"I take orders from the Octoboss."

The Crow (2024)

Can you believe they finally really did it? They remade THE CROW! We don’t need to go into the whole litany of attempts, but they’ve been announcing versions of this for 16 years. And now they did it. And they released it.

The people I hear from online are, to put it mildly, not eager to welcome this new little birdy into the world. Many people hold the original 1994 movie, and sometimes the James O’Barr comic book it was based on, sacred. It’s a cool movie, people a little younger than me saw it as angsty teens, they feel connected to the soundtrack, and of course it’s a movie about tragedy that you can’t separate from the actual tragedy of Brandon Lee. There are people who instinctively pull out the torches and pitchforks for any remake announcement no matter what, but this one feels more religious, like when THE LAST TEMPTATION OF CHRIST came out.

It’s possible that’s an internet exclusive. When a real life friend brought up the remake a while back and I mentioned people being up in arms about it she was completely baffled. But now the reviews are out and critics too are acting like a pile of rotting garbage crawled out of a dumpster, rang their doorbell and asked if it could wear their favorite shirt. (It’s at 29 on Metacritic.) A movie as rejected and disreputable as its hero.

I’m posting from an undisclosed location, I know all the exits, I got my go-bag packed, so I’m gonna give it to you straight: I liked THE CROW (2024). Not just “it’s not as bad as they’re saying” – I honestly think it’s pretty good.

I’ll get the negative things out of the way first, but for me that’s a short list. There are one and a half important things that I like better in the original. The first is the ultra-goth, expressionistic gloom of it – the endless night, the stylized model city, it has a real larger-than-life sense of place that I love, that makes the movie endure. The new version is pretty stylish, it looks good, but not like that.

The other reason is the villains – in the original they were so colorfully sleazy, such nightmarish degenerates, these are a more standard type. I consider this a negative because Danny Huston (30 DAYS OF NIGHT) as Vincent Roeg is not as cool of a villain as Michael Wincott as Top Dollar. But I’m not counting it as a full negative because I like the meaning of his villainy better. We’ll come back to that.

Maybe the reason I’m an outlier here, besides great taste and a cosmically transcendental understanding of da movies, is a long history of revisiting variations on this story and trying to understand why it doesn’t fully work for me anymore. I reviewed the 1994 film once in 2009 and again last May. I reviewed THE CROW: CITY OF ANGELS in my Summer Flings series, I reviewed THE CROW: SALVATION for The Ain’t It Cool News when it came out and again last April, when I also reviewed THE CROW: WICKED PRAYER. Obviously THE CROW 1994 is way better than any of those sequels, but as much as I love its style I do have some issues with its substance, especially as I get older. People who hold it more sacred than I do will hate this new version, because it’s a very different film, but I really appreciate it standing on its own while addressing pretty much everything that bothers me about the original.

This is partly the story of Shelly, played by the singer FKA Twigs. Her friend Zadie (Isabella Wei) sends her a video she thinks they can use to expose the wrongdoings of a powerful man. Shelly knows the existence of the video puts her in danger so she tries to leave town, but gets busted for drug possession and sent to a (rehab? psychiatric?) facility.

That’s where she meets Eric (Bill Skarsgård, ATOMIC BLONDE), who’s covered in ink and muscle, and so traumatized by his shitty childhood that the other patients can’t get him to talk even when they pin him against the wall and threaten to beat him. He talks to Shelly, though, and when the people she’s hiding from arrive to “visit,” the two of them escape and hide out together in an extended fling of unspecified duration. They’re fellow dirtbag psychedelic enthusiasts and artists (she sings, he draws spooky pictures and writes words he doesn’t consider either poems or songs), but we see she runs in rich-people circles from the friend’s apartment she has access to. At first I assumed it was a drug thing, she partied with this guy Roeg, but really she was one of his piano prodigies. Her mother (Josette Simon, Blake’s 7) seems to be upper class and working with them to find her.

Top Dollar was a gangster/slumlord, but also some kind of warlock, with a witch girlfriend. This guy Roeg’s supernatural angle is a vampiric/Faustian thing. He finds innocent people to suck energy from, and he’s lived hundreds of years by giving their souls to Hell. But he passes for respectable – a normal, suit wearing rich guy and patron of the arts, choosing young woman pianists and sponsoring their careers. I think metaphorically he’s like that doctor on the gymnastics team or Jeffrey Epstein or Harvey Weinstein or other powerful predators who get away with abusing young women for years and years because the people who find out about it feel like they have to protect the organization, or their own financial situation, or their career, and the more they do that the more their complicity snowballs and becomes harder to extricate themselves from. That’s what Roeg’s right hand woman Marion (Laura Birn, A WALK AMONG THE TOMBSTONES) says when her number comes up. It started out small, then before long it was too much to get out from under.

So although Top Dollar was cooler, I think Roeg is truer. The original THE CROW is a vast improvement over the comic book’s one-dimensional, subhuman criminals, but it’s still based in DEATH WISH style urban paranoia. Almost everybody in Detroit is dirty, scummy, perverted, out to get you, deserving of death. People in the streets and clubs are sickos, except for our special rock ’n roll boy, who accosts them with Edgar Allan Poe quotes. 2024 CROW sees the world differently – the dirtbags are the good guys, the grimy, graffitied spots and tattoo parlors are places of refuge, the people you gotta be scared of have money, wear suits and live in the clean part of town. The final battle takes place at an opera house.

