Visitors Review

Noel Kardaris (2012-05-25 16:48)

What Is Best In Life??

WHAT IS BEST IN LIFE???NOT TO REMAKE CONAN!!I was looking forward to watch that movie, although I was skepticalabout it. The R rating was at least a hope, but I left the theater witha bitter taste in my mouth. This is NOT Conan. Perhaps Jason Momoalooks more like the comic character and on his favor he has a killerbody, but Conan is not just that. Jason was a better Barbarian in Gameof Thrones for sure- Conan is "To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and tohear the lamentation of their women." - Conan is to F*ck the witch and then throwing her into the fireplace - Conan is 2 buckets of blood every time he uses his sword - Conan is 20 lines in the whole movieNow - Conan should NOT be making LOVE to the heroine - Conan should NOT be saying jokes - Conan is NOT a pirate - Conan should NOT be smilingAND WHERE IS CROM? Not a sign of the God associated with the character.And Don't let me start on the Soundtrack.. The soundtrack is a completedisappointment! Nothing to do with the original Basil Poledouris'masterpiece.I am giving this movie a 5/10 rating only because I am a huge fan ofConan, and for the first 15 minutes which reminded me of the old Conanmovie. The rest of the film has a prince of Persia, pirates of theCaribbean vibe.

eoinej (2012-05-25 02:55)

Conan, Lord of the Rings,Hercules Unchained, you name it....

Much will be written and argued abut this film by way of comparisonwith every possible sword and sandal fantasy even 13th Warrior and TheMumm(ies), so let's stay with this one alone and keep it short.Fantastic scenery and shooting, beautiful landscapes, both real andCGI. Riveting action in places, story line predictable with cleargoodies and baddies definition. Some loose ends like the thief but sowhat?.Time wasting, visually exciting, hocus-pocus gobbledygook maybe, butplease don't deteriorate into a TV series type franchise. Give it somewelly, develop the story, loose some of the tongue-in-cheek, keep upthe visual standard, and I'll happliy watch Son of Conan or Conan III,IV, or whatever else comes out.

sheenafilm (2012-05-24 20:32)

Like there's no tomorrow

I enjoyed watching this new Conan. It kicks off with a strong openingscene: "born on the battlefield", that's something I haven't seenanywhere else before. The following story is simple enough and itoccasionally captures the spirit of the novels quite well, for instancewhen Conan parties with the thieves, ex-slaves and topless wenches likethere's no tomorrow - a careless barbarian straight from the book.Black magic isn't fought with white magic as in most of today's fantasyfilms - it's hit with a sword, and once again if it doesn't go away.Jason Momoa makes a good Conan, he fortunately does not try to imitateearlier muscle men, but gives his own interpretation, mean and kicking.Stephen Lang plays a villain with fanaticism and passion, for examplewhen he smashes the priest's head, he's truly terrifying. Ron Perlmanis magnificent as Conan's father, larger than life. The female castmembers are much less convincing, though. Rachel Nichols (who was greatin 'P2') is nowhere near Sandahl Bergman. Rose McGowan jumped out ofthe pages of some silly goth magazine, it seems. There are a couple ofweak points; the new Conan is surely no masterpiece like the 1982version, but compared to other movies of the sword and sorcery genre,it still gets 'thumbs up' from me.

capone666 (2012-05-24 05:06)

The Vidiot Reviews...

Conan the BarbarianThe best part of wielding a broadsword is that, no matter what the sizeof the envelope, you'll have no problem opening it.And while the savage in this fantasy film doesn't use his blade to openletters, he does use it to open his enemies.Born in battle, Conan (Jason Momoa) is raised by his father (RonPerlman) to be a warrior.But when a warlord (Stephen Lang) looking to resurrect his dead wifeusing a magical mask slays his father, Conan vows revenge.Meanwhile, the despot and his daughter (Rose McGowan) seek out a pureblood to unleash the mask's power. With a splintered storyline that strains under the weight of dreadfulacting, Conan the Barbarian is a slapdash adaptation of Robert E.Howard's anti-hero.Unfortunately, when body-builders see the type of muscle mass that canbe gained from barbarism, they'll likely add rape to their workoutroutine. (Red Light)

kelldave-206-121576 (2012-05-23 19:35)

Really Hollywood?

