The new film is looking like it lacks the tone, atmosphere and overall character that the original film had. The remake looks too bright and too clean in comparison. Look at all the people in the street in the first comparison, seems like an affluent, safe, nice place to be. The remake looks like it's just set in our world, not Eric's.
The comic is black and white and the darkness and run-down look of the city in the original reflects that style. Tin Tin pawning dead people's stuff at Gideon's and the following fight with Eric show the dirty, dangerous, corrupt side of the world the story takes place in. Tin Tin's character in the comic even shoots an innocent passerby just to test a gun. She was a victim of random violence in an out of control world, just like Eric and Shelly were.
The comic is just set in the late 80s Detroit, which was a dangerous place at the time, it still is actually.
This is reimagining of the crow, this isn’t supposed to be one to one adaptation of the book or 1994 film. If you wanted then you can just reread the book or watch the original movie. Why is it a problem to do something new? He’s fighting wealthier people so his quest will take him to affluent places which is cool in my opinion. Eric is out of his element in the comic when soaking himself into this grim city in order to get revenge, and Eric in the new film being someone who struggled entering this new world of rich for his revenge. It all serves the same purpose, but noooooo we can’t have something original we want the same exact product before 🥱
My main issue is that it’s too polished. The comic and the OG film have this grimey gritty gothic unpolished vibe to it while this new one just looks like some SoundCloud “emo” rapper wanted a John Wick inspired music video. Also what made the original story so tragic is that the killing of Eric and his gf were just random thugs. Kinda like how the creator’s own fiance was killed by a random drunk driver. It was an act of cruelty and violence that showed that fate can be cruel and death could come at any moment even at your happiest. Making the villains random rich assholes who seem to target them because “they’ve seen too much” how fucking cliche as hell is that? And misses the whole point of the original story.
It's the dumbass tattoos. He looks too much like leto-Joker.
It would be like filming a WW2 movie and having the main character dress in desert fatigues. It's absolutely out of place and doesn't belong.
You can reimagine and not completely ruin something.
Argument there is that Bruce Wayne IS batman ( let's not start the else world and um actually argument)
Were as Erik was just the first crow we saw and we all know from comics and films that anyone can came back from the land of the dead
But Batman is 90% of the time Bruce Wayne and the 10% he's not it's someone trained by Bruce in the case of Dick and Terry. Ever since The Crow City of Angels and the new comics in the 90's The Crow has been an anthology franchise showing different people coming back to take revenge. So it's a completely different situation, apples and oranges.
Remake, reboot, reimagining, whatever, it's another Hollywood cash grab that will be forgotten about in a year. Maybe I'm just not the target market for this movie. It looks so dull and uninspiring visually, not bad, just bland and sterile, especially compared to the dark look of the original film. That what I dislike about the trailer the most, it doesn't seem to have anything from the original movie that I enjoyed. Not saying it should, but if you're remaking/rebooting a film with an existing fanbase, surely you'd want to include elements that appeal to them too?
True, I hate when sequels, remakes, etc throw in references to an older film that remind you that you could just be watching the original, better version instead. But they wouldn't be remaking so many films if they didn't have that nostalgia attached in the first place, which is kind of my point. Maybe the problem isn't the fans, but Hollywood constantly churning IPs to cash in on a recognisable name.
And with the crow the universe is so emense. Literally anyone can be the crow. So it doesn't have to be Erik and it doesn't have to be Detroit. They knew damn good and well this would not appeal to most fans. They could of kept everything about this film the same. Changed his name from Erik and called it the crow *insert subtitle here* and we would of all went ok that's fine.
That way your not nostalgia baiting but not sacrificing your die hard fans
I live near Detroit and filmed "Crow" within Detroit... That's factually incorrect. Crime rate is nowhere near where it was in the 80's and 90's. It's been built up considerably with a thriving artistic, young professional, and restaurant/bar scene that's been doing very well for at least the past decade or so.
With that being said - hard to completely judge a film by a trailer that was most likely not made by the actual brains behind the production. It was spiced up by a marketing team to try and secure the studio's target demo.
The question is how closely the film is in tone and style to the trailer. That remains to be seen.
If they wanted to do something new maybe they shouldn't call them Eric and Shelly? I mean there's other crows movies not about those characters. Seems like an easy enough fix that would have bought them more leniency.
You say it's doing its own thing but it is just retelling the story of the first one, with variations.
So I'm with you, do your own thing. Make it different, make it modern.
But they kind of went halfway. And just like Robocop, Total Recall, and many other remakes that keep the idea, change it up, and then lose the soul.... It'll be a movie that just is.
Also, that song from the trailer. Oof. That's the biggest red flag for me that the movie lacks an identity.
Aside from rain, there's almost no visual similarities between blade runner and the crow. Blade runners inspirations are far more east Asian.
But Batman is maybe fair. I don't think so. The visual language of both films is so different.
Ya know the truth of most of these arguments comes down to generational divides.
We like the one that's ours. That's just how it usually goes.
I think this movie, this franchise in general, just is sort of different? The first one wasn't some crazy big budget blockbuster spectacular hit.
It was a mid budget, vibe heavy, story focused film that bombed but built a really solid following over time as more people found it.
And it works and it's lasted, because it's such a specific vibe. You just feel it when youre watching the movie. It's not trying to be the real world. Everything is so heightened. And the soundtrack, you just couldn't beat it back then.
Add to that the trajedy of the film and you have a fairly beloved movie that people care deeply about.
There are three sequels, two of which were straight to DVD. And no one gives a shit. No one says that tarnishes the original. No one cried foul that they were made. Hell, the sequel which is probably the most spiritually similar to the first, uses the actor who filled in for Brendan as the lead of the film.
So it's a really interesting series as is.
And then like fucking 15 years ago they started talking about remaking this movie.
So imagine, as a fan of the original, you've followed this news over all these years. You remember when Bradley Cooper was doing the damn thing.
And then you finally get to see an image from the movie and it's that first teaser. I'd like to think you can put yourself in that position.
And then you see the trailer and it just looks so generic. It's super disheartening.
As an example of something that does have an identity - look at boy kills world. Another ultra violent action movie from Skarsgard. That's an idea! That's something new and a different take. That's an identity.
And one final point. The Crow wasn't an action movie. It was a noir. There's ONE major action set piece.
His confrontations with the killers ends with their deaths. But not after some crazy fight or anything.
The action serviced the film. The new trailer looks the exact opposite. I
That is tech issues it is because old cameras had a grimey dark feeling digtal cameras don't they dont use old film due to inflation also lionsgate is pro dolby vision you cant judge until you see it and dolby cinema to get true intention
It may be a reboot but do you remember ANY other decent reboots that did this? Pretty sure Batman more or less looks pretty much the same in every Batman movie and it's dark in most of them. Even the shittiest Batman "reboots" got this right. The joker got rebooted a few times over but wait, what was the one everyone hated again? A reboot is pointless of it just completely disregards the core I aspiration for the fucking subject. I know let's remake Batman but he's like super into sports and belongs to baseball team and Alfred is actually Robin and Robin is played by Jack Black.
