Robert E. Howard Readers discussion
Films, TV & Games
>
The new "Conan" movie
I understand your pain & sympathize. If I hadn't seen far too many books similarly butchered, I could possibly empathize. As it is, I'm afraid that I can't bring any emotion stronger than a mild distaste & mental note to miss this one, too. Thanks for the heads up.
I dont care about the movies at all they dont even try to adapt REH stories. They dont exist to me. Momoa is a very bad choice for Conan, not because of his looks only but because he could barely act in Stargate Atlantis.
The only good thing about the new movie is that some new fans might read REH.
I've never held out much hope for Hollywood.
It is true enough. When it comes to making movies from books, Hollywood is altogether useless. But I think Mohammed makes a good point: The movies, as bad as they are, might lend new fans the impetus to read the stories. These readers, however, must preserve the ability to differentiate between book and movie. This, regrettably, does not always happen. A case in point occurred when I was talking to a friend of mine about Tolkien's, "Lord of the Rings." My friend is a big fan. He has read the trilogy, and he has seen the movies several times. Anyway, he swore up and down that Eowyn was Theoden's daughter, and that she was the one whom Theoden spoke his dying words to. My friend was wrong, of course, and I told him so. In Tolkien's, "Lord of the Rings," Theoden was Eowyn's uncle, and it was Merry whom Theoden spoke to as he lay dying. Hell, Theoden didn't even know Eowyn was on the battlefield. So, you see, because he viewed the movies, my friend consequently got the film adaption confused with Tolkien's actual masterpiece. And that's the main problem people have when they see movies based upon books they've read. Many will blend both presentations together. They don't consciously do it, but, unfortunately, many folks tend to remember images better than lines and lines of written words.
Personally, I believe films make blasphemies out of their book adaptions. I understand movies must cut and compress a lot, but why the hell do they change or add new material? The filmmakers of these "Conan" movies know little about Robert E. Howard; moreover, I'll wager they've never even read a single Conan tale. That being the case, what gives them the right to mar Howard's work by sacrificing the authenticity and vividness of his character and stories for superfluous special effects, hackneyed plots, cheap humor, and misguided character castings? Gahhhhhh, movies! The hell with them. Books are the thing.
I think the problem is generally the people who are ultimately responsible for getting the movies made. They don't enjoy the stories/books,for that matter do most even read? I mean look at what's on TV. Any time a thoughtful/thought provoking program shows up, it's usually canceled before it can even establish a time slot. There are a few exceptions, but whenever I hear a book I love or one of my favorite authors' works is being made into a movie, I usually cringe.
To be fair, it's awfully tough for anyone to match my imagination in 'reality', even with CGI.
I'll venture the heretical thought here that I actually did kind of like both Conan movies --though I'm not under the illusion that they're great cinematic art, and I liked the Conan books that I've read much better. That said, I agree with a lot of the thoughts others have expressed above: Jim's absolutely right that the pictures a reader's imagination can paint beats movies hollow; and it's an outrage that most Hollywood writers and producers don't even read the books they're "adapting," and make so many unnecessary changes. There are some fine exceptions to that, and for me, it's fun to see a well-done movie adaptation of a good novel or story and compare the two art forms; but too often the film version comes off as an eye-rolling travesty.Of course, the Conan movies weren't direct adaptations of any of Howard's works --though they potentially could have been a lot better if they actually had been, provided the writers really had resisted the travesty temptation and followed the original "as closely as possible," as suggested above. But this new remake apparently doesn't improve on the first one in that respect, and sounds terribly miscast to boot; so I don't think I'll bother seeing it. Thanks for warning us, O'Ruairc!
The first Conan movie wasn't too bad... Conan the Destroyer however, well, let's not talk about that. Not Howard, but I just saw where this coming weekend the "SyFy" channel is running "A Princess of Mars" an adaption of Edgar Rice Burroughs first John Carter novel. Cross your fingers, it probably won't do much good, but we can hope.
"Princess of Mars," eh? Well, Mike, let us know how that goes. I won't watch it account of me not owning a TV. If the adaption proves worthy, however, perhaps I'll find the DVD of it sometime in the future.