This isn't a remake, its a whole new story. Way too much intro story,not enough middle. The acting is way to over the top, overly dramatic.The child Conan was OK but seemed to aggressive. The world they createdseemed bland and unbelievable. The older Conan was fine but he talkedtoo much. I was really disappointed with this movie.It feels cobbledtogether at the last minute."no man should live in chains" says Conan....where is that from sincehe wasn't taken as a slave.The original story tells why he was such a great swords man, this storyleaves you believing that it was in his blood.I pray they don't make another along these lines, I wont pay to see it.

lodewickus (2012-05-23 00:29)

Don't believe the haters...completely.

I'd admit that I was one of the skeptics based on the negative reviewsand word of mouth. In the end I figured why not and gave it a shot.I was pleasantly surprised what it turned out to be. I enjoyed theoriginal, but also looked at this one for what it is. Same characters,different vision.Jason Momoa really did an excellent job at conveying a man withoutfear. It's not an Oscar performance, but the role doesn't call for thatkind of acting. Considering the time he had to prepare for the role, hebecame very proficient with the sword. While Conan is cutting the enemydown limb by limb, you'll believe it.Having Rachel Nichols not play the usual damsel in distress was also anice surprise. Rachel and Jason bounced nicely off each others'chatter. The change in her persona was badly dealt with tho, in that itwasn't convincing what and how the story told it.Stephen Lang and the rest of the co-stars were all convincing enough. Ido think that Ron Perlman could have had a bit more aggression, but heplayed the caring father well enough to make up for it.Which gives way to the main negative about the film. Inconsistentediting ruins the continuity between scenes. Luckily it's not half asbad as people make it out too be, there are far worse movies, but it isdistracting.The other gripe is the dialog. Albeit I wasn't expecting smart andwitty dialog, I had to remember that people living in such a time won'tbe the smartest cookies. That doesn't distract from the fact it couldhave had a little bit of smarts added.Really apart from that it was honestly not that bad at all. Music wasforgettable, but fitting. Sound effects did a good enough job atresounding the noise of steel blades sparking each other or the soundof limbs flying. CGI did its part, not exactly ILM or Weta, but hey, itworked, especially the establishing shots.If you enjoy fantasy that carries some maturity and shows the way sucha time would be like to be in, you'll enjoy Conan for what it is. Onebrutal warrior without fear pursuing utter revenge and completelyobliterates his enemies through the sword.

karnasaur (2012-05-22 04:09)

Never has a film angered me so. CROM! (very slight spoilers)

