Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="NiTessine" data-source="post: 4942731" data-attributes="member: 475">There is a recurring character in the stories, actually, N'longa, who is in both "Red Shadows" and "The Hills of the Dead". You might also count Sir Richard Grenville, who makes appearance only once but is referred to often. The rest of the content in the trailer just has jack to do with the character. As stated before, Solomon Kane simply never did any of those things, and their explanation for how a Puritan ended up in a monastery must be interesting indeed. I also disagree, by the way, with the decision to bring the Devil into the story, when Howard's stories draw more from Lovecraft's mythology (especially "The Footfalls Within") and have sorcerers, monstrous creatures and undead, but no presence of any supernatural forces from the Christian mythology.That, incidentally, is what makes Solomon Kane's unswerving faith so remarkable. He has met and fought monsters and fell creatures from before man, and wields a magic staff from the age of Atlantis, but has never seen direct proof that what he believes in is in any way real. In here, the inclusion of this Reaper thing cheapens that aspect of the character - having tangible proof brings hard knowledge, which kills faith, and it's not hard to believe when there's a demon out to drag you to Hell.It isn't a case of whether it helps the audiences get into the character - it's that it's the wrong character.It is far easier to make a bad movie than a good one. The LotR movies, if you'll note, did take from Tolkien things other than the name. I'm not sure if anything beyond the name, the hat and the sword has survived here. While it's too early to pass final judgment with only a trailer and a pair of reviews to go by (though the mindless gushing on AICN was particularly informative and uncommonly repellent), it does look a lot like they took the name and stuck it on something that may or may not have been written before they picked it (cf. King Arthur, Van Helsing).For a movie where the hero's background was never explained, check out Shoot 'Em Up. It's pretty far from Solomon Kane in tone, but Clive Owen's character isn't actually very far from what Solomon Kane might be like in the modern day. It works there. Clint Eastwood's Western career has more than one such a character there. It can be made to work, and it is not even difficult if one has the will to do it.</blockquote>

Verification