web counter
 

The New Conan Might Be Worth Seeing For Beardless Khal Drogo, Even Without a Giant-Metal-Chain-To-Horse-Face Shot in the U.K. Trailer

By Rob Payne | Posted Under Trailers | Comments (13)

Thumbnail image for pajibaukconantrailer.jpg

Admittedly, I’m not the biggest Conan fan in the world, but I like the milieu and the first movie is a perfect conception of that kind of sword and sorcery. A large part of its success, of course, is due to Arnold Schwarzenegger. His muscles (who I hear were shipped over from Brussels) are a necessary component to that, but his version of Conan is immensely re-watchable because - be prepared to have your mindhole blown again this week - he is fun to watch. Based on what his character in “Game of Thrones” gets away with nearly every episode, Jason Momoa and his impressive pecs do appear to have the chops necessary to wield the Governator’s bloody broadsword.

Even with his limited screen time, Momoa’s Khal Drogo is high on the list of the show’s characters with whom you want to spend more time. Not with him personally, just televisually. Given what little he has to do most episodes, his talent-level seems untapped, as he more than makes up for the bodybuilder-turned-thespian stereotype with scenes ranging from rousing speeches to being disarmed sexually by his new bride. He isn’t breaking any new ground here, but he has charisma and charm in the role, and that carries the day more often than whatever Kevin Sorbo was trying to do in the 90s. Charm and charisma are features that any actor needs, but especially so when playing raping pillagers like the Khal, or like Conan the Barbarian.

Unfortunately, the new U.K. trailer still doesn’t reveal if he actually has the acting muscles to match his biceps (seriously, dude is stout, if stout also meant ginormous). It’s fairly plot driven, with a lot drawn from the character’s origin, and most of Momoa’s dialogue is placed over other footage, like voice over. There is one not not-clever line about the character’s name that he seems to sell, but considering that everyone digs Drogo, I’m at a loss as to why the studio isn’t pushing Momoa and the “Game of Thrones” connection more. Or, at all. Maybe he’s just a better fit for TV?

Take a gander:

Yeah, it doesn’t look great. Better than Prince of Persia: Whatever That Was, maybe missing the camp of the Destroyer and Red Sonja, but not quite the distillation of concept the original was. That isn’t the worst thing in the world. As long as Khal Drogo isn’t a one trick horse lord, this new Conan the Barbarian will be watchable, and he seems to be at least a two, or even three, trick pony. Right?

Maybe it’s the beard?

Rob Payne also writes the indie comic The Unstoppable Force, co-hosts the internet radio show/podcast We’re Not Fanboys, and you can follow or flame him on the Twitter @RobOfWar. He may wants to wait until he finishes the HBO series to start reading A Song of Ice and Fire, but he’d really prefer to start now. It’s just that good.









Each Time You Like, Share, Tweet or Stumble a Pajiba Post, An Angel Does the Paul Rudd Dance

← Is That Supposed To Be Cute? Totally Unlovable Love Interests | The Mystery And Excitement Of First Looks: New Images From Tintin, Soderbergh's Haywire, And (FINALLY) Cabin In The Woods →









Comments

Not bad. I have come a long way towards liking this. Seeing Ronan show up in Game of Thrones and now Conan is fun.

Posted by: Harold at July 7, 2011 3:24 AM

IDK to me Arnold OWNED that role. Dont see how anyone else is going to take it from him.

Posted by: logan at July 7, 2011 9:39 AM

Momoa was not bad on Stargate: Atlantis. Of course, he didn't get to do much more than kick ass and look menacing/protective, but I seem to recall the few Ronon-centric episodes were pretty decent. He had a nice dry sense of humor, too.

Posted by: Three-nineteen at July 7, 2011 11:36 AM

Count me as one of the fans of Milius' Conan the Barbarian. No, it's nothing like Howard's creation, but the movie is similar to The Road Warrior -- a hero that speaks little, a plot that's straightforward and villains that you want to see lose (in this case, James Earl Jones hamming it up as Thulsa Doom). Add the great Basil Poleoudouris score and it's one of my favorite movies.

