Tattoos in film have long served as potent visual cues, instantly communicating volumes about a character’s personality, history, and inner turmoil. In Rupert Sanders’ 2024 reimagining of “The Crow,” the protagonist, Eric Draven, played by Bill Skarsgård, is adorned with an array of striking tattoos, most notably a sprawling piece across his back. This prominent back tattoo, featuring an excerpt from H.P. Lovecraft’s poem “Despair,” is not merely decorative; it’s a deliberate design choice that speaks volumes about the character and the film’s thematic depth. According to graphic designer Nikola Prijic, Skarsgård himself suggested the Lovecraft excerpt, recognizing its resonance with the dark and melancholic spirit of “The Crow.” The stanza, beginning with “Evil wings in ether beating” and concluding with “in a cloud of madness,” was meticulously crafted by Prijic into a custom stencil, applied to Skarsgård’s back to embody Eric Draven’s tortured soul.
Tattoos as Character Billboards: Instant Storytelling
The strategic placement of a large, fake tattoo on an actor’s body, particularly across the back, operates almost as a cinematic billboard. It’s a visual shortcut, instantly broadcasting key aspects of a protagonist’s character. While tattoo artistry is incredibly diverse, societal perceptions often associate tattoos with non-conformity, edginess, or a troubled past. Films frequently leverage these cultural assumptions, using tattoos to quickly establish characters as ex-military, members of organized crime, or individuals grappling with inner demons and artistic sensibilities – often embodying several of these traits simultaneously.
This concept of tattoos functioning as instant character indicators has been explored by academics like art historian Matt Lodder, who describes it as “overdetermination.” Similarly, Nikki Sullivan, Lodder’s colleague, uses the term “dermal diagnosis,” highlighting the ingrained idea that tattoos visually manifest inner truths and core identities. While the roots of this assumption are somewhat problematic, tracing back to 19th-century criminologists’ flawed attempts to link tattoos to criminal tendencies, its cinematic application is undeniable. Movies and TV shows frequently employ tattoos to emphatically signal a character’s hardened nature, trauma, or exceptional status, contrasting them with more conventional, “corporate” archetypes.
Prijic explained that director Rupert Sanders envisioned a “modern version of Eric” to connect with contemporary audiences. This modern Eric draws visual inspiration from the heavily tattooed aesthetics of popular rappers of recent years, such as Lil Wayne, whom Prijic specifically cited as a reference. The sheer quantity of tattoos on Skarsgård’s character in “The Crow” is itself a design element. Prijic described the layered effect, ranging from “shitty homemade” tattoos, reminiscent of impulsive, drunken self-expression, to more elaborate and professionally executed pieces. “Some tattoos are really nicely done, but you have layers upon layers, this scratcher-style, homemade, I’m just doodling with a needle on my arms tattoos, and he’s probably letting his friends do the same.”
These layers of tattoos serve as a visual timeline, condensing the years between a traumatic childhood incident and the film’s present narrative. Both the crude and refined tattoos reference the East L.A. tattoo style, influenced by jailhouse tattooing and the photorealistic artistry popularized by studios like Good Time Charlie’s (now TattooLand), incorporating iconography deeply rooted in Chicano culture. Lodder notes, “There’s a real particular kind of look of that style.”
Bill Skarsgård and FKA twigs in THE CROW. Photo Credit: Larry Horricks for Lionsgate
Beyond Shorthand: Character Depth and Tattoo Stereotypes
While tattoos offer a convenient visual shorthand, relying solely on them for character development is a pitfall. True character depth emerges from nuanced storytelling – framing, costume, movement, emotional expression, and meaningful choices. Over-reliance on tattoos risks perpetuating simplistic stereotypes and incomplete assumptions, ironically, the very stereotypes that make tattoos so appealing for cinematic shorthand in the first place.
Lodder raises a crucial sociological point: the idea that tattoos possess inherent, readily decipherable meanings is itself a learned behavior, largely shaped by media representation. “There are good sociological arguments to say that even the didactic account of this stuff, the idea that things must be encoded with a straightforward, readable meaning, is a learned behavior, right? It’s something you pick up from media, potentially,” Lodder explains. He argues that the notion of tattoos as narrative and deeply meaningful symbols is a relatively recent phenomenon, emerging more prominently in the 1970s and 80s, influenced by external media portrayals rather than being intrinsic to early tattoo culture.
The Evolution of Movie Tattoos: From Paint to Print
Regardless of evolving cultural perceptions of tattoos, the practical methods for creating film-ready tattoos have become increasingly sophisticated. Prijic describes the modern process as akin to “kid stick-on tattoos.” Designs are printed on specialized paper with adhesive, allowing for application to the actor’s skin. The challenge lies in achieving realistic on-screen appearance, ensuring they don’t look artificial.
While poorly executed movie tattoos still occur, advancements in stencil-printing technology have significantly reduced instances of obviously fake-looking tattoos, a common issue in older films where tattoos were often painted directly onto actors. Lodder acknowledges, “The technology for that is getting a lot better than it used to.” He humorously points out a common cinematic trope – instantly healed tattoos, citing “The Hangover” as a prime example where fresh tattoos appear fully healed without redness, shine, or scabbing.
“The Crow” appears to prioritize realism, with Prijic and the makeup team collaborating to create tattoo applications that convey both visual impact and a sense of physical pain, aligning with the character’s emotional state. Prijic emphasizes the collaborative design process: “I always have to stick [my design] on a model in Photoshop and it helps me a lot. You get the opinion of the makeup artists and the director and then of course the actor, because if he doesn’t like it, you have to change it.”
Navigating Tattoo Copyright in Film
Copyright considerations surrounding tattoos in film and television have become increasingly defined. For a long time, the legalities of displaying tattoos without explicit licensing were ambiguous, often resolved through out-of-court settlements. The case of Mike Tyson’s facial tattoo artist, who sued over its unauthorized use in “The Hangover Part II,” is a well-known example. Similarly, the artist behind Rasheed Wallace’s tattoo was surprised to see his work animated in a Nike commercial, and tattoo artist Catherine Alexander successfully sued over the use of Randy Orton’s tattoos in the “WWE 2K” video game franchise.
Lodder explains, “Copyright for tattoos and movies was, for a long time, kind of an unsettled question because I think legal scholars suspected that the way that copyright law was written and copyright treaties were written did apply to tattooing, but it was unclear exactly how and what the remedies would be.” He notes that producers now have greater clarity regarding copyright boundaries.
Alt text: Promotional image for The Crow movie, copyright Lions Gate/Everett Collection, subtly displaying crow tattoo design elements and highlighting legal and copyright considerations in film tattoo usage.
This increased legal awareness is why productions like “The Bear” often opt to conceal Jeremy Allen White’s real tattoos and create bespoke designs for the show. “The Crow” similarly utilizes original designs by Prijic and other tattoo artists, alongside licensed stock tattoo designs.
The design process for “The Crow” was highly collaborative with Skarsgård. Beyond the Lovecraft quote, the actor also requested a tattoo of a Swedish zip code, a personal detail unrelated to Eric’s character. This inclusion, while subtle, exemplifies how even seemingly minor tattoo choices can encode personal meaning within the broader cinematic narrative, adding layers to character portrayal and demonstrating the thoughtful approach to “The Crow Tattoo” and the overall visual identity of the film.
