Why was it panned by critics at release then went on to become a great classic?

Why was it panned by critics at release then went on to become a great classic?

The wikipedia article is hilarious, it was either too violent or not violent enough, too cheesy or not cheesy enough etc etc.

>Ebert called Conan the Barbarian "a perfect fantasy for the alienated preadolescent"

Stay dead you fat fuck

GREATEST MOVIE OF ALL TIME!

but hes right.

its just those preadolescents grew up and now they're all like "dude it was perfect!"

Because it was unironically too deep for them.
The only valid complaint about the film is that the first act drags on too long.

This tbqh

well what do you expect from liberal jewlywood
they saw an austrian ubermensch barbarian killing his enemies with an accent and starting with a qoute from nietsche to boot so they went ooooyyyy veyyyy
godbless Millius the goddamn goywalker

>listening to critics

because it's good
only what said, maybe the witch part could have been done better, otherwise movie was good

Can confirm.

>Hated Predator
>Hated Predator 2
>Hated Conan
Was Ebert always a fucking pussy?

He was telling his audience what he thought they wanted to hear.
The sheer amount of backpedals he did later is pretty clear evidence of this

The Wizard: Between the time when the oceans drank Atlantis and the rise of the sons of Aryas, there was an age undreamed of. And unto this, Conan, destined to wear the jeweled crown of Aquilonia upon a troubled brow. It is I, his chronicler, who alone can tell thee of his saga. Let me tell you of the days of HIGH ADVENTURE!

so he had little to no integrity
kinda just thought he had shit taste i mean he gave tlw a thumbs down but jp3 a thumbs up
as much as tlw sucked it was nowhere near as bad as jp3

>with the success of Logan now would be a perfect time to do Conan 3 with Old King Conan taking in and mentoring some young upstart who reminds him of himself
>arnold doesnt want to return to the franchise

I dont want this Riddle of Feel.

Because it was dogshit but nostalgia goggles make people think it's good.

>it's a retard thinks that praising one of the most rewatched films on Sup Forums is just nostalgia goggles
I bet you're the type of spastic that says the same about Alien and The Thing

if Conan can't be a live action movie due to Arnold's age, why not make an animated movie where he voices the character?

And yet he agreed to that shitty terminator movie

Maybe that's what made him change his mind.
IIRC, he was all up for it a few years ago

it was mostly how the market was absolutely flooded with similar movies at the time and the weak attempts at differentiation were fooling no one.

Then a few decades passed, the flood was forgotten, and all that remained in memory were the movies that stood out.

best fight

But making contemporary comparisons was quite literally his job.
it's understandable to be uncharitable for the reasons you listed, or to grasp a concept and dislike the execution, but Ebert missed the entire point of the film.

Ever consider, maybe, you liked the film first, for reasons you can't quite vocalize, and then, to justify that unspeakable affinity, held up "the point" as the reason?

Siskel and Ebert were fucking hacks, no idea why they were so lauded back in the day.

I can only think of Red Sonya and The Beastmaster, and I'm pretty sure they came later.

every child goes through a phase when they don't understand why critics don't like what they like.

of course that phase can now last forever because its easy to find any number of retards who will mirror your idiotic opinions.

hollywood hates milius

Unironically my second-favorite movie of all time, after Robocop.

>>arnold doesnt want to return to the franchise

Source for this? What I read was that no studio wanted to risk spending money on Conan 3.

I'm honestly impressed with the amount of detail the wiki page goes into

Panned for being a dumb movie then, studied today as an important film

>arnold doesnt want to return to the franchise

He's been trying to get King Conan started for a long ass time now.

Not really.
The themes of Conan are quite readily apparent from the moment The Riddle of Steel comes up. If the Nietzsche quote didn't tip people off, there's no saving them.

And some people never get out of worshipping the ground critics walk on phase, even when they say demonstrably retarded things.

Excalibur
Flash Gordon
Dragonslayer
Beastmaster
Dark Crystal
Among others. There were several fantasy movies that came out in the late 70's/early 80's. Most of them were shit, and relegated to the same bin as the Sword and Sandal gladiator movies from the 50's and 60's. Arnold was an unknown quantity at the time. People just knew he was buff and talked funny. I doubt Conan was taken seriously when it was released. But it turned out to be really good, and a shitload smarter, and a lot gorier than most fantasy movies. So it was too gory and naked for kids to see, and adults saw fantasy movies as "kid stuff." Plus, Star Wars was in full effect while people were psyched for Revenge of the Jedi to come out, so with no robots and pew-pew, Conan was in a tough market to crack.

>Because it was unironically too deep for them.
This. It's pretty obvious that critics at the time were expecting a dumb comic book movie and didn't like what they thought was a bait and switch.