I can understand why one or the other of the film can not abgewinnen too much, but the plot seems relatively clear ... the biggest "surprise plot" was quite predictable. However, it behaves in my opinion similar to Conan ... we must not forget how and when the basic character (whether or Conan Solomon Kane) has emerged. Howard's stories have been largely (in effect, comparable to "pulp magazines" which indeed mostly contain highly spiritual literature) written for Pulp Magazines. Nevertheless, they were trend-setters and have helped to define the genre fantasy. Conan has countless other figures inspired, and I have to say that the more "classic" story of the film and the "pathos" in the speech style of the characters quite well with the spirit of the stories from the first third of the 20th century. Part these were slightly turgid, often the actions were not so incredibly profound, and what could be construed as "opponent from the cliché catalog" today, at that time was not so often used for a long time and just a bit tiring as it is today. Even the final battle does not bring any revolutionary idea could be defined as too abrupt even, but once you read Howard's stories, and as the villains ended there, also fits very well in the frame.
Proceeding with these expectations (namely that there is no revolution is to be expected, but the adaptation of a figure of the early fantasy era), the film makes a good impression. The atmosphere fits, the action does not take so much out of hand that plot and characters in CGI tumult perish, and I found that the main character has well the tragedy of the main character, somewhere between contrition, humility, guilt and pride, mediated.