Crom! I cannot get how bad this new Conan movie was out of my head! Howbad was it? It was a Conan movie made by people who have never seen aConan movie or TV show, or read one of the numerous Conan novels orcomic books. It's like someone described them, generally, to thefilmmakers instead. Conan says "Crom" exactly zero times in the film.Cimmeria looks like Hobbiton, and the "barbarians" there have ametallurgy industry that would have shamed the 18th century. JasonMomoa, Conan here, can play an excellent barbarian, I've seen him do itin Game of Thrones. Rachel Nichols is good in everything she's in...why oh why does she only appear in garbage? Please, some director whoisn't completely awful, give this woman a role! Why was Rose McGowan,not an ugly woman, IMHO, turned into a hideous freak here? Why not justhire a hideous freak? Stephen Lang can be an effective baddie when anot completely incompetent director like James Cameron is calling theshots. Crom! And why did adult Conan, in his first scene, free those slaves? Was hea Hyborean Age anti-slavery crusader or something? The scene baffledme. He didn't even rob anybody! It would have taken 2 seconds toexplain that a friend of his or a girl he liked was captive there, butno. Conan's just a good 'ol 21st century hero here! Oh! And Morgan Freedman as narrator? What on earth were these peoplethinking? Yes, when I hear Mr. Freedman's honey-soft southern accent, Ithink of the Hyborean Age, whither came Conan. Was he hired as somesort of meta joke? They should show this film in film schools as an example of a filmwhere every single thing, every single shot, is done wrong.And Maestro Bates, who did the music, what the hell? Is he somebody'scousin or something? And Jason Momoa kills a guy with molten metal... again! Who'd havebelieved that that kind of thing can happen to the same guy twice?(Sort of, you know what I mean. If you've seen it, that is.) And thanks for all the little homages to the real Conan movie (Conanthe Barbarian, 1982, starring Arnold Schwarzenegger, directed by JohnMilius. I love this film.). Being reminded of how similar scenes canwork when the filmmakers aren't complete morons improved the film somuch for me! Gosh darn that Arnold was good! Wish he was here! ThatMilius guy sure could film a battle! Was he busy or something? (checksIMDb...) No.At least it had lots of blood and lots of naked chicks running around,like a Conan movie should (making this, improbably, a better film thanConan the Destroyer). But even that was done wrong. Rachel Nicholsshows the world her lovely lady nickels, but the troglodyte filmingthis thing films them in such a way that it looked like they were usinga body double! Body Double, by Brian dePalma, is an excellent film,BTW. Was Brian busy? (checks IMDb...) No. Apparently they spent 90 million dollars on this failure. Not a merefiasco, no, a failure. This is the biggest waste of money since theIraq war. You know what would have been a better film? They could havemade a stack of 90 million dollars they spent on this abortion, in 20dollar bills, and set it on fire. In front of this burning stack youcould have had Rachel Nichols read the script for the atrocity that isConan the Barbarian (2011) while Jason Momoa ran around said pyre in aloincloth, waving a sword and shouting "Crom!" occasionally. And everytime something incredibly stupid happened in the script, Rachel wouldremove an article of clothing. She'd be naked within 30 minutes. Iwould watch the heck out of this movie. Oh! And, at the end, MarcusNispel, Danny Dimbort (his real name? Sorry!), George Furla, Eda Kowan,Trevor Short, and Henry Winterstern, the director and producers of theunfortunately real Conan the Barbarian (2011), would be driven forth inchains and murdered by Jason Momoa with molten lead. Hurray! The hopelessly inappropriate soundtrack would still be done by TylerBates, but right at the very end, as a stinger maybe, he would bemurdered by the axe-wielding ghost of Basil Poledouris.In summary, I did not like this film.Please, Arnold and John, make King Conan! You're not busy and the worldneeds it!

Freemheart (2012-05-22 02:59)

Beyond Revenge - What the brainless critics omits

Twenty year ago, just to read something, I bought my first comic of TheSavage Sword of Conan, after that, I watched the John Milius film andspecially the books of Robert E. Howard and many more comics. I beenreading many reviews and almost all the critics seems to know nothingabout Conan except the movie with Schwarzenegger, a very good moviebut...Even when the new Conan The Barbarian has his flaws, a story with a fewthings in commons with "The lord of the rings", not so much referenceto the countries and races of the Hyborian age, and a not so wonderfulsoundtrack like the Basil Poledouris's masterpiece. If you compareJason Momoa with the descriptions of Robert E. Howard, the comics, heis perfect as Conan in every scene: he is rude but not so stupid asseems to be in the Milius film, he is full of anger but knows how touse it and knows how to show other emotions, even his dialog is good.Conan, Khalar Zym, Marique, Tamara almost every character show his ownstory not as pure good or pure evil, every one has an important part.It began like a bad "pastiche" of JRR Tolkien and after a few minutesbecame a true Conan movie, with a lot of action, great sword battles,lot of blood (everyone who had read the tales of Conan knows isimpossible tells his story without blood sequences) but a wonderfulstory not only about revenge, but also the sons and daughters thirst tokeep the legacy of their parentsI love the John Milius I have seen that film more than 30 times, but Ihave to admit, this new adaptation (not remake) is far faithful to thework of Robert E. Howard in every single thing.

gregeichelberger (2012-05-20 22:44)

Was this 'Conan' or 'Pirates of the Caribbean'?

