|Page 3 of 32:||            |
|Index||317 reviews in total|
Having read many of the reviews, I was quite surprised that major points
were overlooked. I'll give you some personal background which will help
clarify where I am coming from. I'm a father of three daughters and I'm
always looking for good role models for my girls. I've also just recently
heard a documentary on date rape on CBC radio and was appalled. The usual
question came up: is date rape a societal issue or a result of exploitive
media? Well I think it's mostly societal and the media is a window into
that world. Violence against women starts the minute a male discovers
he can exert power over a female and get what he wants with impunity. Yes
men have greater physical strength and women are known for
Now for the movie. I took my middle daughter, aged 10, and was glad I took the risk. Here was a role model, Lara Croft, who was in total control of her life and had a solid moral code. She has brains and she has brawn. Not once does she have to use sex appeal to get what she wants. (Yes there are the stolen kisses and a tumble on the floor; but Lara uses Terry's sexual advances in order to confine him for justifiable reasons.) However, most importantly, she is never rescued by a male. I know you may think this is trite or even tripe but I feel that this is important. Films are dominated by males taking command and solving the problems...but let's face it...more often than not...it is also males who are the source of the problem. This was abundantly evident in this film. Yes it may have been preachy but men were the war mongers and they paid the price. Is this really so far fetched from reality? Look at the world now...look at the wars we are now having...but who actually pays the price: the women and children. (Notice also that no women, children nor animals were hurt in this film...is that a bad thing?)
So get off of the fact that you'd have liked to see a little nipple or the fact that Lara Croft seemed like a cartoon cut-out (what about James Bond, Spiderman, etc.) I think that this movie, Cradle of Life TR2, shakes up the status quo and so what of it? This is finally a chick-flick with a vengeance. Men haven't done so well in the last 4,000+ years. I think it's time to give the women a chance.
I went into this film with mixed feelings. On one hand, I wanted to be
excited- especially after seeing the trailers. But then I had seen the
trailers for the first Tomb Raider movie, and boy, had I been
So, I went into this movie with restrained excitement.
However, from the moment this film began, it was no longer restrained
excitement... but pure hair-raising EXCITEMENT. The action in this movie
absolute eye-candy, and one of those few instances, where it seemed
necessary within the narrative.
Angelina Jolie was sensational... she gave personality to Lara. Lara Croft
can now be put in the same league as James Bond, Indiana Jones, etc. I
the little laughs she had, and she really was amazing when she performed
stunts. The English accent was perfect, too.
The character Terry Sheridan was great, and the chemistry between him and
Lara was electrifying.
The plot was tight and understandable, unlike the first movie.
This is not ARTISTIC or a movie-trying-to-be-clever, it is pure entertainment. It delivers the action, but is three-dimensional because of the characters, and the emotion. It moves along, and doesn't get boring! Fans of the game will be pleased, because there are many scenes that closely resemble the game, especially the way Lara moves. :-D I really recommend this film and hope they make a third.
I like Lara Croft. I like Angelina Jolie playing the role of Lara Croft and I liked all the special effects they used to make this movie. Movie is entertainingly good. I wished Jolie considered playing a third part, but she already declared she won't do it again. "Two Tomb Raiders is enough" I hope she changes her mind.
Considering "Lara Croft: Tomb Raider" was pretty good entertainment,
this sequel was a disappointment. Critics disagreed and liked this one
better, but I disagree with them. As with most sequels, it just
overdoes what was popular in the first film.
In this case, that means the action is WAY overdone (since it was too much on the first film, to begin with); "Laura" becomes WAY too much of a feminist-macho icon and Jolie's British accent here is so phony it's embarrassing, and annoying to hear.
On he good side, I enjoyed the exotic locales (Far East and Africa), it had very little profanity and some of the stunts were wild and fun to watch. As far as I know, they don't have another sequel planned, which is smart.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
As you may be aware, this film is fictional, and therefore I will not
be speaking to whether sharks growl, or if black acid pools exist.
What I will be saying is that a film doesn't have to be a national treasure in order to be top-notch. All it has to do is play its cards correctly.
Female heroine. Superb. She's not jaded, not a feminist, and she's a romantic. VERY unique in the world of film where women heroes are supposed to out-man the man. She's tough, clever, smart, worldly, well-connected, great-looking, and still has a soft spot for the skyline of Hong Kong.
Male anti-hero. Nicely held together. Gerard Butler is absolutely smashing here, never better. His repartee with Lara is simple but high on the keen level, so kudos to the screenwriter. As Lara, skilled, connected, and just a bit flawed in the moral department makes Terry ripe for his own death.
