The Crow: City of Angels - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

The Crow: City of Angels Reviews

Page 1 of 82
½ October 1, 2016
Weak sequel to the excellent Brandon Lee original. Reportedly director Tim Pope and writer David S. Goyer wanted to do something very different from the original film, but Mirimax did significant re-editing to make the film seem more like the original and the two completely disowned the film that was released. You can tell there were some seeds of a good movie here with the very different Los Angeles setting, which looks terrific, and you also have an excellent villain with Iggy Pop. Still, this film can't overcome it's desperate attempts to try to ape the superior original and the end result is just a mess that's hardly worth watching.
½ February 7, 2016
'The Crow: City of Angels' is a muddled mess that has little sense of direction and no emotional pull compared to the original. This movie is very short to begin with but features some unnecessary scenes that add absolutely nothing to the main story line. It's almost like the editors just slapped a bunch of clips together and called it a finished product without attempting to review the material to see if it makes sense. There is so much more to add but honestly it's a waste of both my and your time. Bottom line is that the highly superior original movie out there and if you've already seen it, re-watch that again instead of this monstrosity.
January 23, 2016
To be honest I didn't realise this was the sequel to the Crow. I was not at all impressed by the plot and the inclusion of heavy metal in nearly every scene made it almost unbearable. What made watching the film worthwhile in the end was the performance of Vincent Perez and Mia Kirshner. Vincent Perez in particular was very good and pulled off a Jonny Depp-esque type role to perfection. Mia Kirshner was also very captivating and I'm surprised we haven't seen more of both of them.
½ January 12, 2016
The Crow: City of Angels is a sorry excuse for a sequel. It doesn't have the same signature elements as the amazingly well made original, with terrible acting and a frankly boring and slow plot (not much of one at that).
The Crow is back...kind of. Everyone even behind the scenes knows the franchise is better off on its own, as a half assed plot involving a man who lost his son to street violence resurrects and is powered by a crow, much like Eric Draven did in the original, but without the coolness to it.
So I really liked The Crow when I saw the original. The film is better than most superhero flicks of today and the titular character's bright eyed Joker-like wittiness and an atmosphere that rivals that of Gotham City is impressive. The Crow isn't a superhero film but the film prevails in that genre's feel. The Crow's previous actor Brandon Lee passed away on the set of the original, and the franchise should have been left alone. This is the first in a string of bad sequels, the other two I won't review (sorry, it's not like there's anything notable anyways). City of Angels feels like a bad fanmade movie with a bigger budget. The acting is off and sleazy, with nobodies as the main characters and a poor job at establishing characters. The biggest part of City of Angels is establishing a new Crow that still holds true to Lee. The new Crow isn't a tough, fearsome guy. It's an actor who is mainly involved in French films and it really shows. He has no wit or no talent and doesn't deserve donning the same makeup Lee once did. The film's atmosphere of a Gotham like area has been replaced with that of a crackhouse. The darkness yet nicely done grunginess of the original is now a druggie paradise, filled with dull greens of streetlights and an abandoned like town. Nobody seems to inhabit this town. Hell, the secondmost character isn't like Ernie Hudson's cop character, it's a tattoo artist who has little to no importance in the film. City of Angels is extremely poor and even angering in a sense. It's a slap in the face to Brandon Lee and the original, it's an excuse to get big money off of a soon to be tired franchise that was never meant to be a franchise.
January 6, 2016
Lacks the supporting characters of the first, but makes up for it with some interesting fight locations. The S&M is a bit stronger in this one as it appears to be an attempt to make the villains even more depraved than the first installment. Another let down is that the movie is called City of Angels, but doesn't really capture an L.A. feel to it. It was certainly more entertaining than I expected, but not nearly the powerhouse that the original was. Two more were made, and I expect them to get weaker as if they were the half life of a chemical leading the body.
September 22, 2015
'The Crow' was bad, but it had some redeeming qualities that saved it from atrocity. 'The Crow: City of Angels' however almost has no redeeming qualities. It may be the worst sequel that has ever existed, if there were any other terrible sequels.
April 28, 2015
Once Lee past,that one very fine performance and film should not have been got know when to leave well enough alone.
Super Reviewer
March 8, 2015
I used to own this on VHS as a kid, and It appeared on cable the other night, before watching I googled Vincent Perez.. Wondering who he really was.. MARIUS from Queen of the Damned.. I was really excited to re-watch it, hard to believe it was him. really good job, no where near as good as the first crow, but defiantly more tolerable than the ones that followed.
February 27, 2015
Although it wasn't considered a quality film, since The Crow: City of Angels served as a sequel to the the legendary fantasy action Neo-noir film The Crow and it featured a performance from Thuy Trang, it sounded like it was worth a view.

