oh reall that's co--

...a lot must've happened in 21 minutes.

Harry from AICN gave it a tepid review. Considering how he masturbates on everything, that must mean the film is decidedly mediocre.

I saw the film last night, and pretty much have to agree with Harry's review. Jason Momoa actually kinda works as Conan, but the rest of the movie is pretty much a mess. It's got some fun moments, some gory kills, but the direction is terrible, there's a lack of danger and it just doesn't have the correct feel that a Conan movie ought to have. That said, it's a fun diversion and I didn't hate it. There were a couple moments that really got the crowd into it although the lackluster direction pulled them out soon enough. As is the norm nowadays, most of the fight scenes are shot so tight it's almost impossible to tell what's happening.

Momoa was in the audience last night and fielded questions afterwards. He seemed like he'd been drinking a little during the film and some of his comments made me think he was really concerned everyone was going to hate it. He obviously loves the character and he complained about how the Robert E. Howard feel was missing from the film ("because they were trying to fit so much stuff in..."). He seemed to realize it was a slightly missed opportunity, and he's definitely concerned about comparisons to Arnold. He mentioned his two favorite REH stories that he thinks would be great to do next and would be more accurate to the character which I thought was nice. If the film turns a profit it'd be nice to see Jason get another crack at it.

Funniest moment of the night was Momoa doing his impression of internet fanboys:
<nerdy voice>"Oh, he was in Baywatch and Stargate, this will suck."
"And then..." he busted out some Dothraki to cheers from the audience
<excited voice>"OMG he could totally pull off Conan!"

He was a fun and charismatic guy. I hope the film works out for him.


Also, definitely see it in 2D. It's pretty obvious that it was post-process 3D and there's some weird moments where they pan sideways and the front of something large appears to be completely unattached from it's body because it just doesn't move "right", and occasional items in the background seem to be in front of objects in front of them. I began to look for it and it took me out of the film several times.

I will never understand why directors continue to use shaky-cam and closeup shots during fight scenes.

I feel sorry for Momoa. He would have hit a homerun with just a little help.

Supposedly it's to make you feel like your in the fight. I think that's how being on the receiving end of an ass kicking would be like.

...In that case we need more beatings like the one Morty did in Layercake.

I didnt see any "Darker Approach" as per your thread title after seeing this crappy movie.

Not Fun, Not Gory but yeah NOTHING Else

The darker approach in this film was to film everything in the dark and wear sunglasses (pseudo 3D glasses) when watching this film.

Pretty much. It's an aesthetic that is overused and often misused. I think Layer Cake is one of the few flicks to use it approriately.

I saw the new Conan and, well, I liked it. Went in fearing a train-wreck and walked out reasonably entertained by it. And I saw it in 2D which I think is crucial. (I now wonder how many of the reviewers who panned it saw it in 3D instead?) It's really not bad and I think Jason Mamoa is perfect in the role. Honestly. I'm a fan of the original movie with Schwarzenegger but think Mamoa is a much better Conan. I also think that this movie evoked the world of the Hyborian Age far better than the Schwarzenegger movies did. It really seemed like a complete world. Although I still prefer the original Conan with Schwarzenegger more, this one is a lot better than the sequel Conan The Destroyer (which was a true train-wreck through and through). Although I do wish that they had kept Basil Poledouris' great Conan theme music (why they didn't use such a perfect theme for the opening credits is a mystery).

Now I've never read Robert E. Howard's Conan stories (but do plan to) and expect that this movie will be a disappointment to anyone who is familiar with those stories. But for anyone who, like me, only knows and likes the original Schwarzenegger Conan movie and likes the better Sword and Sorcery movies will probably like this as well.

Pretty much agree with all this except for thinking Momoa being a better Conan, though I think he did a pretty good job. But I also think one of the reasons I enjoyed it was because I dont think my expectations could be any lower. Also I really appreciated the effort in trying to make a movie like this.

This film started up quite promising with scenes of Conan as a boy showing his future prowess with being at home with barbarian violence, but the main storyline lumber heavily and without much verve or attitude, and the final act just doesn't cut it for a Conan movie.

I give it 2 stars, or a grade of C.

heh

I saw that before. All those articles say it is Stan Lee suing, but I don't think he has anything to do with that company anymore. He's been sued by them in recent years.

I was expecting to read this article when the more respectable Solomon Kane came out. I don't know why they want to fight over this Conan slop. It's just pocket change anyway. Instead of Marvel or Stan Lee suing bad movies, they should just invest their time and money in good superhero movie scripts. There's plenty of good Marvel comic book stories and plenty of good writers that can make a good screenplay.

Neither Marvel or Stan Lee are suing.

Just got back from a 2d showing. I liked it. Sure there were a few too many quick edits, but overall I thought it was a pretty entertaining flick. It moved along at a brisk pace, had some good fight sequences, and had some hot women in skimpy outfits. Pretty much what I'd expect from a Conan flick. I can see this getting panned by critics, but I don't get the hate from action fans.