Tuesday 17 May 2011

The Main Problem with the Conan the Barbarian Trailer (and film in general)

I've been holding off on revealing my opinion on the Conan trailer for a while, mostly because I think I've finally achieved the last stage of the Kübler-Ross model.

Stage 1: Denial
Date: 23rd February 2009
Trigger: the Latino Review Featurette
"Let's not be hasty, guys, the Latino Review might have gotten their facts wrong, or perhaps someone's screwing about with them. No way is this script outline real: "Khalar Singh"? Conan's tribe being wiped out yet again? Acheron being a significant plot point in what's chronologically the first Conan story, but never gets mentioned again until the very last? Come on, guys."

Stage 2: Anger
Time: 23rd October 2009
Trigger: Moviehole character casting sheet report
"I am vexed. After almost 80 years, we're going to get Another Made Up Origin Story just like the one we had 30 years ago.  It is extremely difficult to amply convey my deep and resolute exasperation at this turn of events."

Stage 3: Bargaining
Time: 12th September 2010
Event: Encouraging reports on Blackman's script for the sequel
"OK, OK, maybe there's another way of looking at it: if this film does well, then can we get an actual Howard adaptation? If this film does well at the box office, maybe we'll finally get a Howard story on the big screen. Maybe Blackman's script really is a pretty close adaptation of one of the original Conan tales - come on guys, this could be our chance!"

Stage 4: Depression
Time: 12th March 2011
Trigger: Conan the Barbarian teaser released

Stage 5: Acceptance
Time: 17th May 2011
Trigger: This post
"You know what? This is happening. It can't be stopped. It can't be changed. It can't be helped. We just have to figure out what we're going to do from here."

It's a source of constant amusement to me that there are several folk on various boards who think I'm somehow not a "real" Conan fan because I have the audacity to try and give the movie the benefit of the doubt.  Some even seem to think I've gone soft, that Sean Hood's outreach has given me some sort of about-turn on the project, and that I've said the formerly heinous script was now awesome (Wikipedius, he say: "citation needed.")  As far as they're concerned, I'm now the project's number 1 fan, and I brush off all criticisms with a "hey, at least it isn't Ahnold." They have no idea how very, very wrong they are. What they don't know is that giving the film that benefit of the doubt is the only thing that's keeping me sane.


Sure, I could make every single post on the Conan Movie Blog a bitter tirade about how clueless the production seems to me, ignoring anything remotely good because of the stuff that simply can't be changed. What does it matter that Jason Momoa might make a fine Conan if he's in a story concocted by a bunch of screenwriters that isn't based on any of the Howard stories? What does it matter if they have a substantial budget for an R-rated film if none of the funds are going to realise the prose and descriptions Howard put in? What does it matter if the film tanks or soars at the box office if it has nothing to do with REH?

I could. So easily, I could. But I won't, because I have enough damned negativity already. Being measured and fair in approach to the film has done absolute wonders for my sense of calm and general wellbeing. I call out the things that seem obviously wrong to me, but I don't repeat past misgivings, I try to keep the snark to a minimum, and if I see things worth praising, I let them have it.

What would be gained by unleashing all the pent-up frustration, irritation and outrage in every single post? There's only so many times I can say "just a shame Khalar Zym doesn't exist in any Howard story, or I might care about his costume/actor/motivations/design/singing voice," or "this is all well and good, but since it's not only not a Howard story, but in many ways antithetical and contradictory to Howard's work, I see no reason why I should care about this stupid Mask of Acheron or Tamara the Chosen One or Conan the Scary Violent Kung Fu Kid," or "it's nice they're going to the effort of shooting on location in Bulgaria and using every trick in the book to get all they can out of their budget, just a shame it's all going to be wasted on a story made up by the geniuses who made Sahara and A Sound of Thunder...

It gets repetitive. However, I'm going to concentrate on the one thing which upsets me most about the trailer, which is indeed one of the things which bothers me about the film in general.

