The Crow: Wicked Prayer (2005) User Reviews

Easily the Weakest of the Four

[Mad-Hamlet · 3/10 · 5 September 2005]

Greetings I'm afraid Crow fans are going to be in for a disappointment. 'Wicked Prayer', it starts out quite strong but rapidly loses steam. David Boreanaz, who should be well known by now at the very least for excellent villains, is not given much room here. I don't think it was his fault; what he could do, he did do but the role just didn't have much.

The plot is lacking seriously, the mythology is entirely corrupted (The Crows power does NOT come from love thank you very much), and the fight scenes, aside from the initial murder, are pathetic.

Which is a shame really because there was a half hearted effort to make the four bad guys, Famine, Pestilence, War and Death more than just another series of bad guys like T-Bird's gang, and Curve's boys or those cops in the underrated third movie. They were, from time to time unnerved by the violence, but this plot thread was crushed by how easily and half-heartedly they were lured back to evil deeds.

The biggest disappointment was their ends; perhaps it was budget constraints but there was near zero visceral satisfaction. I'm bloodthirsty, sue me.

Also a lot of the drama, what little of it was built up, was totally savaged by Danny Tregjo's native American 'Crow Dance'. Tregjo makes one of the bad-assest Mexican bag-guys/evil doers/violence loving vigilantes on screen today. He can even pull off a good priest and a so-so mourning father. What he cannot do, tattoo laden pectoral muscles flopping around like half empty water balloons, is a American Indian ceremonial dance. Not, at least, without my jaw hitting the floor before I follow after holding my ribs in a fit of hysterics.

I was incredibly sceptical of Eddie Furlong in the title role but heard good things from the crew on the film and, having seen him in the irony mask, felt my concern ebb. Truth be told he did have a few good moments but his pain was never convincing, not for one. single. second. Acting enraged, pained, tormented is a key part of the Crow's character and he just did not have it. He can't even compare to Vincent Perez's little tantrum in front of Spider Monkey. Don't even try to contrast Furlong with Mabius' first humorous curiosity, then growing rage, or God Forbid, Brandon Lee's near perfect representation of pain.

My biggest beef? The lighting. The entire movie was well lit. No darkness, no shadows. Everyone meandered about either in full time sun, or well lit night scenes. And that was a physical representation of this entire film: It wasn't dark enough.

The Crow: Wicked Prayer, easily the weakest of the four. While I hate to admit it I think this franchise has gone as far as it can.

I remain, as always, Mad-Hamlet

Quoth the raven..."Please, no more!"

[BHorrorWriter · 3/10 · 30 July 2005]

In the year 1993, Brandon Lee created a very memorable, dark & beautiful character: The Crow. The movie, with an exceptional script, smart direction, excellent photography and a brilliant cast, it truly one of my all time favorites. Everything from the look of the film, the characters (especially Lee as the Crow), the phenomenal soundtrack and the overall story of love being stronger than death - I was hooked! I love that film! I saw it in theaters no less than 8 times.

CITY OF ANGELS was a shallow, bastardized attempt to cash in on the success of the first film. In some ways, ANGELS almost ripped-off the original, but in a way that makes me loathe the film. Very disappointing!

SALVATION, the third in the series was...I can't even remember. I saw it once, and do not remember being overwhelmed by it or feeling anything for it.

And now, 2005 brings back the return of The Crow with WICKED PRAYER. Unlike the first three films, this one takes place in the desert, near an Indian reservation. I must admit, I was impressed with the cinematography on this film. The desert scenes, the flashback scenes, all were well done and looked great.

So...what do I think of the film? The direction? The acting? For starters the direction of this film was all too often sloppy. It appeared, more times than not, the film was confused with where it wanted to go. The characters seemed stuck into scenes, with little to no direction, and carried scenes with no skill. Each set up seemed and felt under-rehearsed and underdeveloped.

Edward Furlong is by NO stretch of my imagination an acceptable Crow! Looking too much like a gay goth groupie, instead of a vengeful angel set to make the wrong things right. His costume appeared to steal too much from the original. I felt his performance was bland and tasteless. There was no emotion displayed by his character. I did not feel pity or sorry for him, or what happens to him. I was no convinced that his love was so undying that he could be brought back from the dead. He is no Brandon Lee! I mean, come on: "Quoth the Raven, Nevermore. Motherf**ker!" What kind of crap writing is that? Boreanez is wasted in this film. Though, he has not impressed me much with previous roles such as Adam Carr in VALENTINE, I still feel he is a solid actor and really can pull off the bad guy look. However, in WICKED PRAYER, it never feels like we are 100% sure of what he is doing or why. OK, I get that he is performing a ritual to become a demon or devil, but where did this come from? What is in motivation? World domination? I don't think we will ever know.

