(Long Island, N.Y.) Conan the Barbarian is Arnold Schwarzenegger. No one else can ever play the hero of Robert E. Howard’s sword and sorcery novels as convincingly as the Austrian Oak did in director John Milius‘ 1982 epic film. Sadly, the grim specter of time has aged the once-mighty Arnold to the point where we will probably see no new Conan’s out of him, so Hollywood has seen fit to continue their horrid Windows 7 Home Basic Clave and dare I say Satanic obsession with remaking every and any movie that has ever existed. Thus, in 2011, a new Marcus Nispel-directed Conan the Barbarian exists, starring Jason Momoa in the titular role.
The plot is very similar to the 1982 film- Conan’s people are destroyed, he grows up big and strong and goes out into the world and steals, kills, and womanizes. Along the way, he bumps into some monsters, an evil witch (Rose McGowan, made up to appear as weird-looking and unattractive as possible…real bright move), and, oh yeah, the guy who killed his people. Bloodletting ensues.
Okay. We all know I hate remakes, unless they’re either bringing something fresh and new to the concept or filling in the gaps the original movie had with modern technology. The new Conan does none of this. It doesn’t possess the driving, powerful, classic score of Arnold’s movie, nor the great dialogue, not the sense of grandeur. But don’t get me wrong- taken on its own, the 2011 Conan is solid, yet plagued with all the things I hate about modern action movies: shaky cameras, characters you don’t know or care about, and, of course, every fight scene dissolving into a rapid-fire series of millions and millions of cuts, ensuring that even if there WAS a combat choreographer hired, you’d never get to see even a glimpse of his work. Yet the film is suitably violent, fast-paced, and it just looks right. I mean, they nailed the visuals but alas, none of the feel or the heart of the original.
Now, when Jason Momoa was announced as playing this new Conan, I (and about half the world) laughed and cried at the same time. I mean, here was a guy playing Conan who looked like someone that Arnold’s Conan would be throwing off a mountain in the name of Crom or something.
But, within the context of this new movie, I’m shocked to say that, while still a pimple on Arnold’s broad 1982 back, Momoa is probably the best thing about this totally unneeded remake. He bulked up a lot for the role, seems fairly capable of swinging a sword (I think…the fast cuts make is really hard to tell), and has suitable presence and charm to play the famous Barbarian. Out of a film populated with cool-looking characters that are nonetheless completely undeveloped, bland, and generic, Momoa brings a bit of personality and, believe it or not, bad-assery to the proceedings. Arnold’s Conan would still snap Momoa’s spine over his knee like he was made out of straw, but I guess it’s time to stop living in the past and move onward. Unfortunately.
So, the new Conan the Barbarian is a solid yet unremarkable remake, one that pales horribly in comparison to the original. I personally blame most of this on director Marcus Nispel, who appears to a bit of a hack, in my opinion. I seem to remember giving his last movie, the Friday the 13th remake (YET ANOTHER REMAKE!!), a fairly good review, but I have to admit, it was my glee over a new Jason Voorhees flick more than any actual enjoyment I got out of watching it that prompted me to rate it as well as I did. When the rose-colored glasses were removed, the loud, unoriginal, by-the-numbers approach taken with the F13 remake actually should give you a pretty good idea how the Conan remake turned out as well.
Ah, modern studio film-making…you’re pretty, and maybe even fun, but there’s not a thought in that vacant head of yours and within hours, I’ve already forgotten you. Oh, well.