Because of that, much of the violence is set to classical music, and surprisingly most of the rest of the soundtrack doesn’t seem aimed at the younger and hipper than us. It’s mostly Joy Division, Gary Numan, The Cure stuff like that. Also, it taught me that “Ready Or Not” by the Fugees comes from an eerie Enya song called “Boadicea,” which forced me to ask “Is Enya good?” Anyway, if you’re hoping to yell at this movie to get off your lawn, it will have to be on the basis of tattoos or haircuts, not that noise they listen to these days and call music.

It’s probly for the best we never saw ’94 Eric’s band play. There’s a strong chance it would lower my opinion of him. But this one has a part where they record a little song together, and it’s a good scene. Shelly can sing! (I don’t know FKA Twigs’ music.)

It has always bothered me that in the original – and this comes straight from the comic, if I remember right – Shelly is not even a character. She only exists as your standard dead wife memories – flashes of smiles and sex. Enough to say “they’re in love, you get it” and justify why he enjoys tormenting and murdering her killers. There’s a term in comic books called “fridging,” to describe the trope of something horrible happening to a female character to create drama for the male hero. The name comes from a time when Green Lantern came home to discover a super villain had killed his girlfriend and stuffed her in the refrigerator. But at least that poor lady had a whole other issue where she was a living person doing alive stuff! The 1994 CROW opens with Shelly already figuratively in the fridge.

Don’t they know you’re only supposed to be happy like this in little camera flash memory snippets!? We can’t experience this kinda shit in the present tense!

This time she’s a main character, a genuine presence, the co-lead of at least a third of the movie, seems more like half. We see them falling in love, we see what they bring to each others’ lives, and I found myself invested in it. I don’t know Twigs as a singer, I knew the name but didn’t even know what she looked like, but I like her natural presence here, I get why he’s crazy about her. To me it’s a deeper story, more fleshed out characters, fucked up and fucked over and trying to grasp some type of happiness while they can, eventually by mythical supernatural violence. It’s just more interesting than “you killed my girlfriend, I must kill you (after I play a guitar solo on the roof).”

The mythology is elaborated on a little, but it was so simple before that it’s still not too complicated. After dying Eric follows a guy who the credits call Kronos (Sami Bouajila, THE BOUNCER) into a flooded, grown-over warehouse full of fog and crows that apparently exists between the living and the dead. Kronos tries to explain things to him and pushes him into puddles that send him back to the living world.

Eric wonders, like I did last time I watched the ’94 version, why he’s the one to come back and not Shelly. This time there’s a reason: Roeg gave her innocent soul to Hell to extend his life. Kronos tells Eric if he kills these people it will restore balance and bring her back. So his goal is not revenge, he’s not going DEATH WISH II on some guys. And he’s not an indestructible force getting off on killing until he loses his powers, it’s an uphill battle the whole time. He’s confused about what’s happening to him, it seems like a dream. He feels pain and gets horribly fucked up. Killing these guys is a struggle at first. The first time he fires a gun it’s inside a car, he loses his hearing for a minute and seems to be in shock. And (SPOILER) he actually fails his task, not by not murdering good enough, but because his unconditional love for Shelly falters when he learns something bad about her. So it’s him proposing a new deal with Kronos that leads to fully becoming “The Crow,” and I think that’s a smart touch to give him more agency in it. Only then does he get good at being a killing machine and start having fun with it, so it feels less sadistic, less like a gross power fantasy.

And yet it’s gorier than the ’94 version! When you hate this movie can you at least have the courtesy to acknowledge “Hey guys, good job on the violence”? There’s lots of thick, gooey blood, lots of limbs chopped off, he goes pretty overboard. Yes, he heals from bullet and knife wounds, but it’s worse than that. Bones and intestines poking out of his wounds, hit by a car, good stuff. He gets a sword stabbed through him and (spoiler) figures what the hell, he leans down and uses it to poke out a guy’s eyeball. Way to “yes and,” The Crow. He goes to an old friend (Jordan Bolger, THE WOMAN KING) to get a gun, and when they’re hanging out we notice that this guy has a bunch of posters for old samurai movies and even CRYING FREEMAN starring Mark Dacascos (!) on his walls, so later Eric has a samurai sword, and it makes perfect sense that guy would’ve had one. (And I’m thankful that he uses the sword more than the gun.)

The screenplay is credited to Zach Baylin (KING RICHARD, CREED III) and William Josef Schneider (RETURN TO SILENT HILL). The director is Rupert Sanders. Any Rupert Sanders fans out there? I’m gonna guess no. I thought his first film SNOW WHITE AND THE HUNTSMAN was pretty dull, but I was surprised to find it looked amazing. His second was GHOST IN THE SHELL, which I had issues with, but I thought they were interesting issues to dissect (check out that review) and I don’t think anyone would deny how cool it looks. Although THE CROW is his first movie I’ve liked unreservedly I imagine that puts me in an elite group of fans. So yes, move my name to the “I’ll check out whatever he does next” column.

