|
|
Post by Vincent Dolan on Jul 24, 2011 0:08:34 GMT
I'd agree, except I just didn't like it because of Arnold. He was slow, lumbering, and unintelligible throughout most of the movie. If the actor playing your main character is being carried by bigger (and better, in my opinion) names, then there's something wrong. The premise of the movie, as well as the execution for its time period, is great. But the main character is what draws me into a story; if s/he (or the actor/actress playing them if it's a movie) doesn't grab my attention, I tend to not really care about the story. Arnold didn't do any of those things, so my view of the movie is lowered.
Conversely, I like Momoa. He was great as Khal Drogo and very good as Ronan Dex (Stargate Atlantis). If it weren't for the oversized boffer-ish look of the new sword, I'd say he fits the part, physically and characteristically, of Conan better than Arnold. Of course, even if it was designed by Jody Samson, I was never a fan of the original sword; it just never sat right with me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Federico on Jul 24, 2011 0:18:46 GMT
No...just no. Conan doesn't need to talk and be this great articulated speaker. He's a barbarian. Arnold didn't succeed in the role as a great actor, but rather as being Arnold : a cold, laconic, Nordic looking mountain of muscle. Compared to the original, Momoa lookes like a pumped up surfer. Now, if we bring into the picture Conan the destroyer...yeah, I think the new movie will be WAY better than it.
|
|
Aaron
Member
Senior Forumite
Posts: 2,369
|
Post by Aaron on Jul 24, 2011 0:25:26 GMT
...Except Conan WAS a smart dude, very cunning. Arnold portrayed a man with the intelligence of an adolescent.
Sean: Eh, I can see where you're coming from. I don't cry often either and I laugh off most physical pain and tend to be somewhat reckless in pursuit of "macho fun". That car wreck was a different sort of trauma for me, though. So I guess I see both sides of it. Being manly doesn't mean being emotionally numb.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vincent Dolan on Jul 24, 2011 0:33:34 GMT
Except that's the opposite of how Howard describes him. He's often described as having bronzed skin (not Arnold's pale), black hair (not Arnold's brunette), the grace and agility of a panther, intelligent, multilingual, and has a good sense of humor (none of which Arnold has in his depiction of Conan). As a stereotypical ignorant barbarian whose only mission in life is to pillage, plunder, and murder, Arnold excels. But as the capable Conan? I can't help but wonder what the casting directors were thinking.
|
|
Sean (Shadowhowler)
VIP Reviewer
Retired Moderator
No matter where you go, there you are.
Posts: 8,828
|
Post by Sean (Shadowhowler) on Jul 24, 2011 0:40:17 GMT
I saw the first Conan movie before I read or even knew of the stories... thus for me the movie was its own thing. I do agree that it did not reflect the character as written... and this movie (stupid looking sword aside) stands a better chance of doing that.
However... I just LOVED that first movie. No CGI, just real set pieces... it had a gritty, authentic feel to it... and the score was out of this world good. The movie, for me, just flowed so well as some form of visual poetry. Its what got me interested in swords as a little kid... and into fantasy and a life of playing D&D and collecting blades.
This new movie may be closer to the true Conan as written... we shall see... but the style and vibe I'm getting from the previews I've seen don't invoke a good feeling from me. Too shinny and digital and plastic... I hope I'm wrong and the movie rocks, but it just doesn't vibe right for me yet.
I've noticed with the younger generation this is less of an issue... because they have grown up on CGI and video games and this is what they know and like.
Yup... I've turned into the crotchety old man on the front porch screaming 'Get off my lawn.'
|
|
|
|
Post by Bryn on Jul 24, 2011 0:45:03 GMT
So, throwin' my two cents into the ring. I think Momoa is truer in character to the Book Conan. However, the new movie will most certainly screw everything up, with respect to both the book and the original movie with Arnold. Given how he moved and fought in GoT, I think he's got the speed to be the panther-like Conan of the books.
However, this thread is about the sword, not the men portraying Conan.
I don't like the new one that is shown. Granted, I didn't really like the old one. Frankly put, it was just too damn short for a barbarian. Again, just my .02 cents, nothin' against Jody Samson.
