The 3D effects are post-prod creations and at some points make the action sequences very hard to follow (close-ups aplenty). Also, at some points, they messed it up, so you can see a pillar on the background moving past almost as quickly as one on the foreground.
If there's a way to see this in 2D instead, I'd definitely take it! (14 euros (~20$) for the showing was entirely too much)
I personally hate 3D and this one certainly isn't worth the extra charge, I saw it in 2D.
I'll just throw in my 2 cents, having just watched it last night in 2D (Thank goodness that 3D isn't entirely forced upon us). I for one am much more a fan of the books than the earlier movies, or this one, so i really don't feel there has been a proper 'Conan' movie yet ;P But, that said, I did quite enjoy it as a sword and sorcery action movie.
They got his hair the right color this time at least :p just not the eyes...
And hey, its still a hundred times better than Krull the Conqueror back in 97 lol!
They got his hair the right color this time at least :p just not the eyes...
And hey, its still a hundred times better than Krull the Conqueror back in 97 lol!
| Tim Boyer wrote: |
|
And hey, its still a hundred times better than Krull the Conqueror back in 97 lol! |
Well there is that. :D It's probably best to go see this one with a Kull, Red Sonja and Hawk the Slayer level of expectation. That way you'll be pleasently surprised.
| Patrick Kelly wrote: | ||
Well there is that. :D It's probably best to go see this one with a Kull, Red Sonja and Hawk the Slayer level of expectation. That way you'll be pleasently surprised. |
Totally concur Patrick, it's of the same "B" fantasy movie level right up there with the Beast Master movies. I can probably add mention of other movies that are the same level...but my brain would hurt for the rest of the day and I'd develop indigestion...so I won't. :-)
| Bryce Felperin wrote: | ||||
Totally concur Patrick, it's of the same "B" fantasy movie level right up there with the Beast Master movies. I can probably add mention of other movies that are the same level...but my brain would hurt for the rest of the day and I'd develop indigestion...so I won't. :-) |
Take the same script with a few tweaks, and have a good director like Christopher Nolan of the Batman re-boots directing and it could have been a very good film and they could have just modified the music track from the original Conan ? After all most if not all the James Bond movie re-use some basic Bond music although each has it's own theme music.
On the radio tonight there was an interview with a special effects person who worked on the film and he said that the shoot was very chaotic and disorganized and plot gaps may have been filled in with pointless action ? There are some very good directors who are good directors because they know what they want and are very organized and on top of things ! Others get lost in the process and muddled thinking during the shoot makes for very difficult editing sessions trying to fix what was missed or botched during the shoot.
A good director is like an army general with as many logistical issues to keep up front in his mind as well as being a good director of actors, and as I mentioned before: Some are good story tellers and some just don't have that talent. :(
Well, I finally saw it and it wasn't as bad as I thought it would be. Yes, the plot was a bit trite. Yes, the acting was overdone. Yes, the dialogue was forced. Yes, the huge swords and goofy armor bothered me. I still enjoyed it. The CGI wasn't as overdone as I was expecting for which I was thankful. I likely won't see it again, and I would NEVER want any of the props from the movie (which I would from the Arnie version... The Father's Sword would be sweet!) but it was a fun movie to see with a buddy. The snowcaps and popcorn were great.
| Tim Lison wrote: |
| ...and I would NEVER want any of the props from the movie (which I would from the Arnie version... The Father's Sword would be sweet!) but it was a fun movie to see with a buddy. The snowcaps and popcorn were great. |
Agreed. I still dream of owning one of Albions Fathers swords as the original had such an effect on me as a young teenager. On the other hand, I wouldn't give you a bucket of warm spit for any of the weapons in this latest movie. I notice that Albion has announced a replica of Jason Momoas sword. I forsee this one will tank just like several of Albions other film sword projects. I'm sure there was licensing agreements involved in that decision and monies spent. I wish they'd spend their time, effort and resources on some of their other long standing projects rather than waste it on something few people will want. I wasn't expecting much from this new movie after seeing a couple of trailers. I was at least hoping for some cool swords but that turned out to be the biggest let down of the production.
| Jean Thibodeau wrote: |
|
Take the same script with a few tweaks, and have a good director like Christopher Nolan of the Batman re-boots directing and it could have been a very good film and they could have just modified the music track from the original Conan ? After all most if not all the James Bond movie re-use some basic Bond music although each has it's own theme music. On the radio tonight there was an interview with a special effects person who worked on the film and he said that the shoot was very chaotic and disorganized and plot gaps may have been filled in with pointless action ? There are some very good directors who are good directors because they know what they want and are very organized and on top of things ! Others get lost in the process and muddled thinking during the shoot makes for very difficult editing sessions trying to fix what was missed or botched during the shoot. A good director is like an army general with as many logistical issues to keep up front in his mind as well as being a good director of actors, and as I mentioned before: Some are good story tellers and some just don't have that talent. :( |
That was my impression, namely that the direction of this Conan movie was a disaster. Too many continuity breaks and problems with the plot , which probably a writing issue. I noticed that there were two flags that I use for indicating problems with plot/scriptwriting. The first is having a director's name on the writing credits, which usually indicates some ego or meddling in the process by the director. The second is having more than three writers, which means too many cooks making the soup to me.