Tara Reid....Ugh! And Macy Gray?!?!? And what was up with Dennis Hopper, in what could only be his worst performance.

None of the cast is able to save this mess! Very upsetting to see the series continue to be treated this way. What started out 12 years ago with such an inspiring beginning, is continuing to fall further down the spiral of sequel Hell!

Yes, This might be one of the worst movies in history!

[Dracin · 2/10 · 22 January 2007]

I started out watching this movie with an open mind, keeping it that way until it was all over. But what I found was; a large piece of junk... Badly acted, badly filmed, badly directed and very badly written!

I love the first movie, but I have not yet seen the second two... But this one was one of the worst movies I have ever seen, alongside city of fear, that is.

It was SO bad, I can't even try to explain it, but I just want to warn you all, it's BAD! (Not Micheal Jackson bad... Just plain old bad) Edward, David, Tara, Danny and Dennis all reach a new low in this movie.. And under no circumstance would Edward Furlong ever make a good crow... What on earth were they thinking here? And what was Dennis Hopper doing in this one? He tried to sound like a pimp, but ended up sounding worse than Chinese-water-torture... (Probably not his fault though... I think I blame the writers) Also; David, Danny, Edward and Tara have all appeared in good movies before, proving their ability to act... It's just this movie that drags their names trough the dirt... Making Edward a dirty s*** after this one and Pet Cemetary2...

I give this movie a 2... since I'm in a good mood...

Somebody forgot the script...

[Lanraso · 1/10 · 6 September 2006]

Back in the day Alex Proyas brought us the relatively low budget actioner The crow, after that a sequel that wasn't too bad followed, after that yet another not great but not too terrible sequel came...and now this.

What on earth went wrong, and why was this movie ever made? It is one thing making a bad movie that had the potential of being a good movie, but this movie never had potential whatsoever.

It was awful to watch, the script were terrible and it was almost as if the director wasn't quite sure what he wanned the movie to look like, he tried to give it a 2000's MTV hip-hop feel in the beginning and then tried to do something quite different and then everything went to hell and everything got so cheesy that I only needed a patty and a bun and I would have had a cheeseburger, it actually bordered on slapstick comedy.

Yes this film should not be watched and its lightyears away from the classic helmed by Alex Proyas.

This movie hasn't got a prayer.

[arcwulf · 1/10 · 30 September 2005]

It is amazing how "The Crow" franchise manages to slide in quality from one film to the next. The first one was really good, the second was so-so, the third was terrible, and this one... this one...

The movie starts out with promise. Four criminals who have named themselves after the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse are seeking to revenge themselves on a small mining town for past injustices. They vent some of their rage on a former associate and his soon-to-be fiancé. This interesting plot device works for the first five minutes of the film. Then the "acting" begins.

I have nothing against Edward Furlong, really. And to be fair he does a pretty good job for someone who has no business playing an action hero. The other actors leave a lot to be desired. It becomes painfully obvious as the film progresses that the production crew only hired David Boreanaz and Tara Reid because they were the biggest names their shoestring budget could afford, in an attempt to lend credence to a VERY substandard production (I don't care what their excuses are, if Robert Rodriguez could film "El Mariachi" for under $10,000 there's no reason this film couldn't have been better). There is NO chemistry between Boreanaz and Reid at all. None. Zip. Nada. It is sickening to watch them interact. Reid's character is to this film what a rose stem would to one if it were lodged in one's favorite pair of walking shoes - pretty and irritating to the point of being painful. Throughout this entire film one keeps expecting her character to develop, but is instead treated to whiny and forced compassion for her boyfriend's victims one minute, unnecessary stabbings and eye-gouging the next.

Things I learned from watching "The Crow: Wicked Prayer": 1.) Satan speaks in "Hipster" 2.) Native Americans can be readily replaced by Latino actors. 3.) Southwestern Native American traditions include totem poles for some reason. 4.) Native American dance includes jumping up and down and mumbling. 5.) A movie doesn't have to have a cohesive plot, interesting characters, story development, a research team, or anyone that knows anything about anything so long as it has a budget to attach some sort of star power to it.