Even moreso for Skarsgård. (Not even including Robert Eggers’ NOSFERATU, my most anticipated film at this point.) Man – what is up with these Skarsgårds? The dad, Stellan, is one of the greats of course. Older brother Alexander really impressed me with his physical, even bestial performances in THE LEGEND OF TARZAN and THE NORTHMAN, plus he starred in the outstanding INFINITY POOL. But Bill stays entirely out of his shadow with these transformative performances – Pennywise in IT of course, then he went from a prissy High Table dork in JOHN WICK CHAPTER 4 to an absolutely ripped, non-verbal fight machine in BOY KILLS WORLD, and he carries that into this, but with a heartbroken street kid twist.

Of course people will say Brandon Lee was better, but importantly Brandon Lee was different. This is not the Eric who fronts Hangman’s joke, this is the one who plays a little fuzzed out keyboards to encourage Shelly to sing, but admits she can play it better than him. It’s not the Eric who wears leather pants but is nice to kids, it’s the one who maybe burned down his mom’s trailer as a kid and still hasn’t fully adjusted but Shelly thinks he’s “quite brilliantly broken.” Skarsgård makes me sympathetic to that guy and also makes him look cool when he’s a specter on a rampage and let me tell you, none of the guys in the sequels ever pulled off either of those things.

No surprise that this is the best THE CROW since THE CROW. But I think it deserves more credit than that. Some day it might even be acceptable to like it. Buildings burn, people die, but a movie where (SPOILER) the hero comes out covered in blood during the curtain call of an opera and tosses two severed heads into the crowd is forever.

This entry was posted on Monday, August 26th, 2024 at 7:02 am and is filed under Reviews, Action, Comic strips/Super heroes, Horror. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

37 Responses to “The Crow (2024)”

  1. I’m sure I’ll watch this when it hits one of my friend’s Plex servers but I seem to be in the progressively smaller and smaller few who saw the ’94 movie in theaters and remember it being…not great? Reviews at the time seem to confirm my feelings. I think because people have strong feelings about the soundtrack (which goddamn rules) and the tragedy around Brandon Lee, those might be bleeding into the OG movie in some sort of 90’s nostalgia stew? I mean, there’s been several Crow sequels and a tv series which no one I know has seen or cares about so I don’t know why this particular movie is getting such hate?
    Then again, I didn’t know there were ardent Ghostbusters or Top Gun fans either??!!

  2. Yeah, it’s crazy. Even in the AICN days I can’t remember seeing so much rage against a remake, but CROW 94 fans seem to be more hardcore hate filled than modern day STAR WARS fans!

  3. I mean, Edward Furlong played The Crow once!! In 2005!! We were all cool with that??!! But this movie is the problem?!?!?!

  4. I don’t think anybody watched Wicker Prey. It was so low-budget and under the radar, that everyone thought it was going to suck. Only the completionist watched that one.

    I know there are a few die-hards to like City of Angels, and I’m probably one of five people who likes The Crow Salvation. So The Crow sequels have always been very hated, and most people haven’t really been cool with them.

    So no surprise that people didn’t want to watch The Crow 2024, especially with Eric looking like The Joker from Suicide Squad.

  5. Vern, count me in. I also think it’s a good movie. And I’m not just sucking up. I also really liked the extension of the relationship of Eric and Shelly. Their kind of lifestyle couldn’t be any further removed from my own if one of us lived on the moon. And a lot of the time I can watch movies depicting this kind of lifestyle and it holds no interest or understanding from me, but seeing it through their relationship, I got it. I don’t know if that’s down to the writing, acting, direction, or a combination of it all, but it felt like a world I could understand. Except, of course, it didn’t feel like anywhere in the US. The original movie made you feel like it was some kind of alternate reality version of Detroit. This one just kind of felt like they filmed it in Europe, using a bunch or European actors, and pretended it was supposed to be in the US. This amused me rather than bothered me, though.

    One thing I have to be pedantic about, though, Vern, is it’s not a warehouse that is the in between after life place he goes to. It’s an abandoned train station. That’s why Kronos says something like you think they’d come up with a better metaphor.

    I have said this on other movies, but I once again have to praise Bill Skarsgard. One of the reasons I think this movie is successful is how well he plays Eric going from confused, messed up, obviously lonely, to living in the moment and happy, to naive, scared, heartbroken but trying to desperately do anything he can to save Shelly, to absolutely fucked up terrifying rage-monster menace really, really well. ***SPOILERS*** At first I was confused about why he would throw the heads into the crowd because I don’t think the theater was filled with Roeg’s people. I think they were just regular muckety mucks out enjoying the opera. Then I realized that he did it as a fuck you to that society in general – they were the ones turning a blind eye to any rumors or ideas that Roeg was doing monstrous things. They were the enablers letting him get away with it all because they didn’t want to rock the boat on their perfect lives, and possibly disturb their own money making endeavors. And it was badass.

  6. Wait, you didn’t already know about Boadicea from SLEEPWALKERS?

    It kind of seems like Lionsgate gave up on this film at some point, they came out swinging at first but then moved it to this dump slot even though they still released it in IMAX. I will give it a go at some point, because I did quite like the trailers even though to be perfectly honestly with you I haven’t really “got” this particular Skargard, he is to me what Rami Malek is to Vern, what (leaving aside the personal life rumours) Jared Leto seems to be to most people and even Nic Cage was to normies 15 years ago, someone doing big swings that I unfortunately find to be big, grating misses (why yes, I do prefer Edward Furlong).