However, if Conan gets the sword that's in the title of the new movie, the one with the curved quillions and the flared shoulders blade, then I could be satisfied.
|
|
|
|
Post by Federico on Jul 24, 2011 0:46:30 GMT
True, but I don't see picking an articulate yet much less manly looking guy as an improvement. Besides, Arnold's portrayal isn't that dumb. He's the ubermensch, from Thus Spoke Zarathustra. Everything fits, even the curse against his own gods as the final nail in the coffin of the creation of his own moral code! Anyways, I'm biased...but then again, I'll prolly be at the theaters the day the new Conan comes out :mrgreen:
Enough Conan talk, back to swords.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lonely Wolf Forge on Jul 24, 2011 1:06:12 GMT
is it just me or does this sword look like the Atlantean sword had buttsex with the Kurgan sword and ths is the baby that came out....
|
|
|
|
Post by RicWilly on Jul 24, 2011 6:02:55 GMT
I couldn't agree more.
|
|
|
|
Post by Alexander on Jul 24, 2011 15:05:47 GMT
Like to chime in a little about the movies. The first movie is to me Conan, not necessarily the Conan of the books. Many times translating books to movies is not always an exact science. Movies are a visual media and making the most visually appealing movie is the main objective. Thats where Arnold excelled, like it or not his physical appearance is the ideal most people have of Conan even before he made the movie. Also for the intelligence of Conan in the original movie they do make it clear that he had access to different languages and reading.
The swords, the shear size of the new one says to me that they are trying to hold to the standard set in the original movie. But unlike the original it has none of the thought put into it. The first swords are unparalleled in in design and imagery, not necessarily historic or functional. This new one looks as though the only instructions that were given were to make it big and ugly. As someone else has mentioned swords in movies become icons, even stars themselves. Show a picture of Anduril and a lot of people will tell you its name or at least the movie(s) it was in. This sword I can only guess was designed to appeal to WOW players.
|
|
ecovolo
Senior Forumite
Retired Moderator
Posts: 2,074
|
Post by ecovolo on Jul 24, 2011 19:58:49 GMT
 I know I've said this before in another post, but I'll post it here: The blade that would have worked for me in this movie would have been Fable Blades', "Crimson Sleep": www.fableblades.com/Crimson%20Sleep.html (Followed closely by the Nokkelen, here: www.fableblades.com/Nokkelen.html) To me, the Crimson Sleep design screams "Conan The Barbarian Sword", never mind the description on the webpage  . The fantasy elements are there (ie. the pommel), while still looking practical and not overly cartoonish, as the blade in the above photo does. --Edward |
|
|
|
Post by Lonely Wolf Forge on Jul 24, 2011 20:29:45 GMT
i agree, like i said they have a vast number of people they could have contacted...
|
|
|
|
Post by Pogo4321 on Jul 24, 2011 22:30:43 GMT
You never know, the sword design could tie into the plot some how. ...all the other barbarians laugh and call him names and never let poor Conan join in any barbarian games. And then one dark and foggy eve Crom comes and says "Conan with your big ugly sword so bright won't slay my enemies tonight."
|
|
|
|
Post by Deepbluedave on Jul 25, 2011 10:59:04 GMT
I suppose this is a bad time to say "I pre ordered mine for the discount".
|
|
|
|
Post by William Swiger on Jul 25, 2011 11:23:45 GMT
[quote="Sean (Shadowhowler
To each their own. I'm from the old school I guess... I've only cried a couple times in my life... mostly when a bone was sticking out of some part of my body (and often not then) and once or twice when I was alone at night and some girl had torn my heart out and stepped on it.
It could have at least been beer or whiskey. :lol: [/quote]
Were the girls the ones who also broke your bones? :lol:
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2011 11:48:13 GMT
it hink arnold has lots of humor  i fear that this movie will be just like the newer bond movies, maybe they are good movies but way too fast to be ever called bond (or conan) not because the movie is just bad, but because the improvements lose anything that was bond (or conan). the slow and badly acting made conan conan for me, so even if they do it better it won't be conan but just another fantasy movie. |
|
Sean (Shadowhowler)
VIP Reviewer
Retired Moderator
No matter where you go, there you are.
Posts: 8,828
|
Post by Sean (Shadowhowler) on Jul 25, 2011 15:59:25 GMT
Well... taste is subjective... and its your money. :roll: Given the collection of beautiful swords you have, I would be surprised if you did pre-order this POS because I think you have better taste then that, and the money could be put to a much better weapon... but I've been known to be wrong before. 
|
|
|
|
Post by Neil G. on Jul 25, 2011 16:32:12 GMT
I'm going to go watch the movie and try to not let my preconceived notions of what Conan looks and sounds like in film to interfere with it. I mean it will likely be closer to what Rober Howard envisioned than the Ahnold version and I'll try to keep that in mind.
|
|
|
|
Post by RicWilly on Jul 25, 2011 19:42:40 GMT
I was willing to give the movie a chance myself... until I saw that hideous sword. I don't think I can get past it.
|
|
|
|
Post by craigd on Jul 25, 2011 20:00:20 GMT
I will definitely still watch it, be kinda silly not to give it a chance..BUT I can see myself getting really irritated by things like that sword.  |
|
. The fantasy elements are there (ie. the pommel), while still looking practical and not overly cartoonish, as the blade in the above photo does.