I saw one "promo" yesterday...and "Dejah Thoris" looks to be dressed in what I'd call "barbarian leathers". Not encouraging, though they couldn't show almost nude as Burroughs describes her. Still, the Maritain "Red" people were not barbarians. There is a "bid budget" movie planned for 2012, hope it's handled well.
This post is arguably off topic; but I thought maybe we could make this thread our forum for talking about any and all REH-related movies. At our local flea market this morning, I noticed that a vendor who deals in recently-released DVDs had one titled Solomon Kane, and the cover art showed a brawny warrior type looking very much like a Howard hero. The cover copy, though, was in French --leading me to think it may be a French-language film. Has anyone heard anything about this movie?
Never heard of it...but I Googled it and apparently it was released in 2009... It got some good reviews on Rotten Tomatoes and is supposed to be the first in a trilogy of movies. I'll have to try and run it down.
Did any of those reviewers mention whether or not it was originally done in English?
The film is american, produced bý two american production companies and Czech one. I geuss its an indy film. The director did Wilderness before.James Purefoy from HBO's Rome is perfect for the role.
Heh the film is old news for me thanks SFFchronicles forum,Conan.com/REHforum.
I was waiting for the DVD since it didnt get to theatre over here.
I hadn't noticed it over there either...then I don't go to the movie/TV threads much. I guess it's a snooze/lose thing. :)
The new SOLOMON KANE film is actually British. As mentioned, Purefoy is Kane, with Max Von Sydow in support. It's only just come out on DVD/Blu-ray over here in the UK, so I haven't watched it yet. Yes, it's definitely in English.One thing I do know is that the script is not based on any one Kane story, but rather it's an "origin" film. Unfortunately.
Graham wrote: "The new SOLOMON KANE film is actually British. As mentioned, Purefoy is Kane, with Max Von Sydow in support. It's only just come out on DVD/Blu-ray over here in the UK, so I haven't watched it yet...."Wandering Star company is british i thought it was amaerican because they realese REH books.
You can say the film is international and not only brtiish. The two other companies behind it are French,Czech.
Actors,director being british dont mean anything. Danny Glover is in a new Swedish film.
I found a copy of the UK dvd on ebay pretty cheap. Its actually a pretty good film, but is not based on any particular story. If you go to the films website, its release here in the US has been pushed back again to the middle of next year.
Thanks, Jim! We'll have to watch for that one.
Did everyone see that they finally announced a release date for the new Conan movie: August 11, 2011.
Thanks. Too far away for me to think about it, though.
I'll see it at some point, but the guy playing Conan ain't the Conan of Robert E. Howard.
Jim wrote: "I found a copy of the UK dvd on ebay pretty cheap. Its actually a pretty good film, but is not based on any particular story. If you go to the films website, its release here in the US has been p..."The Solomon Kane movie is excellent, in my opinion. I saw it at the cinema on it's UK release and have watched the DVD a number of times - it does bear multiple viewings.
Purefoy is a great actor and plays Kane with an authentic Devonshire accent, which is a nice touch. Although the story is not based on any particular REH story, remember that he didn't write an origin for SK, people not familiar with the character need an origin to make a connection. I don't think there's anything in the "origin" that is inconsistent with the canonical works.
The film contains plenty of swashbuckling and fantasy and, while Kane certainly gets to kick arse, he's definitely not portrayed as a one-dimensional superhuman killing machine.
There is a depth to the characters that adds that little bit more than might be expected in a film of this genre. I'm not claiming it to be a masterwork of world cinema, but it is clearly made with a love of and consideration towards the source material.
With supporting roles by the late, great Pete Postlethwaite, Max von Sydow and Alice Krige, the film makers put some heavyweight acting talent on show.
Sadly, the film seems not to have done so well at box office. UK distribution was limited (I had to make a 50 mile roundtrip to see it, and have several major cinema chains within half that distance) and I don't think that it got distributed in USA cinemas at all. Whether the planned follow-ups will be made (which were to follow Kane into Africa and get some of REH's actual plotlines on screen for the first time) seems increasingly unlikely.