With a character like The Crow, it's not unfair to say that the role is interchangeable. The character of The Crow in itself is largely a concept which can fit the profile of any vengeful soul against the forces of evil. The story is widely applicable, and so a sequel to The Crow about a different character is a welcome one especially because it doesn't impede upon the univese created by the original film.
There is a lot of confusing internal logic in the narrative. The bare basic elements of the story regarding how Ashe Corven is resurrected makes sense, but everything gets lost towards the end. Although Judah kills the crow and takes his powers by drinking his blood, Ashe Corven remains alive even after falling off a building. As we learned from the preceding film The Crow, if the crow is injured then it's soul becomes mortal. By that logic when it dies, the soul it awakened should too. Ashe Corven does not die, even though the crow does and he falls off a building. If there is some more deep explanation for this all then you can't see it in The Crow: City of Angels. The ending for the film was meant to be much different to fit Tim Pope's vision before Miramax came in and manipulated it so the truth remains a mystery, but in its current form The Crow: City of Angels remains confusing. There are many narrative problems in the film, but most of them come into play because of studio interference. As it is clearly mentioned. The premise of The Crow: City of Angels was intended to be significantly different from the original, but studio interference forced it to be recut to be as similar to its predecessor as possible. This is clear in the way that the narrative from start to finish of The Crow: City of Angels is practically identical to the original with slight differences in the premise. You can tell that there was a lot of potential in The Crow: City of Angels, even if the screenplay has generic dialogue. There are thin characters too, but there was potentially much more depth in the story until it was tampered with by Miramax. Frantically, it is hard to tell the extent of damage that Miramax laid down on the film, but you can tell that the directorial work of Tim Pope dictated that it really could have been a good film. Even with all the damage imposed by studio tampering his directorial work survives as the best asset to the film. Unfortunately, the film itself does not survive as much. The weak and overly familiar narrative in The Crow: City of Angels ensure that the film dies, but there is enough spirit in it to suggest that if it were brought back to life by a good director's cut then it could walk the earth again. But only time will tell, and for the time being viewers are stuck with a conventional, familiar and confusing narrative to tell the story of the legendary fallen hero.
While the screenplay is far from perfect, the general style of the film is good enough to hit the mark with the right viewers. The narrative flaws and involvement from Miramax prevent me from calling it a good film as a whole, but it is entertaining in many parts and as a whole was a worthy viewing experience thanks to the wortk of Tim Pope. Considering that Tim Pope is the popular director of many music videos, it is no surprise that his one feature film feels like a music video extended to feature length. In terms of style, it actually manages to work because the energetic and dank music combined with the dark and detailed production design give the film a truly gothic feeling which is thoroughly atmospheric. The Crow: City of Angels is an intense and energetic film with a perfectly stylish atmosphere, so it looks right and it feels good. The dark lighting of the film casts an interesting colour of shadow over the production which gives it a dark visual palette without making it impossible to see. The experience is occasionally damaged by the inconsistent cinematography which ends up a bit shaky or too close at times, but the majority of the time it effectively captures the look of everything very nicely. While The Crow: City of Angels does not have the most intelligent thoughts behind it, it general style of the film is undeniably creative which makes it hard to dislike.
The cast of The Crow: City of Angels also make a firm effort.
Vincent Perez is a strong casting decision as the titular crow, Ashe Corven. In contrast to Brandon Lee's performance as the first Crow which was soulful and sympathetic, Vincent Perez plays his rendition of the character in a far more sadistic manner. There are moments where the sadism borders on Heath Ledger's Academy Award winning performance as The Joker in The Dark Knight, meaning that his performance is correctly sick and twisted while he remains a fairly badass hero. Vincent Perez honours a character like The Crow with a perfectly sick and twisted performance without defying the likable elements of the character and his ability to put up a strong fight, so the image of him riding his motorbike through the streets sticks with me to this day.
Iggy Pop is also perfect. The legendary musician is too immaculate in the decision to cast him in The Crow: City of Angels because his rockstar nature and relentless energy is an ideal fit for the film. He is sadistic on a much lighter level than Vincent Perez, but his antagonistic nature is excellent. Iggy Pop's darkly glamourous performance in The Crow: City of Angels is awesome, and it encourages the nature of the music video style of the feature really well. It is awsome to see a musical legend like him taking on someone like The Crow.
Thuy Trang is decent as well. She deseved more than she got because the tame nature of her final fight scene is handled a bit too tamely and she gets minimal screen time, but she is still a welcome presence in The Crow: City of Angels. With her silence comes a haunting sense of wonder about her encouraged by the dark stare in her eyes. She brings a sense of darkness to her role simply by the way she stands and the way she stared, compensating for her lack of dialogue. It is a nice contrast to see her as a villain after she immortalized herself as the heroic Yellow Ranger Trini Kwan from Mighty Morphin' Power Rangers, I just wish the fight scene they gave her matched up to her potential more..