Now the sequel? That was more fun...but it sucked.

Posted by: Fredo at July 7, 2011 11:38 AM

Anyone else notice that Gregor "The Mountain" Clegane is played by a dude whose name is actually Conan? Conan Stevens, IIRC. Also that he looks like Bluto in his greathelm.

Posted by: lubeg at July 7, 2011 11:40 AM

I've said it before and I'll say it again, I think this is gonna rock, or at least not blow the chunks you've been dreading. O think Momoa gonna surprise y'all.

Posted by: Odnon at July 7, 2011 1:34 PM

And no. Apparently I do not spell check.

Posted by: Odnon at July 7, 2011 1:35 PM

I just want a Khal Drogo movie. Everyone speaks Dothraki and we see how he assembled such a massive army (read: killing people for ninety minutes). That is a movie I would pay money to see.

Posted by: AngelArm45 at July 7, 2011 2:58 PM

I keep saying it: There seems to be TOO MUCH going on in this movie. Seriously. Follow the original film, KiSS, Keep it Simple Stupid.

Posted by: DeistBrawler at July 7, 2011 5:17 PM

"Admittedly, I’m not the biggest Conan fan in the world, but I like the milieu and the first movie is a perfect conception of that kind of sword and sorcery."

As good as the original film is on its own merits (and it isn't perfect, but it's far more nuanced than most give it credit for), it's also been an albatross around Conan's neck: despite the character appearing in comics, books and the like for 50 years before the 1982 film came along, because the franchise took a massive nosedive since CtB, Conan and Arnold have been inseparable.

Now we're getting a Conan that's (trying) to get out of the shadow of Arnold, people only aware of the character through the films think this is some sort of sacrilege. Which is ironic, because that's exactly what Robert E. Howard fans thought of the 1982 film in the first place.

So when all the Arnold fans are going to this film, complaining about how this isn't like Conan at all, complaining about why they changed all the characters, asking why the film-makers decided they have to monkey about with perfection - welcome to our world. It's not a nice feeling, is it?

All I can hope for is that the film can stand on its own, and hopefully introduce new fans to Howard's work. Maybe get an actual adaptation of one of Howard's stories for the sequel.

Posted by: Al Harron at July 7, 2011 6:23 PM

This is another movie where they show flashbacks to the child version of the big action hero and it turns out he's been letting out murderous roars since he was in diapers. Classic, overhead shot zooming out murderous roars, only coming from sub-10-year-old lungs they're hilarious. Wolverine had one, baby Fassbender in First Class had one that lasted at least a solid minute, I swear, and now baby Conan.

Kids don't scream good, I don't know how directors haven't noticed it by now.

Posted by: Jim at July 8, 2011 4:18 AM

As a fan of the graphic novels of Busiek and Truman, of Robert E. Howard's Sword and Sorcery characters of Conan and King Kull, I would say that I have a fair opinion on what Howard's writing is about, and no, the Stone/ Milius movie of Conan is not actually Conan, but a lose interpretation. Honestly, you could have put the "Kull" title on the Schwarzenegger Conan movie and it would be just as honest to the overall theme of what Howard's Hyperborean/Hyborian tales are about; the idea of Barbarianism vs. Civilization. I like the Arnold Conan movies; both of them. They have a special place in my childhood memories and even now I still watch them because they are fun. And, I am extremely excited about Mamoa's take on the barbarian. I think he will do a great job, and portray the barbarian "close to the book". I only say this due to the fact that I don't think people should avoid this film because it's main character is not played by their ever popular Governator. I believe that people should go see this film because they want to see some fun sword and sorcery, ale drinking, womanizing, monsters and bloody sword play. So, what say you?!

Posted by: Taylor Lymbery at July 11, 2011 10:44 AM

As a backup to what I just wrote, yeah I can not wait to see a horse get faced with a giant chain. Maybe the title to that preview should be, "By this Chain I rule!"

Posted by: Taylor Lymbery at July 11, 2011 10:47 AM