If you can get a copy of Solomon Kane on DVD I'd say it's definitely worth the investment.
Would like to see the Solomon Kane movie. As for the most recent Conan movie, if it is a remake of the Arnie one it's a fail.
Can you imagine if a true REH fan produced a 300-like adaptation of Beyond the Black River?
John, I'd love it if a true REH fan did a faithful adaptation of any of the Conan stories that I've read! Michael, I'll have to keep an eye out for the Solomon Kane movie if it ever shows up on DVD; thanks for letting us know about it.
I win the lottery and I'll produce that movie, Werner, and hire you and the others here as Quality Assurance Analysts, by Crom!
Dont have too high expectations of Solomon Kane film. James Purefoy was the perfect REH Kane but the rest of film was a decent adventure fun.
Mohammed wrote: "Dont have too high expectations of Solomon Kane film. James Purefoy was the perfect REH Kane but the rest of film was a decent adventure fun."What can I say - I loved it! :-D
Indeed, if I had the expertise and aptitude for film-making, along with millions of dollars, my goal in life would be producing one of REH's stories for the big screen. Aaah well.Have any of you seen that 1961 television version of "Pigeons From Hell?" Boris Karloff used to narrate some TV show called "Thriller," and Howard's story was the basis for one of the episodes. I didn't care for this reworking of "Pigeons." In fact, I fell asleep watching it. A rather odd reaction on my part since "Pigeons From Hell" is one of my favorite REH stories but, hey, what can I say? In my opinion, the 1961 TV adaptation of "PFH" really sucked.
Michael, I was quite a fan of Karloff's Thriller series as a kid, but that particular episode is one I don't remember. (There were probably quite a few that I didn't see --and from what you wrote, it sounds like I didn't miss anything by not seeing that one!)
Off Topic a bit but when I was a kid I saw a Karloff movie where some kind of bright alien stone in the well of a house was wreaking havoc on the locals. Plants became meat eaters and I'll never forget the image of a vine lifting a very real looking human heart after plying it from its owner. Karloff was in a wheelchair, if I recall correctly.
Freaky fun, that one.
I confess, aside from the "Pigeons From Hell" episode, I've never seen Karloff's 'Thriller' series. I don't doubt that it was entertaining. A while back ago I heard "Pigeons" was one of the 1961 episodes. I searched far and wide for a copy, found one, then, upon watching it, realized all of my energies were wasted. It seems "Vultures of Whapeton" is being made into a film, and it's supposed to be released soon. Too, I think they are making a "Bran Mak Morn" movie come 2012. Whatever. When it comes to movies based on REH's stories, I wax pessimistic, alas.
I vaguely recall seeing some of these, so the conversation caught my interest. Archive.org only has 1 Thriller episode available here:http://www.archive.org/details/Karlof...
The Return of Andrew Bentley (1961)
Apparently you can buy the full series on DVD from Amazon for $110 or pick it up here:
http://www.classicradioandtv.com/thri...
for $99. Apparently this set is made up of freely available recordings, including broadcast TV, so it's probably worth it to spend the extra $11 & get the Imagine Entertainment set which is supposed to be remastered.
"The Return of Andrew Bentley" is one of the episodes I remember most fondly (it scared the bejabbers out of me as a child :-) ). It's a dramatization of an August Derleth story by the same title.
Has anyone seen the teaser trailer for Conan film ?The actors trying to be grim voice made me laugh!
Agreed. Conan was grim, but REH gave him sufficient conversational skills. His actions often carried the force, not so much his manner of speech. The trailer makes Conan come off as some kind of cave man. Not good.
At least the lines he uttered in the trailer were Howard's. They came from "Queen of the Black Coast." Just so, the plot in the movie is not from "Queen of the Black Coast," and this film-version Conan is not saying those words to Belít. *@#&*X<@)+^$ movies!
O Ruaric, good call ... I have seen those words in a sentence a time or two as well. His delivery is slow in the trailer, and together with that jutting brow thing had me concerned they were thinking barbarian = cave man = Neanderthal, which is far from the quick-thinking and quick-to-act Conan.And I don't know about the rest of you, but I feel that spin-move with the sword is b.s. You don't spin on the battlefield. Maybe in a duel if you're cocky, but I don't recall any spin moves described in REH's scenes, or in history books of ancient battles.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MPNKAC...
