Box art for Conan the Destroyer

Conan the Destroyer

action & adventure


In this second Conan epic, Conan is asked by the evil Queen Taramis to accompany a beautiful young princess to find a magic treasure.

Rotten Tomatoes® scores

  • Critic Score
    27%
  • Audience Score
    39%

movie reviews from Rotten Tomatoes®

Top Critic Reviews

Rotten:

- Christopher Null, Filmcritic.com, Monday, May 14, 2007

Rotten:

- Cole Smithey, ColeSmithey.com, Thursday, June 24, 2010

Fresh:

- Emanuel Levy, EmanuelLevy.Com, Thursday, June 24, 2010

Audience Reviews

4 stars

This is a great sequel and fantasy adventure film. I really enjoyed it. The story wasn't too predictable, but it wasn't confusing either, it was good and had humor, romance, and surprises as well as action and swordplay. A lot of fun.

- ajv2688, Thursday, December 6, 2012

0 star

Toning down the violence of its predecessor, and injecting "comedy" is not a recipe for success. This film borderlines on "unwatchable" (and I've seen Good Luck Chuck). I know De Laurentiis and company wanted to make Destroyer a PG film in order to broaden its appeal, but this certainly isn't the way to go about it. On the bright side, I was surprised to find out that legendary cinematographer Jack Cardiff shot this film (The African Queen, Black Narcissus, and The Red Shoes among his career highlights). Just when you thought a Powell-Pressburger/Conan connection couldn't be made, there you go.

- JonathanHutchings, Saturday, September 10, 2011

3 stars

The first Conan film is a great one, I honestly felt like I was there, in the dark, bloody and barbaric ancient world of thieves, warriors and wizards. The sequel on the other hand is not the same experience, it's something less. The story goes a little like this, the mighty Conan is assigned by the Queen Taramis to do something for her. That something is not a massive bloody rampage but rather a quest that is more boring and still with a lot of instructions, take a virgin princess to get a magic diamond and then to temple to get an ancient horn to fulfill a destiny that she never makes clear to our hero. So he does just that. First thing to say is that Conan, played again by Arnold Schwarzenegger, isn't quite the amazing character here as he was before. In the first film, he was an anti-hero, a brutal warrior and a killer with ambiguous morals even if he did ultimately do the heroic thing. Here he's just something of a do-gooder hero who's a bit more dumbed down. He's been promised that his lover Valeria will be brought back from the dead if he completes his quest, this isn't particularly bad, but it doesn't further the character besides the fact that he misses his girlfriend. The fact that this is such a driving force doesn't seem completely characteristic of such a hardened character. Of course, the change in character comes with an overall change in tone. No longer a dark and brooding tale but rather a family friendly romp with the grand and bloody action sequences pushed aside for slapstick. Even the music has gotten a downgrade, no longer an omnipresent ambiance, it's very limited and more whimsical than moody. Everything just doesn't pack the same punch as in the first movie and that's what makes it suffer the most. The characters are well, a ragtag bunch for sure. The main sidekick is the not the archer Subotai, but instead an unfunny little weasel named Malak. He is supposed to be the comic relief, but he fails miserably like many characters of his kind and if anyone shows just how lousy the dialogue is, it's this guy. He doesn't do anything noteworthy through the entire movie. Sarah Douglas plays the treacherous queen who only wants the horn to resurrect an ancient demon. Wilt Chamberlain plays Bombaata, the also treacherous captain of of the guards who also double crosses Conan. The other characters are nothing special, Olivia D'Abo is out of place as the princess, Grace Jones is okay as the raider Zula, Mako is just along for the ride as the wizard from the first movie, he sounds like he's in it for a paycheck even in his opening narration, which of course sounded much cooler and theatrical in the first film. There's really not much of interest here, the action is clumsy, the cinematography is very standard and doesn't really pop, the music is slightly above average and isn't very powerful and the characters are odd and uninteresting. The plot of Conan going on a quest with a bunch of ragtag adventurers is kind of cool, if only he was the tougher and more brooding character he was written as in the original stories and portrayed in the original film. Ultimately, while very cheesy, the movie is actually kind of okay on its own if you want a sword-and-sorcery fantasy adventure flick. But compared to the first film, it's quite a disappointment. The first film was big, bold and exciting and full of compelling characters and memorable moments its unfolding story of one incredible man. The sequel tries to be silly and campy, something never intended by any previous works. What's worse is that while it seems to lampoon itself and be something for the kids who prefer lighter fare, it still tries to pass itself as a genuine sequel, even including the same ending shot of an aged Conan on his throne. Not that bad but not that good either, just a standard popcorn flick with just enough entertaining moments to keep you watching but not nearly as powerful or unforgettable as its predecessor. If this movie and the first film were to have a gladiatorial battle, the sequel would be decapitated, disemboweled and left for the buzzards to feed upon.

- cancercapricorn2002, Friday, May 6, 2011