Lara Croft Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 10 of 32: [Prev][5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [Next]
Index 316 reviews in total 

Angelina Jolie IS Lara Croft, and then some!

Author: Renaldo Matlin from Oslo, Norway
26 December 2003

It's ironic (and depressing) that this movie - which in many ways is a vast improvement on the first film - might mean the end of the "Lara Croft" film series, because it didn't do well enough at the box office. If the studio had some brains it might realize that the reason this movie did worse than the first one is because millions of people thought the first one sucked and imagined this one would do the same.

As opposed to the first one, in "The Cradle of Life" one actually feels for the characters, especially the tension-filled relationship between Lara and Terry Sheridan (played to perfection by Gerard Butler) works great, and Ciarán Hinds is so loathsome as the chief villain that you wish him a really painful death; this man is so inconsiderate and fiendish he hides a biological weapons lab inside a public shopping mall! Thank God they had the sense to loose the overrated Simon West as director after his abysmal job on the first one. On top of that, if you think the use of locations was exotic in the first movie, wait till you see this one! I can not remember seeing a movie that conveys such a strong feeling of a screen character using the entire world as their private little playground (the only real competitor has to be James Bond). The filmmakers also help underline a feeling that was never really explored in the game series; that when you scrape of all the muscles and get under that icy outer shell, Lara Croft is really a tragic figure. Most people associated with her seem to die. In the end that's very sad of course, but it also helps to give the character (and film) the soul and heart the original lacked. "The Cradle of Life" does however suffer a little bit by the same thing plaguing the original movie: it *is* a bit overlong.

One comment on something that takes place during the first fifteen minutes of the film: I saw some people in the discussion board talking about how ridiculous a scene between Lara and a shark is. What did they expect? This is Lara Croft, not Veronica Guerin! And what she does to that shark is even described in the well known "The Worst-Case Scenario Survival Handbook" so all these things considered the scene is truly one of the highlights of the film and only an uninformed moron can dislike it.

I played several of the original games on Playstation and loved them, but after the first movie I was almost provoked when hearing there would be a sequel, but now after seeing "The Cradle of Life" I would love to see the series continue for another film.

Was the above review useful to you?

The Earthly Goddess in Action ! ! !

Author: Ahmed Fahmy ( from Alexandria, Egypt
25 December 2003

Lara Croft Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life

The Earthly Goddess in Action ! ! !

Ho Haaa ! ! !

I am a great admire of Angelina Jolie; she is truly one of today's most beautiful and talented actress, who is also able to perform very hard physical stunts. In Tomb Raider I, she was able to perfectly portray the character of Lara Croft exceedingly well. And since I enjoyed the first installment although a lot of critics do not agree with me, but I think when you have got this gorgeous female in a movie, together with Jan De Bont you've got a good action/adventure movie to watch.

Overall the movie is average, it does not succeed its prior installment, and Simon West (Con Air) was able to deliver a better story, cast, stunts and directorial than De Bont (Speed, Twister…). The opening of TR II was very weak, not to mention that scene where she punches the shark, but from then the movie is stable and exciting in many scenes. The sound score is also weak, not like TR I. The action scenes are cool enough, De Bont is better when it came to gunfight scenes.

Anyway Lara Croft Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life is a joyful adventure movie for family but a disappointment to the fans of the first movie who expected more.

I enjoyed Jolie kicking ass and saving humanity from what ever . ..

I think that Jolie has much more potential in her; if another director supplied her with better tools and idea's this would have been a better movie. The lovely Angelina, the passionate Gia, the smart Amelia from The Bone Collector, the amazing mentally ill Lisa in Girl, Interrupted and the seductive lady in Original Sin has much to offer us beside her beauty, in movies yet to come, hopefully in Oliver Stone's upcoming Alexander.


Was the above review useful to you?

Better than expected

Author: moviefan2003va from Washington, DC
22 December 2003

This movie is typical summer fare in terms of implausible action sequences and such but it has a solid story line that it sticks to and even manages to fit in a story line of choosing personal happiness over what's best for the rest of the world.

Was the above review useful to you?

Angelina the Great.

Author: fastmike from Long Branch, NJ, USA
1 December 2003

Angelina Jolie gives a great repeat performance as super heroine Lara Croft, (combination 'Indiana Jones' and '007') as she sets out to save the world from bio-terrorist.

It's a little 'far-fetched' at times, but the run-chase-find action is non-stop, and the special effects are cleverly blended in to 'sum-up' to a really fun unique action adventure.

Was the above review useful to you?

Angelina Jolie is great BUT.....

Author: popzit from Atlanta
29 November 2003

Although this film is worth watching, that's all I can say about it. When Hollywood sets out to make a big-budget blockbuster, they "give it all they got" and so it was with the first Tomb Raider, which was a solid success and a great movie. Then they think this magic feat can be duplicated by another blockbuster with the same star. Sorry but it rarely happens like that and didn't in this case. Ms. Jolie is great and sexy and wonderful but the screenplay and story just falls short of the original. To be fair, the temple battle with the Rock Creatures in the first movie was just too hard of an act to follow. The same can be said about many of the original's scenes. Everything about this film was good-just not excellent. Good entertainment and worth watching once but I wouldn't buy the DVD for my home library.