If this had been filmed by college students for one semester of course credit using fresh-faced actors, it would be somewhat enjoyable. Alas, it was not.

Like A Horrible Accident You Can't Take Your Eyes Off Of But Never Want To See Again

[crowes-18865 · 3/10 · 24 April 2020]

I reviewed the best and feel obliged to review "the worst?" (debatable since City of Angels is so boring). This movie is a one time watch train wreck you can't take your eyes off of. It's such a mess and such a bad movie that it is an amusing watch even if only one time. As a Crow sequel or anything even associated with The Crow comics this is a shameful thing to be hidden away from the world and forgotten about but as its own thing, a study in weirdly bad cinema it merits a viewing. From strange casting decisions to ludicrous storylines you will be mesmerized at just how bad it truly is. If you're still on the fence this should get you off of it...... Tara Reid award caliber performance, on of the corniest and most ridiculous villains you'll ever see and a Crow who cannot fight. Still on the fence? THERE IS NO FENCE!!!

Awful.......just, awful.

[eharrold63 · 2/10 · 26 September 2005]

Wicked Prayer is a departure from the previous films in that it takes place in an entirely different, unique setting. The third sequel is set in the American Southwest, and the director has created a film with a style more in line with spaghetti westerns than with the other Crow films. This immediately starts the film out on the wrong foot. The concept of a makeup-wearing avenger can be silly if it isn't treated with respect and verisimilitude, and that is a big reason why The Crow: Wicked Prayer falls flat on its face. From the very beginning of the film, when the villains are introduced with jokey subtitles featuring their nicknames and main attributes, Wicked Prayer is just too tongue-in-cheek to be compelling in any way. David Boreanaz's over-the-top, Nicholson-esquire performance doesn't help matters, and Edward Furlong simply doesn't have the acting chops or the charisma to make up for the film's numerous flaws. In the end, he turns out looking more like a mid-90's Smashing Pumpkins fan than a fearsome spirit of vengeance. Add in some embarrassingly bad wire work in the fight scenes and you have one big, bad, direct-to-video disaster. It's not even worth a rental.

Oh my God! Please...

[cibyll-1 · 1/10 · 22 January 2007]

My almost top ten favorite movie is since I'm 14 "The Crow" with B.Lee. I love it too much, to say there is a good sequel from it. No. There isn't. The second part was OK, the third terrible and this... i don't know what to say about. It's a big hole with full of sh*t... I hope lot of people around the world understand with me, because the original movie was one of the biggest thing in my life. I'm very sad, because there are a lot of emotions in the story and I can't understand how the sequels are so stupid and cheap, full with action(worse action)against feelings and love... I hope there will be no more movies with this title, because Brandon will really come back to make the wrong things right!

What possessed him?!

[WitchcraftCrazy · 4/10 · 17 October 2005]

I adore the Crow franchise... I love all the movies and even the T.V show on occasion.

But lets face it, Wicked Prayer was the worst movie to date. The original was fantastic, as they always are, the second (City of Angels) was passable, but Vincent Perez was great as the Crow. Salvation, my second favourite, made use of some amazing young talent... But Wicked Prayer?! No. David Boreanez is a great actor, I think he did an amazing job as Angel in Buffy and Angel, Tara Reid is great in all her other movies... But so miscast in this it's untrue... The new crow, not too bad, but far too underplayed! Where's the angst? The special effects were lousy to say the least and it seemed the director was too interested I'm piling up the body count than making a genuine love/revenge story that the entire crow fiction centres upon.

I honestly have to steer people away, as only the true die-hard fans would want to see it, for the sake of saying they have seen it. Every one else would be put off the movies for good!

The Crow Wicker Prayer

[brett_banton · 1/10 · 1 October 2005]

Watched The film with an open mind thinking the film wouldn't be that bad!! How wrong i was the plot makes no sense at all, unlike the original film the actors are all wooden and seem to have no sense of what the legacy and style of the Crow is all about. The plot of the graphic novel of the same name is completely different. At Times the film almost seems like a bad parody of the original with some frames lifted directly from it. The problem with all the sequels is the budget is never enough and also James O'Barr doesn't seem to want to have anything do with it. Also why the hell was dennis hopper in it? he popped up from no where acted everyone under the table and then had the worlds crappiest death.

