11 9:52 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Finally saw this last night; found it frustrating, as there ISN'T any crippling flaw I can point to that ruins the film- much of it is well-done; it's just never as good as it should be. It feels like it was made by a well-intentioned committee- everybody had a reasoned, thoughtful discussion about what should be in a Conan movie, and then they made one to those specifications. (I get the same impression from the current crop of Marvel movies, but they generally turn out better than this). Milius' CONAN had it's flaws, but it was a full-blooded, rousing swashbuckler that felt like a real MOVIE MOVIE. This new one feels like a pilot for a tv series.
oglebee		#28	[-]
Dec 22 11 9:59 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	This Conan showed a lot of Howard's vision, the storyline and the settings were also reminders of the pulp writers imaginary world, with enough sorcery to be interesting, with out the overdone instant solutions to all the evil lords problems. The Milius film was more Batman type icons, I found that Howard's stories had little to do with the screenplay, and I don't remember a lot of 'wisecracks' from the Weird Tales character. This film probably will not ignite interest in remakes, I would hope for a Red Nails influenced film someday. More Marvel nonsense and politically correct creations, I long for the Howard, Burrough's savage, showing the influences of these writers on the film, renewing the reading experience. I doubt it.
Omega Man		#29	[-]
Dec 22 11 12:30 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	drmedula wrote: Finally saw this last night; found it frustrating, as there ISN'T any crippling flaw I can point to that ruins the film- much of it is well-done; it's just never as good as it should be. It feels like it was made by a well-intentioned committee- everybody had a reasoned, thoughtful discussion about what should be in a Conan movie, and then they made one to those specifications. (I get the same impression from the current crop of Marvel movies, but they generally turn out better than this). Milius' CONAN had it's flaws, but it was a full-blooded, rousing swashbuckler that felt like a real MOVIE MOVIE. This new one feels like a pilot for a tv series. Watched this over the weekend and I'd say DrMedula sums it up perfectly. I'd add, though, that the climax (Conan vs. the main baddie) was interminably drawn out. I did like Momoa as Conan, it should be mentioned -- better than Arnold, in fact. He's much closer to R.E. Howard's depictions of the character in the original stories, with the exception of not having striking blue eyes. (But hey, Connery didn't have blue eyes, either, like the literary James Bond.) His movie-fighting skills -- sword, hand-to-hand -- are definitely superior to Arnold's. He moves a lot quicker, too, which, again, is pure Howard. Actually, you'd have a pretty terrific Conan movie if you could put Momoa in the '82 film (perhaps with a bit more dialog). "Dammit, it's jammed!" www.eccentric-cinema.com
ARGumshoe		#30	[-]
Mar 4 12 11:54 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Meh.
	Remove this ad
3H Double B		#31	[-]
Mar 7 12 3:04 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I enjoyed the movie. It wasn't perfect, but I felt it was closer to the original pulp Conan than the First film. Rob
TheLizard		#32	[-]
May 14 12 10:27 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Man, I had the queen alien in that commercial as a kid, and it was sweeeeet. I had a lot of those alien figures, and a bunch of other cool toys, but they were all being stored in my cabin I moved out of about a year and a half ago, and it unfortunately burned down a few months ago. I lost a lot of cool stuff from my childhood, but fortunately had the foresight to grab a few special things. I would be heartbroken if I didn't still have my foot-tall, rubber Godzilla figure. I think in second grade I might have slept with that thing. Anyway, back to the subject. I really love Conan. I'm a fan of the original Robert E. Howard stories, and am really big on the comics, especially Savage Sword of Conan. I'm one of the people that likes the '82 film. I always thought it's held up over the years much better than a lot of other fantasy films from the time, and the soundtrack is a classic. I had mixed feelings about this when I saw commercials, but I'll give it a shot when I get a chance. I'm glad to hear he fights a subterranean tentacled creature. Conan was always fighting those. Them and degenerate, carnivorous apes.
SteveZodiak		#33	[-]
