Review: Conan The Barbarian

Genre: Action / Adventure / Fantasy

Director: Marcus Nispel

Cast: Jason Momoa, Stephen Lang, Rachel Nichols, Rose Mcgowan and Ron Perlman.


The General Idea
Conan (Jason Momoa) is on a quest for vengeance, for the murder of his father (Ron Perlman) and the slaughter of his entire village by the evil warlord Khalar Zym (Stephen Lang). Who is on a quest of his own for the Acheron Bone Mask, perpetrates these acts of violence and genocide. Yup you got it, it’s as dumb as it sounds but don’t worry the story takes a back seat in this adventure.

The Good

Momoa is a decent enough Conan, he looks the part and swings a sword with conviction. I dare say he is bested by young Conan played by Leo Howard, seeing Conan grow up however brief was one of the better moments, I couldn’t tell you his age but he is an absolute badass even as a tiny barbarian.

Stephen Lang does a good job as the movies villain Khalar Zhym, when the dialogue allows it.

The battles scenes are not amazing but they are good, the shot is held long enough and cuts are appropriately placed to keep the action interesting. One scene in particular stands out – Conan fights enchanted sand warriors? Ya lets call them that. Anyway these are a great mix of CGI and special effects make-up, one of the rare moments when the CGI does not look like straight out of a SyFy show.

The Bad

Oh man where to start, how about we start with two of the absolute worst performances in the entire movie.

Rose Mcgowan as Marique the creepy daughter to Khalar Zym, every line she had was completely butchered – not that the lines themselves were any good. Staying in a state somewhere between constipated and horny every time she came on screen I wanted to set the theater on fire.

Saïd Taghmaoui as Ela-Shan a skittish burglar? Thankfully he’s not in many scenes, but as with Mcgowan when he opened his mouth you wish he hadn’t.

The 3D added nothing to the movie; mind you I am not a fan of 3D but not once did this feel like it was worth while.

The biggest problem is not one single thing but it can be described with a single word, uneven. The CGI as mentioned earlier ranges from actually good to down right awful, same can be said about the costume’s and the few instance’s of dialogue.

One thing that is however consistent is the story its bad throughout, the bone mask, the pure blood – All you actually need to know is, Conan pissed, Conan want revenge.

 Overall

Despite my above tirade of dislikes there were parts of the movie that kept me entertained and while it may have lost a lot of steam towards the end, I had a good enough time overall. If you need a strong story and good dialogue I do not recommend a trip to Hyboria.  If you want to get your fill of mindless action, pectorals, tits and a lot of blood, enjoy.

Score: 4.5/10 

Arnie you are still the true Conan.

Comment with Facebook

26 thoughts on “Review: Conan The Barbarian

  1. Well, to be frank, ı do like American films but I am a bit sick and tired of seeing same sort of flms these days….Americans are really good at drama. I still can’t forget about The Green Line. I want to see more of this kind. And this film, being a remake seems a bit boring.

  2. Well, to be frank, ı do like American films but I am a bit sick and tired of seeing same sort of flms these days….Americans are really good at drama. I still can’t forget about The Green Line. I want to see more of this kind. And this film, being a remake seems a bir boring

  3. Well, to be frank, ı do like American films but I am a bit sick and tired of seeing same sort of flms these days….Americans are really good at drama. I still can’t forget about The Green Line. I want to see more of this kind.

  4. All I could think was- what’s with Rose McGowan’s Medieval Freddy Kruger Glove?! Totally agree that the young Conan outclassed Jason Momoa in every respect- he was so much more interesting in Game of Thrones! The 3D was pretty good but the plot was totally lacking… no sense of urgency- and how comes when the main bad guy manages to put on the evil mask it doesn’t render him anymore powerful?! strange…

  5. Wow! No offence to the readers/posters on here, but some of you are on some SERIOUSLY shitty weed! This movie is BY FAR the shittiest movie of the year. The only other movie I’ve watched (in recent memory) that is worse, is In The Name Of The King. This movie should be taken out to pasture, and shot multiple times, to make sure it never sees the light of DVD!

    Dialogue 0/10
    Action 0/10 (Are you kidding me, that those scenes can be classified as action? There’s points where the nemesis is waiting for Conan to hit his sword! Fucking disgraceful)
    Editing 0/10
    Overall, if I was paid to watch this movie, I would’ve quit!

    The only worthwhile part would’ve been for some tits, but even those scenes sucked. Oh, and we’re supposed to believe a 10 year old can mutilate 8 rabid hunters? This movie is rife with racism and there’s only 1 word that can describe this pile of shit, and that’s “despicable”.

  6. It’s good to see some of the other reviews on this thread. The original reviewer was far to harsh. I thought the movie was bad ass and accept it for what it is, an action flick. It wasn’t perfect and sadly it follows the path of many action movies now a days and jumps around with the story instead of adding some depth into the journey. Clash of the Titans suffered because of this as well. The two worst performances were pointed out in the main review and I cringed every time Rose Mcgowen spoke. The thief could have been left out of the movie and you wouldn’t have missed him. They either needed to find someone more notable to play him or bring back the character from the original Conan movie.