Trailers are a finicky thing. Show too much, and the audience might think there's no point, since they've already shown all the best bits; too little, and the audience just isn't interested. A general audience should be treated as largely ignorant of the source material, should it exist, and one cannot simply assume that they'll know what's going on, who certain characters are, whatnot. The trailer is selling the story to people who don't know names, history, biographies, as well as to the casual fans who might be on the fence.

From a more dedicated fan's point of view, however, trailers have a far more profound effect. These faces, places, creatures and things can be recognized. A figure glimpsed for a second can instantly recall memories of an instrumental character; a landscape seen in a few moments can conjure the events and adventures that happened; a mere silhouette might be enough to trigger the synapses. Fans can recognize characters in trailers: these aren't just actors, effects, puppets, matte paintings or location shoots, these are people, moments, beings, nations, history.

So it is with a number of trailers where the general audience and the fanbase can have a very different reaction to a trailer. I'll use an example, one of the first trailers for The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring. Not the film itself, mind, I'm going purely by the trailer.


The average cinemagoer sees nothing particularly familiar: a series of bearded folk with swords fighting some horrific creatures in pitched battles, some sympathetic child-like young heroes taking up extraordinary challenges, a wise woman of the forest, a gigantic monster, a wide range of locations from rural idylls and lush forests to oppressive underground caves and slag-strewn volcanic landscapes, and all manner of things that make it look like a ripping good time at the cinema.

But the Tolkien fan sees so much more. They're seeing Gandalf riding into Hobbiton to meet Bilbo at Bag End.  They're seeing Sauron forging the One Ring, marshalling the Hosts of Mordor.  They're seeing the Nine riding out; Frodo gazing upon the ring, the ring-verse reflected in his innocent face; Aragorn, Legolas, Gimli, Boromir, Elrond, Arwen; Mount Doom, Moria, Minas Morgul, Rivendell, the Argonath; the journey through Khazad-Dum, the voyage down the Anduin. They're seeing things that they recognize.  Of course you'll have fans disagreeing with certain interpretations, but it's at least clear that they are interpretations of Tolkien's characters, places and events, and not made up for a new story.

How about a more recent one, perhaps one that isn't quite as engrained in popular consciousness as The Lord of the Rings, yet has a substantial fanbase of its own - Green Lantern?


Once again, the general audience just sees the things that might entice them: the promise of action, grand spectacle, a little humour, some gravitas, and things they haven't seen in a film before. But the fans are seeing Hal Jordan receiving the ring from Abin Sur, they're seeing his relationship with Carol Ferris, they're seeing Sinestro, Tomar-Re, Kilowog, Hector Hammond...

Now let's look at the Conan the Barbarian trailer.


The average cinemagoer might feel a number of things, ranging from "this just looks like another dumb Sword-and-Sorcery movie like Clash of the Titans or Prince of Persia, I'll pass" to "cool, this looks like another dumb Sword-and-Sorcery movie like Clash of the Titans or Prince of Persia, I'm so there!"

The Howard fan in me feels... nothing.

I see a great castle. I don't know what it is, or what it's meant to be. It's just a big castle.  With a skull in the mountain. It could be a city referred to by Howard, or one of the pastiches, or an original creation of the script, but without anything immediately evocative of Howard - the gleaming white spires and minarets of Khorshemish, the blue and golden towers of Tarantia, the black monolithic citadels of Khemi, the jade walled cities of Xuthal or Xuchotl, the colossal pylons and purple minarets of Python - it's just a castle.