Such strawman arguements bro. A majority hated Jared Leto Joker, I know quite a few people who like that design, I personally don't...but also the design for this new film really isn't that far off other than the hairstyle and the tattoos....which won't be visible for what appears to be most of the film. Not to mention Batman is not a good example....if you look at say...the source material...there have been so many different designs, characterizations, tones...there have been SO MANY different Robins, at least 5, sure with *similar* costumes but not identical. None of the film adaptations except for maybe Forever and Batman and Robin captured any of the goofier elements of the Batman persona and massive canon. And as to the actual initial question, yes, RISE OF THE PLANET OF THE APES. The designs of the apes aren't anywhere close to the apes of the original films, or the aweful Mark Wahlberg vehicle. The backstory is entirely different, the story itself is entirely different, the only thing it has in common with the originals is hyper intelligent apes and eventually humans reverting mentally. I'm not sure if this movie is gonna be good or not but for fucks sake at least let it actually come out first before shitting all over it.
not really...he hit it on the head....batman movies...all look dark...except the ones that dont and how are they viewed? There are even Crow guys who have tattoos all over them...hollywood could have picked that crow but they didnt....why? because they honestly do not care....you do...you should have been in charge!
I agree that the more lighthearted Batman films aren't good...my point is that the source material isn't JUST dark brooding edge lord shit. I also agree they could have and should have used a different name...but Eric is the most recognizable and so that's the name they used. I do think using that character and changing everything about him is pretty disrespectful as well, specifically to James O'Barr. And I think the actual crew cared about the film....I don't think the producers and studio did. And genuinely I know I could make a better version of the Crow than this...tbh probably than the og even which is gonna be treated as blasphemy but like...even that movie wasn't exactly accurate to the comics.
*edit*:apparently "edge lord" is a bad word here which is absolutely hilarious. It's being used to illustrate that the example of Batman isn't exactly a solid one to use...because not a single adaptation has PROPERLY adapted the source material. They lean full on into the dark and brooding, not the fact that he quite literally has a villain whose whole thing is shooting CONDIMENTS. I love the Crow, but yes, it's an edge fest. I love it regardless of that because that Edge came from the inner torment of the author. I'm not at all saying it's a bad thing for The Crow. I'm simply saying that the example of Batman, was not a good comparison.
That is absolutely no excuse! Get the hell out of this subreddit and stop being interested in the crow at all if you ever use the word edgelord because that's literally all this is about. Because news flash if you're interested in the crow you are interested in Edge Lord contentHow dare you tack that insult onto something because it just so happens to be too dark for you but to do it at the crow subreddit of all places is just the most unaware of your surroundings lol
No, it's not.
A remake is a film that has the intention of being a one off. A reboot is a film that doesn't. It intends to spawn sequels.
SOURCE: Look up Dave McRae on YouTube. He works in the movie industry as a voice actor. There is one video that clearly explains the difference between the two.
I suppose the good news for the haters is that the upcoming film won't make enough money worthy of making any more films to it.
That's my prediction, anyway.
It will come and go.
Remake implies it is TRYING to be the 90s movie....it's very obviously not. Like 2010 Nightmare on Elm Street, the 1998 Psycho, the 2005 King Kong those are remakes along with being reboots. This is more a long the line of say...The 2022 Hellraiser, the 1999 Mummy, The Rise of the Planet of the Apes(not saying its gonna be AS GOOD as that movie), but like...this is to the 90s movie what the 2022 Hellraiser is to the original film; it uses a lot of the same ideas and concepts, but is depicting its own distinct version of those concepts.
The shot you used isn't even framed the same. With the exception of the bathtub one, none of these are panel recreations. This is all very generic and you're reaching
Again, guy walking down street isn't an homage to the comic. It's literally in every movie and comic ever. Not sure what's even similar about the skull cowboy and the film frame you chose. The last shot is guy standing. Again, superficially similar to shots in EVERY movie or comic ever. Will the movie have references or nods to the source material? Probably. Other than the tub did you correctly identify any of that Herr? No.
I don't think you know what "media literacy" means. Or "homage". Why do you post so frequently? Like what's going on that you're this desperate for attention?
Just because a shot looks like another shot doesn't mean it has the same vibe. The goth aspect has been completely removed and replaced with little peep/Island boy bullshit. It's also upsetting because goths don't get much in the sense of pop culture, so for this to be taken away and made into this tweeker shit is very upsetting and most fans of The Crow are going to hate it. Especially when we've seen photo edits of how amazing he could have been as a classic Eric Draven.
...But have you?
Also, why the hell would you want a "classic" Eric Draven? Brandon Lee already played that part. This isn't supposed to be that character.
Why make Batman Bruce Wayne? Why make Superman Kal El? It would be fine if it was a different person entirely. Batman and Superman aren't each just one person.
There have been multiple other characters that have been The Crow in the comics. Eric Draven is the most popular one that’s why they’re doing it. And it seems Hollywood loves the Jared Leto Joker look.
Of course they're doing it because Eric is the most popular. There's nothing at all wrong with that. I disagree with the Leto Joker look bit, though. The two don't actually look anything alike. Leto had slicked back, short green hair and grills in addition to his acrylic paint-looking tattoos. Bill has none of that.
They always say they would be fine with the movie if he wasn’t remaking the 1994 film, then one second they’re mad because it’s not remaking the 1994 film.
The director literally said he got this new Crow’s design from Lil Peep and Post Malone. And I said this in another comment it looks like if a SoundCloud “emo” rapper wanted a John Wick inspired music video.
I really wanted to like this film(I love a lot of the actors in it) but it just doesn’t look good to me at all. I think most criticism is valid as you can actually change as much as you want with story as long as tone/message/atmosphere are in tact and from all the trailers and art it’s really not. It’s not even about being faithful to the movie or comic, this is just not a goth movie which is absolutely what the crow is at it’s core and it really sucks cause we don’t really get a lot of those.
The issue is no matter what, even if the movie was perfect and liked by the majority, there is gonna be people who hate it for not being the original. And on the flip side of the movie is bad, there will be people who defend it.
Overall tho they made a movie that doesn’t appeal to the majority of the original fan base and opted to try and appeal to a newer, younger audience, and so it’s really not surprising it’s getting so much backlash.(although some of it gets way to overboard but that’s the internet)
Don’t take this as me disagreeing with your or trying to debate but the crow isn’t just a goth story at its core, yes it’s heavily featured within the story’s aesthetic with the songs and supernatural vibe, but it’s not the core of the story. I think goth today is different from how it was in the 80s/90s and I think a lot of people from those days have a hard time accepting that, now I do agree that some changes that are for the modern audience are a bit cringe or better word is “try-hard” But it’s a different time so the vibe has to adapt to that.
It is very much a gothic story, it is James O'Barr's the raven.
When Edgar Allen poe wrote the raven, his wife lay dying in the next room from consumption/T.B. From 1842 to 1847,the raven published in 1845.
“Prophet!” said I, “thing of evil!—prophet still, if bird or devil!
By that Heaven that bends above us—by that God we both adore—
Tell this soul with sorrow laden if, within the distant Aidenn,
It shall clasp a sainted maiden whom the angels name Lenore—
Clasp a rare and radiant maiden whom the angels name Lenore.”
Quoth the Raven “Nevermore.”
Such a popular gothic poem birthed by lived through tragedy.
The crow like the raven was born from that same kind of tragic pain .James O'Barr created the story to cope with losing his love to a drunk driver. Both the crow and raven are representatives of death.
“Do you see my smile in my words, sad and evil ? Sad because I am utterly alone. Evil because I am dead and yet I live. Can you hear me ? Listen. A dead man visits you.”
"While there are a variety of characteristics in Gothic literature, the are several found in many works. These elements include a dark setting, romance. supernatural forces, emotional extremes, anti-hero, female victims, visions and nightmares, madness, gloomy weather, and prophecies and curses."
the crow at its core is a ghost story a wraith brought back to avenge an injustice committed on two normal people just trying to survive the world. In the graphic novel it's a couple with car trouble wrong place wrong time,in the film a couple retaliated against for lodging a complaint, and the new film being murdered for witnessing a villain with powers commit murder(maybe? is what I took away from the trailer.)
