This thread reeks of pre-viewing bias coloring the opinions of the posters before they've even seen the opening credits.
Who knew Conan the Barbarian would be so polarizing?
I'm guilty yes.
The casting was a major fail right out of the box for me.
Can't fix that. I am incapable of accepting this actor as the character,
First photos then trailers assured me I could not accept him.
Too much Frazetta and comic consumption for me after Arnie. LOL
I'd never heard of this guy until he was announced as Conan.
So was neither a fan nor hater of him in that regard.
I'm sure he does fine with what they gave him in the eyes of those that can see him as the character.
That being said, if I saw raving reviews that said this film had channeled REH and the Hyborian world I would have bit the bullet and taken a look.
That was far from the case.
You can read the plot points easily on line.
You can read reviews which I have. No character development, crappy tired barely there plot, action scene after another with lots of blood to please those that like lots of blood to be pleased.
Trailers show the films flavor,
I know exactly what to expect as this is the kind of stuff we've been getting for years.
Even many (of the few) positive reviews have some kind of excuse for the film.
"The very fact no attempt is made to hide the over-acted performances and under-developed storyline will sit perfectly fine with fans of this kind of junk"
"Does it satisfy, this tale? In its own modest way, it does."
So yes, you can determine if a film is something you want
to reward with a ticket sales and thus show support that you would
like more of the same.
I want Conan to get the Peter Jackson treatment that Lord of the Rings got. Dig deeply into the source materials and breath life into the Hyborean age.
The literature supports that kind of care is deserved.
Film must make changes I know, and for Conan I support that fully as it is a different animal then Lord of the Rings. But I want to see a faithful attempt one day.