|Page 10 of 32:||               |
|Index||316 reviews in total|
Glad we bestirred ourselves to watch this movie, as it is innovative,
energetic and vastly
The neon lighted gymnastics alone are worth the price of admission. Terrific stunts all around.
With gorgeous photography, delicious eye candy, and brilliant, flawlessly flowing sequences, it's tempting to watch it a rare second time.
And what a refreshing conclusion for an action-adventure romp, a total surprise!
This is not a great movie. It may not even be a good movie - BUT it is
entertaining and is better than many of the other action flicks out there
The first 30 minutes of the movie are by far the worst. The opening sequence which has nothing to do with the movie is a waste. They then throw several mini-scenes that are not well-connected and in some cases, add nothing to the movie ("why was Laura riding through the forest shooting at targets in the trees?).
As in the first movie, we have absolutely no reason to care about LC as a person. Jolie could have been replaced by a blow-up doll in some sequences.
Until.... ...she gets an ex-boyfriend out of prison to assist her. The tension, the "do I trust you?" aspect, the "who is the alpha in this relationship" adds dimension lacking in the first movie. At the same time, the storytelling settles down and you get a fairly standard but well-paced action story ala Indiana Jones.
The final bonus for me was the lack of CGI until the end where supernatural creatures were required. This was such a welcome relief considering all of the awful CGI (again, LXG) I have endured. This looked like a real movie - not a computer simulation.
If you are interested, go ahead and see it. You've sat through a lot worse this summer.
Lara Croft Tomb Raider:The Cradle of Life(2003)*** Angelina Jolie. In this
sequel, Lara Croft is out to find the map which leads to Pandoras Box. She
needs to get there before the bad guys. This is more fun and action packed
then the original, and The plot is a lot better. The first 15 minutes where
confusing, but after it gets through with that, it really is enjoyable. If
you liked the original, then you will relish this one. If you thought the
original was Ok, then you still might like this. The stunts are cool and the
special action scenes were good, too. For anyone who is a casual moviegoer,
then see this. Recommended!
PG-13 for action violence, some sensuality, and brief profaintity.
Why? Why are we forced to see James Bond with an equal competitor/sidekick?
Why are we now forced to see Lara Croft with one as well?
Why cant these heroes be heroes in their own right? Why do we feel the need to eclipse them with other actors?
This is my main complaint about what could have been a fantastic movie. The film is leaps and bounds over the first movie which, while fun, had its plot and intelligence problems. This film outdoes all of that, but now forces you to watch as the once super heroine Lara Croft is now forced to play second fiddle to her sidekick, Terry Sheridan.
I thought Lara was supposed to be a female role model? a strong female figure in the action movie community? Now we see her being saved by a man on at least two occasions when in the games and in the previous movie she could have saved herself. This is just as sickening as the Halle Berry intrusion into the world of 007. These are powerful characters and should be. Thats why they are our heroes. I'm all for humanizing them a bit, but why make them impotent and reliant on some throwaway character?
It is after all, Lara's name at the top. Not Terry Sheridan. I think the filmmakers would have been wise to remember that.
What is everyone's problem with this film? lighten up people! People
complain too much about tomb raider, then why don't they just major in
and write their own script if they're so smart?
This movie is really good and I'm not just saying it because I love Angelina Jolie (well, maybe a little) but because the story is interesting. I think a lot of thought was put into the script and i think it was neat that pandora's box is a real myth and how it wasn't just made up for the movie.
the settings are beautiful in this movie. Everything is a little bigger than the first one and I thought the love interest Terry Sheridan showed the softer side of Lara and how she can be human and fall for someone who's not trusting.
If anyone says that this movie does not have an original script, then they're wrong. One critic said that this movie is the same as the first--a bad guy trying to take over the world. but if that's such an issue...could anyone tell me the difference between the 1st, 2nd and 3rd terminator? all three movies have the same purpose--robots trying to take over the world. oh, and The Matrix is about the same thing. Why don't people complain about that then bash Tomb Raider?
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
I really enjoyed the first Tomb Raider, despite the numerous that didn't. With Cradle, I decided to go in with the exact expectations that I had with the first film: none. I didn't expect anything at all. Cradle has a good storyline, good characters, and some good sets, but that's about it. The actions scenes were good, but they just didn't put me on the edge of my seat. (sorta spoiler)The excess use of slow motion was dreadful. Many scenes would have been better than they were, if it wasn't for that slow motion.(/sorta spoiler) Even with all this, I still enjoyed the 2nd installment in the Tomb Raider series, again despite the bad reviews.
can somebody explain to my why punching a shark on the nose is so
ridiculous? while its probably difficult to have the presence of mind to
this, punching an attacking shark on the nose is the most effective and
often the only way to prevent sadi shark from choosing to maul
perhaps you people should spend more time reading (do you know how?) and less time comparing this movie to charlies angels 2.
tr:2 has a deeper plot line than t3, more realistic action than charlies angels 2 and is a far better movie than bad boys 2. theres no reason to hate this movie so much. its not a classic but its better than the majority of rubbish presently in the cinema and offers at least some originality.
if you must compare then chose something more apropriate, like a 007 movie. croft and bond are quite similar; quite arrogant, somewhat unrealistic and gadget-loaded. the main difference of course is that angelia looks a little better in a silver wetsuit.
so instead of whining about movies, choose one you might like. dont waste my time writing about movies you hate. if youre such an intellectual go and see whale rider, otherwise sit back and eat popcorn while enjoying some explosions and the beautiful sets and locations that tr:2 affords.
Being a huge Angelina Jolie fan for many years, I was slightly
with Lara Croft: Tomb Raider. The plot was thin, and even Ms. Jolie
reportedly found it a bit boring. But I found The Cradle of Life to be a
good film. The action sequences had my eyes glued to the screen, and the
constant mystery of her "partner" had me thinking throughout the movie.
watched many behind-the-scenes programs about this movie and have heard
about all the work the makers and actors put into the project, and I think
that they've done a great job. I recommend this movie to all Angelina
This movie was very action packed and had a decent story line. Like most Angelina fans are wondering no you dont see her naked but there are some very good makeout scenes and some scenes were she is wet and in a skin tight swim suit. I did not see the first Tomb Raider so I cant give a comparison to the first movie. Although I did enjoy this movie. And Angelina did look hot plus she had a sexy accent.
It's a fun and silly movie way better than the first one. After all it is fantasy, and based on a video game but hugely entertaining with a much better story and better direction ( and I usually do not like Jan DeBont films ), but this time he's on the mark. Go and enjoy!!!
|Page 10 of 32:||               |
|Plot summary||Plot synopsis||Ratings|
|Awards||External reviews||Parents Guide|
|Official site||Plot keywords||Main details|
|Your user reviews||Your vote history|