Is It Just Me or Did the Conan Movie Just Get Hotter?
 
RSS

Is It Just Me or Did the Conan Movie Just Get Hotter?

— by CAM SMITH —

With the reboot/revamp/re-(insert useless buzzword here) of “Conan,” the once and former Barbarian and Destroyer, speedily getting ready to roll before cameras in Eastern Europe, with previously-announced stars Jason Momoa and Mickey Rourke signed, sealed and delivered and director Marcus Nispel probably eager to prove he’s more than a mechanically-competent hired gun, we’re going to be inundated with a veritable cavalcade of casting announcements over the next few glorious weeks.

While the oft-reliable folks at Latino Review have leaked some juicy info regarding the next thespian willing to don leather and heavy armor for two months or so, I’ve instead decided to call upon a higher power to divulge this exciting news!

    “*Ahem* Dearest Crom, blessed savior and almighty warrior God, tell me, if you will, what thunderous casting decision could have been made that would ensure my interest in this ridiculous film?”

    A long pause follows – during which I shift nervously from foot to foot – before a bolt of lightning slices through the blackened sky and a booming voice echoes from up yonder: “Well, my dutiful subject, I’m beyond contented to inform you that your puny motion picture has been blessed with one of your most beautiful of human glories – the stunning female specimen you refer to as Rachel Nichols! Does this satisfy your ardent mortal curiosity?”

    “Oh boy, does it ever! Thanks Crom, you rock!”

Now, for those blanking on her name, Nichols no doubt caught the collective eyes of many male movie-goers with her sexy appearances in the crummy horror flick “P2” and, more notably, J.J. Abrams “Star Trek” (she was the green alien cutie). She also portrayed Scarlett in last summer’s cheeseball epic “G.I. Joe: Rise of the Cobra” instantly winning my heart forever the moment she began explaining – with a straight face, no less – the finer points of utilizing spherical trigonometry to triangulate the position of wayward super-villains. (I know I’m not the only one who felt the magic.)

Latino Review has also posted a casting breakdown and summary of her character, Tamara, which provides some juicy insider info as to what type of female lead you can expect to see posing opposite the mountainous Conan:

    “18 to 24 years old, Caucasian or Middle Eastern, open to all ethnicities; beautiful, studious, correct, a novitiate of a Greek influenced monastery. A master of martial arts, she has been trained to be the Queen’s servant, bodyguard and best friend. She and many other female bodyguards to the queen have been in hiding most of their lives because of the curse of Acheron, which would take the queen’s life to bring almost immortal power to its king. When Khalar Singh, a powerful warlord with ambitions to become the king of Acheron, storms the monastery and captures all of the novitiates, she is separated from Ilira, the one she must protect. With all of her strength and will, Tamara is determined to find and rescue her. She finds herself in league with Conan because of a mutual need to find Khalar Singh. She is not in the least intimidated by Conan’s size or grim demeanor and their alliance eventually blossoms into something that surprises them both…”

Of course, while all those details sound dandy, I’m sure you can pretty much bet all of your golden chalices and precious human sacrifices that Nichols’ utmost acting challenge will ultimately end up being solely to stay looking incredibly hot and seductive while taped and glued into a mercilessly uncomfortable costume number like this.

But you know what? I’m perfectly okay with that. I’m sincerely hoping that “Conan” winds up being a silly, gory, campy action extravaganza – free of monotonous solemn speeches, ham-fisted attempts at subtlety and overwrought tragedy – filled with oiled-up, be-muscled dudes beating each other into paste and eye-popping Amazonian babes in revealing get-ups swingin’ swords and launching a new era of adolescent boys into the wondrous throws of puberty. Is that so wrong?

What do you guys and gals think of Rachel Nichols joining “Conan”? How would like to see the film turn out? Strap on your chain-mail, shoulder your best bow and scabbard and attack our comments section like Crom ordered you to!

. . .

Follow Cam Smith on Twitter at http://twitter.com/camspcepisodes.

Be Sociable, Share!

5 Comments Add Yours ↓

  1. 1

    awesome been a fan of hers since she was on Alias. Can’t wait see her and Jason on screen in Conan!!!

  2. cathy #
    2

    Rachel is going to be an asset to any film- there’s no doubting she’s got the looks to make any guy melt (inc Conan is my bet) but she’s also got the talent, enthusiasm & dedication to back it up. Bring on the rest of the cast!

  3. 3

    “I’m sincerely hoping that “Conan” winds up being a silly, gory, campy action extravaganza – free of monotonous solemn speeches, ham-fisted attempts at subtlety and overwrought tragedy – filled with oiled-up, be-muscled dudes beating each other into paste and eye-popping Amazonian babes in revealing get-ups swingin’ swords and launching a new era of adolescent boys into the wondrous throws of puberty. Is that so wrong?”

    Well, if you’re looking to make a Conan film true to Robert E. Howard…

    There’s this preconception that Howard’s Conan was only popular because of the babes and violence. While undoubtedly they were an element, and Howard was extremely vivid in his descriptions of those things, they’re not the things that set Conan and Howard apart from his countless imitators.

    After all, if all people want is sex and violence, then there’s any number of Ators and Yors and Beastmasters to watch. Conan was different, Conan was better, and Conan was more intelligent.

    Now, Howard’s speeches were hardly monotonous, the subtlety crafted strongly enough to be missed by even fans, and the tragedy permeating yet not suffocating. The philosophical aspects of Conan the Barbarian, while not representative of Howard’s, are probably the best thing about the film, and why it’s stood the test of time while others have not.

    Sadly, neither of us look to get our wish. The film is nothing like REH, and the script is chock full of ridiculous philosophical mumbo-jumbo. I’m sure Rachel will do a fine job in her role of hot-n-bothered piece.

    (Also, I would make a comment on how ill-advised any sort of prayer to Crom would be, but even I have my limits of nerdiness.)

  4. Teebs #
    4

    It’s not just you. 😉

  5. N. Oefinger #
    5

    Yes, she’s a gorgeous, talented babe. There are many like that. Is she sexier than many of those? Sure. There are many like _that_, too.

    Is this movie a horribly mangled, entirely unfaithful take on a classic collection of fiction with a strong, large, and fiercely dedicated fan following? Yes. If you want to make something that’s not Conan, don’t call it Conan. Why does everything need to be changed around completely?

    Is it, the hotness notwithstanding, horribly miscast? Yes. They couldn’t have picked worse actors for this movie if they tried. They’re completely unsuited to their roles. Momoa doesn’t look like Conan in any way, and that’s the main character – right? Or did they change THAT too?



Your Comment






Switch to our mobile site