Leofwine_draca While THE CROW is one of the freshest anti-superhero movies of the 1990s, the various sequels and spin-offs that have followed it have been of mixed quality. This effort, the last to date, is by far the worst, an ill-conceived and frankly stupid effort to tell the same kind of story on a little budget. After a super-stylish opening sequence – by far the best thing in the film, it gave me hope that this might be actually good – we're thrown into a stomach-churning mess of repellent, off-screen violence, idiotic characters, a distinct lack of anybody to root for, and a kind of rubbery, B-movie atmosphere. The two things to blame the most for this are the script, which is profanely diabolical, and the direction, which is of sub-film school quality.It's a real shame, because there's a B-movie cast who might have done better with different material. First up is Eddie Furlong, everybody's favourite John Connor, all grown up with an angsty streak. Sadly, he seems to be struggling to bring life (ha ha) to his role as The Crow, and he just comes across as irritating. He's less irritating, though, than the bad guys, who truly are a despicable bunch, and not in a good way; you want to stave their heads in every moment they're on screen. Worst of the lot is David Boreanaz, giving an abominable performance which, by rights, should have sunk his career. Over-the-top isn't the phrase for his appalling overacting on show here. Just as bad is the hopeless Tara Reid, clearly out of her depth and floundering; sadly nobody gives her a lifeline, and by the end the suggestion that we're supposed to empathise with her is, well, just ridiculous.There are familiar faces lower down the cast list: requisite Japanese guy Yuji Okumoto (ROBOT JOX) as a henchman, and the always-great Danny Trejo as an Indian priest. Even the likes of Macy Gray (annoying) and Dennis Hopper (embarrassed) pop up in the final reel to no avail. The action consists of people being thrown through the air or innocent folk being shot, and apart from a single neck break, all of the violence and bloodshed is kept off screen, no doubt for budget reasons (although it looks like it's been censored more than anything else). The ending is particularly excruciating. The one memorable scene – for all the wrong reasons – sees Danny Trejo's priest performing an ancient Indian dance over the body of a dying bird; it's the one moment that got a genuine chuckle from this viewer.

gavin6942 On his way to becoming an immortal demon, gang leader Luc Crash (Boreanaz) orchestrates the murder of Jimmy Cuervo (Furlong) and his girlfriend, Lily (Chriqui).You would think by this point that the Crow franchise would have died out. But no. You get another chance, and even with direct-to-video, they pulled out some pretty good stars: Edward Furlong, Tara Reid, David Boreanaz, Danny Trejo and even Dennis Hopper! Though not a great film, it is not as awful as it could have been. What the "Crow" has done a good job of, at least since the second film, is give the minority community a hero. Furlong is of Mexican descent, as are many of the actors in this one. How many horror films feature Latinos? Not many.

Dougie B Imagine a "Crow" movie in where Dennis Hopper appears as a Satanic priest who speaks like an 80's kid that is trying to emulate a 50's greaser (that's the best explanation I have). Macy Gray appears as... someone... in the Satanic church with about four lines who does... something. Danny Trejo's character, a Native American Christian minister, attempts to save the day by revealing his chest tattoo of a woman in a sombrero and while performing a Native ritualistic dance. I can't make this stuff up.I honestly can't remember the last time I watched a movie with my jaw literally dropped. Thoughts rushed through my head throughout the entire film, wondering just exactly what the filmmakers were thinking. I have a feeling this a DVD of this movie is sitting on the shelves at home of all those involved, still in the shrink wrap.

darkenseraph-410-184073 Let's face it, Edward Furlong is not all that convincing as an action hero... that thought passed after Terminator 2.The story... had holes. The biggest is... this was set in a little town outside of a reservation... and our best story line is a gang of Satanists? I know for a fact that most histories of Native American tribes have plenty of reference to different spirits and demons...Okay, so that was not organic... what else? The acting... Most of the actors in this film that have any sort of name that is recognized have proved that they can act. We may not like them, we may not approve of all of their acting jobs, but they have proved at least a bit of skill in the field of acting. So why was the acting so bad? My only guess is the director... Isn't that the director's job... to get the best performance and contributions from all involved? What was the best part of this movie...? Well... if you are a fan of action movies... if you have watched and paid attention to them... you learn that a LOT can be done with camera work. The camera work in this movie, in the fight scenes at least, was brilliant... You know... as much as I appreciate Furlong and Boreanaz as actors, I would not really qualify either as a serious action star... but the camera work in this film made them look valid.Thanks for reading.