    I will say this though; is anyone else surprised in all the backlash almost none of it seems to be about them replacing Brandon Lee with a white guy? Especially given that this is from the same guy who directed GHOST IN THE SHELL? And then was going to do another film that got cancelled because he was going to cast Scarlett Johansson in another role that was already upsetting people without a single frame being shot? I guess the argument could be that race was never (as far as I recall) specified in the original film, and that the character probably wasn’t asian in the original comic, plus none of the sequels went that route, although none of those featured the same character (whereas the TV series did, and cast Mark Decascos). Not saying I think it’s an outrage, or even that I’m convinced it’s “wrong” necessarily, just surprised there’s been very little discussion about it.

  7. Two of my most respected critics digging this (Walter Chaw also wrote a positive review) while everyone else hates it? Now I gotta see this thing.

  8. I seem to be in the progressively smaller and smaller few who saw the ’94 movie in theaters and remember it being…not great?

    I saw it due to having to check out of a hotel at 11, but not catching a flight until like 5. I went in cold (it was the movie that was starting when I arrived at the theater), and even though I was aware that Brandon Lee had died, I don’t think I was aware he died while filming the movie I was about to see.

    I thought it was incredibly tedious, and I’m not sure I even followed what absolutely little story there was (when his girlfriend crawls out of the grave at the end, I wondered aloud “wait… why the fuck couldn’t she avenge her own death???” causing the other three people who were still awake to laugh, so I guess they had the same question)

    Afterwards, when I would pass a Spencer’s Gifts at a mall and would see “Crow” posters, I assumed they were remnants of some failed attempt at a Batman-style marketing blitz (I took the movie’s endless night, and stylized urban goth playground as an attempt to replicate Bat-Maina™)

    It wasn’t until years later that I discovered that people not only actually liked the movie, but loved it. I even rented it again to confirm I wasn’t in a bad mood or something (I wasn’t)

  9. I’ll just say that as somebody multiple decades outside of the movie’s key demographic, THE CROW, much like Star Wars, Indiana Jones, Marvel movies, and so many other film franchises, is no longer for me. All that shit belongs to a new generation now, and they can have it. Except even young audiences seem to not want to have anything to do with this new Crow movie. Maybe it’s due to the “R” rating that it hasn’t been able to find its audience. Congrats to the filmmakers on getting it done after so many years, but maybe the boat sailed on this property long ago?

  10. Vern, you know I respect you callin’ ’em like you see ’em, but every change to the source material you describe here sounds like exactly what a room full of hacks would come up with when tasked with making a CROW remake that was different enough that they could sleep at night but not so different it’ll upset the suits. The original CROW (comic and movie) were flawed, messy exercises in ugly emotion. They don’t add up because they’re coming from a personal place of rage, selfish and primal and unhealthy, and in that they were universal and mythic. Yes, they are sadistic. Yes, they are power fantasies. No, they are not interested in being an intersectional examination of class and trauma. And that’s what’s interesting about them. Isn’t that what grief is like? Are we not all sadists in the face of life’s cruelty? Do we not all indulge in the miserable ecstasy of vengeance at those times when pain cannot be healed, but merely avenged? There’s an ugly truth to it.

    This movie sounds like it was thoroughly worked out and diagrammed by some very competent and healthy individuals who wanted to make sure we knew that revenge is, like, bad, mmmkay? They want to make sure we know that the real bad guys wear suits and look like Danny Huston and aren’t cool or interesting or entertaining to watch like those awesome archetypes in the last one. They want to reassure you that there was a very solid plot reason for the happy couple to be murdered, so it’s not just random, not just chaos, so we can feel very justified and healthy about our contractually mandated murder rampage. It happened to THESE PEOPLE, for THESE REASONS. It can’t happen to you. There are rules, you see, world-building, an exposition-spewing tour guide character telling you how these things work, how everything makes sense, how you can have your murder cake and eat it too, because this will actually save the girl, not just avenge her, and isn’t that so much more healthy? Don’t we feel so much better about ourselves when we make productive choices?

    That’s all great in any other movie. But THE CROW’s different. It’s not healthy. It’s not socially redeeming. It’s not interested in that. It’s not ABOUT pain, as viewed from a safe distance, endlessly rewritten and retooled for modern sensibilities. It’s an embarrassing, heart-on-its-sleeve, too-soon present-tense first draft coming right from the heart of pain. You can’t recreate that, and I have no particular desire to watch anyone try.

  11. Majestyk – that was an issue with the 94 Crow as well. In the comic, the crow is there to remind Eric that he’s not in some beautiful afterlife BECAUSE he’s so all consumed with rage and vengeance. He needs to literally move past it to move on. The movie, because it was a 90’s Miramax production, instead went with the angle that there isn’t a problem that murdering a whole mess of people can’t solve which has sadly become a staple of these movies ever since.

  12. Gotta be honest, I did not expect Mr M to prefer the 90s pre-A24 movie over the more pulpy “kill the rich” version.

  13. Also a fan here. If it’s you, Walter Chaw, Matt Zoller Seitz, MaggieMayPie and me against the world, so be it!

  14. >”the dirtbags are the good guys, the grimy, graffitied spots and tattoo parlors are places of refuge, the people you gotta be scared of have money, wear suits and live in the clean part of town. ”

    Honestly that sounds so cliched at this point. Yes, those poor underappreciated drug users and grimy urban homeless. What heroes. Such refuge. It’s exactly what I would expect from a movie written by the kinds of moneyed guys in suits that we’re supposed to be wary of.

