A Murder of Crows Reviews

Page 1 of 7
Super Reviewer
½ January 23, 2013
Despite the fact this film has the appearance of a TV movie its actually a decent little thriller. On the whole the film is quite tame and the plot is rather quaint, it could almost be a mystery for Agatha Christie's 'Hercule Poirot' or 'Miss Marple'.

The plot is about a lawyer (Cuba Gooding) who is disbarred and goes off to live in the Florida Keys to write. He meets an old man whom he becomes friendly with, the old man shows him his novel and promptly dies days later. The novel is a top class murder thriller so Gooding's character decides to sell it as his own book, it goes viral and he becomes rich.

It later becomes apparent that all the murders in this book are based on real unsolved murders, thusly Gooding's character becomes the main suspect. Its up to him to get to the bottom of the whole ordeal.

The film is obviously played out as if you the viewer were reading a book, there is a constant narration through most of the film from Gooding. There is very little violence, no swearing I believe and the odd moment of action...oh and some sex n ass shots. The stalwart Tom Berenger plays the detective hunting Gooding's character down in a nice almost apologetic way, whilst Gooding suits the role of the innocent helpless fresh faced young ex-lawyer perfectly with his goodie goodie looks.

Overall a very solid film which is more of a 'who dunnit?' than thriller, its not tense enough to be called a thriller. The films dark title kinda gives you the wrong impression really, the film is more like a classic mystery from the 40/50's era of the silver screen.
ScoopOnline
Super Reviewer
September 5, 2008
Great Thriller. Solid Story, great acting, and my fav great Costumes.
Amitraj and Andrew Stevens productions are very random.
Mark Pellegrino is very under rated actor. He is a Multi Talent I tell you.
Super Reviewer
November 1, 2007
Sometimes a film is so well written, that even though you know what's coming, you're still on the edge of your seat. A Murder of Crows is an independent film with some big time star power, that makes a terrific story that much better. The film focuses on Lawson Russell, (Cuba Gooding Jr.) a successful New Orleans defense attorney, who suddenly finds his conscience. A series of events leads to his disbarment, so he begins life a new in Key West. Once there, he meets a lonely old man looking for a friend. The old man insists that Russell read his crowning achievement, a novel. Russell is more than impressed with the book and goes to tell his friend about it when he finds that the old man has died. Russell then suddenly loses his conscience again and decides to pass the book off as his own. Russell's life seems to be back on track until the FBI shows up and arrests him. As it turns out, the murders depicted in the book weren't fiction and Lawson Russell is the prime suspect. From there the film turns into a mystery, who was this old man? Why did he set Lawson up? Who is the real killer? As I said the story is ingenious and very well written, unfortunately, I watch a lot of movies and actually figured the whole thing out, twenty minutes into the film. It wasn't that the film was predictable, most of the other reviews I've read seem to suggest that most people were shocked by the ending. I have no idea why I figured out what was going on so quickly, but this film is so good, that even knowing what was going to happen, I still loved it. Cuba Gooding Jr. was just off the charts good in this movie, he brings such energy and charisma to this role, that it easy rivals his Academy Award winning performance in Jerry McGuire. The rest of the cast is terrific as well, but all the other parts were seemingly bit parts that centered around Lawson Russell. This movie was the perfect fit for Cuba Gooding Jr. and was one of the best written films I've seen all year. A Murder of Crows proves that you don't need a big budget, with huge special effects, in order to make an extremely entertaining film. Gems like this one are rare, but ultimately are the whole reason I watch Independent films.
