Sign Up | Log In

Write a Review
Post a Quick Tip
Create a List
Ask a Question
Create a Poll
Create a Community

Movies •Books •Music •Food •Tv Shows •Technology •Politics •Video Games •Parenting •Fashion •Green Living •more >

Lunch » Tags » Movie » Reviews » The Crow - City of Angels (Collector's Series) (1996)

The Crow - City of Angels (Collector's Series) (1996)

1 rating: -3.0

A movie

Because of his tragic death on the set ofThe Crow, we'll never know if Brandon Lee would have turned one successful film into a popular series. But one look at this tepid sequel suggests that not even the charismatic Lee could have rescuedThe Crowmovies … see full wiki

Tags: Movie

Cast: Thomas Jane, Vincent Perez, Iggy Pop, Mia Kirshner, Richard Brooks (VI)

1 review about The Crow - City of Angels (Collector's Series)...

Showing 1-1 of 1

Sort by:

A slap in the face to O'Barr, and all involved with the original film

Jul 6, 2009

by NicanorJourney
posted in Movie Hype

Rating:

-3

As a fan of Mystery Science Theater 3000, and the general practice of mocking bad films I can honestly say that there was no redeeming value in `The Crow: City of Angels.' The film is just downright sloppy, and very unnecessary given the plot of the first film and how it didn't warrant a sequel in ANY way, but you know Hollywood: if one film makes a profit they need to try and repeat that film's formula and cash in again.

This movie was a low-budget film, roughly $18 million in total cost, which doesn't say anything about the quality, because Alex Proyas, with a simple $15 million managed to make the first film- one of the most visually captivating comic-based films of all time. But what the disadvantage this film does have is that director Tim Pope has nowhere near the talent of Proyas. In fact, 95% of this film's visual style is a carbon copy of the original film, only now most of the city is lit by bright, YELLOW lights, and it happens to be situated beside the ocean. Other than this the style of this film is a rip-off and being a rip-off fails to captivate the mind of the audience in the same way as the first film.

Not to rip on Vincent Perez, but his performance as the new Crow was downright despicable- a pale, heartless imitation of Brandon Lee's critically acclaimed character in the first film. This is probably more the fault of the director and scriptwriters, but regardless, this comes across more as a perversion of Brandon Lee than of a new character picking up the mantle of the Gothic anti-hero.

The script is one of the cheesiest you'll ever see. There is literally a point where the villain kills and drinks the blood of the crow and then gets the strength of the Crow. This makes absolutely no sense and in no way reflects ANY of the mythos in either the first film or the comic series.

The Crow is just too simple of a story to be made into an effective franchise because the formula runs like so: guy and loved one are brutally murdered, guy kills dudes who murdered him and said loved one, leaving a crow emblem at the crime scene, then when he's done he dies and joins loved one in afterlife. This is all The Crow is. It was good for one movie, but it just cannot be turned into a franchise.

Keep in mind, I was half asleep when this movie was on TV, and even then -the time of day when I'm most acceptable of bad movies- I still managed to hate this movie with a passion, and not because I was a fan of the original, or because I had read bad buzz surrounding the movie (I hadn't even HEARD of it before that fateful night- and for good reason!) , but because I honestly, and truly could not stand ANY aspect of this film.

If you enjoyed the first film and the James O'Barr comic book, don't do as I did: do the smart thing. Avoid `The Crow: City of Angels' with every ounce of your being.

What did you think of this review?

Helpful

Thought-Provoking

Fun to Read

Well-Organized