On a list of completely unnecessary remakes, the latest version of"Conan The Barbarian" certainly comes close to the top. And, unlikeit's box office competitor, "Fright Night," this one takes itself fartoo seriously for this humble critic to take anywhere near seriously.Based on the stories by Robert Howard and inspired in part by thegraphic novels and the 1985 Arnold Schwartzenegger film, this MarcusNispel-directed (the new "Friday the 13th," "Pathfinder") stars JasonMamoa as the title character and makes the first installment look like"Spartacus." Mamoa ("Game Of Thrones," "Baywatch" TV series) is as much a satisfyingsubstitute for Schwartzenegger as Wally Cox; and his quest to avengethe death of his Hyborian village family is like watching "NationalLampoon's Vacation" (without the laughs and more decapitations) blendedwith "Pirates Of the Caribbean." Yes, in fact, there's probably more time spent on old sailing vesselsin this movie than in "On Stranger Tides," if that's conceivable. Andwhen this tale of brutal genocide and vengeance is not waterlogged,it's stranded on dry land, making Nispel's dismal "Pathfinder" seemlucid and coherent by comparison.This newest version, with lightweight cast (especially the lead) andincomprehensible direction will certainly not invoke a rush for moresuch films (at least I HOPE not), and may even cause a spike in thepurchase or rentals of the original - itself a substandard sword andsandals semi epic on the lines of "Clash Of the Titans" or "Red Sonya."Nispel also seems to steal from "Indiana Jones and the Temple Of Doom,"as well, with a scene taken directly from the tearing out the guy'sheart for Kali sequence. In addition, look for the head villain, KhalarZym (Stephen Lang, also the bad guy in "Avatar") to be the object oflust from his own daughter. More than a little creepy, friends.Still, with Hollywood running out of new ideas and still catering - forsome bizarre reason - the the LCD (lowest common denominator), in thiscase 14-24 year-old males, this picture will no doubt top the mostimmediate box office polls.Thanks, of course, in no small part, to the many scenes of almost over-the-top graphic violence and a multitude of beheadings, dismemberments,disembowelments and just plain old slicing, dicing and stabbing. One of the most striking examples features a young Conan who has to runa race with a bird's egg in his mouth. In doing so, he slaughters ahorde of bad guys that appeared as if they just came from the set of"Last Of the Mohicans" with more than a passing resemblance to thePawnee Indians from "Dances With Wolves."Of course, it's all in a day's fun for the long-locked Mamoa, whosubstitutes such activity for any form of competent acting ability.So, if you're in for two hours of such banal nonsense - with noredeeming social or moral justification - feel free to part with yourhard-earned cash and enjoy this movie. If nothing else, it will give you the opportunity to check out theaging Ron Perlman ("Hellboy"), as Conan's old man, who over time isbeginning to look more and more like his TV series character of TheBeast, even with little or no makeup.

markhof1007 (2012-05-20 18:41)

Negative critics need to watch cartoons.

OK, all of you cry babies who's mommy must have burned your bacon thismorning, get over it. Give this movie a break. It is closer to Howard'sConan than your opinion gives credit. Robert E Howard's "Conan" was anaction adventure man of very few words. A hero of massive muscle butsimple mind. A hero like most of Howard's heroes that, in the words ofE Hoffmann Price, "is simpler. You get them in a jam, and no oneexpects you to rack your brains inventing clever ways for them toextricate themselves. They are too stupid to do anything but cut,shoot, or slug themselves into the clear." Conan started out as an"untutored boy from the barbarous northlands, who could neither readnor write and who scorned such civilized skills as effeminate!" Conanwas blood-mad. He wandered around and physically took what he wanted.If you got in his way, he took your head. As written in the first fewpages of the first book, "Conan had his first taste of the luxuries ofcivilization when, as one of the blood-mad horde of Cimmerian clansmenthat had poured over the walls of Venarium, he had taken part in thesack of that Aquilonian outpost. The taste had whetted his appetite formore." In the same paragraph, Howard continues, "He had no clearambition or program of action; nothing but vague dreams of desperateadventures in the rich lands to the South." At this time Conan was afifteen year old boy. No Conan story ever had a plot or a moral or ahappy, loving, feel-all-warm-inside ending. A distinct story line in aConan movie? Give me a break. This movie has a simple premise thatserves its' purpose. So enjoy the simple, barbaric, true to Howard'sConan movie and leave the story telling to your mommy when she tucksyou in tonight. Conan needs to continue to wander and any critic hemeets, he needs to take their head. I am looking forward to anadventure filled sequel.

benflashrock (2012-05-20 11:07)

Conan The Barbarian? Conan The Bore.

