DeputyDave

I’ve had this argument several times with friends who have only heard of Conan through the Marvel comics and the movie. Recently, whenever news articles talk about the surge of comic book movies, Conan is usually mentioned as a Marvel franchise movie. Today in my local paper it was mentioned again (this time as a beginning point for the modern comic movie trend).

Now I understand that it was a popular Marvel comic, but I had been reading the books and stories long before I even heard there was a comic version. As much as I loved Conan, I hated the comics because they seemed to minimize the hero and make him (I know, I know) "cartoony".

The books and stories have been around since at least 1932, written first by Robert E. Howard (who I think has always been short changed in history; Howard more than Tolkien is the father of the sword and sorcery genre) and then carried on by a dozen other writers.

So which is it? Should Conan be considered a comic book movie that happens to have had books written about the character, or is the movie based on the books, a source shared by the comics?

Maxflier

Although i'm fully aware that the books were written before the comic came along, I grew up on the comics not the books, so I still consider it to be a comic book movie. But I honestly have no idea which one the people who made the movie based it on.

LivingINClip

Most certainly not. Hell, it's not even a faithful adapation to the novels.

fumanstan

Nope.

Yavin

If the comics came before the movie and the movie is based on the comics, then yes. If not, then no. Based on the earlier posts in this thread, it appears that the latter is the case, so no.

DeputyDave

Well the comics did come before the movie. The comic book started in 1970 or so (12 years before the movie), but the BOOKS predate the comic by almost 40 years.

Yavin

Ah, ok. I'm not up to speed on my Conan canon.

devilshalo

I think it's a combination.. could you imagine what Conan (or any similar movie characters) would have looked like if it weren't for Frazetta?

Johnny Zhivago

No, it's a book movie. I grew up on comics like every other kid but I was aware of the books prior to the comics.

Dr. DVD

It's based upon the characters and books by Robert E. Howard. But in all honesty, it's inspired most by the drawings Frank Frazetta did for the books. Director Jonh Milius proclaims that it is the closest thing one will ever get to a live action Frazetta movie.

zombiezilla

That's fun to say...LOL.

DeputyDave

It may be telling to note that Marvel had absolutely nothing to do with the making of this movie.

caligulathegod

Frazetta's paintings were for the paperback edition covers rather than the comics. Prior to Frazetta, Conan looked like Flash Gordon in a loin cloth in depictions.

DeputyDave

Frazetta may have set a style but Howard's descriptions of Conan are pretty detailed. Frazetta follows thos descriptions (with his own style) pretty faithfully.

Josh-da-man

Conan isn't a Marvel character. They only licensed the property from the rights-holders (Howard's estate?) and produced comics based on the character. Conan is no more a Marvel property than Star Wars or Transformers, both of which they published in the past.

I suspect that many consider Conan a comic book character because the comics were quite successful and that was probably where most people had heard of the character. I'm not sure if the novels were ever as popular or well-known as the comics, though it wouldn't surprise me if they were, especially for people born after 1960 or so.