Metascore
36 out of 100

Generally unfavorable - based on 29 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 2 out of 29
  2. Negative: 15 out of 29
  1. Reviewed by: Mark Holcomb
    Aug 17, 2011
    70
    Squeamish types may balk, but the gory cruelty on display here is faithful to the source material and deeply thrilling.
  2. Reviewed by: Kyle Smith
    Aug 19, 2011
    63
    It has a certain commitment to its cause, and by that I mean it supplies the necessary flayings, slayings, beheadings and, um, a be-nose-ing, all of it dancing to the tune of those amusingly stilted He-Man declaratives - King James Bible cadences applied to comic-book visions. It knows it's a B movie, and gets on with it.
  3. Reviewed by: Betsy Sharkey
    Aug 18, 2011
    60
    Brutal, bloody beyond belief, and has no socially redeeming value. So it is with a certain amount of guilt that I say it's kind of a wicked blast to watch, especially if you're in the mood for some righteous revenge.
  4. Reviewed by: Keith Uhlich
    Aug 17, 2011
    60
    The film's secret weapon proves to be Freddy Krueger–fingernailed witch Marique, whom Rose McGowan plays with the kind of fuck-it-all brio - imagine a cross between Madeline Kahn in "History of the World: Part I" and Lady Gaga - that should garner her a Razzie and an Oscar.
  5. Reviewed by: Steve Persall
    Aug 19, 2011
    50
    Conan the Barbarian has its small, insipid pleasures, if you're in the mood.
  6. Reviewed by: Manohla Dargis
    Aug 18, 2011
    50
    Mr. Momoa has some awfully big biceps to fill. He rises to that task with a pumped physique made for ogling. Thankfully, he also shows glints of self-awareness that can make hypermasculine blowouts like these more watchable and were largely missing from Mr. Schwarzenegger's wide-eyed turn in the first "Conan the Barbarian" (1982).
  7. Reviewed by: Ben Sachs
    Aug 18, 2011
    50
    Rife with the oldest and simplest pleasures of 3-D movies: all sorts of objects fly at the camera, and the climactic battle takes place over a deep, dark chasm. At its best the movie suggests a funhouse at a state-of-the-art county fair; at its worst it's a fairly dumb celebration of brute violence.
  8. Reviewed by: Michael Phillips
    Aug 18, 2011
    50
    It's mostly noise and splurch and, as I mentioned, aaaaarrrrggggghhhhh!
  9. Reviewed by: Lisa Schwarzbaum
    Aug 17, 2011
    50
    There's something and nothing for everyone in Conan the Barbarian 3D.
  10. Reviewed by: Roger Moore
    Aug 17, 2011
    50
    Take away much of the myth, most of the sorcery and all of the humor of the 1982 John Milius-Arnold Schwarzenegger version of the sword and sorcery epic "Conan the Barbarian" and you've got an idea what the new "Conan" is like.
  11. Reviewed by: Peter Debruge
    Aug 16, 2011
    50
    The well-executed picture solves the biggest challenge facing those hoping to breathe new life -- however nasty, brutish and short -- into the 79-year-old franchise by finding an actor capable of filling Ah-nuld's shoes.
  12. Reviewed by: Stephanie Zacharek
    Aug 18, 2011
    45
    The movie's look is artificially grainy, and most of the scenes are encrusted with CGI - you'd have to chip it away with a chisel to get to anything human or interesting or even remotely fantastical.
  13. Reviewed by: Richard Corliss
    Aug 18, 2011
    40
    A gaudily ornamented medieval banquet table groaning with junk food and open entrails.
  14. Reviewed by: Todd Gilchrist
    Aug 17, 2011
    40
    The bigger problem is that the action literally bleeds together and there's no sense of pacing.
  15. Reviewed by: James Berardinelli
    Aug 19, 2011
    38
    The 2011 version of Conan the Barbarian looks cheap and feels rushed. The few good elements are dwarfed by a generic, nonsensical plot and shoddy storytelling.
  16. Reviewed by: Rick Groen
    Aug 18, 2011
    38
    In today's cultural climate, any remake of Conan the Barbarian can only be considered (a) redundant or (b) a cruel case of rubbing salt in our cinematic wounds. Either way, it ain't a pretty sight – in fact, it's downright barbaric.
  17. Reviewed by: John DeFore
    Aug 18, 2011
    38
    Those nostrils do a lot of Momoa's acting, to be honest. As right as he is looks-wise, Momoa falls short in attitude.
  18. Reviewed by: Scott Bowles
    Aug 18, 2011
    38
    Conan the Barbarian lives by a pretty simple ethos: He lives, he loves, he slays. What he doesn't do, alas, is act.
  19. Reviewed by: Ty Burr
    Aug 18, 2011
    38
    As for the movie itself, it's tolerable.