Not worthy of the Cimmerian blade. Started well, gruesome, loads ofblood splatting everywhere (which I wasn't expecting) and coolfighting, some awesome action...then too much...then more...then waymore. Story was rubbish and boring, didn't feel a thing for any of thecharacters and couldn't care less what happened. The villains quest wasclear at first then confusing and then pointless. I feel sorry for theactors as I think they thought they were making some brilliant epic,especially the lead, his acting certainly wasn't the problem. Seemed rushed as well, possibly this film had been butchered in theedit suit? They definitely got a few things right but it lacked themystical and magical feel that it needed. And the music was just 'meh'.The final product is forgettable. If you wanna see 'Conan The Barbarian' go get the John Millus/ArnoldSchwarzenegger version.

Rabensblut (2012-05-20 05:50)

Much more better than other Action films done this day

first of all I will say my point of view as a film viewer, Conan fan,REH purist and all in all as a man with a open mind. This film made mepuzzled...the directing could be better, the story is quite good, asfor Conan I know worse than this, but the funny elements as catapult,catapulted my mood directly the opposite way and the egg race was dumb(proven to be a warrior with running with eggs in your mouth ???? Ithought proving that you are a man was breaking the neck of a CimmerianBull). Small things that make the film just silly like going on a triparound hyborian inland with a ship. On the other hand parts as thedweller and Acheron made me really satisfied having that REH Cthulhumythos stories look , plus the scenery was great. Jason as Conan isgreat at least he can move and has a voice for Conan. Conan is noBodybuilder, he is a Savage (or as many call him a barbarian, althoughI do not like to use the word). The others - Lang, great, Perlman (oneof my fav. actors) could show more, but did not have so much space,Tamara and others - hmm playing the second violin to Conan as theothers except of Lang, who is a great baddie, but hey, this is no soapopera here, it is Conan, that has to be straightforward action, andthat this film deliveres. From the REH point of view, There were lotsof remarks (Tower of the elephant, Yara, Zingara, Acheron ...) so Iliked it a lot this way, since this is an origin story of Conan andthus something like a "Welcome back it's so long we missed you" film.If they will do the Frost Giant's daughter/Queen of the black coast(Sean Hood all alone script no Oppenheimer crap) as part two, then Ican accept this number one without Howard's story (1982 and 1984 werealso Howardless stories as well). All in all, compared to the comicsadaptations and other action films done this day, this one standsstrong, it is a love it or hate film for all film viewers, Conan fans,REH purists. It is indeed a film that divides and devours as a slice ofthe Conan's sword. I give it a Action film 10/10 (hell yeah) Good film with philosophy and characters05/10 (poorly written) Conan fim 10/10 (definitely it is Conan) Momoa10/10 (Momo has potential for the future and Conan suites him) REHpurist 07/10 (still missed some expectations)PROS - athmosfere, locations, Khalar and Marique, action and Momo CONS- bad dialogues and script, egg race, big ship "sailing" throughHyboria (come on) and catapultall in all I give it 8/10 hoping for the Frost Giant's daughter/Queenof the black coast sequel

unruhjon (2012-05-18 17:37)

Way better than all the cynisists reviews... REH would be proud.

