#and then the second graphic happened

[khaotunq]

live through this, and you won't look back

[616witch]

your worst day as a mutant will be your best as an x-man.

[hinasho]

I'll tell you what people's problem with The Crow 2024 is — I'm a longtime fan by the way, I own the comics, I watched all the movies, so on.

The Crow 1994 managed to get the soul of the source material (comics). The Crow is a story about overcoming grief and acceptance of death — the author wrote Eric's story during his darkest periods of grief after his girlfriend was killed. So the story of Eric and Shelley have meaning, they are meaningful characters to a lot of people. Brandon's movie, while with some differences from the original story, still carried the same themes beautifully and the tragedy that happened during the filming made people (me included) turn protective over the memory of The Crow and it’s meaning.

There were three other movies after The Crow 1994 but they never dared to touch on Eric's character, instead they created new ones like Ashe Corven, Jimmy Cuervo and Alex Corvis. And those movies suck, don’t get me wrong, but people don’t have a problem with them because they didn't touch on Brandon's Lee legacy and di their best to stay on theme — grief and acceptance. They are their own thing, and that's that.

So did the comics. Eric story is the first main one, but no one took him and tried to continue it, he's pretty much untouchable, he has his beginning and his end. Instead, they created new Crows for their stories: Joshua, Iris Shaw, Mark Leung...There's a long list of existing Crows with their own stories.

The problem with 2024 The Crow is mostly that they called it a remake and took Eric's names to a character that doesn’t even resembles the original Eric — and I'm not saying in physical appearance, I'm saying his essence because the original Eric is a killer of bad guys, but he's also pretty charismatic; he loved life, he was gentle with the little girl Sarah he was friends with, he was kind, he was thoughtful, he even jokes around! Which, to many people, Bill's Eric does not resembles even a little bit of Eric's other than his name and neither does his story matches the themes and soul behind The Crow franchise.

The main gripe The Crow community has with the 2024 version is them taking Eric's and Shelley story, then changing it so much and losing it's soul when the easiest thing to avoid all this controversy and review bombing would've been just be like "Hey, we're making a new Crow movie, but we have created our own original protagonists for it!" just like people have been doing for years, because that's what 2024 Shelley and Eric feel like to people — original characters who just happen to share the names of the OG's.

Anyway, I watched the 2024 version and while Bill did a phenomenal job as always with what he was given and he looks so damn good, the story just...Didn't get me at all. There's not one bit of The Crow essence in there for me.

Hello, thank you for sharing your thoughts! 💞 I finally watched The Crow 1994 and City of Angels today (still need to watch Salvation & Wicked Prayer) so fortunately I now have a bit more context.

The problem with 2024 The Crow is mostly that they called it a remake

So to begin my breakdown: The 2024 isn't a remake of the 1994 movie. This seems to be a widespread misconception. But in all of the clips and trailers Lionsgate has released, they clarify that it's a "modern re-imagining of the original graphic novel". The movie never claims to be a remake of the 1994 film.

Now a fair debate could be how closely tied (or not) the '24 movie is to the graphic novel, which the two are remarkably different, but based on the reviews and comments I've seen, fans seem more inclined to keep comparing it to the 1994 adaptation despite Lionsgate never claiming they were trying to remake that specific film.

So basically, comparisons between '94 Eric and '24 Eric don't really hold up as valid criticisms in my opinion, because the director had no intention of adapting the '24 film from the '94 movie in the first place.

the original Eric is a killer of bad guys, but he's also pretty charismatic; he loved life, he was gentle with the little girl Sarah he was friends with, he was kind, he was thoughtful, he even jokes around! Which, to many people, Bill's Eric does not resembles even a little bit

'24 Eric is still a killer of killers. He only kills those that attack him first or had something to do with his and Shelly's deaths. He never kills needlessly.

In regards to him loving life, 2024 Eric does in droves! He actively hates having to kill so many people and takes no enjoyment out of it. The opera scene, while fantastic, wasn't a fun moment for him. Since her death, you can tangibly feel that all he wants to do is get back to his simple life with Shelly. He loves her and he loves the life they had.

