It is good to know that I am not alone here. Conan was certainly my favorite, but this Solomon Kane thing has intrigued me. I have picked up some books including a graphic novel and it is some pretty good stuff. What do you think of him, and what of the movie?
I never read anything from the Salomon Kane franchise so i really cannot comment with anything that resembles sense. In a way I think the appeal of Howards characters for many people was the way they were written. We were rarely told what the characters were thinking only shown what they were doing, and left to decide for ourselves why they did what they did.
I think that if they stick to the feel of Salomon Kane the film will do fine (At least among the fans of Howard) because Howerds works were almost made for the big screen and not read simply because you never know the intent of the character based on what they are thinking only by what they say and do. Does this make sense? Sorry just woke up so I am typing in a daze rigsht now LOL
Interesting that Howard, like many pulp writers, wrote with a sense of the theatrical. His telling of the epic battles between Conan and...wel just about everybody gave a sense of scale to the exploits that many current novels lack. I am an avid Doc Savage reader and have always appreciated the In Media Res feel of the stories. They don't need a lot of backstory because motivations are filled in along the way. You don't really have to know why Conan hates sorcerers, just that as his stories progress, they seem to be the ones that give him the most trouble.
A Solomon Kane movie would have been great back in the Bush years,not so much now-but I'm still very curious about it. I just read the 'Borak' collection about a Texan roaming about Afganistan having adventures and that would have been even better for Bush!
A few years ago during the R.E.Howard Centenial the World Fantasy Convention was held down here-there were trips up to Cross Plains and everything.it was great fun.I still have the backpack they gave everyone.