So after seeing several scathing reviews by fans and critics, I figuredI'd speak up…Long time REH/Conan fan, and I have most of the marvel CTB collection -gave up comics with high school, and have not followed any of the DarkHorse stuff, so it's possible that the way he has presented of latewill let newer fans down…Because of all this I went into this movie expecting little…Here's my take on this movie;This movie lives up to the Conan I grew up reading.I believe it was the marvel comics group that coined the slogan "swordand savagery at it's best" ~ that's about the only way you can cointhis movie… or the REAL Conan.I thought the lead did a great job of playing Conan who is supposed tobe a sullen anti-hero.Contrary to any actual critic's summary of the plot, Conan DOES NOT inany way shape or form go on a quest to save the world for some ominousfigure - in fact this movie happens to tell a (somewhat newish versionof a) story of his youth, then cuts into a point where he's living, andgets wind of the where about of his fathers killer; Who in this movietakes the role of protagonist.I didn't really care for this interpretation of 'borne into war' etc,but it didn't take away from the Conan I like so… meh.Much to the disgust of my movie going comrade, I was caught laughing atthe brutality in moments which some might feel on the edge ofrepulsion; But did I mention I pretty much grew up on Conan?I thought much of the climactic battle was 'fromage', but in all Iliked this movie.At the end Conan dumps the useless woman and rides away - so it waskind of an anti-ending of sorts (which is the way Conan stories areSUPPOSED to end btw).It seems to me like this movie is already doomed to terrible ratings,when in fact it should have more credit where due (maybe the screeningof this movie should have been to a more selective audience??)I mean this is NO marvel super-hero… this is guy who's an infinitesimalstep up from a thief & killer…Exactly what I'd expect to see.I give it a strong seven out of ten… and hope this isn't the last Conanmovie to come out of Hollywood… err, Or should I say Europe?lol

gimlid2002 (2012-05-18 14:46)

Conan The Merciless

Actually,It was the writing and direction that was truly merciless. Conan wasreally the victim here (as well as myself and anyone with an IQ above60 who watched the movie).Truly pathetic, this movie broke my heart as a conan fan ofapproximately 30 years. Of course it had everything a movie needs to succeed today: poorlighting, bad cgi, unrealistic looking fighting choreography, badacting,chase scenes and accidents of "A-Team" caliber, etc....Dino Delaurentis please come back and see that the next attempt at a RE Howard movie is worthy.I actually felt very depressed by what they have done to the Conancharacter. Truly saddened. Gimlid

DICK STEEL (2012-05-18 10:21)

A Nutshell Review: Conan the Barbarian

By Crom, Conan the Barbarian actually showed how the recent sword andsorcery films, from Prince of Persia to Clash of the Titans, could havebeen a lot more fun if things were kept a little simpler, and not havetaken itself too seriously, where bloating the film with big name starsdo not necessarily spell success. Created by Robert E. Howard, thisversion of Conan may feel like it's being updated for the modernaudience, and in some ways presents the Cimmerian Barbarian in aphysique that's a lot more nimbler and leaner.Jason Mormoa plays the titular character, and while ArnoldSchwarzenegger may have been Conan's defacto poster boy for his twofilms made in the 80s, complete with little dialogue (since he can'tspeak fluent English then) and plenty of bulk muscle flexing, Mormoa'sversion happens to be a little more charismatic compared toSchwarzenegger's wooden acting, better looking and being able toexecute a lot more niftier moves, being the sole survivor of his tribehell bent in looking for the murderers of his villagers', and fatherCorin (Ron Perlman). Admittedly this Conan is a little less beefy, butmore than made up for it in his arrogance, directness and being thatultimate alpha male chauvinist blessed with superb ability in his DNAand tough training.Being an origin film that possesses potential to kickstart a newfranchise, this one charts Conan's birth in battle, and goes to showhow the young warrior got brought up in a barbaric value system, wherebecoming a fighter is a great honour, only for his training to beinterrupted by the evil Khalar Zym (Stephen Lang) and his sorceressdaughter Marique (Rose McGowan) as they seek out the missing componentof a magical death mask, so that they can summon a dead companion andthen rule the world, as always and typical. The battle between good andevil cannot be more pronounced than that, with Conan's quest forvengeance standing in their way, and we get introduced to a number ofallies that is reminiscent of the old cartoon series Conan theAdventurer.Significant screen time got devoted to the first act when Conan was achild (Leo Howard) and introduced us to the barbarian code, in additionto the myths behind the sword, which was covered in the Schwarzeneggermovie, and painting a picture that this Conan will grow up to be quitethe bad ass for his natural ability honed into violence dished withoutremorse. A big jump in time to fast forward to the adult days wherehe's already quite the adventurer with Artus (Nonso Anozie) the pirate,before the narrative takes the very rote and very routine course ofConan chancing upon quite conveniently with characters from his past,and so begins a joining the dots from one villain to the next. Inbetween he gets to tangle with some romance courtesy of Tamara (RachelNichols) the novitiate of a monastery, also conveniently being thechosen one whose lineage to activate the death mask, making her thetarget that Khalar Zym and Marique seeks. It's an extremely simplestoryline and a singular objective of revenge.Director Marcus Nispel opted to make this film a lot more violent thanwhat we've seen before in the films by John Millius and RobertFleischer. There are 1001 ways characters die in the film, where horsesget hacked down in battle, to elaborate torture scenes that will makeyou squirm when Conan decides to interrogate his enemies, to fancydeath methods inflicted by forces on either side, from dismemberment,beheading and even being thrown against a stone, or repeatedly smackedheadlong against a stone floor. It's no holds barred and takes a strongstomach to sit through it all, at times involving CG-ed enemies thatcome as fancy as sandman type warriors, or an imprisoned mythicalcreature with mean tentacles tossing, squeezing and chomping off itsprey to add to casualty numbers.But in true blue Singapore standards, we get the M18 rated version thatis totally fine with the gratuitous violence on screen, but to save usfrom witnessing Conan turn from warrior to lover, his sex scene withTamara gets the unceremonious snip from the censors scissors, despite apromising start with plenty of gratuitous nudity from the "wenches"(yes that's what they're called in the credits). It's probablyblasphemous to show a more tender side to Conan, so we don't get thatat all, preserving our memory of a brutal warrior who dispatches hisenemies without remorse in Punisher: War Zone attitude and style.Ultimately it's a fun romp, if only you put aside a lacklustre finaleand a story that has glaring loopholes and continuity issues involvingtime and distance that characters can travel, or the usual roteelements such as the grand villain monologue and arrogance. Still,Jason Mormoa embodies the spirit of Conan with a little bit of ametrosexual tendency - check out his fancy battle armour that he adornsin different fight scenes besides the usual cloak and skimpy tunic, andhopefully this film does decent box office business to justify at leastanother film to expand on what's been established here. Recommended,and better than expected, reminiscent of the good old 80s withcountless of swords and sorcery films that never cease to amaze andthrill.

