The new Conan movie: latest rumors

I already posted this in the French forum, but here is a translation of the latest rumors about the new film for English readers.

John McTiernan could direct the new movie.

From Madmovies.com, originally written in French:

Cyril Delelée wrote:

No, this is neither a joke, nor a geek rumor: it's already known that Nu Image purchased the rights to Conan, to produce a new trilogy budgeted at $80 million and that the first movie could be presented in Cannes in 2009. It's also known that not actor has been chosen (although there's more and more talks about Gerard "300" Butler), that John Milius is not currently involved and that the governor Arnold cannot ("Bekhause I have to rrrrule Califôôôrrrnia!"). But the killer info, is that the producers wish to entrust the present of this opus 1 of the Cimmerian's revival to no other one that John McTiernan, who no longer needs to prove his taste for epic barbarity (Predator, The 13rd Warrior). Pray to Crom that he accepts this challenge to re-gild the reputation of his career.

Later in the talkback on the MM website, the author of the article updated it, with a little bit additional information:

Quote :

Legitimate question about our sources. The information came to us quite simply, by talking in person with someone from Nu Image. It is logical that the US sites do not relay it, considering that as it is specified, the producers of King Conan WISH to propose it to McT, and than this is not a "press release". It is not granted that he will accept, but in any case, this choice shows their will to entrust the project to someone which is an obviousness to direct it: Nu Image wants, above all, to make a film which did not suffer of the comparison with that of 1982, and in my opinion (I specifically said: in my opinion), if McT declines, it is not excluded that they turn towards Milius or Verhoeven. McT is at the head of their "wish-list", period. It seemed important to us to spread this exclusive information, so much it raises the level of the project. As for Butler, claimed everywhere, it is logical that his name was spoken of, but those of the "Rome guys" were too (McKidd and Stevenson, therefore). Time will tell, but at least it is sure that they want an actor, not a wrestler. Whatever, the thing is on the way, and that is the central issue. King Conan is no more a "film that we would like to see". It's a film that we WILL see. And, oh yes (because of my emotion, I made a little mistake): 80 million will be invested in the 1st film, not for the whole trilogy !

He talked about "KING" Conan:

1) It could simply mean that Nu decided to set the movies in a late Era of Conan's life (with new scripts).
2) Perhaps the author of the article made an error (unlikely: he repeated the word twice).
3) A reminiscence of the old "Crown of Iron" project (Nu using JM's script) ?

Kevin Mckidd, Ray Stevenson and Gerard Butler? Are they out've their limited minds? All they need now is James Cosmo in his kilt as Conan's dad and Clancy Brown raiding the Cimmerian village with a fantasy helmet again.

John Mct is currently in prison, Axe.

http://www.martyangelo.com/john_mctiernan.htm

Though he probably could be available for 2009.

Sounds like fan rumblings, but who knows. The 13th Warrior, while an OK film, certainly not a very good one, least the finished product(actually directed/edited by Michael Crighton). Moreover its basically rehased CTB with Beowulf thrown in.


They should get Milius back and take it from there, all I have to say about this movie.

*The first appearence of CONAN by the way, was as a king, in "Phoenix on the Sword".

Cromulus The Destroyer wrote:

John Mct is currently in prison, Axe.

Though he probably could be available for 2009.

I know Cromulus, the latest news are:

Quote :

"Lie Die Hard" director John McTiernan was granted bail and released on a $50,000 bond Monday, pending an appeal of his guilty plea for allegedly lying to the FBI about his knowledge of celebrity PI Anthony Pellicano's alleged illegal wiretapping operation.

Will his appeal be successful or not ? BTW, a "four-months sentence" won't prevent him to direct a movie in 2008, he could be available in time.

Quote :

Sounds like fan rumblings.

Hey Cromulus, Madmovies.com is not a fansite ! It's the website of a magazine about SF/Fantasy/horror movies released for years in France.
It seems their journalist really talked with someone from Nu Image. But they don't have made any decison yet. 80 millions for one movie is a pretty decent budget.