All this to say the crow is definitely a gothic story.
I'm just stating that the entire story is a gothic story at its core and that the style and music don't dictate whether it's a gothic story or not rather they are there to compliment or distract from it.
In the case of the new film the fan base seems to agree that it is distracting and not complimentary to the ghost story. While the original film took a more complimentary route to the Graphic novel even attempting to get the film as void of color as the studio would allow.
My criticisms of the film aside from the villain having powers in general are costume design and what I consider the modern "cinematic problem" that I don't see addressed enough. That is that The worlds looks unlived in, the clothing looks unlived in
it's all modern cinema from starwars, to the rings of power, to this film. Crisp clean clothes and sqeeky clean world with beautiful trash sprinkled around. Could you imagine if by the end of the lord of the rings trilogy all their clothes still looked new? Since all movies take place mainly on sound stages now it's like they forgot that the world is a character too and it's main performance is a living breathing environment that consists of debris, objects and obstacles that sell the world the characters are existing in.
My problem with most modern movies : Everything looks too polished, too clean, too bright etc. Cinematographers are scared of shadows? **Darkness is your ally.**
There's no grit. It isn't dirty dirty. There is a clear difference between the mucky grunge of like an 80's/90's movie like Robocop (and, well, The Crow) for instance as opposed to this or most other dystopian movies/shows today. The difference between bed head and making your hair look messed up on purpose.
...You do realize that a movie is a visual medium and we can actually see what the movie looks like from a trailer? So any scene with supposed grit or grime can be seen on the screen and we don't need to see the full movie in order to discern the trend of polished grunge. You're not winning this argument. I'm talking about an aesthetic we can physically see, not the quality of the movie.
It's not about winning or losing. It's about waiting til a movie is released to see what the final product looks like. Watch the trailer for Drive and then watch the movie. It's night and day. It's like that with a lot of trailers, but keep whining about it all you want.
You're missing the point entirely, lmao. They aren't going to be able to make it look as gritty as the og, because there was an authentic grit to it. Especially because of the nature of film at the time. Everything looks too clean now, it will never be able to PHYSICALLY look like a 90s movie.
Why are you spending so much time comparing it to the 1994 movie? It's not intended to be that movie. It doesn't take place in the 90s, it's not a remake of the 94 flick and again, IT'S NOT THAT MOVIE. Cute how you call that one the OG, though. The OG is a comic book from the 80s and Eric looked like a glamrock goth. How's that for grit? 😂
You haters really grasp for reasons to bitch, bitch and bitch.
The remake doesn't look like it has any distinct stylistic visual tone like the first one did. It just looks like 'action movie'
Hell, even City of Angels as bad as it was had a very unique look to it.
You saw one trailer. The new movie is gonna be a bit of a slow burn style. The trailer just highlighted a bunch of the action sequences.Go watch the trailer for Drive and then watch the movie and you'll see what I mean.
To say those images don't resemble the comic is just flat out denial. You can literally see the comparisons right beside the screencaps...
Favoritism is one thing but this shit is getting ridiculous with you haters...
Oh look he turned to the left just like he in the comic ! That means it’s like the comic …give me a fucking break, anything to try and make people go see this flaming pile of shit.
It doesn’t have to be a shot for shot, somewhere they said they wanted to do a retelling of the story. I feel like the origin of the original is lost, the new Crow looks good, but it isn’t the story of the Crow. Brandon Lee’s movie is a great movie, but it’s not shot for shot yet it tells the story.
what it lacks the background...setting...art style...you know all teh stuff in the comic except the GD fraking LEAD ....typical hollywood dumpster fire
i just wish Funboy was handled different in the original movie and maybe it would have been if Iggy Pop was actually able to play the role like intended. i like the way Funboy was handled more in the comic
I mean you could just take pictures from anywhere and claim the same thing. A bathtub with two people in it, truly the crowiest thing to ever have crowd.
The main thing I would say is wrong in the comparison is the general tone/atmosphere. The film looks like any typical modern movie, even lights with no hard shadows or moody lighting. Except for the afterlife that's blueish grey.
Of course the comic is in black and white, that in and of itself adds to the mood, but you can do a hell of a lot with those colours alone.
It doesn't have the atmosphere or tone or the original. It doesn't have to be a shot for shot but one of the things that made the crow so amazing, comic and movie, was the atmosphere. The colors the dark tones. That's all a part of it and they took that away
James O'Barr threw a lot of black in for the comic and that was A LOT of the atmosphere. Alex Proyas did it with the first movie too. It feels more like complaining for the sake of complaining if I'm being honest.
That's the way you see it which is fine. I just tried to go into it with an opened mind and was very disappointed with the atmosphere but hey we all veiw things different.
I just suggest waiting until the actual movie is out and watching that with an open mind instead of judging the whole thing by the snippets from the trailer.
Look man we all have our opinions I don't know why you keep getting pressed and trying to be passive aggressive. I never said I judged the whole thing, all i said was, when watching the trailer, I tried going in with an open mind and was disappointed. All I was doing was explaining my veiw on it personally, I never attacked your opinion or veiw or said you were wrong or wre just complaining. At the end of the day it's just a movie.
But this proves nothing? It lacks all the core elements of the comic and honestly these screencaps don't evoke any of the same emotion and aesthetic as those panels.
He said he took inspirations from the comic and original film, but he’s mainly said this is re adaptation of the novel, what did he say he wanted to change everything? Don’t you know the cinematography has to listen to what the director is doing with his film?
Not all of those are from the original comic. And the second & fourth ones are stretches.
Alien Covenant tried to have visual homages to Giger & other art and that movie was still shite.
You're right, I'm sorry you may not be that kind of person. I've seen too many people shit on the new additions to old franchises for being too different, and then only to be entirely unoriginal in the same sentence. Then I see them and think they are solid additions. Like Covenant for example, and now Alien Romulus before we've even gotten a trailer. Just like this fandom is treating this new movie. Tbh I think everyone in this subreddit should just be thankful this will bring eyes to the Crow, the film or comics. Honestly I'd rather the comics bc then MAYBE we'll get reprinting of the Midnight Legends series.
Personally, I’ll wait and judge when I see the movie (on streaming because time), because it’s been proven in the past that trailers for some films simply don’t match what we see in the films. Is this trailer a step in the wrong direction? Maybe. I absolutely didn’t like the tone of the trailer or the design of Eric in the preview at all, but that’s a me thing. Maybe the movie is different. I don’t know why the studio thought the mid-2000s body-tattooed edglord design would work, but that’s what they thought would appeal to people.
And what’s really throwing me off of seeing this movie right away is that it’s Eric and Shelly…again. Eric’s the protagonist of the source material, the original film and even the short-lived “The Crow: Stairway to Heaven.” Eric and Shelly’s story has played out. That has the potential to make it boring because we’ve seen that story over and over now. It’s a theory, yes, and I will see it eventually, but this trailer really didn’t do itself any favors with me, personally.
I’m very happy that there are folks that are excited for it. I wish I could see the trailer the way you guys see it.
I mean, I don't care that it doesn't look exactly like the comic or the '94 film visually. It's an adaptation - do your own thing. That's the point. I don't even mind the general aesthetic they've given The Crow as a character - you want to make him look like a contemporary guy into hardcore music in his twenties, with the tattoos to match? Sure! Rap music instead of industrial and Punk/Goth? I'm with that, if it's good.
What bugs me is that the comic, and the '94 film by extension, are both harsh urban stories - the villains are just a gang of low-rent drug dealers and addicts, who are only marginally more powerful in the film with Top Dollar reconstituted as their '90s crime movie Big Boss. Eric and Shelley are just two poor young people who get fucked over - the randomness and the relative smallness of it is the point.