Then we see a girl in a weird headdress. Just a girl. Not Belit, nor Valeria, Yasmina, Zenobia, Belesa, even Olivia or Natala - just some girl in a weird headdress. The giddy glee of recognition is untapped. Jason looks pretty good as Conan, but he's doing these preposterous, pointless twirls and katas which don't evoke Conan to me so much as a Wuxia epic. Then we see some bald guy asking us to "behold and despair our new master" - not one of Howard's despicable villains like Xaltotun, Thugra Khotan, Tsotha-Lanti, the Master of Yimsha, Yara, Khosatral Khel, Nabonidus, or anyone who could be recognized from their attire or words. Then we see some balding chick with weird tattoos and a sword too big for her. All through this trailer, I'm feeling nothing... until the quote from "The Frost-Giant's Daughter."  Then I feel that spark, that "hell yeah" - but it's gone almost as soon as it arrives as I see another succession of meaningless images. It comes back when I see that frame of Momoa holding the two swords, an absolutely fantastic expression on his face that's pure Conan to me.  Then it's gone again.

I viewed almost the whole trailer with all the emotion of someone who knows nothing about Conan, because I have zero emotional investment in Tamara, Artus, Ela-Shan, Khalar Zym, Marique, Corin, Fassir, Ukafa, the Greek-Influenced Monastery, the Hornet, and so forth. I'm a massive fan of Conan, and yet I'm experiencing no greater excitement or deeper feeling than someone who's never heard of the character. This state of affairs is, simply, perverse.

I'm watching The Lord of the Rings trailer, seeing beloved characters from the story I've read over and over again. I'm even watching the Green Lantern trailer with more enjoyment - even though I haven't read much of the comics, I know enough to recognize Sinestro, Kilowog and Tomar-Re, and think "wow, they're actually not half bad translations from the comic." I watch the Conan the Barbarian as if it's something completely new, unproven, and has yet to be experienced. A character with 80 years of history, and I'm treating it with the sort of vague disinterest I show towards Immortals.  It's absolutely baffling.

To show you what I mean, let's try a hypothetical trailer using a Howard adaptation. Let's try... "Black Colossus," just for fun.

A black screen. Text appears on screen:
"There was an age undreamed of..."
The trailer opens with the ruins of Kuthchemes. A deep, calm, bell-like voice:
Voice of Mitra: "Speak not, my daughter, for I know your need."
Cut to the shadow of Natohk menacing Yasmela in her nightmares.
Cut to Yasmela & Vateesa trembling before a great statue.
Voice of Mitra: "In one manner may you save your kingdom"
Zoom in on Yasmela's face.
Cut to various shots of Conan dealing death.
Cut to Yasmela meeting Conan in the streets.
Yasmela: "Come with me off the street."
Conan: "Devil bite you, hussy!"
Lionsgate/Millenium/Nu Image/Paradox logos
Cut to Natohk's horde converging in the desert from all directions towards Shamla Pass.
Cut to Shevatas creeping through the ruins of Kuthchemes.
Cut to the serpent guardian.
Cut to a wide shot of the dome under Kuthchemes. A voice:
Natohk: "The desert is a rose-garden beneath the moon..."
Cut to the hooded figure of Natohk communing with the forces of darkness.
Natohk: "... where blossom the fires of a hundred thousand warriors."
Cut to Natohk's chariot before his massive host.
Natohk: "I have grown strong in the long years of dreaming..."
Cut to Natohk's destruction of Eruk's walls (as mentioned in an early draft, which I think would be awesome to include)
Cut to the Shemite friend of Conan:
Shemite: "A new prophet had risen among the nomads. Men spoke of tribal war, of a gathering of vultures in the southeast."
Cut to the Asshuri, Kushite and Nomad commanders.
Cut to Prince Kutamun with his Stygian nobles.
Cut to shots of Khoraja.
"Men said that the uplands of the Hyborians were the goal of Natohk and his chanting votaries."
Cut to Yasmela, imperiously addressing the nobility:
Yasmela: "The kingdom is in peril."
Shots of slaughter, destruction and rapine.
"Tomorrow we march southward"
Shots of the Khorajan army marching to war.
Cut to Yasmela.
"And there is the man who shall lead you!"
Conan steps out in full plate
Amalric: "Conan!"
Cut to Conan dealing death again.
Thespides: "This man is a savage – a fellow of no culture or breeding!"
Cut to Conan dealing death yet again.
Cut to Yasmela talking to Conan as he's eating.
Yasmela: "But can you lead men and arrange battle-lines?"
Cut to Conan. Comic beat as Conan pauses munching his huge joint of beef:
Conan: "Well, I can try!"
Cut to Conan in full plate finery riding out with the army.
Amalric: "If the dog ever commanded more than a company of cutthroats before..."
Cut to Amalric.
Amalric: "I’ll eat him, harness and all!"
Cut to various shots from the story: Thespides' charge, Conan and Yasmela at the camp, the giant snake, the battle, though without revealing any of the really big shots.
Cut to the commanders looking behind the camera (the fog, but it won't be revealed in the trailer.) Suddenly Conan puts his ear to the ground, his eyes widen.
Conan: "Crom!"
Final montage of various scenes: action, mystery, adventure, danger, excitement.
Title screen "Conan the Barbarian: Black Colossus"
Cut to Conan rearing his charge.
Conan: "This day you become knights! Mount and follow me to hell!"
Cut to the delightful "Join the Barbarian Army on Facebook" screen

