OH CROM DAMN IT.

CROM DAMN IT ALL.

Universal Pictures has made a deal for The Legend Of Conan, an action film that will star Arnold Schwarzenegger in one of his signature roles as Robert E. Howard’s mythic barbarian. The deal brings Conan and Schwarzenegger back to Universal, which released the first film that launched Schwarzenegger’s movie career back in 1982. Universal has world rights on the film.

The film will be produced by Fredrik Malmberg and Chris Morgan. Malmberg is CEO of Paradox Entertainment, which holds the rights to Conan. Morgan is the Universal-based writer and producer whose credits include the last four Fast and the Furious films, along with Wanted and 47 Ronin. Morgan has hatched the story and might write the script. The caveat is that the studio wants The Legend of Conan for summer 2014, and Morgan might not be finished writing the seventh Fast and Furious installment by then. If that happens he will be a very active producer, because this is Morgan’s dream project.

Schwarzenegger starred in two Conan films before moving on to Terminator and other blockbusters as he became the world’s biggest action star. Paradox was involved in a 2011 reboot at Millennium Films that starred Jason Momoa and misfired. Paradox’s Malmberg, who moved the project away from Warner Bros after seven years of development with big name filmmakers because the project was moving too slowly, feels that this is the version of the film that he and everybody else always wanted to see on the screen but couldn’t while Schwarzenegger was Governor of California.

“The original ended with Arnold on the throne as a seasoned warrior, and this is the take of the film we will make,” Malmberg told me. “It’s that Nordic Viking mythic guy who has played the role of king, warrior, soldier and mercenary, and who has bedded more women than anyone, nearing the last cycle of his life. He knows he’ll be going to Valhalla, and wants to go out with a good battle.”

There are no plans for Momoa to return. Morgan said that in his mind, The Legend of Conan not only skips over that film, but also the 1984 sequel that Schwarzenegger starred in. The direct link is to the original, which was directed by John Milius from a script that he wrote with Oliver Stone. That was a testosterone-laced exploration of Howard’s mythology of a child sold into slavery who grows into manhood seeking vengeance against the warlord who slaughtered his family and his village.

“After the original seminal movie, all that came after looked silly to me,” Morgan said. “Robert E. Howard’s mythology and some great philosophy from Nietzsche to Atilla the Hun was layered in the original film. People say, he didn’t speak for the first 20 minutes of the film, but that was calculated in depicting this man who takes control of life with his own hand. This movie picks up Conan where Arnold is now in his life, and we will be able to use the fact that he has aged in this story. I love the property of Conan so much that I wouldn’t touch it unless we came up with something worthy. We think this is a worthy successor to the original film. Think of this as Conan’s Unforgiven.”

Let's go through stages of grief of a Howard fan - not representative of all Howard fans, of course, just one in particular. I'll approximate it through the use of video clips. Then I'll try and give a more level-headed commentary. Emphasis on try. I am so crotchety right now.

 Denial.

Anger.*

Bargaining.

Fear.

Acceptance.

OK. Well then, that out of the way...

Yes, this appears to be happening. The Conan film rights reverted to Paradox/CPI in July of this year, with Millennium not taking the option for a sequel: this obviously left the door open for a new deal with the makers of the 1982 film, enabling a nice clean reunion without too many pesky legalities. This also means that we can pretty much rule out a direct sequel to the 2011 film, so bad luck for those looking for the further adventures of Ela-Shan, Artus and Tamara, those who liked Dirk Blackman's Conan the Barbarian: A Witch Shall Be Born screenplay, or those who had high hopes for Sean Hood's adaptation of "Queen of the Black Coast."

Now depending on whether this goes any further - keep in mind Arnold promised to do Crown of Iron a long time ago, so his word on this is not concrete, and projects can begin and end on a dime - and whether Universal can come to a deal with Warner Brothers, this could result in either the resurrection of Crown of Iron** if picked up by Warner Brothers, a return to Conan the Conqueror, or even a new script entirely. I will admit, the possibility that this new film could mean Arnold Schwarzeneggar will portray a Conan closer to Howard's creation in an adaptation of "The Hour of the Dragon" or even "The Scarlet Citadel" is most tempting, but I don't think it likely for several reasons.