  20. Reviewed by: Roger Ebert
    Aug 17, 2011
    38
    A brutal, crude, witless high-tech CGI contrivance, in which no artificial technique has been overlooked, including 3-D.
  21. Reviewed by: Marc Savlov
    Aug 28, 2011
    30
    The result is a somewhat functional blood feast for the exploitation crowd, but it's hardly a bead of sweat on the original's battered backside. Oh, and the score? Basil Poledouris' bombastic brass is still No. 1.
  22. Reviewed by: Bill Goodykoontz
    Aug 17, 2011
    30
    There's just not a lot to like here, with the exception of what may be one of the all-time best bad movie lines, one Conan utters to Tamara as a kind of personal credo: "I live. I love. I slay. I am content."
  23. Reviewed by: Kirk Honeycutt
    Aug 16, 2011
    30
    There is no purpose to the film other than random blood splattering amid scenes of bondage, primitive savagery and S&M eroticism. The film is numbing and dumb with its hero indistinguishable from its villains.
  24. Reviewed by: Mick LaSalle
    Aug 18, 2011
    25
    Morgan Freeman's voice is heard as the narrator, which is in itself the stuff of parody. Then we listen and get lost within two sentences, because the narration is so poorly written that Freeman himself probably didn't know what he was talking about.
  25. Reviewed by: Rene Rodriguez
    Aug 18, 2011
    25
    Momoa, a familiar face from "Game of Thrones" to "Baywatch," has the muscles but not the imposing persona and barbaric presence that Conan requires.
  26. Reviewed by: Keith Phipps
    Aug 17, 2011
    25
    It shouldn't, in other words, be that hard to make a good Conan movie. John Milius did a half-decent job with "Conan The Barbarian" in 1982, but this new film of the same name feels like a half-hearted revamp of virtually any of the Conan rip-offs that clogged up video-store shelves in the '80s.
  27. Reviewed by: Jaime N. Christley
    Aug 17, 2011
    25
    The re-whatevered Conan the Barbarian feels unexpectedly low-rent, even with its multi-million-dollar backdrops and ear-splitting, rumbling soundtrack and (presumably post-converted) 3D imagery.
  28. Reviewed by: Joe Neumaier
    Aug 19, 2011
    20
    With the most growling and grunting of any movie this summer - and that includes those apes perched atop the box office - Conan the Barbarian seems at times to have actually been made by barbarians.
  29. Reviewed by: Scott Tobias
    Aug 18, 2011
    20
    There are swords and sorcery, pirates and monsters, taxed bodices and taxing mythology. In other words, there's the bare minimum necessary to summon this dismal movie into existence.
User Score

Mixed or average reviews- based on 120 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 29 out of 54
  2. Negative: 17 out of 54
  1. I like Conan and I like Jason as him, but I think the script is just bad and full of action clichés. There is no charisma in the characters except Conan. You can have fun with the movie, but it is just because it is Conan. Please, next time pay a real scriptwriter and dont leave your nephew write it. Full Review »
  2. Ok. I'm a Conan fan, always have been. I read the terrible critic reviews for this film with a sense of dread as I had tried to keep an open mind and had hopes that the movie would defy expectations and be good. Undaunted, I went to the cinema (albeit with fairly low expectations), and donned my 3D glasses. I have to say, for the first 20 minutes or so, this movie was magnificent. I was totally engrossed, emotionally involved, and thoroughly impressed. The intro scenes depicting Conan's birth and the following exposition around his early years as a young Cimmerian boy are fantastic. I turned to my friend who was watching the film with me and said 'I don't understand it, the critics are so wrong.' But then, unfortunately, came the rest of the film. For some inexplicable reason, after a brilliant setup (outstanding performance by Ron Pearlman), and a captivating turn by the lad playing the young Conan, the film kind of lost itself, and the plot, the pacing and the action became increasingly pointless until finally one didn't really care what was happening and by the third act I was waiting for it to be over. It's a shame really, because I think the new Conan is perfect - for me he's totally believable, and embodies the barbarian really well. I also loved the art direction and the CGI which was really well implemented. The 3D was ok - but didn't really add anything overall. Too much fighting without good story to back it up, too much noise and crashing rocks for no real purpose. Started really well, and last 5 minutes it finished strongly, but the second and third acts were quite painful to endure. My take is that it's not a bad movie, but it's not real good either. If it weren't for the first 20 min's I would be rating it much lower. Here's hoping they nail it in the sequel. Full Review »
  3. The story and sets truly capture the spirit of Robert E. Howard original novelettes. I even think Jason Momoa did well as Conan, despite the script. Action scenes were great and truly engrossing. Besides most of Jason's lines, the dialogue was poor and amateur. If you're an action fan or a true Conan fan (not the crappy arnold movie from the 80s), don't let the professional reviews deter you from seeing this movie. You will be happy. Full Review »