It tells you the story without giving too much away, a few shots of the cool beasties, characters, locations and set pieces, it casts Conan as a badass with a sense of humour, and of course plenty of action and sexiness. Cinemagoers would see pretty much everything the mass audience needs for a Conan movie: a badass hero swinging his sword, naked flesh, dire sorcery, horrific monsters, lots of blood and thunder - i.e., the stuff that You Just Do.  They're as instrumental to a Conan film as tanks, guns and soldiers would be in film set in a World War II battle.

Now, can you imagine what I'd be like watching that trailer? "It's Yasmela! The voice of Mitra sounds awesome! Thugra Khotan looks great! Kutamun looks badass! Conan's just like how he was! Kuthchemes, Khoraja, Shamla Pass, all look fantastic!" Sure, I'd be likely to be caterwauling about any and all of the things they got wrong, like how I despised Arwen's stupid "come and claim him line" in The Lord of the Rings, but again, that's what fans do. The important thing is, I knew what was happening. I knew these people, the places, the events. I don't know Khalar Zym, or Tamara, or Marique, or any of the characters in the film outside of Conan himself. I have absolutely no emotional investment in them. This would already be the case for the average cinemagoer - but the fans?

Perhaps people might feel I'm expressing some sort of entitlement issues. "I'm a fan, so I deserve this."  Well... what's so wrong about that?  I'm hardly asking for the impossible here.  All I want is to have the same experience watching a Conan trailer that Tolkien fans would watching the trailer for Jackson's Lord of the Rings - heck, I'd take Narnia or Harry Potter.  Sure, some of it might be negative, but it's a strong, passionate reaction to something they know.  If Conan the Barbarian: Black Colossus did Thugra Khotan wrong, I'd be passionate about it, because I know and care about Thugra Khotan enough to have strong ideas and a personal mental image.  If they do Khalar Zym wrong, I don't give two figs, because I don't know or care about Khalar Zym.

I just want to be able to see a trailer and feel what those Lord of the Rings, Green Lantern, Narnia and Harry Potter fans have already enjoyed.  I want to watch a trailer for Conan: The People of the Black Circle and jump up and down in my seat at the sight of Yasmina taking command, Conan assaulting Mount Yimsha, Khemsa and the Lord of the Black Circle duelling souls, the battle of Gurashah.  I want to watch a trailer for Conan: Queen of the Black Coast, and giggle like a lunatic at seeing Conan's battle on the Argus, Belit in all her glory, attacks on the Stygian fleet, the fight with the snake and the were-hyenas and the Winged One, Belit's return from the grave. I want to watch a trailer for Conan: The Hour of the Dragon, and squeal like a girl as I see the Black Ring battling the Khitans, Akivasha lurking in the darkness, the Aquilonian and Nemedian hosts clashing, Conan freeing the slaves, Xaltotun at the king's altar.  To feel that sense of glee, of recognition, of understanding, that there's so much more to Conan than the Cimmerian himself.