A different view

[Mescalitospoke · 8/10 · 18 June 2005]

Nothing tops the first, and I'm not saying it's impossible to make a better crow film than the first I'm just saying this one wasn't as great, but definitely the second best. Furlong did an excellent job especially, he really was a sort of angry/ apathetic crow hybrid, and i was very impressed.

Contrary to the first reviewer, I think the only bad thing about this flick WAS Dennis Hopper, I don't know if it was how he was scripted, if he ad libbed, or if they just cast the wrong person, either way, you will find yourself asking the timeless question, "what the ****?" See it, and pay for it, especially if you are a fan and you'd like to see quality sequels made, when they are actually good it's up to us to support what we demand when it's delivered

not as bad as some people say

[sara_loves_svs · 7/10 · 18 June 2005]

No way as good as the original but not many movies are. However there were some good performances considering a poor script and talented acting by Furlong and in some ways Boreanaz made the movie worth watching. Looks like David Boreanaz is already type-cast as the wise cracking evil cool dude maybe he should have swapped characters with Furlong to rid himself of this mould.Tara Reid walks around trying to be the evil witch but her talents lie in her looks not her acting ability. Dennis Hopper, well , devil worshipping homeboy very strange casting.Overall not a great movie but no great disgrace to the genre .Watch it and make your own mind up its worth 90 minutes.

"Come on baby, fart in my gas tank"

[starburstjellybabies · 2/10 · 26 February 2006]

"Come on baby, fart in my gas tank"

While it's temping to allow that direct quote to speak volumes about this film, I suppose its best we cover a little more ground; The Crow 4 follows the mystical journey of someone so Goth they die and come back as Helena Bonham Carter to wreak horrible Tim Burtonised revenge on wrongdoers.

The film is surprisingly full of familiar actors considering it's the 3rd in a long and disastrous trail of The Crow branded sequels. But familiarity doesn't equal quality, but that's somewhat obvious just by a brief glance at the DVD cover. Angel…I mean…Angelis…Sorry - David "I'm a serious actor" Boreanaz reminds us yet again that he's a one trick acting pony with no discernible talent. Meanwhile the only interest Tara Reid holds during the movie is the way her fringe magically becomes higher the more evil she becomes.

The shock of seeing Edward Furlong looking like Marla Singer in Fight Club is actually marginally less alarming than the late movie appearance of Dennis Hopper, as a hip old Satanist pimp (or something) who spouts golden one liners such as "Kiss the bride mother f***er" and "Satan, dude is that you? The original gangsta'?" So even if your theatrical cup runneth over with all that talent there's still the storyline, the confused direction, the script and the makeup – oh god the makeup. So yeah yeah, they're so in love, blah blah, somehow they die, yawn yawn their love was sooo pure and strong he has to come back in gothpaint and kill people. That's basically the only succinct area of the movie. Unable to creatively address the back-story to the film the writers were reduced to a Wile E Coyote intro. This was basically moot because the entire film was a mish mash of Satanism and manic Native American ritual eventually sending the viewer into a psychological epileptic fit.

I suppose if you're 15 and just discovered eyeliner this film may appeal to you. But if you ever loved T2 even just a tiny bit, save yourself the anguish of having to see Furlong this way.

Caw! Caw! Flop! Flop!

[mbj123-1 · 3/10 · 27 June 2005]

I have to admit that with a cast like Dennis Hopper, Eddie Furlong and David Boreanaz, I expected this to be a decent movie. For me at least, it wasn't. It's a retelling of the original movie with an added twist, David Boreanaz is trying to become the anti-Christ and to do so, requires the help of the pimp, Dennis Hopper.

To me, the movie lacked emotion (and in some scenes, acting ability). It seems rushed. Instead of trying to focus on building relationships between characters in the movie, they simply say, "Okay. Here is the cast, here is a one minute flashback to show how they know each other, and we will throw elements in every now and then to explain the conflict." I'll conclude with this: Dennis Hopper, Eddie Furlong and David Boreanaz have done some good work in their time. This isn't it.

Awful sequel that's almost totally devoid of redeeming values

[Leofwine_draca · 2/10 · 29 May 2016]

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.

