5 Reasons Why Bill Skarsgard's The Crow Remake Bombed At The Box Office - SlashFilm
www.slashfilm.com
The Crow remake starring Bill Skarsgard failed to get off the ground. Here's why the long-delayed film flopped at the box office.

While the summer movie season has been generally strong for the last couple of months, this past weekend was a bumpy ride so far as new releases were concerned. MGM’s “Blink Twice,” the feature directorial debut of Zoe Kravitz, did well enough for itself with a $7.3 million domestic start. Unfortunately for Lionsgate, the long-gestating “The Crow” remake didn’t fare nearly as well, to put it mildly. The new adaptation of James O’Barr’s graphic novel of the same name had nothing shy of a disastrous start to its box office run.

Director Rupert Sanders’ “The Crow” took in an estimated $4.6 million on its opening weekend, placing at number eight on the domestic charts. That was just barely above “Despicable Me 4” ($4.4 million), a movie that has been in theaters for going on two months. It also failed to gross more than the “Coraline” 15th anniversary re-release ($5 million), which is on its second weekend. Not only was this well below already low projections, it was less than half of what the original “Crow” made on its opening weekend in 1994, as that version opened to $11.7 million in its day.

What went wrong here? How did the producers miss the mark so badly? We’re going to go over the biggest reasons that “The Crow” failed to fly high at the box office. Let’s get into it.

The reasons are:

  • The Crow failed to impress critics and audiences
  • The Crow’s competition didn’t help matters
  • The stench of development hell surrounding The Crow lingers
  • The Crow franchise has been dead for years
  • The Crow was another reboot nobody asked for
  • SteveEnglish
    124·
    22 days ago

    it’s genuinely startling just how utterly wretched the finished product is and how unfit it is for a wide release […] incoherently plotted and sloppily made

    I have seen it, and can tell you this review is sensationalized for views.
    It’s not remotely that bad. In fact I’d say it’s the opposite of incoherently plotted. The plot is overly coherent. I think it would benefit from some more ambiguity and mystery.
    And it’s not at all sloppily made. The cinematography, set design, and general production, are easily average. Even quite good at times.

    The story is it’s biggest weakness. It’s not an adaptation. It’s more like “Inspired By”. And none of the story changes improve anything. Some hurt things quite a bit.

    • bizarroland@fedia.io
      21·
      22 days ago

      I would have liked this movie more if they had dug Brandon Lee up out of his grave and rigged him up with animatronics and used AI to recreate his voice.

      I say that to say do you have any idea how little I would like a movie if they dug Brandon Lee up out of the grave and rigged him up with animatronics and used AI to recreate his voice?

      That’s how little I like even the very concept of a continuation or sequel or reboot of this franchise.

    • Lemonparty@lemm.eeEnglish
      43·
      22 days ago

      Bro I think you have either exceptionally bad taste, or an almost inhuman tolerance for the putrescent. Probably both actually.

      • SteveEnglish
        53·
        22 days ago

        Dude I think you have exceptionally binary taste, or unrealistic expectations for most works of art. Almost certainly both actually.

        I’d recommend you watch the The Room (2003), to re-calibrate your perception of how bad a movie can be.