1. What possible precedence is there that the filmmakers who gravitate towards Howard have any interest in actually adapting his work? The sole adaptation of a Howard story in the history of cinema was a cannibalization of a Conan screenplay, and resulted in less a screenplay than a scrambled game of Chinese Whispers. One out of five films. Even if they choose to adapt HotD, you can't tell me they wouldn't make sweeping changes that would make A Sound of Thunder look like The Princess Bride: they'll make Zelata a hot young woman warrior, cut out and conflate half the characters, replace Pallantides with Subotai and Hadrathus with the Wizard, alter the story and themes to fit better with the 1982 film, and so forth.

2. Arnold's too old. Conan is 44-45 by the time of "The Hour of the Dragon," and so although not at his absolute peak, he's still a formidable and able warrior. Arnold is 63, with a hip replacement, a new heart valve, rotator cuff surgery, and a litany of broken bones in his medical record. Even at his physical prime back at the beginning of his career, he could hardly be described as a speedy and agile fighter: it's extremely difficult to imagine Arnold at his current age holding his own against four adventurers, leaping about the deck of the Venturer, running through the streets and nighted tombs of Khemi, and holding off an army of pikemen with a great black axe. Even in the (likely) chronologically latest Conan story, he was a blinding whirlwind compared to the slow and deliberate fighter of Milius' films

3. What would the filmmakers have to gain? The goodwill of the longtime Howard fans who've been burned so often? Let's face it, while we may have some measure of influence and voice, to be able to affect ticket sales is almost certainly as far outside our abilities as it was for Asimov fans to help or hinder I Robot. A veneer of authenticity to add some literary shine? They did that for every Howard adaptation, claiming to adhere to "the spirit" of the source material. Look how that turned out.

All in all, I'd say the ship has sailed on Arnold's The Hour of the Dragon/Conan the Conqueror. And frankly, I think that's the only way to do it: sure, I'd like to see a film adaptation of "The Hour of the Dragon," but I don't think it can be done in the same continuity as Conan the Barbarian without severely altering the latter. I certainly don't think they'd render elements of Conan the Barbarian non-canon, much as I'd concluded a while ago.

In order to work as a sequel to Conan the Barbarian, "The Hour of the Dragon" would need to be substantially changed - and when you consider this would be the second adaptation of the story (the first being the wretched Kull the Conqueror), what are the chances we'd get a third adaptation that actually decided to be remotely faithful? Doubtful at best. I'd honestly rather they made up a new story than essentially stall any future adaptations of one of my favourite adventure novels in this way.

I said before that the ghost of Conan the Barbarian may have to make its peace with cinematic eternity before we can truly begin with a return to the source from which it sprang, to slough away the fabrications and inventions of successive writers before starting from the beginning - only when the first story is over can the new one begin. And please don't get me wrong: I'm happy for the fans of the 1982 film who have been waiting all this time to finally see old King Conan, grey-bearded, sceptre in hand, for the final act of a story that's echoed for 30 years. I'll admit to a certain level of entitled resentment that they got "their" long-awaited Conan movie before I did, a sentiment which I recognize is selfish and not at all fair. After all, we're all Conan fans, no need to drive the schism betwixt film and novel fandoms apart, especially considering so many are members of both unions: better we have one group happy than none at all.

But... well, look who's in charge. The visionary behind The Fast and the Furious, Wanted and 47 Ronin.

The film will be produced by Fredrik Malmberg and Chris Morgan. Malmberg is CEO of Paradox Entertainment, which holds the rights to Conan. Morgan is the Universal-based writer and producer whose credits include the last four Fast and the Furious films, along with Wanted and 47 Ronin. Morgan has hatched the story and might write the script. The caveat is that the studio wants The Legend of Conan for summer 2014, and Morgan might not be finished writing the seventh Fast and Furious installment by then. If that happens he will be a very active producer, because this is Morgan’s dream project.

Oh, I don't doubt this is Morgan's dream project at all.  After all, Milius and Nispel have both called Conan their dream project, which is why they were so faithful to the bwahahaha I can't even finish that sentence. Milius and Nispel were Frazetta fans; they were Viking fans; they were machismo & mythology fans. If they were Howard fans, why wouldn't they adapt one of Howard's stories, as opposed to making up their own? So yeah, from the outset I have my misgivings about how big of a Howard fan Mr Morgan is.