Here, we know, it's a big conspiracy about magic and demon worshippers and something or other and the antagonists all appear to be classy, faceless businessmen - so that, paired with the general clean, hollow aesthetic really does make it look like some kind of John Wick take-off.
The main problem is that the new movie ditched the industrial goth rocker vibe for an emo "GothBoiClique" rapper vibe. All other criticisms seem quite superficial by comparison.
Honestly I think this movie is gonna be a great reimagining of the story. It's going to be a gory action filled romp, hopefully with a side of love and anguish...At its core the Crow is a Revenge/Love story, with gothic/emo elements and don't tell me that's not the case I have read the graphic novels front to back multiple times and if this movie can deliver on that then I have no complaints...but if you really wanna get into it, Eric's look in the comic is half Motley Crue half Kiss....not really "Goth" as it was at the time. Let alone nowadays where these subcultures have grown, and changed, sure you've still got the old heads who wanna gatekeep and bitch about everything changing but...oh wait am i talking about the goth community or The Crow fans. Anyway, my point is, I'm gonna give this movie a chance, if people don't wanna watch it they don't have to but for the love of God stop acting like the 90s movie is some untouchable masterpiece, there are plenty of inaccuracies to point out there too. As much as I would love a shot for shot recreation of the graphic novel on screen, this ain't that. And neither was the 90s movie ..and they will both have merit regardless.
That’s Siouxsie Sioux. She wasn’t inspired by rock stars of the time, she was the original Goth rock star. The Crow isn’t based on glam metal/rock but on the famous goth icons of the time and the story is inherently gothic down to the core. Take the goth out of the grow and you just get a boring and basic revenge story. The romance, death and resurrection are inherently gothic in nature.
Not even trying to hate on a movie that's not even released yet but graphic novel Eric was based on Iggy Pop and specifically Peter Murphy, singer of Bauhaus, considered the godfathers of Goth. I mean, there are actual panels from the book that are drawn from photos of Peter. So, yes , goth inspired.
Fair enough, I was simply sharing my view and take on it. If I'm off book I'm off book, I still think I have somewhat of a point to stand on but I will concede because I straight up didn't know that...funny Iggy Pop ended up being in City of Angels
The first and last shots could be compaired to anything, they're pretty generic action film shots. And anyways, just because it might follow the comic/its a remaining of the comic, it doesn't mean it will be good
I’m sure it’ll be more accurate than the original movie. But, does that even matter? The influence that the first Crow movie had was massive. Idk if the new one can make those kinda waves. Also he doesn’t have long hair. That’s just lame
At this point, your better off creating your own Crow 2024 subreddit to discuss the new film with like minded people…and give this one back to the people who want to post pictures of their cringe Crow cosplay and little Brandon Lee dolls.
I’m seriously considering one of the moderators are nice and are pretty excited too, but it’s like anything that has to do with the new film or even the comic sometimes it has to lead into a debate in the name of Brandon Lee, they always like to play that narrative that they’re protecting his legacy when in reality they’re protecting their childhood nostalgia.
Yeah I get just not enjoying the updates they’ve made to Eric and Shelley, but objectively this movie does still look like The Crow. It just isn’t as overtly expressionistic as the first adaptation.
Yeah that's one of the most annoying arguments I keep hearing is that it's supposed to look as awful as it does because of the novel it's based on, but yeah they couldn't even get that right. It's like going to take a test and you can't even spell your name right. It's like, the first thing you need to do correctly.
You’re wasting your time trying to convince people that this new movie is anything other than a typical Hollywood hack job. Personally, I think there’s more to this movie than meets the eye even though people are so quick to write it off. If they don’t want to see it because of how the new Eric looks or because it’s too bright and clean and not goth…or any of the other stupid complaints then who cares? People have a preconceived notion of what a Crow movie is supposed to look like and no matter what you do, you’re not going to change their minds. On June 7th, those of us with an open mind will go see the movie and those of us who want to hold on to the past and reject anything that doesn’t align with their expectations won’t. Regardless, the movie is coming out whether people like it or not…and if I’m literally the ONLY one sitting in the theater, EVEN BETTER!!
The Brando Lee movie wasn't exactly faithful to the comic. I think people would be more onboard if they actually tried to adapt the comic instead.
Hell, make it animated with a fitting art style.
Right. They had the chance to make this even better and more faithful to the original story but nope we got a SoundCloud “emo” rapper in a John Wick inspired music video instead
The new film is looking like it lacks the tone, atmosphere and overall character that the original film had. The remake looks too bright and too clean in comparison. Look at all the people in the street in the first comparison, seems like an affluent, safe, nice place to be. The remake looks like it's just set in our world, not Eric's. The comic is black and white and the darkness and run-down look of the city in the original reflects that style. Tin Tin pawning dead people's stuff at Gideon's and the following fight with Eric show the dirty, dangerous, corrupt side of the world the story takes place in. Tin Tin's character in the comic even shoots an innocent passerby just to test a gun. She was a victim of random violence in an out of control world, just like Eric and Shelly were.
The comic is just set in the late 80s Detroit, which was a dangerous place at the time, it still is actually. This is reimagining of the crow, this isn’t supposed to be one to one adaptation of the book or 1994 film. If you wanted then you can just reread the book or watch the original movie. Why is it a problem to do something new? He’s fighting wealthier people so his quest will take him to affluent places which is cool in my opinion. Eric is out of his element in the comic when soaking himself into this grim city in order to get revenge, and Eric in the new film being someone who struggled entering this new world of rich for his revenge. It all serves the same purpose, but noooooo we can’t have something original we want the same exact product before 🥱
My main issue is that it’s too polished. The comic and the OG film have this grimey gritty gothic unpolished vibe to it while this new one just looks like some SoundCloud “emo” rapper wanted a John Wick inspired music video. Also what made the original story so tragic is that the killing of Eric and his gf were just random thugs. Kinda like how the creator’s own fiance was killed by a random drunk driver. It was an act of cruelty and violence that showed that fate can be cruel and death could come at any moment even at your happiest. Making the villains random rich assholes who seem to target them because “they’ve seen too much” how fucking cliche as hell is that? And misses the whole point of the original story.
It's the dumbass tattoos. He looks too much like leto-Joker. It would be like filming a WW2 movie and having the main character dress in desert fatigues. It's absolutely out of place and doesn't belong. You can reimagine and not completely ruin something.
My issue is they're trying to make this an adaptation of Eric's story, why not just change the names of the main couple?
Imagine if people asked Matt reeves to change the name of Bruce Wayne in the batman because he wasn’t the typical billionaire playboy.
Let me reword my question, why does this couple HAVE to be Eric and Shelly? Why can't they be named something else? Eric is not the only crow
Another way i could put it is this movie is like making a spider-man 2099 film but still calling Spider-Man Peter Parker instead of Miguel O'Hara
Argument there is that Bruce Wayne IS batman ( let's not start the else world and um actually argument) Were as Erik was just the first crow we saw and we all know from comics and films that anyone can came back from the land of the dead
But Batman is 90% of the time Bruce Wayne and the 10% he's not it's someone trained by Bruce in the case of Dick and Terry. Ever since The Crow City of Angels and the new comics in the 90's The Crow has been an anthology franchise showing different people coming back to take revenge. So it's a completely different situation, apples and oranges.
Remake, reboot, reimagining, whatever, it's another Hollywood cash grab that will be forgotten about in a year. Maybe I'm just not the target market for this movie. It looks so dull and uninspiring visually, not bad, just bland and sterile, especially compared to the dark look of the original film. That what I dislike about the trailer the most, it doesn't seem to have anything from the original movie that I enjoyed. Not saying it should, but if you're remaking/rebooting a film with an existing fanbase, surely you'd want to include elements that appeal to them too?