Super Reviewer
September 19, 2008
This thriller has a genuinely original plot and is very well written. The plot twist isn't easily spotted and will definitely have viewers guessing for a long time. It's fast paced and well directed by Rowdy Herrington, who's really a director to look for. Cuba Gooding Jr. does a good job in the lead, proving he can well handle dramatic parts as well. Tom Berenger does well, as always, in a relatively small part as a tough detective. A Murder of Crows is a suspenseful and thoroughly entertaining thriller that deserves to be better known.
½ June 28, 2011
This movie was both intriguing and disappointing. The story was very well conceived but not very well written. The characters were a bit vapid and unpolished, I wanted more. Cuba does OK and like I said the storyline was great I just didn't feel it was delivered as well as it could have been...
February 23, 2008
Interesting and creative. The acting was a little above average, nothing special. The script was very good at keeping my attention and the unexpected turns made this movie fasinating.
July 13, 2008
a very good suspense movie....greed got the best of him.....it does not pay to be dirty or greedy...cuba was in hot water for a while......watch this movie if u haven't.
½ June 1, 2007
this movie was crazy that guy in there man i know there is a nigga out there doing some shit like that right now!
½ January 12, 2014
The cast is good, the atmosphere is good, the twists are unpredictable, but there's just one little problem: the scriptwriter forgot about alibis. This oversight makes this the dumbest plot ever written.
Picture this: a disbarred lawyer trying and failing to write a novel meets an old man who just so happens to give him a great murder-mystery manuscript-about a serial killer who murders wealthy defense lawyers who successfully represented guilty clients-before keeling over and dying himself. Our lawyer publishes the manuscript as his own, to great acclaim. But then it turns out that all the murders described in the book actually happened.
Naturally, suspicion falls on our lawyer-turned-author, and naturally he immediately says 'it couldn't have possibly been me, because on the nights in question I was with...." And therein lies the problem. He doesn't say that. In fact, no one does. Not the police, not his lawyer ex-girlfriend, and not his former defense attorney self.
You maybe could have got away with some throwaway voiceover like "he'd planned it all out in advance: timing each of his murders to match a day when I saw no one, trying to write my book" or something like that. It's implausible-how could the killer both know our protagonist is in seclusion and be out killing someone at the same time?-but at least they tried to address the issue.
But the movie doesn't do this. It just ignores the whole issue of the main character (again, a former defense attorney!) trying to, you know, prove his innocence with evidence and stuff. This renders the entire second half of the movie ludicrous, a farce that reaches its zenith when the main character (in voiceover) says he'd never broken into a house before about one scene after he'd just broken into a different house. Now that's writing!
September 15, 2013
Cuba Gooding plays an embittered lawyers turned novelist who moves to Key West, Florida to get inspiration but nothing works. So he meets an old guy who has written an interesting tale but not yet submitted it and then old guy dies and he steals the manuscript. But guess what? The tale becomes a best seller and then the law shows up because it plots out exactly how a string of lawyer murders took place.

