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 312 reviews in total 

An ok movie

Author: relentless1313 from Texas
1 September 2003

this movie was ok i don't think it was great or even good just ok. it has to much of that Hollywood B.S. where one person kills 500 and dosen't even get a scratch. i know that this film is based on a video game but a little more realism wouldn't have been bad. i gave it a 6 for some of the cooler ideas of the movie namely the story line. it was a good idea and it got lost in the explosions and gun fights along the way.

Was the above review useful to you?

A marked improvement,.... Alleluyah!

Author: ( from London, UK
30 August 2003

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

(Possible Spoilers)

Alas fellow members, I found this film to be better than the first installment; and for this I am truely grateful :-) The first one really left a soar taste in my mouth, even though Jolie did her level best to save it!

This doesn't however mean that this film is without any rough edges that need smoothening out...... more on that later.

I'm pleased to report that Angelina has got Lara 'perrrrfectly' and is totally at ease with the role. It was also really nice seeing her faithfull mansion hand-helps again, always a good laugh.

The story is also a marked improvement on part one. It flows alot better this time round, each section being joined by some real nice stunts/actions scenes and Jolie impressing us with her 'Lara-esque antics' - those who've played the game will know what I mean ;-)

The fight scenes were also pretty good; I say 'pretty' because for those who have seen Blade and Matrix........

And, and.... we even get to see one proper tomb room this time round!! What a cool sight it is too!

The script isn't without it's flaws however,..... but they are no worse than the usual action movie stuff, and I personally feel that the film was better put together this time round hence I didn't feel the need to dwell on these minor kinks for more than 5secs.... Honest!

So, for all u Lara/Jolie fans out there, please go see this, it is better than the first! (It still defies belief that some of you out there think the 1st film is better?!!!?!? But hey, each to their own ehh)

Hopefully, the next film will be set in tomb like region for more than half the film, with booby traps all over the shop and more strange creatures than u can shake a stick at, like the ones in this film, (they rocked)!! So,..... Egypt anyone????

Was the above review useful to you?

How boring.

Author: aris-6 from Philadelphia, USA and Thessaloniki, Greece
30 August 2003

I liked the first Tomb Raider and I like Angelina Jolie as Lara Croft. But frankly if it wasn't for her, I would not have stayed till the end of The Cradle of Life. I would also suggest the Hollywood screw-up-writers to take some lessons on Greek Mythology and History and not to place Alexander the Great before the volcanic eruption of the Island of Thera (Santorini). Or quit their job.

Was the above review useful to you?

Really, not that bad

Author: rogerdarlington from United Kingdom
30 August 2003

This movie has had a tough time from the critics, but really its weaknesses and strengths are very similar to the original outing - and that grossed almost $300M worldwide. There are worse things in life than spending two hours watching someone with Angelina Jolie's animalistic eyes, bee-stung lips and engaging figure knocking hell out of the bad guys, while performing swirling gymnastics and sporting two huge guns.

Jan de Bont ("Speed") has taken over as director. Again the plot is simple and silly: some megalomaniac (an unimpressive Ciarán Hinds) wants to gain access to an object that will give him unprecedented power over the world (this time it's Pandora's Box which can only be located through a golden orb). Again the script is weak when not risible. But again the locations are wonderful (Greece, Hong Kong and Kenya) and the action non-stop. An extra bonus is Scotsman Gerard Butler who brings a real physicality to his role as a renegade agent and some emotional vulnerability to Croft's tough exterior.

Was the above review useful to you?

Angelina IS Lara Croft - again!

Author: na071 from Lampeter, Wales
29 August 2003

*** This review may contain spoilers ***


I saw this movie with my nine year old cousin, the day after I had seen TR1 for the first time. He said that the movie should have been a 15 certificate and not a 12a. I agree - the movie was not the usual Hollywood runaround summer blockbuster and was definitely aimed at the 15+ age group.

I thought it was not quite as enjoyable as the first Tomb Raider film, but it certainly does not deserve the criticisms levelled at it (especially when one thinks of the execrable 'Hulk' and disappointing 'Terminator 3').

I can see why it has been panned. There are gaping holes in the plot and, when all is said and done, it is simply not an exciting movie, but then I can see the point in this. For once, despite a fairly incomprehensible (at times) plot, the director has veered away from the popcorn MTV style of moviemaking and delivered a quite sombre, much more gritty film. When I think of the modern blockbuster, it would appear that films are edited in a far too chaotic fashion. Wham bang images and loud rock anthems dominate. Here, however, de Bont has opted for a melancholic sounding orchestral score and a much slower editing style that allows the set pieces to become visually more arresting than, say, the unexciting chase sequences in Terminator 3.