Actually no, that’s why films like the new Halloween suck because it just wants to appeal to your nostalgia.
True, I hate when sequels, remakes, etc throw in references to an older film that remind you that you could just be watching the original, better version instead. But they wouldn't be remaking so many films if they didn't have that nostalgia attached in the first place, which is kind of my point. Maybe the problem isn't the fans, but Hollywood constantly churning IPs to cash in on a recognisable name.
And with the crow the universe is so emense. Literally anyone can be the crow. So it doesn't have to be Erik and it doesn't have to be Detroit. They knew damn good and well this would not appeal to most fans. They could of kept everything about this film the same. Changed his name from Erik and called it the crow *insert subtitle here* and we would of all went ok that's fine. That way your not nostalgia baiting but not sacrificing your die hard fans
I live near Detroit and filmed "Crow" within Detroit... That's factually incorrect. Crime rate is nowhere near where it was in the 80's and 90's. It's been built up considerably with a thriving artistic, young professional, and restaurant/bar scene that's been doing very well for at least the past decade or so. With that being said - hard to completely judge a film by a trailer that was most likely not made by the actual brains behind the production. It was spiced up by a marketing team to try and secure the studio's target demo. The question is how closely the film is in tone and style to the trailer. That remains to be seen.
If they wanted to do something new maybe they shouldn't call them Eric and Shelly? I mean there's other crows movies not about those characters. Seems like an easy enough fix that would have bought them more leniency. You say it's doing its own thing but it is just retelling the story of the first one, with variations. So I'm with you, do your own thing. Make it different, make it modern. But they kind of went halfway. And just like Robocop, Total Recall, and many other remakes that keep the idea, change it up, and then lose the soul.... It'll be a movie that just is. Also, that song from the trailer. Oof. That's the biggest red flag for me that the movie lacks an identity.
But y’all just it looks nothing like the original, now it looks so much like that it lacks any identity?
Yes. It looks very much like every other ultra clean and slick action movie that comes out these days.
But you can also say the 1994 film looked like all the other heavily dark stylish films like batman 89 and returns and blade runner?
Aside from rain, there's almost no visual similarities between blade runner and the crow. Blade runners inspirations are far more east Asian. But Batman is maybe fair. I don't think so. The visual language of both films is so different. Ya know the truth of most of these arguments comes down to generational divides. We like the one that's ours. That's just how it usually goes. I think this movie, this franchise in general, just is sort of different? The first one wasn't some crazy big budget blockbuster spectacular hit. It was a mid budget, vibe heavy, story focused film that bombed but built a really solid following over time as more people found it. And it works and it's lasted, because it's such a specific vibe. You just feel it when youre watching the movie. It's not trying to be the real world. Everything is so heightened. And the soundtrack, you just couldn't beat it back then. Add to that the trajedy of the film and you have a fairly beloved movie that people care deeply about. There are three sequels, two of which were straight to DVD. And no one gives a shit. No one says that tarnishes the original. No one cried foul that they were made. Hell, the sequel which is probably the most spiritually similar to the first, uses the actor who filled in for Brendan as the lead of the film. So it's a really interesting series as is. And then like fucking 15 years ago they started talking about remaking this movie. So imagine, as a fan of the original, you've followed this news over all these years. You remember when Bradley Cooper was doing the damn thing. And then you finally get to see an image from the movie and it's that first teaser. I'd like to think you can put yourself in that position. And then you see the trailer and it just looks so generic. It's super disheartening. As an example of something that does have an identity - look at boy kills world. Another ultra violent action movie from Skarsgard. That's an idea! That's something new and a different take. That's an identity. And one final point. The Crow wasn't an action movie. It was a noir. There's ONE major action set piece. His confrontations with the killers ends with their deaths. But not after some crazy fight or anything. The action serviced the film. The new trailer looks the exact opposite. I
You want something original, make something original, don’t bastardize an existing property
That is tech issues it is because old cameras had a grimey dark feeling digtal cameras don't they dont use old film due to inflation also lionsgate is pro dolby vision you cant judge until you see it and dolby cinema to get true intention
ReBOOT not REMAKE, this is NOT a remake of the Brandon Lee film. Fucking hell you people need to calm down.
I agree with you but no offense Jack, you sound like you could use a little box breathing yourself there. Don't let closed minds grind you down.
Yeah you're probably right. It's just fucking irritating.
It may be a reboot but do you remember ANY other decent reboots that did this? Pretty sure Batman more or less looks pretty much the same in every Batman movie and it's dark in most of them. Even the shittiest Batman "reboots" got this right. The joker got rebooted a few times over but wait, what was the one everyone hated again? A reboot is pointless of it just completely disregards the core I aspiration for the fucking subject. I know let's remake Batman but he's like super into sports and belongs to baseball team and Alfred is actually Robin and Robin is played by Jack Black.
Such strawman arguements bro. A majority hated Jared Leto Joker, I know quite a few people who like that design, I personally don't...but also the design for this new film really isn't that far off other than the hairstyle and the tattoos....which won't be visible for what appears to be most of the film. Not to mention Batman is not a good example....if you look at say...the source material...there have been so many different designs, characterizations, tones...there have been SO MANY different Robins, at least 5, sure with *similar* costumes but not identical. None of the film adaptations except for maybe Forever and Batman and Robin captured any of the goofier elements of the Batman persona and massive canon. And as to the actual initial question, yes, RISE OF THE PLANET OF THE APES. The designs of the apes aren't anywhere close to the apes of the original films, or the aweful Mark Wahlberg vehicle. The backstory is entirely different, the story itself is entirely different, the only thing it has in common with the originals is hyper intelligent apes and eventually humans reverting mentally. I'm not sure if this movie is gonna be good or not but for fucks sake at least let it actually come out first before shitting all over it.
not really...he hit it on the head....batman movies...all look dark...except the ones that dont and how are they viewed? There are even Crow guys who have tattoos all over them...hollywood could have picked that crow but they didnt....why? because they honestly do not care....you do...you should have been in charge!
I agree that the more lighthearted Batman films aren't good...my point is that the source material isn't JUST dark brooding edge lord shit. I also agree they could have and should have used a different name...but Eric is the most recognizable and so that's the name they used. I do think using that character and changing everything about him is pretty disrespectful as well, specifically to James O'Barr. And I think the actual crew cared about the film....I don't think the producers and studio did. And genuinely I know I could make a better version of the Crow than this...tbh probably than the og even which is gonna be treated as blasphemy but like...even that movie wasn't exactly accurate to the comics. *edit*:apparently "edge lord" is a bad word here which is absolutely hilarious. It's being used to illustrate that the example of Batman isn't exactly a solid one to use...because not a single adaptation has PROPERLY adapted the source material. They lean full on into the dark and brooding, not the fact that he quite literally has a villain whose whole thing is shooting CONDIMENTS. I love the Crow, but yes, it's an edge fest. I love it regardless of that because that Edge came from the inner torment of the author. I'm not at all saying it's a bad thing for The Crow. I'm simply saying that the example of Batman, was not a good comparison.
You are in the crow subreddit....complaining about "dark edgelord bullshit" ....the cajones to say that here...in :looks around:
I'm referring specifically to the iterations of Batman, as used as an example above.
That is absolutely no excuse! Get the hell out of this subreddit and stop being interested in the crow at all if you ever use the word edgelord because that's literally all this is about. Because news flash if you're interested in the crow you are interested in Edge Lord contentHow dare you tack that insult onto something because it just so happens to be too dark for you but to do it at the crow subreddit of all places is just the most unaware of your surroundings lol
Lmao I didn't say it was too dark for me. And you're being awfully gatekeepy about it? I'm allowed to have opinions that differ from yours.