The action. The pace on this film is on par with almost any James Bond movie. The lulls are few and contain interesting scenery, mainly travelogue. We go to Africa, Greece, and China, on location. Jolie's prowess is truly on display, martial arts, weaponry, horseback, climbing, acrobatics. While some aspects feel rushed, most are just right. The stunts are tremendous and hardly anything looks fake, even if it is a movie.
The plot. A bit thin after the initial setup. Mostly, this is a chase and be chased film. Some Bond, some Bourne, some Indiana Jones. The villain is centered correctly, only becoming unhinged at the very end. I think Reiss' toughness was overrated and the finale fight with Lara was about 30 seconds too long, since she is obviously superior in every way to his wild gunslinging. The orb was QUITE interesting, and the Greek mythology mixed with origins of life was, of course, a rip from The Lost Ark, among others. This was not distracting, actually, as there is little to go wrong when a plot centers around, essentially, the power of God.
Special Effects. The guardians of the canyon were fun and slight, just right for this type of film, intense but not evil enough to spill this to demonic. Their movements were exciting, and the way they guard/kill quite interesting, by absorbing the humans into the terrain. The box itself was somewhat of an anticlimax, not being opened long enough to produce havoc.
Dialogue. Not riveting, but not boring or annoying. A straight shot.
Is Alien a better franchise? Terminator? Star Trek? Star Wars? Obviously yes. But you will be hard-pressed to find a more well-rounded film than this one, where fun and excitement meet sincere movie-making.
I'm torn about this film. On the other hand, I cannot quite pinpoint
the differences between this and the original Lara Croft film, and yet
it feels inferior in every aspect. But why is that? Why do I feel that
this isn't as good as the original. Well, novelty might be one
explanation. The first Tomb Raider was fresh, new, something we hadn't
seen before. This one is just the first one with a new coat of paint,
which is never a good thing.
One explanation might also be that I don't really like Gerard Butler's Terry Sheridan as a character. The first Tomb Raider was great because the focus was on Lara. She was the undisputed hero of her own story. In this one I feel that they regretted that decision and decided to add some unneeded masculinity into the mix. And yes, this is hypocritical, because if any sequel to a male lead adventure film decided to add a kickass female character, I wouldn't complain at all. Unfortunately, that's the world we live in, and I cannot lie about how I feel about Terry.
I also miss the interplay between Lara and her father. The first film was very focused on her character and the stages were personal. Not so much in this film. Lara quests for the Cradle of Life, not because it means something to her personally, but because she's ordered to do so and she just went: "Yeah, I didn't have anything planned for the weekend anyway." A workable solution if you don't have anything else, but it's a bit on the weak side.
Otherwise the movie is pretty much identical to the first one. Gorgeous locations, great stunt sequences, imaginative action scenes and Angelina Jolie is as great as always, although the need to cover her up in order to cover her tattoos is a crime against humanity. So, if you liked the first one, I'd give this one a watch as well. It's not quite as good, but it's not noticeably worse either. If you didn't like it, this won't change your opinion.
In 2001, fan boys and gamers alike were able to get their eye full with
Angelina Jolie in the lead role as Lara Croft. It may not have been a
success in critics' eyes but it did well at the box office and fans
wanted a sequel. So as a follow up, this movie doesn't perform badly at
all. But it does lack a few details that keep it from being as good as
the first. The majority of these flaws lie in the writing as well as
some character development.
In this story, Croft is set on the quest to find Pandora's Box and keep an evil money mogul from getting his hands on it and causing countless deaths around the world. So to accomplish this task, she once again calls on her friends and companions at home and around the world to assist her. The two important ones that most fans like are Hillary (Chris Barrie) and Bryce (Noah Taylor). I was happy to see them reprise their roles - their presence in the first added comedic relief to various situations, as do they in this installment.
Of course, Jolie as Croft is still a great choice. Her athletic and flexibility abilities are still impressive and are similar if not the same as the moves that Lara Croft does in the video game. And I don't know if it's just me but I found Jolie to be even more attractive in this picture. Her face is different. Playing the evil money mogul is Ciarán Hinds. Hinds also puts in a good performance. He may not be the most sinister of villains but he's no fresh apple either.
