Conan

[Melathys]

At first, I wasn't sure what to think of the new conan actor, Jason Momoa, you simply can't/don't replace Arnold. But, it seems to me that he actually represents a better realization of the Conan found in artwork of the character than Arnold.

especially if you look at artwork from before Arnold.







I'm just talking visually here. I have no opinion on performance, or the movie's story or anything like that, lol. Just saying, this new guy seems like he's actually closer to the original interpretation of the character than Arnold based on appearance alone.

*edit

well, maybe not the -original- concept. Here's the cover of the first book released in 1953...



*edit again

I guess we can go even further back, to the 1930s
http://spazioinwind.libero.it/menhir/Menhir/weird.htm

[Fridmarr]

I don't know what you mean, by looking at those first two images you posted, he's too small. Arnold at that time, was a much better fit for those images. The new Conan has a good physique, but not enough mass to match up as well to those pictures.

Or are you talking about face and hair? I suppose that is closer.

[Heil]

Drogo rep FTW

[Melathys]

I don't know what you mean, by looking at those first two images you posted, he's too small. Arnold at that time, was a much better fit for those images. The new Conan has a good physique, but not enough mass to match up as well to those pictures.

Or are you talking about face and hair? I suppose that is closer.

yea, more in the face/hair. He makes a darker, grittier, Conan than Arnold did, more in line with the artwork of pre-Arnold Conan. But you're also right, this guy doesn't have the mass, which was the first thing I noticed when I saw the trailer. I'm reserving judgement of this guy as Conan til I see the movie though.

I wonder though, if a long haired Dwayne Johnson might have made a good Conan. He seems to be more massive than Mamoa, and we know he's got the larger than life persona to make Conan work. Then again, we come back to the darker, grittier image of Conan, which I'm not sure if Johnson would really bring to the character.



I haven't seen Fast Five, but by the trailers, it seems he's gotten even bigger lately.

[Fivelives]

Compare Johnson in the Scorpion King movie(s? was he in the first one too? I forget) to Momoa's performance in the Game of Thrones series.

Who played their respective role better? That's pretty much what you can expect from either of them. I found Dwayne Johnson to be campy and ham&cheesy in the Scorpion King, while Momoa is believable as Drogo in the Game of Thrones.

Frankly though, I don't think that Conan is a series that ever needed to be remade. The movies are classics, and unless you've got a tremendously breakout cast and all of the stars align, all you're going to have is a multimillion dollar flop. True Grit was the exception rather than the rule, as an example (I was quite surprised to find that I liked the remake better than the original. The Dude out-Duked The Duke!). On the other end of the spectrum, you have movies like Nick Cage's Bangkok Dangerous (really, Hollywood? That movie was released originally in 2000... and you remade it in 2007!?), and pretty much every other remake/reboot/reimagining out there.

[Melathys]

I agree with the remake thing. But I honestly don't know enough about the movie to know if its a remake, or if their doing a different story arc. With a character 80+ years old, they have plenty of stories to choose from.

I agree with what you said about the rock. I think he's got the build, but not sure if he could pull off the character, especially if they're trying to make him darker than arnold's conan.

I was talking to my fiance about remakes. If they ever remake ET we're going to swear off hollywood for a while.

[Fridmarr]

I don't know, the originals were pretty cheesy. I mean Arnold and Wilt Chamberlain (from the Destroyer) have never exactly exuded acting talent, and cheese is definitely in their repertoire. Plus there are lots of opportunity for special effects that of course have been vastly improved on over the years. The series is kind of like that old video game that you remember fondly, only when you go back and play it the graphics and UI are so dated it's actually painful to sit through.

I don't know if this version is any good, but I'm glad they are taking a crack at it.

[Shyrtandros]

Who played their respective role better? That's pretty much what you can expect from either of them. I found Dwayne Johnson to be campy and ham&cheesy in the Scorpion King, while Momoa is believable as Drogo in the Game of Thrones.

Well if you think of the overall movie... Scorpion King is not a "serious business" type of movie.. it had its comical moments.. just not as many as say.. "The Mummy"

[Arnock]

Is it really a 'remake' though? Conan, as a character, existed LONG before Arnold, so wouldn't it be more of a continuation than an actual remake?

Similarily, I'm not sure I'd really consider true grit a remake, they were trying to make a movie that was closer to the original book, not redoing John Wayne's movie

[Fivelives]

I'm betting Conan is going to be a remake. From all of the little infoblurbs they've released about it, it talks about how he's going on a quest to avenge his slaughtered family and village bla bla bla - which is the plot of the original Conan movie.

Scorpion King wasn't necessarily a "I r srs direktur. This r srs muvee." situation, no - but Johnson went beyond hamming it up into the ham & cheese territory. Even on the serious parts. He's not a very good actor except for certain roles - keep him as a sports guy (gridiron gang etc) and a kids' comedy actor. Those are roles he excels in.

I don't know, the originals were pretty cheesy. I mean Arnold and Wilt Chamberlain (from the Destroyer) have never exactly exuded acting talent, and cheese is definitely in their repertoire.

That's what makes them so deliciously good! They're campy, fun, over the top movies to watch. And special effects aren't that important to me - I mean sure, it's nice to have GOOD SF/X, but it's not that important.

[Fridmarr]

Well if you saw those special effects today, you'd probably gag.

My point isn't that it'll be a better movie or they should do it because of advances in special effects. I just don't think Conan ranks up there as a classic deserving of any special treatment when a director comes along thinking of a remake.

[Fivelives]

I still enjoy it. There's something special about Ahnold's earlier films. He wasn't a great actor (or even a good one) by any means, but there's some ... je ne sais quoi about them that makes them awesome. At least in my book anyway.

Same thing with Krull. Who here wouldn't sit there with a bowl of popcorn and watch Krull if it was on TV?

[lythac]

Well if you saw those special effects today, you'd probably gag.

Looks fine to me.

[Torquemada]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBGOQ7SsJrw

[Dantriges]

IIRC most of the time, he was fighting some quite normal guys.

Don´t need many special effects for that.