Conan the Destroyer

The most powerful legend of all is back in a new adventure.

My memories of Conan the Destroyer were that it paled in comparison to Conan the Barbarian. Barbarian I remember being a well made balls to the wall action flick. Destroyer I remember being a terrible, boring and cheap sequel to it's predecessor. Having recently watched both I can say I was wrong about both. Barbarian was not as good as I remember it. Slow, not that much action, not to much to recommend. Destroyer on the other hand was better than I remember it, not to say it's a good movie, or even that it's better than Barbarian, just that it was better than I remember it.

I remember this film being ridiculously cheesy and corny throughout. From the story to the special effects to the acting, my memory was telling me there was nothing good about this film. Having watched it in a crappy televised pan & scan version a few times in my youth I can say that my opinion of Conan the Destroyer was not fully formed.

There aren't many good things about Conan the Destroyer, but somethings do stand out over others. The cinematography is gorgeous with it's widescreen shots of desserts landcapes and magical sets. Some of the sets look quite good too, while others look like they have come straight out of the low budget world of the original Star Trek.

Arnold's acting has improved from Barbarian too. Not that he's a good actor here, just better than he was in the last film. He delivers his lines better than he did in Barbarian and he wields the sword faster and more confidentially than he did before. And like the first film, there really is no one else who one can think of that would be a better Conan than Arnold. But unlike the first film, there are no supporting characters that deliver good performances. The acting is uniformly bad throughout. Tracey Walter, who plays Malak, Conan's sidekick is god awful and Olivia D'aba doesn't fare much better. Interestingly enough, I remember Grace Jones being the worst thing about this film but she actually comes off better than half the actors that come and go throughout the film.

The last positive thing about Conan the Destroyer is the music. Once again scored byBasil Poledouris, the music is epic and enjoyable and features the classic Conan theme from the first film. In Barbarian I found that the music, although good, was misplaced for the most part. This time around, the music suits the scenes a lot better than before. With soft moments, loud moments, thrilling moments, sad moments and romantic moments, Conan the Destroyer's music is a well crafted, enjoyable score that makes the movie better than it should be.

The bad things about this movie are endless. I've already mentioned how there is not a good performance to be had from anyone, and how some of the sets look incredibly cheap and fake. I know that this film is 18 years old but the original looked better than this one did, so there is really no excuse to some of the shoddy special effects that appear throughout.

For example, when Conan is fighting a lizard like creature in a castle (don't ask) somewhere in the middle of the film, the lizard looks like the lizard creature Kirk fights in a classic episode of Star Trek. By that I mean, it looks incredibly fake. I can't believe the crew, the actors or anyone in the audience could take that seriously. And then when Conan and company have escaped the castle and are in a boat, the blue screen effects are really some of the worst that I have ever seen.

Then there is the story that is just plain weak. Both Conan films featured weak stories, but this one is just to far out there. Barbarian tried to place Conan in our world; Destroyer seems at times to  forget this and goes to far into stupidity and mysticism. And there are some extremely cheesy jokes and set pieces scattered throughout. I don't think I could ever forget the moment with Conan and the camel, but man do I wish I could.

Mako, who returns as the wizard from the first film, has to be the worst and most useless wizard I have ever seen. The only thing he does here is use his 'powers' to close a door. What kind of wizard is that and why even have him in the film?

But the worst thing about Conan the Destroyer is that unlike the first film, this one is rated PG. What made the first Conan good, in a sense, was the violence, the sex, the gore. This movie gets rid of all of that and replaces it with annoying characters and corny jokes that don't work. Why did the producers do this? Especially since the first film was a huge hit. I don't know about you, but I'd much rather see Arnold stab a guy with a sword than making stabbing motions towards a camera over and over again.

So if you've never seen this movie, but need to see everything Conan or everything Arnold then I'm sure you will see this one, but otherwise stick to the first one, if even that. There are better Conan style adventures out there and Arnold has made so many better movies. After all these years I finally saw this film again, and upon completion it has become abundantly clear why Arnold never made another one.

Film Rating: 48%

Breakdown (How Conan the Destroyer scored 48%):

Production Design: 4 out of 10
Cinematography: 7 out of 10
Re-playability: 4 out of 10
Originality: 4 out of 10
Costumes: 6 out of 10
Directing: 4 out of 10
Editing: 4 out of 10
Acting: 4 out of 10
Music: 7 out of 10
Script: 4 out of 10