    Pass.

  15. I’m not here to defend this movie or not, haven’t seen it doubt Iwill. But you’ll definitely see people prefer the OG because A) it came out when they were young so it resonated with them and B) it’s cartoonier and some people like doofy thrills.

    Draven was not randomly killed inthe first one either, it was siimply because he was fighting evicition, it seemed implied they were going to renovate the buildings to make them nicer and more cash. These have always been Hollywooded-up movies.

  16. Wanted to see this, but my local theater had really shit showtimes. Rupert Sanders has thus far seemed like a beer commercial guy given material far above his ken, but I always feel a little sympathetic towards a movie that gets buried by cliche-happy critics six months before the damn thing comes out. Especially considering these people aren’t so dumb as to not realize, by remaking this, they’re iceskating uphill.

    A couple of things:
    1) I’m down with the Roeg angle, but I kinda… hate Danny Huston? Am I the only one? Total ham. And Jack Huston bores me. I am anti-Huston! Angelica is cool.
    2) Enya rules.
    3) If you like sexy, experimental hip hop, fka twigs is a must. I LOVE her music.

  17. I haven’t heard much outside of her Shepherd Moons album, but if that’s representative I can report that Enya is, in fact, good.

  18. There was a point in my life where the idea of this movie would have been both incredibly exciting and also a worrying potential sacrilege to me. But after however many decades, all I can muster for this remake is a shrug.

    I struggle with this feeling, because I like movies, really I do! But I just don’t really care about remakes of movies I previously really enjoyed and find to be formative movies. Maybe the 94 version really isn’t a great movie, when analyzed by credentialed filmatic scholars and people with actual taste- but man, I still love it, for all the dumb reasons listed in this review- hammy named villain caricatures and fridged girlfiend angels with sword fighting trench coat clad mime painted dead guys vs warlock kingpins burning eyeballs with incestual Chinese sisters and shootouts in industrial rave warehouses and lightning struck iron crosses.

    But I just don’t have the mental energy to care either way about this one, and my old man tendencies creep in to my opinion like the ghost of Andy Rooney on my shoulder. Like- I’m sure Formerly Known As Twigs is a nice lady who deserves a fair shake. But I’m going to see you show up on a poster for a movie with an Xbox username instead of a real person name, and I’m already rolling my eyes at the idea of spending two hours giving the benefit of the doubt.

  19. And now I can’t even use an internet sight without fat fingering the submit button too soon, mangling the corpse of whatever point I was unsuccessfully making already.

    I think this is just thinking out loud about how I don’t want to be in that chorus of “meh” from the internet peanut gallery, let alone the group looking to file a class action against movies for doing unspeakable things to the personification of my adolescence (let alone childhood), but that just results in me not wanting to offer my opinion on movies because I can’t articulate my feelings on the matter with as much flair and insight as someone like Mr Majestyk, even though I find that kind of reading of these movies and their appeal to be very much in line with my own impressions.

    All of it makes me relate to Jay Sherman more than I ever thought I would, but without the conviction to even say “it stinks!” Rather it’s just- “it’s fine.”

    I’ll probably still see it on streaming but it feels weird to now be numb to the nostalgia that used to still generate a little mental buzz for me to want to find out.

  20. I don’t know, you make it sound like one of those Disney live-action remakes that fills in the plot holes and papers over the problematic areas, at the cost of the genuine artistic expression of the original. I just don’t care too much why the Hyenas weren’t allowed in the Pride Lands.

  21. Crudnasty: Yeah, that’s more or less where I’m at. A few years ago, I’d have taken a more hardline stance: “You CAN’T remake THE CROW!” Now I’m more like, “Well, I guess technically you can, but you can’t make me give a shit about it.” Like you said, I just don’t get that nostalgia buzz anymore. I get whatever the opposite of nostalgia is. I see the trailer for some new franchise revival or remake or reboot or whatever the fuck they want to call it these days and my first response is “Oh, fuck you.” I might see them eventually, but I’m never gonna be excited about them. The thrill is gone.

    Intellectually, I realize that remakes have been part of cinema since forever. Some of my favorite movies are remakes. So I’m not gonna say that these movies shouldn’t exist. I’m just not interested in them anymore. It’s like, I don’t know, chicken parm or something. You have chicken parm every day for 20 days straight, I don’t care how much you like chicken parm, you’re not gonna want it on the 21st day. Somebody might say, “What’s the matter? You liked chicken parm yesterday. What’s the difference?” But chicken parm didn’t change; you did. The experience of eating all that chicken parm has turned you into a person with no appetite for chicken parm anymore. That’s where I’m at. There are so many other movies I want to watch that the idea revisiting some 80s or 90s shit for the umpteenth time holds no appeal for me whatsoever.

    There’s nothing wrong with the movies. It’s just that I’m sick of leftovers.

  22. The Crow has already been remade. In 1996, 2000, and 2005. They can call them sequels but they’re essentially just rehashing the same shit in the same basic style except maybe set in the desert or making the film look like someone pissed all over it. This movie doesn’t have the same storyline, just sharing the same character names and that seems to be it.