So The Crow: City of Angels has an electric sense of style thanks to the creative production design, grim atmosphere and powerful performances from Vincent Perez and Iggy Pop. Unfortunately, the narrative flaws and tampering from Miramax leaves it unsatisfactory as an experience.
February 7, 2015
Though its story is tired and its characters frightfully unlikeable, "City of Angels" features lush, moody cinematography that rivals the original, backed by unique production design that brings the city's dilapidation and desperation to life.
½ December 31, 2014
The first one with Brandon Lee was the best but this one was absolutely crap a utterly boring sequel don't even get me started on this uhhhh.
December 16, 2014
Not recommended.
It's one of those very gothic movies without substance ... too much eyeliner ... very little intelligence and sensitivity.

Besides the crazy Iggy Pop this movie features the participation of another madman (unjustly forgotten):
½ November 2, 2014
There will be no crow to bring any of us vengeance for this disaster. Terrible script, horrible acting, tired and unbelievable fight scenes make this an insult to its predecessor. This simply shouldn't exist.
October 6, 2014
A complete utter waste of the original's talents.
September 11, 2014
If there is anyone in the history of time who looks awkward holding a pistol, it is Iggy Pop...even Estelle Getty looked more convincing holding that hand cannon!
½ September 5, 2014
Do you have a phobia of good films!
Than you came to the right place!
August 29, 2014
pooor sequel to the original that doesn't match the mood or the energy
August 9, 2014
Although Thuy Trang of Power Rangers fame is in this, I am NOT watching trhis trainwreck of a movie.
June 28, 2014
Aside from one death that really bothered me as a crow fan, there are a lot of issues with this movie. Mia is good but the Crow is horrible. He was like a cross between the joker and Frank n Ferter from rocky horror. Just a poor knockoff of the first. The original is one of the best comic based movies ever made. This is not that movie
May 24, 2014
Two and a half stars alone for the quick scene of the Deftones playing live. Other half a star for Vincent Perez' thick accent.
Page 1 of 82