Conan - Part 2

[Slushy]

Arnold's version of Conan was pure badass.

With that said, even though I thought the remake of Conan was sh**ty as fu**, I enjoyed Momoa's take of the character.

 

[Thundarr]

Conan 1982 is a one of the best fantasy films ever made. Arnold was iconic.
All the stuff related to the Discipline of Steel was great.
Now, if we could get a King Conan movie with Arnold before the man fossilize it would be nice.
Momoa was not bad but his movie didn't have the epic feel of Conan 1982.

As far as I know, the script has been written & Arnold has signed a contract to reprise his iconic role. I believe they're just trying to round out the rest of the cast and secure shooting locations, etc. They'll probably shoot it over the summer, edit it through the autumn/winter months, then release it in spring/summer of 2014.

 

[Thundarr]

Then go elsewhere. No one's attacking Schwarzenegger personally, and most everyone likes the original Conan film. But Conan himself is about as close to the REH version as Julian McMahon was to the comic version of Dr. Doom. Which is in name only. That's a legit complaint.

You only seem to be in this thread to **** on the new movie. Don't like it? Fine. But don't accuse people of "picking nits" when they have perfectly valid reasons for doing so, while you proceed to do the the exact same thing.

I s#!t all over the new Conan movie because it was a s#!tty @ss movie. I don't care about them having different origin stories in the different movies, because Conan's true origin doesn't make for very good movie material. His later adventures do, just not his origins.

If you cut out the origins of both Conan films and start watching them about 30 minutes into the films, you'll find that Arnold's Conan is every bit as accurate to REH's discriptions as Mamoa's Conan, if not more so.

And I can never hate Arnold's Conan, no matter the inaccuracies, for it's his movie that got me interested in reading the B & W comics, which in turn got me interested in reading REH's original stories.

 

[ChickenScratch]

I s#!t all over the new Conan movie because it was a s#!tty @ss movie. I don't care about them having different origin stories in the different movies, because Conan's true origin doesn't make for very good movie material. His later adventures do, just not his origins.

If you cut out the origins of both Conan films and start watching them about 30 minutes into the films, you'll find that Arnold's Conan is every bit as accurate to REH's discriptions as Mamoa's Conan, if not more so.

And I can never hate Arnold's Conan, no matter the inaccuracies, for it's his movie that got me interested in reading the B & W comics, which in turn got me interested in reading REH's original stories.

Examples please.

 

[Thundarr]

Conan doesn't need an origin story. :\ He's not a superhero.

And ugh, Milius.

Unless you're already a fan of the original REH books, or the Marvel comics, or Dark Horse's new line of Conan comics, there needs to be an origin story in the film. Otherwise your average movie audience member just won't care about the character and will likely not enjoy the film. It's just the way movies are, especially in this day & age.

And Milius is an awesome writer & director. The main reason Destroyer flopped was because he wasn't the writer and director for that one. If he were, it would've been less comedic, darker, more serious, and Conan would've gotten laid at least once.

 

[Thundarr]

I consider John Milius' Conan the Barbarian to be a masterpiece and one of the greatest films ever made.

But it was a piss poor adaptation of what Howard created.

The way I think of it is that Arnold's interpretation of Conan is like Sean Connery's Bond; popular and great as it's own thing but very different from the source material, whereas Jason Momoa's Conan was like Timothy Dalton's Bond; extremely accurate to the actual character from the novellas but let down by a horrible film.

Hopefully after Arnie's version gets his conclusion we'll get a version that is both accurate and epic in scale.

That's an interesting analogy. I think someone (maybe you?) wrote something similar on one of the other Conan threads (Legend Of Conan, I think).

 

[C. Lee]

I s#!t all over the new Conan movie because it was a s#!tty @ss movie.

I liked it....so booyah to you by Crom!!!!!!!!

 

[Thundarr]

I consider John Milius' Conan the Barbarian to be a masterpiece and one of the greatest films ever made.

But it was a piss poor adaptation of what Howard created.

The way I think of it is that Arnold's interpretation of Conan is like Sean Connery's Bond; popular and great as it's own thing but very different from the source material, whereas Jason Momoa's Conan was like Timothy Dalton's Bond; extremely accurate to the actual character from the novellas but let down by a horrible film.

Hopefully after Arnie's version gets his conclusion we'll get a version that is both accurate and epic in scale.

That's an interesting analogy. I think someone (maybe you?) wrote something similar on one of the other Conan threads (Legend Of Conan, I think).

 

[Victarion]

I saw the seeds for a pretty good plot in Destroyer that went undeveloped. Conan agreed to do that job for the queen. So, he does. That was it. I would've had Conan use the opportunity to figure out what the queen's plans were for the ritual. Conan taking advantage of other's perception of him as a muscle-bound idiot is something I'd like to see on film.

 

[rogue trooper]

Unless you're already a fan of the original REH books, or the Marvel comics, or Dark Horse's new line of Conan comics, there needs to be an origin story in the film. Otherwise your average movie audience member just won't care about the character and will likely not enjoy the film. It's just the way movies are, especially in this day & age.