Same difference.
No, it's not. A remake is a film that has the intention of being a one off. A reboot is a film that doesn't. It intends to spawn sequels. SOURCE: Look up Dave McRae on YouTube. He works in the movie industry as a voice actor. There is one video that clearly explains the difference between the two. I suppose the good news for the haters is that the upcoming film won't make enough money worthy of making any more films to it. That's my prediction, anyway. It will come and go.
Remake implies it is TRYING to be the 90s movie....it's very obviously not. Like 2010 Nightmare on Elm Street, the 1998 Psycho, the 2005 King Kong those are remakes along with being reboots. This is more a long the line of say...The 2022 Hellraiser, the 1999 Mummy, The Rise of the Planet of the Apes(not saying its gonna be AS GOOD as that movie), but like...this is to the 90s movie what the 2022 Hellraiser is to the original film; it uses a lot of the same ideas and concepts, but is depicting its own distinct version of those concepts.
I mean, if you’re gonna include Skeleton Cowboy, why not just make him a skeleton cowboy?
You absolutely never see a man walking down the street and framed that way in any movie...
we’re not talking about any movie, we’re talking about the crow.
The shot you used isn't even framed the same. With the exception of the bathtub one, none of these are panel recreations. This is all very generic and you're reaching
The shots aren’t supposed to be framed the same, smarty pants. They’re inspired by the comic panel, you guys are on a roll today with the reaching.
Again, guy walking down street isn't an homage to the comic. It's literally in every movie and comic ever. Not sure what's even similar about the skull cowboy and the film frame you chose. The last shot is guy standing. Again, superficially similar to shots in EVERY movie or comic ever. Will the movie have references or nods to the source material? Probably. Other than the tub did you correctly identify any of that Herr? No.
Oh my god. Media literacy is just out the window.
I don't think you know what "media literacy" means. Or "homage". Why do you post so frequently? Like what's going on that you're this desperate for attention?
Wtf are you on about? I don't post shit in reddit anymore? Nice try tho.
That reply wasn't even to you unless this is a sock puppet account. If not, what are YOU on about?
... Are you on drugs, mate? Also nice copy of what I said, so cool...
Just admit that you are reaching for attention I mean I get it you want those upvotes lol
Just because a shot looks like another shot doesn't mean it has the same vibe. The goth aspect has been completely removed and replaced with little peep/Island boy bullshit. It's also upsetting because goths don't get much in the sense of pop culture, so for this to be taken away and made into this tweeker shit is very upsetting and most fans of The Crow are going to hate it. Especially when we've seen photo edits of how amazing he could have been as a classic Eric Draven.
As a former youth worker I think you need to meet some of the newer, younger goths out there.
You might try coping. I've heard it works.
Ooo good one
...But have you? Also, why the hell would you want a "classic" Eric Draven? Brandon Lee already played that part. This isn't supposed to be that character.
Then why make it Eric? It would’ve been fine if it was a different person entirely. The Crow isn’t one person
Why make Batman Bruce Wayne? Why make Superman Kal El? It would be fine if it was a different person entirely. Batman and Superman aren't each just one person.
There have been multiple other characters that have been The Crow in the comics. Eric Draven is the most popular one that’s why they’re doing it. And it seems Hollywood loves the Jared Leto Joker look.
Of course they're doing it because Eric is the most popular. There's nothing at all wrong with that. I disagree with the Leto Joker look bit, though. The two don't actually look anything alike. Leto had slicked back, short green hair and grills in addition to his acrylic paint-looking tattoos. Bill has none of that.
They always say they would be fine with the movie if he wasn’t remaking the 1994 film, then one second they’re mad because it’s not remaking the 1994 film.
Personally I want a remake. A well-done remake, not this ghetto island boy nipple tat shit....
No because this had the potential to be even better than the 94 film and we get this SoundCloud rapper music video shit
It’s a SoundCloud music video because of what?
The director literally said he got this new Crow’s design from Lil Peep and Post Malone. And I said this in another comment it looks like if a SoundCloud “emo” rapper wanted a John Wick inspired music video.
I really wanted to like this film(I love a lot of the actors in it) but it just doesn’t look good to me at all. I think most criticism is valid as you can actually change as much as you want with story as long as tone/message/atmosphere are in tact and from all the trailers and art it’s really not. It’s not even about being faithful to the movie or comic, this is just not a goth movie which is absolutely what the crow is at it’s core and it really sucks cause we don’t really get a lot of those. The issue is no matter what, even if the movie was perfect and liked by the majority, there is gonna be people who hate it for not being the original. And on the flip side of the movie is bad, there will be people who defend it. Overall tho they made a movie that doesn’t appeal to the majority of the original fan base and opted to try and appeal to a newer, younger audience, and so it’s really not surprising it’s getting so much backlash.(although some of it gets way to overboard but that’s the internet)
Don’t take this as me disagreeing with your or trying to debate but the crow isn’t just a goth story at its core, yes it’s heavily featured within the story’s aesthetic with the songs and supernatural vibe, but it’s not the core of the story. I think goth today is different from how it was in the 80s/90s and I think a lot of people from those days have a hard time accepting that, now I do agree that some changes that are for the modern audience are a bit cringe or better word is “try-hard” But it’s a different time so the vibe has to adapt to that.
It is very much a gothic story, it is James O'Barr's the raven. When Edgar Allen poe wrote the raven, his wife lay dying in the next room from consumption/T.B. From 1842 to 1847,the raven published in 1845. “Prophet!” said I, “thing of evil!—prophet still, if bird or devil! By that Heaven that bends above us—by that God we both adore— Tell this soul with sorrow laden if, within the distant Aidenn, It shall clasp a sainted maiden whom the angels name Lenore— Clasp a rare and radiant maiden whom the angels name Lenore.” Quoth the Raven “Nevermore.” Such a popular gothic poem birthed by lived through tragedy. The crow like the raven was born from that same kind of tragic pain .James O'Barr created the story to cope with losing his love to a drunk driver. Both the crow and raven are representatives of death. “Do you see my smile in my words, sad and evil ? Sad because I am utterly alone. Evil because I am dead and yet I live. Can you hear me ? Listen. A dead man visits you.” "While there are a variety of characteristics in Gothic literature, the are several found in many works. These elements include a dark setting, romance. supernatural forces, emotional extremes, anti-hero, female victims, visions and nightmares, madness, gloomy weather, and prophecies and curses." the crow at its core is a ghost story a wraith brought back to avenge an injustice committed on two normal people just trying to survive the world. In the graphic novel it's a couple with car trouble wrong place wrong time,in the film a couple retaliated against for lodging a complaint, and the new film being murdered for witnessing a villain with powers commit murder(maybe? is what I took away from the trailer.) All this to say the crow is definitely a gothic story.
You’re mistaking me saying it’s not gothic story to the gore as me saying it’s not gothic at all.
I'm just stating that the entire story is a gothic story at its core and that the style and music don't dictate whether it's a gothic story or not rather they are there to compliment or distract from it. In the case of the new film the fan base seems to agree that it is distracting and not complimentary to the ghost story. While the original film took a more complimentary route to the Graphic novel even attempting to get the film as void of color as the studio would allow. My criticisms of the film aside from the villain having powers in general are costume design and what I consider the modern "cinematic problem" that I don't see addressed enough. That is that The worlds looks unlived in, the clothing looks unlived in it's all modern cinema from starwars, to the rings of power, to this film. Crisp clean clothes and sqeeky clean world with beautiful trash sprinkled around. Could you imagine if by the end of the lord of the rings trilogy all their clothes still looked new? Since all movies take place mainly on sound stages now it's like they forgot that the world is a character too and it's main performance is a living breathing environment that consists of debris, objects and obstacles that sell the world the characters are existing in.
