| Author |
Message |
Mikko Kuusirati
|
 Posted: Thu 28 Jul, 2011 9:15 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Depends on what he does with it, I suppose.
"And sin, young man, is when you treat people like things. Including yourself. That's what sin is."
— Terry Pratchett, Carpe Jugulum
|
|
  |
 |
|
Taylor Ellis
|
| Posted: Thu 28 Jul, 2011 9:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Well Japanese fencing is closer to the real deal than your typical Hollywood blade bashing crap I suppose..?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Phil D.
|
| Posted: Thu 28 Jul, 2011 10:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
I like the idea.It makes sense that Conan would have picked up different styles during his wanderlust.Wasn't Khitai of Asian influence.
"A bottle of wine contains more philosophy than all the books in the world." -- Louis Pasteur
"A gentleman should never leave the house without a sharp knife, a good watch, and great hat."
|
|
|
|
|
Mikko Kuusirati
|
| Posted: Thu 28 Jul, 2011 11:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Phil D. wrote: | | I like the idea.It makes sense that Conan would have picked up different styles during his wanderlust.Wasn't Khitai of Asian influence. |
Hyrkania (Vendhya, Turan, Khitai etc.) is Asia, untold aeons and a world-changing cataclysm ago.
"And sin, young man, is when you treat people like things. Including yourself. That's what sin is."
— Terry Pratchett, Carpe Jugulum
|
|
|
|
|
|
Phil D.
|
| Posted: Thu 28 Jul, 2011 11:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mikko Kuusirati wrote: | | Phil D. wrote: | | I like the idea.It makes sense that Conan would have picked up different styles during his wanderlust.Wasn't Khitai of Asian influence. |
Hyrkania (Vendhya, Turan, Khitai etc.) is Asia, untold aeons and a world-changing cataclysm ago. |
There you go.Asian swordplay resolved.
"A bottle of wine contains more philosophy than all the books in the world." -- Louis Pasteur
"A gentleman should never leave the house without a sharp knife, a good watch, and great hat."
|
|
|
|
|
Mikko Kuusirati
|
| Posted: Thu 28 Jul, 2011 12:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't really care as long as it doesn't look silly. The Hyborian Age was so inconceivably long before even what we would call prehistory that any resemblance to historical cultures is basically just random chance, easily chalked up simply to the limited number of ways the human body can move - you could have Stygians using Kalarippayattu and as long as it sat well with their otherwise Egyptian vibe, I'd be happy.
That said, yes, I know Howard specifically came up with the Hyborian Age as an excuse to write very thinly veiled historical stories without the requirement for historical accuracy that using actual historical milieus brought with it: he was an enthusiastic amateur historian, but also a professional author writing for a living and well aware of his limitations, and the research took far more time to be profitable.
But still, there's a lot of leeway here. I just hope they keep the wirework and CGI to a minimum.
"And sin, young man, is when you treat people like things. Including yourself. That's what sin is."
— Terry Pratchett, Carpe Jugulum
|
|
|
|
|
Marko Susimetsa
|
| Posted: Sun 28 Aug, 2011 11:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
Well, the movie has now been out for over a week (and opened even here in Finland already). Let's just say that you should not expect much. And if your expectations are low enough, it might actually entertain you a little bit.
Here's a link to my full review, if anyone is interested:
http://susimetsa.blogspot.com/2011/08/review-...-2011.html
|
|
 |
|
|
Karl Knisley
|
| Posted: Sun 28 Aug, 2011 12:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hello
I went and saw Conan, and ,Cowboys and Alians,in 3D, the other day.I have to say I liked, Cowboys, better.But Conan is worth seeing(just dont go expecting overmuch) I liked this version better than Arnold`s. But,R.E.H`s, Conan,chased adventure for the fun of it,not revenge. Telling a story closer to the books would have been just as good,and action packed.
