Likes: 
Faceplams: It’s the worst one for sure.
It’s okay to punch nazis
It’s the worst one for sure.
Active Member
I'm holding off judgement until I see the movie. It couldn't be worse than the three sequels or dumb TV show.
Last edited by GulDukat; 02-28-2024 at 03:19 PM.
House Always Wins
Nipple eye.
They should close the chapter on this IP. They will NEVER capture the lightning in a bottle release of the moody, goth 1994 film no matter how hard they try.
I liked Salvation a bit, sue me. City of Angels and Wicked Prayer are terrible.
I was nobody. Nothing.
I saw the OG on opening night at age 14...a few days after TDS was released, of course.
Plus, at the theater by my house, opening night was Friday the 13th.
I also was (and am) a bruce lee fanatic.
SO, yeah. Putting all that together, I had the new NIN album, and this eerie gothed out movie, in a packed theater, on a Friday the 13th, featuring Bruce Lee's late son, (which created a both a palpable sadness AND mystique), and like ...i mean...goddamn.
What more could an angsty teenager ask for?
I remember every second of it-i mean, i remember where i was SITTING, ffs.
I'd imagine a LOT of us had a similar experience.
NO other version or sequel will touch it, and i think most of us would agree on that.
BUT, BECAUSE of that experience, i DAMN sure went to see City of Angels, and either saw Salvation in the theater, or bought the VHS, posthaste-can't remember which.
And i dug them. I was YOUNG, though, but, you know.
I'm down. I'll give any piece of The Crow media a shot
I hope the thing is good-i'm VERY critical of films, these days. And, yes, that photo looks awful.
But, still, i'm down. Let's go.
Active Member
Making Draven look like a Soundcloud rapper is NOT the vibe.
Also, City of Angels rules and is what introduced me to the Deftones so I got zero hate for that movie.
Bored
I know "a picture is worth a thousand words" but also "don't judge a book by its cover".
I have faith in my boy Bill.
Always remember that Heath Ledger's Joker was said to be the ultimate version of the character. Then came my man Joaquin with his take on it.
Active Member
There's supposed to be a longer, director's cut of SOA that is supposed to be better.Originally Posted by richardp
I think Salvation might have been okay if it had been an episode of Tales from the Crypt.
Saul Williams fan.
Active Member
That looks like he has a plunge holder sticking out of his eye.
Only By Night
Not like this.....
*shakes head*
....... Not like this.
Active Member
Also looks like Thom Yorke
Active Member
Now I can't unsee that.Also looks like Thom Yorke
Only By Night
FATUM NOS IUNGET
FATUM NOS IUNGET
WOOOOF!
Last edited by october_midnight; 03-14-2024 at 09:31 AM.
Active Member
Looks pretty generic. Pass.
Throbbing Member
Given the music in the trailer, and Draven's look, it appears this version of the Crow is for a younger generation. I'm ok with that; I'm glad I got my version back when I was in college. Hopefully it's good and captures the spirit of the original.
Only By Night
What bothers me about modern day Hollywood, is the production. It's way too slick, and every movie looks exactly the same. There is no atmosphere, and I love Skarsgård, but he seems so wooden, in a trailer that again, seems like they condensed the entire movie into one trailer.
If this seems like its for a younger generation, that is indeed the problem. Even video games fall victim to this, like The Last of Us getting a million remakes so the "Younger generation" can accept it better, with updated graphics and mechanics... Why is it that our generation (I'm an 80's kid) were able to adapt to the things our parents grew up with, but a Gen-Z crowd has to have their hand held with generic nonsense like this seems to be.
It looks like the Devil May Cry remake, when they gave Dante short hair, and threw the white wig in our face in that one scene. Let's cut his hair, and give him this young, edgy look, and modernize the shit out of It. Looks like a rehashed, action version of the original.
Last edited by Self.Destructive.Pattern; 03-14-2024 at 12:45 PM.
Active Member
It doesn't actually look TERRIBLE, like I'll watch it. My biggest gripe is still Sarsgard looking like Jared Leto's Joker, but at BEST it looks like a decent straight to VHS sequel from the early 2000s, at worst it looks like a movie that people will rip to shred for a week or two until they forget about it entirely and then it'll disappear into oblivion.
Throbbing Member
1000% this. The original film was seeping with atmosphere. The set pieces were a work of art unto themselves. Didn't want to judge this thing based on one image alone, but now I've seen enough. Hard pass for me. And they should never have been allowed to use the Eric Draven namesake for this face tattoo embarrassment of a costume design. The other sequels might be shitty, but at least they had the decency to make them about different characters. Like, who is this movie even for?
Only By Night
I really try to keep an open mind with everything, when it comes to stuff like this. I suppose I really don't understand the catering to a younger generation schtick, when you can still, easily watch the original film, and enjoy it for what it is. I know a lot of people that get turned off by that "It looks old, I don't wanna watch it" outlook, but the original still holds up in my opinion.
