Although “Conan the Barbarian” (2011) shares the same initial setup as the 1982 version—where raiders destroy Conan's village and he sets out for revenge—the story itself is quite different. The plot revolves around Khalar Zym and his daughter Marique, who seek to resurrect Zym’s wife using sorcery, requiring a specific type of blood for their magic. What works well includes Jason Momoa’s portrayal of Conan, which surpasses Arnold Schwarzenegger's performance; it’s hard to imagine anyone else in the role. The Bulgarian locations are visually striking and the costumes feel more authentic to Robert E. Howard's writings than Arnie’s loincloth did previously. Acting is generally better too, with the exception of James Earl Jones from the earlier film. The action sequences are brutal and thrilling, featuring convincing swordplay—a marked improvement over the 1982 version. Nonso Anozie delivers a solid performance as Artus, Conan's comrade, among the corsairs. The sets and props effectively create the atmosphere of the Hyborian Age. There’s a good serious tone throughout, despite the overly cartoonish final act. Rose McGowan is suitably creepy as Marique, and Ron Perlman appears as Conan's father. The opening sequence is particularly strong, showcasing the love between Conan and his father, which connects to the idea that true greatness often stems from a close relationship with a strong role model. It’s also commendable how the film depicts Conan’s early life in Cimmeria, something Howard never explored in detail. However, the film does stray from Robert E. Howard's original work, though not as much as the 1982 adaptation did. While it maintains the overall pulp feel, I would have preferred to see one of Howard’s other stories adapted. Stephan Lang’s portrayal of Zym is a bit cliché and cartoonish, especially towards the end; James Earl Jones' Thulsa Doom was more memorable due to his uniqueness. Rachel Nichols as Tamara is adequate but doesn’t measure up to Sandahl Bergman’s Valeria. The musical score is decent, but it can’t compare to Basil Poledouris' iconic work from the earlier films. There's an excess of what I would call "Modern Blockbuster Syndrome," geared towards shorter attention spans. The final act feels excessively comic book-like and over-the-top, although some might see a connection to Howard’s “Jewels of Gwahlur.” The biggest shortcoming is the lack of depth. More quieter moments—campfire scenes, for example—would have helped establish distances and provided contrast to the constant action. Developing Conan and Tamara's relationship further would also have been beneficial. The filmmakers seemed primarily focused on delivering an action film, which ultimately detracts from its overall impact; audiences connect more with characters when they’re given room to develop. It also lacks a sense of epic scale or emotionally resonant moments. While the 1982 version deviated from Howard's writing, it compensated with depth and grandeur—like Conan and Subotai’s stand against overwhelming odds, or Conan’s triumphant salute. This film has fleeting glimpses of that, such as Conan’s birth on the battlefield or his father’s final act of love, but these moments are insufficient. Ultimately, the filmmakers got many things right, particularly Momoa's performance and the authentic feel of the Hyborian Age. While not a bad movie by any means, it needed more depth, epic-ness, and originality to rise above generic blockbuster status. It sometimes feels like violence for its own sake, which becomes tiresome around the 90-minute mark, and the final act is just too cartoonish. The relentless action prevents the film from truly connecting with the audience. Still, it’s a respectable Conan movie—serious and brutal, thankfully devoid of cutesy characters. It's on par with "Conan the Destroyer" in some ways and surpasses “Red Sonja” (1985). The film runs 1 hour, 53 minutes. GRADE: B-/C+

Source on TMDB