Quote :

*The first appearence of CONAN by the way, was as a king, in "Phoenix on the Sword".

Really ?

At least the project is on the way !

I know man, I was being humorous with regards to McT.

Still sounds like fan rumblings from either the company and/or journalists.

its not really a question of budget for me though, as 80 million, isnt bad, but generic budget for today's pictures. Its also basically Scorpion King's budget(which was like 60-70 million), things today are just inflated.

They would be better off making a smaller more personal picture, not cramp it with CGI or try and imitate The 13th Warrior, which was a major failure of a movie and certainly not on the level of CONAN THE BARBARIAN , namely in the general public's eyes thats for sure.

McT wouldn't be number one on MY wish-list (either M. Mann, J. Millius or P Verhoeven if I was in charge), but I don't hate this choice. McT directed good movies (not masterpieces): Predator, the first Die Hard, The Hunt for Red October and The 13th Warrior. I liked 13th, it's certainly not one of my favourite movies, but IMO it was far from being a failure. IMHO he's a good action filmaker even if he's not a great one.

About the three actors envisioned, I don't know.
For Arnold, it's too late now. Who would you like to see as Conan ?

axerules wrote:

I liked 13th, it's certainly not one of my favourite movies, but IMO it was far from being a failure

The movie we see is really supposedly mainly Michael Crigton's version, and it was it a box office failure. I really didn't like the fantasy armor of the main lead, the Conquistador armor nor the Roman Gladiator armor used by some of Norse men. The movie itself was mediocre and too deritive of CONAN THE BARBARIAN and BEOWULF.

McT isnt a bad director at all, probably could pull it off, just wont be a classic like original movie, but he doesn't write his own material(miluus for exampLE wrote HUNT FOR THE RED OKTOBER). Too many place to much on the director alone, when it reality it is the right combo of Director and Writer, or Writer-Director .

I want to know who is penning this script, just better not be some hack asshole annd chicken shit the movie down to PG-13 like Die Hard 4.

Right now I kinda getting the feeling its a pirate adventure or some quest-like adventure, probably using elements of "Hour of the Dragon".

__________________-

This Paul Sloan guy looks the part of a Frazetta CONAN





He's in this upcoming movie called Stiletto. I never seen him act, but if they bulk him up more could work quite good. However it will boil down to Direction and Storyline. Just wish Milius was back on board, its the only way I personally can trust a new movie, or until being proved otherwise.

..Of course there can be only one:




http://www.pixolator.com/zbc/showthread.php?t=43212&page=2

His name not being listed among the screenwriters in the credits doesn't necessarily mean a director did not work on the script.

Milius only rewrote parts of Sean Connery's lines on RED OCTOBER.

And I won't even comment the "13TH WARRIOR was mediocre" part!

Well your big fan of the John McT and the "13th warrior" movie, so partve of its appeal is no doubt the director and of course of Conan and Beowulf qualities/similarities. Best part of the film for me was really the Goldsmith soundtrack. I guess just a matter of opinion at lenght.

* I was under the impression that Milius ghost wrote the final screenplay, just wasnt given official credit?

Ah, OK, maybe he did rewrite a little bit more than "only parts of the Connery lines"...

Quote :

IGNFF: Another alleged statement that you could confirm or deny – that you rewrote The Hunt for Red October.
MILIUS: I did.
IGNFF: And added some speeches to Connery's Marco Ramius character.
MILIUS: Yeah. As a matter of fact, I wrote all of the Russian stuff. Everything that's Russian in that movie.
IGNFF: Do you find it easy to write for Connery?
MILIUS: Oh yeah. Well, he asked for me to do that. He was great. I said, "What do you want me to do?" And he said, "Make it about me."

http://uk.movies.ign.com/articles/401/401150p11.html

Paul Sloan's face is actually pretty frazzeta-like. I do agree. But the main problem with acting is if the actor is not too good, you need a deep script and a good direction in order to make the actor expressive. Arnold didn't need to talk too much, he was 80% of the movie mute and serious, but Milius make us believe Conan was actually thinking.