In any case I'm sure we'll get another "Lord of the Rings" level first class fantasy movie sometime down the road in the future. Another Conan remake probably won't be it though.
I was bored tonight, so I watched it. This is a horrendously bad movie by all accounts (especially compared to the Millius one, faithful to Howard or not) but with regards to our common interest this amused me the most: young Conan at the very beginning of the movie (yeah, right before he goes out casting a steel sword tempered in raw snow with daddy) is wielding an rather interesting sword: no less than a 1831 french infantry short sword, which could not be more out of place. Some prop guy has been very lazy here, most likely picking this up from a box lying around, wrapping duck tape around the handle for a leather effect...yeah that will do!
Screen caps were a tough one here, but I gave it a go. In motion, there is no doubt to me. I own an antique of this type.
Attachment: 25.86 KB
Attachment: 31.34 KB
Screen caps were a tough one here, but I gave it a go. In motion, there is no doubt to me. I own an antique of this type.
Attachment: 25.86 KB Attachment: 31.34 KBHey now, it has a few saving graces. Young Conan (I forget his name) is properly badass, Ron Perlman is Ron Perlman, and Jason Momoa is a major improvement over Ahnuld. :)
But yeah, I noticed the sword... I'd laugh, but it's still prettier than most of the props specifically made for the movie.
But yeah, I noticed the sword... I'd laugh, but it's still prettier than most of the props specifically made for the movie.
| Mikko Kuusirati wrote: |
| Hey now, it has a few saving graces. Young Conan (I forget his name) is properly badass, Ron Perlman is Ron Perlman, and Jason Momoa is a major improvement over Ahnuld. :)
But yeah, I noticed the sword... I'd laugh, but it's still prettier than most of the props specifically made for the movie. |
Agreed, the props looks really bad, the swords especially are chunky and a far cry for J Samson work.
As far as Momoa being an improvement over Schwarzy, I beg to disagree. In relation to the book he is more agile and credible as a rogue and a thief. But he lacks the presence that Schwarzenegger displayed effortlessly. Main point is the poor acting around these guys (Conan companions are especially cardboard cut) and the reduction in scale from Milius epic to a mere provincial skirmish. No surprise, we have a guy how wrote the screenplay of apocalypse now on one hand, and another who made a lazy remake of Texas chainsaw massacre on the other...
Hard to compare especially Tholsadum, gazing at some timeless Nietzschean abyss with Khalar Zym who doesn't have the breadth and depth of a major villain...a sub plot character at best Imo.
Let's hope the upcoming adaptation of hour of the dragon with Schwarzenegger will prove to be better, but again, I won't hold my breath :)
I place the blame for Momoa's lack of screen presence squarely on the director (and the script, which is just about as generic as it could possibly be). Momoa's done much better work in the same vein before. He was pretty damn good as Khal Drogo - see here, or here. Arnold had more gravitas, yes, but only as long as he didn't need to move or open his mouth. :)
Milius's Conan the Barbarian is a far, far better movie, there's no way around that. It's just in an entirely different league. But I'd say Momoa is a better Conan, and could've been pretty much perfect with more competent direction.
But then, the best Conan I've ever seen on screen is the kid from the new intro! Well, until the script arbitrarily has him stop being badass all of a sudden...
Milius's Conan the Barbarian is a far, far better movie, there's no way around that. It's just in an entirely different league. But I'd say Momoa is a better Conan, and could've been pretty much perfect with more competent direction.
But then, the best Conan I've ever seen on screen is the kid from the new intro! Well, until the script arbitrarily has him stop being badass all of a sudden...
That movie was the most profound let-down I have ever experienced. Not that it was the *worst* movie I had ever seen (though it was a loooooong way from good) but the descrepency between what I hoped for, based on the teaser scene that was released of the young Conan begging Ron Pearlman for a chance to take part in the run around the hill with water in your mouth ritual, and his run in with Picts. That scene was brilliant, well shot, well acted, rousing, you name it. That teaser filled me with such high hopes, and then the movie... just ergh...
I consider the Momoa Conan movie to be in the Savage Sword of Conan realm and not the canon of Howard. With that in mind, I was able to actually enjoy the movie.
Page 4 of 4
You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
All contents © Copyright 2003-2006 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Full-featured Version of the forum
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Full-featured Version of the forum