Just my 2cents;-)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Colt Reeves
|
| Posted: Sun 28 Aug, 2011 2:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I dunno about how good the movie will be, but I am disturbed by its lack of a epic soundtrack. The old one had Basil Poledouris's musical genuis behind it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UChMJ14dQNs
The new one has modern generic "adventure" music. No matter what you can say about the old movie/movies, they had a real soundtrack...
"Tears are for the craven, prayers are for the clown.
Halters for the silly neck that cannot keep a crown.
As my loss is grievous, so my hope is small.
For Iron, Cold Iron, must be master of men all..."
-Cold Iron, Rudyard Kipling
|
|
|
|
|
Jean Thibodeau
|
| Posted: Sun 28 Aug, 2011 8:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Karl Knisley wrote: | Hello
I went and saw Conan, and ,Cowboys and Alians,in 3D, the other day.I have to say I liked, Cowboys, better.But Conan is worth seeing(just dont go expecting overmuch) I liked this version better than Arnold`s. But,R.E.H`s, Conan,chased adventure for the fun of it,not revenge. Telling a story closer to the books would have been just as good,and action packed.
Just my 2cents;-) |
Arnold had the huge(er) physique but more importantly had that " unique " and brutal facial features that made him very scary, and the accent worked very well for his version.
I sort of like this Conan as it actually feels and looks like the books more than the cheesy Arnold version.
One flaw is the lack of character development of most of the other characters although Jason Momoa does a very physically fit Conan who moves fast and looks in great shape but not the " Monster " that Arnold was.
Rose McGowan does a very convincing witch and the style is very " Conan " in look to me.
The visuals are very good but the story does tend to turn into one generic chase scene after another and suffers from the fact that too many movies do the constant action thing to the point of it now becoming boring through overuse.
The swords are " clunky crap " with bulky guards that would add 4 or 5 pounds to the swords if they where in Bronze or even steel.
Oh, the actor who does the young Conan almost steals the movie as a teenage Conan who is as ferocious as an Alpha Wolf ! I've read that the DVD might be better as a lot of over the top " decapitations " where cut out of the theatrical presentation version.
Still, I sort of enjoyed the film but liked Cowboys and Aliens better ...... sort of about equal to Thor I guess. 
You can easily give up your freedom. You have to fight hard to get it back!
|
|
|
|
|
Marko Susimetsa
|
| Posted: Sun 28 Aug, 2011 8:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Colt Reeves wrote: | I dunno about how good the movie will be, but I am disturbed by its lack of a epic soundtrack. The old one had Basil Poledouris's musical genuis behind it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UChMJ14dQNs
The new one has modern generic "adventure" music. No matter what you can say about the old movie/movies, they had a real soundtrack... |
It was so generic that I only realised that I remembered NONE of the music at the end of the movie. Not that music had many opportunities to come forth, as the soundtrack was filled with action stuff 95 per cent of the time...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joel Minturn
|
| Posted: Sun 28 Aug, 2011 8:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Colt Reeves wrote: | I dunno about how good the movie will be, but I am disturbed by its lack of a epic soundtrack. The old one had Basil Poledouris's musical genuis behind it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UChMJ14dQNs
The new one has modern generic "adventure" music. No matter what you can say about the old movie/movies, they had a real soundtrack... |
Not sure it would have mattered. When I went to see the movie the theater had the volume cranked up so loud the poor speakers had a hard time keeping up. The whole thing would have sounded better if it was turned down a couple of dB's
Other than that I liked the movie, nothing too special but fun. Well except for the sword making scene, they kept the casting the sword blank scene. 
|
|
|
|
|
Scott Wells
|
| Posted: Mon 29 Aug, 2011 8:26 am Post subject: conan movie |
|
|
IMHO, this conan as a stand-alone action flick would be an acceptable film if i hadnt seen the earlier version. Jason Mamoa is not an actor, never has been, never will be. While most would say Arnold isnt one either, he looks way better in the role. I agree the story in the new one was more in line with Howard. The bottom line is, the music from the first still has power today, the swords are better, the story is better, etc. But the question is, will you be watching the New Conan 10 years from now or still watching the old one?
