Conan el Bárbaro

A mí me gustó bastante, un espectáculo de fantasía de acción sin pretensiones en el que no hace falta pensar en nada. Y sobre todo, no aburre, lo cual es uno de mis principales requisitos para una película de acción. Evitaré compararlo con el verdadero Barbar Conan, ya que solo vi Destructor de Conan y fue mucho peor que esto. Jason Momoa, aunque me resultaba terriblemente antipático, parecía una versión pobre de Vladko Dobrovodský, en cambio, el papel ideal fue elegido para Ron Perlman, le sientan de maravilla esas expresiones actorales. (26.10.2014)

Un esputo búlgaro en DVD demasiado cara sin alma cinematográfica, sin imaginación y sin fantasía. Peor que cualquier película histórica barata muy mala y tampoco mejor que la peor parte de Mortal Kombat. Como si su creador odiara las películas, como si odiara a sus espectadores y quisiera derrotarlos. Las únicas emociones que transmite la película son el aburrimiento, la molestia y la resistencia a la violencia por violencia. Y el único hecho que (después de El Guía del Desfiladero) confirma que Nispel es actualmente el peor director de Hollywood en producción cinematográfica. Solo una cosa podría haber resultado peor aquí, y es el maquillaje y el vestuario, por ellos doy una estrella. (30.08.2011)

I was brought up on Howard’s Conan books and so I’m disappointed (again!) that the movie focuses just on the main hero and the world where the story takes place. It would have been so easy for the creators to borrow one of the countless already written stories, but they didn’t (ok, there’s a mention of the Elephant Tower, but nothing else) and all they did was stuff a couple of action scenes (miserably filmed by Nispel) and a couple of dialogs (that sort of make sense) into the clichéd template. The only positive thing here are the actors, headed by the superb Momoo who at last is a honest to goodness Conan who looks like he has stepped out of the cover of one of the books in my bookcase. Both Lang and McGowan made respectable villains. The third star is for solid production design and special effects, and the blood spurting from cleaved heads also made me happy. I really hope there will be a sequel, but please with a different screenwriter (one good one would be better than three cooks) and with a brand new, better director. (20.08.2011)

A Conan that’s a little better than Conan, but at the same time a Conan considerably worse than Conan. A C-movie to the core, full of confused editing and disjointed shots, non-actors and zero story... But luckily it doesn’t attempt to be anything more and there’s more fighting than talking here, and at a solid pace. If this had had the same energy as the magnificent introduction from his childhood all the time, I would have been absolutely content. But then it’s just too... Well, just neither (laughably) bad nor (really) good. And the result is more an average imitation of Werewolf (and dozens of other movies; what Nispel liked in some movie, he put into this) than a continuator of the original Conans. (18.08.2011)

Conan the Barbarian? Don't let anyone laugh at you. More like Cohen the Barbarian for Cosmopolitan readers in an amateurish performance by the director, who should only participate in A-filmmaking as a passive observer. By far the worst film of the year - buy Solomon Kane instead, which is light-years more exciting, darker and more brutal, and not these races in casting raspberries on the ground. (18.08.2011)