Is that really so much to ask?

20 comments:

  1. I feel the same way. I'm trying to work out whether it *matters* that all adaptions ignore what's actually good about Conan. I suspect it comes down to "bad Conans make actual fans look stupid".

    The same goes for the genre wars. If the lit establishment looks down on SF&F - well, it doesn't seem to affect sales (though I wonder), and the books themselves can't suffer. However, it does foster a discrimimation against the people who read SF&F.

    Hmm....

    ReplyDelete
  2. Al,

    This is a great post and one that perfectly articulates the differences between the good use and bad use of pre-existing characters in film. After reading it, I couldn't help but feel (once again) that this upcoming film is yet another missed opportunity for Conan. And I would love to see your "Black Colossus" movie :)

    ReplyDelete
  3. Christ, Al! Black Colossus isn't even one of my favourite Conan stories, yet after 'seeing' your trailer in my head I am so pumped to see that film! The damned thing isn't even real and I'm more excited about it than I am about Nispei's efforts.

    It just underlines how powerless CGI, big stars, a pumping soundtrack and all the money in the world that you can throw into that really is when compared with a few words and a little imagination.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Great, spot on... and more imaginary trailers please!

    The real trailer may look like "generic" sword & sorcery (though McGowan's Marique is quite strange-looking) and more like any number of Conan pastiches than Howard's Conan. However, for a half-hearted defense of this film, similarities to other sword & sorcery movies can be chalked up to common tropes present in one way or another in the stories, pastiche and original.

    Saying that it looks like Clash of the Titans/Prince of Persia/The Scorpion King/etc. smacks of laziness. Why? Shirtless dudes and sword-play in the sands or in ancient cities? Better to qualify that statement, like taking issue with green screen/CGI, etc.

    Still, people will keep comparing a Conan movie to other fantasy films regardless of any kind of fidelity to REH. But if a Conan film were to avoid such perceived clichés like rock music in the trailer and flashy sword moves (for Conan), people might complain less.

    ReplyDelete
  5. But the only problem ARE NOT the characters: what about the places??? You see the LOTR trailers and you see the shire, Moria, Rivendell...

    Look at the Conan trailer. A castle. A lake. A forest. Ooooooooooooooooooookey...

    ReplyDelete
  6. Loved it. Can't wait to see you in June.

    But if I may...there are two ways to go on this. First off, let's just forget a Howardian plot or a Howardian story. That's off the table. We won't see Tower of the Elephant. Okay, deep breath.

    Now, what's left? Two parallel points of view have crystalized for me in these past few months. The first track has to do with whether or not the character of Conan is written well. As of this writing, it only needs to be a better, closer vision of Howard's barbarian to be, well, better than the dominent pop culture image. Not having read the script, and not having ventured out into spoiler realm, if all of the details of the story are fudged, but somehow, some way, Conan himself is "done right" (also subjective, given the range of interpretations, but let's just keep it with "closer to Howard than ever previously attempted before") then the movie will not be a total loss, because it will lead people to track number two:

    If the movie, despite our protestations to the contrary, is watchable and the character compelling and the action appropriately Howardian (or Game of Thronesian)...then people will come out of the movie with a renewed interest in Conan that will lead eventually back to Robert E. Howard.

    Even if it's bad, I intend to use it as a talking point to get to REH.

    I'm at the acceptance level, too, but I just kinda skipped some of the other steps along the way.