As for him being charismatic, I can see your point there. In the graphic novels (from summaries I've read), GN Eric does have a morbid sense of humor and at times played around with his kills before finishing the job. His relationship with Sherri was brief but sweet and he gets a cute cat!! He continues to form relationships even after Shelly's death because of his charisma and kindness.

From a writing perspective, I believe all of these moments are intended to humanize Eric given the GN begins with him as The Crow pretty much immediately. We are introduced to him already in the throes of his grief and seeking vengeance.

In contrast, the '24 film paces the transition MUCH slower with the first act being about how Shelly and Eric meet, and the growth of their romance. I believe Director Rupert Sanders used those scenes to humanize the characters instead, which he accomplishes as both Eric and Shelly feel like they're just normal people dealt a shitty hand who only want to live their lives together. You can see the love they shared and how pure it was.

Basically, the core of the characters remain the same, just told in different ways throughout the story. In the graphic novel, James O'Barr humanizes Eric & adds levity in the midst of the carnage, while Rupert Sanders adds it before the carnage. Despite the timeline differences, both succeed in showing that Eric isn't a mindless murdering machine, and is just a regular guy who's been driven to the point of madness.

(It still would've been a nice touch for '24 Eric to adopt a cat for Shelly in the movie though.)

Bill's Eric does not resembles even a little bit of Eric's other than his name and neither does his story matches the themes and soul behind The Crow franchise.

From my understanding, the main themes behind the franchise are grief, the difficulty to move past it, and divine justice.

All three Erics suffer from visions of Shelly, who's memory plays on a feedback loop as they go about their spree. Something both the '94 and '24 films don't do, however, is touch on GN Eric's self harm tendencies. Which isn't a criticism! I'm merely discussing the different ways they show Eric's state of mourning.

The inability to move on is also still prevalent in the '24 movie. It's an active choice Eric makes when Kronos gives him the option to get his life back, and instead Eric submerges deeper and signs away his soul. He steps into it with his eyes wide open knowing he's damning himself forever.

Meanwhile in the graphic novel, Eric is already submerged. He is already a walking corpse, the embodiment of a heart so broken the only way to put himself back together is to weaponize the shards of his loss. I believe this is who '24 Eric develops into after the second act when he signs away his soul.

In the first act, he is human. In the second act, he is transitioning, and in the third act, he has truly become The Crow. Too deep in grief to escape it. The main difference between the '24 version and the GN version is that we see '24 Eric's journey to reach that final stage. It's the difference between character-focused narratives vs parable-like storytelling. Neither is inherently better than the other, just different.

And when it comes to divine justice, hmmm.....

In the GN, Eric and Shelly are killed and brutalized due to a completely random act of evil. The gang that killed them and assaulted Shelly had zero connections to the couple and were just some cruel, awful randos off the street. Based on what I've read, Eric nearly kills all of them without difficulty. Most of his hardship comes from his own bouts of depression and misery.

(By the way, by having the villains all be mediocre average goons, and majority of Eric's troubles be psychological, the GN focuses more on the danger of all-consuming grief, highly likely because of the trauma James O'Barr was experiencing when he wrote it. Meanwhile both the '94 and '24 films have Eric struggle a lot more during his fight scenes, elevating the danger of his physical opponents. But this is a tangent, back to what I was talking about!)

By all of them being average goons, the story gets across that: yes normal everyday people can and are capable of atrocious acts of evil, and yes they deserve to face the brunt of their crimes and divine punishment.

However in both the '94 and '24 movies, Eric and Shelly's deaths are not random and are planned crimes to silence Shelly. And both come up with a "big bad" for Eric to face off against. In the '94 movie, it was Top Dollar, a criminal kingpin, and in the '24 movie it's Vincent Roeg, a rich executive who's also a crimelord.

BUT what the '24 film does differently is that Roeg is also a supernatural being himself, who's made a pact with the devil to trade innocent souls for immortality.

