Oh, boy: Geeks of Doom put up a video interview with Becky Cloonan and Brian Wood. While -ood has discussed some of his plans and ideas, Cloo- has been a bit quiet: it's good to hear from her. In particular, she states her plans for Conan: he's going to be "sexier" and "prettier" than previous interpretations, with a particular aim at getting more female fans into the fold.
The more I see of Brian & Becky, the more excited I am about what they're up to... and the more apprehensive. It's just... I've been burned so many times before, you know?
In any case, I suspect a few alarm bells might be ringing for some when Becky explains how her Conan will be prettier for the ladies. Now, while I've explained why I don't think Conan should ever be thin, I don't have any objections to Conan being handsome. There really is little to go on in the text regarding Conan's facial features beyond eye colour: all we really know is he has a "low, broad brow," "black brows," "thin lips," and a "scarred, almost sinister face." In my estimation, Conan could be a neanderthalic brute or a Tall Dark Stranger. My own interpretation of Conan has a lot of Sean Connery and Oliver Reed in him - definitely not Rudolph Valentino, but not Wallace Beery or Louis Wolheim either.
Just as long as we don't end up with Bishie Conan. We don't want that.
In any case, I suspect a few alarm bells might be ringing for some when Becky explains how her Conan will be sexier for the ladies.
ReplyDelete"Sexier" isn't necessarily alarm bell-worthy, but Cloonan also said her "vision of Conan" is "prettier." That is a bit more worrisome.
Barry Windsor Smith's Conan was more handsome and boyish looking without sacrificing any of the feel of R.E.H.'s character. Although that's kind of his drawing style. I prefer a more rugged, dangerous looking Conan like in Frazetta's paintings.
ReplyDeleteI do understand your trepidation though. After MoMo the Barbarian, I think this is going to be the direction hollywood and comics will go.
"Sexier" isn't necessarily alarm bell-worthy, but Cloonan also said her "vision of Conan" is "prettier." That is a bit more worrisome.
ReplyDeleteI don't know why I typed "sexier" when I actually meant to type "prettier" (considering I add in a Bishonen gag), but that is what primarily worried me.
Barry Windsor Smith's Conan was more handsome and boyish looking without sacrificing any of the feel of R.E.H.'s character. Although that's kind of his drawing style. I prefer a more rugged, dangerous looking Conan like in Frazetta's paintings.
I tend to like a lot of different visual interpretations of Conan, but I end up gravitating more towards the Sean Connery/Oliver Reed look, which is definitely rugged, but you can also see as a smouldering sex symbol. In fact, I think Frazetta in his self-portraits and photographs looks pretty good as Conan, too.
I do understand your trepidation though. After MoMo the Barbarian, I think this is going to be the direction hollywood and comics will go.
If nothing else, it's at least a new direction as opposed to aping Frazetta while losing his soul: let's just hope it doesn't go too far and becomes self-parody. We all saw what happened when Conan tried to enter the Liefeld years, after all.
Its kind of funny how much importance we put in the image of a written character. Seems like people have been obsessing over this for ages.
ReplyDeleteIt would be neat to see an adaptation that only showed a broad back and the occasional closeup of his volcanic eyes. Imagine a picture where half is conans broad sholders, turned with his back to us, and the other half a person looking wide-eyed at the barbarian faceing us, and a full description of Conans appearance in text ;)
Its kind of funny how much importance we put in the image of a written character. Seems like people have been obsessing over this for ages.
ReplyDeleteThe thing about Conan is that we don't have a definitive written description of the character beyond the basics: black hair, blue eyes, scars, black brows, low broad brow, thin lips, "almost sinister" face... That might sound like a lot, but it really isn't. It can lead to a variety of interpretations, but when any one interpretation reigns supreme, sometimes that can effect people. I know Frazetta's Conan has affected me to an extent, and I'll wager it's the same as many, but as great as Frazetta's work is, it does Howard and Conan a disservice to consider it the be-all end-all interpretation.
It would be neat to see an adaptation that only showed a broad back and the occasional closeup of his volcanic eyes. Imagine a picture where half is conans broad sholders, turned with his back to us, and the other half a person looking wide-eyed at the barbarian faceing us, and a full description of Conans appearance in text ;)
Without giving too much away, this is extremely similar to how I'm planning on depicting Conan in a number of pie-in-the-sky projects I have in mind. I always felt it would be interesting to depict Conan extremely vaguely, never getting a good look at him, almost impressionistic. Like Batman in Arkham Asylum: A Serious House on Serious Earth: just a great shadow, only his burning blue eyes clearly visible, the impression of a massive scarred body implied more than seen, his movement a blur...
