Critic Reviews



Based on 10 critic reviews provided by
It's easy to criticise Conan. Cheesy. Dated. And ever-so-slightly fascist (Conan is the ultimate Aryan: punishing the weak and defending the strong, while looking great in thigh-high boots). But while all that's true, for Arnie fans, the film still rocks.
I liked a lot of it myself, and with me, a few broadswords and leather jerkins go a long way.
Those who have an inherent distaste for this sort of entertainment will appreciate Conan the Barbarian's impeccable production values without enjoying the story; most everyone else will be swept away by the film's spectacle.
Schwarzenegger has probably never been better-cast.
The Globe and Mail (Toronto)
An excessively brutal adventure comic book is exactly what it has set out to be - a medieval Heavy Metal. [14 May 1982]
A series of meaningless adventures punctuated with a lot of clanky, very bloody swordplay, Conan the Barbarian is best remembered for a scene in which Schwarzenegger punches out a camel.
Director John Milius does a nice job of setting up the initial story.... But for whatever reasons, [Schwarzenegger] has a minimum of dialog and fails to convey much about the character through his actions.
The New York Times
Conan the Barbarian is an extremely long, frequently incoherent, ineptly staged adventure-fantasy set in a prehistoric past.
Milius has nothing to say: this 1982 film only hints at the romantic heroics of "The Wind and the Lion" and has none of the personal quality of "Big Wednesday."
Conan is a sort of psychopathic Star Wars, stupid and stupefying.

More Critic Reviews

See all external reviews for Conan the Barbarian (1982) »

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Reviews | User Ratings | External Reviews | Message Board