    Over all though, the movie was enjoyable and the sword play was awesome. This is by far a better Conan and a better representation of REH Conan. I actually look forward to another and hope we get a trilogy just so I can see Conan kicking some more ass.

    1. Yep, totally agree with you on all points. I am also looking forward to a sequel. Can’t wait to see Mamoa wield the blade once again as Conan.

      I dont see how movies avoid the inevitable jumping around with so many restrictions nowadays on film time. Many films are “butchered” in editing room as it is to make these time frames. I think this is part of the problem going in for a director, right out of the gate you are hamstrung because you know your movie has to fit withing a certain length/time-frame so theaters are willing to show it. So making an epic film is a real risk, will it makes its money back? etc.

      The current state of film making is a quagmire, at least its my opinion.

  7. I didn’t think there was much to this than some relatively well done blood and guts, mostly towards the beginning. But it pretty much had what the original had to offer, and that’s shallow and campy “entertainment”, if you’re into that…I’m really not.

  8. Honestly I wasn’t expecting much from this movie (and I certainly wouldn’t waste the extra money on 3D) in the first place. I was expecting nothing but a weak story to tie together some cool looking (even if they weren’t great quality) fights and some pretty scenery (which was all I cared for in the old Arnold version, which btw turns 30 next year).

    After reading this I will more than likely just wait for the DVD (which it fades without making much impact the DVD will probably be out by the end of the year).

  9. I had high expectations going into this movie. Hoping that with an actor I admired like Jason Momoa ( of Atlantis fame ) the franchise could be resurrected. Thinking they would use Momoa’s ability to add charm and timing to enhance the campiness of the original, along with 21st century C.G.I to make the new Conan great visually also. I could not have been more wrong. The director (Marcus Nispel) never even tried to bring out any campiness with this movie. Dare I say there wasn’t one joke delivered in the new Conan. To sit through a movie without one laugh or chuckle is hard to do, but they made it possible. Nispel was also unable to even have any sustained interaction with the Conan character and any other secondary actors. How are we to judge Momoa’s portrayal if he is given nothing to do. It was almost as if Conan was a secondary character to Steven Lang (Khalar Zym) and Rose McGowan (Marique). With all of this said the acting was not the problem in this movie, what was then one might ask? It was the Cinematographer (Thomas Kloss) my gosh what was he on? He would go jumping from scene to scene with no continuity what so ever. One moment Conan & Tamara (Rachel Nichols) would be leaving a ship on a rocky ocean front, next they would be deep into the Black forest lands of somewhere else, from there to a desert, a snow cover mountain next to a jungle back to another rocky bluffed ocean front. Earlier when I said I didn’t have anything to laugh at in this movie. I take it back, because the cinematography was so laughable it bordered on comical. I feel sorry for these actors that were subjected to both Nispel and Kloss.

  10. Hmmm, agree with Thordan above. 4.5 is a ridiculous rating, I would have given a modest 6/6.5 myself. There is one thing about the review I agree with, young Conan steals the show!

    I am tired of hearing about the Arnold Conan. He was so great the director and producer made a conscious decision to narrate the entire movie limiting Arnold’s speaking parts. So yea, we saw what happened in the ensuing films didnt we. Arnold will always be Conan, really?

    I didnt like the 3D myself, should have saw it in 2D. The 3D added nothing to the film except $3 in added ticket cost.

    As for myself, for all its flaws and I can find them with most flms… I loved it! Jason Mamoa sword skills far out-shined anything the lumbering Arnold did in the original. Did you even see how he was spinning that blade?

    This review was just off.

  11. This is a problem I’ve noticed with some action movies, especially 3d ones (Clash of the Titans, anyone?) There is no story, no depth, its all flash and gore and CGI, rushed storyline, basically like how most horror movies are now. *sigh*

  12. 4.5? Really? Did you even watch the Arnold Conan’s? That is a fucking pathetic review.

    The movie is a lot of fun. A lot better than other films like Prince of Persia or Scorpion King. Of course some of the acting was bad, some of the sci fi lower budget, but what are you wanting? Not everything is going to be Avatar.

    Considering the love goo that drops from the blog about old action classics, I would expect a more understanding approach to an underfunded movie that tries to rekindle some original action. I feel like its a society of spoiled film brats that only want to see No Country For Old Men every time they sit down in a movie seat.

    Honestly? What were you expecting? 4.5 is literally a retarded review. I would give it a minimum 7. But to say that it flunked out at everything is just complete tomfoolery! You, my sir, are dead to me.

    1. As much as I respect your opinion, the point of being on this site is to respect others. I hope in the future that we do not have to hear you rant about somebodies review or opinion with the type of langauge that you used. It is not right to attack someone like that.

      I hope in the future we can see your opinions in the same light we would expect to see others.

  13. I’m already not a big fan of this type of movie and I didn’t like the first one. After reading one bad review after another, I’m sure not to watch it. And I’m a bit sick of all these 3D releases. I thought that the 3D didn’t make a difference in “Rio” either, which was a waste.

Leave a Reply