This is probably the only area in which I agree with OG fans on that a central theme was changed. Because by making the main antagonist "unnatural", it's no longer about everyday, normal people committing horrible evils. It's about a supernatural entity on par with The Crow.

I think Rupert Sanders wanted to focus more on the supernatural aspect of The Crow universe. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing and definitely made for a fun movie, but I do agree with OG fans that the "grounded" nature of casual human cruelty was lost in that regard.

By implementing this change, the weight of Eric's vengeance is also changed. Because now it's no longer just personal. As the character of Kronos says in the movie, they need Eric to kill Roeg because he and all the deaths he's caused are unnatural and they essentially need Eric to tip the scales back into balance. While Eric's primary motive is still about doing right by Shelly, there's now an element of saving the world from an unnaturally superpowered tyrant, rather than the everyday cruelties of man.

So in this aspect, I do agree that a core theme was changed between the graphic novel and the 2024 movie. This still doesn't necessarily mean it's a bad story, just that Rupert Sanders had different intentions.

Because this still connects to the previous theme, the inability to move on and cope with death. Except now it's portrayed in the antagonist as well. His power is completely about his refusal to accept his own mortality. However, this does, like I said, detract from the normality of evil theme. So it's basically a gain and a loss 😅

(Plus, as I was writing this, I thought about how Eric's motivation is changed as well. In the '24 movie, Eric's goal is still to do right by Shelly, but it's to save her. Because if he succeeds, Shelly will be resurrected. This adds a noble spin to his killing spree, whereas the GN and the '94 film are solely about overwhelming rage at the loss of a loved one. There is no resurrecting Shelly. It's about enacting divine justice against their killers before traveling to the afterlife together. They're already dead and there's nothing GN Eric can do to change that, unlike 2024 Eric.

On the flip side, while this "nobler" take may feel like a negative change, I think it's countered by the fact that Eric succeeds in saving her, but is still dissatisfied because he's unable to actually be with her. GN and '94 Eric were able to find peace and reunite with their loves. '24 Eric only gets about 5 minutes before she's resurrected and he's stuck in purgatory forever.

At the end of the '24 film, both Eric and Shelly are dissatisfied as they can no longer be together. It's a bittersweet ending that feels more bitter than sweet. So while there is a "nobler" cause behind Eric's actions, the tone of the story is still very grim.

This is also why I believe the way the 2024 movie ended was with the intentions of a sequel where Eric does achieve his own peace. But that's a different conversation!)

...the easiest thing to avoid all this controversy and review bombing would've been just be like "Hey, we're making a new Crow movie, but we have created our own original protagonists for it!" just like people have been doing for years, because that's what 2024 Shelley and Eric feel like to people — original characters who just happen to share the names of the OG's.

Sure! I don't disagree. Well, I don't really think anything deserves to be review bombed unless it's content that's actively harmful. But I don't disagree with the original protagonists angle. Changing the names couldn't have hurt.

That said though, and I say this as gently as I can, Eric's character existed before '94 Eric and does not need to end with the '94 movie. I think it'd be one thing if the 1994 movie created the story of The Crow and that was the first iteration of Eric's character. But... it's not.

Multiple re-imaginings and adaptations of books / comics have been around since forever. The show Smallville and Man of Steel both adapt Superman in wildly different ways. Shakespeare's Taming of the Shrew has had five different adaptations, and yet no one shits on 10 Things I Hate About You (1999) or Deliver Us From Eva (2003) for being modern re-imaginings. Awhile ago, me and my friend were discussing our favorite adaptations of the Little Women novel. Her favorite is the 1994 film while my favorite is the 2022 modern Kdrama!

I bring up all of these examples to say that there is REALLY nothing wrong with doing modern re-imaginings of older works, and tweaking characters and plotlines to reflect the changed style of the story and time period.

What's most important is that the heart of the story is kept. At the end of the day, The Crow is about an innocent man who enacts divine justice against he and his lover's murderers, while struggling to cope with her loss. Based on the graphic novel and what I've seen of the 1994 movie and the City of Angels sequel, the world of The Crow says that life can be fair and that no matter how high, or low, or cruel, or spineless, someone is, that karma is a bitch and it IS possible for them to reap what they sow.

