Unfortunately, the film hasn’t exactly been accepted with open arms, with some members of the original movie even speaking out against it, which came as a surprise to producer Molly Hassell.

“It should make people proud,” Hassell told THR. “I’m surprised it hasn’t made the original filmmakers more proud, because it’s a step in a different direction, but it’s a necessary step to deal with the age-old themes of love and loss.“

This is the only bit of new news. The article then digs up older comments from the original film’s director Alex Proyas and another screenwriter both being critical of this new version.

I’m willing to give the new version a chance but the way these articles are worded, it feels like they’re willing the new version to fail regardless. I have a gut feeling this film won’t do very well and then hit streaming services quite quickly.

  • Ezergill@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    4 months ago

    I’m kinda confused. Why do so many people (including this article) treat this as a reboot of the first movie, when the creatives have said that it’s another adaptation of the original graphic novel? And why is everyone suddenly so protective of the legacy of Brandon Lee, when there’s already been a direct sequel to his movie and a separate TV series?

    • janonymous@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      4 months ago

      I think there is enough precedence to come to the belief that remakes are bad in and of itself. Big movie companies do like to put their money in already established or at least known franchises or names. This leads to them forcing a movie they think should make money rather than letting the creatives follow their passion, which may or may not lead to better movies. And then there is also the typical knee-jerk online reaction in play here. People like to be dismissive and jaded about things. I think it’s partly because we have a lot of reasons to be jaded, but it’s also because it’s easy and it makes you feel smarter. I believe in most cases people aren’t actually informed enough to form a real opinion, they just like to shit on things online to make themselves feel better.

      In my late teens and early twenties I had a phase where I basically disliked every new movie. I thought old movies where perfect and new movies where all just cash grabs with the exception of indie movies. After a bit of growing and working in a creative industry myself, I now know that this is bullshit. There are lots of reasons why movies turn out bad, but in most cases the people working on them are trying their best and genuinely want to make something great. With that in mind I’ve become much more open and appreciative. It’s so easy to shit on things online. It is very, very hard to make a movie, even a bad one.

      Sure, sometimes the movie turns out bad and yes the chances of a reboot, remake, sequel or prequel to be bad is higher. But it might also turn out to be a great movie in it’s own right! To be honest lots of old movies did not age well and could use a remake. If you don’t like it, the original movie is still there for you to watch instead.

    • kux@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      i think largely because it’s called ‘the crow’ rather than ‘the crow: straight to video’ or similar colon title. none of the sequels or spinoffs or whatever they were affected the cult following of the original film/books because nobody gave a shit if they’d even heard of them in the first place, curiosities at best. this one has some real money/clout behind it and is consequentially more disruptive

      • Ezergill@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        I guess you’re right. Although I’ve never heard the TV series to be referred by its full title, it has decent reviews (and it was my first introduction to the character).