    ReplyDelete
  7. @ Mark Finn: I absolutlely agree. part of what gave me peace with this film(not that I was experiencing any great turmoil it is after all, just a movie ) is that I stopped expecting Robert E Howard.I dont know if I ever did, even with a direct adaptation of a story. Howards writing is very layered and as we've read from many fine smart folks here and on the conan blog leaves room for different interpretation.with LOTR like many novels it's self contained with recurring characters and such. Conan is the only recurring character in his stories and like Bond( as mentioned many times by myself and others,Conan movies can get really off base if modeled after Bond one of the most successful film series in history maybe 3 out of 23 get it near fleming).!)I expect a decent pastiche, like the many decent pastiche's(among many poor of course) that have come the past 50 years or so pertaining to conan.Anything original with conans name can only be that.If there are nods or even Howardesque moments I will also be pleased. (heck even valeria in the milius film qoutes belit right?)I already am at least 95% convinced that Momoa is closer to Howards conan than Arnold,Ralf, Cartoon guy and Sorbo ( thats right I said it, that was no kull Sorbo played!)could ever get near, and thats only a few seconds of watching.( Pretty ignorant of me and I love the milius flick but it shows how off arnold was aside his physique for the time.)what it comes down to is that it will get people talking(the last post on conanmovieblog states that an the trailer was number 1 video watched on yahoo, thats huge!)may even get people reading.-Mario

    ReplyDelete
  8. Hi Al, I've been following your blog for a long time but never felt moved to comment until now. This is one of your best posts I reckon, a very astute encapsulation of what many REH fans are feeling. Also, as has been mentioned, your 'Black Colossus' trailer is feckin' class.

    Fair dues lad.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Yeah you nailed it there. I feel nothing watching the trailier other than "Gee I hope this is at least more Howard than the 82 film..."

    ReplyDelete
  10. Maybe the cinematography art? is a bit overrated, why we need cinematographical adaptations of Conan if we have excellent stories like Black colossus? But of course they musn't use the character of Conan for bad adaptations

    ReplyDelete
  11. This is one of your best posts. If I ever need to explain why I get so angry over Conan related media, you have given me the tools to do so. Also, that hypothetical trailer sounded awesome. I woulda picked "Hour of the Dragon," but there ya go.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I feel the same way. I'm trying to work out whether it *matters* that all adaptions ignore what's actually good about Conan. I suspect it comes down to "bad Conans make actual fans look stupid".

    Ultimately, my biggest problem with adaptations that miss what make Conan great is simply that: they miss what make Conan great, and that robs an audience of seeing and hearing Howard's themes, prose, power and art on screen.

    It's also something I've alluded to in the past, where I just want to be able to talk to even more people about Howard than I already do. Contrary to what people might think, I'm far from a snob: I love Transformers, ferchrissakes! I have no time for those who seek to treat REH as a Secret Club only the Cool Guys are allowed to appreciate. I want EVERYONE to experience REH, to the point where I must sound like a broken record on other forums. A Conan film that actually adapted Howard would make that much easier.

    Just... so true...

    Thanks, Kike!

    This is a great post and one that perfectly articulates the differences between the good use and bad use of pre-existing characters in film. After reading it, I couldn't help but feel (once again) that this upcoming film is yet another missed opportunity for Conan. And I would love to see your "Black Colossus" movie :)

    Thanks very much, James.
    Christ, Al! Black Colossus isn't even one of my favourite Conan stories, yet after 'seeing' your trailer in my head I am so pumped to see that film!

    Wow, thanks MD! Truth be told, "Black Colossus" isn't a favourite of mine either: I specifically chose it because it's one of the stories that has what the audience generally expects from Conan (i.e. Girls, Grog and Gore). Something like "Beyond the Black River" or "The Tower of the Elephant" would probably disappoint those expecting scantily-clad ladies. That said, there are a lot of great moments and quotes in BC that would lend themselves to a trailer, too.

    Great, spot on... and more imaginary trailers please!

    Hah, I might well do exactly that! It was a lot of fun coming up with one. In fact, I've half a notion to do a "fake trailer" in the style of those fan videos on youtube using scenes from other films. The only problem would be finding someone to "play" Conan - much like real life, of course.

    The "looks like 300/PoP" is indeed lazy. Kind of like criticizing a war film for looking like Saving Private Ryan. That said, I do see some disquieting similarities (use of colour filters, certain stunt sequences, etc), though not enough to actively comment on as comparisons.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Loved it. Can't wait to see you in June.