Suffer no guilt yee who wield this in the name of Crom"
|
|
|
|
|
Jean Thibodeau
|
| Posted: Mon 29 Aug, 2011 2:53 pm Post subject: Re: conan movie |
|
|
| Scott Wells wrote: | | Jason Mamoa is not an actor, never has been, never will be. |
Well he was in STARGATE ATLANTIS for a number of years, and although he might not be a great actor, he was O.K. in that role.
In this movie with it's roller coaster non stop action, there wasn't much room for " subtle acting " and the Conan character is not one for lots of " introspection " i.e. not the sensitive or gallant politically correct " Girly-man ".
I do find it positive that they didn't make him soft and sqwishy with the female " good girl " to conform with current P.C. ways of treating females as equals.  He does end up having some respect for the woman, but only after she shows some courage in battle, she just got lucky to have seen his good side and became perceived as an ally and not as just a " tasty bit " !
I think this is consistent with the Barbaric Fantasy World that Robert E. Howard created.
You can easily give up your freedom. You have to fight hard to get it back!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Myles Mulkey
|
| Posted: Mon 29 Aug, 2011 5:03 pm Post subject: Re: conan movie |
|
|
| Scott Wells wrote: | | IMHO, this conan as a stand-alone action flick would be an acceptable film if i hadnt seen the earlier version. Jason Mamoa is not an actor, never has been, never will be. While most would say Arnold isnt one either, he looks way better in the role. I agree the story in the new one was more in line with Howard. The bottom line is, the music from the first still has power today, the swords are better, the story is better, etc. But the question is, will you be watching the New Conan 10 years from now or still watching the old one? |
Scott I agree, the old one is better. I honestly just liked Milius' interpretation of Howard's stories better than the stories themselves. The Wagner-esque soundtrack, Nietzsche based story, "the Riddle of Steel", and of course the classic Arnie factor just made for a better movie experience for me. It was cheesy but awesome at the same time. And in my book, nobody can ever be Conan except Arnold.
|
|
|
|
|
Marko Susimetsa
|
| Posted: Mon 29 Aug, 2011 8:37 pm Post subject: Re: conan movie |
|
|
| Scott Wells wrote: | | IMHO, this conan as a stand-alone action flick would be an acceptable film if i hadnt seen the earlier version. Jason Mamoa is not an actor, never has been, never will be. While most would say Arnold isnt one either, he looks way better in the role. |
As I observed in my review (linked above), most actors in Hollywood need a good director to make a good performance. Nispel is not a character director (plainly), so most actors in this movie overact their parts.
But I have to say that Momoa was better in the role of _Conan_ than Arnold was. Arnold's was definitely the better movie, but the character that he played was never Conan. Still, Momoa's Conan was only a shadow of the real one. I'm sorry to link elsewhere again, but just take a look at the link below as an example - neither of the film Conans could ever say the stuff that Howard put on paper:
http://susimetsa.blogspot.com/2011/08/conan-c...arian.html
|
|
|
|
|
|
Patrick Kelly
|
| Posted: Mon 29 Aug, 2011 10:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jason Momoa is a far better physical Conan than Arnold but neither catches the essence of Howards character very well. The one advantage Arnold had was screen presence, Jason Mamoa has almost none. Nearly all of the actors in the first movie had more than those in this resent effort and I'm not even referring to James Earl Jones and Max Von Sydow. The three main protagonists had far more magnetism and screen presence, in spite of one being a body builder, one a surfer and the last a dancer. Thespians they were not. Still, John Milius is a master at this type of genre and he was able to bring out the best in his cast while minimizing their weaknesses. Rachel Nichols is a better actor than this movie allowed her to be. While she'll never be an A-lister she has more to offer than the screaming damsel routine. Stephen Lang was much under used in this newest movie and is one of the more talented actors in the cast. Rose McGowans performance was by far my favorite as I thought she actually seemed like she might have stepped from the pages of a Howard story.
