Rating: 
Summary: A Must-have
Review: Among Arnold's early movies, this one stands out for the eclectic supporting cast. His early movies were remarkedly free of any acting on his part; I suspect he was still learning English then. But one way to make him look better is to hire nonactors, or miscast semiactors. Enter Wilt and Grace. (Later, Richard Dawson). This is as much a collectible as Terminator 2.
Rating:
Summary: 180-degree reversal on the original.
Review: Conan the Destroyer is a much less malignant sort of animal than the original, carnivorous, and ultimately bleak original film. This sequel was done with tongue firmly in cheek, and no pretenses to otherwise. On that level, it works quite well as mindless, macho entertainment, with so many visual gags that at times it comes close to becoming a full-out comedy.Grace Jones easily steals the movie as the athletic, feisty Zula ("toothpick"), and Wilt Chamberlain makes a good physical counterpart to Arnold Schwarzenegger's Conan. I read somewhere that Schwarzenegger was actually asked to put on more muscles for the role than before, and it shows. Conan the Destroyer also evokes much more of a sci-fi/fantasy element than the original Conan, which had a much more occult, primitive tone to it. The sequel piles on a one-horned monster and a wizard living in a crystal palace and ups the action further. The swordplay in Destroyer is faster-paced than in the first film, and less bloody -- though still violent enough to make its PG rating a gross misrepresentation. All in all, well executed "male" entertainment, with a top-flight score and good casting.
Rating: 
Summary: Great
Review: I always loved this one because i saw this one before barbarin but i love both of the movies they are great but i think i just like this one a little bit better thant he first because its more adventurous more fighting and good special affects my whole family loves this movie so i think its a good movie!
Rating:
Summary: A fairly enjoyable adventure movie!
Review: I must say that many of my fellow reviewers here has been quite harsh on this movie.
For one; I don't understand when people say that they're disappointed with this movie? It's not Lord of the Rings, true, but it never pretends to be anything else than what it is... which is a fun adventure movie that's been made for entertainment.
The first movie (Conan: The Barbarian) was fun, but a little too cheesy at times, but the sequal is alot more fun to watch; mainly because of my personal hero: Grace Jones.
Come on... I recall a reviewer asking why she's describes as androgynous; I tell you why.
First off, Grace changed her disco-diva image in 1980 from which three of the best albums of the eighties followed (Warm Leatherette 1980), (Nightclubbing 1981) and (Living My Life 1982).
Remember her One-Man Show? It was fantastic, Grace performed with outrageous outfits and often poked at the legend of "The Demolition Man" in which she so rudelessly said: You kept on coming, you should have ran. I'm nobodys friend I'm a Demolition Man.
The whole "Grace Jones legend" is worth a mention. Conan: The Destroyer was her first major movie and she was chosen simply because of her amazing physique and muscular body.
That being said; Arnold really manages to grab the role by the throat; the main problem of the first movie was Arnold's pathetic attempt at being serious... let's face it, he failed.
The story is adequate and it certainly managed to keep me watching, Mako is also another highlight of the movie. Remember the crazy-hazed Sensei in Sidekicks? Yeah that's right it's him.
Stick the poke at the tinman and stop being so damn rightgeous.
Conan: The Destroyer is a fairly good adventure film that never pretends to be anything else than what it is.
Rating: 
Summary: Watch It For A Good Laugh...But thats it.
Review: I saw this one and was so dissapointed. But thats ok cause it made me laugh alot. Cheesy 1980s special effects, bad acting, bad casting and dorky characters. Arnold's dorky sidkick makes me laugh so hard in this one. The dialog in this film is so bad that it makes you laugh. Here are the good parts, the princess is young and hot and so is her aunt the queen. And Arnold rules no matter how bad the film might be. All you basketball fans will be glad to know that Wilt Chamberlain is in this one. The bad news is he cannot act. This is a reccuring trait in this movie.
