That it was a Conan tale wasn't really a problem for me. It's nearer to Howard's version of Conan than the Arnie Barbarian film, (which I see as the better film), but still suffers tremendously.
There's far too much clunky fantasy cliche in there, along with bad decisions in writing.
Before most of that, the central conceit is horrible. Powerful mask smashed to pieces, and the best plan is to hide those pieces away? How about smash it to dust and let the wind sort it out? Oh hey, a forge. Wonder if it melts or burns?
After that rather blunt warning that what follows is likely tosh, it doesn't take long to spot the writer's footsteps as he plots out the story.
The villain-seeking boulders. We're treated to a shot of slaves chained together mingling with the bad-guys. Moments later the boulders are taking bad-guys out with amazing accuracy, yet the slaves are left unharmed, (despite being hindered by chains). Later still, we see boulders at rest at the far side of the slave's wagons, which were also left unharmed. If this doesn't jolt a viewer, then I suspect they can withstand a lightning strike.
Child Conan seems a more capable fighter than adult Conan. Why? Because the writer needed to establish Conan as a natural fighter early, but if he ramped up his ability in line with his growth, he would be unbeatable and destroy any suspense later in the film.
Conan is a huge muscular monster of a man, yet can't lift a woman without tremendous difficulty, why? Because we need drama there, and if we can't write it in skilfully, we'll force it in and hope the audience doesn't notice. We'll pass it off as synergy with the way his father was on the other end of a previous chain, which gives the villain time to go into a monologue, which in turn sets up the hero for the cliche "breaking the ground beneath his feet" method if villain disposal.
Boat dragged over land by elephants and slaves. Why? Why have inexplicable land-boat!?! Is it because it looks visually striking and to hell with practicality? Hrmm? Perhaps?
Conan can parabolically launch a man a mile with pinpoint accuracy using a trebuchet, and land him at the villain's feet while inside his inexplicable land-boat. Why? Because ... I don't know. Probably because it looks cool, and that's all they were thinking. Was an action beat due? Ahh yes, here it comes, a cgi sandman battle that evokes guilty pangs of Kevin Sorbo's legendary journey as Hercules.
Conan and heroine decide they want to have sex, and away from the boat. I'm ok with that. They go and inexplicably find a cabin. Ok, I'll let that slide. She decides that despite being the most wanted woman right now to wander back to the ship by herself. Questionable. This route takes her through a forest where the bad guys are waiting for her and literally step out from behind trees all around her. Damn are they good! Or, perhaps the love-shack is just known the world over? We have to leave a sign however, otherwise Conan won't know she was taken, so the creepy sorceress leaves one of her Freddy-blades on the grass, and then has a full set in the very next scene. It must have been a spare? I can forgive the odd questionable event, but when they stack them like that I start checking the DvD box to see if it says comedy.
Now there is actually an answer to this, as the sorceress lunatic comments earlier that she can 'taste' the pureblood in the air, which on the surface provides a reason they found her, but is actually one of the worst possible conceits of fantasy. Why? Because magic, but only when convenient to the plot. It's one of the basic traps any fantasy writer knows to avoid like the plague. Connect your plot with magic as an explanation at your very great peril, as it very quickly causes more problems than it solves.
Hyboria has an alarming amount of people who randomly embrace the sky and scream as the music swells to artificially inject drama. It's cheap, it's tacky, it feels forced.
Blood packs: Blood in film is neither cool nor something to be censored, but is merely an effect. It has to fit the events on screen however, or it either seems neutered, or gratuitous. This film errs at the latter. Striking people in Hyboria, even with a blunt weapon such as a hammer, results in impressive fountains of claret which are almost cartoonish. The hammer wielding henchman in the temple assault is the best example. I wish I had a man-exploding hammer. I really do.
Armour is useless in Hyboria. I don't recall one instant where armour in any way mitigated the damage of strikes. Even glancing blows seemed to produce the fabled claret fountain.
None of the film's problems really have much, if anything to do with it being a Conan movie. They're film-making issues that have no respect for a thinking audience.
They had the budget. They had a solid cast. Where it fell down I'm not sure. The screenplay, the direction, influence from the producers? That I don't know. I just know what's on the screen, and while it's often pretty, it's vacuous.
Despite my criticism of it, I actually find it quite watchable, but in 'that' bracket of films, where you just switch off and watch the action without paying too much attention. That's a good runner-up prize for a film, but it's not exactly the thing to aim for.
TL;DR: Being Conan isn't the problem. It's just a shoddy film.
reply
share