Seriously, this chatter about the 1982 version of Conan the Barbarian being some sort of classic needs to stop. John Milius’ treatment of author Robert E. Howard’s pulp hero was a lumbering bore, with a wooden Arnold Schwarzenegger not yet seasoned enough to work up the charisma that would serve him well in later pictures. Still, I’m now forced to recall the ’82 model with at least some smidgen of fond nostalgia after sitting through the perfectly dreadful Conan the Barbarian (* out of four), 2011 Edition.
A humorless endurance test from the director (Marcus Nispel) who previously desecrated horror staples both good (The Texas Chain Saw Massacre) and bad (Friday the 13th) with so-what? remakes, this Conan fails in practically every respect. Despite being presented in 3-D, this sports characters who barely fill out one dimension. The battle sequences are staged with little variance and no imagination. There is one nifty FX scene involving an army of monsters made out of sand, but even this becomes idiotic once it’s apparent that a single tap will cause them to fall apart (guess they should have been fashioned from adamantium instead).
As the title warrior who makes it his life’s mission to avenge the death of his father (Ron Perlman), Jason Momoa has the requisite six-pack abs but otherwise comes off as such a contemporary jock that you half-expect him to eventually forget about the bloodletting and start discussing Cam Newton’s chances as the Carolina Panthers’ new quarterback. And speaking of Perlman as his pop, am I the only one who thinks his facial hair makes him look like the title creature from that dreadful ’80s family flick, Harry and the Hendersons?
Perlman isn’t the only decent actor wasted here: Providing the narration is no less than Morgan Freeman, who sounds so bored and distracted that it’s likely he was reading his lines while simultaneously making an omelette or putting away his laundry. As the daughter of Conan’s nemesis (an unrecognizable Stephen Lang), Rose McGowan, never more freaky, sports a receding hairline and talons that would make Freddy Krueger jealous. Her character is also blessed with an incredible sense of smell, although obviously not strong enough to keep her away from this suffocating stinkbomb.
This article appears in Aug 23-29, 2011.
I find your review quite boring and trite. You either know very little about Conan…or are so caught up with yourself you cannot enjoy a good show. Yawn.
I enjoyed your review and agreed with you in regards to the 2011 edition, but you quick and complete dismal of the 1982 version was almost offensive to me. You may have not enjoyed the 1982 version, but you cannot disregard the fact that it is a cult classic.
The canon of Conan the Barbarian is vast to say the least, and to say John Milius and Oliver Stone (who you conveniently left out as a writer) treatment of the character as “a lumbering bore” actually makes me think you either have a grudge against the science fiction fantasy or saw the 1982 version in passing and dismissed it quickly. The entire movie is devoted to developing the character of Conan not as a superhero, but as a savage slayer of men and kings who was forged from the brutality of men of great power. Conan doesn’t speak for the first part of the movie because there is literally nothing to be said; Conan was not asked what he thought about slavery or being forced to become a cage fighter like a dog because he had no choice, and, later, no real care to discuss his situation. Showing how he becomes brutal and having it narrated, saying, “He did not care anymore. Life. Death. The same.” and then watching his character grow is half of the charm of the movie. John Milius and Oliver Stone do a seamless job of executing this, particularly in this era of plot hole riddled movies. Not only that but the movie is almost a hallmark of top tier, finely executed non-CGI action. If memory serves someone actually lost the tip of their finger in one of the sword fights and they were plating semi-real swords into specially designed blood pack vests. All with out super fast cuts and cartoon looking CGI. As for Arnold’s performance, again I feel you were being amazingly short sighted and unfair.
First of all, if there was ever, EVER, two characters that were almost written for Arnold it was Conan and The Terminator. To argue Arnold had a wooden performance in these movies is to disregard the character he is playing in those films. Arnold, to my understanding, in real life is a real cut up, and a funny exuberant guy, so you would have to argue that his wooden acting of wooden characters was not done well. Which is very hard because his steely look is what made him so famous in the first place, not his amazing character acting and execution of dialog and monologues.
The movie opens with an aphorism from Nietzsche: “That which does not kill me, only makes me stronger.” Nietzsche was speaking of the military life, the life of a warrior in the aphorism – the movie then opens with the amazing score by Basil Poledouris, which he also conducted, and shows us the casting of Conan’s family sword. Science fiction and action movies are not made this way anymore, with depth and care for an thinking adult crowd. These are just some of the reasons why Conan The Barbarian is a cult classic and a strongly suggest you give it another fresh viewing – chopping off heads has never been so well developed and, cough, cough, executed. 😀
Still waiting for a definitive Conan.
Not holding my breath.
And for the record, Arnold was always a terrible, terrible actor.