Also starring Tom Berenger, Ashley Laurence and Eric Stoltz.

Good enough tale but not great. Tropical Key West location helps it a slight notch, too.

CINEMATOGRAPHY: B; STORY/PLOTTING/EDITING: B; CHARACTERS/DIALOGUE: B minus to B; INVESTIGATION THREADS: B to B plus; OVERALL GRADE: B; WHEN WATCHED: early October 2012(streamed)
June 25, 2013
Not of the caliber of Witness for the Prosecution, but not all that bad. An interesting plot line and good cast.
June 16, 2013
Despite it's low budgeted and the awful acting of Cuba Gooding Jr., the villain in the movie intrigued me. A killer who goes after the lawyers who defend the criminals is something refreshing and show's a fact of life. Morever, framing someone for his crimes is simply brilliant. With the help of a workable plot and twist, this is something to look forward to as a psychological thriller. Just ignore Cuba Gooding's performance and it's one hell of a movie. LOL
½ May 10, 2013
Pedestrian, average, predictable, uninspired and badly acted; that about sums up 'A Murder of Crows'. It gave me a bad case of 'movie ennui' and made me think that perhaps I should take a break from watching movies (or pay more attention when selecting them). Cuba Gooding Junior, (who wasn't awful but ........), plays Lawson Russell, a successful Lawyer who 'snaps' after defending one too many sleazy, guilty, rich clients, and is disbarred. Russell's quite non-plussed about this and goes from lawyer to purveyor of fishing trips in Florida, hoping he might, some day, get around to writing 'that novel'. His job brings him into contact with an old man (who is so obviously a young man with loads of fake wrinkles and make up - god, you'd think in this day and age they'd have the technology and know how to either do it properly or simply hire a real old man) - and guess what? The old man gives him a manuscript to read and then dies promptly before Russell can return it. I really need say no more about the plot as it's quite obvious what happens next. Yes, there are a few 'twists' (but you could see them coming a mile away, even if you were blind, deaf and had just had your head chopped off) so there's no real need to see the ending of this middle-of-the-road work of mediocrity. Although Gooding Junior was 'ok' in the acting department at the start of this film, as it wore on he seemed to just give up (as the script writer and director had presumably done). If you're looking for a movie that requires no thinking, no surprises, no interesting screen play, and no great actors, then 'A Murder of Crows' just might fit the bill. The only thing I can really recommend about this movie is the 'acting' of the police, detectives, agents, bailiff etc - their performances are SO bad, you might get a good chuckle (for about 2 minutes)
January 25, 2013
Jonathan -
This is the movie I have wanted you to see. Memorable. I think that you would like this.
½ January 24, 2013
دوات الفيلم:اداء كوبا جونيور لم يرق لي حقيقة وكان بأمكانه ان يكون افضل بكثير لا أعلم شعرت انه لم يحبذ ان يظهر كل مالديه لأني مقتنع انه لديه الموهبة ومن شاهد له افلام سيقتنع بكلامي .القصة كان جيدة ومفيدة واهميتها في موضوعها ومحورها رغم وجود ثغرة جلية بالنسبة لي هي فيما يتعلق بالرقابة على نشر الرواية المقصودة بالعمل على كل حال هذه الثغرة لا تعكر تشويق واثارة الفيلم ،الموسيقى كانت غبية جدا وقبيحة لكن استطعت تحملها وابتلاعها، النص كان جيد ومتماسك بالأخص في اول نصف او ثلاثة ارباع الساعه الاخراج مقبول ومميز في ادارته لعنصر التشويق والاثارة ونجح المخرج بحبس الانفاس هذه الميزة لا يحققها المخرج كما هي الاا ان كان هو الكاتب ،،السيناريو حبذا لو كان اطول ولو بنصف ساعه لأن موضوع العمل يتحمل ذلك وعنصر العمل هو الراعي لذلك لطالما اعتمد التشويق والاثارة.
رغم انزعاجي قليلا من النهاية لكن لا بأس ومن يحب الصدمات والصعقات عليه بالفيلم المذكور حيث احتوى اقل شيء على اربع صدمات جيدة ومتفاوته من حيث القوة وانا على رهن ان كنت كشفت صدمة او اثنتين ستقع بالثالثة والرابعه ونجح المخرج في ادارة وتوزيع عنصر التشويق ، ايضا دون ان انسى الراوي كان مفيد احيانا في اغلب فترات الفيلم