  23. It may well be cliche, but Nü-Crow is the worst film I’ve seen this year, unseating Jerry Seinfeld’s dire, mean-spirited Pop-Tart whatsit Unfrosted. Unfrosted, at least, was weird. Nü-Crow is, for me, simultaneously tedious and frustrating. Every interesting idea—Eric’s not being an instant badass, Roeg being a centuries-old Satanist, Shelly’s mom’s ambivalence towards having sold her kid’s soul—goes underdeveloped in favor of dragged-out montages and monotonous violence.

    Skarsgård and FKA Twigs are doing their damnedest, but for all that Eric and Shelly get more screen time, it isn’t used well. It’s twirling montages and an insistence that they feel deep love for each other rather than giving them space to build that love and let it breathe. Maybe there are alternate takes, but I don’t feel their connection in the finished film.

    Vern, your take on Eric’s losing his powers is more generous than mine. Shelly’s framed as Eric’s redeemer until he learns that she was possessed by Roeg, at which point Eric doubts her, and the film doesn’t portray this as a major change in his behavior. It’s weird, sour “purity” nonsense.

    Heck, that’s my big issue with Nü-Eric. He’s so damn monotone, a vague ball of underexplored feelings whose callousness is constant rather than a consequence of his becoming an avatar of retribution. Part of why Lee’s Eric is compelling is the dissonance between “Eric Draven, cornball sweetheart who likes people” and “The Crow: Brutal Avenger.” Skarsgård’s Eric starts as a ball of hurt and stays that way. His relationship with Shelly is supposed to show more of him, but it fails to do so.

    The ideas behind Roeg are interesting in concept—particularly the implication that he might be looking for a way out of whatever deal he made—but they’re flat in execution. Huston’s not world-weary and desperate; he’s bored. His cadre of wealthy assholes has the space to be colorful and menacing, a la Top Dollar’s goon squad. Wealthy assholes get up to weird shit—see Get Out, for instance. Roeg’s ghouls aren’t ghouls; they’re just bodies. He could at least give his Stormtroopers some spooky masks or something.

    And this may be a matter of preference, but Nü-Crow’s look is dreadful. The ink needed more attention if it was supposed to be as important as parts of Nü-Crow make it out to be. Instead, it’s the emergency backup version of the Leto Joker’s infamous ink.

    It’s both boring and infuriating, at least for me.

  24. Maggie – Thank you. I didn’t think it was a warehouse when watching it, but that’s what Wikipedia called it, and I didn’t know otherwise.

    Pacman – You’re right, I even mentioned it in my review, but had forgotten already.

    J.S. – I’ve seen other people calling it Nü-Crow too, but isn’t o.g. Crow the nü-metal one?

  25. Oh and by the way, Enya is great.

  26. A couple stray thoughts

    Long before this movie even started filming, I can (genuinely) remember thinking “well, at least it’ll be a fun Vern review.”

    I was astonished and almost embarrassed when I started to realize I was kinda grooving on the movie and its central love story. When Eric and Shelly broke out of rehab and the Joy Division track kicked in, it was like, “son of a bitch, they found a take. they actually did it.” If this movie ever finds an audience with the target age of person who a Crow story is for (high schoolers), someone is going to be obsessed with Eric & Shelly and their undying love, and will also (importantly, let’s be honest) think these two are sexy. As less-open-minded Gen X-ers rail against this movie (which I’ve come to learn poses a threat to Brandon Lee’s legacy, in a way that one supposes “Harvey Weinstein presents: The Crow: Salvation” did not), I keep thinking that they’re reacting to Skarsgard’s Eric (“they made him a fuckin pronoun kid!!!”) the way people their age would have reacted to someone at a Hangman’s Joke concert (even someone who didn’t say shit like “mother is the word for god on the lips and hearts of all children”). Counterculture changes! So, the “dirtbags are the good guys” aspect really hit for me. It makes the story actually feel youthful and rebellious again.

    It did unfortunately take me out of the movie that the villains are so *defiantly* devoid of texture. Roeg is a great concept for a villain with a horrifying hook (the suicide whisper!), but there’s just nothing to him. Danny Huston cannot make him memorable. That plus a Crow movie taking place in Anytropolis, USA was nearly fatal. But the spirit guide fella (who you allege has a name) was the thing that finally hurt my ability to stay plugged in. Giving the supernatural aspect of the movie a face that then has *that little character* just seems like a waste. I can’t believe it, but here is a Crow movie that could actually really use a Skull Cowboy.

    It’s a shame that the global corporate film economy is what it is, otherwise it seems like *someone* would have pitched the idea to make one of these movies explicitly queer, instead of spending 16 years trying to negotiate whether or not they can get away with giving Bradley Cooper or Bill Skarsgard lipstick to play The Angry Boyfriend. Do any of these angry old grunge dudes remember what this character *fucking looks like?* Eric Draven, at his most compelling (and, let’s be honest, sexy), seemed like normal masculinity was something that was buried with him a year ago. It’s 2024! Give me twenty minutes and a bag of ketamine and I’ll find you eight Transwomen who could make electric tape and mime makeup look cooler than any cis guy considered for the role since 1995.

    Anyway, you’re a real motherfucker for always being the guy who will give a movie like this a chance. We need voices in film who don’t think pulp is a waste of time and that the kids don’t always need to turn their music down.