Schwarzenegger starred in two Conan films before moving on to Terminator and other blockbusters as he became the world’s biggest action star. Paradox was involved in a 2011 reboot at Millennium Films that starred Jason Momoa and misfired. Paradox’s Malmberg, who moved the project away from Warner Bros after seven years of development with big name filmmakers because the project was moving too slowly, feels that this is the version of the film that he and everybody else always wanted to see on the screen but couldn’t while Schwarzenegger was Governor of California.

“The original ended with Arnold on the throne as a seasoned warrior, and this is the take of the film we will make,” Malmberg told me. “It’s that Nordic Viking mythic guy who has played the role of king, warrior, soldier and mercenary, and who has bedded more women than anyone, nearing the last cycle of his life. He knows he’ll be going to Valhalla, and wants to go out with a good battle.”

...

... Fred, I know you're a businessman first and foremost, but I know you're also a Howard fan. I know the disappointing earnings of the 2011 film must smart like nobody's business. I'm in no position to make any sort of comments on your business choices. But you must know that there are going to be a serious amount of Howard fans that are going to feel incredibly betrayed by this.

This isn't just a case of entitlement, of "how come you do another Arnold movie when we still haven't had a proper Howard movie." For years Paradox has been hoisting the Howard flag high, distancing itself from the 1982 film and other iterations of the franchise. And I am deeply, forever grateful for that, that you and the rest of the folk at Paradox allowed Howard's unexpurgiated texts to be made freely and plentifully available, without clogging up the bookshelves with Tor pastiches and sub-par comics like in the '80s and '90s. But were we really in such dire straits that we had to make a deal with the devil, and slink back to the Shadow of Konahn after a decade of defiance?

Again, I'm not wanting to alienate fans of the 1982 movie, but readers of the blog know where I stand on this. It's perverse that the inferior derivative should outshine the incredible original. Don't try and argue with me that Milius's Conan stands alongside Howard's, because it doesn't: don't try to allege that Howard's was only best because his was first, because any number of essays and analyses by far greater Howard fans and scholars than I prove otherwise; certainly don't try to presume some sort of nostalgic or pretentious bias on my part, otherwise I'd be exalting Conan the Adventurer over all. As cinematic and enthralling and memorable as the 1982 Conan is as a film, it is inferior to the sheer genius of Robert E. Howard's creation, and has done incredible damage to public perception and opinion of Howard's creation - not through direct maliciousness, but through obfuscation and overshadowing. And now, with The Legend of Conan, the harm will keep going - unless Howard fans are vigilant.

There are no plans for Momoa to return. Morgan said that in his mind, The Legend of Conan not only skips over that film, but also the 1984 sequel that Schwarzenegger starred in. The direct link is to the original, which was directed by John Milius from a script that he wrote with Oliver Stone. That was a testosterone-laced exploration of Howard’s mythology of a child sold into slavery who grows into manhood seeking vengeance against the warlord who slaughtered his family and his village.

Oh for Crom's sake, how on earth could the 2011 film occupy the same universe as the 1982 film when they both directly contradict each other? I'd be astounded if Morgan actually did try to reconcile the 2011 film with the rest of the mythos. I'm saddened that Jason won't be returning, since he was a vastly superior Conan to Arnold, but it's unavoidable unless they want to do something daft like make him his son. It doesn't surprise me that Morgan also plans to ignore Conan the Destroyer, one of the few things I wholeheartedly endorse as a matter of course. And I don't need to tell you what I think of the bolded section.

“After the original seminal movie, all that came after looked silly to me,” Morgan said. “Robert E. Howard’s mythology and some great philosophy from Nietzsche to Atilla the Hun was layered in the original film. People say, he didn’t speak for the first 20 minutes of the film, but that was calculated in depicting this man who takes control of life with his own hand. This movie picks up Conan where Arnold is now in his life, and we will be able to use the fact that he has aged in this story. I love the property of Conan so much that I wouldn’t touch it unless we came up with something worthy. We think this is a worthy successor to the original film. Think of this as Conan’s Unforgiven.”

Morgan, this is complete codswallop and you know it. Just stop it before you hurt yourself. Conan doesn't take his life into his own hand until long into the film, and even then it's as much a mistake as not (going off on his own to "infiltrate" Doom's camp, for example). And for Crom's sake, Genghis Khan is the warlord you're looking for, not Attila the Hun. This isn't Conan's Unforgiven, it's Conan's Superman Returns, right down to ignoring the sequels you don't like.