I would prefer a Ray Stevenson actor rather than a muscular guy, who can act sensitive and tough sides depending of the moment. I would not say he is the perfect choice, but he would tell us more about the character than any unexpressive actor.

I really loved the Hbo's Rome series, and I think it's not an intelligent idea to take the cast and change the concept into a Conan movie. That would kinda suck in the same way they did with the Hercules turning into Kull. But if they only made a movie with the same care for historical details and ambientation, primitive and pagan spirit, and deep and strong characters, then that would be a movie I would like to watch.

Verhoeven would be cool... or would suck. Who knows. It surely would make a movie with interesting parts, maybe not a masterpiece but he allways had a couple of great ideas. Anyway, even though Milius is labelled as "psycophathic, gory, blood-and-guts-lover", he gives violence a reason and is allways a part of the story he is telling. On the other side Verhoeven's violence is for me an excuse to make his movies more exciting and sometimes I dislike it. It's sometimes too surreal. Like he is making fun of it.

Best thing about CTB was it took violence serioulsy. Reason why it is so politically incorrect even today. BUT... in a world where you have to kill or be killed, that moment should be taken serioulsy. It's the only way to show violence as it is: crude and unmoral. Unmoral in political correct paramethres, but the warrior has a moral code. CTB's violence has a moral, a rule. Kill to survive. It's not killing just for the killing.

I think if you make fun of violence too much then it stops being important for the audience. Maybe it worsk in some kind of movies, with acid and reivindicative tone, but for a "Conan" movie? No... I want a warrior, not a psycho.


Verhoeven made "Flesh and Blood", a very nice movie where violence was taken very serioulsy. He didn't made fun of nothing and you can't even say there was "good" or "bad" characters there. They all where just humans: good and evil together. It would be nice if he came back into that perspective and made a "Conan" movie like that... But I am sure that people wants Conan as a hero, a good guy, -even some kind of god- beter than just a man who tries to survive, and it's not perfect... just a man.

The good thing is both McTiernan and Verhoeven are big fans of the Milius movie!

I cannot see either of these two men as CONAN, though on an interesting note John Milius co-wrote some episodes and co-produced this program. Type casting though is pretty much what propels some people to stardom. So seeing their names thrown around isnt surprising.



Personally I found the ROME series boring and historically inaccurate, it took great liberties with history and seemed more like a British softcore porno soap opera in a classic setting. Best episode was the when with Pullo as in the Gladiator pit. One thing I felt was Milius's touch, was how the characters are always being saved by some act of god or fate..rather like his Conan was .

One thing on Milius's Conan the Silent, Arnold did have more dialogue but it was all cut out due to the producer's insistence or so how it goes which could well be true..however I wouldnt be surprised if Milius pulled a Woody Allen and decided to edit together a completely different picture in post production.

Sorbo's KULL was probably closer to Howard's CONAN.

Flaming Turd wrote:

But the main problem with acting is if the actor is not too good, you need a deep script and a good direction in order to make the actor expressive. Arnold didn't need to talk too much, he was 80% of the movie mute and serious, but Milius make us believe Conan was actually thinking.

I do agree FT. If they chose a culturist/wrestler and not an actor, he has too shut up !

The problem IMO is that I don't see any actor as "THE" new Conan. I would have liked to see Arnold a few years ago, but now it's too late. Some actors are better choices than others IMO, but I don't picture anyone as the "perfect Conan" in my mind.

Cromulus The Destroyer wrote:

Personally I found the ROME series boring and historically inaccurate, it took great liberties and seemed more like a British softcore porno soap opera at times. One thing I felt was Milius's touch, was how the characters are always being saved by some act of god or fate..rather like his Conan was .

Rome took a lot of liberties with history. Do you remember Caesar: "I'm only a soldier, I don't know matters of religion" (I'm paraphrasing here, I don't recall his exact words). It was a little bit strange for Rome's pontifex maximus ...but overall I found it enjoyable, entertaining and the actors weren't ridiculous.