Jun 29 12 9:52 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Finally saw this last night and it was worth waiting for. Worth waiting for another 20 years. It was just bad, not horrible, just bad. Conan does not require a background story, just start the damn movie. Agree with all about the long drawn out fight scenes. And the dialogue? The writers must have watched Xena and Kevin Sorbo's Hercules adventures. I expected the pure blood to ask Conan for his twitter handle. I like Mamoa well enough as Conan, just get a Howard story, some decent screen writers and a supporting cast. Why do I have to waste my time outwitting morons?
Andy Sheets		#34	[-]
Jun 29 12 11:29 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Yeah, this was painful. It's really not a Conan movie anymore than the original, but at least the original had some ambition behind it. It seems to me that the makers of the new one merely aspired to be as good as the cheap Conan knock-offs of the 1980s, except I'm not sure they even managed that. Momoa was okay, though.
hermanthegerm	CONAN THE BARBARIAN (2011)	#35	[-]
Jul 9 12 9:29 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	It starts well enough, and Ron Perlman's presence is really appreciated. It ground the movie with a solid emotional core.... But then the movie loses it's way and dumb and careless decisions are made. Bandits appear out of nowere, characters disappear when it would not be convenient for the script to have them be there and characters appear when needed regardless of space and time limitations. I hate it when a character falls hundreds of feet only to meet someone he just left up there. The new actor is more human and smarter than the old version, but not nearly enough. Also Bob Englund would be spinning in his grave if he was dead, which he isn't. "There is a lot of money tied up in this film and people expect to hear a boom when something blows up, so I'll give them a boom." George Lucas as quoted by Harlan Ellison's WATCHING
Grant		#36	[-]
Feb 16 13 11:53 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I know a lot of people hate anthology films, and probably a lot of others don't like very "episodic" ones, but has anyone ever considered making a very faithful film of 3-4 of the more famous issues of the comic? With pretty much "self-contained" stories, in other words? Last Edited By: Grant Feb 16 13 11:57 AM. Edited 1 times.
Andy Sheets		#37	[-]
Feb 16 13 12:05 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	That's something that some fans have suggested, yeah. You could do a movie that adapts, for instance, The Frost Giant's Daughter, The Tower of the Elephant, and Rogues in the House to have a movie focusing on a young Conan, or you could mix it up and do a young Conan story, a mid-period Conan, and King Conan, casting different actors as the character. I doubt movie producers today would go for it because, as you say, "people hate anthology films".
Grant		#38	[-]
Feb 16 13 8:03 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	That's what I thought. In spite of the lack of affection for it, the CONAN series from 1997 seemed to go in for that. It used at least one early issue of the comic. I'm not sure about others.
Scathach80		#39	[-]
Feb 17 13 9:01 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Andy Sheets wrote: Yeah, this was painful. It's really not a Conan movie anymore than the original, but at least the original had some ambition behind it. It seems to me that the makers of the new one merely aspired to be as good as the cheap Conan knock-offs of the 1980s, except I'm not sure they even managed that. Momoa was okay, though. Actually, they had numerous details (reference to his time as a pirate, reference to the Tower of the Elephant) which indicates that some of Howard's tales took place inbetween the events of the film.
Scathach80		#40	[-]
Feb 17 13 9:03 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Grant wrote: I know a lot of people hate anthology films, and probably a lot of others don't like very "episodic" ones, but has anyone ever considered making a very faithful film of 3-4 of the more famous issues of the comic? Kind of an odd thing to say; what you do mean by "the comic"? Robert E. Howard wrote his tales in prose for Weird Tales. I suppose Conan Properties, Inc. may have the rights to some of the original tales specifically written for the comic books. Last Edited By: Scathach80 Feb 17 13 9:06 AM. Edited 1 times.
	Remove this ad

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Add Reply

Yuku free message boards

CONAN THE BARBARIAN (2011)