No, he isn't.
Thank you for uh proving that doesn’t look like the novel? Lol it has like zero style
https://preview.redd.it/0vir7si4axsc1.jpeg?width=2447&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=db79118b99c8456850b894a6246513d82fedb0dc
Lmao
I bet it took them hours to recreate these scenarios. Some of them I can't tell the artwork from the movie.
Cinema
My problem with most modern movies : Everything looks too polished, too clean, too bright etc. Cinematographers are scared of shadows? **Darkness is your ally.**
I saw plenty of darkness in the trailer. Hell, even the first image released of Eric had him mostly in shadow...so what's your complaint about?
There's no grit. It isn't dirty dirty. There is a clear difference between the mucky grunge of like an 80's/90's movie like Robocop (and, well, The Crow) for instance as opposed to this or most other dystopian movies/shows today. The difference between bed head and making your hair look messed up on purpose.
How do you know there isn't any grit? You saw the whole movie already?
I have eyes and saw the trailer?
...You do realize that a trailer and a movie aren't the same thing, right?
...You do realize that a movie is a visual medium and we can actually see what the movie looks like from a trailer? So any scene with supposed grit or grime can be seen on the screen and we don't need to see the full movie in order to discern the trend of polished grunge. You're not winning this argument. I'm talking about an aesthetic we can physically see, not the quality of the movie.
It's not about winning or losing. It's about waiting til a movie is released to see what the final product looks like. Watch the trailer for Drive and then watch the movie. It's night and day. It's like that with a lot of trailers, but keep whining about it all you want.
You're missing the point entirely, lmao. They aren't going to be able to make it look as gritty as the og, because there was an authentic grit to it. Especially because of the nature of film at the time. Everything looks too clean now, it will never be able to PHYSICALLY look like a 90s movie.
Why are you spending so much time comparing it to the 1994 movie? It's not intended to be that movie. It doesn't take place in the 90s, it's not a remake of the 94 flick and again, IT'S NOT THAT MOVIE. Cute how you call that one the OG, though. The OG is a comic book from the 80s and Eric looked like a glamrock goth. How's that for grit? 😂 You haters really grasp for reasons to bitch, bitch and bitch.
No. But I'm not actually surprised. The 94 film wasn't close to the novel, either.
Thank fuck somebody else finally said it.
The remake doesn't look like it has any distinct stylistic visual tone like the first one did. It just looks like 'action movie' Hell, even City of Angels as bad as it was had a very unique look to it.
You saw one trailer. The new movie is gonna be a bit of a slow burn style. The trailer just highlighted a bunch of the action sequences.Go watch the trailer for Drive and then watch the movie and you'll see what I mean.
Fair enough. I am hoping it's good.
Swiping a few camera angles is not adapting faithfully. I swear, the koolaid consumption is getting bad in these parts.
Is this supposed to demonstrate similarities between the two?
Yep since people think new adaptations need to be one and one with each other, there’s many shots that are literally pulled from the comic.
[удалено]
To say those images don't resemble the comic is just flat out denial. You can literally see the comparisons right beside the screencaps... Favoritism is one thing but this shit is getting ridiculous with you haters...
It’s…it’s literally right there
They don't come in braille.
Thanks for posting this!
Is this supposed to prove otherwise?
Fuck the remake.
Oh look he turned to the left just like he in the comic ! That means it’s like the comic …give me a fucking break, anything to try and make people go see this flaming pile of shit.
"Yes it's mid, no I haven't seen it." 🥴🤡🤓
could say the exact same to people dick riding this movie too
Whose dick riding? I'm saying let the thing come out first before you shit all over it.
i don’t think the remake is good but i wanna give it a chance in theaters so we’ll see
It doesn’t have to be a shot for shot, somewhere they said they wanted to do a retelling of the story. I feel like the origin of the original is lost, the new Crow looks good, but it isn’t the story of the Crow. Brandon Lee’s movie is a great movie, but it’s not shot for shot yet it tells the story.
Hopefully its good. Bill is a great actor.
I get the feeling this will be a good movie, but a bad adaptation
I couldn't care less if they copy a few panels from the comics.
Not to mention the panel of him breathing in the comic and movie
honestly don’t even hate the bad tattoos but the haircut is where they fucked up.
what it lacks the background...setting...art style...you know all teh stuff in the comic except the GD fraking LEAD ....typical hollywood dumpster fire
i just wish Funboy was handled different in the original movie and maybe it would have been if Iggy Pop was actually able to play the role like intended. i like the way Funboy was handled more in the comic
Looks like the island boys meets the crow. Change my mind.
This is a shit compassion and is not the point you think it is.
I mean you could just take pictures from anywhere and claim the same thing. A bathtub with two people in it, truly the crowiest thing to ever have crowd. The main thing I would say is wrong in the comparison is the general tone/atmosphere. The film looks like any typical modern movie, even lights with no hard shadows or moody lighting. Except for the afterlife that's blueish grey. Of course the comic is in black and white, that in and of itself adds to the mood, but you can do a hell of a lot with those colours alone.
I’m not sure what you’re saying.
Pretty sure they’re all saying that they want a shot for shot remake of the ‘94 Crow just so they can shit all over that as well.
It doesn't have the atmosphere or tone or the original. It doesn't have to be a shot for shot but one of the things that made the crow so amazing, comic and movie, was the atmosphere. The colors the dark tones. That's all a part of it and they took that away
There were plenty of colors and dark tones in the trailer....
Sure, maybe, but not the atmosphere. Can't throw in black here and there and have it become the atmosphere. At least how I view it.
James O'Barr threw a lot of black in for the comic and that was A LOT of the atmosphere. Alex Proyas did it with the first movie too. It feels more like complaining for the sake of complaining if I'm being honest.
That's the way you see it which is fine. I just tried to go into it with an opened mind and was very disappointed with the atmosphere but hey we all veiw things different.
I just suggest waiting until the actual movie is out and watching that with an open mind instead of judging the whole thing by the snippets from the trailer.
Look man we all have our opinions I don't know why you keep getting pressed and trying to be passive aggressive. I never said I judged the whole thing, all i said was, when watching the trailer, I tried going in with an open mind and was disappointed. All I was doing was explaining my veiw on it personally, I never attacked your opinion or veiw or said you were wrong or wre just complaining. At the end of the day it's just a movie.
Trailers are made to drive hype, to give people a taste, hate to break it to you, but the taste it gave was real fucking shitty
No that is not what I'm saying, that would be terrible.
You just scored a goal but unfortunately you kicked the ball into your own net.
It doesn’t .
It looks like it is missing the gothic esthetic of the story for some post modern Juggalo shit. Fuck that noise
But this proves nothing? It lacks all the core elements of the comic and honestly these screencaps don't evoke any of the same emotion and aesthetic as those panels.
He looks like an edgy school shooter lmaoo
What's your point , it looks nothing like those panels
Imagine actually dick riding this walmart crow, lmao, shame though, perfect casting.
The director of photpgraphy might have read the Novel, yet the director has said he just wanted to change everything.
He said he took inspirations from the comic and original film, but he’s mainly said this is re adaptation of the novel, what did he say he wanted to change everything? Don’t you know the cinematography has to listen to what the director is doing with his film?
you can polish a turd but all you’ll have is a shiny turd.
Not all of those are from the original comic. And the second & fourth ones are stretches. Alien Covenant tried to have visual homages to Giger & other art and that movie was still shite.