Accompanying Croft in her journey across the globe is an ex-boyfriend named Terry Sheridan (Gerard Butler) who is good with guns and I agree, he is. I also found him to have a funny sense of humor with his Scottish accent. What upset me about though was that writer Dean Georgaris wrote his character to be untrusted and unpredictable. That caused the character development between Sheridan and Croft to whither. They had good chemistry but they were always up and down. Like a love-hate relationship. Can we just pick a single tone for these two? I also didn't like how Georgaris did not explain what happened to Alex West (Daniel Craig) from the first movie. Craig's character did not die so why wasn't it at least explained where he was or why he left? Continuity people! But that's really all I have to nit-pick about. I enjoyed the action which felt solid. The director, Jan de Bont, who also directed the megahit Speed (1994) seems to have a good idea what an action movie needs even though his profession lies in cinematography. I also felt that the musical score provided by Alan Silvestri instead of Graeme Revell was an improvement. It expressed action, tension and feeling at the right moments. Although it's not as great as the first, I still liked it.
Its writing is a little off with character development and continuity but it still holds up strong. The characters are still fun to watch as well as the action and improved musical score.
The attempt here is to deify Jolie as the goddess of technology, war
and 'craft' through movie iconography. Plainly, the passage is through
the Indiana Jones series, and several of the James Bond installments,
including "Dr. No", "Goldfinger", "Moonraker", "A View to a Kill", and
"Tomorrow Never Dies". Note her partnering here with a 'rogue Scot'.
"Mission Impossible 2" and "Point Break" are thrown in for good
This falls flat because of the deadly dull seriousness, and the absence of any sex appeal. It amounts to a spoof in all of its manifold allusive features, yet it generates no laughs. Jolie needed to play this with a wink at the audience, but got it completely wrong.
The other missing dimension is the lack of acknowledgment that this is, at its root, a game. There's no interaction with us, no engineering of narrative to engage us within this in some way.
We get a boring procession of visual platitudes, nothing more.
Now I am very laid back on movies and give all movies chances and most them I've seen haven't been as boring as this one. Well laura croft was at it again trying to find some treasure, (I forgot what it was because I fell asleep). Then I tried watching it again then I fell asleep. The action sequences don't even get you into the movie. The acting good but the storyline didn't really draw me in this movie. I tried giving this movie a chance and I'm not a person who wants it extactly with the video game or something, I didn't want a movie that would change my life or anything, just an enjoyable movie I can watch over and over again. My suggestion to you is don't try this movie out because I think it would be a waste of time.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
For a long time the worlds of cinema and video games have been interlinked. For every film which has it's own game released, one game has a film created in the opposite direction. In 1993 we were introduced to the Bob Hoskins' picture "Super Mario Brothers" based on the original game. Eventually it wasn't long before the Lara Croft series would continue this route and therefore in 2001 the first "Tomb Raider" film was released. Whilst this first outing was a suitable story with relevance to the original series, the 2003 sequel was shocking in the fact that it was awkward, badly written and badly filmed. Ultimately, not even Angelina Jolie in tight outfits and bikinis could save this film from the rubbish dump where it belongs.
In this second film, Jolie's Lara Croft is dispatched off around the world in the search of Pandora's Box, also referred to as "The Cradle Of Life". Along the way, Croft picks up an exlove in the shape of Terry Sheridan (Gerard Butler) as she attempts to prevent greedy, virus dealer Jonathan Reiss (Ciaran Hinds) from unleashing an awful plague across the globe.
In James Hart's story, the idea of "Tomb Raider" dies a painful death. Whilst the original story was clever and intriguing with Croft travelling around the world with her butler Hillary (Chris Barrie) not far behind, this second adventure was relatively limited in location and with more violence than thought process. The first inspired people to think and actually focus on such a mindless film. In contrast, "Lara Croft Tomb Raider: The Cradle Of Life" is monotonous and infuriating. This film is in fact so pointless that the brain rots as you slowly watch more of it.
As well as the awful script, this film suffers from a lack of acting ability. Whilst Chris Barrie's butler has evolved from a butler to a ridiculous comedy figure, Angelina Jolie has increased her posh English accent and produced a truely hideous performance. It's a shame actually because Jolie has the perfect body and appearance to represent Croft, but she just makes the role slightly too hilarious to be taken serious. Jolie has a nice body, ridiculously good in a black bikini, but mentally the actress is too stressed to provide a suitable performance.
Ultimately this second "Tomb Raider" film suffers from a lack of plot and a bit too much special effects. The thought process of the series and game have been removed in favour of Jolie in tight outfits and pointless elements. In some films this could work, sadly in the "Tomb Raider" series, it doesn't.
|Page 3 of 32:||            |
|Plot summary||Plot synopsis||Ratings|
|Awards||Newsgroup reviews||External reviews|
|Parents Guide||Official site||Plot keywords|
|Main details||Your user reviews||Your vote history|