"Conan the Barbarian" Jason Momoa SPOILERS

As I said Larry this is the best live action take on Conan yet,maybe not perfect but surely close.
as you said Momoa certainly was Conan more then any other before him,and he looks damn close,I loved the part where young Conan not only keeps going but kicks the living snot out of the other savages and totes their heads back home!
the tavern scene was like some of the old comics come to life,and the way he played it was spot on to the character (to me)

So what's my hope? well if Ghost Rider can have a second film I hope we get more of this Conan,maybe see him fight a giant cyclops next? en?
 
Granted, some of the writing could have been better, better defined plot, but Momoa WAS Conan.

Ahnold was a mentally retarded parody.
 
I could take pics of all my Conan books to.

Please do, Ben. I'll bet they aren't the Ace paperbacks from the 70s, and, if they are, I'll bet you got them second-hand, what with me having pants older than you and all.

Please be respectful of the fact I'm proving to the haters that I'm a long-time Conan fan.
 
Here watch the fanboys squeal.

I tore the cover off of mine returned it for credit at a buddies book store.

THE MCQUARRIE COVER

(hear them squeal)
 
Vader-Noooooooooo.jpg
 
I just got back from seeing this and I thought it was a fun bit of entertainment. Not brilliant but fun. As much as I love the 1982 version this is more Conan to me.
I thought Jason Momoa played a great Conan and was far closer to the way I envisioned him when reading Howard's stories. He has the scars, he has the stare, and he can actually speak whole sentences. Rose McGowan was perfectly serpentine as Marique and damn if that woman doesn't have the sexiest lips I don't know who does. The story was far closer to Howard’s stories as well; it felt like an adventure not an opera. It had many of the recurring elements from Howard’s stories. Yes there were changes to some of Conan's history from the stories but with the budget I can understand why. I loved seeing the Picts brought to life and thought Conan's rise to warriors status extremely satisfying. The action was good, there were a couple scenes that needed to go back to the editing suite but nothing too bad. The music was typical of music scores nowadays. It doesn’t hold a candle to the Basil Poledouris score but not many scores can, that score is a genuine masterpiece. The 3D was passable but not necessary. The sword designs were not as creative as the 1982 version but at least looked like they were usable weapons made with not so pure material.

Is it the best movie ever? Of course not but I didn’t find it as generic as the Clash of the Titans remake. I will be picking this one up on Blu when it's released.
 
Please do, Ben. I'll bet they aren't the Ace paperbacks from the 70s, and, if they are, I'll bet you got them second-hand, what with me having pants older than you and all.

Please be respectful of the fact I'm proving to the haters that I'm a long-time Conan fan.

:) I did get them secondhand! Argh..... that means I am less of a fan. :(

Wait you have pants that are 27 years old? :) BY CROM! I guess the recesssion is hitting the comic book business really hard as well. :)

(I am kidding of course)
 
Last edited:
I just got back from seeing it. I didn't think it was awful or awesome - I suspect I'll have forgotten most of it a few days from now. I like Momoa in general, I thought he did fine in Game of Thrones. But here I didn't get any sense of presence from him. Stephen Lang is a fine actor (in everything from Tombstone to Gods and Generals to Avatar,) but Zym was pretty blah as a character. Same with the heroine. Same with the thief. The only two characters that really interested me were Conan's pirate buddy (who will be in season 2 of Game of Thrones) and Rose McGowan's character.

All that said, I thought the scenes with young Conan and his dad were great, especially the fight with the Picts.
 
Bombed and sued.......

'Conan the Barbarian' Lawsuit Seeks Character Rights (Exclusive) - Hollywood Reporter

If anybody thought that Stan Lee Media Inc., the company which now operates independently from its comic book legend founder, was gone for good, guess again. On Friday, SLMI made a big move in U.S. District Court in California to grab back rights on the fictional character Conan the Barbarian and win proceeds from the just-released Conan the Barbarian 3D film.

The new suit comes from SLMI, which has had a rocky history since being founded by Stan Lee in the late 1990s.

Initially, the company looked to be on its way towards success after Lee assigned SLMI rights to his famous comic book characters. In 2000, the company added to its stable of rights by acquiring full ownership of Conan Properties. Then, the following year, SLMI entered bankruptcy, and the company's IP assets were diverted, leading to a decade of protracted litigation.

Last year, SLMI found its feet again after a Colorado court recognized SLMI's new board as the duly authorized representative of the company. Since then, the company has been looking to put back the pieces.

SLMI's latest splash is a lawsuit filed on the same day that the latest Conan the Barbarian film hit theaters.

According to the complaint, after SLMI went into bankruptcy in 2001, an unauthorized agent of the company purported to transfer its ownership of Conan Properties back to Conan Sales Co.

The company claims that the transfer of the "Conan" character is void because at that time in 2002, "the shares of Conan Properties and all other assets of SLMI were part of a bankruptcy estate and protected from unauthorized transfer by the automatic bankruptcy stay."

SLMI says that the defendants obtained relief from the automatic stay in March 2002 by getting a judge to sign off on a "Settlement Approval Order" but that this order was itself void because the defendants didn't provide notice and give 1,800 SLMI shareholders an opportunity to protect their interests by opposing the motion to transfer Conan.

The transfers, allegedly made by attorney Arthur Lieberman among others, is alleged to have constituted fraud and a breach of fiduciary duties. Lieberman himself is a defendant in this lawsuit.

In 2002, after Conan Sales Co. reacquired rights to Conan, it sold those rights to a Swedish company called Paradox Entertainment, which has spent the last decade attempting to revive the character's commercial value, including new comic books, a computer game, and now a 3D film from Nu Image/Millennium and Lionsgate.

In its lawsuit against Conan Sales Co., Paradox, Lieberman, and others, SLMI is demanding it be restored its rights over the franchise and that the defendants be ordered to turn over any money or property derived from the success of the character, including the newest film. Conan disappointed at the box office this weekend, bringing in about $10 million. Reports have pegged the budget as being anywhere from $70 million to $90 million.

Paradox couldn't be reached for comment.

Meanwhile, SLMI continues to wage war against Stan Lee and Marvel Entertainment over rights to Spider-Man, the Incredible Hulk, X-Men, Iron Man, the Fantastic Four, Thor, and more. Similarly, the company believes that this IP was unlawfully transfered when the company was in bankruptcy protection. A California federal judge recently stayed proceedings, awaiting a ruling by the 2nd Circuit whether an alternative lawsuit in New York can be pursued once again.

Conan the Barbarian was created by Robert E. Howard in the 1930s, revived as a comic book character by Marvel Comics in the 1970s, and became a film starring Arnold Schwarzenegger in 1982.
 
This thread is more than 12 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top