MovieChat Forums > Conan the Destroyer (1984) Discussion > Wow...hanging tough at 5.4 on imdb ratin...

Wow...hanging tough at 5.4 on imdb ratings



After more than 22,300 votes and it's still over 5....unbelievable.

This pile of fail is a 3 at best.




"We're Americans. We don't plan, we do!"

reply

I wouldn't even give it that much. I think it's all but unwatchable.

reply

So i guess you must have never seen Manos the hands of fate. Destroyer is no masterpiece. But it's hardly unwatchable. Sarah Douglas and Olivia d'Abo are two great reasons to watch this.

reply

Holy Christ...it's now up to 5.6 after more than 38,600 votes....this is the new world order where some people think Prometheus is actually just as good as Blade Runner.


"If God did not want them shorn, he would not have made them sheep."

reply

Conan the Destroyer and Prometheus are both good movies -- you just do not have the wit or intelligence to appreciate them.

reply

I think it's more likely that you're a scrotum sitting in his parents basement using his 2001 Gateway computer to surf the web and troll message boards. Both those movies suck when compared to Conan the Barbarian '82 and Blade Runner.

_____________________________________________
I'll always be going to see the varmint, Eve.

reply

I'll agree with you on Blade Runner. Best film ever made in my book.

reply

It's nice we found some common ground, but until you concede that Conan '82 is infinitely better than Conan/Destroyer, we cannot be Internet friends...so F-O!

_____________________________________________
I'll always be going to see the varmint, Eve.

reply

I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that.

reply

I had the luck of Ion TV screening the 1st Conan a day or 2 before screening "C:TD". Of the 2 I'd definitely prefer the 1st one.
Don't get me wrong I've enjoyed catching airings of C:TD over the years. I'd only catch bits & pieces of the 1st one, by comparison. Having watched both in their entirety, though, the 2nd one seemingly played things out for laughs more than anything. It kind of reminds me of the situation with Star Trek V where laughs were given precedence over plot, in the wake of the better, yet more serious, Star Trek IV.

IMHO, C:TD isn't a wholly bad film. It just seems like all the cheesy barbarian flicks that followed in the wake of the epic Conan the Barbarian. And, yeah, it was probably a better idea to have left Arnold as an occasional line deliverer, as in the 1st flick, than to have given him so many in the 2nd one. Then again, since they were going for laughs, what's more laughable to us Americans than having a muscled guy w/ a heavy German accent deliver supposedly dramatic lines?!

reply


For the love of God...it is now up to 5.8 with 50,120 votes.



_____________________________________________
I'll always be going to see the varmint, Eve.

reply

I'm amazed at anyone who can't se the difference between Milius' and Fleischer's direction. Fleischer pretty clearly just wanted to get this thing done and get paid. It has Arnold, it looks like the old Conan, but it has no spirit.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0087239/

reply