OH MY STARS: DAVE MCKEAN'S CONAN. Imagine his interpretation of one of the "horror-Conan" stories, like "The Devil in Iron" or "Xuthal of the Dusk". Or "Red Nails"! Good grief, I need to lie down for a moment...
I absolutely agree. there a ton of ways to interpret Conan.Look at those lovecraft vids i sent via fb Al , that alone could inspire. And I also agree about frazetta, I love and am inspired by the guys work as much as anyone else, But I have felt for a long time that ( espescially in cinema which wont happen now anyway) that Conan or any number of heroes need a different visual reference.Its a great interpretation , but I have found the artists who have done do the del rey illustrations (gianni etc) very worthy ,especially the guy ( who's name escaoes me) who did the conquering sword of conan. very grounded and cinematic.-Mario
ReplyDeleteIndeed, there has been some talk about who´s "telling the story" here (like if Olivia is telling the whole story or not). The way I see it, Howard chose to describe Conan in the way his companions see him at the moment, making him stand out as rough and massive or like all those grizzly tiger panter wolf attributes. Not really giving us more than someones impression.
ReplyDeleteI know from my own experience how people get hung up om my eyes and say I got eyes like a vampire, cat, anime, jigglypuff of whatever they happen to think of at the moment.
although he has curly hair the keyboardist and singer Darren Wharton, Thin Lizzy, Dare, has an awesome dark hair, blue eyes celtic phenotype, by the way I though he is irish but he is from Failsworth, Lancashire...
ReplyDeletehttp://www.spirit-of-metal.com/membre_groupe/photo/Darren_Wharton-13691.jpg
put his face in the body of the italian Mark Gregory, 1990, the Bronx warriors
http://monsterhunter.coldfusionvideo.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Bronx-Warriors-1.jpg
and you got a very atractive Conan, by the way Mark Gregory with blue lenses could had did, ehem my grammar, a nice and a bit latin Conan
Becky Cloohan, I'm fearing a Conan for female teenagers, Stephanie Meyer and all of that...
Francisco
I absolutely agree. there a ton of ways to interpret Conan.Look at those lovecraft vids i sent via fb Al , that alone could inspire. And I also agree about frazetta, I love and am inspired by the guys work as much as anyone else, But I have felt for a long time that ( espescially in cinema which wont happen now anyway) that Conan or any number of heroes need a different visual reference.Its a great interpretation , but I have found the artists who have done do the del rey illustrations (gianni etc) very worthy ,especially the guy ( who's name escaoes me) who did the conquering sword of conan. very grounded and cinematic.
ReplyDeleteGlad you agree, Mario. We can live with many visual interpretations of Sherlock Holmes, Tarzan, King Arthur and many James Bond: why shouldn't we have many for Conan?
The way I see it, Howard chose to describe Conan in the way his companions see him at the moment, making him stand out as rough and massive or like all those grizzly tiger panter wolf attributes. Not really giving us more than someones impression.
Very much so, and it's especially noticeable as the stories go on. The early tales like "Phoenix," "Daughter," "Tower" and "Citadel" are more or less from Conan's perspective, with maybe a few chapters with the antagonist. Then you get to "Pool," "Circle," "River," "Stranger," and "Nails," where Conan is either co-protagonist or in the "John Wayne" role as the star-but-not-lead-male.
I know from my own experience how people get hung up om my eyes and say I got eyes like a vampire, cat, anime, jigglypuff of whatever they happen to think of at the moment.
This is why I grew a beard: it takes all the attention!
by the way Mark Gregory with blue lenses could had did, ehem my grammar, a nice and a bit latin Conan
Hmm, not "my" Conan (especially with the latin aspect) but it'd be better than some suggestions I've heard.
Becky Cloohan, I'm fearing a Conan for female teenagers, Stephanie Meyer and all of that...
There's a definite concern over at the REH Forums and elsewhere, but as long as he's more like Jacob than Edward (in terms of ruggedness) and Cloonan doesn't sacrifice his scars/stubble/chest hair/grit/whatnot, I'd be willing to see what she comes up with.