Rating:
Summary: not much better
Review: I wasn't too impressed with Conan the Barbarian but people told me that Conan the Destroyer was better so I decided to give it a chance. Though there were some good scenes, the overall movie leaves more to be desired same as the first Conan. While the plot was not so drawn out, the lack of action hurt the movie to some degree. The returning characters are Conan (of course) along with his side kick Malleck from the first movie. And speaking of the first movie, Conan became king at the very end but in Conan the Destroyer he sets off on a quest all over again to find his destiny. (What's up with that?) Anyway, the fights are not as brutal this time around and the characters are a little more likeable than those in the first Conan. The last part of the movie was pretty good but it just wasn't enough to make an overall good movie. Not only that, Conan's wife from the first movie was supposed to get ressurected but it never happened (Can we say "plot hole"?) Again, the Conan films don't deliver very much and leave more to be desired.
Rating:
Summary: Quirky casting decisions quickly sink this "Conan" sequel
Review: The 1982 film "Conan the Barbarian" is the film that gets the credit (or blame) for turning Arnold Schwarzenegger into a movie star, but it should be remembered more as the best Sword & Sorcery film produced to date. The main reasons, besides Schwarzenegger cutting an imposing figure as Conan, flexing his muscles and swinging his big sword, was that director John Milius treated the characters seriously and avoided descending into camp. But for the 1984 sequel "Conan the Destroyer," the key factor seemed to be coming up with casting in a similar vein to the logic that had landed Arnold the role. The story of "Conan the Destroyer" was by Roy Thomas and Gerry Conway, a pair of writers for Marvel Comics. Thomas was the writer for Marvel's "Conan the Barbarian," often adapating Robert E. Howard's stories, whether they were originally Conan stories or not. The story is a basic quest story where Conan escorts a virgin princess to bring back a powerful gem from a crystal palace, which will then be returned to a queen (Sarah Douglas), who turns out to be evil and wants to sacrifice the princess so the gem can used to summon an ancient demon, at which point wackiness will ensue. The problem is not in the story, which certainly allows you to string together a series of Sword & Sorcery adventures, but in the casting. The princess is played by Olivia d'Abo, who simply looks too young (i.e., Conan was forever leaving pregnant princesses behind in his various adventures but there is not chance for that sort of chemistry here). Her body guard, Bombaata, is played by basketball Hall of Famer, Wilt Chamberlain, while Zula, the warrior woman who joins the group is played by Grace Jones, the singer/dancer/model/crazy woman. Comic relif, which was relatively absent in the orignal film, is provided by Tracey Walter as Malak. With such casting the descent into camp becomes inevitable. Besides, there is nothing in this film even close to rivaling Arnold's best moments in the original (especially since the final shot of the old King Conan is recycled from the first film). Those who have actually read the originally Conan stories will also find it rather distressing that Toth-Amon, the great Stygian wizard who was Conan's biggest enemy in the Howard stories, is reduced to a pit stop on this quest (I remember thinking at the time that this was the equivalent of Darth Vader being one of the guys that got dispatched at the Cantina in "Star Wars"). Thomas and Conway were upset by Stanley Mann's final screenplay, as well as the finished film, and ended up turning their story into the graphic novel "Conan and the Horn of Azoth," with art by Mike Docherty (all the names got changed to avoid any confusion). Ultimately, "Conan the Destroyer" gets three stars because we round down simply to make sure that it is clear that "Conan the Barbarian" was a better movie. Besides, this 1984 film pretty much killed the franchise, although Milius is apparently preparing a 2005 film "King Conan: Crown of Iron," which there being a lot of speculation as to who will play Conan now that Arnold is Governor of Cal-e-fornia (the hot names are apparently all wrestlers).
Rating: 
Summary: Hail Conan, the Destroyer!
Review: The Hyborian Age, when shinning kingdoms lay spread across the world like blue mantles beneath the stars and powerful sorcerors cast mighty spells, and a man lived by his sword. And on to this, Conan, destined to bare the jeweled crown of Aquilonia upon a troubled brow, and who had recently made motion picture history with his previous success "Conan the Destroyer", was hired by director Richard Fleischer, and cast along with Grace Jones, Wilt Chamberlain, and Mako. Hence this rousing fantasy-adventure, with wizards, princesses, and warriors a plenty! Yes, that's right, folks, that sword-wielding, Crom-worshipping Cimmerian is back, and this time, he's on a quest to help a princess retrieve a magical horn (don't worry, it's better than it sounds). Although this is definitely not as good as it's successer, this is still one good movie that will keep you entertained. It does get corny at times, and the acting does get a bit sloppy. But I still stick to my review. Basil Pouledouris does it again, with another great musical score. They should make another sequal, that shows how Conan becomes king of Aquilonia. But that is another story!