I truly think the 2024 adaptation captured that feeling, even if it may look different than what people might be used to or expected.

Instead of being upset about how unexpected it is, try going in with an open mind and seeing the story Rupert, Bill, and FKA Twigs wanted to tell. I've read and seen a few interviews by now, and these three were genuinely passionate about the characters & story, and you can feel that in the movie.

And even if you still have no interest, the other parts of the franchise you do enjoy aren't going anywhere. The 2024 adaptation doesn't effect them in any capacity. The stories you love still exist and the new addition can't harm or take them away from you.

[lisutarid-a]

[nabaath-areng]

Half assed screens, but some of the glamours I might will use for Ieeha throughout the journey of Dawntrail!

[aeolianblues]

was kinda thinking about this when I saw Renee Rapp live recently-- I didn't know her visual vibe, I'd heard a few songs here and there but I hadn't really *seen* her, and her attire at Osheaga was really casual, a jersey (baseball/basketball?) and slacks. And that was so amazing! I couldn't help thinking, the work Billie Eilish has done for how women in pop music are allowed to dress is incredible. Seeing her up there all comfortable you just know that Billie walked in her oversized tops so that Renee in her slacks could run; Billie walked through all the critcisms about how she dressed slobbily and having to assert that she didn't owe anyone a display of skin, so that Renee could be comfortable and unquestioned running up and down the catwalk in front of 10,000 people. How iconic.

And I don't think we even realised at the time how much something as simple as letting Billie dress the way she as a (then-) 17-year-old teenager dressed, could end up meaning for a future generation of women in music.

Obviously there is still way to go, there were weirdos complaining about how 'plain' Dua Lipa's Glastonbury outfit was this year (in 2024!!), l have to ask, are you at Paris Fashion Week?? She is the musical HEADLINER of an entire day of music at one of the biggest music festivals in the world, and you can't grant her the space to exist as an artist, you have to moan about her dress not being excitingly revealing enough. There's work to do, it's still dismal out there. But the space Billie Eilish has created for a most ordinarily-dressed woman popstar is still heartening.

[wintertundra-art]

I can't believe the amount of lore I have for my ocs compared to the main story which is like lots of events I have no idea how to link to each other

[sidewalk-cracks]

Where was my “Danny and Vlad forced team up episode”- no, no, Reign Storm doesn’t count, neither does Vortex’s episode, those were only for like, 30 seconds. I mean a full 20 minute episode. Or even better, a two-parter. We got one between Danny and Valerie, what about the main antagonist of the show? Where was my “Danny and Vlad on the run from something together”? Where was my incessant pestering and bugging and teasing between the two? Where was my character-developing cathartic shout-match argument between them on opposite sides of their little campfire one night? Where was my Vlad softly saying, “I’ll take first watch, go to sleep” some time after the argument, refusing to meet Danny’s eyes because he feels responsible for getting a child into this mess and is going through character development? Where was my Vlad getting injured and Danny crying “Vlad!” before he can even fully process what happened, just that Vlad is on the ground and hasn’t gotten back up? Where is my camera shot of Danny and Vlad surging forward side-by-side, firing the same attack in unison during the climatic final fight against their opponent?

[catkin-morgs-kookaburralover]

i remember once seeing an ad for scar reducing creams and ended up deciding no that's not reasonable to buy if it's literally self inflicted. but because of this now being in a visible place (can probably hide until summer, but after it's too warm to wear long sleeves... oh gosh. :< ) I feel like I probably should do research on how to minimise scarring at least for visible cuts for the sake of others.

and maybe invest in a nice light summer cardigan :) you know those pretty lacy ones, I bet I could pull that off, and I've wanted one for ages so this might be my motivation :)

....I should also do research on how to hide them before they've healed, because I've got a simulation next Tuesday. If necessary I talk to the person running the sim and get permission to be in long sleeves for that

oh gosh why did I forget. I'll have to be in short sleeves for placement. oh gosh oh gosh I am an idiot