Flaming Turd wrote:

Verhoeven made "Flesh and Blood", a very nice movie where violence was taken very serioulsy. He didn't made fun of nothing and you can't even say there was "good" or "bad" characters there. They all where just humans: good and evil together. It would be nice if he came back into that perspective and made a "Conan" movie like that... But I am sure that people wants Conan as a hero, a good guy, -even some kind of god- beter than just a man who tries to survive, and it's not perfect... just a man.

Flesh and Blood was great and is one of the reasons I would like to see PV directing Conan.
I also hope the "comic's" route with "Conan the good guy" will be avoided (do you remember all that bulls**t about Conan slaping a kid ?).

axerules wrote:

Flaming Turd wrote:

But the main problem with acting is if the actor is not too good, you need a deep script and a good direction in order to make the actor expressive. Arnold didn't need to talk too much, he was 80% of the movie mute and serious, but Milius make us believe Conan was actually thinking.

I do agree FT. If they chose a culturist/wrestler and not an actor, he has too shut up !

Well to be fair, in truth, I dont understand the reluctance or hatred for casting a wrestler or bodybuilder as CONAN. It'll just have to depend on the specific wrestler/bodybuilder like it would the regular actor. The only problem with Arnold was that he was perhaps too handsome for the role,lol. Howard's CONAN was described essentially as an ugly brute with an extremely well built body. He was complete with an oversized jaw, slopping protruding forehead, skin like tanned leather, flesh scared by war and the elements and a page-boy (prince Valient)hairdo.

Howard supposedly based Conan on local pub brawlers, gangsters/bootleggers and of course boxers. Now I doubt these people were pretty, lean or even overly muscular and using this literally isnt a good idea for casting either. Howard didnt dwell to much time on describing CONAN's body type, however he left many clues on his body type and demeanor by giving out many hints and referrences to animals like Bears, Wolves, Tigers, Panthers and Lions to describe CONAN's body type and even movements. Most of those animals are indeed very muscular, at the arms, chest, shoulders and legs, with the narrow waistelines, like a typical Herculean or Olymian athlete(any wrestler, boxer or Gladiator of the past ). Sometimes, I wondered if Howard was describing a warrior or a dancer with Conan's fighting ability, but these ideas went into Arnold's, Lopez's and Sandahl's training, as each three developed a fighting style for their body type.

I think Howard often mentions the thickness of Conan's neck and arm muscles & veins being ripped and corded like steel cables or whatever.


I think an actor with mesomorphic( muscular body) but also ruggedly handsome (mature and masculine) looks is best for the role. A Frazetta-like CONAN is imo the best bet and looks more brutal and believable as a Cromagnon looking warrior. If they take it a more brutal direction it could be something worth while and different. Obviously in order to remain faithful to Howard's CONAN, one would need a Ron Perlman with prosthetics on his face and in a rubber muscle suit, but nobody in their right mind wants that I think atleast , haha. Seriously though, the thing about Hollywood and certain fans is that they would often rather cast a very handsome male lead, or some guy that looks like he spends too much time in the pub drinking and bare knuckle fighting, than taking care of his body and sword fighting.

* I remember some CONAN fans complaing that Arnold didnt look like a James Bond era Sean Connery, with all the hair on his body...But all I could say was that "shaving off body hair goes back to the Stone Age". Some also couldnt believe that one could get muscular like Arnold and was therefore imposible for Howard's CONAN, all I could say was, " look at ancient statues and know that weightlifting existed in Ancient Greece and Rome".

Besides in all the lastest games, its basically a Frazetta like bodybuilder type as Conan. Even the teaser poster has a bodybuilder body.