حول موضوع العمل: لعلي محظوظ اعتبر نفسي نوعا ما بموضوع هذا الفيلم لما يمتلكه من حساسية عالية جداجدا وتمس حياة البشر ،مايجعل الموضوع مميزا هو تسليط الضوء على مهنة المحاماة من جانبها المظلم والمعكر لشعار هذه المهنة الا وهو الميزان الذي يرمز للعدل.
اولا استطاع هذا الفيلم ان يطرح هذا الجانب بشكل جيد ليبرهن على مدى (قذارة) هذه المهنة اليوم وعلى ماوصلت اليه, سنستخلص من العمل ان المحامي الذي يعمل بالسلك القضائي لدولة عظمى كالولايات المتحدة ماهو بالنهاية الاا اجير (بالتأكيد هنا لا نعمم) يقبض اجره من موكله الذي هو ثري ويتصرف كما يطلب من هو اعلى منه وهو القوي ،، القوي اظهره الفيلم بأنه القاضي الآمر الناهي في جلسات المحكمة ومدى تجذره بالسلك القضائي وابتزازه للمحاميين الذي يعملون لديه وهذا كان ظاهرا و واضحا عندما قام القاضي بطرد (رسل) من المهنته وتجريده من لائحة المحاميين عندما اصبح هذا الاخير شريفا ،، ههه يالها من قذارة.
عندما يطفح كيل محامي اصبح شريفا سيعامل كذلك اقول اصبح شريفا لأنه كان قد برئ العديد من المجرمين والقتلة من خلال الاموال بمعنى آخر عندما كان المجرم (يشتري حريته بالمال) وهذا اتضح تماما من خلال حديث المحامي رسل مع زميلته السابقة اليزابيث وقالت له عن نسب تفشي الجريمة في الولايات ومدى نسبة المدانون,, للاسف الانسان عندما يجد نفسه في هذه الدنيا بمكانها وزمانها اليوم واقعا بين فكين هما(الاقوياء_الاثرياء) الاقوياء رعاة المال والاقوياء رعاة القانون الشكلي بالتالي مهما بلغت نقاوة ومهنية و استشراف هذا الشخص هو خاسر بالنهاية لا بل قد تكبله قيود اخرى كان بغنى عنها،، هذا بالظبط ما حدث لصاحبنا المحامي بالفيلم اراد ان يشلح عنه ثوب العار والانسياق والعبودية المقنعه لأرباب المال ولكنه كان حتى هو خاسر نعم لعله خسر النزال ولكنه كسب جولات مصيرية ومفيدة له على الصعيد الشخصي ولعل ابرزها هو تحرير شخصيته كمحامي من شخصية المحامي السائدة في الوسط الذي هو فيه حيث شاع القول ان المحامي حرامي قانوني ونعرف تمام المعرفه وبالاخص الاخوة المحامون ان المحامي بالدرجة الاولى شخصية وكاريزما ,, شعرت ان الفيلم بنهايته اراد لنا ان نعلم ونعي تماما انك ان كنت على حق وكان طرف الاخر هو الخطأ ولكنه قوي او غني حيث ابقا مبتعدا ولاتقترب او حتى تناوشهم لأنك خاسر وقد يؤذوك ويضروك اذاً عليك ان تكون متابعا بصمت دون ان تتلفظ.
بالنهاية يد واحدة لاتصفق،،، سؤال تبادر لذهني بعد ان انهيت العمل هو: كم عدد المحامين الذين من الممكن ان يفعلوا مافعله المحامي رسل ؟؟
ان يقفوا موقفا يشرفهم قبل ان يشرف السلك القضائي بأي دولة كانت حتى لو كان هذا الموقف يكلفهم حياتهم ومهنتهم.
الانسان عليه ان يتعلم من اخطائه فالأنسان يفترض به ان لا يقع في الحفرة مرتين لكن منهم من يقع وفي احداث مهمة لهم . حدث ذلك في فيلمنا حيث ان رسل رفض ان يكون منصاعا للمال على حساب العدالة هذه تحسب له بعد ما كان شبه عبد للاقويا و الاغنياء.
و عاد لينصاع مرة اخرى ولينحني امام المال وكان المال هنا متمثلا بالرواية التي قدمها المدعو العجوز كانت الرواية بالنسبة له عتبة ممتازة جدا لدخول عالم الشهرة والثراء فكانت المال .
ههه يالغباء الانسان في بعض الاحيان عندما يعود ويقع بالحفرة مرة ثانية وكانت هذه الرواية بالنسبة له المصير الذي لم يكن مرة بحياته يتوقع ان يلقاه حيث استغل رحيل العجوز و انتحل الشخصية والرواية بطريقة غير شرعية وبعد نيله ما اراد من شهرة ومال كانت بأنتظاره ((العدالة السماوية)) الله على صورة عادلة تنطق بصدق القضاء الالهي وكأنها تقول للمحامي رسل : يا عزيزي رسل حتى انت غير شريف وكأنك مشبع وممتلئ تماما بما تلقيته وادمنته من خلال عملك بسنوات خلت بهذا القضاء الفاسد على الرغم من انك بريئ مما ذُكر بالرواية...
ههه ليصبح هذا المحامي المسكين مطارد ممن كان يطاردهم ,, لو تعمقنا جيدا لرأينا ان المخرج والفيلم ككل اظهر لنا ان المحامي عندما اصبح شريفا اصبح مطلوب للعداله. حقيقة هذا الظاهر ولكن لو القينا نظرة على مابين السطور لشاهدنا ان المحاميين الغير مطاردين والذين هم في عملهم وذكرتهم الرواية هم بالفعل من يجب ان يكونوا مطلوبين للعداله وليس هو.
ايضا لا بد ان اشير لأمر هام المتابع للعمل ولتطور الاحداث المثيرة فيه سيرى ان رسل المحامي لم يقم بنشر الرواية لأظهار فظاعة مهنة المحاماة اليوم بقدر ما اراد المال والشهرة.
فكانت رواية (قتل الغربان) بمثابة الطُعم الذي تمكن منه في مرحلة معينة خلال العمل الى ما قبل النهاية بخمس دقائق وكأن المرحلة العصيبة التي مر بها كانت درس له على ما كان يفعله طوال عمله بهذه المهنة
لكني انا تمنيت ان يكون الدرس اقصى واقوى ولكن المخرج هكذا اراد لأنه ايضا الكاتب.