They’ve yet to figure out whether the film will be R-rated like that original film, but they won’t flinch from the hardness of the period depicted.

“I loved the choices they made in that film,” Morgan said. “You start with the wholesale slaughter and death of Conan’s village at the hand of the warlord played by James Earl Jones, and you see young Conan chained to a wheel as he becomes stronger. Then he’s a pit fighter, and later basically a stud bull before he meets the first kind person of his life, who lets him go. All of that horrific stuff happened for a reason, and then an act of kindness sends him on his journey. Will that level of violence be there? Absolutely, but only if it serves a character who lives by that barbarian law of the wild, who is capable of extreme violence and rage, but who has created his own code and operates from within it. By the end of that film, Conan became a certain character, and this film picks him up there, as he faces different challenges that include dealing with age.”

"I loved the choices they made in that film" - pretty much solidifies that this guy may be a Howard fan, but he clearly isn't above mucking around with his creation. And good luck quelling the outcry from fans if this ends up PG-13. I couldn't care less - heck, even an R rating is too milquetoast to do Howard justice - but evidently others do.

So what's a Howard fan to make of this? All the things I said from the onset of the last film:

For good or ill, many people will go to see this film. It remains to be seen how many, and whether the response is negative, positive, apathetic or whatever. What is a certainty is that cinema-goers will see the name “Robert E. Howard” on that big, silver screen. Captivated by the brutality, action and adventure of the film, some will wonder who this “Robert E. Howard” is, and embark on a quest to find out more. Learning that Howard wrote stories published in the 1930s, some of them may wonder if those yarns are worth reading today, and seek out people who know more.

We must be there for them.

Sorry to keep quoting myself, but I'd rather do that than just remix the same words over and over again.

Our job as Howard fans is going to be difficult. I foresee one of the frequent refrains being "but we tried it your way with Jason Momoa: he was closer to the source material, and the movie bombed, so that means a Conan closer to the source material is box office poison." Kindly tell these people that you are going to ignore them while you talk with the intelligent human beings.To those who will listen: tell them about Howard, how awesome his works are, and how very different they are from the 1982 film. Try to explain to them, without chopping their heads off (a tall order, I know, it's an urge I have to suppress every day), exactly why a fan of Conan might not necessarily be thrilled at the prospect of Arnold's triumphant return and the continuation of the 1982 film. Be inclusive, not exclusive: instead of saying "this isn't Conan," say "there's so much more to Conan than just the films."


I'm angry about the film's announcement, but not because of the film itself, not in the slightest: I'm glad we're finally getting closure on the 1982 film, even if I have serious doubts that it could remotely measure up to Milius' mad opus. The film itself isn't the problem. I'm just not looking forward to the same old arguments, the same old criticisms, myths, misconceptions and falsehoods cropping up all over again. I'm not looking forward to the people who demand that, because the nature of adaptation means change, we're not allowed to criticize a film for its divergence from the source material, as if there was no difference between making Conan's hair an inch too short, and making him a robot. And I'm disappointed that this will be the sixth cinematic adaptation of a Robert E. Howard character that doesn't bother to actually adapt his prose.

I'm still unsure if I'll go back to Conan Movie Blog. Good old Waldgeist has posted news of the new film up, so perhaps he's happy flying solo, though I'd happily contribute my thoughts. I'm sure not going to be doing trailer breakdowns, script or character analyses, and certainly won't fly down to the UK premier: why would I bother? I'll just watch the trailer, check out pictures and articles as they come, and because I enjoyed the 1982 film, I might catch it when I have time on its release. I have a real "job" now with my art, and I have no problems sticking to it: there's no temptation to constantly refresh my browser for new snippets of news. However, aside from continuing with business as usual on the Blog and offline, I'll spruce up the Newcomer's Guide to REH, just so everyone knows what's what.

Fans of Conan the Barbarian, rejoice. Fans of Conan the Cimmerian, seize the opportunity.  We have to make the most of this.

Accept no substitutes.

*In which a Maladjusted-to-the-point-of-psychosis Howard fan vents his frustration on the Schwarzenegger/Milius fans who are, quite reasonably, celebrating the confirmation of a long-awaited to conclusion to a beloved cult classic.

**NO CROM. NO CROM PLEASE NO. NO. NO. NOOOOO