There's a bit of electricity in the air. I think something's coming: a teaser, a poster, an announcement. News about the Conan film has been trickling, but very little of substance. And as more news about Conan comes up, so more discussion about its relation to Howard and Conan the Barbarian will come up.
So we come to Arnold Sucked As Conan.
In an introductory post, DC outlines his plans for the blog. He notes that he isn't sticking purely to Arnold's conception of the character, but the film in general. Something I'm most interested in is his plan to address some of the more ludicrous elements: in addition to the divergences from Howard, DC will discuss the silliness of the Wheel of Pain, and how it would not, in fact, be a particularly good way to build a Nietzchean Superman. Crom knows there are many silly bits of this ilk in the film - the preposterous weapons of Rexor and Thorgrim and the woefully inaccurate sword-forging, for instance.
The first proper post discusses one of the most famous moments in the film - as well as one of the least Howardian.
And... well, he did suck as Howard's Conan. I foresee many angry posts by Milius/Arnold/Stone fanboys attempting to argue otherwise, but ultimately, DC has the facts - not to mention the Robert E. Howard Shieldwall - on his side. The only way one could argue that Arnold Did Not Suck As Conan is to say that he played the role Milius wrote for him - but that's not the scope of the blog, and besides the point. The point is to illustrate why Arnold Sucked As Robert E. Howard's Conan, which is the point of contention between Howardists and Conan the Barbarian fans - in those occasions when we're dealing with two opposing points of view. There are certainly many people who are both Howard fans and CtB fans. As I labour to point out, I am a fan of Conan the Barbarian. I'm also a fan of the film and novel Starship Troopers. Being a fan of both doesn't mean I'm not going to take a side.