[jorvikzelda]

What are your top 3 seemingly-small-but-actually-huge overarching improvements you'd like to see in SSO, excluding any that have been officially announced (retrofits, updated inventory, MC 2.0 etc)? Mine are:

Updated sky - the one we have during winter is so pretty and by a LARGE margin outshines the normal sky, and I wish the sky worked in a way that didn't make it very obviously a cube when you're close to the corners (to, for example, make the aurora stop being severely skewed in Redwood Point during winter). Also, moon please 🥺

Better/proper lighting system and more atmospheric sunrises, sunsets and nights. With moonlight please 🥺

Update to all the older gen 3 horses to give them a mouth rig with teeth/tongue + the improved mane/tail system that newer models seem to have

[starzzyeyed]

I DEMAND TO KNOW ABOUT PEE PEE BOY !!!!!!!!!!!!!

-rattie

There’s a boy

Who needs to pee

[freckledgeto]

i shouldve studied something else i should’ve done stem

[thekenobee]

What I ordered:

What I got instead:

[itsbrucey]

S2 Ep42 Dungeons and Daddies mention

Anyway um fucking great episode as always. I was so excited for Darryl to come back like that's my MAN THATS MY BITCH RIGHT THERE I WAS SO HAPPY. AND THE GRANT AND DARRYL REUNION?

I'm just also thoroughly repulsed by the graphic piss torture that Matthew Arnold thought it was ok to inflict upon me. A SMOOTHIE??? DRIP FEEDING?? RECYCLING...... THAT'S. ENOUGH!!!

[six-improbable-things]

I fucking love having weird-ass dreams. Especially when I get to remember them when I wake up.

[sanstropfremir]

So someone brought this up a while ago, but Hybe had their whole survival show for their Japanese boy group earlier this year, and just dropped the debut (I think? Japan is weird with prereleasing music videos) today. Apparently the group is called &Team which is just….a choice.

But anyway, I watched the music video and honestly kind of felt bad for them. The song wasn’t horrible - typical hybe production but obviously aiming to sort of hit that light rock sound that’s been popular in Japan for a while. I don’t think they were that successful but it’s not awful, just extremely forgettable. The video, on the other hand, was bizarre. It’s like they forgot it’s a music video and tried to do a weird lore heavy trailer. I then realize they’re already pushing what looks to be a webtoon based on the group! I didn’t watch the webtoon trailer, but it’s obvious it all ties together. I guess most newer hybe artists are doing this webtoon thing. but at least the other groups (minus enhypen with their cheesy vampire theme) are slightly more subtle, as where for &team it felt like the music video existed solely to advertise for the webtoon.

Obviously the way hybe is doing this is weird and I’m not here for it, but I’m a. Curious about your thoughts on their attempt, and b. Curious how you think this sort of kpop group x media collab type of thing could actually be done successfully.

i've thought a bit about this and to be honest i don't think i can answer this fully because straight up? i do not give a shit about whatever this webtoon nonsense is and i don't really want to waste my time reading up on it bc it sounds boring as hell. but i have some thoughts as an artist that works across multiple different mediums, so i'll give an answer anyways.

one of the first questions i ask myself when i'm conceptualizing a new work is this: what is the best medium for the story i am trying to portray? why that medium specifically? what does the medium itself add to the work? you have to think about the form the artwork takes just as much as the content itself. the best and most effective works of art are the ones in which the medium is intrinsic to the meaning and experience of the work itself. it cannot be transposed to something else. it's the reason why it's so hard to adapt a novel to film, because a good novel needs to be a novel. there's a reason it's a novel. kpop mvs and performances are meant to elevate an emotion in accordance with the song that they're choreographed to. there's already the crossover of several different mediums happening here in a long developed line of historical synergy. if you are intending to make an artwork that covers both a performance element and a written element, you better damn well make sure that there's a reason both of those elements are absolutely necessary to tell that story.