Hollywood Flacks Eat Crow
In 1989, American artist James O’Barr wrote a comic book about an undead vigilante called Eric Draven who was brought back from necrosis by a supernatural crow to avenge the death of his ill-fated fiancée, Shelly Webster. Now, 35 years since the comic’s inception, a film deemed ‘unnecessary’ by O’Barr himself has flown onto the big screen, much to the dismay of nerds across pretty much all artistic disciplines.
The film stars Bill Skarsgård as Eric, electronic pop musician FKA Twigs as Shelly and… that’s pretty much everyone of note for this particular film. However, that’s not why we’re here. We’re here to talk about exactly how this film’s PR team screwed the proverbial pooch, or in this case, killed the proverbial crow.
For context, this isn’t the first time Hollywood has attempted to tackle The Crow. Back in 1994, a cult classic starring Brandon Lee (yes, Bruce Lee’s son) made waves with a grimy, gothic depiction of O’Barr’s creation. While the film itself garnered decent acclaim — with a score of 87% on Rotten Tomatoes and a string of MTV Movie Award nominations, including best song for Big Empty by Stone Temple Pilots — it was the untimely demise of Brandon Lee on set which immortalised The Crow as a celebration of Lee’s life.
For this very reason, rumblings of a movie remake riled-up critics across the mainstream media, which is not a great temperature check from a PR perspective. Alas, the remake moved forward with a reimagining of the original plot and a type-casted weirdo (AKA the guy from It and Nosferatu) in the driver’s seat as Eric Draven. Actors from the 1994 film also jumped on the anti-remake bandwagon with Eric Hudson saying: “The actor, who — I can’t think of his name — is playing the lead, I love and respect. But, for me, The Crow is Brandon Lee.”
There’s certain iconic roles you just don’t mess around with. And films you don’t remake for no reason.
A Murder of Crows
Eventually, Skarsgård himself joined in the commotion, talking smack about the ending of his own movie to the press in favour of “something more definitive” instead of what The Guardian has referred to as “one of 2024’s most atrocious films”. We guess he would have preferred not to leave room a sequel…
Their scathing review reads: “The Crow 2.0 is a total, head-in-hands disaster, incoherently plotted and sloppily made, destined to join the annals of the very worst and most pointless remakes ever made.” With a meagre 23% on Rotten Tomatoes, the film grossed $23 million worldwide against a production budget of $50 million, ouch.
What can we learn from a movie referred to by vulture as “a movie for goth incompetents,” I hear you ask?
Pay respect to origin and legacy work, don't pretend you reinvented the wheel or you'll lose your audience
If there was any semblance of respect for Brandon Lee and his legacy through the original movie, maybe this movie would have had some legs to stand on among the passionate and somewhat incel-adjacent world of comic book fans
Skars-guårding key messages and purpose
Who has been talking about this film, apart from critics flogging a dead horse and Bill Skarsgård running circles around sed dead horse, donning a cowboy hat and yelling: “Yeah, I didn’t like the ending either?” They didn’t seem to do any major PR around the mythology of this franchise, story or it’s legacy. And that likely means Skarsgård was also left unsupported and eventually just got fed up of defending the piece.
One final takeaway, for those of you who are trying to create a successful venture of your own: if it’s already been done, it doesn’t need to be repeated. UNLESS you can make it better, evolve it ultimately, DISTRUPT it for the better.
— McGonagle
