I'm sorry, I love her in the original, but this is a bad take. The entire vibe and look of the original film is "dirty, dingy, and grungy". Does she not remember? Not only is Eric's body covered in scars and eventually ripped, taped-up clothing, but he literally steals his signature black leather coat from one of the villains (Tin Tin) and wears it for the remainder of the film -- therefore dressing exactly like one of the villains he killed.
Also, I would personally find it MORE disrespectful to Brandon Lee if they had hired an actor who is a Brandon Lee clone, dressed him up exactly like Brandon Lee's Crow, and then tried to ape or copy everything about Brandon Lee's version (which is likely what Momoa's version would have been), compared to respecting Brandon's legacy enough to realize they can't and shouldn't try to copy it, and instead should try to go in a different direction that hopefully simply retains the essence of the source material and offers a new perspective of the core story at hand.
In the original comic and film, Eric Draven is not meant to be some kind of clean-cut boy scout superhero or symbol for good. He is a borderline psychotic "ghost" with a thirst for violent vengeance. He is portrayed as being nearly as colorful and unhinged as the villains he hunts down and kills, but he has a good soul and heart. He does have compassion for the innocent. His mission is deranged, but he is driven by grief and the power of his love for Shelly. In the comic, Eric's intense grief even causes him to engage in self-mutilation when not on the hunt. (Self-mutilation is his only vulnerability in the comic). The ways he dispatches the villains in the comic are even more grotesque and violent than in the film itself.
I just find it hard to understand what it is about tattoos that gets people so riled up. It's clear this version of Draven is not a former rocker from the 90s, but most likely some kind of recovering drug addict living in modern day -- someone who has not always lived life on the straight and narrow. To me, his Crow look in the newly released photo is not much of a departure at all from the source material. Look at the picture from the comic of the shirtless Eric Draven that was posted here recently. I see a shirtless Eric with a torso that is covered in scars, wearing Crow makeup and rocking an 80s/90s mullet. In the new picture, I see a shirtless Eric with a torso covered in tattoos, wearing Crow makeup and rocking a 2020s mullet. What am I missing? What is the big deal???
It's amazing how the internet can take something so small and turn it into a huge deal, creating a lasting negative narrative about something before anyone has seen anything more than 2 pictures. This movie might completely suck, or be amazing, or be mediocre. But how can anyone say it will suck because of tattoos??