Abysmal sequel even worse than other terrible sequels

[a_chinn · 1/10 · 20 May 2017]

Edward Furlong plays a resurrected ex-convict who seeks revenge against a group to Satanists led by David Boreanaz and Tara Reid, who murdered his girlfriend. Not that the prior sequels were all that good, but this one is awful! All three main leads seem horribly miscast. Changing the setting from a dark Gothic cityscape to a mystical south of the border modern day western setting also seemed like a serious misstep. I'm tempted to say there is nothing to recommend about this film, but Danny Trejo does have a small part, so that's one glimmer amongst a sea of awful.

A True Cinematic Mistake - UUUGH!!!

[bilromultimedia · 1/10 · 21 July 2013]

The title of this atrocity should have been "The Movie That Killed A Franchise"! Are you kidding me? One great movie - and then a pretty good sequel - and then a not so good, but still interesting second sequel - and then finally - this vile thing? REALLY??? Devolution at it's absolute worst...

David Boreanaz as the arch villain in a Crow movie? That's about as logical as casting Jack Black as James Bond. Talk about attempting an "oil and water" mixture. Also, Tera Reid had absolutely no business being in a movie like this, after all - it's devoid of cheerleaders - and there are no Frat houses full of drunken National Lampoon extras. A genuine "Fish out of water" type of situation to be sure.

The casting on this toilet flush must have been suggested by somebody who was deliberately bent on ruining a movie before it was even entirely off of the drawing board - no doubt a desperate act of revenge more gruesome than any Crow movie could ever have portrayed to begin with. At least somebody could have been merciful enough to have taught Danny Trejo how to do a half way decent native American dance for crying out loud - instead of looking as if he were attempting an Orangutan impersonation. This traffic accident was to the memory of Brandon Lee - as burning the U.S. flag is to the Veterans of Foreign Wars association.

This film was not in keeping with the "Crow tradition", in that it was not at least a marginally well done, moody, atmospheric, eerie tale of an otherworldly instrument of karmatic payback - but was instead written as if it were a story made up by third graders over a cafeteria table at lunch. it was childish and silly - not moving and involving. I've seen deeper, more exciting Burger King commercials.

Edward Furlong was actually creepy and passively interesting enough to have made a pretty good "Crow", but unfortunately he was far too bogged down by idiotic writing, poor direction, lousy stunt choreography, derivative costuming, horrible production values, and a sheepish budget to have effectively gotten any revision of the character properly off of the ground. A very sad thing. I think that he may have been able to go places with this character - had his creative vehicle been slightly better than a rusted out junker with four flat tires.

The entire movie seemed like it was written and shot in a single afternoon. A real disappointment - and a bad way to end a running theme. The funding for this movie would have better been spent if it were used for building a Putt Putt golf course. To call this movie merely "silly", is to give it far too much credit.

I'd rather catch covid than ever watch this movie again

[chadg-79933 · 1/10 · 13 December 2020]

No joke my title said it all WTF for this movie if you're any fan of the original the crow do not watch this movie...

Rather great original telling of the crow mythology-Furlong was amazing in the film...

[jetdtw · 10 March 2006]

By no means a perfect film although by far the most amazing in the series bar the first. There is something about Wicked Prayer that is so cool, an i think id have to say it is Edward Furlong. This guy really does make a good crow. Maybe because unlike the other previous Crows, he doesn't pretend or act like Brandon Lee, instead we have a much angst an angry Crow, who doesn't go out of his way to b nice to someone that isn't guilty. It makes for a difference in plot and story. Okay Boreanaz was alright up to a point, then just started to act a bit too Angelous(don't get me wrong i love Angel, an think Boreanaz is great in his series, its just that he overacts in this as Angelous). Dennis Hopper was awful, over-acting every word and statement he had to make. Sure it didn't help him that his dialogue was fairly crap and to a certain extent pointless and Tara Reid just can't act. The story its self is rather entertaining and adds originality to the crow story instead of it just being the usual re-telling of the 1st, like city of angels. I would just love it tho if the love theme from the awful third film made it into this, then at least you wouldn't have such an amazing theme linked to an awe-full film. Oh well, the music wasn't that bad, tho nor was it good. Anyway, moan the furlong, this film has certainly made me a fan of his. He was amazing, in a hugely under-rated film. I'd advise any one to watch this cause it was actually a great film.

