This is one of my all time favorite films. I have NO idea why it gets panned so much. I thought it had great style, action, acting, and a very good plot. I loved the script, and I thought it was very well delievered.
People keep comparing it to the original. it's just a sequel, and if it's looked at as a stand alone film, it's pretty good.
I think this film desereves to be considered a cult classic, equally as much as the first.
[deleted]
i couldn't agree more, i loved the set and the art directing, it looked so full of despair and beauty all at the same time... plus 2 major hotties Mia Kirshner and Vincent Perez, they were great... god she looked a lot better then (when she weighed like 125, now she's practically 80 pounds, gross).. but yes i love this movie too
shareI loved the movie. I guess it was because i connected to it better than the first one. One of my family members died last year, and i have felt the same pain as Ashe did. The movie looked great, it kind of reminded me of Phantom of the opera with Lon Chaney. The acting was good, it didn't have the most well known actor's like the others, but they acted the best out of all the sequal's cast's. Vincent Perez is the best crow in the sequals, and is the second best of all the crows in the series behind Brandon Lee. It was a good,entertaining movie, not made to be Oscar material, but made for people to enjoy, and not for them to be bored.
shareI guess I can understand why this movie gets dogged so much. Was a sequel really needed? No, not really. Is this film the victim of a money hungry studio looking to strike while the iron is hot? Absolutely.
Underneath it all is a very intriguing (to me at least) film. The atmospheric haze in the movie is what draws me into it. It's almost as if the smog is a character in it'self. It's kind of like watching a Tim Burton film. Of course I say that about the first one as well (blasphemy, I know). Perez does a good job with some of the bad dialogue that he's given. The rest of the characters are really bland to me. But it is what it is, a good action/exploitation film. You don't go into a crow movie expecting Goodwill Hunting or Shawshank Redemption. If you do, the movie hasn't failed, your expectations have.
While I really like the movie (and other than mood, look, design and lead, can't put my finger on why)it has it's downpoints.
First of all, I feel Judah (nevermind his horrible death, thanks studio) is a weak lead villain. IMO, I think you should have had some strange S&M guy running the show with all of the crazy's he had running around downstairs. He would have at least been edgier (Judah definately didn't have one). Secondly, I hear the studio cut down alot of time from the film. I feel like some of the latter scenes feel rushed, and that is no doubt in part to a hackjob of an editor/studio.
In closing, CoA will never be the original, and thank god for that. We already had that story. I am glad that we ended up with a moody, artistic film about revenge. What else is there?
Come with me if you want to live.
It is one of my favorites too.
shareExactly my feeling. I love the moody atmosphere, the art direction, the highly stylized "look" of the film--it's completely dreamlike in a way that most films that aspire to be "dreamlike" never are.
shareSo glad that so many people on here share my same views on this film. I catch so much *beep* from people for liking this movie. Don't get me wrong, the first will always be legendary. But I love this movie on its own and have for many years and will for MANY years to come.
FANS OF THE CROW: CITY OF ANGELS, UNITE!!
I still like the movie too, regardless of it being a highly edited version of it's original Director's vision. Did anyone else here found themselves crying in some scenes of the Crow:City of Angels? I will admit, I cried when I saw this movie, it was very emotionally powerful and moving. I am not ashamed to admit that. It was also one of the few movies to finally get me interested in becoming a movie director(one who can have as much control over his vision).
shareThe Images and music are great. It's the bad dialogue. The actors did what they could but In the end the dialogue was the weakest point. The pacing was a little bit weird. But it is really beautifully made on a technical and artistic level.
I just can't believe they didn't fix the bad dialogue. David Goyer can tell good stories but he should learn to write like people speak. Hince... why he is only one of the writers of The dark Knight.
Goyer's original script actually had some good dialogue. And most of that script wasn't even used. Instead they opted for just a new retelling of the first film.
"It can't rain all the time."- Eric Draven
I think this is an okay film, better then the last two, and better then the series. This is pretty much a stand alone film since the only thing it has in common with the first one is Sarah and the cat. Although it was Sarah that kept me interested in watching it. I would love to meet someone as dark and sexy as her.
I love the scenes and I think the actors did well for what they was given for a script but it just didn't seem as good writing. I do understand the main script had better lines and I'm sure if they stuck to the original idea then the movie would of done better.
One thing I kind of had a problem with was all the magic tricks he did while killing them. Just didn't sit right with me.
so overall its a movie I enjoy watching although I like the first one better as far as movies go.
A man can change his stars
Just seen it yesterday and really liked it. I wouldn't say it is better than the first because the first was great but this one is very good.
share