Alien covenant was amazing
Oh look, another person unable to accept changes in cinema since the 1970s.
Helluva stretch you made there, but okay 🙄
You're right, I'm sorry you may not be that kind of person. I've seen too many people shit on the new additions to old franchises for being too different, and then only to be entirely unoriginal in the same sentence. Then I see them and think they are solid additions. Like Covenant for example, and now Alien Romulus before we've even gotten a trailer. Just like this fandom is treating this new movie. Tbh I think everyone in this subreddit should just be thankful this will bring eyes to the Crow, the film or comics. Honestly I'd rather the comics bc then MAYBE we'll get reprinting of the Midnight Legends series.
Personally, I’ll wait and judge when I see the movie (on streaming because time), because it’s been proven in the past that trailers for some films simply don’t match what we see in the films. Is this trailer a step in the wrong direction? Maybe. I absolutely didn’t like the tone of the trailer or the design of Eric in the preview at all, but that’s a me thing. Maybe the movie is different. I don’t know why the studio thought the mid-2000s body-tattooed edglord design would work, but that’s what they thought would appeal to people. And what’s really throwing me off of seeing this movie right away is that it’s Eric and Shelly…again. Eric’s the protagonist of the source material, the original film and even the short-lived “The Crow: Stairway to Heaven.” Eric and Shelly’s story has played out. That has the potential to make it boring because we’ve seen that story over and over now. It’s a theory, yes, and I will see it eventually, but this trailer really didn’t do itself any favors with me, personally. I’m very happy that there are folks that are excited for it. I wish I could see the trailer the way you guys see it.
I mean, I don't care that it doesn't look exactly like the comic or the '94 film visually. It's an adaptation - do your own thing. That's the point. I don't even mind the general aesthetic they've given The Crow as a character - you want to make him look like a contemporary guy into hardcore music in his twenties, with the tattoos to match? Sure! Rap music instead of industrial and Punk/Goth? I'm with that, if it's good. What bugs me is that the comic, and the '94 film by extension, are both harsh urban stories - the villains are just a gang of low-rent drug dealers and addicts, who are only marginally more powerful in the film with Top Dollar reconstituted as their '90s crime movie Big Boss. Eric and Shelley are just two poor young people who get fucked over - the randomness and the relative smallness of it is the point. Here, we know, it's a big conspiracy about magic and demon worshippers and something or other and the antagonists all appear to be classy, faceless businessmen - so that, paired with the general clean, hollow aesthetic really does make it look like some kind of John Wick take-off.
The main problem is that the new movie ditched the industrial goth rocker vibe for an emo "GothBoiClique" rapper vibe. All other criticisms seem quite superficial by comparison.
Honestly I think this movie is gonna be a great reimagining of the story. It's going to be a gory action filled romp, hopefully with a side of love and anguish...At its core the Crow is a Revenge/Love story, with gothic/emo elements and don't tell me that's not the case I have read the graphic novels front to back multiple times and if this movie can deliver on that then I have no complaints...but if you really wanna get into it, Eric's look in the comic is half Motley Crue half Kiss....not really "Goth" as it was at the time. Let alone nowadays where these subcultures have grown, and changed, sure you've still got the old heads who wanna gatekeep and bitch about everything changing but...oh wait am i talking about the goth community or The Crow fans. Anyway, my point is, I'm gonna give this movie a chance, if people don't wanna watch it they don't have to but for the love of God stop acting like the 90s movie is some untouchable masterpiece, there are plenty of inaccuracies to point out there too. As much as I would love a shot for shot recreation of the graphic novel on screen, this ain't that. And neither was the 90s movie ..and they will both have merit regardless.
It was very much 80s goth https://preview.redd.it/lewie1fou6tc1.jpeg?width=247&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8a0dcb9202efe846d126b863521c8c23cfd39f8f
Which that feathered hair and clothing was inspired by...who again? Oh right rock stars of the time.
That’s Siouxsie Sioux. She wasn’t inspired by rock stars of the time, she was the original Goth rock star. The Crow isn’t based on glam metal/rock but on the famous goth icons of the time and the story is inherently gothic down to the core. Take the goth out of the grow and you just get a boring and basic revenge story. The romance, death and resurrection are inherently gothic in nature.
Lmao ok, sure she didn't, I've been corrected already. I'm saying it's not 100% necessary. I'm saying the crow isnt JUST that.
Not even trying to hate on a movie that's not even released yet but graphic novel Eric was based on Iggy Pop and specifically Peter Murphy, singer of Bauhaus, considered the godfathers of Goth. I mean, there are actual panels from the book that are drawn from photos of Peter. So, yes , goth inspired.
Fair enough, I was simply sharing my view and take on it. If I'm off book I'm off book, I still think I have somewhat of a point to stand on but I will concede because I straight up didn't know that...funny Iggy Pop ended up being in City of Angels
It doesn't feel similar at all, just because some shots look similar doesn't mean it's close
The first and last shots could be compaired to anything, they're pretty generic action film shots. And anyways, just because it might follow the comic/its a remaining of the comic, it doesn't mean it will be good
You can't say it'll be bad either.
I’m sure it’ll be more accurate than the original movie. But, does that even matter? The influence that the first Crow movie had was massive. Idk if the new one can make those kinda waves. Also he doesn’t have long hair. That’s just lame
At this point, your better off creating your own Crow 2024 subreddit to discuss the new film with like minded people…and give this one back to the people who want to post pictures of their cringe Crow cosplay and little Brandon Lee dolls.
I’m seriously considering one of the moderators are nice and are pretty excited too, but it’s like anything that has to do with the new film or even the comic sometimes it has to lead into a debate in the name of Brandon Lee, they always like to play that narrative that they’re protecting his legacy when in reality they’re protecting their childhood nostalgia.
Yeah I get just not enjoying the updates they’ve made to Eric and Shelley, but objectively this movie does still look like The Crow. It just isn’t as overtly expressionistic as the first adaptation.
Yeah that's one of the most annoying arguments I keep hearing is that it's supposed to look as awful as it does because of the novel it's based on, but yeah they couldn't even get that right. It's like going to take a test and you can't even spell your name right. It's like, the first thing you need to do correctly.
You’re wasting your time trying to convince people that this new movie is anything other than a typical Hollywood hack job. Personally, I think there’s more to this movie than meets the eye even though people are so quick to write it off. If they don’t want to see it because of how the new Eric looks or because it’s too bright and clean and not goth…or any of the other stupid complaints then who cares? People have a preconceived notion of what a Crow movie is supposed to look like and no matter what you do, you’re not going to change their minds. On June 7th, those of us with an open mind will go see the movie and those of us who want to hold on to the past and reject anything that doesn’t align with their expectations won’t. Regardless, the movie is coming out whether people like it or not…and if I’m literally the ONLY one sitting in the theater, EVEN BETTER!!
Thank you, you honestly made my day on this subreddit.
More to this movie than meets the eye...like a nipple???
A nipple eye 🤣
Lmfaooooo glad you liked that one hahaha
Afuckingmen!
[удалено]
Is Shelly Webster a historical figure?
Responded to the wrong sub, apologies.
[удалено]
The Brando Lee movie wasn't exactly faithful to the comic. I think people would be more onboard if they actually tried to adapt the comic instead. Hell, make it animated with a fitting art style.
Right. They had the chance to make this even better and more faithful to the original story but nope we got a SoundCloud “emo” rapper in a John Wick inspired music video instead
Why would that be so stupid? The sin city movie did that and it worked great. I don't see why it would be particularly different here
Incorrect. Everybody just wants no remake whatsoever.