ummmmm.....
*thinkin*
ahhhhhhh....
ehhh......
Rise of the Planet of the Apes was much more entertaining.
Isn't new HAF great?
Took a day to think on it. Spoiler alert?...maybe.
If your idea of entertainment is a little boy that is more barbaric than the rest of his tribe....whose sole purpose in life is to slay, eat and screw (Conan's words, not mine. Although in the movie his actually says "love" but that's not what he's been up to until he meets the heroine)...and a movie that's mostly slay, a little screwing and very little eating, no humour and no other emotion other than hate and anger, then go see Conan the Barbarian.
Lots of boobs too. Little acting. Virtually no story within the plot...or have I got that backwards?
Quote from: Gawen on August 22, 2011, 01:35:04 AM
Took a day to think on it. Spoiler alert?...maybe.
If your idea of entertainment is a little boy that is more barbaric than the rest of his tribe....whose sole purpose in life is to slay, eat and screw (Conan's words, not mine. Although in the movie his actually says "love" but that's not what he's been up to until he meets the heroine)...and a movie that's mostly slay, a little screwing and very little eating, no humour and no other emotion other than hate and anger, then go see Conan the Barbarian.
Lots of boobs too. Little acting. Virtually no story within the plot...or have I got that backwards?
So what your telling me is that I should simply watch the worthwhile clips on MrSkin?
I started watching it and found it to be a bit boring.
I'm planning on seeing it. Only because..
1) Jason Mamoa
2) I'm a big fan of the old Conan cheese movies
3) Jason Mamoa
Or..I'm gonna go see the remake of Fright Night.
Either way I go on the budget day for $6. So not such a bad loss if it sucks.
Quote from: ThinkAnarchy
So what your telling me is that I should simply watch the worthwhile clips on MrSkin?
Not really. Boobs are boobs. You'd be better off watching a good porn flick to make it worthwhile...*wigglin me eyebrows*
Quote from: Medusa on August 22, 2011, 10:01:27 AM
I'm planning on seeing it. Only because..
1) Jason Mamoa
2) I'm a big fan of the old Conan cheese movies
3) Jason Mamoa
Or..I'm gonna go see the remake of Fright Night.
Either way I go on the budget day for $6. So not such a bad loss if it sucks.
The classic Conan movies were better, I think. Even the music was better. The music in this was so loud at times it distracts. The only redeeming factor of this movie was that for 2 hours, I was in very good air conditioning.
However, I see your point about Jason. But if you'd rather watch him act at not being a psychopath, watch
Game of Thrones. If you want cheesecake, it's all there. Sad part is Jason scowls throughout the movie.
This movie is not the classic good vs. evil story. It's the classic revenge story with a psychopath as the avenger.
My advice is to watch it on one of those websites that....ummmm....well, you know what I mean.
Oh yeah...one thing I forgot. During the intro of the movie, when the narrator brings everyone up to speed, there's a CG effect of a castle blowing up. This effect was no better than the 1960's best special effects. First thing I thought was to laugh...and then thought, "that was a bad omen"...*chucklin*.
I don't even think Whitney will like this B movie (B as in bad). But then again, Medusa, for 6 bucks, you'll find this out for yourself.
Quote from: Gawen on August 22, 2011, 12:57:16 PM
This movie is not the classic good vs. evil story.
That alone is a very good quality of a movie.
Stereo typing, and polarized veiw of good and bad people is a major issue in society.
-duplicate post-
So Jason Mamoa is Khal Drogo from Game of Thrones? I knew that guy looked familiar!
Quote from: Stevil on August 22, 2011, 07:44:38 PM
Quote from: Gawen on August 22, 2011, 12:57:16 PM
This movie is not the classic good vs. evil story.
That alone is a very good quality of a movie.
I agree. That sort of thing makes movies
really shallow and cheesy.
Hmm I guess I might end up with Fright Night remake for tomorrow.
Perhaps my hopes were to high, I dunno.
Not everyone is the same, the movies we like are an individual thing. There are movies that the majority of people do not like and movies the majority do, but that says very little about individual preferences. There's nothing wrong if you don't like a movie that most people like or if you like a movie that most peole don't. Neither is a superior or inferior position as art is very subjective. So maybe it just wasn't your cup of tea.
Quote from: Davin on August 23, 2011, 04:53:51 PM
So maybe it just wasn't your cup of tea.
Oh no, I love a good revenge movie (Death Wish, Gladiator, Sudden Death). I love good vs evil stuff Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, V for Vendetta).
I found it to be a bit vanilla; not very innovative, nothing screaming greatness. Still, I was mildly entertained for a couple of hours. Jason Mamoa was fine as Conan, and I like good ol' Arnie, but I'm not hung up on which is better. One thing I will say is that this movie gets closer to the feel and spirit of the 1930's pulp fiction from which the Conan stories originated. Like Star Wars, Indiana Jones, and the cliffhanger serials on which those are based, that are the cinematic equivalent of their literary counterpart, pulp fiction short stories. When this new Conan movie gets going, it's just going from one set piece to another; the 80's Conan the Barbarian movie had action yet was much more deliberate in pace.
Eh, it's a step closer, but still a little shy of seeing the literary incarnation of Conan. I never got the impression he was initially driven by revenge; it always seemed like he kept adventuring to drive out the memories of his homeland because it was a depressing, cheerless and melancholy land. As opposed to a cataclysmic personal tragedy. Someone else I talked to commented that Robert E. Howard's Conan was often not really too proactive, we're usually catching up with him in each story as he's trying to get out of one scrape or another. He still kicked a#$ though, always. Thematically, Conan was often a character which enabled Howard to explore the clash of values and attitudes between barbarism and civilization (developing the premise that civilization was an unnatural construct of humans, and barbarism would ultimate prove a superior way of life). I didn't pick up on that in the movie, though, if it was there at all.