tundrawolf2000-1 (2012-05-17 18:08)

I had to give it a chance...EPIC FAIL

This movie would have been okay if they had called it "Clash of theBarbarians" or "Rise of the Barbarians" but not "Conan the Barbarian"!.I'll admit I hated Jason Momoa as a choice for the part the minute Istarted seeing stills for this movie,( and YES I saw his performance inGame of Thrones -if anything it made me dread going to this movie evenmore). But being a fan of the original movie I had to give it a shot.With the opening narration done by Morgan Freedman (couldn't they findan unknown?) and then the first shot of Ron Perlman as Conan's fatherlooking like he just walked off the set of Quest for Fire, I almostwalked out. But I couldn't justify letting go of my $13 bucks thateasily and I sat there shaking my head in disbelief for the next hourand a half.For the 1st half of the movie I actually thought the leadvillain was the guy from the Beastmaster TV series (lol) As a fantasymovie like "Krull", or "Beastmaster" or even "Willow" it would betolerable, because it has every sword and sorcery cliché in the book(from side kicks to the mandatory cliff jump into the ocean). But thiswas not the Conan I grew up reading about. I read all the novels as akid and still own all the Marvel comic books and black and whitemagazines, and in them Conan was a Brute force to be reckoned with, hisstrength and skill with a sword second to none.This Conan for all hisscars and snarls was a pussy by true Cimmerian standards, even hissword ( and the one made by his father) sucked! I really went into thismovie with an open mind hoping the critics were wrong, but plot playedout like a 1980's Dungeon and Dragon's Module and had the look of an Rrated Xena episode. It has been said about some movies that they are"so bad they're actually good" and eventually become Cult Classics,this movie is bad and just stays bad all the way through and you shouldbe able to find the Bluray DVD in the Walmart bin of discount moviesfor $5 by Xmas.

trojans7 (2012-05-17 03:47)

A must for any conan fan

Enter the world of conan and you enter a world of blood and thundersword and sorcery. but you enter this world, the film takes you intothis male fantasy and keeps you there for 2hrs. and its a very good2hrs more bone crunching fights more sword play than you could askfor..cool monsters, great villains,awesome landscape, great set designs andtrue to conan fans.from the director of pathfinder who has come withthe lighting crew this time round.and brought ron pelman along for goodmeasure. the best thing about this movie it does not pander to thecritics or the masses it's for the fans and no one else. so if you area fan of conan or it's type rush in and you wont be disappointed.No arnie but hay no movies perfect.