I must admit that the movie is simply not that exciting. And herein lies the problem - the villain and his motivations are simply not enough to engage any attention from the audience. Imagine Stromberg (Curt Jurgens) from The Spy Who Loved Me and you will see my meaning. The character is not able to generate any sympathy, hatred or reasoning for his searching for the Cradle of Life. It's a shame, really, because a good villain would have made the movie better. And, of course, a good villain makes the heroines exploits and the climactic showdown more exciting for the audience, which unfortunately does not happen here.

As for the supporting characters? Well, Chris Barrie is good as the butler and it was nice to see a cameo appearance from the one and only Leslie Phillips. But the love interest? Bland is the only word I can think of for this actor and his character (even though the character is apparently a traitor to Britain - a plot device never followed up which was a shame).

Of course, the movie seems designed as a showcase for Ms Jolie. In all fairness, a one dimensional character has been fleshed out by the actress to become a heroine of some standing. She gives a good account for herself and it would be a shame to see this as her last outing as the adventurer. Ms Jolie seems to give it her all, and it would appear that she enjoys making these movies, so I hope she gets another chance.

All in all, I thought the movie was enjoyable, but there was something missing from it - no, don't think of plot, characters etc - that sort of indefinable 'something' that makes, say 'Raiders of the Lost Ark' the godfather of these types of movies whilst others merely sit in that movies shadow.

My rating? 6 out of 10.

Was the above review useful to you?

Summer fun!

Author: PorkPie007 from Nottingham, England
23 August 2003

The plot and its elements are fused beautifully with the camera-work and acting into a synthesis of truth from the direction alone... plus it has Angelina Jolie in it! Just try to get past the slightly below-par special-effects in some scenes and you're all set for two hours of sheer, enjoyable nonsense.

Was the above review useful to you?

Simple Fun

Author: Arni Fridriksson from Iceland
22 August 2003

I'm from Iceland so when I saw the first movie I was more than curious because it takes partly place in Iceland. I was disappointed. So I was quite surprised when I saw part 2. It IS much better then the first one. The action flows well and it remains entertaining to the end (the ending is maybe a little bit melodramatic). But beware! This movie has nothing got to do with acting or storytelling. It's simple fun.

Was the above review useful to you?

Somewhat dissapointing...

Author: SweetAngel22 from USA
21 August 2003

*** This review may contain spoilers ***


If you're looking for a good action flick with lots of cool stunts this is a great movie. But if you're looking for a movie with a good plot it's ok. I must say I was VERY impressed with the acting and stunts, especially Angelina Jolie. In my opinion she makes the movie. Then there's the downside. I was very surprised at the amount of violence in this PG-13 movie. That alone should have made it R but then you have the plot in itself. The little bit that it had was very mature! It's about a mad scientist trying to get to Pandora's box and open it no matter what. Which means killing many innocent people. That's why Jolie is after him, to stop him. Not only that but at the end the death of the mad scientist is very gruesome and dramatic with the way he dies. Don't get me wrong because I do like twists in movies but the ending of this on was just plain SAD! If you watch it you'll see what I mean. My main conclusion is if you go to see it for action and wonderful acting by Jolie, great movie...BUT if you're going to see it for storyline (like I said at the beginning) it's ok. My final vote would be 4 out of 10 stars.

Was the above review useful to you?

Good action flick, now if someone actually take the time to create a plot....

Author: Kong Wong from Hong Kong
17 August 2003

Its a bit errie to watch this film when Dr. Reiss' lab is just under my seat. Yes, I watch this action packed film right in the Mall where the lab was suppose to be and all the audience chuckled when the actors spoke in Chinese or what they think is Chinese.

This film is a good action movie with the standard Hollywood fancy which leads to a lot of special effect, explosions, gunfights, fist fights, pretty girl in bikini, pretty girl in nothing but a towel and very little senses. There are lots of eye candies, and nothing you will remember.

It could be a better film if someone take out like .05% of the overall budget and pay some real writer to create a plausible, belivable and enjoyable plot. Instead, we have a stright forward line that consist of shoot them up and shoot some more with a villian thats not even half competitant, a heroine with an emotion crisis only in the last minute of the film, and a dude who does a 180 with no sign offered at all. The movie's climax, if it was a climax, was very disappointing.

It is a hollywood summer action movie, what else do you expect.

Was the above review useful to you?

The Return of Lara Croft

Author: EmperorNortonII from San Francisco, California
16 August 2003

Angelina Jolie reprises her role as that hellcat archaeologist and video-game vixen in "Lara Croft Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life." The sequel isn't quite as good as the original. Granted, Angelina shows off her moves well, as seen with her drill team moves while fighting using the antique rifle. But the story has quite a bit to be desired. The movie at least has some beautiful locations, such as Africa and the Chinese countryside. If there is a sequel to "The Cradle of Life," it will only be because of the following of the "Tomb Raider" video game.

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