    But if I may...


    Looking forward to June too!

    Ultimately, I agree that it just has to be *better* than Arnold/Milius/Stone's Conan, but unfortunately a mixture of nostalgia and misunderstanding of the film itself might lead some people to actually REJECT a more Howardian Conan. "How could they change him from a slave-gladiator-samurai into a thief-pirate-warrior! It's such a betrayal of the character!" and so on.

    Hi Al, I've been following your blog for a long time but never felt moved to comment until now. This is one of your best posts I reckon, a very astute encapsulation of what many REH fans are feeling. Also, as has been mentioned, your 'Black Colossus' trailer is feckin' class.

    Fair dues lad.


    I appreciate your first comment deeply, Bloody Savage, and hopefully I'll give you more reason to comment in future. Preferably in the positive, of course, I'd hate to put my foot in it!

    Yeah you nailed it there. I feel nothing watching the trailier other than "Gee I hope this is at least more Howard than the 82 film..."

    Without knowing the extent of Sean Hood's changes I can't comment on how Howardian it is, but I can see that, at least from the trailers, it's already more Howardian than CtB was. Unless they do something monumentally stupid like make Conan a fervent monotheist, it's hard to imagine them not making it more Howardian.

    Maybe the cinematography art? is a bit overrated, why we need cinematographical adaptations of Conan if we have excellent stories like Black colossus?

    Well, we don't need them, no. Then again, we don't strictly need Frank Frazetta's iconic artwork, or Smith & Buscema's work, or any of the multitude of artistic interpretations, to enjoy the original stories. They aren't necessary, but by Crom, they're wonderful things to have.

    This is one of your best posts. If I ever need to explain why I get so angry over Conan related media, you have given me the tools to do so. Also, that hypothetical trailer sounded awesome. I woulda picked "Hour of the Dragon," but there ya go.

    Thanks, Evan! Well, I'm pretty sure I'll be getting around to THotD at some point, since it's one of The Spectacular Seven (the seven Conan stories which strike me as absolutely essential), and it's one you could easily make into a fine 2 or 3 hour film.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Maybe the character of Conan fits better on comics and illustrations than on the screen

    ReplyDelete
  15. Send that post to the guys at Paradox, Al.I think most of us have been trying to say what you so eloquently wrote there ever since filming on this began. I too would love too see your "Black colossus" trailer,hah,hah! Way to go.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Um - best imaginary trailer EVER. "Watching" your trailer, I got the feelings you were just describing: "I know that part!"; "what about the joint of beef?"; "harness and all!"

    ReplyDelete
  17. This post was so good I linked to it in my own assessment of the trailer.

    I have a lot of friends who like Tolkien (including one who actually learned a bit of elvish) and hear occasional bemoaning of the fantasy ghetto to which they think he's relegated. They have no idea what it's like to be a Howard fan. I think the real reason why the film makers have no interest in Howard's stories is that they (like much of the public) still consider them trash. Never mind the reassessments that have been written since Moorcock's trashing of Howard and King's dismissal of heroic fantasy as a whole. Never mind that the Del Ray paperbacks are widely available, and the stories speak for their own quality. Never mind that respected authors have spoken in Howard's defense. The people making this movie have bought into the myths of De Camp and Milius and about a million uncritical critics who have not likely read, much less seriously considered the stories.

    That's the real issue: Howard is the one who has been ghettoized. Nobody will make the effort to adapt him as others have adapted Tolkien, Rowling, Lewis, or Dick because nobody working in the industry considers him worthy of that treatment. Say what you will of those fantasy and science fiction films that have come before; they were still ostensibly respectful and aware and made by people who could be described likewise.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Maybe the character of Conan fits better on comics and illustrations than on the screen

    We won't know until we've tried.

    Send that post to the guys at Paradox, Al.I think most of us have been trying to say what you so eloquently wrote there ever since filming on this began. I too would love too see your "Black colossus" trailer,hah,hah! Way to go.