It seems incredibly, unnecessary, and very niche, even for a newer generation. I can understand like you said about the sequels using different versions, but using the same name, just makes it seem even more unwarranted lol.
Skarsgard is a really good actor, but even great actors do not always knock it out of the park. I'll watch it, but it seems bleak at this point.
Bored
I hear you, fellow cinephiles, I really do. And you make good points; especially Nu Eric looking like the Joker. It's cringy.
However, in 2014, James O'Barr had this to say:
He has a point. A big one.We're not remaking the movie. We're re-adapting the book. My metaphor is that there is a Bela Lugosi Dracula and there's a Francis Ford Coppola Dracula. They use the same material, but you still got two entirely different films. This one's going to be closer to Taxi Driver or a John Woo film, and I think there's room for both of them.
I have seen the original movie. Once. I loved it, but I can't watch it again. I find it too painful. It's hard to deny that Brandon Lee's tragic death has added a layer to the movie that can't be ignored.
I will see this movie for the story that it has to tell me and without the emotional baggage that the first one has. I'm looking forward to see if it will be awesome, meh, or OMG I can't get out of here fast enough.
House Always Wins
Yikes.
Active Member
Ok... Ok. This is coming from a 33 (almost 34) year old...
I see NOTHING wrong with this movie (aside from the standard hollywood overproduction). I fail to see how this is any different than Robert Pattison's new Batman which everyone loves...
I LOVE the original film, ever since I first saw it as a kid, saw a TV edited version one Friday night (before I ever knew who/what NIN was). Growing up, always loved it. Rewatched it recently and still do.
That said, this movie looks quite good for what it is.
I don't understand why everyone wants to "boycott", "cancel" this movie due to their love of the 94 version. This movies takes NOTHING away from the original. I'm a die hard Jurassic Park nerd...am i mad that they made Jurassic World sequels... no. Am I mad that they are rebooting Jurassic? Nope. Because it doesn't erase Jurassic Park or what it did for me. We all complain that GenZ kids are ruining everything but Gen X and Millennials (I am included in this)... we're all starting to sound like a bunch of grumpy, old Karens that want things to stay the same. We're all getting older and guess what, this world isn't ours. LET the younger generations do their thing. If anything, this movie will get younger audiences to see the original if they never were going to. And if they think its lame or don't like it... THAT'S OK. Because us old folks... still have it for us. haha
Oh, and the Posty/Ozzy song works very well in the trailer. Only gripe is they show the entire movie IN the trailer. Lame. Looking forward to see more backstory with Eric and Shelly.
Active Member
The Batman was a good modern movie that had excellent atmosphere...one of the few! Dune is another one.
Active Member
Meh. I might stream it.
Only By Night
There is a difference between wanting to stay the same, which no one is saying here, and showing blantly lazy ideas, that have horrible execution. The new Jurassic Park movies, besides maybe the first film of the trilogy are god awful, but there are great points being made, when Hollywood can no longer come up with an original idea. Just dangle the carrot: "Hey! Remember this! Let's reboot and remake every single fucking IP known to man, and either gender swap it, or race swap it just for the sake of it!" For fucks sake, they're even remaking Don't Tell Mom The Babysitters Dead... Like give me a break. Demand better.
I am all for letting other people of color shine, and some films may need a polish, but it is absolutely tiresome at this point; I'm not drinking that kool-aid anymore. And to compare this Crow movie to fucking classic hammer films lile Bela Legosi films, and Copplola is hilarious to me, and absolutely pretentious. It's not even earned, nor warranted yet.
If you simply just want to be entertained, fine, but the mass majority that have problems with stuff like this have a point, whether you like it or not. The Batman even looks, and felt more like A Crow movie, than this shit does.
And to add, I used The Last of Us comparison above, because that was one of the main reasons Naughty Dog remade the game... And remastered it... To cater to the "New audience" when even the PS3 version still stands the test of time. Did millennials get remakes of universal monster films like The Thing, The Mummy, or War of the World's... Yes, we got remakes as well, but a lot of those films needed updates, or modern day twists. If they used a different alias for this new Crow movie, than fine... Cool... But it literally seems like rehash of the original film, and that is my main problem with it.
Last edited by Self.Destructive.Pattern; 03-15-2024 at 02:27 PM.
Active Member
I dunno about wasting bandwidth like that. You can always check your local library when it comes out on video, that's how we see most movies that don't look theater-worthy.
Matador de Froot Loops
I didn't want to be a "hater", but i couldn't care less and i agree with what @Self.Destructive.Pattern said.
This looks for a younger generation and i'm no longer the target for it, i know everyone knows the story, i just don't get why they needed to show the entire movie with all twists and turns.
Nothing against Bill Skarsgård, he looks like the right man for the job, i just think the movie looks generic AF.
I might watch it for curiosity one day, but going to the cinema and watch it on this year, don't think so...
Bored
I think you have misunderstood the O'Barr quote. He gave Dracula as an example of a book that have been adapted twice in two very different ways. He did say that this new Crow movie would look like a John Woo film... which makes your point, in a way.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote