F/SF

This is a reasonable read although some parts made me roll my eyes. I mostly liked the style, but some parts became too flowery or pretentious. Some dialogue is written in an archaic style, but other dialogue has a distinctly contemporary feel. As for the love scenes, I think they were only included to mimic the movie; they're basic and awkward and the book would have been better without them. ( )

This is good for what it is. I am an over the top Conan fan. I first heard of the character in the early 80s just before the film came out. De Camp is not the best Conan writer by any means...nor is he the worst. Some of the pastiche writer are below kindergarten level. This is good for what it is. It is kind of hard to put this in the chronological order of the character and I mean order from the first Howard stories to the Tor books. But it is a good story nonetheless. ( )

This is a book based on a film that was based on a series of books. The original Conan tales by Robert E. Howard will never be equaled in my view, though I enjoyed both the 1982 "Conan the Barbarian" film and this novel by L. Sprague de Camp.

Like the film, this book borrows several elements and characters from various tales by Mr Howard, while adding new themes. Several authors have endeavoured to fill in the gaps of Conan's history, of which L. Sprague de Camp has proven to be the most dedicated. Whether he's produced the best new writings is arguable, but no one can deny his desire to be faithful to the original Howard approach.

I read "Conan the Barbarian" first when in my early teens and again in my mid-twenties. I can state that I enjoyed this tome as a boy and as an adult. ( )

When I saw this book in the second-hand bookshop I thought it was one of Howard's original Conan stories, and that maybe it was the first - it turned out not to be the case. This is one of the reasons I like reading introductions to the books because I can learn something about the authors and the book itself, no matter how short the book (or the introduction) is. Robert Howard, the creator of Conan, was an odd character, and his stories can be considered pre-Tolkien fantasy. However, most of his stories either remained unpublished or in note form, and those that had been published had been consigned to the realm of science-fiction magazines.
The one day Sprague de Camp came across a box full of Howard's manuscripts, purchased the rights to them, and began to release many of the unpublished stories, and completed many of the stories that were in note form. If it wasn't for de Camp, Conan probably would have gone the way of many of the other stories of the early 20th century (like John Carter of Mars). Some (okay one person) has suggested that de Camp butchered the stories as he set them in a direction that he wanted them to go (namely fantasy adventure as opposed to stories more like Cthulu), but others admire de Camp for bringing these stories into the spotlight.
This book is not one of the originals, in fact it is the novelisation of the Milius movie. I loved the original Conan movie and while I initially baulked at reading another novelisation, I decided to give it a go and I must say I quite enjoyed it. In a way it has made me want to get my hands on the Fight Club novelisation (though I have since discovered that this is not a novelisation as the book was written three years before the movie was released), however as I look at the plethora of novels on my shelf, and think of the others on their way from the United States, I sort of shrug my shoulders and think 'maybe not at this time'.
This novelisation adds a lot more to the story behind the movie and creates a lot more colour than what was able to be done in the film. The film was mostly narrated, however the book does not come out in a similar style. We know that the wizard is narrating, but the story runs like a standard fantasy novel. There are a few changes, such as Conan escaping from the pit fighters as opposed to being set free, and the existence of the beastmen in Thulsa Doom's mountain, but it mostly follows fairly closely to the plot as it is in the movie. It is easy to get images of the film as we read through the book, but the descriptions that de Camp uses seems to add a lot more colour.
I really liked the movie and the story behind it, and de Camp does do a good job of bringing the story into the form of a novel. However at this stage I have not read any of Howard's original stories so it is very difficult to compare them. First I wonder if Valaria is mentioned in any of the stories, and also if the thief and the wizard also appear. I loved the wizard from the movie, though he does not seem to come across the same in the book. The other thing that I noticed was that de Camp creates Conan as being somewhat more intelligent and literate than he appears in the film. We are told in the film that during his pit fighting days his master is teaching his literature and retorical skills, but that is missing from this book. However we do learn that Conan is apt at picking up languages.
The problem with movie novelisations is that they are connected to another medium, and that medium is always sitting at the back of my head. It is sort of like the novelisation of the recent Tintin movie. To me you cannot novelise a Tintin book. They were always graphic novels and to me the only medium that Tintin works in is the graphic novel. Some have scoffed at me for that statement namely on the basis of the film, however the film was not Herge, but if anything can be considered a tribute to Herge. However I have wondered off track here a lot and will simply finish off by suggesting that Arnie never really seemed to come across as an intelligent Conan. ( )