Bhupender Thakur (2012-05-16 19:46)

all muscle but not story

WELL I was very excited about the movie when i entered in the theaterbut it faded away after the 20 minutes duration.. i was hoping thatthis Conan movie seems different not simply because of involvement of3D or CGI effects but a lot has been changed in the way movie makingworks these days. the trailers were nice so everyone was hoping thestory is there this time unlike previous installments where onlymuscles were the center of the story. Hero displays his biceps andholding sword in his both hands..cut, next scene a lovemakingscene...cut... climax..the end.no wonder why the first two movies never impressed me that they were agenuine effort. they were only made to cash the popularity of Arnold.Well they succeeded but at that time audience were not kept aware ofthe storyline or screening so that they have a clue of what they aregoing to see.. they bought ticket just for the sake of star cast.But current scenario has changed..if the story is good even without anunknown star cast movies works..This Remake of Conan fails on several levels.. 1. STORY 2. ACTING 3.REPRESENTING SOMETHING WHICH HAS BEEN DONE BETTER WITHOUT THE MODERNTECHNOLOGY IN THE PAST.I notices many scenes in the 3D version were not getting the feel of3D. they looked more like 2D quality. I WAS WATCHING many sceneswithout using my glasses & faced no difficulty at all..I don't knowwhat was in the mind of director during the post production work.the story was same as the Bollywood directors calls a "MASALASCRIPT"... i.e. hero is in childhood, his father is on the oppositionof villain so villain kills the father of hero to clear his path.. heroruns away or hides himself so that one day he grows up and avenge thedeath of his family. In India many movies were made on the same theme &they somehow managed to attract the crowd. but this formula has beenrepeated so many times that even in India people don't go for thesefilms & no wonder filmmakers don't make these kinda films.But Hollywood audience is way more smarter than this. So how thedirectors of this movie dared to present this script. where nocreativity is present. Because script didn't brought anything new sothere was not plenty to do for actors so poor performance in acting.Graphics were good but it cannot holds your interest for the whole 90minutes or so. My friend was also with me and he doesn't watch manyHollywood movies but even he said that this movie was a crap & waste ofmoney. and i was fully agree with him. I felt that a huge fan base wasconned by the filmmakers.A huge disappointment..!!! 2/10 is my rating.

Sid da'Cool (2012-05-16 01:14)

Leading the Que of flop Remakes...

Being a "Conan The Barbarian series" fan when i saw the banner of it iwas so excited to watch the movie.I was waiting for it to release. butafter watching the movie my excitement was gone..Nudity is shown briefly,wheres no need to show it..its like making amovie and patching some nude women to add some essence to the movie.none of the actor or an actress has performed well..except "RonPerlman" In short....A flop Remake.....wasted my 1 n half hour.....Arnold is way better than this new bee.......Thumbs Down...

JoeB131 (2012-05-15 06:15)

Not a bad film...

It was actually pretty enjoyable.The plot is simple enough. Conan is a barbarian minding his ownbusiness until an evil sorcerer slaughters everyone in his village. Hethen spends the rest of his life seeking revenge. The basic plot is nottoo different than the 1982 version, and slightly better acted. So itdefinitely has the right flavor.The only actor you might really recognize here is Ron Perleman, usuallythe kiss of death for a movie, but he works here as Conan's father.The movie doesn't shy away from sex and nudity, which I give it pointsfor. The MPAA has taken all the fun out of movies.The action scenes are okay. Predictable, but kind of no real surprises.I still think the 1982 film was a better film, despite Schwarzenegger'slimitations. I don't think this guy is going to be a major star in tenyears.