Talk:The Crow (1994 film)

Uncited material in need of citations

I am moving the following uncited material here until it can be properly supported with inline citations of reliable, secondary sources, per WP:V, WP:CS, WP:IRS, WP:PSTS, WP:BLP, WP:NOR, et al. This diff shows where it was in the article. Nightscream (talk) 19:59, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

However, they unknowingly left the live primer in place at the rear of the cartridge. At some point during filming, the revolver was apparently discharged with one of these improperly-deactivated cartridges in the chamber, setting off the primer with enough force to drive the bullet partway into the barrel, where it became stuck (a condition known as a squib load). The prop crew either failed to notice or failed to recognize the significance of this issue.

He was rushed to the New Hanover Regional Medical Center in Wilmington, where he underwent six hours of surgery. However, attempts to save him were unsuccessful, and Lee was pronounced dead at 1:03 pm EST on March 31, 1993, at the age of 28. The shooting was ruled an accident.

Nightscream (talk) 19:59, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Genre

Every notable site lists it as Action, and then alternately crime, drama, fantasy, thriller, and horror. Not one lists "superhero" once.

• https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0109506/
• https://www.boxofficemojo.com/title/tt0109506/?ref_=bo_rl_ti
• https://www.allmovie.com/movie/the-crow-vm434236
• https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_crow
• https://www.avclub.com/film/reviews/the-crow-1994
• https://www.metacritic.com/movie/the-crow/
• https://movieweb.com/movie/the-crow/
• https://www.primevideo.com/detail/The-Crow/0HOLEPPZO3JB645FH6FXVN6X6A
• https://letterboxd.com/film/the-crow/genres/

Superhero is such a reductive and incorrect assessment of the film purely because it's based on a comic book. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 21:48, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Superhero as a genre is more speicifc and the movie actually falls into the genre. Additionally, it's sourced in the article, and The Independent is very reliable source. Sources you've linked have genres as tags (it should be noted that the "superhero" tag doesn't exist on most of these sites; Allmovie, for example, does, and it's listed), while those that call The Crow a superhero film actually call it a superhero film in the text. Also, AV Club has an article that calls it a superhero film too... I've seen many reliable websites and books that refer to The Crow as a work within the superhero genre.

31.41.60.15 (talk) 22:05, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

The independent is talking about the film in 2023 post MCU where every comic book film is apparently a "superhero" film. The overuse of superhero film across Wikipedia is a negative trait, boiling an action thriller like Captain America: The Winter Soldier down to the equivalent of a science-fiction comedy like Ant-Man. A gothic crime action drama like The Crow is not a superhero film, Eric Draven is not a superhero, he's a vengeful spirit and at best an anti-hero. Darkman's a superhero film according to Wikipedia, it's a joke. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 22:23, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

I agree with Darkwarriorblake, it is weird and reductive to try and put this film into the superhero box (it fits better in the revenge thriller Death Wish box IMO). That you can fit squeeze it into that box doesn't make it a good fit or the primary genre. The genre in the lead section has fluctuated over the years(diff 2015) but seems to have been mostly supernatural action. (The AV Club is retrospectively decades after the fact categorising the film as superhero so that Tom Breihan has an excuse to cover that week it in his recurring column.) WP:FILMGENRE That a few sources stick it in the superhero box anyway doesn't mean that this encyclopedia has to give more WP:WEIGHT to those sources. Editors really need to think more carefully about writing the lead section in a way that is useful to help introdcue _encyclopedia readers_ to the subject, and I am not convinced that the labelling genre of as a superhero is the most useful thing for readers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.76.192.119 (talk) 00:35, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Interesting, and the argument that the film isn't being described as such by various sources carries real weight, though the point that "superhero" isn't a recognized category by some of those sources is also a pretty solid rebuttal. I think I would be likely to classify it as a superhero film, in large part because I would classify the character as part of the superhero genre, which I think is the wider perception in the comic book community. He's rather reminiscent of Jim Corrigan's Spectre in that sense, in that he's a spirit of vengeance whose origin story involves his own murder; after taking vengeance on those who killed them, each move on to pursue vengeance against other wrongdoers. The comic character of the Crow follows the usual comic book superhero tropes (with a darker, Goth-inspired facade) and would, at the very least, be considered an antihero in the vein of someone like the Punisher. Are there comic book antiheroes who have had film adaptations that were not classified as superhero movies?

When we identify comic book characters with film/television adaptations who are clearly not classified as superheroes, we usually move into territory like Sandman or Tintin or Jesse Custer or Michael Sullivan--characters whose stories are told in the comic book medium, but who have no real connection to classic superhero story structure (though Custer could certainly still be accurately classified as an antihero). Grandpallama (talk) 17:29, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Sleeper hit claim

The claim that his film was a sleeper hit is nonsense. The film opened at number 1 in the box office! The claim is entirely unsourced original research, and was added without any explanation by anon an IP in January 2015.(diff)

"Sleeper hit" much is much like "cult classic" in that for years editors added it all over Wikipedia without any factual basis, merely because they happened to like a film.

If for some reason editors actually believe this claim please note that because it has been in the article for so long someone out there has probably copied from this article and repeated the bogus claim. WP:CITOGENESIS is real.

Now I'm going to remove the claim from the article, it's only about a decade overdue. -- 109.76.192.119 (talk) 01:07, 15 March 2024 (UTC)