Rating: 
Summary: Awful movie. I wish I could forget it
Review: The masterul epic quality of "Conan the Barbarian" demanded an epic sequel. Instead, what we were given was a parody. In the first movie Conan's character was well developed, you saw what happened to him over the course of his life, what created him, and what his motivations were. In this movie, Conan is reduced to a bodybuilder in a fur diaper. Conan's companions in the first movie were formidible accomplices who Conan respected. In this movie, Conan's companions, especially the annoyingly sniveling cretin Malak, (played by Tracey Walter) have no redeeming qualities at all. I kept hoping Conan would impale him and put us out of our misery. I was constantly lead to wonder "Why is Conan hanging around with this guy?" Sandahl Bergman in the original movie was a Valkyrie. She was amazingly beautiful, but also amazingly powerful and dangerous. In the second movie we were given Grace Jones. Please. Not only is she unattractive, her character was essentially unbelievable, crude and repulsive. The notion that she could portray any kind of a warrior was laughable. The villains in the first movie are fearful. James Earl Jones as Thulsa Doom, Sven Ole Thorsen as Thorgrim and Ben Davidson as Rexor come across as men who could perhaps beat Conan. It made the outcome uncertain and Conan's eventual victory that much more powerful. In this movie the villain is a guy in a monster suit, and a rhino horn with poorly done special effects. It is so ridiculously, lame that Conan must drop his sword and arm wrestle the monster for a fair fight. Wilt Chamberlain, while a creditable athlete, simply did not have the screen prescence necessary. One look at him and it was obvious that Conan could take him. Chamberlain didn't do the role justice. In the first movie, magic was just that. Magic. It was dangerous, expensive in terms of life and used only in dire circumstances. In this movie magic is reduced to the level of a bad "Dungeons and Dragons" game. I halfway expected The wizard (Mako) to pull out some oddly shaped dice and roll them in his battle with the Man Ape/Toth-Amon. In the original movie, Conan ponders The riddle of steel, he's a thinker and a man of action. He speaks little. In this movie, talks toomuch, Conan rescues a blonde girl and is betrayed by the evil stepmother. It was a variation of Snow White, Cimmerian style. At least there weren't seven dwarves. Finally, Conan movies should be R rated. The world of Conan is violent, brutal, lusty and grim. Solutuions ot problems are found with the edge of a blade, not with talk. This watered-down milquetoast version of a Conan adventure was designed to pander to a family friendly audience and D&D geeks. There's plenty of family entertainment out there, and to bring adapt Conan to that environment is wrong. It's too bad that John Milius was not in charge of this movie. The suits in Hollywood had their way and this movie stinks as a result. The fans lost, because instead three movies we only get one good one, one bad one, and if a third is ever made, it likely won't star Arnold in the title role. What a missed opportunity. It could have been SO much better. If you like the Conan stories, ignore this film, and stick to the one and only Conan movie.
Rating:
Summary: Sword and the Toad
Review: This is an absurd and hastily made sequel to the far superior Conan the Barbarian. Swartz is back as the big hulking paleoanthropic warrior who has more muscle than brains. This time around the landscape looks like something out of a cheap fantasy movie and nothing ever clicks or feels like the original. The difference with this is that the first film had a believability to it and this one just oozes out vacuous emptiness. The plot concerns a princess who must fight an evil sorceress. . . not much there to begin with. Along the line there are more absurd characters including Grace Jones who resembles a twig and beats men 8 times her size with a stick. Chamberlain is even more lackluster as a personal guard to the spoiled princess who has special powers to defeat darkness. Look for the awful 'non-moving face' monster in the hall of mirrors that is about as scary as a dead fish. Even as a kid I hated this movie.
|