You know, initially I believed this. Very much. Then I got to think about Leone's Dollars Trilogy, and most recently Dredd. In those mentioned films, there was no "origin" given to the main character. So, I think maybe a "slightly" upgraded adaptation of a Howard story like "Beyond The Black River", or "Red Nails" could have been all that was needed all along.

Also, I think it needs to be understood that having Conan be raised as a slave goes against something that is core to the character, because Conan is someone who is suppose to triumph by "natural order"(barbarism), not by being honed to civilization through slavery. The 2011 film understood this aspect of the character.

 

[Roose Bolton]

That's an interesting analogy. I think someone (maybe you?) wrote something similar on one of the other Conan threads (Legend Of Conan, I think).

Yeah I think I posted that in the other thread a few months ago.

 

[Panthro]

Speaking for myself...

My first exposure to Conan was catching part of Conan the Destroyer (1984) on TV one night when I was a kid just before going to bed - Conan in the room of mirrors just before he fights the gator-ape whatchamacallit conjured by Toth-Amon (the late great Pat Roach, RIP). Having no idea what the film was, I wouldn't catch up with Destroyer until years later; some very good fight scenes (except the Toth-Amon/gator-ape sequence, which comes off being more unintentionally funny than anything else), great sets, great scenery, great costumes, but a little too comedic.

As a kid Conan the Adventurer was one of those shows I tried to wake up early to watch along with Exo-Squad. Sometimes I succeeded, sometimes I didn't. The opening was pretty awesome, but my memories of the show itself are vague at best (saw it was available on DVD but wasn't entirely sure I cared enough to pick it up).

I finally caught up with Conan the Barbarian (1982) in the 8th grade. It is, simply put, one of the greatest, most underrated adventure films of all time.

I didn't catch the 2011 film in theaters, but picked it up on Blu-Ray, and enjoyed it more than I thought I would.

I still haven't caught up with the Conan comics written by Marvel and Dark Horse, but I did read the original REH stories a few years ago (before the release of the 2011 film) and while my memories of the stories are a bit rusty I would say, when comparing them and the films, that the 1982 film did a better job of capturing the flavor and atmosphere of the original REH stories than the 2011 films did. Then again, I saw the 1982 film before I read the original stories so the 1982 film probably shaped my imagination's idea of what the world of Conan was supposed to look and feel like.

As for the actors and their portrayals of Conan, if I'm remembering the REH stories right Conan was a fairly grim character mostly devoid of humor (something both the 80s film and 2011 film added more of in varying amounts) but for the occasional put down against his "civilized" counterparts, with the very occasional act of compassion (though these were few and far between) to arguably hint at him being a Noble Savage type, or usually the lesser of two evils. Though he rarely spoke (Conan is surprisingly bombastic when given the chance in the older stories), I think Arnold captured the noble savage grimness of the character pretty well. I also thought Jason Momoa did a good job of capturing that same grim noble savagery, though his film wasn't as atmospheric as the 1982 predecessor.

In the end I would say the 1982 film is the more electrifying of the two, but I enjoy both actors in the role.

I would have liked to have seen that animated version of Red Nails that featured Ron Perlman (Conan's dad in the 2011 film) voicing Conan, but alas, it seems that will never see the light of day.

 

[ChickenScratch]

Speaking for myself...

My first exposure to Conan was catching part of Conan the Destroyer (1984) on TV one night when I was a kid just before going to bed - Conan in the room of mirrors just before he fights the gator-ape whatchamacallit conjured by Toth-Amon (the late great Pat Roach, RIP). Having no idea what the film was, I wouldn't catch up with Destroyer until years later; some very good fight scenes (except the Toth-Amon/gator-ape sequence, which comes off being more unintentionally funny than anything else), great sets, great scenery, great costumes, but a little too comedic.

As a kid Conan the Adventurer was one of those shows I tried to wake up early to watch along with Exo-Squad. Sometimes I succeeded, sometimes I didn't. The opening was pretty awesome, but my memories of the show itself are vague at best (saw it was available on DVD but wasn't entirely sure I cared enough to pick it up).

I finally caught up with Conan the Barbarian (1982) in the 8th grade. It is, simply put, one of the greatest, most underrated adventure films of all time.

I didn't catch the 2011 film in theaters, but picked it up on Blu-Ray, and enjoyed it more than I thought I would.

I still haven't caught up with the Conan comics written by Marvel and Dark Horse, but I did read the original REH stories a few years ago (before the release of the 2011 film) and while my memories of the stories are a bit rusty I would say, when comparing them and the films, that the 1982 film did a better job of capturing the flavor and atmosphere of the original REH stories than the 2011 films did. Then again, I saw the 1982 film before I read the original stories so the 1982 film probably shaped my imagination's idea of what the world of Conan was supposed to look and feel like.

