Saturday, November 26, 2011

Conan the Barbarian (2011)

The ill-conceived CONAN THE BARBARIAN remake is an absolute mess of a film that places bloody violence and over-budgeted effects over character and story. While it attempts to remain closer to the works of Robert E. Howard, it lacks the heart and epic qualities of Howard's writing. The casting is like a bad joke. Jason Momoa may look the part, but his over-confidence and exaggerated expressions come off as being silly instead of stern and powerful. There is no consistency whatsoever in the accents or dialects of the various groups of people that Conan encounters in his travels. The world of Hyboria is dramatically reduced as a result, especially considering how quickly Conan is able to travel from land to land in search of his betrayers. Most of the story and background are related by an unseen narrator, who quickly tries to piece things together for the audience in between the overblown action sequences. Zym is a bland and forgettable villain that would cower before James Earl Jones' Thulsa Doom. What is worse, the grand scheme that has taken him over 20 years of battling and searching to complete is spoiled in one brief and unsatisfying final conflict. This consists mostly of unbelievable feats and unnecessary computerization. The only entertainment comes from the absurd amount of bloodshed and heavy reliance on nude wenches. For mindless sword-fighting and mayhem, CONAN is a serviceable action flick, but in all other ways, it is utterly underwhelming.

Rating: 6/10.

Movies like CONAN THE BARBARIAN:
THE SWORD AND THE SORCERER, PATHFINDER, HAWK: THE SLAYER, CLASH OF THE TITANS.

5 comments:

  1. I just watched this yesterday and I completely agree. The only time I was feeling it was the nude wenches, Rachel Nichols and the violence. I'm a huge Rose McGowen fan too, but man was she weird lookin' here (I still would). Like her little nod to freddy with scratching the wall though. Still, I saw all of it coming. The way Conan's father breaks the ice to stop him earlier in the film, only for that act to be repeated later. Nothing happened that I didn't expect storywise.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I was all about the nude wenches, and I totally appreciate that they are listed as wenches in the credits, but god did this suck. I really don't get how Momoa got through the audition process. He is laughable in the role. By the time you have two guys fighting on a big circle crucifix as it plummets into a volcano, its time to hang up your hat. But no one seemed to learn from Peter Jackson's vine-swinging tyrannosaurs now, did they...

    ReplyDelete
  3. Yes, this remake was awful. Nothing like the campy violent fun of the original Conan the Barbarian.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I have seen only cuttings of the film, or only trailer, but I believes also, on this occasion it behaves like in the Films of "Nightmare on Elm Street" where there is only one Freddy Krueger who is shown by Robert Englund. Conan knows and may I only with Arnold Schwarzenegger. But also here I can say that Conan is typically for the 80th and works for me therefore only with hand made effects. I simply state sometimes that this film is a pure CGI effect show where the story and theatrical achievement if it one gives get in the background.

    ReplyDelete
  5. See now I kind of liked it. It had good effects, creative monsters and a pretty simple plot to drive it forward.

    For all my disdain for CG blood, it's prevalent. At this point, it's like hating the sunrise- it's going to happen no matter how we all feel.

    I don't think that this film is necessarily better than the original films. Bear in mind that I like 'Conan the Destroyer' most of all (awesome fun!) and have sat through most of the more infamous rip-offs (Ator 1-4, Deathstalker 1-4, etc).

    ReplyDelete