Brandon Lee is cringing in his grave

[michaelmunkvold · 1/10 · 10 April 2015]

"A man has an idea. The idea attracts others, like-minded. The idea expands. The idea becomes the institution. What was the idea?" - Top Dollar (Michael Wincott) in the original "The Crow"

So, a murdered ex-con comes back from the dead, paints himself up like a member of the KISS Army, and goes after the Satanic cult that killed him and his girlfriend - a cult led by the blonde girl from "American Pie" and the guy from "Bones". The premise of "The Crow: Wicked Prayer", the fourth and (here's hoping) final entry in the "The Crow" franchise, sounds like the setup to a joke... and well, it is a joke. Not a funny one, though.

"The Crow: Wicked Prayer" is the final nail in the "Crow" series' coffin. The acting, dialog and direction is awful, and the story is both ridiculous and boring. Not one character on screen could be recognized as a real person. Really, it doesn't get much worse than this.

To think the franchise started off with such promise. The 1994 film "The Crow" did something that had never been done before: it took elements of the ghost story and revenge thriller genres and told a story about characters we liked and cared about. It had real, human heart to go along with the balletic violence and Gothic set pieces. That, and the late Brandon Lee's iconic performance, made the film a wonderful experience, one of those rare movies you can watch over and over again, each time finding something new.

Then Edward R. Pressman Films, the studio that produced the movie, smelled money, and started grinding out grade-Z sequels. "The Crow: City of Angels" was dull and lifeless, and "The Crow: Salvation" was incoherent and silly. "The Crow: Wicked Prayer" has the dubious distinction of being far and away the worst of these sequels.

A certain amount of melodrama is to be expected in the revenge movie genre, but "Wicked Prayer" is as histrionic as a teenager's dream journal. Should you actually decide to watch this movie, it's my duty to warn you that you'll have to listen to lines like "Revenge is easy - forgetting is hard", "You owe me two lives and a pair of perfect blue eyes", and my personal favorite, "Quoth the raven nevermore, motherf---er!".

It doesn't help that director Lance Muniga doesn't seem to know the difference between a film and a music video; he substitutes explosions, pointless jump cuts and imitation "Matrix" fight choreography for plot, character and dialog.

He doesn't know how to cast or work with actors, either. Edward Furlong is horribly miscast as an undead avenger: he pouts, whines, and looks like a trick-or-treater in the Crow makeup. We don't care if he gets revenge or not. David Boreanz and Tara Reid are quite possibly the least intimidating Satanists ever seen on film - they call each other "dawg" and "shorty", fer Chrissakes. And poor Dennis Hopper just looks embarrassed in a cameo as a Satanic priest who speaks in Ebonics ("The devil will be your homey forevermore!").

Like the "Jaws" sequels and the Joel Schumacher "Batman" movies, "The Crow: Wicked Prayer" is depressing to watch. A brilliant idea has been co-opted and ruined by a bunch of amateurs. The idea has become the institution. It's time to move on.

this movie should be buried as well as careers

[guardianengelever · 1/10 · 16 January 2007]

I saw this movie after reading the novel that it was supposed to be based off of and follow-yet what they did to it was massacre it to a point of which you cannot reognize anything about the book

The Acting was terrible, over dramatized and hammed up every second to make you pretty much wanna jam a pencil through your eardrums so you wouldn't have to listen to it anymore, and well as jus was all around terribly and damn well goofy.

Edward Furlong was a Terrible Crow, David Borneanz-sucked...no other words to describe it, and Tara Reid-well shes Tara Reid-she was horrible what do you expect.

I watched this once on Video then had to sit through it again with friends and nearly used some blunt metal object to knock myself out to spare me from enduring it.

Overall this is generally crappy movie-not worth the money that was used to make it....some of the pple who were in this movie should have their careers buried along with this trash of a movie...(Tara)

let the story end here-they've massacred the legacy behind the story, and I'm sure anyone that is a fan of the movies and/or graphic novel will surely agree this film needs to be burned and buried to never be found. Out of Respect for the original, the book, and the graphic novel...let the series rest...this was the worst one of all-and im sure any further attempts will be even worse.