As for the actors and their portrayals of Conan, if I'm remembering the REH stories right Conan was a fairly grim character mostly devoid of humor (something both the 80s film and 2011 film added more of in varying amounts) but for the occasional put down against his "civilized" counterparts, with the very occasional act of compassion (though these were few and far between) to arguably hint at him being a Noble Savage type, or usually the lesser of two evils. Though he rarely spoke (Conan is surprisingly bombastic when given the chance in the older stories), I think Arnold captured the noble savage grimness of the character pretty well. I also thought Jason Momoa did a good job of capturing that same grim noble savagery, though his film wasn't as atmospheric as the 1982 predecessor.

In the end I would say the 1982 film is the more electrifying of the two, but I enjoy both actors in the role.

I would have liked to have seen that animated version of Red Nails that featured Ron Perlman (Conan's dad in the 2011 film) voicing Conan, but alas, it seems that will never see the light of day.

Hither came Conan the Cimmerian, black-haired, sullen-eyed, sword in hand, a thief, a reaver, a slayer, with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

Nobody loves a good time and a laugh like Conan. You read it wrong.

 

[Panthro]

Hither came Conan the Cimmerian, black-haired, sullen-eyed, sword in hand, a thief, a reaver, a slayer, with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

Nobody loves a good time and a laugh like Conan. You read it wrong.

Like I said, it's been a while since I read it.

 

[ChickenScratch]

Yeah, sure, years since you read them. You should go refresh yourself when you have a chance, all the REH stuff is available for free and from your assessment of Conan you need a refresher.

 

[zanos]

As far as I know, the script has been written & Arnold has signed a contract to reprise his iconic role. I believe they're just trying to round out the rest of the cast and secure shooting locations, etc. They'll probably shoot it over the summer, edit it through the autumn/winter months, then release it in spring/summer of 2014.

God, I can't even imagine what Arnold is going to look like as Conan again. Unlike his fellow Mr. Universe, Lou Ferrigno, Arnold looks like any average man of 65. No amount of working out is going to fix him.

 

[craigdbfan]

Yeah, sure, years since you read them. You should go refresh yourself when you have a chance, all the REH stuff is available for free and from your assessment of Conan you need a refresher.

Could you possibly say that in a more condescending way? There's no need for that.

So Panthro forgot a couple of the details. Big deal. If he wants to catch up on it he will but responses like yours really sour the whole thing.

Try to post with less snark next time. Especially if the person did absolutely nothing to warrant such a response.

 

[Roose Bolton]

God, I can't even imagine what Arnold is going to look like as Conan again. Unlike his fellow Mr. Universe, Lou Ferrigno, Arnold looks like any average man of 65. No amount of working out is going to fix him.

Well what a relief that he's playing Conan at 65 then.

 

[ChickenScratch]

Could you possibly say that in a more condescending way? There's no need for that.

So Panthro forgot a couple of the details. Big deal. If he wants to catch up on it he will but responses like yours really sour the whole thing.

Try to post with less snark next time. Especially if the person did absolutely nothing to warrant such a response.

True. It was me. My bud's car got stolen in front of his house during his moving while I was helping. Really soured the Sunday.

 

[x-fan]

Sadly the movie execs wanted an origin story, so we got 2011 Conan, The director and Mamoa wanted to do one of the books, if the first one had done a better box office their plan was to adapt one of the books. The box office tanked(thanks movie execs) and now we have t go back to a 20 something year old sequel instead of moving on. I loved Mamoa's Conan, but the movie was not as good as it might of been.

 

[rogue trooper]

Sadly the movie execs wanted an origin story, so we got 2011 Conan,

...and it was the same thing with the 82' film. Oliver Stone wanted to adapt the story "Rogues In The House", but John Milius wanted to do an origin story.

 

[rogue trooper]

I saw the seeds for a pretty good plot in Destroyer that went undeveloped. Conan agreed to do that job for the queen. So, he does. That was it. I would've had Conan use the opportunity to figure out what the queen's plans were for the ritual. Conan taking advantage of other's perception of him as a muscle-bound idiot is something I'd like to see on film.

The graphic novel "Conan The Barbarian: The Horn of Azoth" is an adaptation of Roy Thomas and Gerry Conway's original script of Conan The Destroyer. You should check it out.

 

[Thundarr]

http://www.fanfiction.net/s/8343371/1/Conan-vs-Conan

 

[Whiskey Tango]

Contrary to the popular opinion of some folks on this site, there's only one actor who truly embodies the character of Conan. And that actor is Arnold Schwarzenegger! Period!

Yeah no.

 

[Bug-Eyed Earl]

http://www.fanfiction.net/s/8343371/1/Conan-vs-Conan

I like how you mocked Momoa's kilt when Conan is supposed to be a pre-historic Celt- Cimmeria is where Scotland is now.

The only problem with your final statement is that Arnold is NOT Conan. He differs in every way from the literary character except for being a big guy with a sword.

I think it's at its worst with the Conan franchise, but I'm not too crazy about being a fan of the original material and being lectured about how perfect a movie and star that are miles away from the source material are as depictions of said source material.

That said, I still love the Arnold movie.