Why new Conan the Barbarian movie DOES NOT suck?

Well, most of you probably know it yet: the new Conan the Barbarian (CtB) movie, starring Stargate Atlantis and Game of Thrones star Jason Momoa in title role debuted fourth in its opening weekend and after that, it just fell down like a stone, followed by vultures, sorry, movie reviewers, who feasted on its fresh corpse, mocking billions of alleged mistakes.
Simply said, epic fail(roughly 48 million of grosses so far, when the production budget was 90, plus usual additional millions for advertisment).
All these "reviewing" people I´d like to ask one, simple question:

ARE YOU ON FRACKING DRUGS?

I must admit, that I feared that what I described will happen since Marcus Nispel was announced as a director of a movie. But now, I must repent.
Of course, Nispel will never shoot anything like balls-ripping stories of Gladiator or Lord of the Rings.
Of course, there are some weak moments in the movie.

BUT

Production design is awesome - CtB looks like much more expensive movie. I have little objection against props, at the ending of "child" part young Conan swings the broadsword as easy as his adult version, which changes the "Riddle of Steel" to the "Riddle of Plastic". But anywhere else in the movie, you really see what were those millions of dollars spent for. And the CGI is very good, there are no unnecessary monsters etc., maybe just in the beginning when village of the Cimmerians is attacked, there are entire armies of tens of thousands of raiders to be seen on the slopes around the village and it´s little bit too much.

Fighting scenes are very good - I little bit expected something what Kull the Conqueror showed us, but fighting scenes choreography in CtB trample this older flick to the dust. I even dare a heretical thought: Jason Momoa´s fencing skill matches Arnold´s.

More "Howardian" story - I mean, that this new CtB contains more of an atmosphere of original R.E.Howard´s stories than the older movie of the same name, despite the fact that Milius´s CtB ripped off more direct elements from REH´s stories. In Nispel´s CtB you find it all - Acheron, old gods, resurrection of the dead witch, giant serpent-like monster, huge barbarian brutes that Conan has to kill, and demonic adversaries.
I also admit, that the scene with freeing the slaves was pretty lame, and I get scared that Kull the Conqueror copy (that obsessive need for freeing the slaves was pretty annoying in that movie) is shaping up.


Jason Momoa IS Conan. Period. I mean, I loved Arnold as Conan, and I still do. But objections against Jason Momoa are the same which were against George Lazenby when he took the role of 007 (well, not a best example, I admit), Daniel Craig by taking the same role or Chris Pine as new captain Kirk. "No one can replace Arnold" statement sits on a gigantic pile of crappy arguments. Do we really want just two movies about Conan to be ever made? And I don´t get that statement, that Jason Momoa has no charisma of Arnold or doesn´t look like Northerner. First, Jason already played a barbarian, do you remember Game of Thrones? And he KILLED IT. Second, his portrayal of young Conan is flawless, his Cimmerian is fierce, passionate, arrogant and crafty, as Conan should be.
Arnold had a warrior face that no doubt helped him to achieve seven Mr.Olympia titles. He always looked like natural born fighter. But Jason has it also, in a different way. Arnold always moved on screen as a bodybuilder, Jason has an agility which corresponds with Howard´s description. Cimmerian was never described by Howard as scandinavian-like redhead, but REH never forgot to mention his bronze colored skin. It doesn´t matter if Conan is played by Hawaii born actor, then.

Did anyone saw Red Sonja or Willow? New CtB is a masterpiece in comparison with these two. And both of these films were meant to be hits (well, Willow actually kinda was, but reasons for it eternally elude me, as why the hell it has 7.1 points on IMDB).

New Conan the Barbarian definitelly is NOT a movie that is going to be remembered as milestone in fantasy genre, but it is worth seeing. It´s 113 minutes of pure adventure. And who needs to get more from a fantasy?

What´s my resume on cause of CtB´s lack of success? Late summer release of an R-rated movie, name of the director that scared off viewers and, of course, reviewers, who didn´t understand that this isn´t a social drama movie with political overlap. Good job, mates! 

2 dear reviewers: I, unlike you, most likely, already saw CtB in a cinema, am planning to go see it for second time and definitely will buy DVD and Blu-ray. That´s all i wanna say for the end of my totally disinterested article.

Radooz