  27. To its credit the Opera action scene was well done but i am not a fan of this remake. Skarsgard is badly miscast here.

  28. The opera is the climax??? They released a clip of that. I’m sure there’s more in the movie but damn they’re just givin’ away the end?

  29. I was much more excited about Vern’s review of The Crow Remake than the actual movie. And this review did not disappoint. It made me curious to see this thing, but a little later from now on streaming. I’m not going to run out to the theaters or anything.

    It’s funny to me that Rupert Sanders’s follow up to his Ghost in the Shell remake is to do a Crow remake. It’s like he’s going to make his way through every film that you got really into when you were fifteen years old.

    But even after Vern’s fine defense of the film, I’m still somewhat skeptical. Everything that’s still enjoyable about the original Crow seems like something you just can’t replicate. It’s stuck in the 90s, for better or for worse. And while it make sense to give more space to the relationship between Eric and Shelly, I’m always skeptical when modern films give us more backstory. It seems like the explanation to everything.

    I’m actually of the opinion that when it comes to movies, we need less backstory. You can have a great character in a movie simply from the combination of the choices they make in the moment, well written dialogue, and a good performance. The character doesn’t have to also have a tragic backstory. We only have 90 to 120 minutes. You can leave most of the iceberg submerged. It’s okay. I promise you.

    But who knows? I actually really dug the trailers. So, the fact that I’m already kind of pushing back against Vern’s review before I’ve even seen it is because I’m clearly prejudiced. The original isn’t sacrosanct. I loved that movie when I was an angsty teen. It’s been probably over a decade since I last watched it, but I remember it mostly holding up. It reminds me of some of the music that I listened to repeatedly at that same impressionable age. When I listen to those songs again, I can still enjoy them. There are still incredible hooks and production that mostly holds up. But then there are cloying, corny lyrics. They were once powerful, but now you just kind of overlook them. So, I guess watching the original Crow thirty years late is similar to listening to Mellon Collie and the Infinite Sadness. And that’s not a knock on either of those. I still enjoy them. But there are just parts that you outgrow, even if they can still tap into residual teen angst.

  30. Vern – I tend to think of Nü-Metal as much more tied to the late 1990s than Crow 94’s mid-90sness.

    Also, fair warning, SPOILERS BELOW:

    Like Roeg’s character, Eric and Shelly’s dirtbaggery could have been interesting but doesn’t have the space or care needed to work. We get to see them interacting with their friends/Shelly’s friends in theory, but so much of that time is given over to montages of the two swooning over each other that their friends don’t register. Who are these folks to Eric and Shelly? Who are Eric and Shelly to them? Are they happy that Shelly’s found a partner who makes her happy? Are they annoyed that Shelly and Eric have become the Designated Make-Out Kids of their friend group? Is Eric close with any of them, or are they Shelly’s friends who he knows. We don’t get to learn.

    Basil Exposition and the tattoo artist are the crew’s only members to get any space. Basil certainly exposits, but we don’t get any sense of what his friendship with Shelly was/is like, and Eric mostly seems to know him as “that guy Shelly talked to on the night we died.” The tattoo artist’s treatment actively ticked me off. Eric and Shelly are oblivious jerks to him, to the point that it seems like he begrudgingly tolerates them more than he actually likes or cares for them. Eric indirectly gets him killed and then doesn’t so much as react. He pays more attention to the first goon he kills upon rising from his second death than he does his ostensible pal’s body. There’s nothing there. If he and his unfortunate buddy had had any space to bond or demonstrate some sort of history, Eric’s callousness would be striking and unsettling—proof that he’s come back more as the Crow than as Eric. But, no, he’s the same callow, detached jerk to everyone who isn’t Shelly that he’s been the entire film. And since, for my money, their relationship doesn’t work, all we’re left with for Eric is “Callow, detached jerk.”

    Nü-Crow has the seeds of neat ideas and the time to make something of them. It doesn’t do anything with either.

  31. Any fans of the Mark Dacascos series here?

  32. As Majestyk said, the original comic and movie are defined by the absence of Shelly, its raw grief and trauma. Honestly the relationship details don’t matter, it could be anyone you truly loved dying (like your child in the awful second movie). I feel like playing out the relationship, making the murders much more targeted, and the whole soul plot show a lack of understanding of the source material. Its not necessarily a bad idea for a movie, but why call it The Crow? Similar to Rupert Sanders’ last movie, which asked “what if we took Ghost in the Shell and removed the defining questions about the nature of self and consciousness in the digital age and did a Robocop instead?” It takes a movie that’s about The Vibes and then tries to figure out what it “needs” to make it work as a standard movie plot (actually that sentence applies to both movies, OG Crow and Ghost in the Shell both cared more about cityscapes and soundtracks than narrative).

    BTW, Nu-metal is the rap-rock era, after the OG Crow. The second Crow soundtrack was moving in that direction with the Deftones on the soundtrack/in the movie (btw Deftones are my favorite band and have thankfully long since outlasted and outgrown the rap/rock bubble).

