Conann

There are films that carry a kind of eternal magic and Conann is one of them. A multiverse of the transcendental mind, an experience at all levels, philosophical, psychological, sensory, narrative, corporeal and once again, Conann is one of them.

And yet it is so hermetic for those who will not dare to be sensitive to such a work, the mind must be able to cross its own gendered limits. Cinema trance-genre and non-binary, like the wild boys, the cinema of Bertrand Mandico is unique, fascinating, missed sometimes, I think of after blue for example who for me misses a part of his subject with a game and scenario too wobbly that lacks finishing.

Conann is his opposite for me, he knows perfectly where he is going, to the point where he assumes himself in the sublimation of his style and his messages. Here we probe the soul of the warrior woman, the barbarian Connan, who constantly transcends herself in each of her lives, every time she murders herself. Because of its small character theatre of which Rainer is the keystone (the animal part, the dog) this barbaric cruelty shows us that horror is at the center of life, as beauty, indeed, the sublime cannot exist otherwise.

We navigate here in the subconscious of a woman, who surrenders to her transcendence. She'll be as ruthless as any man, gender doesn't change anything when you accept yourself. A film to live urgently if you are not afraid to travel in a new genre, explored notably by Panos Cosmatos on another scale more meta-societal than gendered, yet both belong to this new fascinating phase of modern cinema.

From afar, it will really not please everyone, I almost enjoy imagining almost the head of the average spectator in front of such a show. But it is a fascinating foot for who will take his measure and dare to dive into the film without restraint, without fear and without preconceived opinion while trying to understand what he says about this part of ourselves.

You liked wild boys, Connan will delight you.

How this movie got financed is a mystery. It is so bad and repulsively ugly on absolutely every level (story, dialogues, production design, costumes...) that it is not even funny to watch. Please do not waste your time by attempting to watch this disaster, Ed Wood is a creative genius compared to Bertrand Mandico. Why this is titled "Conann" baffles me because the lead female character has no connexion whatsoever with Conan the Barbarian. I wonder why some people actually take this film seriously and analyze it as if it had any intellectual merit and signification. All I see here is just a atrocious and tasteless display of dreadful fantasies.

The content fails to connect with the source material. Robert E. Howard wrote of masculine men and feminine women, of course, and he also leaned into a feminist viewing of women where they were strong enough to handle themselves even when the odds were against them. His publicized letters shows an affinity towards such too. He likes his men and women strong in the face of systematic adversity where the rulers are corrupt and debaucherous. If the content is worth anything, create new characters and see how far it goes. Even the coattails of success of Conan the Barbarian cannot drag this into a coherent and enjoyable experience. Simply, those who look for such content, don't look for Conan, and vice versa.

No pun intended - the movie may tell us that this is Conan, but as the title already suggests, it is not just a female version (albeit a weird and strange "re-telling") ... no this is about way more! It is about life and the fact that even though we know it is not forever ... we do not cope well with that fact! Making deals, trying to skip stuff (experiences), trying to grasp for stuff we do not have .. not realizing what we do actually have might be good enough.

There is a lot hidden here - though some things are quite obvious I assume. When it comes to analogies that is. It also is quite bloody and explicit in many ways. There is some nudity, though that should not be problematic for most. The sexuality may be an issue with some - those who are more close minded that is.

I have not seen the previous output from the same director, but this got me curious. The changing of color and black and white, the background/set design .. there is a lot here. Many ideas, many things to enjoy ... if you are into that kind of thing ... half the cinema left when it played .. so be aware of what you get yourself into.

Mandico envisioning of hi couture meets 80s American pop culture and exploitative cinema. Not to mention that 80s Conanfilm series and "sword /fantasy" genre brought forth so many duplicate, "rip offs" of Barbaric schlock! From Italian film exploitation cinema to Hollywood low budget productions.

I'm sure that many viewers will probably not get the cultural art discourse, sprinkled throughout the film's violence and explicit gore. But it doesn't matter, so much visuals and physical action happening.

Any viewer with a short attention span, can probably get through it, but Mandico seems to be more interested with aesthetics tend viewers getting the story. The characters might be considered over the top, situations always in very "hi" fashioned settings.

If you like the visuals rather than linear storytelling, see this film. Many are already trying to force this flick into "cult" status. It may catch the eyes of some, but without any weight, will lose its lustre. This film is up for award nominees and has garnished some of them.

Part of this lustre is having many characters, thankfully there's one just one can fixate on "Rainer", a dog-like "cerebus" humanoid creature. It kinda reminds of a mashup of Jackson's "Lord of the Rings" and Boorman's "Excalibur" films with gore effects.