Python Hyena The Crow: City of Angels (1996): Dir: Tim Pope / Cast: Vincent Perez, Mia Kershner, Iggy Pop, Thomas Jane, Vincent Castellanos: Thankless chunk of sewage that delivers nothing but visual effects. We never learn anything of this city of angels but it's probably just as well. Vincent Perez steps in replacing Brandon Lee who died while filmmaking the original. In that film a young man is killed by a gang and the revenge he enacts when a crow becomes his vision. In this sequel the same crap happens again and he kills the guilty one by one. Director Tim Pope allows everything to get away on him. Instead of a man and wife, it is a father and son who witness a murder and are erased for it. He kills them one by one and we don't give a rat's ass. Perez is not doing anyone any favors by appearing in this mess and Mia Kershner delights in sharing the overacting credit. Also wasting our time are singing sensation Iggy Pop, looking less than sensational here, and Thomas Jane who looks even less sensational. This junk exist only because the first Halloween act of lunacy made money. But let it be known that the first film is basically Death Wish in costume. For better use of your time, listen to any number of Iggy Pop songs. This pathetic sequel should be placed in a trash bag and burned along with the other garbage that emerged from Hollywood this year. Score: 1 / 10

BA_Harrison Sarah, the skateboarding street urchin from the first Crow film, is now all grown up, looking fine, and living in Los Angeles, where she meets Ashe (Vincent Perez), who has recently returned from the dead. Recognising all the signs of a recently resurrected soul from the netherworld—the tortured expression, bedraggled hair, and a crow for a companion—Sarah (played by hottie Mia Kirshner) slaps some paint on Ashe's face and sends him off to find those responsible for killing him and his son.The Crow: City of Angels is basically a retread of the first film, only with cheesy characters and laughable dialogue, a less charismatic actor in the lead role, and a less talented movie-maker in the director's chair. Perez has none of the screen presence of Lee, while Alex Proyas' replacement, MTV video director Tim Pope, tries to bring his own sense of cool to proceedings by plundering his music promo bag of tricks, swathing every scene in smoke and brightly coloured lights. The result is a garish multicoloured nightmare that has none of the dark splendour or haunting atmosphere of Proyas' Gothic vision.Matters are made even worse by a weak head villain in the form of shirtless S&M fetishist Judah (Richard Brooks), who gets all of the worst lines, and a couple of terrible supporting performances from Iggy Pop as Judah's crazy henchman Curve and Ian Dury as Sarah's lovable tattoo parlour boss Noah.

MaximumMadness Ah, 1996's "The Crow: City of Angels"- the first sequel in the downfall of a once-promising franchise. Directed by Tim Pope and written by David S. Goyer (whom both went on to disown the film due to studio re-edits that destroyed it), this is the tragic misstep that destroyed the series after the incredible 1994 debut.Vincent Perez stars as Ashe, a man whom was murdered, along with his child, after witnessing a gang-related hit. Some time later (it's never exactly established, but I think it's a short time later), Ashe is brought back by the power of a crow, to seek vengeance. He is helped along the way by Sarah... yes, the same Sarah from the first film, now all grown up and quite stunning (portrayed by the sexy Mia Kirshner). She uses Eric Draven's influence on her to paint the iconic crow makeup onto Ashe and send him on his way, also acting as a slight love interest in the rushed narrative.Ashe is after Judah (Richard Brooks), the drug lord of Los Angelas, who is sort of responsible for the loss of his own life and that of his child. Judah's men (including Thomas Jane, Iggy Pop and the late and great Thuy Trang) are the ones who murdered him. Through a bizarre series of events that just don't "gel" together properly, Judah forms a plan to steal the powers of the crow to make himself invincible, and Ashe must stop him at all costs.To give credit where it is due, there are some good aspects to the film. For starters, Pope's direction is quite nice, on the whole. He went for what seems to be the exact opposite of what Alex Proyas did with the first film. The movie is all in shades of red, orange, purple, etc. It's much harsher and more angry, and camera-work is generally good. Graeme Revell also returns to score the film, and he utilizes a fantastic combination of new themes with musical cues from the prior film. It helps ground them both in the same universe. And the performances aren't bad.However, it stops there. The films really, truly suffers from the studio re-edits. Rumor has it that the original cut of the film was much longer and significantly different, but Miramax, wanting to cash in on the success of the first film, had more than an hour of footage cut, and many scenes re-arranged in the narrative, in order to make it more like the original. And it shows. The pacing is sloppy and characters are left completely undeveloped. In addition, the tragedy and connection to the characters is also severed, and the ending (without spoiling anything) makes no sense whatsoever.The film feels like it's missing the backbone to the story, and what's left after these studio edits feels like an empty shell. It's barely watchable as-is, and isn't very enjoyable.Here's to hoping that one day, we may get the original cut of the film (which isn't the DVD Director's Cut, don't be fooled), and see this film in the best possible way, as the original cut does sound far superior.As it stands, "The Crow: City of Angels" gets a 3 out of 10. It's a worse version of the original film, and should be skipped over by all but die-hard fans who feel they need to see it.

Walter_Skinner Although his this a painfully sleep inducing movie this movie shouldn't had been made because it and it's sequels tarnish the image of the first movie. Although this has never stopped Hollywood from making movies before. This movie doesn't even seem like a Crow movie. It seems like a very typical revenge movie (something that the original Crow movie managed to make work for itself) you don't really care about the characters, the movie is obviously put on a lower budget, and it's the kind of movie that you can't help but not get involved in. It really seems like you could go out to eat, watch a different movie, and then come back and you wouldn't had missed anything. The movie also relies far too much on the clichés of the first movie (the following sequels also do that as well though.)