    I love the first movie, while acknowledging its flaws. I was a kid when it came out, but definitely saw how popular it was with the older teens/20something goth adjacent people I got to know (one called himself Draven, of course!). I honestly can’t imagine any of those people bitching on the internet about the new Crow, most of them would probably just ignore it. I think its the usual tiny percentage of very loud, very online people who kick up a fuss over every remake/reboot/adaptation. When I saw a midnight showing of The Crow circa 2003, I made a couple jokes that got big laughs. I wasn’t trying to go full MST3k, but since everyone had seen it many times I made a few quips and no one got mad at me for interrupting their sacred movie. Actually, come to think of it we went through this with the old sequels. We all hoped City of Angels would be good, it sucked, and it was basically never discussed again (although I still spun the soundtrack). The DTV ones were laughed at/ignored. Personal note: Crow: City of Angels is the first movie I ever chose to watch on my own that I did not finish (age 11 or 12?). I had paid for the rental and everything, but about an hour in I was just depressed and stopped the VHS, rewound and returned it. that was pre-social media, though.

    My favorite part of the original to this day is the look. Vern always talks about how comic book movies post-Batman usually created their own heavily production-designed world, this is one of my favorites. The miniatures of the city are just fantastic. Those opening flyovers really do give me chills. Everything is wet, dirty, and/or on fire. My biggest turn off for the new movie is the bland look of the setting. And Joker-fied Crow is pretty lame, the hair especially is hideous. I don’t see anyone imitating this look for years to come.

    Underrated essential element of The Crow: Ernie Hudson. The seen-it-all beat cop suddenly faced with weirdness is an old trope, but Hudson brings warmth, humor, and humanity to a stock character. His interactions with Sarah also help sell that character. They are the humanity and the connection to Eric’s past (and Hudson also has exposition/plot functions as the cop who was there when Shelly died).

    For anyone who made it this far: When I was 13 (circa ’99) I decided to go as The Crow for Halloween. Borrowed a friend’s trenchcoat and everything. I then went to a party of kids my age where the few people who recognized my costume thought I was the wrestler Sting. I also rode my bicycle there, having to try and keep the coat out of the back wheel and the bike chain the whole time. So feel free to point and laugh at past Adam. It did help me realize how out of my element I was, though. I left to hang out with my nerdy older friends, and I think that was the first time I got drunk and the first time I watched Evil Dead 2.

  33. Well, I’ve spent 30 years feeling that was the specific thing that sucked about the source material (especially the comic), so I’m glad me and a few dozen other people got to enjoy a different take on it.

    I know that nu metal came after THE CROW. What I was trying to say was that (from my not very knowledgeable perspective) the original seems more related to nu metal aesthetics than the new one does. Or at least everyone I know who has a thing for nu metal has even more of a thing for THE CROW soundtrack and against the new movie existing. And I believe the new soundtrack is mostly music from the ’80s, but that may just be the ones I was familiar with. Anyway I propose Nouveau Crow.

  34. well vern, you got me to see this movie (based on your positive tweet, i didnt want to read the review first lest it bias me one way or the other) but unfortunately it turns out to be one of the extremely rare cases where we disagree. i was fully onboard with fleshing out shelly and the love story, but everything after that fell apart quickly for me. my full review

  35. One important moment of the movie that is not getting discussed is that we think The Crow is walking about looking moody with Gary Numan on the soundtrack, and then it turns out that the evil guy’s hitman is playing Gary Numan on his car stereo. That really made me laugh, I love the idea of a hitman who is into 80s synth pop – like a cooler version (imo) of Fassbender in The Killer listening to The Smiths.

    Also liked The Crow putting on his make up (which is tattoo ink rather than facepaint) to Enya.

    I did think it was strange to have the visual stylings of this guy – post malone, lil peep – clash so profoundly with the music. I get the sense that the picks on the OST are stuff Rupert Sanders found cool when he was 19, which is sweet. But I’m kind of more interested to see a version of this story where they’re listening to the strange, abrasive corners of underground, soundcloud rap. A version of this with spooky black, lil ugly mane or whoever would have been cool.

    I’m hoping to like this more overall on revisit. I thought Sanders’s prior two films were much better looking unfortunately.

  36. I’m gonna have to disagree. Even if you remove the original from the equation., this film still doesn’t work. It takes an hour and fifteen minutes to do what other revenge thrillers do in the first 30 and while spending more time with Shelly is a good idea in concept, but the execution here is abysmal. The actress is terrible and relationship isn’t believable. It’s comes off as a drug fueled tryst rather than an actual romance. The trailer made this look like it was going to be schlocky fun ala Punisher 2004 and it couldn’t even clear that low bar. Crow Wick can work and when the action finally ramps up, it does but it’s a fucking slog getting there. The best parts of this film are hit youtube as this hits VOD anyway.

  37. *How I Got My Ex Back with the Help of a Spell Caster +2349161779461*

    Hello everyone, my name is Kiara Hahn from California. I want to share my story about a powerful spell caster named Dr. Jakuta. I was heartbroken when my fiancé left me without warning, and I spent the last month feeling confused, guilty, and devastated. Desperate for help, I searched online for relationship advice and found Dr. Jakuta, who has helped many people with their relationship problems. I reached out to him, and he promised to bring my fiancé back to me within 72 hours. After following his instructions, my fiancé surprisingly showed up at my doorstep, apologized, and now we’re living happily together again. If you’re having relationship issues, you can contact Dr. Jakuta at:

    Email: doctorjakutaspellcaster24@gmail.com
    WhatsApp: +234 916 177 9461

Leave a Reply





XHTML: You can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>