I mostly agree with Cromulus about the bodytype of a good Conan. We could also take in consideration the age of the character : he could be a little less muscular in "God In The Bowl" than in "Hour Of The Dragon".
A lot of things also depend on the decision to make or not a serie of films rather than a one shot. Would it be interesting to see the progression of Conan from a simple thief to a king ? Or could we tale any story in any order ?
Anyway I also think that a good Conan should have a little more lines than Arnold had in CTB. In most Howard stories, the character talks a little more. So the guy need to be credible.
Finally, the question/problem is that everybody has his own mental representation of Conan based upon movies, comics, animated and (sometimes) Howard's stories. And especially for people in this forum, who care about this character for decades sometimes ! That's why it will be very hard to agree on this question which may finally be more personal than it seemed at first glance!

Yeah, it finally turns into a matter of personal taste.

I like to imagine Conan in a way that I haven't already seen in comics, movies or pictures. I like the idea of him having a beard and maybe not the "heavymetal" long hair style. -Howard didn't mention Conan as having long hair, that came after Frazetta-.

This way I come out of the canon and the character is more human to me.

Actually I would prefer a brute ugly cromagnon rather than a handsome Adonis. Arnold was very nice as a young Conan, but I think it wouldn't be hard to imagine his face and body turned ugly after thousands of battles, hits and scars.

The body is strong but not specifically a bodybuilder's one. All those muscles are too sthethical and not useful in a real warrior's life. It's not a prejudge when I say I wouldn't like a bodybuilder, it's just that they could look tough, but for me fuckers like Toshiro Mifune are waaaay much more scarier.

What I prefer is the strenght and energy the actor expresses, rather than the image he could have. I am an actor myself, so I think you can understand why that is my personal taste.

Rashomon, for example, is a movie where you could actually watch the body of Mifune in action. Very agile and strong, pure instinct. He moves like a crazy monkey, and is more related to the description of Howard's Conan moving like an animal rather than the Marvel comics description of a human tank.

If you look at these pictures you could think Toshiro Mifune was not specially strong, and could be beaten by Schwarzenegger with one finger... But if you could watch this actor in action, you would understand what I mean. That is strenght, that is power!!!!!!!

http://oook.info/easia/rashomon.jpg

http://cache.viewimages.com/xc/3308498.jpg?v=1&c=ViewImages&k=2&d=BAA3E61C514E7EC6A7722840F1E1D3ACA55A1E4F32AD3138

http://img2.timeinc.net/ew/dynamic/imgs/070615/action/sevensamurai_l.jpg

http://images.greencine.com/images/article/kurosawa-throne.jpg

http://www.vetinfo.com/michal/toshiro.jpg

Those old Weird Tales covers, had a Cary Grant looking CONAN dressed in Roman garb. I guess rather like a modern Harlquin love novel quality.

I am partial to the statues of Hercules myself..looks more like the possible inspiration for Howard's physical descriptions of CONAN btw:




The dying Gaul look could work, minus the moustache perhaps though:

The picture I have in my mind of REH's Conan would be someone looking like the French rugby player Sébastien Chabal:



With effective muscles and not a pretty face.

I'm NOT suggesting he could play Conan in the movies, he is not an actor anyway, it's simply someone close of (not EXACTLY like) my mental image.


I wouldn't hate to see a wrestler/bodybuilder playing Conan. In this case, if he doesn't know how to act, his part should be almost silent. A few words from time to time, no more. If they chose an actor who is to "weak" physically, then they'll probably "enhance" him like they did in 300. I'm not sure that it is the best thing to do, I'd rather see someone with the right body and credible...but I don't know him yet !

BTW, Cromulus, REH himself said about the Weird Tales covers that if the artist's work was fine, Conan had too much a "latin" appearance for his tastes (in his correspondance).

For the role of CONAN we dont need a Shakespearean actor either of course.

Axe, that French guy does look pretty good for the part. Reminds me of a more musular version of Adrian Paul,lol.

*My own personal taste would be always Steve Reeves, but this is not possible though sadly:

Quote :

French director Xavier Gens ("Hitman") tells Le Film Francais that he may direct the new "Conan the Barbarian" movie.

Source: http://www.darkhorizons.com/news07/071228c.php

Maybe GI JOE will have a decent score atleast, his Delta Force and Predator soundtracks were great.

