Wednesday, August 28, 2013

The Crow

Welcome to the brand spanking new Future Film Flashback. If you didn't read my intro page to this new section, here's the deal: Mark and I have found some films that are soon to be remade, for whatever reason. We're going to watch the originals and decide if a remake is a good idea. This is not entirely a review, as we've done in the past. Since this is the pioneer post, we're not really sure how it's going to go. It will probably mold itself into something more coherent and hopefully interesting once we get into the swing of things.

Our first film is The Crow, starring Brandon Lee and directed by Alex Proyas. It came out in 1994; the remake, according to IMDb does not yet have a release date, though F. Javier Gutierrez is set to direct, and Luke Evans is starring. The original spawned a few sequels, but I don't believe they had the critical approval or cult following of the original.

Netflix: Yes


Mark: This was my first time watching The Crow, so I went into it knowing only what I have gleaned here and there. Mainly that it had good set and production design and some nice action, and really that was all I’d heard. So I went it with 'meh' expectations. That being said, I came out wondering why I’d never gotten around to seeing this sooner. I think the first thing I would want to focus on, since it would be the major thing any remake would go after, is that much touted set design. This is a movie that combined miniature sets with the real streets of Detroit and it worked wonderfully. Proyas, the director, blended them seamlessly, which for it’s time, was remarkable to me. But, from what I know of remakes, all of this will be lost in the “grand” age of CGI.

Dylan: Yea, set design is not something I usually focus on. But this movie totally mastered it. It reminded me a lot of the section of the Narrows (section of Gotham) in Batman Begins. You can tell it’s not a real city, but the way it flows and moves -- which is enhanced by the first person view of the crow soaring over the buildings, through steam and smoke and snow -- gives the city just enough dystopian grit to make it both fantastical and believable. The thing is, this movie came out in 1994, and it really shows. Not necessarily because of the CGI, but pretty much everything else. The aesthetic style, the characters, the music; these are things that make this movie unique and great, but also anchor it to the time period. I mean, come on, the main character is like this hardcore but sensitive rocker, and the bad guys are all metal heads in leather and spikes. It’s kind of goofy in its seriousness. It just seems like a remake would deliberately get rid of all this, since it’s not going to work with today’s audience. But then it’s not really a remake, is it?

Mark: I understand what you’re saying. I mean, Top Dollar (the main bad guy, obviously, with a name like that) wore very gothic outfits and had a ridiculous collection of swords, not to mention his general mannerisms made him at one point unbelievable but at another wildly engaging. Everyone in this movie, beyond the cop and Sarah are, let's be honest, insane. But the movie seemed to be fueled both on the serious thread of revenge and love, and at the same time, it’s manic rush of action and vividly cartoonish characters. They played well against each other, when movies nowadays are often tonally imbalanced. My fear would be that this remake will be in line with comic book movies nowadays: brooding (anti)hero in serious world. There is a moment that is really only a second long, but when the mass of cops tell Draven (The Crow) to freeze, he literally dances off the screen. It was funny, but it fit his character and underlined how ridiculous all this action and violence really is. And I feel a remake would lose that kind of self-aware satiric attitude.

Dylan:In a sense, I think the movie has already been remade, with The Punisher: Warzone. That takes a lot of what works in this film, as well as the general premise, but just loses itself in ridiculousness. It’s hard to say why one works and the other doesn’t. For one thing, dark, goofy superhero movies made sense in the '90s; look at Blade, Spawn, Tim Burton's Batman movies, and even the original Punisher with Dolph Lundgren. But my point is, can something like The Crow still work today, in a world with a million other vigilante/superhero movies?

Mark: I guess, what it has going for it in that regard, is that in the mainstream eye, I don’t think a lot of people know this it's based on a comic book. But either which way, this is still a costumed vigilante out for justice, so it’s all the same in the end. And the problem will be making it stand out. To revisit the Batman analogy, a remake would probably function the same way Batman Begins did after Tim Burton's movies. A complete shift in tone and seriousness that may be new and entertaining, except for the fact that at this point it's not new at all. And of course they'd be looking for a franchise, so you can expect an even mildly successful remake to have at least two sequels. I don’t think a remake has enough to put itself apart from the pack, especially since when it comes out, we’re already gonna be into the new Batman and a whole new wave of DC and Marvel properties. The original Crow stood alone in a genre that wasn’t even a genre then.

Dylan: From what we’re saying, I’m surprised they’re remaking this film at all. You figure, the studios these days are afraid of R-rated comic book movies (Kick-Ass 2 being the exception. And I suppose you could make an argument for upcoming Sin City and 300 films). But chances are this one will get lowered to a PG-13, in order to bring in an audience that is already going to be scratching their heads at the movie’s premise. While I do sort of think The Crow story could benefit from a more modern treatment (Batman again), I just don’t think this is the era for it. And then they’re going to put it in 3D and set it up for sequels and shit. Maybe I’m a cynic, but I just don’t see it.

Mark: Oh they will most definitely set it at PG-13. The film itself is coming up on 20 years old, so most of the people who know it, will shirk the new film since, you know, the original is still good. And the younger audience will have no idea what this is about beyond what is told to them from the studio and whatnot.

Dylan: To be fair, there are like three sequels to The Crow.

Mark: This is true, but let's be honest, less and less people saw them and those who did, probably forced themselves to forget. So, for a remake, they will have to make it more accessible to younger audiences. Unless they go for a small budget, so there is less to recoup from sales, and can risk the R rating. But almost no ones does that without having huge muscle behind them in terms of director or actor. And I don’t see them getting that, since the director they seem to have has done little to nothing and Luke Evans is set to be Draven, and I forget who he is. I just don’t see this remake doing well. Now it’s still early, and little has come out, so maybe they’ll create some really interesting reimagining, but for now, with how well, in my opinion, the original stands out, a remake seems like nothing but a cash grab on a property that has been out of the general public mind for just long enough to seem “fresh”.

Dylan: Fun fact: Luke Evans was also in the movie The Raven. Get it? Raven...Crow. He was born for this role. 

----------------------------------------------------------------

So there you have it. They're remaking The Crow. If you're someone like me, who was young in the 90s, perhaps you haven't seen the original. And that's probably what the studio behind the remake is counting on. Since it's on Netflix, I would definitely recommend a viewing. And then feel free to comment. Do you think this movie deserves a remake? Have you even heard of the original? Tell us what you think.

No comments:

Post a Comment