Review of Conan the Barbarian (2011) by Spyros T — 07 Jan 2013

A horrible remake idea that ended up ten times more horrible when they hired Marcus Nispel. This has to be one of the most awfully shot and edited films I've seen in a long time. I hated how Conan's action scenes were edited.

I'm so tired of this hack-cut-slash-cut-blood-cut-face-cut-swing-cut-scream-cut-glare technique. Usually it's much more interesting and fun to use some fucking medium shots that last more than a second or two.

It makes me sad that long shots are becoming such a lost art. Also, I don't know why Conan was speaking that much. He's not one for a lot of words. Momoa should have portrayed Conan as he did with Khal Drogo on Game of Thrones.

I'm reading that this Conan was very faithful to the comic character but lets face it, even if Arnolds Conan was not close to Robert E. Howard's original character, it's his portrayal that's stuck in our subconscious and it is very hard for anyone to live up to Arnold.

Arnold at the time Conan was made had a very animalistic or primitive feel about him, besides the physical presence he also carried a confidence that other actors have a hard time duplicating. Finally, I hate it when they are too lazy to call a remake something else.

Couldn't they have called this film something ELSE with the word "Conan" in it? I think I may have reached an emotional turning point with "reboots" (I hate this phrase) of films that don't actually require them.

Hollywood has raped and butchered so much of my childhood. As Conan himself would say, "This is NOT what is best in life."!