    Cheers, Steve!

    Um - best imaginary trailer EVER. "Watching" your trailer, I got the feelings you were just describing: "I know that part!"; "what about the joint of beef?"; "harness and all!"

    High praise indeed, my hirsute arachnid friend, I thank thee.

    This post was so good I linked to it in my own assessment of the trailer.

    Hey there, Goldenpigsy! I came across your blog a while ago and have enjoyed it quite a bit, so it's a pleasure to see you turn up over here.

    I have a lot of friends who like Tolkien (including one who actually learned a bit of elvish) and hear occasional bemoaning of the fantasy ghetto to which they think he's relegated. They have no idea what it's like to be a Howard fan. I think the real reason why the film makers have no interest in Howard's stories is that they (like much of the public) still consider them trash. Never mind the reassessments that have been written since Moorcock's trashing of Howard and King's dismissal of heroic fantasy as a whole. Never mind that the Del Ray paperbacks are widely available, and the stories speak for their own quality. Never mind that respected authors have spoken in Howard's defense. The people making this movie have bought into the myths of De Camp and Milius and about a million uncritical critics who have not likely read, much less seriously considered the stories.

    That's the real issue: Howard is the one who has been ghettoized. Nobody will make the effort to adapt him as others have adapted Tolkien, Rowling, Lewis, or Dick because nobody working in the industry considers him worthy of that treatment. Say what you will of those fantasy and science fiction films that have come before; they were still ostensibly respectful and aware and made by people who could be described likewise.


    Ultimately, I think the state of Howardom is far superior to what it was twenty years ago - which isn't saying a lot, since all you had were the heroic efforts of fans like Lord, Sasser, McHaney, Waterman and more making fanzines and spreading the good word while Howard was practically out of print, yet pastiches and awful tv series roamed the earth.

    However, the fact that REH is finally in the Library of America, Penguin classics, and is the subject of an upcoming peer-review book still has to filter down into public consciousness. Despite Howard scholarship being taken more seriously than ever before, there's still a lot of work to do in terms of saying there's more to Conan than the three Gs, and that Howard brought so much more to the table than just being a "great storyteller" (which is apparently not the same as being a great writer).

    I also want to deeply thank you for articulating exactly why I'm such a strident defender of Howard, and in a way I wish I had articulated a long time ago. Tolkien, Lewis, Moorcock, Dunsany et al all have high-profile defenders and have significant support in academia. Howard is still storming the gates, as it were - but until they climb over the walls, we still have to deal with the ridiculous amount of "facts" and "truths" about the man and his work.

    It's a great time to be a Howard fan, but not one to spend resting on our laurels.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I think the makers of this film have failed to learn what PJ clearly knew years ago: if you pander to the fans a bit, they will forgive a great deal -- and, in the process, they will help generate a tremendous buzz. Equally, I can't think of anyone who doesn't agree that the lesson of PJ's LOTR is "don't rewrite, just cut as necessary". The best parts of the films (other than the cinematography and general "look"!) were those that hewed closely to the books; the worst parts were where the story and characters got rewritten in some bizarre way.

    I am baffled as to why filmmakers have failed to realize the potential that a big pile of existing Conan stories offers. Milius rumbled about a "James Bond" approach to Conan films, though he never realized it (though you can count me as a fan of CtB). Short stories are more easily adapted than novels, and short stories that have stood the test of time should demonstrate that you are just wasting your efforts (and probably shooting yourself in the foot) by making up a whole bunch of incoherent bollox on your own.

    Some day, someone will take the original stories and run with them -- and while they can hardly satisfy all the fans all the time, they will be clever enough to satisfy most of the fans most of the time. And the fans will generate good buzz, and other people will follow the fans, and (if you have a semi-decent looking bunch of films) you will have a successful film franchise that runs for decades (and is strong enough to survive the occasional dud).

    Some day .....

    ReplyDelete