Murder of Crows

1st watched 4/27/2002 - 7 out of 10(Dir-Rowdy Herrington): Effective murder mystery with many convoluted plot-twists that are almost too much to believe, but good performances by Gooding, Berenger, and even Eric Stolz, in a somewhat minor role as far as the plot, does a good job. Without giving too much away this is basically about a lawyer who gets disbard for doing the right thing(turning in his guilty client) and then publishes a novel, which he really didn't write, about a lawyer-murderer and then is accused of the actual crimes that were mimicked from the book. That is quite enough in itself, but the story involved even more than that and is told at times from Cuba's characters perspective(which means of course that he isn't dead when it's over, but that‘s okay he‘s the star). The ending seemed a little too long and it worked too hard to make it happy for the viewer but besides that this was a well-done picture that is carried by the stars involved.

The actors attracted me to this film. They were all in it and did a fair amount of acting. The plot was very original. Be forewarned; if you're an attorney, it's not flattering to you. Sample line..."Without lawyers, we wouldn't need lawyers."

I love legal thriller/mystery movies, and Murder of Crows was one of the best ones I've seen. Cuba Gooding plays a lawyer down on his luck who decides to write a book. His character in the movie mentioned John Grisham, which I thought was funny because I had just been comparing the movie plot to the way John Grisham writes. I was surprised and intrigued by Tom Berenger - he made quiet a convincing investigator. I think he would have been better cast as the main character.

There seems to be a lot of negativity in the comments for this film. I thought it was pretty decent. Yes, voice-over narration is often a crutch, but it did not annoy me here. Cuba Gooding played it well even though his character was a little bit too good at evading the police. Tom Berenger was also just fine as a New Orleans police detective. Marianne Jean-Baptiste played all of the right notes as well. I guess I don't spend much time while watching movies trying to guess what is coming, or foretelling the ending. It seems that many people do. To each his own, I suppose. Nice scenery in both New Orleans and Key West. This never seems to have made it into theaters, but it is a nice diversion.

The premise was really interesting, and overall I enjoyed it, with some major reservations. The good: Cuba Gooding, who's always good; the use of New Orleans, which was quite well done; and the art direction, which was terrific. I wanted almost every painting I saw on every wall. The bad: I had a hard time believing our hero didn't notice the AWFUL AND OBVIOUS stage makeup on his fishing customer and the keywest detective, who sported the fakest mustache ever put on film! I also couldn't believe that an escaped murder suspect--whose face would not only have been on the news every night, but also prominently displayed on the back cover of a book we are told is a runaway bestseller nationwide-- would just blithely roam the streets of the two places he's known to reside in without fear of recognition by anyone but the police. Please. Finally the HORRID southern drawls affected by Eric Stoltz and Mark Pelligrino were among the most egregious I've heard yet... and that's saying something.

But for all that, I liked it. Big 'ol plot holes and all. So if you're up to suspending a hell of a lot of disbelief, it's a fun movie. If you insist your movies make sense, don't bother.