The Crow: Wicked Prayer delivers

[abahb1 · 8/10 · 5 June 2005]

THE CROW: WICKED PRAYER marks a return to a stylized form of film making. Each scene, especially early on, is like a framed poetic piece of art work. That word "poetic" was used by quite a few folks when describing various scenes. The film/story is set in the desert Southwest. Everything has dust/sand on it. There is a natural haze that seemingly lifts once night fall comes. Gone is the urban decay of previous stories. This dusty/dirty atmosphere helps to establish the film as a modern western tale.

The local community is odds over the mine in their town being closed to allow for a casino to be built. This conflict pits the Native American community against the rest of the community. This conflict, in part, lends to some of the reasons why the Four Horseman gang featured in the film are seeking revenge. The gang believes THEY are righting wrongs. The one thing that the town can agree on is nobody likes Jimmy Cuervo (Eddie Furlong).

The gang is not entirely evil, which is evidenced through some very well done moments in the story where the gang isn't so sure of themselves. This humanizes these characters that have in previous Crow films been nothing more than cartoon characters lined up for the slaughter. Jimmy could easily have fallen into this gang. Were it not for the love of Lily, he may well have. It is this tip toeing of the line between who is good and evil that makes the story fascinating.

Action is straight on, not a lot of martial arts. Wires are used from time to time, but other than that, the action is raw and emotional. There are no car chases, no exaggerated fighting styles. This is bare knuckle action and it fits the setting and story perfectly. I really liked that the action was not over the top.

The opening sequence, with its tip of the 10 gallon hat to THE GOOD, THE BAD & THE UGLY intro of the gang is great and sets the tone perfectly. Jimmy and Lily's intros are great. It was a nice to actually see both lovers alive at the beginning, where we can see them relate to each other rather than relying on flashbacks to establish their relationship. This adds strength to our empathy/sympathy for Jimmy later on. Jimmy's resurrection is done perfectly, a lot of emotion.

The music is absolutely fantastic. Jamie Christopherson's score is THE best, in my opinion, to date. It uses guitars, harmonicas, brass, all the elements that you would expect from a western setting.This is the first Crow film without the benefit of a rock soundtrack. In my opinion having a score-only soundtrack works perfectly given the desert setting.

Eddie Furlong's performance is spot on. He has the crux of responsibility in this film and he handles it beautifully. His character is very different from previous Crow films. He is torn when he comes back. He doesn't want to be there, he wants to be with Lily. Eddie does a great job conveying this pain. Eventually he accepts that this is the only way to be with Lily again. Emmanuelle is a dream, you can feel her love for Jimmy and the strength she has.

The villains overall are a much improved element over previous sequels. The beauty of this film is for the first time, we see the villains as humans. They have back stories that we are given glimpses into through their introductions and flashback sequences.

The director, Lance Mungia, has a great style to watch. The camera angles and shots are beautiful. The editing is near flawless with some very nice transition scenes that go from real-time to flashback back to real-time with beautiful results. I would have to say that for the first time in the sequels, we have a very technically sound film here. There was great care and work put into this film during post-production and it shows.

The ending is one of the best since the first film from an emotional level. It is beautifully shot and executed; you will be moved by it. Again, the word "poetic" comes up time and again when I look for a way to describe the look and feel of this film.

My only complaint with the film is the first half of the 3rd act. This is when Luc has channeled Satan and he and Lola are married to further consummate the union. David Boreanaz, in my opinion, is too far over the top. The dialogue David has during this part of the film is sprinkled with a tongue-n-cheek tone, but his delivery works against the intent, in my opinion. He obviously tries to take a page from Jack Nicholson's slant on the Joker from the first BATMAN film, but goes two pages instead.

Hopper's dialogue is cringe worthy in the 3rd act. I had hoped perhaps the delivery of the lines would improve them from the last script I had read. But as feared, the gangsta' lingo sounds out of place and I wish it would have been changed. Thankfully the second half of the 3rd act gets things back on the right track and gives us a very satisfying and emotional ending.

Overall, loved the film and can't wait for the DVD.