I too missed the crashing epic score of the first version, the music was a real non-event in this one and one of its critical weaknesses. The swords were trash as well. I liked some of the visual settings as they had a real Howard/Frazetta feel to them. All in all a disapointment, not a big one as I had low expectations going it but a let down just the same. Sadly, I think they've effectively killed the franchise.
"In valor there is hope.".................. Tacitus
Last edited by Patrick Kelly on Tue 30 Aug, 2011 4:55 am; edited 1 time in total
|
|
 |
|
Jean Thibodeau
|
| Posted: Mon 29 Aug, 2011 11:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I agree with all the points above by Patrick and I also mentioned in one of my Posts that Rose McGowan was closest to the feel of it being a " Conan " story and the " Young Conan " seemed to have more presence .... too bad they couldn't wait 15 years for the young actor to become the adult version also.
And a lot of the visuals where convincingly " Frazetta " like, as Patrick said so well.  
Patrick's first comment nails it that most actors need good direction and a good script to shine, and the Director/Writer(s) have to be good story tellers ! In this case it seems that action overpowered story telling to the point of making a potentially awesome film just another " cookie cutter " generic action film.
With a better Director it could have been fascinating and compelling instead of repetitive and ultimately disappointing: It's just shy enough of good to be sad.  
You can easily give up your freedom. You have to fight hard to get it back!
|
|
|
|
|
Julien M
|
| Posted: Tue 30 Aug, 2011 2:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jean Thibodeau wrote: | | Patrick's first comment nails it that most actors need good direction and a good script to shine |
That's the rule indeed...the best example I can think of being keanu reeves in the Matrix. While being repeteadly named The Worst Actor In Hollywood History, he made more than a decent Neo (concise dialogues and the overall brilliant concept made up for the cardboard acting).
I Have not seen the new Conan yet, and I fear the worst (technically they already killed the Franchise with Conan the Destroyer...). As mr Reeves above, Momoa did make quiet an impression when portraying Khal Drogo in the game of throne... because most of his job consisted in looking down on other cast member with a threatening look on his face, the made up dothraki language also help to define the character not to mention a generous amounts of mascara...yet I was uneasy during the one scene were he piles up more than a couple of sentences together (when he pledges to win Daenerys crow's back).
Anyway. I'm not going to rush to the cinema to see that one (Is the 3D worth making the effort of going? rather than wait for a DVD realease?)
Cheers,
J
|
|
|
|
|
Jean Thibodeau
|
| Posted: Tue 30 Aug, 2011 2:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Julien M wrote: |
Anyway. I'm not going to rush to the cinema to see that one (Is the 3D worth making the effort of going? rather than wait for a DVD realease?)
Cheers,
J |
I find that with most 3D films one stops being aware of it after a few minutes and except for the odd flying at the audience's faces of throw objects, a lot of the 3D is sort of wasted in most films. ( Note that this generation of 3D movies are at least technically much better than decades ago, and the special glasses fit over my eyeglasses at least. Also, I don't get a headache from the current technology ).
The reason is that 3D is how we normally see and the human brain does a good job with regular 2D images.
Only very close by objects give us a feeling of 3D anyway in real life.
I wouldn't pay extra for the 3D version if another screen at the same theatre is showing a 2D for less money !
The DVD may be better as a lot of the over the top violence didn't make it to the screen, I read somewhere, and maybe some cut out scenes and DVD extras will be worth it ?
Lets not be too brutal about this movie: It's an O.K. " popcorn " action flic, just not that memorable.
You can easily give up your freedom. You have to fight hard to get it back!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You 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 2003-2024 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum
|
This is a standard topic