Yeah, "spin-moves." Typical movie crap.
Poor Conan most film fans think he must always be caveman,just brawn because of the old movies.
Exactly. Conan's not a dumb thug. He's an action guy who also thinks things through, often grim and brooding. Spoiler Alert:
(view spoiler)
Very cool, REH. Very cool.
Yeah plus we see the Conan who was king,general,pirate leader. He didnt get there with brawns over brain action only.
The first Conan movie disappointed me because Thulsa Doom was a King Kull villain and because the powers that be decided to give aahhhnnold Brown hair and I don't know what color eyes. The second movie was worst, Sure Thoth Amon was the most ferocious villain ever met, but the guy that portayed him looked like a drag queen with a scar. Thoth Amon was dark like middle eastern and was evil looking and the guy just never did him justice. I would like to see some directer with balls do a story like Red Nails, or the Tower Of The Elephant, or the God In the Bowl, and do them close to the story line that Howard set forth. By the way the poem Cimmeria was written in my home town of Mission Texas.
Cool about the poem Cimmeria and your hometown, Juan. A director (and producers) with balls who keeps to the REH storyline would be great. And if they'd get a Conan who resembles REH's Conan in size. Conan wasn't just a fit guy good at combat; he could break a bull's neck barehanded and was a one-man wrecking crew on the battlefield.
A link for the new 3D trailer for Conan The Barbarian lies below. Someone correct me if I'm wrong ... REH never had a you-killed-my-father plot, yet there it is in the movie. http://geeksofdoom.com/2011/07/06/con...
And now I realize that brow they put on Jason ... that's why I get a caveman impression. Conan didn't have a jutting brow.
All that aside, it will be good to see an action movie that at least has some REH elements to it.
John wrote: "A link for the new 3D trailer for Conan The Barbarian lies below. Someone correct me if I'm wrong ... REH never had a you-killed-my-father plot, yet there it is in the movie. http://geeksofdoom.c..."
Thanks for posting the link, John. I am, tentatively, looking forward to this film.
There's no "avenge my father" plot in the canon that I can remember. No doubt the REH Brains Trust will confirm this for us shortly.
Hey Michael, Thanks for the feedback.
I'm 99% sure there is no such plot in in any REH Conan story. It's as if the producers/writers just couldn't leave Conan's origins to the vague 'tough youth tired of the bleak life in Cimmeria in search of adventure' premise, and cooked the books with old recipe.
Ah well. What's a mortal to do?
Robert E. Howard Readers
Books mentioned in this topic
If Chins Could Kill: Confessions of a B Movie Actor (other topics)I Am Legend and Other Stories (other topics)
Shadows In Zamboula (other topics)
Shadows In Zamboula (other topics)
Conan the Warrior (other topics)
More...
When I reviewed the cast of characters in this movie, I didn't recognize a single name from any of Howard's stories. This tells me that the film is not based upon any of the original Conan tales. In fact, if I read it aright, this movie is merely a remake of "Conan the Barbarian." The plot, at least, sounds the same: young Conan lives in a village; his village gets ransacked by marauders; young Conan sees his family butchered; young Conan then grows up, gets strong, and proceeds to seek revenge and retribution against his abusers, blah, blah, blah, blah.
Truth be told, I thought the original "Conan the Barbarian" movie sucked too. I do, however, think Schwarzenegger made a good Conan. If they would have given him black hair and lines straight from Howard's resounding prose, the film might have been better.
I'm unleashing this heated invective against these films because they really annoy me. These so called "Conan" movies are a piss-poor portrayal of Howard's creation. Why couldn't they just put a story like "Beyond the Black River" on the big screen, and then follow it as closely as possible?
In any event, when this new "Conan" movie does come out, I won't even deign to see it. I'll stick to the books, thanks. I feel sorry for those poor souls whose only conception of the Cimmerian comes from the depictions they see on screen.
Please excuse me my rantings and ramblings, but it does feel good to inveigh against movies sometimes.