العمل كان جيد واعطيه درجة جيد
B
ـــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ
انا شخصيا احب كثيرا الافلام التي تناقش المحاماة والقضاء من جهة والتعليم من جهة اخرى لأن قوة اي دولة بالعالم ترتكز على ركيزتين (الميزان و القلم)
لعلي سأخرج قليلا عن الموضوع لكن من ضمن السياق يحضرني قول رئيس الوزراء البريطاني الاسبق وينستون شرشل عقب نهاية الحرب العالمية الثانية وكانت بريطانيا ولندن شبه اكوام من الركام نتيجة لقذائف الطائرات الجيش النازي.حيث جمع تشرشل جميع وزرائه ضمن البرلمان واصبح يسأل:
سأل وزير الصناعه ماحال الصناعه اجاب الوزير :الوضع متردي والمعامل والمنشأت الصناعية لا تعمل ومهدمة ومن بقي منها فهو محروق.

سأل وزير الزراعه ماحال الزراعه والمحصول اجاب لقد سممت 70% من اراضينا ولم تعد صالحة للزراعه نحن الان نستورد من حليفنا فرنسا

سأل وزير الدفاع ما خسرنا بالحرب اجاب: خسرنا ملايين العتاد والجنود والاسلحة والمواقع العسكرية ولم يبقى حتى احتياطي لجيشنا الملكي

المهم اخذ شرشل يسأل وزير وزير والكل يجيبه بأمور صعبه جدا وحالة متردية وفقر على كامل المستويات
وصل الى وزيري التعليم والعدل:
سأل شرشل وزير العدل ما حال القضاء لدينا فأجاب الوزير : على قدم وساق والعدالة مطبقة ياسيادة الوزير حتى في اعتى الظروف ،، لم يرد تشرشل والتزم الصمت
وسأل مباشرة وزير التعليم كيف هو التعليم فأجاب الوزير : التعيلم مازال مستمرا وجامعاتنا لم تتضرر كثيرا وطلابنا بدؤوا بالدوام

فصاح شرشل وسط القاعه وقال : اذا ((نحن بخير)) !!
September 22, 2012
This movie was horribly unrealistic. The story could have been good, it had good potential, but things should have gone way differently. You'd think a guy who is wanted for five murders would at least change his appearance. Everybody in that area knows his face, yet he stays there unchanged. And chase scenes make a good movie, but this film was completely riddled with them. Cuba, if you want to be on the run from the police, at least dress up a bit.
August 30, 2012
A suspenseful movie until the end. Made you do some thinking.
½ August 20, 2012
movie with great plot twists. As long as you can get past the cheesy 90s music it is a worth-while thriller.
April 15, 2012
A very weak thriller with an only average cast. This has been done better elsewhere. Avoid.
Page 1 of 7