Some stupid bastard (with a PATHETIC film resume, by the way) is remaking my favorite movie.

http://www.superherohype.com/news/topnews.php?id=7912

Seriously, what in the *hell* are they thinking? Okay, so the original movie was a bit linear, so what? It's still a fucking masterpiece in my eyes.

The original Crow only came out in 1994! What's next? Seriously, are they that desperate?

I can honestly say I would prefer a crappy sequel over a remake of this. At least that way, the original movie would still be the only film capable of calling itself "The Crow". Go and make your crappy sequels but don't fucking remake it!

A remake isn't going to change the originals classic status. It'll still be the same great film. I heard this new film will be more of a reboot (like Batman Begins) than a true remake. When you sit back and think about it, "The Crow: City of Angels" is the only true sequel. "Salvation" and "Wicked Prayer" are stand alone entires that can be viewed as remakes themselves. The director they've picked, Stephen Norrington(Blade), is very capable of making this the best entry since the original.

~Zack~

I am well aware of the fact that the original movie will still be the same after this aberration is made. I'm not *that* dumb

What I'm saying is that there is virtually no need whatsoever to remake it, precisely because, like you imply, the franchise's own mythology can have several characters embody the Crow peronna, not just Eric Draven.  

This is not a reboot--it is a remake, plain and simple. They are approaching possibly canditates for Eric Draven as we speak, among them is Jason Statham--Jason Statham, for chrissake!

If the whole franchise revolves around different characters turning into The Crow, what is the point of remaking the first story? Why not do a Crow character that has not been tackled before?

Do you seriously believe this franchise *can* be rebooted? It can't, simply because each movie is a self-contained story in and of itself, so tell me how, exactly, is retelling Draven's story going to revive the series? If anything it will drag it further down (something which I thought to be impossible after Wicked Prayer)

Norrington also wants to make the film in a realistic, almost "documentary style". Just how the hell is a story based on stylized visuals and an undead vigilante with paint over his face going to match that?

--Julio

Quoted from ReaperCreeper This is not a reboot--it is a remake, plain and simple. They are approaching possibly canditates for Eric Draven as we speak, among them is Jason Statham--Jason Statham, for chrissake!

That must be some kind of mean, twisted joke. PLEASE tell me it's a joke. I'm gonna lose sleep over this...

Bloodydisgusting.com claims that the new movie will be very gritty and realistic, where as very gothic and stylish.

I agree with you though Gomez, this shouldn't be a straight remake. The director should simply add a number 3 after the title and sell the movie as a sequel that ignores the DTV's "Salvation" and the terrible "Wicked Prayer".

~Zack~

That is what I've been saying. I am normally open-minded to the idea of remakes but the Crow franchise in particular has so many stories to tell that it is pointless to just do the first one (Draven's) all over again.

How about a female Crow? That's never been done before and I'm sure a female lead would rake in a bit more cash than an ordinary sequel.

--Julio

I like your idea reapercreeper, a female crow. Never thought about that. You should write the script and hand it in before this film comes out. That will probably make them reconsider it.

I only enjoyed the first one. The second was alright. The sequels don't exist for me. But remaking it is going to be like the remake of Psycho. A very bad choice.  

In one of the comics there was a female crow. Maybe they should adapt that one.

~Zack~

As you can tell I'm not a big comic fan, lol. But I say create it from scratch. Usually remakes suck. But that's my opinion.

There have been a few good remakes in the past (The Fly, The Thing, The Blob--and outside of those genres, hell, even Scarface was a remake) but The Crow's format is basically "remake-proof". Its mythology itself guarantees a retelling of the same love/revenge story with different twists and characters each time around. This is why a remake of Eric Draven's story seems completely pointless.  

And Zack, I've just learned that Jason Statham, while extremely interested in the project (said he would take it without second thoughts), has NOT been approached to do it. Sorry there, my bad.

--Julio

Quoted from ReaperCreeper And Zack, I've just learned that Jason Statham, while extremely interested in the project (said he would take it without second thoughts), has NOT been approached to do it. Sorry there, my bad. --Julio

Thank God. The lead for "The Crow" requires emotion!

What about Will Smith? Seriously... I think he could work wonders with the part.

~Zack~

You're upset over that?  Dude, they're remaking the Rocky Horror Picture Show!  It took me weeks to get the taste of bile out of my mouth when I heard this.


Phil

It's about the status of the original movie. Contrary to whatever anyone might say, a remake DOES damage the original movie's popularity.

I've met people who aren't even aware of the original versions of Prom Night, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, and even Halloween for chrissake!

These are the same people who, after finally learning of the existence of the originals, watch them and label them "lame" as soon as they notice the abscence of shiny CGI or "pretty" actors compared to the newer films.

And thus, those idiots spawn later generations that are even more ignorant than they used to be, finally burying the original movie.

These are the same people who think of the year 2007 and Rob Zombie, not John Carpenter, when the title "Halloween" is brought up.

But never mind that. Let's assume for a moment that I do not care what those people think (which, sadly, I do)--

Remakes are welcome, in my opinion, as long as it is a remake of a horrible or mediocre movie. Something that actually NEEDS remaking, you know?

What exactly about The Crow warrants a remake? Nothing, really. Nothing at all. Nothing is dated. Nothing is done wrong. Nothing *looks* wrong or "old". What could an update possibly do, other than tarnish the reputation of the original movie? Is it the prescence of a vinyl record in one scene? Is that it? Come on!

I dare anyone to try and justify a remake of this movie. There is absolutely no reason for a remake to even be considered. Do they think it's gonna make up for the last installments in the franchise--Salvation and Wicked Prayer? I can honestly tell you right now that a remake of the first film would be even more ill-received than those sequels.

--Julio

I am going to use this thread to shamelessly plug a short I wrote a while ago that deals with this very subject....

http://www.simplyscripts.net/cgi-bin/Blah/Blah.pl?b-short/m-1219367266/s-new/

Quoted from Grandma Bear I don't understand why people get upset over remakes. No one is forcing anyone to watch any of them...

For every remake being produced in Hollywood there is one less original project being greenlit. That means writers working for scale bringing an old classic up to date instead of selling an original spec that could make them more money.

The more people pay money to watch remakes then the more will be made, most Hollywood studios will do whatever brings in the money. If that means the end of original cinema then so be it.

I would think that anyone who has a vested interest in seeing original movies made should be a little upset over the current state of affairs.

Holy crap. You're right, GM. You are shameless. But hell, I'll take a look at it. Might calm me down a little.

--Julio