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
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 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?

    • kux@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 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