Review of Conan the Barbarian (2011) by Lionel C — 31 Mar 2014

I didn't have the highest expectations for Conan the Barbarian because the sword and sorcery genre was great in the 1980's and decreased in quality afterwards, and a remake is rarely ever good. Still, considering that Jason Momoa was cast in the titular role, I had some hopes that there would be some of his acting skills being the source of entertainment, as well as some good action hopefully.

Conan the Barbarian has one of the same problems that the original film of the same name encountered: it attempts to really tell a story. Conan the Barbarian attempts to tell the story of its titular character while only touching upon him lightly, but the fact that the film even bothered to try feels unnecessary. The character Conan is a one dimensional swordsman on a quest for vengeance and to fight for what is right and destroy what is wrong, and any half-wit would be able to predict that before going into Conan the Barbarian, so it really isn't a story that needs to be told all over again in the remake of Conan the Barbarian. And from there on, the film falters even more.

Visually, Conan the Barbarian is sub-par. Since the main thing I hoped for from Conan the Barbarian was for it to be a good visual experience, I was thoroughly disappointed with the result. The sets and props all feel too artificial, and the entire universe that the film is set in feels rather cheap and ineffective which is surprising because the film is budgeted at $90 million which seemingly went into converting the film into 3D. I wouldn't be surprised, because it is so strange that a $90 million film ends up looking so cheap, lifeless and dull as well as artificial. Even the scenery feels artificial, and I wouldn't be surprised if the entire film was shot on a green screen. I don't think that is the case, but it is obvious for much of the time that green screen visual effects are present, and they do not look as good as they should considering that once again, the film has a budget of $90 million. The visual elements in Conan the Barbarian are of poor calibre which makes the experience bad, and yet the negative qualities don't stop there.

It is clear that the visual style of Conan the Barbarian was intended for its 3D release, while its regular DVD release is unable to benefit from this. Everything looks like it is all on the same visual ground in the DVD release of the film which makes the visual style even weaker. If the film was in 3D, perhaps it would be ok. But you cannot pick up on them when watching them with normal eyes on DVD, so the gimmick isn't necessary whatsoever.

Conan the Barbarian rushes through everything when it comes to pacing. The story kicks off fast and then attempts to fit everything into a time frame of 108 minutes. Unfortunately, as director Marcus Nispel attempts to make it both a serious story about Conan himself and a violent venture about swords and sorcery, he overkills the film. Because of him, it succeeds as neither when trying to be both and just ends up being a surprisingly dull film which overstays its welcome all too soon and takes itself way too seriously. Because of Marcus Nispel's attempt to make the film a serious adaptation of the story, it prevents there from being any fun in it. But because of how he threw the money around and away in the wrong ways, it cannot be taken seriously. Conan the Barbarian fails to even succeed as much of a guilty pleasure either, because it doesn't even feature any nudity. I didn't expect there to be any, but a good sword and sorcery film has at least a little. Even 300 and its sequel had brief moments of nudity, but Conan the Barbarian has none. The original does, but not this awful remake.

And last of all, Conan the Barbarian has insufficient action. The one quality that the film can really boast from a visual perspective is its action scenes which despite having moments of poor CGI and useless 3D visual effects have some well choreographed sword action and some good touches of blood and gore. The sword fights have their moments, and while not consistently successful are arguably the most entertaining scenes in the film. But there is not enough of them over the course of the running time in Conan the Barbarian, so it defies its title by having a quantity of action that is everything but barbaric. If anything, a more appropriate film title is Conan the Negotiator since he doesn't have many barbaric qualities to him.

All in all, Conan the Barbarian is a failure in every area except one: the casting of the lead actor.

Jason Momoa is perfect for the role of Conan the Barbarian. As the character is a thinly written man of courage and sword fighting, the only necessities that any actor should have for the part is to have long hair and a muscular form which Jason Momoa has. But luckily enough, he is a talented actor as well. He puts a lot of charisma into the role, more than the character even deserves. So Jason Momoa is the lone bright spot in Conan the Barbarian and puts a lot of humanity and heroism into the character. Jason Momoa is spot on in the part of Conan, and its good to see him in a heroic role after his more dark and savage roles as Khal Drogo in Game of Thrones.

The presence of Ron Perlman is pretty great as well considering he is the legendary hero from films such as Hellboy, so he makes a genial presence for the film.

But despite Jason Momoa's best efforts in the lead role, Conan the Barbarian is a poor quality remake of that didn't require too much to actually be a good remake, and it wastes $90 million on poor quality visual effects, unnecessary 3D visual effects and mediocre storytelling as well as a weak script and a crappy sense of unoriginal storytelling which is too unoriginal,.