*Well, probably could expect that Dougrey Scott or whatever his name to play Conan,lol. I think I'll be like thulsa Doom and crawl back into the underworld..and watch my DVD's.

Mmmh, I have a question. Does anybody know if the next Conan movie will follow the storyline of the Milius' movie? And if it does, will it follow also "The Destroyer"?



Or will it be a complete alternative storyline? -(I wonder beacuse in the promo poster there's the Atlantean weapon, so...?)-

If you wanna hear French director Xavier Gens speaking about the next Conan, click here.

Translation:
I tried to respect Gens' informal tone, I probably made mistakes, please be lenient.

"I was approached, I had meetings... During the promotion of Hitman precisely, I met Nu Image, which actually proposed me to make the film... And I said to them that, in my opinion, the best person to do it, was John McTiernan... The result was then, later, that they went to see John McTiernan and I, for the moment, I refuse... Since the way in which it is presented, is a little bit the same configuration as Hitman, i.e. it remains a studio film, with a screenplay which will be developed by the studio, and where you do not have total control on film. Furthermore, they announced actors for the film who, pfff, in my opinion, do not correspond to the universe... When you, you say exactly to them what you want to do... I.e. me, what I first proposed to them, it is to be able to develop a screenplay and to try to propose a version of what I would like to see whether I could make Conan. Because I adore the first, the original, I said them, voilà, it is necessary to try to stay close of this religious thematic, because during this era, there were religions who seized control on all the populations, and to show this guy a little bit as in the screenplay of the Crusades, which Verhoeven meant to make at one time, which is a formidable screenplay, and to try to be the closest to this universe, to make of Conan a robber who tries to pose as a kind of Messiah and who will be at the head of an army... to conquer a territory and carry a divine word, whereas in fact, the guy, he doesn't give a f*ck, he just wants to plunder, and rape, and to be free, and once that he let those guys enter, then he will become the iconic figure of a whole people... whereas he refuses this attachment completely. And there was a whole set of themes which I wanted to try to develop around that and it is... But precisely, it was that, the matter: you propose an extremely brutal and definitive movie, and then, the guys, they do not want that, they want an huge commercial movie like 300, therefore you see, me, I'm not interested... I know that now, they seek... they sought other guys and hmm... It is true that the first which comes to mind, considering 13th warrior, is McTiernan. Thus you speak to the guys about it, and they do a kind of "invitation to tenders" (NB: "appel d'offres" in French, my translation could suck), and I think that it will not be made with him either and that, today, they are with Lionsgate, and that everything will be decided at Lionsgate. And wholesale, you can be sure that the rumors are completely unfounded, since there is nothing of... Me, I just met the guys, we spoke about it, it went a little bit further and then, finally, I refused. I think that all people will refuse, until they find the good "maker", so, and I think that it is a pity, because in my opinion, the franchise will sink again in a pit and... Hey, it is the Hollywood system !"

FYI.

Thanks for sharing! The crusade movie always sounded appealing, I remember even Milius mentioning it on some interview, and speaking positive about it too.

Well I saw "Hitman", it wasnt a terribly good flick to be honest, but this director seems intelligent, which is a plus. They should just get the real deal then back.. just get Milius back and go for a new actor for CONAN and thats it. Its not rocket science, namely when your having universal praise for the first movie and even all the positive reviews for the solid KING CONAN script. All these writers they have been choosing since Milius, I mean lets be honest, suck balls!



That new CONAN game was a ripoff clone of "Kratos:God of War", and if they want a ripoff of "300" style film..then this franchise is better off dead like this man was saying. *If Gerard Butler stars as Conan, I am gonna laugh my ass off, and please no BEOWULF CGI toon muscles,lol!

Anyway, I been trying to get a hold of Milius' KING CONAN script, trying a few different contacts. I'll see how things go with this but am not holding my breath. It would be cool if someone out there can share it, but knowing human nature, wont happen I guess.