The Crow Wicked Prayer

[burningcorvus · 7/10 · 6 June 2005]

Seattle had screening of this movie for one week only. so this is how i saw it. well there isn't much to say about The Crow: Wicked Prayer. it had its ups and its downs. in terms of a movie though, i thought it just sucked. i thought the intro was good though, had a little profile of the main bad guys with the exception of Lola (i feel they could have picked a better actress other than Tara Reid). Although i do feel that the death of Pestilence (Okumoto), Famine (Ortiz), and War (Chong) could have been better. There was however a fight between Jimmy (Furlong) and Death (Boreanaz). that wasn't really in the previous Crow movies. In the original there was a sword fight, but this one was more one-on-one. I couldn't figure out if the movie was suppose to happen somewhere in America, or Mexico. The Indian tribe, i believe was fictional. Totem poles were found out in the desert-crap type area, and Totem poles are more coastal tribes (if they where more to the cost then they didn't really explain). I also felt that that they could have actually chosen REAL Indians to play the roles of Indians, but I guess they wanted the more Mexica-Indian look (which confuse me because i couldn't tell where the movie was taking place). Dennis Hopper's character, El Nino to me was more of a comic relief character. He spoke slang, and was a satanic-gansta-pimp. The back story between Lola (Reid), and El Nino (Hopper) i felt could have been explained better. Macy Gray in my opnio did not fit the role for the movie and (in my opinion) doesn't really have much to do with The Crow franchise. but thankfully she doesn't last long in the movie. I also felt that Boreanza wasn't a good match for Death, especially the dialog after he becomes the embodiment of Lucifer. All in all i give the movie a 7 out of 10, some of the characters and actors chosen for the characters i felt was off, but the overall story was interesting.

Awful

[jemege · 1/10 · 24 June 2005]

Terrible. The settings, the acting even the basic idea, Nonsense. Not worth paying for. If you do see it, be prepared to yawn. This movie is not for those who valued the first movie. It has become something that is beyond recognition. The entire thing was lacking. The actors tried but failed. The crow himself looked like a whining little goth pansy. Tara Reid could not act if her life depended on it, and as an actress, it does count on it. All of us who viewed it agreed, it was almost blasphemy. The end is the best part. Bacuase it was THE END. A few good one liners in the end sequence including an excellent speech on some guy eating his own heart. BUT THAT IS ALL. Very disappointed with the whole production.

Sadly, a great concept for a Crow film is pushed in the wrong direction at the beginning and never is able to get back.

[LLAAA4837 · 18 June 2006]

*1/2 out of ****

well, for the good things, the look of the film is nice and red. From previous entries the series has mostly used dark colors for the backdrop of the films. Edward Furlong does a surprisingly good job here and David Borneos does good too. The music sounds appropriate for the theme of the film and the storyline involving the main character is a neat concept.

The storyline is as follows, Jimmy Cuervo is murdered alongside his girlfriend as part of a strange satanic ritual. Jimmy rises from the dead to avenge the death of him and his girlfriend. The film takes place in Mexico and the two lovers weren't meant to be as the girlfriend's father doesn't want her to hang out with a murderer. This is the first time the murder victim isn't innocent as he is a convicted killer. This concept can work great.

In a perfect world it can work great, but the film doesn't work. Instead of focusing on the protagonist, the viewers experience with the film is constrained to the villains. The film focuses on the demon worshipers and the rituals and almost never focuses on Jimmy Cuervo.

It's disappointing because the demon worship plot line isn't interesting. it s made even worse by the fact that the audience is supposed to get to know the bad guys more than the hero. This doesn't work either because the bad guys are not interesting or evil enough to really spend time focusing on.

The other crow films featured outstanding villains and more of a sense of reason for killing them. We can't just get to know bad guys knowing that they will be killed. The film should have been more about the hero and his struggles.

To be fair, the head villain is suitably idiotic enough for comic relief. Tara Reid plays his sidekick, but she doesn't have much to do here except to change her mind on the killings. The other villains have back-stories, sure, but they don't have any spirit in their parts.

Speaking of which, the normally good Dennis Hopper is terrible in this film as an annoying Ebonics worshiping boss man. His lines aren't funny, his character is weird, and his reason for being in the film adds nothing. Macy Grey plays a brief but cute role. The murder scenes have no context or a sense of meaning or surprise. They range from a baseball bat to the head, to a heart ripping, to an actual suicide!!! What the hell?! This film was all the more disappointing due to the director Lance Mungia directed one of my favorite films(SIX STRING SAMURAI) and to know that he has talent makes the film seem all the more better, yet worse. Because of this fact, I cannot hate this film. Its not the worst film in the world, and i could watch it again without hesitation. But this film is disappointing for a fan of the crow films.

Rated R for violence and language throughout, some sexual and drug content.