Was the above review useful to you?

Very entertaining adventure film.

Author: senortuffy from Glen Ellen, CA
20 November 2003

This was a fun movie to watch, sort of a mix between James Bond and Indiana Jones. I'm surprised by the relatively negative reviews others have given it. Usually I'm in sync with most people on these things, but I enjoyed this one.

The story is a basic Indiana Jones adventure. Laura Croft uncovers an orb in a lost tomb, Alexander's Lunar Temple, and when a certain musical tone is played, the orb reveals the location of Pandora's Box. An evil scientist hires someone to steal it - he wants to release a plague to wipe out most of the world's population and leave everything to him and a select few. Laura Croft sets out to recover the orb and prevent anyone from getting to Pandora's Box.

As befits a director who made his bones in cinematography, Jan de Bont made a film with lots of stimulating visuals. The scene of the two jumping off a highrise in Hong Kong and parasailing to a ship in the harbor was really impressive. There's a fair amount of CGI, but with all the stunts and action, it was necessary and I didn't find them intrusive. The actual cinematographer here is David Tattersall, who filmed the last Bond movie and the newer Star War releases.

Angelina Jolie is just a fair actress, but she handles the role of a heroic action figure well enough and certainly fills out the physical requirements. Gerard Butler and Ciarán Hinds, though not well known by name, also play their roles as Laura's partner/maybe-love-interest and evil villain well.

The production isn't quite as slick as a Bond movie and de Bont certainly isn't Steven Spielberg, but I found this movie more enjoyable than "Die Another Day." Maybe because the Bond formula is getting tired.

If you like films of that genre, then I suspect you'll have a good time watching this one. I did.

Was the above review useful to you?


Author: PimpSkaterStar from Az
15 November 2003

I wish I liked the two video game movies, but I can't say I do that much. This one was an inmprovment over the irst one because it had more action and a better story. Jolie has never been sexier, but she uses her body to make the audience forget how bad the movie really is. ** out of **** stick to the games.

Was the above review useful to you?

Not as bad as expected

Author: GJBStar from UK
12 October 2003

Having missed the first film but having seen the negative publicity it received, I must admit that I had serious doubts about this film but I actually quite enjoyed it nevertheless. Angelina Jolie sports an impressive and accurate English accent as Lara Croft (she sounds like Tamara Beckwith, IT girl) and I can't think of another actress who could play the role. Gerard Butler is also pretty good as the potential love interest. The plot which revolves around the search for Pandora's Box, whilst far-fetched as one would expect is certainly of the genre. Ciaran Hinds plays the biological weapons expert, Jonathan Reiss and has presence but stands out so much as the bad guy that he might as well have Bad Guy tattooed on his forehead.

However, one cannot avoid the flaws of the movie. I must admit that I've never been a Chris Barrie fan (Brittas Empire anyone) but both he and Noah Taylor as Bryce grate somewhat and seem ever so slightly superfluous. Also, set design and production values in the opening scenes looks and feels cheap - from one of the worst CGI sharks (maybe, left over CGI from Scooby Doo) and Alexander the Great's Temple which looks as if it's made of polystyrene. Also, parts of Chinese countryside look more like Scotland. This though is in marked contrast to production values later in the film and Hong Kong and the Cradle of Life are both impressive - one can only imagine that the budget ran out somewhere. Despite this, Jan de Bont's direction is generally pretty good and the opening shots of the wedding sequence (especially the wine glass shots)show what he can do when not burdened with CGI.

Overall, this movie is fun but slight and similar in tone to the Charlie's Angels movies. However, it is a little more staid and perhaps takes itself too seriously. It will always be a poor man's Indiana Jones but the franchise, should it continue, could be stronger than Charlie's Angels if it loosened up a little. Worth a look when you want something easy.


Was the above review useful to you?


Author: glennz20
10 October 2003

Craptacular is the one and only word to describe this piece of trash movie. I never knew I could hate a film so much, until I saw Lara Croft Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life.

After the medicore, but entertaining first Lara Croft movie, comes this just-plain-crap and boring sequel. Half the time during this movie, I found myself staring away from the screen, wondering about other things - it was just totally uninteresting.

A plot you ask? Well, a plot is very non-existant here, save for a recycled story from the first movie. Lara Croft must find the much desired Pandora's Box, along the way teaming up with her old friend, Terry (an incredibly bland Gerard Butler). Sound familiar? It should - we've seen it before.

Bad action scenes, trashy dialogue and enormous plot holes make up 117 minutes of this movie. Was it really that long? It seemed like a lifetime.

Not even the usually fantastic Angelina Jolie can save this film. Avoid at great risk - (* out of ****).

Was the above review useful to you?

Entertaining and not bad

Author: Stuart from Melbourne, Australia
7 October 2003

- Tomb Raider 2: The Cradle of Life: 7/10

I really enjoyed TR2, even though the reviews have been largely negative. Angelina Jolie is just great as Lara Croft, and the movie was really interesting and fast paced. The ending was kind of flat though, subtracting half a point from my rating.

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 10 of 32: [Prev][5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards Newsgroup reviews External reviews
Parents Guide Official site Plot keywords
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history